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

September 1641, he quitted Geneva, after having spent one-and-twenty months in that city; and, passing through Switzerland, and the country of the Grisons, entered Lombardy. Then, taking his route through Bergamo, Brescia, and Verona, he arrived at Venice; where having made a short stay, he returned to the continent, and spent the winter at Florence. Here he employed his spare hours in reading the modern history in Italian, and the works of the celebrated astronomer Galileo, who died at a village near this city during Mr. Boyle’s residence in it. It was at Florence that he acquired the Italian language; which he understood perfectly, though he never spoke it so fluently as the French. Of this indeed he was such a master, that, as occasion required, he passed for a native of that country in more places than one during his travels.

In 1743, he published without his name, an ode on the battle of Dettingen, entitled “Albion’s Triumph,” a fragment of which is printed in the last edition of the Poets. In 1745 we find him at Reading, where he was employed by the late Mr. David Henry in compiling a work, published in 1747, in two volumes octavo, under the title of “An historical Review of the Transactions of Europe, from the commencement of the war with Spain in 1739 to the insurrection in Scotland in 1745; with the proceedings in parliament, and the most remarkable domestic occurrences during that period. To which is added, An impartial History of the late Rebellion, interspersed with characters and memoirs, and illustrated with notes.” To this he affixed his name, witli the addition of M. A. a degree which it is probable he assumed without authority. The work, however, considered as a compilation of recent and consequently very imperfectly-known events, is said to possess considerable merit. In a letter, published by Mr. Nichols, we have some information relative to it, and to the present state of his mind and situation. “My salary is wretchedly small (half a guinea a week) both for writing the history and correcting the press; but I bless God I enjoy a greater degree of health than I have known for many years, and a serene melancholy, which I prefer to the most poignant sensations of pleasure I ever knew. All I sigh for is a settlement, with some degree of independence, for my last stage of life, that I may have the comfort of my poor dear girl to be near me, and close my eyes. I should be glad to know if you have seen my history, from which you must not expect great things, as I have been over-persuaded to put my name to a composure, for which we ought to have had at least more time and better materials, and from which I have neither profit nor reputation to expect. I am now beginning * The History of the Rebellion,‘ a very difficult and invidious task. All the accounts I have yet seen are either defective, confused, or heavy. I think myself, from my long residence in Scotland, not unqualified for the attempt, but I apprehend it is premature; and, by waiting a year or two, better materials would offer. Some account, I think, will probably be published abroad, and give us light into many things we are now at a loss to account for. I am about a translation (at my leisure hours) of an invaluable French work, entitled * L’Histoire Universelle,' by the late M. Bossuet, bishop of Meaux, and preceptor to the dauphin, eldest son of Lewis XIV. I propose only to give his dissertations on the ancient empires, viz. the Egyptian, Assyrian, Grecian, and Roman, which he has described with surprising conciseness, and with equal judgment and beauty. I design to inscribe it to the right honourable Mr. Lyttelton, one of the lords of the treasury, one of the most amiable men I have ever known, and to whose uncommon goodness, if you knew my obligations, you would esteem him as much as he deserves.”

After his return from Reading, his behaviour, it is said, became so decent, that hopes were entertained of his reformation. He now obtained some employment from the booksellers in translating, of which, from the French language at least, he was very capable; but his former irregularities had gradually undermined his constitution, and enfeebled his powers both of body and mind. He died, after a lingering illness, in obscure lodgings near Shoelane, in the month of May 1749. The manner of his death is variously related. Mr. Giles, a collector of poems, says he was informed by Mr. Sandby, the bookseller, that Boyse was found dead in his bed, with a pen in his hand, and in the act of writing: and Dr. Johnson informed Mr. Nichols that he was run over by a coach, when in a fit of intoxication; or that he was brought home in such a condition as to make this probable, but too far gone to be able to give any account of the accident.

, a French antiquary, was born at Lyons, Jan. 28, 1680, of parents who gave him an excellent education. He attached himself at first to jurisprudence, but antiquities and medals soon occupied him entirely. The chancellor de Pontchartrain, the abbe Bignon, Vaillant, Haruouin, admired him for the amiableness of his manners, and the depth of his learning. In 1705 he published some ingenious dissertations upon medals and other monuments, which procured him to be admitted into the academy of inscriptions and belles-lettres, under the title of pupil; and the year following he became perpetual secretary. The French academy too admitted him of their society in 1715, as successor to M. Fenelon. He was made keeper of the royal cabinet of medals in 1719; and the year after he set out for Holland, with the view of augmenting that grand collection. On returning to Paris he devoted the whole of his time to the academy of belles-lettres, to which he contributed a great many memoirs, and the cabinet of medals. He had the inspection of the library in 1745, during the illness of M. Maboul, before which time he resigned the place of secretary to the academy. He died the 10th of September, 1753, aged seventy-four. He was as estimable for the sweetness of his temper as for the depth of his knowledge. Among his works, are: 1. The edition of the first 15 vols. of the “Memoires de l'academie des inscriptions et belleslettres.” The historical panegyrics which embellish these memoirs were printed separately in 2 vols. 12mo. They are ingenious and agreeable; they may contain fewer of those delicate strokes with which the éloges of Fontenelle abound, but perhaps they exceed them in elegance and taste! They are, however, unequal. 2. The second edition of the “Medallic history of Louis XIV.” brought down to his death, 1723, folio. He gives the drawings and impresses of many of them. 3. “The history of the emperor Tetricus illustrated by medals.” 4. Several dissertations on the ancient medals, dispersed for the most part throughout the “Memoires de l'academie des belles-lettres.” 5. He published the “Catalogue of his library,” 1745, fol. which was well chosen, and full of rare and curious books. This catalogue is very much in request among the bibliographers, and sells at a high price. Another was published after his death, Paris, 1753, 8vo. There is also attributed to him a work called the “Yellow Book,” “Livre jaune, contenant quelques conversations sur les logomachies, disputes de mots, abus de termes,” &c. Bale, 1748, 8vo, of which only thirty copies were printed, on what is called vegetable paper.

, archbishop of Canterbury, is supposed to have been born at Hortfield, in Cheshire, about the middle of the reign of king Edward I. in the fourteenth century. He was of Merton colle'ge, Oxford, and was one of the proctors of that university in 1325. He excelled in mathematical knowledge, and was in general distinguished for his accurate and solid investigations in divinity, which procured him the title of the “profound Doctor.” He was confessor to Edward III. and attended that monarch in his French wars, often preaching before the army. Sir Henry Savile informs us that some writers of that time attributed the signal victories of Edward, rather to the virtues and holy character of his chaplain, than to> the bravery or prudence of the monarch or of any other person. He made it his business to calm and mitigate the fierceness of his master’s temper when he saw him eitherimmoderately fired with warlike rage, or improperly flushed with the advantages of victory. He also often addressed the army, and with so much meekness and persuasive discretion, as to restrain them from those insolent excesses which are too frequently the attendants of military success. When the see of Canterbury became vacant, the monks of that city chose him archbishop, but Edward, who was fond of his company, refused to part with him. Another vacancy happen ing soon after, the monks again elected him^ and Edward yielded to their desires. The modesty and innocence of his manners, and his unquestionable piety and integrity, seem to have been the principal causes of his advancement. He was, however, by no means adapted to 'a court, where his personal manners and character became an object of derision, the best proof history can afford us of their excellence. Even when he was consecrated at Avignon, cardinal Hugh, a nephew of the pope, ridiculed the prelate by introducing into the hall a person in a peasant’s habit, ridiog on an ass, petitioning the pope to make him archbishop of Canterbury, but the jest was so ill relished that the pope and cardinals resented the indignity, and frowned on the insolent contriver. Bradwardine was consecrated in 1349; but not many weeks after his consecration, and only seven days after his return into England, he died at Lambeth. His principal work “De Causa Dei,” against the Pelagian heresy, was edited from the ms. in Merton college library by sir Henry Savile, 1618, fol. with a biographical preface, in which he informs us that Bradwardine devoted his principal application to theology and mathematics; and that particularly in the latter he distanced, perhaps, the most skilful of his contemporaries. These mathematical works are, 1. “Astronomical tables,” in ms. in the possession of Sir Henry. 2. “Geometria Speculativa, cum Arithmetica specuiativa,” Paris, 1495, 1504, fol. The arithmetic had been prAited separately ia 1502, and other editions of both appeared in 1512 and 1530. 3. “De proportionibus,” Paris, 1495, Venice, 1505, fol. 4. “De quadratura circuli,” Paris, 1495, fol. Sir Henry Savile informs us that the treatise against Pelagius was first delivered in lectures at Oxford, and the author, at the request of the students of Merton college, arranged, enlarged, and polished them, while he was chancellor of the diocese of London. As Bradwardine was a very excellent mathematician, he endeavoured to treat theological subjects with a mathematical accuracy, and was the first divine, as far as I know, says sir Henry, who pursued that method. Hence this book against Pelagianism is one regular, connected series of reasoning, from principles or conclusions which have been demonstrated before; and if, in the several lemmas and propositions, a mathematical accuracy is not on all occasions completely preserved, the reader must remember to ascribe the defect to the nature of the subject, rather than to the author.

, abbe d'Aulnay, who was born in the comtat Venaissin, and died April 11, 1758, is known by several works in physics and astronomy. The abundance of words, the frequent repetitions, the great number of insignificant ideas perceived in his writings, have disgusted many readers; though they contain much excellent matter. The principal are, 1. “Letters on cosmography,” 1744, 4to. 2. “Modern system of cosmography and general physics,” 1747, 4to. 3. “Explication of the flux and reflux of the sea,” 1739, 4to. 4. “Cosmographical ephemerides,” 1750, 12mo, 5. “History or police of the kingdom of Gala,” 1754, 12mo, pretendedly translated from the Italian into English, and from English into French.

, M. A. rector of St. George the Martyr, Southwark, and vicar of Wickham-Skeith, a political writer, who has been sometimes mistaken for the subject of our last article, was, however, probably of the same age, although we have no account of his early life. He was of Caius college, Cambridge, where he proceeded B. A. 1766, and M. A. 1769. When he had obtained the latter degree, he wrote an ethical essay, entitled “Conscience,” intended for one of the Seatonian prizes; but an accidental delay which it met with on the road, occasioned its being presented to the vice-chancellor two days after the appointed time, and on that account it could not be admitted to the competition. Mr. Brand, however, published his poem in a quarto pamphlet in 1772, and it was allowed to possess considerable merit, but not enough to procure it a place among the favourite poems of the day. From this time we find him devoting his attention to political subjects, which produced in succession; 1. “Observations on some of the probable effects of Mr. Gilbert’s bill, with remarks deduced from Dr. Price’s account of the national debt,” 1776, 8vo. 2. “The Alteration of the Constitution of the House of Commons, and the inequality of the Land-Tax, considered conjointly,” 1793, 8vo. 3. “A Defence of the pamphlet ascribed to John Reeves, esq. and entitled ‘ Thoughts on the English government,’ addressed to the members of the loyal associations against republicans and levellers,” 1796, 8vo; a clear and methodical tract, but exceeded in general utility by, 4. “An historical essay on the principles of Political Associations in a state; chiefly deduced from the French, English, and Jewish Histories; with an application of those principles, in a comparative view of the associations of the year 1792, and that recently instituted by the Whig Club,” 1796, 8vo. 5. “A determination of the average depression of the price of wheat in war, below that of the preceding peace; and of its readvance in the following; according to its yearly rules, from the Revolution to the end of the last peace; with remarks on their greater variations in that entire period/* 1800, 8vo. 6.” A Letter to **** ******, esq. on Bonaparte’s proposals for opening a negociation for peace; in which the British guarantee of the crown of France to the house of Bourbon, contained in the triple and quadruple alliances, and renewed by the treaty of 1783, is considered; together with the conduct of our national parties relating to it,“1800, 8vo, an argument more ingenious than satisfactory, and unfortunately leading to an impracticable conclusion. 7.” A Refutation of the Charge brought against the marquis Wellesley, on account of his conduct to the nabob of Oude. From authentic documents,“1807, 8vo. This was the last of Mr. Brand’s political works. As a divine, we know only of a” Fast Sermon,“published by him in 1794, and a” Visitation Sermon," 1800. In 1797, he was presented by the lord chancellor (Loughborough) to the rectory of St. George’s in Southwark, vacant by the death of the rev. Joseph Pote, the value of which Mr. Brand procured to be increased by act of parliament, in 1807, but did not live long enough to profit by it, as he died Dec. 23, 1808, leaving a numerous family.

, a learned ecclesiastical historian, was born at Amsterdam, July 2 5, 1626, and after having made distinguished progress in Greek, Hebrew, Latin, philosophy, and divinity, he was invited to be pastor of a church of remonstrants at Nieukoop, where he married Susanna, daughter of the celebrated professor Gaspard Barleus. In 1660, he came to Hoorn, and in L667 to Amsterdam. He died Oct. 11, 1685, leaving two sons, both excellent scholars, Caspar and Gerard. He wrote in German, 1. “A short history of the Reformation,” and of the war between Spain and the Netherlands, until 1600, Amst. second edit. 1658, which has a continuation, in the form of a chronicle, until that year. 2. Also in German, “A history of the Reformation in the Low Countries, &c.” 4 vols. 4to, 1671, and following years, a work of which the pensionary Fagel said to bishop Burnet, that it was worth while to learn German on purpose to read it. The English public, however, has been long acquainted with it, in a translation in 4 vols. fol. 1720, & seqq. The translator was John Chamberlayne, whom Foppen has converted intoRichardCumberland, merely that he may add,with true Popish bigotry, that he was “pseudo-episcopus Petro^ burgensis.” Brandt’s history was also abridged in 1725, in English, in 2 vols. 8vo, apparently from a French abridgement. Ruleus or Ruillius, a minister of the reformed church, having attacked some parts of his history, Brandt published an apology. 3. “A history of Enkhuisen,” a celebrated mercantile town. 4. “The Life of De Ruyter,” the celebrated Dutch admiral, Amst. 1684, fol. translated into French, ibid. 1690. 5. “Historical Diary,” with biographical notices of eminent men, Amst. 1689, 4to. 6. “Poemata,” Rotterdam^ 1649, 8vo. 7. “Poemata sacra et prophana,” Amst. 1638, 4to, and 1726, in. 2 vols. 8. “Historia judicii habiti annis 1618 and 1619^ de tribus captivis, Barnevelt, Hogerbeets, et Grotio,” Rotterdam, 1708, and 1710, 4to, with some other works, enumerated by Foppen, and Adrian a Cattenburg in his “Bibl. Scriptorum Remonstrantium.”

, second son of Gerard, and brother to the preceding, was born in 1657. (Saxius says 1653, which is the year of the preceding), at Nieukoop, and studied with his brother for eight years, philosophy and divinity under Limborch, to which he joined the knowledge of Greek, Latin, Hebrew, Italian, French, and English. He was minister at Schoonhoven, at Dokkum, and at Rotterdam, where he died at the age of twenty-six, but Saxius says thirty, in 1683. He translated Dr. HeyJyn’s Quinqu articular History, or History of the Five Articles. In 1678, he published in German, without his name, and with only the letters V. T. V. a history of events in Europe for the years 1674 and 1675, and sixtyfive sermons.

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

, a French poet, was born at Torigniin Lower Normandy, 1618. He was distinguished chiefly by a translation of Lucan; which, notwithstanding its inflated style, its numerous antitheses, and its various false brilliancies, continued to be long admired. It engaged attention and applause so powerfully at first, that cardinal Mazarine made great promises of advancement to the translator; but died without fulfilling them. But the l>est and the most popular of his works is, the first book of Lucan travestied, an ingenious satire upon the great, who are described as never losing a moment’s sight of their greatness and titles; and upon the meanness and servility of those who, with a view of making their fortunes, submit to flatter them as gods. It is said of Brebeuf,. that he bad a fever upon him for more twenty years. He died in 1661, aged 4S; and, if the last anecdote of him be true, it is somewhat marvellous that he lived so long.

, a member of the French academy of sciences, was born at Paris, Sept. 14, 1713, of a good family, and after having studied humanities in the Mazarin college, and a course of philosophy in the college of Beauvais, applied himself more particularly to medicine and law, and the oriental languages in the royal college. The great progress which he made in the latter, occasioned his being invited to Rheims to teach these languages, and to fill a professor’s chair; but this he declined out of respect to his father, who wished him to appear at the bar. Neither this, however, nor languages, were to his own liking, and his parents, after some consideration, allowed him to pursue his inclination for medicine, and natural history, to which he added a taste for general literature and criticism. In 1737, he began to give extracts from the London Philosophical Transactions, and this with so much judgment and ability as to excite the attention of the literati of France, who after revolving the plan, conceived that a translation of the Transactions with notes would be more useful than these extracts, and agreed that M. de Bremond should be requested to undertake it. He accordingly began the work, and published four vols. 4to. including the years 1731—1736, withacomplete index, and notes pointing out where the subjects are treated in the memoirs of other learned bodies, or in separate publications: some of these notes are complete dissertations. The royal society, on this, honoured him with the title of secretary; and on March 18, 1739, he was admitted into the French royal academy of sciences. The same year he read a learned paper on respiration. He joined afterwards with M. Morand, a celebrated surgeon, in collecting and translating all the English publications respecting Mrs. Stephens’s remedy for the stone, which once was thought infallible. He translated likewise Dr. Halley’s experiments on sea water, and Hauksbee’s experiments, 2 vols. 12mo; and Murdoch’s new loxodromic tables, for the construction of marine charts. This industrious writer died March 21, 1742, aged only twenty-nine. His eloge was composed by M. cle Mairan, then secretary to the academy.

, a learned member of the French academy, and of that of Inscriptions, was born in the country of Caux in 1715, and died at Paris in 1795, aged eighty. His youth was spent in the acquisition of the learned languages, and he afterwards came to Paris to enjoy the company of the literati of that metropolis. Being sent to England to search for materials respecting the French history, he published the result in a paper in the Memoirs of the Academy of inscriptions in 1767, by which we find that he collected in the British Museum, and the Tower of London, an invaluable treasure of letters and papers relative to the his-, tory, laws, and constitution of France, which papers had till then been unknown to the literary world. The same Memoir concludes with some anecdotes relative to the famous siege of Calais in 1346, which do little honour to the memory of Eustache de St. Pierre, and are, by no means, consistent with the encomiums that have been lavished on him, on account of his heroic patriotism. Brequigny was of a very communicative disposition, and loved to encourage young men of learning, by lending them his books and manuscripts, and imparting his ideas of any subject on which they might be employed. In his writings, his style is clear and simple, and he had the happy talent of extracting with judgment and accuracy, of which he left many proofs in his notices inserted in the Journal des Savans, and in the Memoirs of the Academy of inscriptions, to which he was a frequent contributor. The substance of a curious paper of his, on the life and character of Mahomet, may be seen in the Monthly Review, vol. XXXIV. (1768.) His principal works are, 1. “Histoire des Revolutions de Genes,” Paris, 1752, 3 vols. 12mo. 2. An edition of “Strabo,” vol. I. Gr. and Lat. 1763, 4to, containing the first three books, corrected according to some Mss. in the royal library, particularly one numbered 1393, which was brought from, Constantinople; the Latin version is Xylander’s. A short time after the first volume was published, Berquigny sent over all his materials for the further prqsecution of the work to the university of Oxford. 3. “Vies dfes anciens orateurs Grecs,” with a translation of many of their orations, 1752, 2 vols. 12mo, containing only Isocrates and Dio Chrysostom. 4. “Diplomata, Chartaj ad res Franciscas spectantia,” 4to. 5. “Table chronologique des diplomes, chartes, et titres relatifs a i'histoire de France,” 1783, 5 vols. fol. 6. “Ordonnances des rois de France de la troisieme race:” of this important collection Brequigny published the last six volumes, enriched with learned notes and curious dissertations on the ancient legislation of France. He also compiled and published in 1764, 8vo, the catalogue of the library of Clermont.

, advocate of the parliament of Paris, and an eminent law writer and pleader, was born at Montrotier, about four leagues from Lyons, Feb. 24, 1656. After studying languages and philosophy at Lyons, he came to Paris in 1677 to apply himself to law, and in 1680 was appointed an advocate. Having conceived a preference to the written over the common law, -he made the former his particular study, and traced its origin with the true spirit of an antiquary. This course of study produced a very much improved edition of the works of Claude Henrys, 1708, 2 vols. fol. and afterwards a work of great utility in the French law, which he undertook at the request of the chancellor D'Aguesseau, entitled “Recueil des principals questions de droit qui se jugent diversement dans differens tribunaux du royaume,” 1718, 12mo, reprinted with additions in 1756, 2 vols. and in 1785, 4to, both with additions by Boucher d'Argis. He died April 21, 1727.

, a naval officer, of whose family we have no account, was, soon after the rupture had taken place with Spain, appointed commander of the Grampus sloop of war. From this vessel he was, March 25, 1741, promoted to be captain of the Roebuck, a fifth rate of 40 guns, and immediately afterwards ordered to the Mediterranean from which he returned in May 1742, and in. November following was removed into the Anglesea, of the same rate as the former. In April 1744 he received the command of the Sunderland of 60 guns, and next year was on a cruise off the French coast, and in February captured a small French frigate richly laden, and with 24,000 pieces of eight in specie. Soon after his return into port he was ordered ta Louisburgh, with some other ships of war, for the purpose of reinforcing commodore Warren, who was then engaged in the attack of that important place. Capt. Brett arrived early enough before it surrendered to distinguish himself by his spirit and activity in the service. He afterwards commanded the St. George of 90 guns for a short time, but having been unwarrantably omitted in the promotion of flag-officers, which took place in 1756, he very spiritedly resolved to quit the service for ever, though on his remonstrance, previous to his actual declaration of this resolution, the admiralty-board, ashamed of having, even for a moment, set aside a brave and deserving man, offered him the rank of rear-admiral of the white, the same which he would have been entitled to in the ordinary course of service, if the partiality in favour of others had not been exerted. His answer to this palliating proposal was, “No rank or station can be, with honour, received by a person who has been once thought undeserving or unentitled to it.” From this time he retired into private life, and survived two long wars, in neither of which he waa engaged. He died in London in 1785. He translated two volumes of father Feyjoo’s Discourses, the one published in 1777, and the other in 1779; and in 1730, “Essays, or Discourses, selected from the works of Feyjoo.” The late Charles Brett, esq. one of the lords of the admiralty, who died in 1799, and Timothy Brett, clerk of the cheque at Portsmouth, who died in 1790, were brothers of capt. Brett.

In April 1745, he was appointed captain of the Lion, of 60 guns. After capturing the Mediator sloop of war, and a privateer which had long infested the channel, on Tuesday, July 9, he gave a more distinguished proof of his courage, in engaging a French man of war of 64 guns, and another ship of 16, both which, after a most desperate battle, he obliged to sheer off: the 64 gun ship got into Brest, quite disabled, having the captain and sixty-four men killed, and one hundred and thirty-six dangerously wounded. Of the Lion’s men, forty-five were killed, and one hundred and seven wounded; among the latter was capt. Brett, his master, and all his lieutenants. The bravery manifested by him on this occasion was the more important to his country, from the circumstance of the ship which he engaged being convoy to the frigate in which the son of the Pretender, then on his passage to Scotland, had embarked; and thus the money and arms intended for Scotland did not reach it in time to be of any service.

In 1747 he commanded the Yarmouth, of 64 guns, one of the squadron under Mr. Anson, which, in the month of May, defeated and captured that of France, commanded by De la Jonquiere. He was one of the captains sent after the conclusion of the action in pursuit of the convoy, of which, Dr. Campbell and other historians assert, two only were captured, but we find it peremptorily asserted in the periodical publications of the time, that five more French ships were brought into Portsmouth, and three into Plymouth. On Jan. 3, 1753, he received the honour of knighthood from his majesty, in consequence of his having carried him to Holland; and towards the end of the year he was appointed captain of the Caroline yacht, as successor to Sir C. Molloy. In 1758, he was commodore in the Downs, having his pendant on board the Norfolk, and was in the same year appointed first captain to lord Anson, in the Royal George, who commanded in the channel, the covering-fleet to the squadron employed under lord Howe on the coast of France. On the conclusion of this expedition he returned to his command in the Downs. In March 1760 he was appointed colonel of the Portsmouth division of marines. In 1761, still continuing to hold the Downs command, we find him frequently and actively employed in reconnoitering the opposite coast and ports of France. In December, having hoisted his pendant on board the Newark, he was ordered for the Mediterranean with seven ships of war, as second in command to sir Charles Saunders, and shared, as a flag, in the rich Spanish prize, the Hermione. In the course of the same year he was advanced to the rank of rear-admiral of the red. From this time he appears never to have accepted any command, but Dec. 13, 1766, was appointed one of the lords of the admiralty, an office which he held until Feb. 24, 1770. In October of that year he was promoted to be vice-admiral of the blue, and on the 28th of the same month, to be vice-admiral of the white; March 1775, was admiral of the red, and finally, in Jan. 1778, admiral of the blue. He died Oct. 12, 1781, and was buried at Beckenham church, in Kent. His biographer adds, that “whether living or dead, the vice of slander and malevolence was abashed at his manifold virtues, ever silent, not only at his approach, but even at the bare mention of his name.” In the last parliament of George II. and the first of George III. he sat as member for Queenborough, in Kent. In 1745, after his return from the South Seas with Anson, he married Henrietta, daughter of Thomas Colby, esq. clerk of the cheque at Chatham; by whom he had two sons, who died young, and a daughter who survived him.

, a French antiquary, was born Sept. 17, 1528, and entered the society of the Benedictines of St. Germain -des-Pres in 1549. He published in 1601 an edition of Isidorus, fol.; and 1. “Le Theatre des Antiquity’s de Paris,” 1639, 4to. 2. “Supplementum antiquitatum Parisiensium,” 1614, 4to. Of these two Malingre availed himself in his “Antiquities of Paris,” published in 1640, fol. 3. “Les Pastes de Paris,” by Bonfons, improved by our author, 1605, and 1608, 8vo. 4. “La Vie du cardinal Charles de Bourbon,” uncle of Henry IV. 1612, 4to. 5. “Chronicon Abbatum regalis monast S. Germani a Pratis,” 1603, fol. He died in 1614, leaving some of the above works ready for the press.

, translator of the duke de Rohan’s Memoirs, was the younger brother of sir Thomas Bridges, of Keinsham abbey in Somersetshire, and son of Edward Bridges, esq. of the same place, by Philippa, daughter of sir George Speke, K. B. He died Jan. 1, 1677, and was buried in Keinsham church. His translation was entitled “The Memoirs of the Duke of Rohan or a faithful relation of the most remarkable occurrences iij France, especially those concerning the reformed churches there; from the death of Henry the Great until the peace made with them, in June 1629. Together with divers politic discourses upon several occasions. Written originally in French, by the duke of Rohan, and now Englished by George Bridges, of Lincoln’s-inn, esq.” London, 1660, 8vo. The translation is dedicated to James, marquis of Onnond, lord lieutenant of Ireland. The translator says he was principally induced to publish it in our language, by some passages tending to the vindication of Charles I. in the matter of relieving the inhabitants of Rochelle, during the memorable siege of that place. A very interesting account of the family of Mr. Bridges may be seen in our authority.

, an able French geographer, was born at Abbeville in 1601, and entered the society of Jesuits in 1619. He taught humanities seven years, rhetoric seventeen, and was some time prefect of the classes, and lectured on the holy scriptures. His private character corresponded with his learning. He was appointed joint librarian with father Cossart of the library of the Jesuits’ college in Paris, where he died Dec. 9, 1668. He published, 1 “Xenia Delphino oblata nomine collegii Rothomagensis,” Rouen, 1639, 4to. 2. “Parallela geographies veteris et novae,” 1648 and 1649, three volumes, 4to, a very exact and methodical work, and ornamented with plates well designed. These volumes, however, contain, only Europe; and it can never be enough regretted, says Niceron, that he did not publish the Parallels of Asia and Africa, which were assuredly finished and ready, but somehow or other lost. He published also, 3. “Annales mundi,” in 7 vols. 12mo, from the beginning of the world to the year of Christ 1663, often reprinted and enlarged; and “Theatrum geographicum Europae veteris,” 1653, in folio. He was farther concerned in a chronological work, joined with father Labbe; but he is supposed not to have succeeded so well here as in geography. 4. “Elogium patris Jacobi Sirmundi,” Paris, 1651, 4to, with an accurate catalogue of father Sirmond’s works. 5. “Acute dicta omnium veterum poetarum Latinorum,” Paris, 1684, 12mo. His chronological work was entitled “Philippi Labbe et P. Brietii concordia chronologica,” Paris, 1670, 5 vols. folio. The fifth volume only belongs to Briet.

, an eminent French physician, was born at Fontenai-le-Comte, in Poitou, 147s, and about 1495 was sent to Paris, where he went through a course of philosophy under Villemar, a famous professor of those times. By his advice, Brissot resolved to be a physician, and studied physic there for four years. Then he began to teach philosophy in the university of Paris; and, after he had done this for ten years, prepared himself for the examinations necessary to his doctor of physic’s degree, which he took in May 1514, Being one of those men who are not contented with custom and tradition, but choose to examine for themselves, he made an exact comparison between the practice of his own times and the doctrine of Hippocrates and Galen and he found that the Arabians had introduced many things into physic that were contrary to the doctrine of those two great masters, and to reason and experience. He set himself therefore to reform physic; and for this purpose undertook publicly to explain Galen’s books, instead of those of Avicenna, Rhasis, and Mesu'i, which were commonly explained in the schools of physic; but, finding himself obstructed in the work of reformation by his ignorance of botany, he resolved to travel, in order to acquire the knowledge of plants, and put himself into a capacity of correcting pharmacy. Before, however, he left Paris, he undertook to convince the public of what he deemed an inveterate error; but which now is considered as a matter of little consequence. The constant practice of physicians, in the pleurisy, Was to bleed from the arm, not on the side where the distemper was, but the opposite side. Brissot disputed about it in the physic-schools, confuted that practice, and shewed, chat it was falsely pretended to be agreeable to the doctrine of Hippocrates and Galen. He then left Paris in 1518, and went to Portugal, stopping there at Ebora, where he practised physic; but his new way of bleeding in the pleurisy, notwithstanding his great success, did not please every body, He received a long and rude letter about it from Denys, physician to the king of Portugal; which he answered, and would have published if death had not prevented him in 1522. It was printed, however, three years after at Paris, and reprinted at Basil in 1529. Renatus Moreau published a new edition of it at Paris in 1622, with a treatise of his own, “De missione sanguinis in pleuritide,” and the life of Brissot; out of which this account is taken. He never would marry, being of opinion that matrimony did not well agree with study. One thing is related of him, which his biographer, rather uncharitably, says, deserves to be taken notice of, because it is singular in the men of his profession; and it is, that he did not love gain. He cared so little for it, that when he was called to a sick person, he looked into his purse; and, if he found but two pieces of gold in it, refused to go. This, however, it is acknowledged, was owing to his great love of study, from which it was very difficult to take him. The dispute between Denys and Brissot raised a kind of civil war among the Portuguese physicians. The business was brought before the tribunal of the university of Salamanca, Where it was thoroughly discussed by the faculty of physic; but in the mean time, the partisans of Denys had recourse to the authority of the secular power, and obtained a decree, forbidding physicians to bleed on the same side in which the pleurisy was. At last the university of Salamanca gave their judgment; importing, that the opinion of Brissot was the true doctrine of Hippocrates and Galen. The followers of Denys appealed to the emperor about 1529, thinking themselves superior both in authority and number; and the matter was brought before Charles V. They were not contented to call the doctrine of their adversaries false; they added that it was impious, mortal, and as pernicious to the body as Luther’s schism to the souL They not only blackened the reputation of their adversaries by private arts, but also openly accused them of ignorance and rashness, of attempts on religion, and of being downright Lutherans in physic. It fell out Unluckily for them, that Charles III. duke of Savoy, happened to die of a pleurisy, after he had been bled according to the practice which Brissot opposed. Had it not been for this, the emperor, it is thought, would have granted every thing that Erissot’s adversaries desired of him; but this accident induced him to leave the cause undecided. “Two things,” says Bayle, in his usual prattling way, “occur in this relation, which all wise men must needs condemn; namely, the base, the disingenuous, the unphilosophic custom of interesting religion in disputes about science, and the folly and absurdity of magistrates to be concerned in such disputes. A magistrate is for the most part a very incompetent judge of such matters; and, as he Jiiiows nothing of them, so he ought to imitate Gallio in this at least, that is, not to care for them; but to leave those whose business it is, to fight it out among themselves. Besides, authority has nothing to do with philosophy and the sciences; it should be kept at a great distance from them, for the same reason that armed forces are removed from a borough at the time of a % general assize; namely, that reason and equity may have their full play.”

, a very active agent in the French revolution, and a victim to the tyranny he had created, was the son of the master of an eating-house, and boru in 1754 at Chartres in the Orleanuois. After receiving a good education, he was intended for the bar, but having served a clerkship for five years, he relinquished the further prosecution of the law, in order to study literature and the sciences; and an accidental acquaintance with some Englishmen, and the perusal of some English books, seem to have confirmed this determination. About this time he changed the appellation of “de Otiarville” to that of Warville, agreeable to the English pronunciation. Having by relinquishing the law incurred his father’s displeasure, he was indebted to the bounty of some friends, who enabled him to prosecute his studies at Paris for two years; after which he became editor of the “Courier de PEurope,” a paper printed at Boulogne; but this being discontinued on account of some articles inimical to government, he returned to Paris, and in imitation of Voltaire, Diderot, and D'Alembert, who, as he imagined, had destroyed religious tyranny, began to attempt the destruction of political tyranny, which he fancied was reserved for his irresistible pen. To develope the whole of his plan, however, was not his aim at first: and he began, therefore, with attacking such abuses as might have been removed without any injury to an established constitution, but which, as they could not be wholly denied, he endeavoured to trace from the very nature of monarchy. With this view he published some works on criminal jurisprudence, as, in 1780, his “Theory of Criminal laws,” 2 vols. 8vo, and two papers arising out of the subject, which gained the prize in 1782, at the academy of Chalons-surMarne. He also began a work which was afterwards completed in 10 vols. 8vo, <c A philosophical library of the criminal law,“and a volume concerning” Truth“and” Thoughts on the means of attaining Truth in all the branches of human knowledge," which he intended merely as an introduction to a work on a more enlarged and comprehensive plan. To all these he annexed ideas of singular importance and utility, although his notions are crude, and his knowledge superficial.

Brissot, at the period of his residence at Boulogne, had been introduced to mademoiselle Dupont, who was employed under mad. de Genlis as reader to the daughter of the duke of Orleans, and whose mother kept a lodginghouse in that place: and having married this lady, he found it necessary to exert his literary talents for gaining a subsistence. But as France did not afford that liberty, which he wished to indulge, he formed a design of printing, in Swisserland or Germany, a series of works in a kind of periodical publication, under the title of “An universal Correspondence on points interesting to the welfare of Man and of Society,” which he proposed to smuggle into France. With this view, he visited Geneva and Neuchatel, in order to establish correspondences; and he also made a journey to London, which was to be the central point of the establishment, and the fixed residence of the writers. His intentions, however, were divulged by the treachery of some of his confidential associates; and the scheme totally failed. During his abode in London, he concerted the plan of a periodical work or journal, on the literature, arts, and politics of England, which, being published in London, was allowed to be reprinted at Paris, and first appeared in 1784. The avowed object of this publication, as he himself declares, was “the universal emancipation of men.” In London, he was arrested for debt; but, being liberated by the generosity of a friend, he returned to Paris, where he was committed to the Bastille in July 1784, on the charge of being concerned in a very obnoxious publication. But by the interest of the duke of Orleans, he was released, on condition of never residing in England, and discontinuing his political correspondence. In 1785, he published two letters to the emperor Joseph II. “Concerning the Right of Emigration, and the Right of the People to revolt,” which he applied particularly to the case of the Waiachsans: and in the following year appeared his “Philosophical Letters on the History of England,” in 2 vols. and “A critical Examination of the Travels of the marq is de Chatelleux in North America.” With a view of promoting a close, political, and commercial union between France and the United States, he wrote in 1787, with the assistance of Claviere, a tract, entitled “De la France et des Etats Unis, &c.” “On France and the United States or on the Importance of the American Revolution to the kingdom of France, and the reciprocal advantages which will accrue from a commercial Intercourse between the two nations.” Of this work, an English translation was published, both in England and America. At this time he was in the service of the duke of Orleans, as secretary to his chancery, with a handsome salary, and apartments in the palais royal; and, without doubt, employed in aiding that monster in his schemes of ambition. In this situation, he wro:e a pamphlet against the administration of the archbishop of Sens, entitled “No Bankruptcy, &c.” which occasioned the issuing of a lettre de cachet against him. But to avoid its effect, he went to Holland, England, and the Low Countries; and at Mechlin, he edited a newspaper, called “Le Courier Beigique.” For the purpose of promoting the views of a society at Paris, denominated “Les Amis des Noirs,” and established for the purpose of abolishing negro slavery, he embarked for America in 1788; and, during his residence in that country, he sought for a convenient situation, in which a colony of Frenchmen might be organized into a republic, according to his ideas of political liberty. But his return was hastened in 1789 by the intelligence he received of the progress of the French revolution. After his arrival, he published his “Travels in America;” (Nouveau Voyage dans les Etats Unis, &. Paris, 1791, 3 vols. 8vo), and as he found the attention of the public directed to the approaching assembly of the states-general, he wrote his “Plan of Conduct for the Deputies of the People.” At this time, he had withdrawn from the partisans of the duke of Orleans; and he took an active part in the plans that were then projected for the organization of the people, with a view to their union and energy in accomplishing the revolution. To the lodgings of Brissot, as a person who was held in estimation at this period, the keys of the Bastille, when it was taken, were conveyed; he also became president of the Jacobin club; and he distinguished himself in various ways as a zealous promoter of those revolutionary principles, which afterwards gave occasion to a great jiumber of atrocious excesses. After the king’s flight to Varennes, Brissot openly supported the republican cause; but, as some form of monarchy was still the object of the national wish, he was obliged to restrain his impetuosity. The popularity acquired by his writings and conduct was such, as to induce the Parisians to return him as one of their members in the “Legislative national assembly,” which succeeded the “Constituent assembly,” in October 1791, of which assembly he was appointed secretary; and he became afterwards a member of the committee of public instruction. Although inferior to many others in talents and knowledge, his activity raised him to the rank of head or chief, in the party denominated “Girondists” or “La Gironde,” the name of the department to which several of its members belonged, and also from his own name “Brissotins.” In his career of ambition, he does not seem to have been influenced by pecuniary cc nsiderations; power, more than wealth, being the object of his aim; for, at this time, he and his family lodged in an apartment up four pair of stairs, and subsisted on his stipend as deputy, and the inconsiderable gains accruing from a newspaper. As a determined enemy to monarchy, he was unremitting in his efforts to engage the nation in a war, with the avowed purpose of involving the king and his ministers in difficulties which would terminate in their ruin, and this part of his political conduct must ever be lamented and execrated by the friends of freedom and of mankind. In the impeachment of M. Delessart, the minister for foreign affairs, Brissot took a principal lead; and alleged against him several articles of accusation, in consequence of which, he was apprehended, tried by the high national court at Orleans, and condemned to die, without being h'rst heard in his own defence, so that he became the first victim to that desperate faction, which afterwards deluged France with blood. His colleagues were so complex ly terrified by this event, that they requested leave to resign, and the ministry was at once completely dissolved. Their successors, appointed by the king, under the direction and inriuence of Brissot, were Dumourier, Roland, and Ciaviere. This appointment was followed bya declaration of war, decreed by the national assembly, against the king of Hungary and Bohemia; and Brissot, during the existence of this administration, which terminated soon, was considered as the most powerful person in France. About this time, Brissot began to entertain secret jealousy and suspicion of La Fayette, and concurred with other members of the assembly, in signing an accusation against him, which, however, he was not able to substantiate. He and his republican party were likewise industrious in their endeavours to throw an odium on the court, by alleging, that a private correspondence was carried on between the king and queen and the emperor; and they even averred, that an “Austrian Committee,” and a conspiracy in favour of the enemies of the country, existed among the friends of the court. The charge seemed to be unsupported by sufficient evidence; the king publicly contradicted these accusations as calumnies; nevertheless, they made no small impression on the minds of the public. To the writings and conduct of Brissot, the horrid massacres at the Tuiileries, on the 10th of August, 1792, have been principally ascribed; and it is a poor excuse that he is said to have preserved the lives of several of the Swiss guards on that fatal day. He was employed to draw up the declaration to the neutral powers concerning the suspension of the king’s authority; but he is said to have regarded with horror the sanguinary spirit that was now predominant among the leaders of the jacobins. Whilst, indeed, he was ascending to the pinnacle of power, he seems to have been the ardent advocate of insurrection and the revolutionary power: but as he found himself raised to that station, he began to inculcate “order and the constitution,” the usual cant of all demagogues who think they have attained their object. In the shocking massacre of the prisoners at Paris in September, he had probably no other concern, than the inwhich his irritating speeches and writings had created on the minds of the more active agents. When the “National convention,” the idea of which is said to have been suggested by him, assumed the direction of the state, and assembled on the 20th of September, 1792, he was returned as member for the department of Eure and Loire, his native country. In this assembly, he openly avowed himself an advocate for a republican government, in opposition both to the Jacobins and Orleanists; and was expelled the Jacobin club. On this occasion, he wrote a vindication of his public conduct, under the title of “An Address to all the Republicans.” He is said to have been so far shocked by the prospect of the fatal issue of the king’s trial, as to have attempted the preservation of his life, by deferring his execution till the constitution should be perfected; a proposition of which the absurdity and cruelty are nearly equal. The war with England, which soon followed the death of Louis, is ascribed to his ardour find credulity; for he was led to imagine, that the consequence of it would be a civil war in this country; and it is said, that this, as well as the war with Holland, was decreed in the national convention, Feb. 1, 1793, at his motion. This charge, however, he retorts on his accusers, and says, that the anarchists, by voting the death of the king, were themselves the authors of the war,

, a learned Frenchman, was born about the end of the fifteenth century, at Auxerre, or in that diocese; and in his education made great progress in the learned languages, particularly the Greek, from which he translated into Latin, Chrysostom’s treatise on the priesthood; his first eight homilies on the epistle of St. Paul to the Romans, and some other works, which contributed very much to his reputation. He used frequently to compose Greek verses, with which he entertained the literati at his house, where they were sure of an open table. From 1512 he was secretary to queen Anne, and archdeacon of Albi. In 1515 he had a canonry conferred upon him in the church of Auxerre, which, in 1520, he resigned, on being promoted to the same rank at Paris. He calls himself almoner to the king in the title of his rare book “Germani Brixii, gratulatoriae quatuor ad totidem viros classissimos, &c.” Paris, 1531, 4to. This contains also four letters to Erasmus, Jerome Vida, Sadolet, and Lazarus Bayf, with some Latin poetry addressed to Francis I. on a marble statue of Venus, which the chevalier Ilenz had presented to that sovereign. He published also an edition of Longolius’s defences, “Christ. Longolii perduellionis rei detensiones duae,” 1520. Brixius died in 1538. He was the familiar acquaintance of Rabelais, and long the correspondent of Erasmus, but what more particularly entitles him to notice here, is his quarrel with sir Thomas More, on which some of the biographers of that illustrious character have been either silent, or superficial. Brixius in 151*3 composed a poem called “Chordigera,”. where in three hundred hexameter verses, he described a battle fought that year by a French ship, la Cordeliere, and an English ship, the Regent. More, who was not then in the high station which he afterwards reached, composed several epigrams in derision of this poem. Brixius, piqued at this affront, revenged himself by the “AntiMorus,” an elegy of about 400 verses, in which he severely censured all the faults which he thought he had found in the poems of More. Yet he kept this piece of satire by him for some time, declaring, that if he should consent to the publication, it would be purely to comply with his friends, who remonstrated to hirn, that compositions of this kind lost much of their bloom by coming out late. There are three editions of the Anti-Morus. The two first are of Paris; one published by himself, in 1520, the other in 1560, in the second volume of the “Flores Epigrammatum” of Leodegarius a Quercu, or Leger du Che'ne. The third is in the “Corpus Poetarum Latinorum” collected by Janus Gruterus, under the anagrammatic name of Ranutius Gerus. Erasmus says that More despised this poem so much as to have intended to print it; Erasmus at the same time advised More to take no notice of it. The chancellor’s great-grandson and biographer, More, seems to think that he had written something in answer to Brixius, before he received this advice from Erasmus, but called in the copies, “so that,” says his biographer, “it is now very hard to be found; though some have seen it of late.” Much correspondence on the subject may be perused in our authorities.

, a man of a visionary turn, was a native of Venice, born in the beginning of the sixteenth century. He embraced the Protestant religion, and expressed a great zeal against Popery. He published several books in Holland, in which he maintained that the particular events of the sixteenth century had been foretold by the prophets, and after he had applied scripture, as his fancy directed, to things that had already happened, he took the liberty to apply it to future events. In this he succeeded so far as to persuade a French gentleman of noble extraction, and a Protestant, that a Protestant prince would quickly overthrow the Pope’s kingdom, and make himself the head of all the united Christians. This gentleman, Segur Pardaillan, was a faithful servant to the ing of Navarre, afterwards Henry IV. and thought heaven designed his master for the glorious enterprise which Brocardus had foretold. Big with these hopes, he proposed to him to send an embassy to the Protestant princes, offering to be his ambassador; and there being nothing in his proposal but what suited with the exigencies of the time, it was approved of, and he was actually deputed to those princes in 1583.

In 1763 she published a novel, entitled, “The History of Lady Julia Mandeville,” concerning the plan of which there were various opinions, though of the execution there seems to have been but one. It was read with much avidity and general approbation. It has been often, however, wished that the catastrophe had been less melancholy; and of the propriety of this opinion the authoress herself is said to have been satisfied, but did not choose to make the alteration. In the same year she published “Letters from Juliet lady Catesby to her friend lady Henrietta Campley,” translated from the French, 12mo. She soon afterwards went to Canada with her husband, who was chaplain to the garrison at Quebec; and there saw those romantic scenes so admirably painted in her next work, entitled, “The History of Emily Montagu,” 1769, 4 vols. 12mo. The next year she published “Memoirs of the Marquis of St. Forlaix,” in 4 vols. 12mo. On her return to England accident brought her acquainted with Mrs. Yates, and an intimacy was formed between them which lasted as long as that lady lived; and when she died, Mrs. Brooke did honour to her memory by a eulogium printed in the Gentleman’s Magazine. If we are not mistaken, Mrs. Brooke had with Mrs. Yates fora time some share in the opera-house. She certainly had some share of the libellous abuse which the management of that theatre during the above period gave birth to. We have already seen that her first play had been refused by Mr. Garrick. After the lapse of several years she was willing once -more to try her fortune at the theatre, and probably relying on the influence of Mrs. Yates to obtain its representation, produced a tragedy which had not the good fortune to please the manager. He therefore rejected it; and by that means excited the resentment of the authoress so much that she took a severe revenge on him in a novel published in 1777, entitled the “Excursion,” in 2 vols. 12mo. It is not certainly known whether this rejected tragedy is or is not the same as was afterwards acted at Covent-garden. If it was, it will furnish no impeachment of Mr. Garrick’s judgment. It ought, however, <to be added, that our authoress, as is said, thought her invective too severe; lamented and retracted it. In 1771 she translated “Elements of the History of England, from the invasion of the Romans to the reign of George II. from the abbe Millot,” in 4 vols. 12mo. In January 1781, the “Siege of Sinope,” a tragedy, was acted at Coventgarden. This piece added but little to her reputation, though the principal characters were well supported by Mr. Henderson and Mrs. Yates. It went nine nights, but never became popular; it wanted energy, and had not much originality; there was little to disapprove, but nothing to admire. Her next and most popular performance was “Rosina,” acted at Covent-garden in December 1782. This she presented to Mr. Harris, and few pieces have been equally successful. The simplicity of the story, the elegance of the words, and the excellence of the music, promise a long duration to this drama. Her concluding work was “Marian,” acted 1788 at Covent-garden with some success, but very much inferior to Rosina.

In the year 1737, when he had reached the summit of fame, he appeared for the last time on the stage at London; from whence he departed for the court of Spain, whither he was invited through the solicitations of queen Elizabeth, vho had known his excellence at Parma. Her design was, by the ravishing notes of this great master, to wean her spouse king Philip V. from his passion for the chace, to which his strength was no longer adequate. On his way to Madrid, he had the honour to give a specimen of his talents before the French king at Paris; and we are told by Riccoboni, that all the audience were so astonished at hearing him, that the French, who otherwise detested the Italian music, began from that time to waver in their notions. He had scarcely set his foot in Madrid, but the king hastened to hear him; and was so much taken with the agreeableness of his song, that he immediately settled on him, by a royal edict, a salary equal to what he had received in England, together with an exemption from all public taxes, as a person destined to his familiar converse; and granted him, besides, the court equipages and livery, free of all expence. He could not pass a day without him; not only on account of his vocal abilities, but more on account of the agreeable talents he possessed for conversation. He spoke French and Italian elegantly, had some knowledge of the English and German, and in a short time learnt the Castilian. By his courtesy and discretion he gained the affection of every one. In his converse he was sincere to an uncommon degree, even towards the royal personages who honoured him with their intimacy; and it was jchiefly this that induced the monarch to set so high a value on him. His first words, when he waked in the morning, were regularly these: “Let Farinello be told that I expect him this evening at the usual hour.” Towards midnight Farinello appeared, and was -never dismissed till break of day, when he betook himself to rest, in the apartments assigned him in the palace, though he had likewise a house in the city. To the king he never sung more than two or three pieces; and, what will seem almost incredible, they were every evening the same. Excepting when the king was to go to the holy sacrament on the following day, Farinello was never at liberty to get a whole night’s sleep.

, an eminent French musician, born in 1660, in the former part 'of his life had been prebendary and chapel-master of the cathedral church of Strasburgh, but afterwards became grand chaplain and chapel-master in the cathedral of Meaux. He published a work entitled “Prodromus Musicalis, on elevations et motets a voix seule, avec une Basse continue,” 2 vols. fol. the second edition in 1702; but his most useful book was his “Dictionnaire de Musique,” Amst. 1703, fol. at the end of which is a catalogue of authors, ancient and modern, to the amount of nine hundred, who have written on music, divided into classes, with many curious observations relating to the history of music, which have been of great service to musical writers and historians. Grassineau’s Dictionary, published in 1740, is not much more than a translation of Brossard' s work; it was also of great service to Rousseau, whose eloquence has certainly furnished us with a more ^pleasant book, yet Rousseau is acknowledged to be most correct where he most closely copies Brossard. Brossard died in 1730. He had a numerous library of music, which he presented to Louis XIV. who gave himself a pension of 1200 livres, and the same sum to hfs niece.

, a French writer of great learning, was born at Dijon, in 1709, and became a counsellor of parliament, in 1730, and president a worker in 1742. During the leisure which his public employments afforded, he cultivated most of the sciences, and was allowed to be well acquainted with all. Voltaire only has attacked his literary reputation, and this his countrymen ascribe to the malice which that writer was seldom anxious to conceal. Buffon, on the contrary, regarded him as a scholar of the first rank, an acute philosopher, and an original and valuable writer; nor was he less estimable in private life. In 1774 he was appointed president of the parliament of Burgundy, but died soon after, at Paris, in 1777, whither he had come to visit his married daughter. He was a member of the academy of Dijon, of the inscriptions and belles lettres, and other learned societies. He wrote: 1. “Lettres sur la Decouverte de la ville d'Herculaneum,” 1750, 8vo. 2. “Histoire des Navigations aux Terres Australes,” 1756, 2 vols. 4to, in which he endeavoured to prove the existence of a southern continent, which subsequent navigators have disproved. 3. “Du culte des dieux Fetiches, ou parallele de l'ancienne idolatrie avec celle des peuples de Nigritie,” 1760, 12mo, a piece which has been improperly attributed to Voltaire. 4. “Traite de la formation mecanique des Langues,” 1765, 2 vols. 12mo, in which he attempts a general etymological system founded on the mechanical formation of articulate sounds; but his countrymen allow that he leans too much to paradox, which certainly has long been an extensive branch of French philosophy. 5. “Histoire de la Republique Romaine dans la cours du VII siecle, par Salluste,” Dijon, 3 vols. 4to. This may be accounted his principal work, and was long his principal employment. He was so sensible of the loss of Sal lust’s principal work, that he resolved to collect his fragments with greater care than had ever been employed before; and by the most accurate arrangement to trace out as near as possible the plan and chief features of that work, and then to connect these fragments in the manner of Freinshemius in his “Fragmenta Livii.” But as De Brosses soon became sensible of the difficulty of assimilating his Latin diction to that of Sallust, he changed his first design, and resolved on translating both the fragments and his author’s histories of the Catilinarian and Jugurthine wars into French, and to attempt to supply the lost work from other ancient writers. The first volume opens with a preface containing remarks on the various methods of writing history, and some information concerning Roman names, ranks, magistracies, and elections. The body of the work itself begins with a translation of, and commentary on, Sallust’s Jugurthine war. The notes subjoined to this part treat chiefly of the geography and population of Africa, and the text is illustrated by a map of Africa, a plan of Meteilus’s march against Jugurtha, and its illustration by a military connoisseur. After this follows the restoration of Sallust’s five books, continued in vol. II. comprizing the war with Mithridates: a description of the Pontus Euxinus, with the adjacent countries; the Gladiatorian war, raised by Spartacus, and the war of Greta. The third volume contains a translation of the Catilinarian war, with its sequel, illustrated with historical and political notes; Sallust’s two letters to Caesar, commonly styled “Orat. de Rep. ordinanda,” which De Brosses considers as genuine; a very minute collection of all the notices of Sallust’s life, writings, gardens, buildings, and even of the remains discovered in later times. The whole concludes with the abb Cassagne’s “Essay on the Art of composing History, and on the works of Sailust.‘-’ Industrious as M. de Brosses has been in this work, we believe that in the life of Sailust, at least, he has been improved upon by Henry Stuart, esq. in his late elaborate publication,” The works of Sailust,“1806, 2 vols. 4to, Besides these, De Brosses contributed many learned papers to the Paris and Dijon memoirs, but his family disown 3 vols. of” Lettres historiques et critiques sur l'Italie," published in 1799 in his name.

, a French Protestant and martyr, was born at Nismes, in 1647, He was an advocate, and distinguished by his 'pleadings at Castres and Toulouse; and it was at his house that the deputies of the Protestant churches assembled in 1683: where they took a resolution to continue to assemble, although their churches were demolished. The execution of this project occasioned violent conflicts, seditions, executions, and massacres, which ended at length in an amnesty on the part of Lewis XIV. Brousson retired then to Nismes; but, fearing to be apprehended with the principal authors of this project, who do not seem to have been comprised within the amnesty, he became a refugee at Geneva first, and thence at Lausanne. He shifted afterwards from town to town, and kingdom to kingdom, to solicit the compassion of Protestant princes towards his suffering brethren in France. Returning to his own country, he travelled through several provinces, exercised some time the ministry in the Cevennes, appeared at Orange, and passed to Berne, in order to escape his pursuers. He was at length taken at Oleron, in 1698, and removed to Montpellier; where, being convicted of having formerly held secret correspondence with the enemies of the state, and of having preached in defiance of the edicts, he was broke upon the wheel the same year. He was a man of great eloquence as well as zeal, greatly esteemed among strangers, and regarded as a martyr by those of his own persuasion. The states of Holland added six hundred florins, as a pension for his widow, to four hundred which had been allowed to her husband. His writings being principally those which, arose out of the circumstances in which the reformed church were then placed, we shall refer to Moreri for the exact titles and dates, and give only the subjects, namely: 1. “The state of the reformed in France.” 2. “Letters to the French clergy in favour of the reformed religion.” 3. “Letters from the Protestants in France to all other Protestants,” printed and circulated at the expence of the elector of Brandenburg. 4. “Letters to the Roman Catholics.” 5. “A summary relation of the wonders, wrought by God in the Cevennes and Lower Languedoc, for the consolation of his church.” 6. A volume of Sermons. 7. “Remarks on Amelotte’s translation of the New Testament;” and some religious tracts, which he published for circulation in France.

, an eminent French naturalist, was born at Montpellier, Feb. 28, 1761, where his father was a reputable schoolmaster, and soon discovered in him an insatiable thirst of knowledge, which we may conclude he assisted him in gratifying. At the early age of eighteen he was appointed by the university of Montpellier to fill a professor’s chair, and six years after he was admitted a member of the academy of sciences by an unanimous vote, a case which had not occurred from the foundation of that learned body, but their choice appeared amply justified by the several dissertations on natural history, botany, and medicine, which he published. It was his earnest wish to establish the system of Linnæus more extensively in France. With this view, as well as for his own improvement, he went to Paris, and examined the collections and museums, but not finding sufficient materials for his purpose, he determined to visit the most celebrated foreign collections, and came first to England, where he was admitted an honorary member of the royal society, and where he began his labours on the celebrated work on fishes. On his return to Paris, he was appointed perpetual secretary of the society of agriculture, which the intendant Berthier de Sauvigny resigned for him. In 1789 he was appointed a member of the electoral college of Paris, and like the other electors, was to supply such vacancies as were occasioned by any interruptions in the exercise of the office of magistracy; and the day it was his turn to go to the Hotel de Ville, he saw his friend and protector, Berthier, barbarously murdered by the populace. Broussonet was then ordered to superintend the provisions of the capital, and was frequently“in danger of his life at that turbulent period. In 1791 he had a seat in the legislative assembly, but quitted Paris the year following for his native city, from which he was soon obliged to make his escape, and after many dangers, arrived at Madrid, where he was gladly received, and liberally assisted by the literati of that city. There, however, the French emigrants were so enraged at his having filled any office under the revolutionary government, that they obliged him to leave Madrid, and soon after, Lisbon, to which he had removed. At last he had an opportunity of going out as physician to an embassy which the United States sent to the emperor of Morocco, and on this occasion, his friend sir Joseph Banks, hearing of his distresses, remitted him a credit for a thousand pounds. After his arrival at Morocco, he employed all his leisure hours in extending his botanical knowledge, and learning that his native country was recovering from its late anarchy, he solicited and obtained permission to return, when the directory appointed him consul at the Canaries. In consequence of this he resided for two years at Teneriffe. In 1796, on his return, he was admitted a member of the Institute, and again became professor of botany at Montpellier, with the direction of the botanical garden. He was afterwards chosen a member of the legislative body, but died July 27, 1807, at Montpellier, of an apoplectic stroke. It was to him that France owes the introduction of the Merino sheep, and Angola goats. His publications are: 1.” Varise positiones circa Respirationem,“Montpellier, 1778. 2.” Ichthyologia, sistens Piscium descriptiones et icones,“London, 1782, containing descriptions of the most rare fishes. 3.” Essai sur Phistoire naturelle de quelques especes de Moines, decrites a la maniere de Linnee,“1784, 8vo, This is the translation only of a Latin satire on the monks, the original of which appeared in Germany, in 1783. 4.” Annee rurale, ou calendrier a I'usage des cultivateurs,“Paris, 1787-8, 2 vols. 12mo. 5.” Notes pour servir a Thistoire de l‘ecole de medicine de Montpellier pendant l’an VI.“Montpellier, J 1 9 5, 8vo. 6.” La Feuille dn cultivateur," 1788, and following years, 8 vols. 4to, which he conducted with Messrs. Parmentier, Dubois, and Lefebure. He contributed also a great many dissertations to the academy of sciences, the society of agriculture, &c. and left many works in manuscript.

, a clergyman of the church of Scotland, who long kept an academy for the education of young men for the ministry among the class called Seceders in that country, was born in 1722, in a village called Kerpoo, in the county of Perth. His parents died when he was very young, leaving him almost destitute, but by some means he contrived to obtain books, if not regular education, and by dint of perseverance acquired a considerable knowledge of Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, with which last he was critically conversant. He could also read and translate the French, Italian, German, Arabic, Persian, Syriac, and Ethiopic, but his favourite studies were divinity, and history both ecclesiastical and civil. His principles being Calvinistic, his reading was much confined to writers of that stamp, but he appears to have studied every controversy in which the church has been involved, with much attention. At what time he was ordained, does not appear, but his extensive* learning pointed him out to the associate synod, or synod of seceders, as a fit person to be their professor of divinity, and train up young men, who had had a previous education, for the office of the ministry within their pale. His residence was at Haddington, where he was preacher to a numerous congregation of the seceders. At one time he received a pressing invitation from the Dutch church in the province of New York, to be their tutor in divinity, which he declined. He died June 19, 1787. His principal works are, 1. An edition of the Bible, called “The Self-interpreting Bible,” from its marginal references, which are far more copious than in any other edition, London, 1791, 2 vols. 4to, and since reprinted. 2. “Dictionary of the Bible, on the plan of Calmet, but principally adapted to common readers; often reprinted, 2 vols. 8vo. 3.” Ex-> plication of Scripture Metaphors,“' 12mo. 4.” History of the Seceders,“eighth edition, 1802, 12mo. 5.” The Christian Student and Pastor,“1781, an abridgment of the Lives of Pious Men. 6.” Letters on the Government of the Christian Church.“7.” General History of the Church,“1771, 2 vols. 12mo, a very useful compendium of church history, partly on the plan of Mosheim, or perhaps rather of Lampe. After his death appeared a volume entitled” Select Hemains," with some account of his life.

, of facetious memory^ as Mr. Addison says of him, was the son of a considerable farmer of Shiffnal in Shropshire, and educated at Newport-school in. that county; from whence he was removed to Christchurch in Oxford^ where he soon distinguished himself by his uncommon attainments in literature. He had great parts and quickness of apprehension, nor does it appear that he was wanting in application; for we are told, that he was very well skilled in the Latin, Greek, French, Italian, and Spanish languages, even before he was sent to Oxford. The irregularities of his life did not suffer him however to continue long at the university; but when obliged to quit it, instead of returning home to his father, he formed a scheme of going to London, in hopes of making his fortune some way or other there. This scheme did not answer. He was very soon in danger of starving; upon, which he made interest to be schoolmaster of Kingston upon Thames, in which pursuit he succeeded. But this was a profession very unsuitable to a man of Mr. Brown’s turn, and a situation that must needs have been extremely disagreeable to him; and therefore we cannot wonder, that he soon quitted his school, and went again to London; where finding his old companions more delighted with his humour, than ready to relieve his necessities, he had recourse to his pen, and became an author, and partly a libeller, by profession. He published a great variety of pieces, under the names of dialogues, letters, poems, &c. in all which he discovered no small erudition, and a vast and exuberant vein of humour: for he was in his writings, as in his conversation, always lively and facetious. In the mean time he made no other advantage of these productions, than what he derived from the booksellers; for though they raised his reputation, and made his company sought after, yet as he possessed less of the gentleman than wits usually do, and more of the scholar, so he was not apt to choose his acquaintance by interest, but was more solicitous to be recommended to the ingenious who might admire, than to the great who might relieve him. An anonymous author, who has given the world some account of Mr. Brown, says, that though a good-natured man, he had one pernicious quality, which was, rather to lose his friend than his joke. He had a particular genius for satire, and dealt it out liberally whenever he could find occasion. He is famed for being the author of a libel, fixed one Sunday morning on the doors of Westminsterabbey; and of many others against the clergy and quality. He used to treat religion very lightly, and would often say, that he understood the world better, than to have the imputation of righteousness laid to his charge, yet, upon the approach of death, his heart misgave him, as if all was not right within, and he began to express sentiments of remorse for his past life.

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

, an eminent physician, son of sir Thomas Browne, hereafter mentioned, was born about 1642. He was instructed in grammar learning at the school of Norwich, and in 1665 took the degree of bachelor of physic at Cambridge. Removing afterwards to Mertori college, Oxford, he was admitted there to the same degree in 1666, and the next year created doctor. In 1668, he visited part of Germany, and the year following made a wider excursion into Austria, Hungary, and Thessaly, where the Turkish sultan then kept his court at Larissa. He afterwards passed through Italy. Upon his return, he practised physic in London; was made physician first to Charl-es II. and afterwards in 1682 to St. Bartholomew’s hospital. About the same time he joined his name to those of many other eminent men, in a translation of Plutarch’s Lives. He was first censor, then elect, and treasurer of the college of physicians; of which in 1705 he was chosen president, and held this office till his death, which happened in August 1708, after a very short illness, at his seat at Northfleet, near Greenhithe in Kent. He was acquainted with Hebrew, was a critic in Greek, and no man of his age wrote better Latin. German, Italian, French, &c. he spoke and wrote with as much ease as his mother tongue. Physic was his business, and to the promotion thereof all his other acquisitions were referred. Botany, pharmacy, and chemistry, he knew and practised. King Charles said of him, that “he was as learned as any of the college, and as well-bred as any at court.” He was married, and left a son and a daughter; the former, Dr. Thomas Browne, F. R. S. and of the royal college of physicians, died in JiJy 17 Jo. The daughter married Owen Brigstock, of Lechdenny, in the county of Carmarthen, esq. to whom the public is indebted for part of the posthumous works of sir Thomas Browne.

The earl of Dorset recommended this book to the perusal of sir Kenelm Digby, who returned his judgment upon it, not in a letter, but in a book; in which, though mingled with some positions fabulous and uncertain, there are acute remarks, just censures, and profound speculations, yet its principal claim to admiration is, that it was written in twenty-four hours, of which part was spent in procuring Browne’s book, and part in reading it. This induced sir Thomas to publish a more correct edition of his work, which had great success. A Mr. Merryweather of Cambridge, turned it, not inelegantly, into Latin, and from his version it was again translated into Italian, German, Dutch, and French, and at Strasburgh the Latin translation was published with large notes, by Lenuus Nicolaus Moltfarius. Of the English annotations, which, in all the editions from 1644, accompany the book, the author is unknown. Merryweather, we are told, had some difficulty in getting his translation printed in Holland. The first printer to whom he offered it carried it to Salmasius, “who laid it by (says he) in state for three months,” and then discouraged its publication: it was afterwards rejected by two other printers, and at last was received by Hackius. The peculiarities of the book raised the author, as is usual, many admirers and many enemies; but we know not of more than one professed answer, written under the title of “Medicus Ivledicatus,” by Alexander Ross, which was universally neglected by the world. Abroad it was animadverted upon as having an irreligious tendency, by Guy Patin, by Tobias Wagner, by Muller, Reiser, and Buddeus, and w&s put into the Index Expurgatorius. At present it will probably be thought that it was both too much applauded and too much censured, and that it would have been a more useful book had the author’s fancy been more guided by judgment.

In 1646, he printed “Enquiries into vulgar and common Errors,” small folio, a work, says his biographer, which, as it arose not from fancy and invention, but from observation and books, and contained not a single discourse of one continued tenor, but an enumeration of many unconnected particulars, must have been the collection of years, and the effect of a design early formed, and long pursued. It is, indeed, adds the same writer, to be wished, that he had longer delayed the publication, and added what the remaining part of his life might have furnished. He published in 1673 the sixth edition, with some improvements. This book, like his former, was received with great applause, was answered by Alexander Koss, and translated into Dutch and German, and afterwards into French. It might, Dr. Johnson thinks, now be proper to reprint it with notes, partly supplemental and partly emendatory, to subjoin those discoveries which the industry of the last age has made, and correct those mistakes which the author has committed, not by idleness or negligence, but for want of Boyle’s and Newton’s philosophy.

, a celebrated modern traveller, descended of an ancient and honourable family, was the son of David Bruce, esq. of Kinnaird, by Marion Graham, daughter of James Graham, esq. of Airth, dean of the faculty of advocates, and judge of the high court of admiralty in Scotland. He was born at the family residence of Kinnaird, in the county of Stirling, Dec. 14, 1730. Of his first years few particulars are recorded of much consequence, except that his temper, contrary to the character which it afterwards assumed, was gentle and quiet; but as he advanced in life, became bold, hasty, and impetuous, accompanied, however, with a manly openness, that shewed the usual concomitant, a warm and generous heart. It having been determined to give him an English education, he was sent to London to the house of William Hamilton, esq. a barrister, and his uncle, with whom he remained for some time, and in 1742 he was placed at Harrow school, where he made great proficiency in classical learning. After leaving Harrow in May 1746, he lived about a year in the academy of a Mr. Gordon till April 1747, where he prosecuted his classical education, and studied French, arithmetic, and geometry. In May of that year he returned to Scotland in order to commence a course of study at the university of Edinburgh, preparatory to his following the profession of the law; but it does not appear that he made much progress, or indeed had much inclination for this study, and the precarious state of his health at this time rendered much study of any kind dangerous. His own expectations of success in the law became gradually abated, and various other circumstances determined him to relinquish it for ever.

His concern in the winotrade gave him an opportunity of travelling over a considerable part of Spain, Portugal, and the Netherlands, but hearing of his father’s death in 1758, he returned to England, and in 1761 withdrew entirely from the wine-trade. He now, from his observation while in Spain, suggested to the prime minister, Mr. Pitt, afterwards lord Chatham, the practicability of a successful expedition against Ferrol, in Galicia, where the Spaniards had a considerable harbour, and generally stationed a part of their navy; but various circumstances, of which perhaps Mr. Pitt’s resignation was the principal, prevented this enterprise from being attempted. Disappointed in this, he resolved to return to his native country, and pass his time as a private gentleman, cultivating his paternal estate. One of the new ministers, however, lord Halifax, diverted him from this design, and suggested Africa to him as a proper field for enterprize and discovery; and that he might go under the protection of a public character, it was proposed to send him as consul to Algiers. Bruce acceded to these proposals, and left England in the end of June 1762. He passed through France and Italy, and carried with him from the latter country an artist to assist him in his drawings. For his subsequent adventures, his travels into Abyssinia, and his discovery of the sources of the Nile, &c. we must refer to his published travels. He returned to his native country in 1773, and in 1776, he married a daughter of Thomas Dundas of Fingask, esq. by whom he had three children, two of whom, a son and daughter, are still living. After he settled at Kinnaird, his time was chiefly spent in managing his estate, in preparing his travels for the press, and other literary occupations; and he was preparing a second edition of his Travels, when death prevented the execution of/ his design. On Saturday, April 26, 1794, having entertained some company at Kinnaird, as he was going down stairs about eight o'clock in the evening, to hand a lady into a carriage, his foot slipt, and he fell from a considerable height. He was taken up in a state of insensibility, and expired early next morning. Mr. Bruce’s figure was above the common size; his limbs athletic, but well proportioned; his complexion sanguine; his countenance manly and good-tempered; and his manners easy and polite. The whole outward man was such as to announce a character well calculated to contend with the many difficulties and trying occasions, which so extraordinary a journey could not but have thrown in his way. His internal characters, the features of his understanding and disposition, seem in a great measure to have corresponded with these outward lineaments. As a country gentleman, though not without a tincture of haughtiness, he exhibited the elegance of a man of fashion, and the hospitality of a Briton. His personal accomplishments fitted him, in a superior manner, for the undertakings in which he engaged. His constitution was robust, and he had inured himself to every kind of fatigue and exercise. In mental accomplishments he equalled, if not surpassed, the generality of travellers. His memory was excellent, and his understanding vigorous and well cultivated. He understood French, Italian, Spanish, and Portuguese, the two first of which he spoke and wrote with facility. Besides Greek and Latin, which he read well, though not critically, he knew the Hebrew, Chaldee, and Syriac; and, in the latter part of his life, compared several portions of the scriptures in those related dialects. He read and spoke with ease, Arabic, Ethiopic, and Amharic. Necessity made him acquainted with these last, and impressed them deeply on his mind. He had applied, during the greatest part of his life, to the study of astronomy, and other practical branches of mathematical learning.

, a Lutheran divine, settled in England, was born in the small island of Cadsand, near the Belgic frontier, Dec. 31, 1726, and was educated with a view to the theological profession, chiefly at the university of Franeker, whence he passed to Leyden, There he obtained a pastorship, and profited by the society of Hemsterhuis, of Valkenäer, and especially of the elder Schultens. His literary acquirements were eminent; he read the Hebrew and the Greek; he composed correctly; and has preached with applause in four languages, Latin, Butch, French, and English. In 1752, Mr. Columbine, of a French refugee family, which had contributed to found, and habitually attended, the Walloon church at Norwich, was intrusted by that congregation, when he was on a journey into Holland, to seek out a fit successor to their late pastor, Mr. Valloton, and applied, after due inquiry, to Mr. Bruckner, who accepted the invitation, and early in 1753 settled as French preacher at Norwich, where he officiated during fifty-one years, with undiminished approbation. About the year 1766, Mr. Bruckner succeeded also to Dr. Van Sarn, as minister of the Dutch church, of which the duties gradually became rather nominal than real, in proportion as the Dutch families died oft', and as the cultivation of their language was neglected by the trading world for the French. The French tongue Mr. Bruckner was assiduous to diffuse, and gave public and private lessons of it for many years. His income was now convenient and progressive. He kept a horse and a pointer, for he took great pleasure in shooting. He drew occasionally, and has left a good portrait of his favourite dog. He cultivated music, and practised much on the organ. In 1767 was printed at Leyden his “Theorie du Systme Animal,” in the seventh and tenth chapters of which there is much anticipation of the sentiments lately evolved in the writings of Mr. Mai thus. This work was well translated into English, under the title “A Philosophical Survey of the Animal Creation,” published for Johnson and Payne in 1768. Mr. Bruckner was married in 1782, to Miss Cooper, of Guist, formerly his pupil. In 1790, he published under the name Cassander, from his birth-place, those “Criticisms on the Diversions of Purley,” which attracted some hostile flashes from Mr. Home Tooke, in his subsequent quarto edition. This pamphlet displays a profound and extensive knowledge of the various Gothic dialects, and states that the same theory of prepositions and conjunctions, so convincingly applied in the “Epea pteroenta” to the northern languages, had also been taught concerning the Hebrew and other dead languages by Schultens. Mr. Wakefield’s pamphlet against Social Worship drew from Mr. Bruckner, in 1792, a learned reply. In the preface to these “Thoughts on Public Worship,” hopes are given of a continuation still desiderated by the friends of religion. Mr. Bruckner began a didactic poem in French verse, which had for its object to popularize in another form, the principles laid down in. his Theory of the Aoimal System. A gradual failure rather of spirits than of health, seems often to have suspended or delayed the enterprise; to have brought on a restless and fastidious vigilance; and to have prepared that termination of his life, which took place on the morning of Saturday, May 12, 1804. He was buried, according to his own desire, at Guist, near the kindred of his respected widow. His society was courted to the last; as his conversation was always distinguished for good sense, for argument, and for humour. He was beloved for his attentions and affability; esteemed for his probity and prudence; and admired for his understanding and learning.

, a French writer of a singular character for versatility, was born at Aix, in 1640, and trained in the reformed religion, in defence of which he published some controversial pieces, particularly against Bossuet’s “Exposition de la Foi,” or Exposition of the faith; but the prelate, instead of answering, converted him. Brueys, become catholic, combated with the Protestant ministers, with Jurieu, Lenfant, and La Roche; but his airy spirit not rightly accommodating itself to serious works, he quitted theology for the theatre. He composed, jointly with Palaprat, his intimate friend, several comedies full of wit and gaiety. We have also of this writer a prosaic paraphrase or commentary on Horace’s art of poetry. In his latter years he became again a controversial writer, and, as his countrymen say, imitated Bellarmine and Moliere by turns. He died at Moritpellier in 1723, aged eighty -three; and all his dramatic pieces were collected, 1735, in 3 vols. 12mo. His comedies have some merit, but his tragedies and other works are deservedly sunk into oblivion.

, a French physician, was born at Bealivais about the end of the seventeenth century, and after studying medicine, acquired considerable reputation by his practice and his writings. He also arrived at the honour of being royal censor of the college, and a member of the academy or Angers. He died in 1756, after having written or edited some works of merit in his profession: 1. “Observations sur le manuel des Accouchments,” Paris, 1733, 4tc, a translation from Daventer. 2. “La Medicine Raisonnee,” from Hoffman, ibid. 1739, 9 vols. 12mo. 3. “Caprices d'imagination, on Lettres sur differens sujets,” ibid. 1746, in which he appears as a physician, metaphysician, moralist, and critic. 4. “Memoires pour servir a la vie de M. Silva,” ibid. 1744, 8vo. 5. “Traite des Fievres,” from Hoffman, ibid. 1746, 3 vols. 12mo. 6. “La Pohtique du Medicin,” from the same, ibid. 1751, 12mo, 7. “Traite des Alimens,” by Lemery, ibid. 1755, 2 vols. 12mo. 8. “Dissertations surPincertitude des signesde lamort, et Tabus des enterremens et embaumemens precipites,” ibid. 1742, often reprinted, and translated into many European languages. This is’the most useful of all his works, and has been the means of saving many lives. He wrote also some papers in the Journal des Savans.

, a celebrated French writer, was born at Rouen, Aug. 26, 1688, and commenced his noviciate among the Jesuits of Paris, Sept. 8, 1704. In 1706, he began his philosophical course in the royal college, and in 1708 was sent to Caen to complete his studies that he might take orders. Some of his pieces are dated from that city in 1710 and 1712, and one from Bourges in 1719. He appears indeed to have passed several years in the country, where he taught rhetoric. In 1713, he returned to Paris to study theology, and in 1722 he was again at Paris, where he took the vows in the society of Jesuits, and was intrusted with the education of the prince of Talmont. About the same time he assisted in the “Memoirs of the Arts and Sciences,” and continued his labours in that journal until 1729, when he was obliged to leave Paris for some time for having assisted in publishing father Margat’s History of Tamerlane, which it appears had g=ven offence. His absence, however, was not long, and on his return, or soon after, he was employed in continuing the “History of the Gallican church,” of which six volumes had been published by fathers Longueval and Fontenay. In 1725, he was appointed professor of mathematics, and filled that chair for six years with much reputation. It was probably in this situation that he read his lecture, on the “use of mathematical knowledge in polite literature,” now printed in the second volume of his works, nor did his various public employments prevent his publishing many other works, which were well received by the public. In 1722 he published, but without his name, his “Morale Chretienne,” Paris, a small volume, of which four editions were soon bought up. In 1723, he also published the first of his three letters, entitled “Examen du poema (de M. Racine) sur la grace,” 8vo, and in 1724, “La vie de Timperatrice Eleonore,” taken from that by father Ceva; the same year, “Abreg des vertus de soeur Jeanne Silenie de la Motte des Goutes,” Moulins, 12mo; and a new edition of father Mourgues “Traite de la Poesie Francoise,” with many additions, 12mo. But the work which contributed most to his reputation was his “Greek Theatre,” entitled “Theatre des Grecs, contenant des traductions ct analyses des tragedies Grecques, des discours et des remarques concernant la theatre Grec, &c.” 1730, 3 vols. 4to, and often reprinted in 12mo, in France and Holland. This useful work, not now in such high reputation as formerly, is yet well known in this country by the translation published by Mrs. Charlotte Lennox in 1760, 3 vols. 4to; to which the earl of Corke and Orrery contributed a general preface, and translated the three preliminary discourses: Dr. Sharpe, Dr. Grainger, and Mr. Bourryau translated some other parts, and Dr. Johnson contributed a dissertation on the Greek comedy, and the general conclusion of the work, which, in this translation, is certainly highly polished and improved. “Brumoy,” says Dr. Warton, “has displayed the excellencies of the Greek tragedy in a judicious and comprehensive manner. His jtranslations are faithful and elegant; and the analysis of those plays, which on account of some circumstances in ancient manners would shock the readers of this age, and would not therefore bear an entire version, is perspicuous and full. Of all the French critics, he and the judicious Fenelon have had the justice to confess, or perhaps the penetration to perceive, in what instances Corneille and Racine have falsified and modernized the characters, and overloaded with unnecessary intrigues the simple plots of the ancients.”

, an illustrious French painter, was of Scottish extraction, and born in 1619. His father was a statuary by profession. At three years of age it is reported that he drew figures with charcoal; and at twelve he drew the picture of his uncle so well, that it still passes for a fine piece. His father being employed in the gardens at Seguier, and having brought his son along with him, the chancellor of that name took a liking to him, and placed him with Simon Vouet, an eminent painter, who was greatly surprised at young Le Brun’s amazing proficiency. He was afterwards sent to Fontainbleau, to take copies of some of Raphael’s pieces. The chancellor sent him next to Italy, and supported him there for six years. Le Brun, on his return, met with the celebrated Poussin, by whose conversation he greatly improved himself in his art, and contracted a friendship with him which lasted as long as their lives. Cardinal Mazarin, a good judge of painting, took great notice of Le Brun, and often sat by him while he was at work. A painting of St. Stephen, which he finished in 1651, raised his reputation to the highest pitch. Soon after this, the king, upon the representation of M. Colbert, made him his first painter, and conferred on him the order of St. Michael. His majesty employed two hours every day in looking over him, whilst he was painting the family of Darius at Fontainbleau. About 1662, be began his five large pieces of the history of Alexander the Great, in which he is said to have set the actions of that conqueror in a more glorious light than Quintus Curtius in his history. He procured several advantages for the royal academy of painting and sculpture at Paris, and formed the plan of another for the students of his own nation at Rome. There was scarce any thing done for the advancement of the fine arts in which he was not consulted. It was through the interest of M. Colbert that the king gave him the direction of all his works? and particularly of his royal manufactory at the Gobelins, where he had a handsome house, with a genteel salary assigned to him. He was also made director and chancellor of the royal academy, and shewed the greatest zeal to encourage the fine arts in France. He possessed in a great degree that enthusiasm which animates the efforts, and increases the raptures of the artist. Some one said before him of his fine picture of the Magdalen, “that the contrite penitent was really weeping.” “That, 7 * said he,” is perhaps all that you can see; I hear her sigh.“He was endowed with a vast inventive genius, which extended itself to arts of every kind. He was well acquainted with the history and manners of all nations. Besides his extraordinary talents, his behaviour was so genteel, and his address Sq pleasing, that he attracted the regard and affection of the whole court of France: where, by the places and pensions conferred on him by the king, he made a very considerable figure. He died at his house in. the Gobelins in 1690, leaving a wife, but no children. He was author of a curious treatise of” Physiognomy“and of another of the” Characters of the Passions."

, a French Jesuit, was born at Nantes in 1607, and died at Paris Sept. 1, 1663. He wrote many pieces of Latin poetry. The principal are, 1. “The Ignatiad,” in xii books: the subject is the pilgrimage of St. Ignatius to Jerusalem. This poem forms a part of his “Virgilius Christianus;” in which he has imitated, with more piety than taste, the eclogues, the georgics, and the Æneid. His “Ovidius Christianus” is in the same strain: the Heroic Epistles are changed into pastoral letters, the Tristibus into holy lamentations, and the Metamorphoses into stories of converted penitents. Father Le Brun also wrote “Eloquentia Poetica,” Paris, 1655, 4to, a treatise in Latin on the precepts of the art of poetry, supported on examples drawn from the best authors. At the end is a treatise on poetical common-places, which may be of service to young versifiers.

, a French priest of the oratory, who made considerable approaches to liberality and good sense in his writings, was born at Brignolle, in the diocese of Aix in Provence, in 1661, and became celebrated for his knowledge of ecclesiastical history and antiquities; on which subjects he lectured in the seminary of St. Magloire, at Paris, for thirteen years. His first publication appears to have been against the illusion of the divining rod; “Lettres pour prouver l'illusion des philosophes sur la baguette,” Paris, 1693, reprinted in 1702, with many additions, under the title of “Histoire critique des pratiques superstitieuses, &c.” Of this there was a new edition in 3 vols. 12mo, 1732, with a life of the author by M. Bellon, his nephew, and in 1737 the abbe Granet printed a collection of pieces intended as a fourth volume. He also wrote against the theatre, as an amusement improper for Christians; but his more elaborate work was that on “Liturgies,” published in 4 vols. 8vd, containing a history of liturgies, prayers, ceremonies, &c. including those of the church of England. This, owing to some liberal opinions, involved him in a controversy, in which he defended himself with great ability, but before the contest was over he died, Jan. 6, 1729.

, a very eminent scholar and historian, derived his name of Aretine, or Aretino, from Arezzo, in which city he was born in the year 1370, of parents sufficiently wealthy to bestow on him a good education. In his early youth he was incited to a love of letters by an extraordinary accident. A body of French troops, who were marching to Naples to assist Louis of Anjou in maintaining his claim to trie sovereignty of that kingdom, at the solicitation of the partizans of a faction which had been banished from Arezzo, made an unexpected attack upon that city; and, after committing a great slaughter, carried away many of the inhabitants into captivity; and, among the rest, the family of Bruni. Leonardo being confined in a chamber in which hung a portrait of Petrarch, by daily contemplating the lineaments of that illustrious scholar, conceived so strong a desire to signalize himself by literary acquirements, that immediately upon his enlargement he repaired to Florence, where he prosecuted his studies with unremitting diligence, under the direction of John of Ravenna, and Manuel Chrysoloras. During his residence at Florence, he contracted a strict intimacy with the celebrated Poggio Bracciolini, and the latter being afterwards informed by Leonardo that he wished to procure a presentation to some place of honour or emolument in the Roman chancery, took every opportunity of recommending him. In consequence of this, pope Innocent VII. invited him to Rome, where he arrived March 24, 1405, but was at first disappointed in his hopes, the place at which he aspired being intended for another candidate, Jacopo d'Angelo. Fortunately, however, the pope having received certain letters from the duke of Berry, determined to assign to each of the competitors the task of drawing up an answer to them, and the compositions being compared, the prize was unanimously adjudged to Leonardo, who was instantly advanced to the dignity of apostolic secretary, and by this victory considerably increased his reputation, as his competitor was a man of very considerable talents. (See Angelo, James.) In 1410 Leonardo was elected chancellor of the city of Florence, but finding it attended with more labour than profit, resigned it in 1411, and entered into the service of pope John XXII. and soon after went to Arezzo, where he married a young lady of considerable distinction in that city. He was thought by his contemporaries rather too attentive to the minutiae of economy, and having married a lady who loved dress and ornaments, was somewhat disappointed. In a letter to his friend Poggio, after giving an account of his marriage expences, he adds, “In short, I have in one night consummated my marriage, and consumed my patrimony.” In 1415 he accompanied pope John XXIII. to the council of Constance, and this pope having been there deposed, Leonardo returned to Florence, where he was chosen secretary to the republic, and was employed in several political affairs of importance. He died in thebeginning of 1444, and was interred with the most solemn magnificence in the church of Santa Croce, with the following inscription, which is still legible, but not worthy of the object:

, or Robert Mannyng, the first English poet who occurs in the fourteenth century, was born probably before 1270, as he was received into the order of black canons at Brunne, about 1288. Malton appears to have been his birth-place, but what Malton is doubtful. He was, as far as can be discovered, merely a translator. His first work, says Warton, was a metrical paraphrase of a French book, written by Robert Grosthead, bishop of Lincoln, called “Manuel Pecche” (Manuel des Péchés), being a treatise on the decalogue, and on the seven deadly sins, which are illustrated with many legendary stories. It was never printed, but is preserved in the Bodleian library, Mss. No. 415, and in the Harleian Mss. No. 1701. His second and more important work is a metrical chronicle of England, in two parts, the former of which (from Æneas to the death of Cadwallader) is translated from Wace’s “Brut d'Angleterre,” and the latter (from Cadwallader to the end of the reign of Edward I.) from a French chronicle written by Peter de Langtoft, an Augustine canon of Bridlington in Yorkshire, who is supposed to have died in the reign of Edward II. and was therefore contemporary with his translator. Hearne has edited Robert de Brunne, but has suppressed the whole of his translation from Wace, excepting the prologue, and a few extracts which he found necessary to illustrate his glossary. Mr. Ellis, to whom we are indebted for this article, has given some specimens of de Brunne’s work.

, an Italian writer to whom atheism has been generally, but unjustly, imputed, was born atNola in the kingdom of Naples, about the middle of the sixteenth century. His talents are said to have been considerable, but this is hardly discoverable from his works: he early, however, set up for an inquirer and innovator, and very naturally found many things in the philosophy and theology then taught in Italy, which he could not comprehend. Being fond of retirement and study, he entered into a monastery of Dominicans, but the freedom of his opinions, and particularly of his censures on the irregularities of the fraternity, rendered it soon necessary to leave his order and his country. In 1582, he withdrew to Geneva, where his heretical opinions gave offence to Calvin and Beza, and he was soon obliged to provide for his safety by flight. After a short stay at Lyons he came to Paris, and his innovating spirit recommended him to the notice of multitudes, who at this time declared open hostilities against the authority of Aristotle. In a public disputation, held in the royal academy, in 1586, he defended, three days successively, certain propositions concerning nature and the world, which, together with brief heads of the arguments, he afterwards published in Saxony, under the title of “Acrotismus,” or “Reasons of the physical articles proposed against the Peripatetics at Paris.” The contempt with which Bruno, in the course of these debates, treated Aristotle, exposed him to the resentment of the academic professors, who were zealous advocates for the old system; and he found it expedientto leave thekingdom of France. According to some writers, he now visited England, in the train of the French ambassador Castelneau, wherehe was hospitably received by sir Philip Sydney and sir Fulke Gre.ville, and was introduced to queen Elizabeth. But though it is certain from his writings that he was in England, he probably made this visit in some other part of his life, and we should suppose before this, in 1583 or 1584. For, about the middle of the same year in which he was at Paris, we find him, at Wittenburg, a zealous adherent of Luther. In this city he met with a liberal reception, and full permission to propagate his doctrines: but the severity with which he inveighed against Aristotle, the latitude of his opinions in religion as well as philosophy, and the contempt with which he treated the masters of the public schools, excited new jealousies; and complaints were lodged against him before the senate of the university. To escape the disgrace which threatened him, Bruno, after two years residence in Wittenburg, left that place, and took refuge in Helmstadt, where the known liberality of the duke of Brunswick encouraged him to hope for a secure asylum. But either through the restlessness of his disposition, or through unexpected opposition, he went next year to Francfort, to superintend an edition of his works, but before it was completed was obliged again, probably from fear of persecution, to quit that city. His next residence was at Padua; where the boldness with which h.e taught his new doctrines, and inveighed against the court of Rome, caused him to be apprehended and brought before the inquisition at Venice. There he was tried, and convicted of his errors. Forty days being allowed him to deliberate, he promised to retract them, and as at the expiration of that term, he still maintained his errors, he obtained a further respite for forty days. At last, it appearing that he imposed upon the pope in order to prolong his life, sentence was finally passed upon him on the 9th of February 1600. He made no offer to retract during the week that was allowed him afterwards for that purpose, but underwent his punishment on the 17th, by being burnt at a stake.

The following is a list of his works, which are in general but little known, as he printed them at his own expence, principally for distribution among his friends. 1, “Considerazioni sopra le cose della grandezza dei Romani, trad, del Montesquieu,” Berlin, 1764, 8vo. 2. “Reflessioni critiche sopra ii carattere e le gesta d'Alessandro Magno,” Milan, 1764, 8vo. This was translated both into French and English, the. latter in 1767; and a new edition of the original was reprinted at Berlin in 1803, 8vo. 3. A German translation of the “Heureusement,” a comedy of Rochon de Chabannes, Brunswick, 1764, 8vo. 4. A Cferman translation of the tragedy of “Regulus,” Potsdam, 1767, 8vo. 5. “Discours sur les Grand Hommes,” Berlin, 1768, 8vo, and ibid. 1803. 6. A French translation of Brandes’ “Ariane a Naxos.” 7. “The Thoughts of a Cosmopolite on Air Balloons,” in German, Hamburgh, 1784, 8vo. 8. “A Discourse on taking the oath, Oct. 2, 1786,” in German, Berlin, 1786, 8vo. 9. “Instructions for his regiment, &c.” in German, ibid. 1791, 8vo, with military figures. 10. “The military history of prince Frederic Augustus of Brunswick-Lunebourg, &c.” in German, Oels, 1797, 4to, with a portrait and twenty plans and charts. 11. "Journal plaisant, historique, politique, et literaire, a Oels/' from July 1793 to July 179$. He left also several works in manuscript, principally on military tactics.

, one of those celebrated persons whose writings attract universal admiration, while their lives pass on in one uniform tenour, without incident or adventure, was born in 1639, 1640, or 1644, (for we have seen all these dates given), in a village of France, near the town of Dourdan, in that part of the late province of the Isle of France which is now denominated the department of the Seine and Oise. Of his education, or of his youthful manners, we have no information. His first situation appears to have been at Caen, in the province of Normandy, where he had an office in the collection of the revenue. His literary talents, however, became soon too conspicuous to permit him to remain long in a situation so little corresponding with the expanding and elevating views of genius. The illustrious Bossuet appointed him to attend one of the royal children of France, to instruct him in history, with a pension of a thousand crowns a year. With this he might be considered at that period, and in that country, as in a state of affluence; and the literary distinctions, then the most courted by aspiring minds, were not withheld from him; for, in 163, he was elected by the express command of Lewis XIV. one of the forty members of the French academy. But he did not long enjoy that affluence which afforded him leisure to cultivate the fields of literature, nor the distinctions which he so well merited, and which were accompanied by the universal admiration of his countrymen, and indeed of all Europe. An apoplectic fit removed him from this transitory scene, in the year 1696, and in the fifty-third year of his age.

The best French editions of his Characters are those of Amsterdam, 1741, 2 vols. 12mo, and of Paris, 1750, 2 vols. 12mo, and in 1765, 1 vol. 4to. The English translation of them is in 2 vols. 8vo, by Rowe, 1713, with a tedious account of his life and writings, by M. Coste. This last contains the Theophrastus, Bruyere’s Characters, with a key, his speech on admission into the French academy, and an imitation of Bruyere by Rowe.

He translated from the French of Alaygri, “A Dispraise of the life of a Courtier,” which Alaygri had translated from the Castilian language, in which it was originally written by Guevara, London, 1548, 8vo. Several of the “Poems by uncertain authors,” printed with those of Surrey and Wyat, are supposed to have been his production. He left also in ms. letters written from Rome concerning the king’s divorce, and various letters of state, which Ant. Wood says he had seen. Dodd accuses sir Francis Bryan of having administered to the extravagant pleasures of Henry VIII. but perhaps he was not more culpable in this respect than Henry’s other courtiers, and it is in his favour that he retained the confidence of the succeeding government.

In 1783 was printed, at the expence of the duke of Marlborough, for private distribution, that splendid work, “The Maryborough Gems,” under the title of “Gemmarum antiquarurn delectus ex prsestantioribus desumptus in Dactylotheca Ducis Marburiensis.” The first volume of the exposition of these gems was written in Latin by Mr. Bryant, and translated into French by Mr. Maty. That of the second was written by Dr. Cole, prebendary of Westminster, and translated by Mr. Dutens. The friendship which subsisted between Mr. Bryant and the family of his patron, prompted him on all occasions to attend to their wishes, and to this disposition the public owe his “Treatise on the Authenticity of the Scriptures, and the Truth of the Christian Religion,” 1792, 8vo, which was written at the request of the dowager lady Pembroke, and is an excellent book for popular instruction. In two years after he published a large volume, entitled “Observations upon the Plagues inflicted upon the Egyptians; in which is shewn the peculiarity of those judgments, and their correspondence with the rites and idolatry of that people; with a prefatory Discourse concerning the Grecian Colonies from Egypt,” 8vo. This is certainly to be reckoned amongst Mr. Bryant’s best performances, and as such will be studiously read.

, the last writer on music in the Greek language that has come to our knowledge, flourished under the elder Paiaeologus, about the year 1320, and it is probable that he was a descendant of the house of Brienne, an ancient French family, that went into Greece during the crusades, at the beginning of the thirteenth century. His work is divided into three books, all which are confined to harmonics: the first is a kind of commentary on Euclid; and the second and third little more than explanations of the doctrines of Ptolemy. Meibomius had promised a Latin translation of this book, but dying before it was finished, Dr. 'Wallis performed the task, and it now constitutes a part of the third volume of his works, published at Oxford, 1699, 3 vols. fol.

, a Scottish historian, and Latin poet, of great eminence, and uncommon abilities and learning, was descended from an ancient family, and was born at Killairn, in the shire of Lenox, in Scotland, in the month of February 1506. His father died of the stone in the prime of life, whilst his grandfather was yet living; by whose extravagance the family, which before was but in low circumstances, was now nearly reduced to the extremity of want. He had, however, the happiness of a very prudent mother, Agnes, the daughter of James Heriot of Trabrown, who, though she, was left a widow with five sons and three daughters, brought them all up in a decent manner, by judicious management. She had a brother, Mr. James Heriot, who, observing the marks of genius which young George Buchanan discovered when at school, sent him to Paris in 1520 for his education. There he closely applied himself to his studies, and particularly cultivated his poetical talents but before he had been there quite two years, the death of his uncle, and his own ill state of health, and want of money, obliged him to return home. Having arrived in his native country, he spent almost a year in endeavouring to re-escablish his health; and in 1523, in order to acquire some knowledge of military affairs, he made a campaign with the French auxiliaries, who came over into Scotland with John duke of Albany. But in this new course of life he encountered so many hardships, that he was confined to his bed by sickness all the ensuing winter. He had probably much more propensity to his books, than to the sword; for early in the following spring he went to St. Andrews, and attended the lectures on logic, or rather, as he says, on sophistry, which were read in that university by John Major, or Mair, a professor in St. Saviour’s college, and assessor to the dean, of Arts, whom he soon after accompanied to Paris. After struggling for about two years with indigence and ill fortune, he was admitted, in 1526, being then not more than twenty years of age, in the college of St. Barbe, where he took the degree of B. A. in 1527, and M. A. in 1528, and in 1529 was chosen procurator nationis, and began then to teach grammar, which he continued for about three years. But Gilbert Kennedy, earl of Cassils, a young Scottish nobleman, being then in France, and happening to fall into the company of Buchanan, was so delighted with his wit, and the agreeableness of his manners, that he prevailed upon him to continue with him five years. According to Mackenzie, he acted as a kind of tutor to this young nobleman; and, during his stay with him, translated Linacre’s Rudiments of grammar out of English into Latin; which was printed at Paris, by Robert Stephens, in 1533, and dedicated to the earl of Cassils. He returned to Scotland with that nobleman, whose death happened about two years after; and Buchanan had then an inclination to return to France: but James V. king of Scotland prevented him, by appointing him preceptor to his natural son, James, afterwards the abbot of Kelso, who died in 1548, and not, as some say, the earl of Murray, regent of that kingdom. About this time, he wrote a satirical poem against the Franciscan friars, entitled, “Somnium;” which irritated them to exclaim against him as a heretic. Their clamours, however, only increased the dislike which he hud conceived against them on account of their disorderly and licentious lives; and inclined him the more towards Lutheranism, to which he seems to have had before no inconsiderable propensity. About the year 1538, the king having discovered a conspiracy against himself, in which he suspected that some of the Franciscans were concerned, commanded Buchanan to write a poem against that order. But he had probably already experienced the inconveniency of exasperating so formidable a body; for he only wrote a few verses which were susceptible of a double interpretation, and he pleased neither party. The king was dissatisfied, that the satire was not more poignant; and the friars considered it as a heinous offence, to mention them in any way that was not honourable. But the king gave Buchanan a second command, to write against them with more seventy; which he accordingly did in the poem, entitled, “Franciscanus;” by which he pleased the king, and rendered the friars his irreconcileable enemies. He soon found, that the animosity of these ecclesiastics was of a more durable nature than royal favour: for the king had the meanness to suffer him to feel the weight of their resentment, though it had been chiefly excited by obedience to his commands. It was not the Franciscans only, but the clergy in general, who were incensed against Buchanan: they appear to have made a common cause of it, and they left no stone unturned till they had prevailed with the king that he should be tried for heresy. He was accordingly imprisoned at the beginning of 1539, but found means to make his escape, as he says himself, out of his chamber-window, while his guards were asleep. He fled into England, where he found king Henry the Eighth persecuting both protestants and papists. Not thinking that kingdom, therefore, a place of safety, he again went over into France, to which he was the more inclined because he had there some literary friends, and was pleased with the politeness of French manners. But when he came to Paris, he had the mortification to find there cardinal Beaton, who was his great enemy, and who appeared there as ambassador from Scotland. Expecting, therefore, to receive some ill offices from him, if he continued at Paris, he withdrew himself privately to Bourdeaux, at the invitation of Andrew Govea, a learned Portuguese, who was principal of a new college in that city. Buchanan taught in the public schools there three years; in which time he composed two tragedies, the one entitled, “Baptistes, sive Calurania,” and the other “Jephthes, Votum;” and also translated the Medea and Alcestig of Euripides. These were all afterwards published;-but they were originally written in compliance with the rules of the school, which every year required some new dramatic exhibition; and his view in choosing these subjects was, to draw off the youth of France as much as possible from the allegories, which were then greatly in vogue, to a just imitation of the ancients; in which he succeeded beyond his hopes. During his residence at Bourdeaux, the emperor Charles V. passed through that city; upon which Buchanan presented his imperial majesty with an elegant Latin poem, in which the emperor was highly complimented, and at which he expressed great satisfaction. But the animosity of cardinal Beaton still pursued our poet: for that haughty prelate wrote letters to the archbishop of Bourdeaux, in which he informed him, that Buchanan had fled his country for heresy; that he had lampooned the church in most virulent satires; and that if he would put him to the trial, he would find him a most pestilentious heretic. Fortunately for Buchanan, these letters fell into the hands of some of his friends, who found means to prevent their effects: and the state of public affairs in Scotland, in consequence of the death of king James V. gave the cardinal so much employment, as to prevent any farther prosecution of his rancour against Buchanan.

Mr. Teissier says, that “it cannot be denied but Buchanan was a man of admirable eloquence, of rare prudence, and of an exquisite judgment; he has written the History of Scotland with such elegancy and politeness, that he surpasses all the writers of his age; and he has even equalled the ancients themselves, without excepting either Sallust or Titus Livius. But he is accused by some of being an unfaithful historian, and to have shewn in his history an extreme aversion against queen Mary Stuart; but his master-piece is his Paraphrase upon the Psalms, in which he outdid the most famous poets amongst the French and Italians.”

, an eminent French physician, censor royal, doctor-regent and professor of chemistry in the faculty of medicine at Paris, an adjunct of the academy of sciences, and an ordinary associate of the royal medical society, was born at Paris, Feb. 18, 1746. His father intended him for the bar, but his inclination stfbn led him to relinquish that profession for the study of the various sciences connected with medicine, in all which he made great proficiency, and gave lectures on mineralogy and chemistry. His plan and familiar mode of teaching soon procured him numerous pupils, and connecting himself with Lavoisier and other eminent chemists, he instituted a variety of experiments which, while they procured him the notice and honours of his profession, much impaired his health, and at a very early age, he was so debilitated in body and mind, as to require the use of stimulants to excite a momentary vigour; he is even said to have taken one hundred grains of opium in a day. By these means he was enabled to protract his existence until Jan. 24, 1780, when he died completely exhausted, although only in his thirty-fourth year. Except his papers in the literary journals, we know of only one publication of Bucquet’s, “Introduction a Tetude des corps naturels, tirés du regne vegetal,” 1773, 2 vols. 12mo. This was intended for the use of his pupils.

, or Bude’ (William), an eminent scholar and critic, the descendant of an ancient and illustrious family in France, lord of Marli-la-ville, king’s counsellor, and master of requests, was born at Paris in 1467. He was the second son of John Budé, lord of Yere and Villiers, secretary to the king, and one of the grand officers of the French chancery. In his infancy he was provided with masters; but such was the low state of Parisian education at that time, that when sent to the university of Orleans to study law, he remained there for three years, without making any progress, for want of a proper knowledge of the Latin language. Accordingly, on his return home, his parents had the mortification to discover that he was as ignorant as when he went, disgusted with study of any kind, and obstinately bent to pass his time amidst the gaieties and pleasures of youth, a coarse which his fortune enabled him to pursue. But after he had indulged this humour for some time, an ardent passion for study seized him, and became irresistible. He immediately disposed of his horses, dogs, &c. with which he followed the chace, applied himself to study, and in a short time made very considerable progress, although he had no masters, nor either instruction or example in his new pursuit. He became, in particular, an excellent Latin scholar, and although his style is not so pure or polished as that of those who formed themselves in early life on the best models, it is far from being deficient in fluency or elegance. His knowledge of the Greek was so great that John de Lascaris, the most learned Grecian of his time, declared that Budé might be compared with the first orators of ancient Athens. This language is perhaps complimentary, but it cannot be denied that his knowledge of Greek was very extraordinary, considering how little help he derived from instructions. He, indeed, employed at a large salary, one Hermonymus, but soon found that he was very superficial, and had acquired the reputation of a Greek scholar merely from knowing a little more than the French literati, who at that time knew nothing. Hence Budé used to call himself ανἶομαθης & οψιμαϑης i. e. self-taught and late taught. The work by which he gained most reputation, and published under the title “De Asse,” was one of the tirst efforts to clear up the difficulties relating to the coins and measures of the ancients; and although an Italian, Leonardus Portius, pretended to claim some of his discoveries, Budé vindicated his right to them with spirit and success. Previously to this he had printed a translation of some pieces of Plutarch, and “Notes upon the Pandects.” His fame having reached the court, he was invited to it, but was at first rather reluctant. He appears to have been one of those who foresaw the advantages of a diffusion of learning, and at the same time perceived an unwillingness in the court to entertain it, lest it should administer to the introduction of what was called heresy. Charles VIII. was the first who invited him to court, but died soon after: his successor Louis XII. employed him twice on embassies to Italy, and made him his secretary. This favour continued in the reign of Francis I. who sent for Budé to court when it was held at Arches at the interview of that monarch with Henry VIII. the king of England. From this time Francis paid him much attention, appointed him his librarian, and master of the requests, while the Parisians elected him provost of the merchants. This political influence he employed in promoting the interests of literature, and suggested to Francis I. the design of establishing professorships for languages and the sciences at Paris. The excessive heats of the year 1540 obliging the king to take a journey to the coast of Normandy, Budé accompanied his majesty, but unfortunately was seized with a fever, which carried him off Aug. 23/1540, at Paris. His funeral was private, and at night, by his own desire. This circumstance created a suspicion that he died in the reformed religion; but of this there is ho direct proof, and although he occasionally made free with the court of Rome and the corruptions of the clergy in his works, yet in them likewise he wrote with equal asperity of the reformers. Erasmus called him porttntum Gallic, the prodigy of France. There was a close connection between these two great men. “Their letters/' says the late Dr. Jortin,” though full of compliments and civilities, are also full of little bickerings and contests: which shew that their friendship was not entirely free from some small degree of jealousy and envy; especially on the side of Budé, who yet in other respects was an excellent person." It is not easy to determine on which side the jealousy lay; perhaps it was on both. Budé might envy Erasmus for his superior taste and wit, as well as his more extensive learning; and perhaps Erasmus might envy Budé for a superior knowledge of the Greek tongue, which was generally ascribed to him.

, a civilian of Oxford, the son of John Budden of Canford, in Dorsetshire, was born in that county in 1566, and entered Merton college in 1582, but was admitted scholar of Trinity college in May of the fol lowing year, where he took his bachelor’s degree. He was soon after ivmoved to Gloucester hall, where he took his master’s degree, but chiefly studied civil law. He was at length made philosophy reader of Magdalen college, and took his bachelor and doctor’s degrees in civil law in 1602. In 1609 he was made principal of New-inn, and soon after king’s professor of civil law, and principal of Broadgate’s hall, where he died June 11, 1620, and was buried in the chancel of St. Aldate’s church. Wood says he was a person of great eloquence, an excellent rhetorician, philosopher, and civilian. He wrote the lives of “William of Wainflete,” founder of Magdalen college, in Latin, Oxon, 1602, 4to, reprinted in “Batesii Vitæ” and of “Archbishop Morton,” London, 1607, 8vo. He also made the Latin translation of sir Thomas Bodley’s statutes for his library; and sir Thomas Smith’s “Common Wealth of England;” and from the French of P. Frodius, a civilian, “A Discourse for Parents’ Honour and Authority over their Children,” Loud. 1614, 8vo.

, esq. a very ingenious but unfortunate writer, was born at St. Thomas, near Exeter, about 1685, and educated at Christ-church, Oxford. His father, Gilbert Budgell, D. D. descended of an ancient family in Devonshire; his mother, Mary, was only daughter of Dr. William Gulston, bishop of Bristol, whose sister Jane married dean Addison, and was mother to the famous Addison. After some years stay in the university, Mr. Budgell went to London, and was entered of the Inner Temple, in order to study law, for which his father always intended him; but his inclinations led him more to study polite literature, and keep company with the genteelest persons in town. During his stay at the Temple, he contracted a strict intimacy and friendship with Addison, who was first cousin to his mother; and when Addison was appointed secretary to lord Wharton, lord-lieutenant of Ireland, he offered to make his friend Eustace one of the clerks of his office, which Mr. Budgell readily accepted. This was in April 1710, when he was about twenty-five years of age. He had by this time read the classics, the most reputed historian^ and the best French, English, and Italian writers, and became concerned with Steele and Addison, not in writing the Tatler, as has been asserted, but the Spectator, which was begun in 1711. Ail the papers marked with an X were written by him, and the whole eighth volume is attributed to Addison and himself, without the assistance of Steele. Several little epigrams and songs, which have a good deal of wit in them, together with the epilogue to the “Distressed Mother,” which had a greater run than any thing of the kind before, were also written by Mr. Budgell near this time; all which, together with the known affection of Addison for him, raised his character so much as to give him considerable consequence in the literary and political world. Upon the laying down of the Spectator, the Guardian was set up; and to this work our author contributed, along with Addison and Steele. In the preface it is said, that those papers marked with an asterisk were written by Mr. Budgell.

, a learned metaphysician, and voluminous writer, was born in Poland, of French parents, May 25, 1661. His parents having removed to Rouen, he was educated there, and afterwards entered among the Jesuits at Paris in 1679, and took the four vows “in 1695. In 1698 he went to Rome, not at the invitation of the general of his order, as has been asserted, but merely to see that celebrated city, in which he remained about four months, and then returned to Paris, where he passed the greater part of his life in the Jesuits college. Here he was first employed on the” Memoires de Trevoux,“and afterwards wrote his numerous separate publications. He died May 17, 1737. His eloge appeared in the” Memoires“in the same year, but principally regards his writings, as his life appears to have passed without any striking or characteristic circumstances, being entirely devoted to the composition of works of learning or piety, of which the following is supposed to be a correct list: 1. Some French verses on the taking of Mons and Montmelian, inserted in the” Recueil de vers choisis,“Paris, 1701, 12mo. 2.” La vie de PHermite de Compiegne,“Paris, 1692, 1737, 12mo. 3.” Vie de Dominique George,“abbot of Valricher, Paris, 1696, 12mo. 4.” Pratique de la memoire artificielle pour apprendre et pour retenir la chronologic, Phistoire universeile, c.“Paris, 1701, 3 vols. and often reprinted and extended to 4 vols. 5.” Verites consolantes du Christianisme,“ibid. 1718, 2d edit. 16mo. 6.” Histoire de Porigine du royaume de Sicile et de Naples,“ibid. 1701, 12mo. 7.” La pratique des devoirs des cures,“from the Italian, Lyons, 1702, 12mo. 8.” Abrege de l‘histoire d’Espagne,“Paris, 1704, 12mo. 9.” Examen de prejuges vulgaires pour disposer F esprit a juger sainement detout,“ibid. 1704, 12mo. 10.” Les Abeilles,“a fable. 11.” Le degat du Parnasse, ou La Fausse litterature,“a poem, ibid. 1705. 12.” La vie du comte Louis de Sales,“ibid. 1708, 12mo, afterwards translated into Italian, and often reprinted. 13.” Grammaire Franchise sur un plan nouveau,“ibid. 1709, 12mo, often reprinted. 14. e6 Le veritable esprit et le saint emploi des fetes de l'eglise,” ibid. 1712, 12mo. 15. “Les prlncipes du raisonnement exposes en deu:: logiques nouvelles, avec des remarques sur les logiques,” &c. ibid. 1714, 12mo. 16. “Geographic universelle avec le secours des vers artificiels et avec des cartes,” ibid. 1715, 2 vols. 12mo. 17. “Homere en arbitrage,” ibid. 1715; two letters addressed to the marchioness Lambert, on the dispute between madame Dacier and de la Motte, on Homer. 18. “Hist, chronologique da dernier siecle, e.” from the year 1600, ibid. 1715, 12mo. 19. “Introduction a l‘histoire de maisons souveraines de l’Europe,” Paris, 1717, 3 vols. 12mo. 20. “Exercice dela piete,” &c. ib. 1718, often reprinted. 21. “Tableau chronologique de l'histoire universelle en forme de jeu,” Paris, 1718. 22. “Nouveau x elomens d'histoire et de geographic,” Paris, 1718. 22. “Sentimens Chretien sur les principales verites de la religion,” in prose and verse, and with engravings, 1718, 12mo. 24. “Traite* des premieres verites,” Paris, 1724, 12mo. A translation of this, one of father Buffer’s most celebrated works, was published in 1781, under the title of “First Truths, and the origin of our opinions explained; with an inquiry into the sentiments of moral philosophers, relative to our primary notions of things,” 8vo. The author has proved himself to be a metaphysician of considerable abilities, and with many it will be no diminution of his merit, that he starts some principles here, which were afterwards adopted and expanded by Drs. Reid, Oswald, and Beattie, under the denomination of common sense. To prove how much these gentlemen have been indebted to him, appears to be the sole object of this translation, and especially of the preface, which, says one of the literary Journals, “though it is not destitute of shrewdness, yet is so grossly illiberal, that we remember not to have read any thing so offensive to decency and good manners, even in the rancorous productions of some of the late controvertists in metaphysics. The writer hath exceeded Dr. Priestley in the abuse of the Scotch doctors; but with a larger quantity of that author’s virulence, hath unluckily too small a portion of his ingenuity and good sense, to recompense for that shameful affront to candour and civility which is too flagrant in every page, to escape the notice or indignation of any unprejudiced reader.”

Father Buffier’s next work, which may be considered as a supplement to the former was, 25. “Elemens de Metaphysique a la portée de tout le monde,” ibid. 1725, 12 mo. 26. “Traite” de lasociete civile,“ibid. 1726. 27.” Traites philosophiques et pratiques d'eloquence et de poesie,“ibid. 1728, 2. vols. 12mo. 28.” Exposition des preuves les plus sensibles de la veritable religion,“ibid. 1732, 12mo. Besides these he contributed some papers on philological subjects to the” Memoires de Trevoux.“The greater and best part of the preceding works were collected and published in a folio volume in 1732, under the title,” Cours des Sciences sur des principes nouveaux et simples, &c." with additions and corrections, the whole forming an useful and perspicuous introduction to the sciences. Buffier was not only one of the ablest and most industrious writers of his time, but one of the safest; and his having made no progress in infidelity, while he professed to be a metaphysician, seems to be the principal objection which succeeding French philosophers brought against him.

, the most eminent French naturalist of the eighteenth century, the son of a counsellor of the parliament of Dijon, was born at Moytbard in Burgundy, September the 7th, 1707. Having manifested an early inclination to the sciences, he gave up the profession of the law, for which his father had designed him. The science which seems to have engaged his earliest attachment was astronomy; with a view to which he applied with such ardour to the study of geometry, that be always carried in his pocket the elements of Euclid. At the age of twenty he travelled into Italy, and in the course of his tour he directed his attention to the phenomena of nature more than to the productions of art: and at this early period he was also ambitious of acquiring the art of writing with ease and elegance. In 1728 he succeeded to the estate of his mother, estimated at about 12,000l. a year; which by rendering his circumstances affluent and independent, enabled him to indulge his taste in those scientific researches and literary pursuits, to which his future life was devoted. Having concluded his travels, at the age of twenty-five, with a journey to England, he afterwards resided partly at Paris, where, in 1739, he was appointed superintend ant of the royal garden and cabinet, and partly on his estate at Montbard. Although he was fond of society, and a complete sensualist, he was indefatigable in his application, and is said to have employed fourteen hours every day in study; he would sometimes return from the suppers at Paris at two in the morning, when he was young, and order a boy to call him at five; and if he lingered in bed, to drag him out on the floor. At this early hour it was his custom, at Montbard, to dress, powder, dictate letters, and regulate his domestic concerns. At six he retired to his study, which was a pavilion called the Tower of St. Louis, about a furlong from the house, at the extremity of the garden, and which was accommodated only with an ordinary wooden desk and an armed chair. Within this was another sanctuary, denominated by prince Henry of Prussia “the Cradle of Natural History,” in which he was accustomed to compose, and into which no one was suffered to intrude. At nine his breakfast, which consisted of two glasses of wine and a bit of bread, was brought to his study; and after breakfast he wrote for about two hours, and then returned to his house. At dinner he indulged himself in all the gaieties and trifles which occurred at table, and in that freedom of conversation, which obliged the ladies, when any of character were his guests, to withdraw. When dinner was finished, he paid little attention either to his family or guests; but having slept about an hour in his room, he took a solitary walk, and then he would either converse with his friends or sit at his desk, examining papers that were submitted to his judgment. This kind of life he passed for fifty years; and to one who. expressed his astonishment at his great reputation, he replied, “Have not I spent fifty years at my clesk?” At nine he retired to bed. In this course he prolonged his life, notwithstanding his excessive indulgences with women, and his excruciating sufferings occasioned by the gravel and stone, which he bore with singular fortitude and patience, to his 81st year; and retained his senses till within a few hours of his dissolution, which happened on the 16th of April, 1788. His body was embalmed, and presented first at St. Medard’s church, and afterwards conveyed to Mont-bard, where he had given orders in his will to be interred in the same vault with his wife. His funeral was attended by a great concourse of academicians, and persons of rank, and literary distinction; and a crowd of at least 20,000 spectators assembled in the streets through which the hearse was to pass. When his body was opened, 57 stones were found in his bladder, some of which were as large as a small bean: and of these 37 were crystallized in a triangular form, weighing altogether two ounces and six drams. All his other parts were perfectly sound; his brain was found to be larger than the ordinary size; and it was the opinion of the gentlemen of the faculty who examined the body, that the operation of the lithotomy might have been performed without the least danger; but to this mode of relief M. Buffon had invincible objections. He left one son, who fell a victim to the atrocities under Robespierre. This son had erected a monument to his father in the gardens of Montbard; which consisted of a simple column, with this inscription:

The father, upon seing this monument, burst into tears, and said to the young man, “Son, this will do you honour.” Buffon was a member of the French academy, and perpetual treasurer of the academy of sciences. With a view to the preservation of his tranquillity, he wisely avoided the intrigues and parties that disgracefully occupied most of the French literati in his time; nor did he ever reply to the attacks that were made upon his works. In 1771 his estate was erected into a comte; and thus the decoration of rank, to which he was by no means indifferent, was annexed to the superior dignity he had acquired as one of the most distinguished members of the republic of letters.

Whilst he remained minister of this parish, the providence of God wonderfully interposed for the preservation of his life; for his lodgings being near a powder-mill, Mr. Morgan, a gentleman of the parish, represented to him. the danger of his situation, and at the same time invited him to his own house. Mr. Bull, at first, modestly declined the offer, but after some importunity accepted it; and, not many days after his removal to Mr. Morgan’s, the mill was blown up, and his apartment with it. In this part of his life he took a journey once a year to Oxford, where he stayed about two months, to enjoy the benefit of the public libraries. In his way to and from Oxford, he always paid a visit to sir William Masters, of Cirencester, by which means he contracted an intimacy with Mr. Alexander pregory, the minister of the place, and after some time married Bridget, one of his daughters, on the 20th of May, 1658. The same year he was presented by the lady Pool, to the rectory of Suddington St. Mary, near Cirencester, in Gloucestershire. The next year, 1659, he was made privy to the design of a general insurrection in favour of king Charles II. and several gentlemen of that neighbourhood who were in the secret, chose his house at Suddington for one of the places of their meeting. Upon the restoration, Mr. Bull frequently preached for his father-in-law, Mr. Gregory, at Cirencester, where there was a large and populous congregation; and his sermons gave such general satisfaction, that, upon a vacancy, the people were very solicitous to have procured for him the presentation; but the largeness of the parish, and the great duty attending it, deterred him Trom consenting to the endeavours they were making for that purpose. In 1662, he was presented by the lord high-chancellor, the earl of Clarendon, to the vicarage of Suddington St. Peter, which lay contiguous to Suddington St. Mary, at the request of his diocesan Dr. Nicholson, bishop of Gloucester, both livings not exceeding 100l. a year. When Mr. Bull came first to the rectory of Suddington, he began to be more open in the use of the liturgy of the church of England, though it was not yet restored by the return of the king; for, being desired to marry a couple, he performed the ceremony, on a Sunday morning, in the face of the whole congregation, according to the form prescribed by the book of common -prayer. He took the same method in governing these parishes, as in that of St. George’s, and with the same success; applying himself with great diligence to the discharge of his pastoral functions, and setting the people an admirable example in the government and œconomy of his own family. During his residence here, he had an opportunity of confirming two ladies of quality in the protestant communion, who were reduced to a wavering state of mind by the arts and subtleties of the Romish missionaries. The only dissenters he had in his parish were quakers; whose extravagances often gave him no small uneasiness. In this part of his life, Mr. Bull prosecuted his studies with great application, and composed most of his works during the twenty-seven years that he was rector of Suddington. Several tracts, indeed, which cost him much pains, are entirely lost, through his own neglect in preserving them; particularly a treatise on the posture used by the ancient Christians in receiving the Eucharist; a letter to Dr. Pearson concerning the genuineness of St. Ignatius’ s epistles; a long one to Mr. Glanvil, formerly minister of Bath, concerning the eternity of future punishments; and another, on the subject of popery, to a person of very great quality. In 1669, he published his Apostolical Harmony, with a view to settle the peace of the church, upon a point of the utmost importance to all its members; and he dedicated it to Dn William Nicholson, bishop of Gloucester. This performance was greatly disliked, at first, by many of the clergy, and others, on account of the author’s departing therein from the private opinions of some doctors of the church, and his manner of reconciling the two apostles St. Paul and St. James, as to the doctrine of justification. It was particularly opposed by Dr. Morley, bishop of WinChester; Dr. Barlow, Margaret-professor of divinity at Oxford; Mr. Charles Gataker, a presbyterian divine; Mr. Joseph Truman, a non-conformist minister; Dr. Tully, principal of St. Edmund’s-hall; Mr. John Tombes, a famous anabaptist preacher; Dr. Lewis Du Moulin, an independent; and by M. De Marets, a French writer, who tells us, “that the author, though a professed priest of the church of England, was more addicted to the papists, remonstrants, and Socinians, than to the orthodox party.” Towards the end of 1675, Mr. Bull published his “Examen Censuræ,” &c. in answer to Mr. Gataker, and his “Apologia pro Harmonia,” &c. in reply to Dr. Tully. Mr. Bull’s notion on this subject was “That good works, which proceed from faith, and are conjoined with faith, are a necessary condition required from us by God, to the end that by the new and evangelical covenant, obtained by and sealed in the blood of Christ the Mediator of it, we may be justified according to his free and unmerited grace.” In this doctrine, and throughout the whole book, Mr. Bull absolutely excludes all pretensions to merit on the part of men; but the work nevertheless excited the jealousy of many able divines both in the church and among the dissenters, as appears from the above list. About three years after, he was promoted by the earl of Nottingham, then lord chancellor, to a prebend in the church of Gloucester, in which he was installed the 9th of October, 1678. In 1680, he finished his “Defence of the Nicene Faith,” of which he had given a hint five years before in his Apology. This performance, which is levelled against the Arians and Socinians on one hand, and the Tritheists and Sabellians on the other, was received with universal applause, and its fame spread into foreign countries, where it was highly esteemed by the best judges of antiquity, though of different persuasions. Five years after its publication, the author was presented, by Philip Sheppard, esq. to the rectory of Avening in Gloucestershire, a very large parish, and worth two hundred pounds per annum. The people of this parish, being many of them very dissolute and immoral, and many more disaffected to the church of England, gave him for some time great trouble and uneasiness; but, by his prudent conduct and diligent discharge of his duty, he at last got the better of their prejudices, and converted their dislike iuto the most cordial love and affection towards him. He had not been long at Avening, before he was promoted, by archbishop Sancroft, to the archdeaconry of Landaff, in which he was installed the 20th of June, 1686. He was invited soon after to Oxford, where the degree of doctor in divinity was conferred upon him by that university, without the payment of the usual fees, in consideration of the great and eminent services he had done the church. During the reign of James II. the doctor preached very warmly against popery, with which the nation was then threatened. Some time after the revolution, he was put into the commission of the peace, and continued in it, with some little interruption, till he was made a bishop. In 1694, whilst he continued rector of Avening, he published his “Judicium Ecclesia? Catholicse, &c.” in defence of the “Anathema,” as his former book had been of the Faith, decreed by the first council of Nice. The last treatise which Dr. Bull wrote, was his “Primitive Apostolical Tradition,” &c. against Daniel Zwicker, a Prussian. All Dr. Bull’s Latin works, which he had published by himself at different times, were collected together, and printed in 1703, in one volume in folio, under the care and inspection of Dr. John Ernest Grabe, the author’s age and infirmities disabling him from undertaking this edition. The ingenious editor illustrated the work with many learned annotations, and ushered it into the world with an excellent preface. Dr, Bull was in the seventy-first year of his age, when he was acquainted with her majesty’s gracious intention of conferring on him the bishopric of St. David’s; which promotion he at first declined, on account of his ill state of health and advanced years; but, by the importunity of his friends, and strong solicitations from the governors o*f the church, he was at last prevailed upon to accept it, and was accordingly consecrated in Lambeth-chapel, the 29th of April, 1705. Two years after, he lost his eldest son, Mr. George Bull, who died of the small-pox the 11th of May, 1707, in, the thirty-seventh year of his age. Our prelate took his seat in the house of lords in that memorable session, when the bill passed for the union of the two kingdoms, and spoke in a debate which happened upon that occasion, in favour of the church of England. About July after his consecration, he went into his diocese, and was received with all imaginable demonstrations of respect by the gentry and clergy. The episcopal palace at Aberguilly being much out of repair, he chose the town of Brecknock for the place of his residence; but was obliged, about half a year before his death, to remove from thence to Abermarless, for the benefit of a freer air. He resided constantly in his diocese, and carefully discharged all the episcopal functions. Though bishop Bull was a great admirer of our ecclesiastical constitution, yet he would often lament the distressed state of the church of England, chiefly owing to the decay of ancient discipline, and the great number of lay-impropriations, which he considered as a species of sacrilege, and insinuated that he had known instances of its being punished by the secret curse which hangs over sacrilegious persons. Some time before his last sickness, he entertained thoughts of addressing a circular letter to all his clergy; and, after his death, there was found among his papers one drawn up to that purpose. He had greatly impaired his health, by too intense and unseasonable an application to his studies, and, on the 27th of September, 1709, was taken with a violent fit of coughing, which brought on a spitting of blood. About the beginning of February following, he was seized with a distemper, supposed to be an ulcer, or what they call the inward piles; of which he died the 17th of the same month, and was buried, about a week after his death, at Brecknock/ leaving behind him but two children out of eleven.

, a learned French writer, member of the academies of Besanc, on, Lyons, and Dijon, and a corresponding member of the academy of inscriptions, was born in 1699, and was professor of divinity in the university of Besangon from the year 1728; and afterwards dean. He had a surprising memory, and although devoted to controversial -studies, was of a mild and affable disposition. His works are of two kinds; some turning on religious matters, and others on literary inquiry. They are all accurate and solid; but we are not to look in them for elegance of style. The principal of them are: 1 “History of the establishment of Christianity, taken from Jewish and Pagan authors alone,” 1764, 4to. 2. “The existence of God demonstrated by nature,” 2 vols. 8vo. 3. “Answer to some objections of unbelievers to the Bible,” 3 vols. 12mo. 4. “De apostolica ecclesise Gallicanae origiue,” 1752, 12mo. 5. “Memoirs on the Celtic tongue,” 1754—59, 3 vols. fol. 6. “Researches into the history of Cards,” 1757, 8 vo. 7. “A dissertation on the history of France,” 1757, 8vo.

, a learned French author, was born at Rouen in 1615, and succeeded his uncle, as king’s secretary, which office he occupied for fourteen years, at the end of which he withdrew to study and religious retirement among the Benedictines of St. Maur, with whom he passed the remainder of his days. His principal works were “An Essay on the monastic History of the East,” 1680, 8vo, describing the manners, &c. of the Coenobites, and proving that monastic institutions are not so modern as has been supposed. “Abridgment of the History of the Order of St. Benedict, as far as the tenth century,” 1684, 2 vols. 4to. “Translation of the Dialogues of Gregory the Great,” with notes, 1689, 12mo; but his modesty would not permit him to annex his name to his works. His style was formed on the model of the writers of the Port Royal; and his knowledge of languages was very extensive. He died of an apoplexy in 1693. His brother, Charles Bulteau, published, in 1674, a “Treatise on the precedence of the Kings of France over those of Spain,” 1764, 4to. He died, dean of the king’s secretaries, in 1710.

, an elegant Latin scholar, was born at Toulouse in 1499, and studied at Paris, where he was distinguished by his quick progress and promising talents. On his return to Toulouse, finding his family unable to maintain him, he went to Padua, where he was supported by Emilius Perrot. He was afterwards taken into the family of Lazarus de Baif, the French ambassador at Venice, by whose generosity he was not only maintained, but enabled to study the Greek tongue, and he afterwards studied Hebrew. George de Selve, bishop of Lavaur, who succeeded de Baif as ambassador, retained Bunel in his service, and when his embassy was finished, carried him with him to Levaur. Upon the death of that prelate, which happened in 1541, Bunel returned to Toulouse^ where he would have been reduced to the greatest indigence, had not messieurs de Faur, the patrons of virtue and science, extended their liberality to him unasked. One of these gentlemen appointed him tutor to his sons; but whilst he was making the tour of Italy with them, he was cut off at Turin by a fever, in 1546. Mr. Bayle says, that he was one of the politest writers of the Latin tongue in the sixteenth century; but though he was advantageously distinguished by the eloquence of his Ciceronian style, he was still more so by the strictness of his morals. The magistrates of his native town of Toulouse set up a marble statue to his memory in their town-house. He left som'e Latin epistles written with the utmost purity, which were first published by Charles Stevens in 1551, and afterwards by Henry Stevens in 1581. Another, but a more incorrect edition, was printed at Toulouse in 1687, with notes by Mr. Gravero, advocate of Nimes.

, was born at Rheims in 1691, and was member of the academy of belles-lettres at Paris, He died in that city Oct. 8, 1785, at the age of ninetyfour, at that time the father of French literature, and perhaps the oldest author in Europe. His great tranquillity of mind, and the gentleness of his disposition, procured him the enjoyment of a long and pleasant old age. In his youth he passed some time in Holland, and was a writer in the Journal de l'Europe. On his return he was much caressed by the learned, and in his latter days had a pension of 2000 livres granted, without any application, by the last king of France. At ninety-two his health was robust, his memory extensive, and he composed and wrote with facility. His works are, 1. “A treatise on the Authority of the Popes,” 1720, 4 vols. 12mo. 2.“History of the Pagan Philosophy,” 1724, 12mo, a learned performance, published in 1754 under the title of “The*ologie pa'ienne.” 3. “General History of Sicily,” 1745, 2 vols. 4to. 4. “Porphyry on Abstinence from Meats,” 1747, 12mo. 5. “History of the Revolutions of Constantinople,” 3 vols. 12mo, 1750. 6. “Life of Grotius,” 1754, 2 vols. 12mo. 7. “Life of Erasmus,” 1757, 2 vols. 12mo. 8. Life of Bossuet,“1761, 12mo. 9.” Life of cardinal du Perron," 1768, 12mo. The historical works of M. de Burigny are esteemed for the accuracy and abundance of the facts they contain. But he is a cold narrator; has but little force and expression in his portraits, and is sometimes rather prolix in his details. His Life of Grotius is a very valuable work, and was published in English in 1754, 8vo. For that of Erasmus, Dr. Jortin may be consulted.

The next and last sera of his history is, perhaps, the most important of all, as it is that concerning which the opinions of the world are still divided. We allude to his interference, for such it may be called, with the conduct and progress of the French revolution. Many of his friends in parliament, as well as numbers of wise and good men out of it, augured from the meeting of the states-general of France, great benefit to that nation, of which the government was considered as despotic and oppressive; and some were sanguine enough to predict a new and happy order of things to all the nations connected with France, when its government should become more free. These sentiments, we can well remember, were not only general, but perhaps universal, although they might not always proceed from the same sources. There were some who loved liberty, and would hail its dawn in any country. There were others who hated the French government as the perpetual enemy of Great Britain. Mr. Burke saw nothing in the proceedings of the French which was favourable either to liberty or peace. He was well acquainted with the genius of the French people, and with the principles of those philosophers, as they called themselves, by whom a total revolution in church and state had long been projected; and from the commencement of their career in the constituent assembly, when they established, as the foundation of all legal government, the metaphysical doctrine of the “rights of man,” he predicted that torrent of anarchy and infidelity which they have since attempted to pour over all Europe. Mr. Fox, and some of the other leading men in opposition, considered this as a vain fear, and a coolness took place between them and Mr. Burke, although they continued for some time to act together in parliament. In the mean time he published his celebrated “Reflections on the French Revolution,” the instantaneous effect of which was to reduce the nation, hitherto unanimous or indifferent on the subject, to two distinct parties, the one admiring the glorious prospects arising from the French revolution, the other dreading its consequences to this nation in particular, and to the world at large. Many able writers of the former class took up their pens on this occasion, in what were called “answers” to Mr. Burke, and some of them were certainly written with great ability. The controversy was long and obstinate, and cannot be said to have terminated until the commencement of the war in 1793, when the changes of government and practice in France rendered most of the points discussed with Mr. Burke no longer of immediate importance. France, as he had predicted, was plunged into barbarous and atrocious anarchy, and the friends of her projected liberty, dearly as they clung to the idea, were obliged to confess themselves disappointed in every hope, while Mr. Burke’s predictions were erroneous in one only, namely, that France was now blotted out of the map of Europe.

In the mean time, an open rupture took place between Mr. Burke and his oldest friends in opposition. In 1790 he had so far expressed his dislike of experiments on the established laws and constitution, as to oppose the repeal of the test-act, and a motion for the reform of parliament. With regard to the latter, we know not that he ever was friendly, but it is certain that he once maintained the propriety of relieving the dissenters from certain disabilities. He was now, however, as he declares in his “Reflections,” endeavouring to “preserve consistency by varying his means to secure the unity of his end; and when the equipoise of the vessel in which he sails may be in danger of overloading it upon one side, is desirous of carrying the small weight of his reasons to that which may preserve the equipoise.” He had identified the whole body of dissenters with Drs. Priestley and Price, and from their writings, particularly those of Priestley, saw nothing but a co-operation with the French in revolutionary measures. Such were his sentiments, when, in 1791, a bill was proposed for the formation of a constitution in Canada. In discussing it Mr. Burke entered on the general principles of legislation, considered the doctrines of the rights of man, proceeded to its offspring, the constitution of France, and expressed his conviction that there was a design formed in this country against its constitution.

After some members of his own party had called Mr. Burke to order, Mr. Fox, after declaring his conviction that the British Gonstitution, though defective in theory, was in practice excellently adapted to this country, repeated his praises of the French revolution; he thought it, on the whole, one of the most glorious events in the history of mankind; and proceeded to express his dissent from Mr. Burke’s opinions on the subject, as inconsistent with just views of the inherent rights of mankind. These, besides, were, he said, inconsistent with Mr. Burke’s former principles. Mr. Burke, in reply, said: “Mr. Fox has treated me with harshness and malignity; after having harassed with his light troops in the skirmishes of order, he brought the heavy artillery of his own great abilities to bear on me.” He maintained that the French constitution and general system were replete with anarchy, impiety, vice, and misery; that the discussion of a new polity for a province that had been under the French, and was now under the English government, was a proper opportunity of comparing the French and British constitutions. He denied the charge of inconsistency; his opinions on government, he insisted, had been the same during all his political life. He said, Mr. Fox and he had often differed, and that there had been no loss of friendship between them; but there is something in the “cursed French revolution” which envenoms every thing. On this Mr. Fox whispered: “There is no loss of friendship between us.” Mr. Burke, with great warmth, answered: “There is! I know the price of my conduct; our friendship is at an end.” Mr. Fox was very greatly agitated by this renunciation of friendship, and made many concessions; but in the course of his speech still maintained that Mr. Burke had formerly held very different principles. It would be difficult, says one of his biographers, to determine with certainty, whether constitutional irritability or public principle was the chief cause of Mr. Burke’s sacrifice of that friendship which he had so long cherished, and of which the talents and qualities of its object rendered him so worthy. It would perhaps be as difficult to prove that uch a sacrifice was necessary, and we fear that his reconciliation with lord North and his quarrel with Mr. Fox must, even by the most favourable of his panegyrists, be placed among the inconsistencies of this otherwise truly eminent character. From this time, Messrs. Burke and Fox remained at complete variance, nor have we ever heard that any personal interview took place afterwards between them.

When the appearance of amelioration in the principles and government of France induced his majesty to make overtures of peace to the French Directory, Mr. Burke resumed his pen, and gave his opinions against the safety of such a negociation in a series of letters entitled: “Thoughts on the prospect of a Regicide Peace.” This was his last work, and in point of style and reasoning not interior to any he had produced on the subject of the French character and government.

From the beginning of July 1797, his health rapidly declined; but his understanding exerted itself with undiminished force and uncontracted range. On the 7th of that month, when the French revolution was mentioned, he spoke with pleasure of the conscious rectitude of his own intentions in what he had done and written respecting it; intreated those about him to believe, that if any unguarded expression of his on the subject had offended any of his former friends, no offence was by him intended; and he declared his unfeigned forgiveness of all who had on account of his writings, or for any other cause, endeavoured to do him an injury. On the day following, whilst one of his friends, assisted by his servant, was carrying him into another room, he faintly uttered, “God bless you,” fell back, and instantly expired in the sixty-eighth year of his age. He was interred on the 15th, in the church of Beaconsfield, close to his son and brother.

, a celebrated commentator on the New Testament, the son of the rev. Miles Burkitt, who was ejected for nonconformity, was born at Hitcharn, in Northamptonshire, July 25, 1650. He was sent first to a school at Stow Market, and from thence to another at Cambridge. After his recovery from the small pox, which he caught there a he was admitted of Pembroke-hall, at the age of no more than fourteen years; and upon his removal from the university, when he had taken his degree, he became a chaplain in a private gentleman’s family, where he continued some years. He entered young upon the ministry, being ordained by bishop Reynolds; and the first employment which he had was at Milden, in Suffolk, where he continued twenty-one years a constant preacher (in a plain, practical, and affectionate manner), first as curate, and afterwards as rector of that church. In 1692 he was promoted to the vicarage of Dedham, in Essex, where he continued to the time of his death, which happened in the latter end of October, 1703. He was a pious ancT charitable man. He made great collections for the French Protestants in the years 1687, &c. and by his great care, pains, and charges, procured a worthy minister to go and settle in Carolina. Among other charities, he bequeathed by his last will and testament the house wherein he lived, with the lands thereunto belonging, to be an habitation for the lecturer that should be chosen from time to time to preach the lecture at Dedham. He wrote some books, and among the rest a Commentary upon the New Testament, in the same plain, practical, and affectionate manner in which he preached. This has often been reprinted in folio, and lately with some alterations and improvements, by the rev. Dr. Glasse. Mr. Burkitt’s other works are small pious tracts for the use of his parishioners.

About six months after he returned to Scotland, where he declined accepting the living of Saltoun, offered him by sir Robert Fletcher of that place, resolving to travel for some time on the continent, in 1664, he went over into Holland; where, after he had seen what was remarkable in the Seven Provinces, he resided for some time at Amsterdam, and afterwards at Paris. At Amsterdam, by the help of a learned Rabbi, he increased his knowledge in the Hebrew language, and likewise x became acquainted with the leading men of the different persuasions tolerated in that country: among each of whom, he used frequently to declare, he had met with men of such real piety and virtue, that he contracted a strong principle of universal charity. At Paris he conversed with the two famous ministers of Charenton, Dailie and Morus. His stay in France was the longer, on account of the great kindness with which he was treated by the lord Holies, then ambassador at the French court. Towards the end of the year he returned to Scotland, passing through Londo/rr, where he was introduced, by the president sir Robert Murray, to be a member of the royal society. In 1665, he was ordained a priest by the bishop of Edinburgh, and presented by sir Robert Fletcher to the living of Saitoun, which had been kept vacant during his absence. He soon gained the affections of his whole parish, not excepting the presbyterians, though he was the only clergyman in Scotland that made use of the prayers in the liturgy of the church of England. During the five years he remained at Saitoun, he preached twice every Sunday, and once on one of the week-days; he catechized three times a-week, so as to examine every parishioner, old or young, three times in the compass of a year: he went round the parish from house to house, instructing, reproving, or comforting them, as occasion required: the sick he visited twice a day: he administered the sacrament four times a year, and personally instructed all such as gave notice of their intention to receive it. All that remained above his own necessary subsistence (in which he was very frugal), he gave away in charity. A particular instance of his generosity is thus related: one of his parishioners had been in execution for debt, and applied to our author for some small relief; who inquired of him, how much would again set him up in his trade: the man named the sum, and he as readily called to his servant to pay it him: “Sir,” said he, “it is all we have in the house.” “Well,” said Mr. Burnet, “pay it this poor man: you do not know the pleasure there is in making a man glad.” This may be a proper place to mention our author’s practice of preaching extempore, in which he attained an ease chiefly by allotting many hours of the day to meditation upon all sorts of subjects, and by accustoming himself, at those times, to speak his thoughts aloud, studying always to render his expressions correct. His biographer gives us here two remarkable instances of his preaching without book. In 1691, when the sees, vacant by the deprivation of the nonjuring bishops, were filled up, bishop Williams was appointed to preach one of the consecration -sermons at Bow-church; but, being detained by some accident, the archbishop of Canterbury desired our author, then bishop of Sarum, to supply his place; which he readily did, to the general satisfaction of all present. In 1705, he was appointed to preach the thanksgiving-sermon before the queen at St. Paul’s; and as it was the only discourse he had ever written before-hand, it was the only time that he ever made a pause in preaching, which on that occasion lasted above a minute. The same year, he drew up a memorial of the abuses of the Scotch bishops, which exposed him to the resentments of that order: upon which, resolving to confine himself to study, and the duties of his function, he practised such a retired and abstemious course, as greatly impaired his health. About 1668, the government of Scotland being in the hands of moderate men, of whom the principal was sir Robert Murray, he was frequently consulted by them; and it was through his advice that some of the more moderate presbyterians were put into the vacant churches; a step which he himself has since condemned as indiscreet. In 1669, he was made professor of divinity at Glasgow; in which station he executed the following plan of study. On Mondays, he made each of the students, in their turn, explain a head of divinity in Latin, and propound such theses from it as he was to defend against the rest of the scholars; and this exercise concluded with our professor’s decision of the point in a Latin oration. On Tuesdays, he gave them a prelection in the same language, in which he proposed, in the course of eight years, to have gone through a complete system of divinity. On Wednesdays, he read them a lecture, for above an hour, by way of a critical commentary on St. Matthew’s Gospel;' which he finished before he quitted the chair. On Thursdays, the exercise was alternate; one Thursday, he expounded a Hebrew Psalm, comparing it with the Septuagint, the Vulgar, and the English version; and the next Thursday, he explained some portion of the ritual and constitution of the primitive church, making the apostolical canons his text, and reducing every article of practice under the head of one or other of those canons. On Fridays, he made each of his scholars, in course, preach a short sermon upon some text he assigned; and, when it was ended, he observed upon any thing that was defective or amiss in the handling of the subject. This was the labour of the mornings: in the evenings, after prayer, he every day read some parcel of scripture, on which he made a short discourse; and, when that was over, he examined into the progress of their several studies. Ail this he performed during the whole time the schools were open; and, in order to acquit himself with credit, he was obliged to study hard from four till ten in the morning; the rest of the day being of necessity allotted, either to the care of his pupils, or to hearing the complaints of the clergy, who, rinding he had an interest with men of power, were not sparing in their applications to him. In this situation he continued four years and a half, exposed, through his principles of moderation, to the censure both of the episcopal and presbyterian parties. The same year he published his “Modest and free Conference between a Conformist and a Nonconformist.” About this time he was entrusted, by the duchess of Hamilton, with the perusal and arrangement of all the papers relating to her father’s and uncle’s ministry; which induced him to compile “Memoirs of the Dukes of Hamilton,” and occasioned his being invited to London, to receive farther information, concerning the transactions of those times, by the earl of Lauderdale; between whom and the duke of Hamilton he brought about a reconciliation. During his stay in London, he was offered a Scotch bishopric, which he refused. Soon after his return to Glasgow, he married the lady Margaret Kennedy, daughter of the earl of Cassilis. In 1672, he published his “Vindication of the Authority, Constitution, and Laws, of the Church and State of Scotland,” against the principles of Buchanan and others; which was thought, at that juncture, such a public service, that he was again courted to accept of a bishopric, with a promise of the next vacant archbishopric, but he persisted in his refusal of that dignity. In 1673, he took another journey to London; where, at the express nomination of the king, after hearing him preach, he was sworn one of his majesty’s chaplains in ordinary. He became likewise in high favour with his majesty and the duke of York . At his return to Edinburgh, finding the animosities between the dukes of Hamilton and Lauderdale revived, he retired to his station at Glasgow; but was obliged the next year to return to court, to justify himself against the accusations of the duke of Lauderdale, who had represented him as the cause and instrument of all the opposition the measures of the court had met with in the Scotch parliament. Thus he lost the favour of the court; and, to avoid putting himself into the hands of his enemies, he resigned the professor’s chair at Glasgow, and resolved to settle in London, being now about thirty years of age. Soon after, he was offered the living of St. Giles’s Cripplegate, which he declined accepting, because he heard that it was intended for Dr. Fowler, afterwards bishop of Gloucester. In 1675, our author, at the recommendation of lord Holies, and notwithstanding the interposition of the court against him, was appointed preacher at the Rolls chapel by sir Harbottle Grimstone, master of the Rolls. The same year he was examined before the house of commons in relation to the duke of Lauderdale, whose conduct the parliament was then inquiring into. He was soon after chosen lecturer of St. Clement’s, and became a very popular preacher. In 1676, he published his “Memoirs of the Dukes of Hamilton;” and the same year, “An account of a Conference between himself, Dr. Stillingfleet, and Coleman.” About this time, the apprehensions of popery increasing daily, he undertook to write the “History of the Reformation of the Church of England.” The rise and progress of this his greatest and 'most useful work, is an object of too great curiosity to require any apology on account of its length. His own account of it is as follows: “Some time after I had printed the ‘ Memoirs of the Dukes of Hamilton,’ which were favourably received, the reading of these got me the acquaintance and friendship of sir William Jones, then attorney-general. My way of writing history pleased him; and so he pressed me to undertake the History of England. But Sanders’s book, that was then translated into French, and cried up much in France, made all my friends press me to answer it, by writing the History of the Reformation. So now all my thoughts were turned that way. I laid out for manuscripts, and searched into all offices. I got for some days into the Cotton Library. But duke Lauderdale hearing of my design, and apprehending it might succeed in my hands, got Dolben, bishop of Rochester, to divert sir John Cotton from suffering me to search into his library. He told him, I was a great enemy to the prerogative, to which Cotton was devoted, even to slavery. So he said, I would certainly make an ill use of all 1 had found. This wrought so much on him, that I was no more admitted, till my first volume was published. And then, when he saw how I had composed it, he gave me free access to it.” The first volume of this work lay near a year after it was finished, for the perusal and correction of friends; so that it was not published tiii the year 1679, when the affair of the popish plot was in agitation. This book procured our author an honour never before or since paid to any writer: he had the thanks of both houses of parliament, with a desire that he would prosecute the undertaking, and complete that valuable work. Accordingly, in less than two years after, he printed the second volume, which met with the same general approbation as the first: and such was his readiness in composing, that he wrote the historical part in the compass of six weeks, after all his materials were laid in order. The third volume, containing a supplement to the two former, was published in 1714. “The defects of Peter Heylyn’s” History of the Reformation,“as bishop Kicolson observes,” are abundantly supplied in our author’s more complete history. He gives a punctual account of all the affairs of the reformation, from its beginning in the reign of Henry VIII. to its final establishment under queen Elizabeth, A. D. 1559. And the whole is penned in a masculine style, such as becomes an historian, and is the property of this author in all his writings. The collection of records^ which he gives at the end of each volume, are good vouchers of the truth of what he delivers in the body of the history, and are much more perfect than could reasonably be expected, after the pains taken, in queen Mary’s days, to suppress every thing that carried the marks of the reformation upon it.“Our author’s performance met with a very favourable, reception abroad, and was translated into most of the European languages; and even the keenest of his enemies, Henry Wharton, allows it to have” a reputation firmly and deservedly established.“The most eminent of the French writers who have attacked it, M. Varillas and M. Le Grand, have received satisfactory replies from -the author himself. At home it was attacked by Mr. S. Lowth, who censured the account Dr. Burnet had given of some of archbishop Cranmer’s opinions, asserting that both our historian and Dr. Stillingfleet had imposed upon the world in that particular, and had” unfaithfully joined together“in their endeavours to lessen episcopal ordination. Our author replied to Mr. Lowth, in some” letters. in answer“to his book. The next assailant was Henry Wharton, who, under the name of Anthony Harrner, published” A specimen of some Errors and Defects in the History of the Reformation,“1693, 8vo, a performance of no great candour; to which, however, our historian vouchsafed a short answer, in a” Letter to the Bishop of Lichfield.“A third attack on this History was made by Dr. Hickes in” Discourses on Dr. Burnet and Dr. Tillotson;“in which the whole charge amounts to no more than this, that,” in a matter of no great consequence, there was too little care had in copying or examining a letter writ in a very bad hand,“and that there was some probability that Dr. Burnet” was mistaken in one of his conjectures.“Our author answered this piece, in a” Vindication“of his History. The two first parts were translated into French by M. de Rosemond, and into Latin by Melchior Mittelhorzer. There is likewise a Dutch translation of it. In 1682, our author published” An abridgment of his History of the Reformation," in 8vo, in which he tells us, he had wholly waved every thing that belonged to the records, and the proof of what he relates, or to the confutation of the falsehoods that run through the popish historians; all which is to be found in the History at large. And therefore, in this abridgment, he says, every thing is to be taken upon trust; and those who desire a fuller satisfaction, are referred to the volumes he had before published.

During the affair of the popish plot, Dr. Burnet was often consulted by king Charles, upon the state of the nation; and, about the same time, refused the vacant bishopric of Chichester, which his majesty offered him, “provided he vvould entirely come into his interest.” But, though his free access to that monarch did not procure him preferment, it gave him an opportunity of sending his majesty a most remarkable letter , in which, with great freedom, he reprehends the vices and errors both of his private life and his government The unprejudiced part he acted during the time the nation was inflamed with the discovery of the popish plot; his candid endeavours to save the lives of Staley and the lord Stafford, both zealous papists; his temperate conduct in regard to the exclusion of the duke of York; and the scheme of a prince regent, proposed by him, in lieu of that exclusion; are sufficiently related in his “History of his own Time.” In 1682, when the administration was wholly changed in favour of the duke of York, he continued steady in his adherence to his friends, and chose to sacrifice all his views at court, particularly a promise of the mastership of the Temple, rather than break off his correspondence with them. This year our author published his “Life of sir Matthew Hale,” and his “History of the Rights of Princes, in disposing of ecclesiastical Benefices and Church-lands;” which being attacked bv an anonymous writer, Dr. Burnet published, the same year, “An answer to the Animadversions on the History of the Rights of Princes.” As he was about this time much resorted to by persons of all ranks and parties, as a pretence to avoid the returning of so many visits, he built a laboratory, and, for above a year, went through a course of chemical experiments. Upon the execution of the lord Russel, with whom he was familiarly acquainted, he was examined before the house of commons, with respect to that lord’s speech upon the scaffold, in the penning of which he was suspected to have had a hand. Not long after, he refused the offer of a living of three hundred pounds a year, in the gift of the earl of Halifax, who would have presented him, on condition of his residing *till in London. In 1683, he went over to Paris, where he was well received by the court, and became acquainted with the most eminent persons, both popish and protestant. This year appeared his “Translation and Examination of a Letter, writ by the last General Assembly of the Clergy of France to the Protestants, inviting them to return to their Communion, &c.;” also his “Translation of Sir Thomas More’s Utopia,” with a “Preface concerning the Nature of Translations.” The year following, the resentment of the court against our author was so great, that he was discharged from his lecture at St, Clement’s, by virtue of the king’s mandate to Dr. Hascard, rector of that parish; and in December the same year, bv an order from the lord-keeper North to sir Harbottle Grimstone, he was forbidden preaching any more at the Rolls chapel. In 1685 came out our author’s “Life of Dr. William Bedell, Bishop of Kilmore in Ireland.” Upon the death of king Charles, and accesion of king James, having obtained leave to go out of the kingdom, he went first to Paris, where he lived in great retirement, to avoid being involved in the conspiracies then forming in favour of the difke of Monmbuth. But, having contracted an acquaintance with brigadier Stouppe, a protestant officer in the French service, he was prevailed upon to take a journey with him into Italy, and met with an agreeable reception at Rome and Geneva. After a tour through the southern parts of France, Italy, Switzerland, and many places of Germany, of which he has given an account, with reflections on their several ojovernments, &c. in his “Travels,” published in 1687, he came to Utrecht, and intended to have settled in some quiet retreat within the Seven Provinces; but, being invited to the Hague by the prince and princess of Orange, he repaired thither, and had a great share in the councils then carrying on, concerning the affairs of England. In 1687, our author published a “Translation of Lactantius, concerning the Death of the Persecutors.” The high favour shewn him at the Hague disgusting the English court, king James wrote two severe letters against him to the princess of Orange, and insisted, by his ambassador, on his being forbidden the court; which, at the king’s importunity, was done; though our author continued to be employed and trusted as before. Soon after, a prosecution for high-treason was commenced against him, both in Scotland and England; but the States refusing, at the demand of the English court, to deliver him up, designs were laid of seizing his person, and even destroying him, if he could be taken. About this time Dr. Burnet married Mrs. Mary Scott, a Dutch lady of large fortune and noble extraction. He had a very important share in the whole conduct of the revolution in 1688; the project of which he gave early notice of to the court of Hanover, intimating, that the success of this enterprise must naturally end in an entail of the British crown upon that illustrious house. He wrote also several pamphlets in support of the prince of Orange’s designs, which were reprinted at London in 1689, in 8vo, under the title of “A Collection of eighteen Papers relating to the affairs of Church and State during the Reign of King James II. &c.” And when his highness undertook the expedition to England, our author accompanied him as his chaplain, notwithstanding the particular circumstances of danger to which he was thereby exposed. At Exeter, after the prince’s landing, he drew up the association for pursuing the ends of his highness’s declaration. During these transactions, Dr. Crew, bishop of Durham, who had rendered himself obnoxious by the part he had acted in the high-commission court, having proposed to the prince of Orange to resign his bishopric in favour of Dr. Burnet, on condition of an allowance of 1000l. per annum out of the revenue, our author refused to accept it on those terms. But king William had not been many days on the throne before Dr. Burnet was advanced to the see of Salisbury, and consecrated March 31, 1689 . Our prelate had scarcely taken his seat in the house of lords, when he distinguished himself by declaring for moderate measures with regard to the clergy who scrupled to take the oaths, and for a toleration of the protestant dissenters; and when the bill for declaring the rights and privileges of the subject, and settling the succession of the crown, was brought into parliament, he was the person appointed by king William to propose naming the duchess (afterwards electress) of Brunswick, next in succession after the princess of Denmark and her issue; and when this succession afterwards took place, he had the honour of being chairman of the committee to whom the hill was referred. This made him considered by the house of Hanover as one firmly attached to their interests, and engaged him in an epistolary correspondence with the princess Sophia, which lasted to her death. This year bishop Buruet addressed a “Pastoral Letter” to the clergy of his diocese, concerning the oaths of allegiance and supremacy to king Wiliiam and queen Mary; in which having grounded their majesties title to the crown upon the right of conquest, some members of both houses took such offence at it, that about three years after, they procured an order for burning the book by the hands of the common executioner. After the session of parliament was over, the bishop went down to his diocese, where, by his pious, prudent, and vigilant discharge of the episcopal functions, he gained universal esteem.

, an eminent modern poet of Scotland, was born on the 29th day of January, 1759, in a small house about two miles from the town of Ayr, in Scotland. His father, William, after various attempts to gain a livelihood, took a lease of seven acres of land, with a view of commencing nurseryman and public gardener; and having built a house upon it with his own hands, he married, December 1757, Agnes Brown. The first fruit of his marriage was Robert, who in his sixth year was sent to a school at Alloway Miln, about a mile distant from his father’s house, where he made considerable proficiency in reading and writing, and where he discovered an inclination for books not very common at so early an age. With these, however, he appears at that time to have been rather scantily supplied; but what he could obtain he read with avidity and improvement. About the age of thirteen, or fourteen, he was sent to the parish school of Dalrymple, where he increased his acquaintance with English gramroar, and gained some knowledge of the French language. Latin was also recommended to him; but he was not induced to make any great progress in it. In the intervals from these studies, he was employed on his father’s farm, which, in spite of much industry, became so unproductive as to involve the family in great distress. This early portion of affliction is said to have been, in a great measure, the cause of that depression of spirits of which our poet often complained, and during which his sufferings appear to have been very acute. His father having taken another farm, the speculation was yet more fatal, and involved his affairs in complete ruin. He died Feb. 13, 1784.

Burns was entirely the poet of nature. Of literature he had none. He knew the Greek and Roman poets, if he knew them at all, only in translations. There have been, indeed, few poets less indebted to art and education. He was a total stranger to the tinsel, the overloading epithets, and other shifts of modern poets. If he read French, he imbibed nothing of the French manner: but his knowledge of that language does not appear to have been very intimate, although some common-place phrases occur in his letters. What superior culture might have done for a mind naturally vigorous and easily susceptible of knowledge, we shall not now inquire. Burns’ s w: orks claim no charitable allowance on account of the obscurity of his birth, or the stnallness of his acquisitions; they are such as few scholars could have produced, and such as learning could not have materially improved: as a poet, he may await the verdict of criticism, without the least necessity of putting in the plea of poverty, or want of literature. In all his works, he discovers his feelings, without betraying his situation. Had they been sent into the world without a name, conjecture would have found no pretence to fix them on a ploughman, or to suppose that they were published merely to raise pity and relief.

, was the natural son of the lord of Bnsbec, or Boesbec, and born at Commines, a town in Flanders, 1522. The early proofs he gave of extraordinary genius induced his father to spare neither care nor expence to get him properly instructed, and to obtain his legitimation from the emperor Charles V. He was sent to study at the universities of Louvain, Paris, Venice, Bologna, and Padua, and was some time at London* whither he attended the ambassador of Ferdinand, king of the Romans, and was present at the marriage of Philip and Mary. In 1554 he was appointed ambassador at Constantinople; but made a very short stay there. Being sent back the following year, his second embassy proved longer and more fortunate; for it lasted seven years, and ended in a beneficial treaty. He acquired a perfect, knowledge of the state of the Ottoman empire, and the true means of attacking it with success; on which subject he composed a very judicious discourse, entitled “De re militari contra Turcam instituenda consilium.” Without neglecting any thing that related to the business of his embassy, he laboured successfully for the republic of letters, collecting inscriptions, purchasing manuscripts, searching after rare plants, and inquiring into the nature of animals, and when he set out the second time to Constantinople, he carried with him a painter, to make drawings of the plants and animals that were unknown in the west. The relation which he wrote of his two journies to Turkey is much commended by Thuanus. He was desirous of passing the latter part of his life in privacy, but the emperor Maximilian made choice of him to be governor to his sons; and when his daughter princess Elizabeth was married to Charles IX. of France, Busbec was nominated to conduct her to Paris. This queen gave him the whole superintendance of her houshold and her affairs, and, when she quitted France, on her husband’s death, left him there as her ambassador, in which station he was retained by the emperor Rodolph until 1592, when, on a journey to the Low Countries, he was attacked by a party of soldiers, and so harshly treated as to bring on a fever which proved fatal in October of that year. He was a man of great learning, and an able antiquary. The public is indebted to him for the “Monumentum Anciranum,” which would be one of the most curious and instructive inscriptions of antiquity, if it was entire, as it contained a list of the actions of Augustus. Passing through Ancyra, a city of Galatia, Busbec caused all that remained legible of that inscription to be copied from the marble of a ruined palace, and sent it to Schottus the Jesuit. It may be seen in Gruevius’s Suetonius. Gronovius published this Monumentum Anciranum at Leyden in 1695, with notes, from a more full and correct copy than that of Busbec. Busbec also vyrote “Letters from France to the emperor Rodolph,” which exhibit an interesting picture of the French court at that period. An edition of all his letters was published by Elzivir at Leyden, 1633, and at London in 1660, 12mo. His “Itinera Constantinopolitanum et Amasianum” was printed at Antwerp, 1582, 4to; “Legationis Turcicæ Epistolæ,” Francfort, 1595, 8vo, &c.

Busching compiled above an hundred volumes, mostly elementary treatises on geography, history, &c. His system of “Geography,” begun in 1754, formed six quarto volumes, and was often reprinted. An edition was published in English, 1762, also in 6 vols. 4to, but was an unfortunate speculation for the bookseller, He published also a “Magazine of Modern History and Geography,” of which we have seen seventeen 4to. vols. from 1777 to 1788, consisting of a collection of original, authentic, and important papers, most of them in German, but some in French, relating to Portugal, Spain, France, &c. This is perhaps the most useful of his publications, and the most unobjectionable as it is independent of style, in which he was very deficient.

, a French Jesuit, was born in 1607, either at Villa Franca in Beaujolais, or at Lyons, and became a very frequent and admired writer, although little of his fame has reached modern times. He died in 1678. His French poetry is now forgot, but his Latin poetry published at Lyons in 1675, 8vo, still has some admirers; and in his “Scanderbeg,” an epic poem, and his “Rhea,” are some animated passages. He published also an abridgment of the History of France, and another, in Latin, of the universal history, called “Floscoli Historiarum,” which he afterwards translated into French, under the title “Parterre historique,” Lyons, 1672, 12nio; the ridiculous dedication of which to the Virgin Mary may be seen in Seward’s Anecdotes. He wrote also “Memoires de Ville Tranche en Beaujolais,” 1671, 4to; and a history of Spain, still in manuscript.

, lord viscount Torrington, an eminent naval officer, was descended from a family long seated in Kent, his direct ancestor Robert Byng, of Wrotham, inthat county, being high sheriff of it in the 34th year of queen Elizabeth; and he was the eldest son of John Byng, esq. by Philadelphia, daughter of Mr. Johnson, of Loans, Surrey. He was born in 1663, and went a Volunteer to sea in 1678, at the age of fifteen, with the king’s letter given him on the recommendation of the duke of York. In 1681 he quitted the sea-service upon the invitation of general Kirk, governor of Tangier, and served as a cadet in the grenadiers of that garrison; until on a vacancy, which soon happened, the general made him ensign of his own company; and soon after a lieutenant. In 1684, after the demolition of Tangier, lord Dartmouth, general of the sea and land forces, appointed him lieutenant of the Oxford; from which time he constantly kept to the sea-service, remaining likewise an officer in the army several years after. In 1685 he went lieutenant of his majesty’s ship the Phoenix to the East Indies where, engaging and boarding a Zinganian pirate, who maintained a desperate fight, most of those who entered with him were killed, himself much wounded, and the pirate sinking, he was taken out of the sea with scarce any remains of life. In 1688, being first lieutenant to sir John Ashby, in the fleet commanded by lord Dartmouth, fitted out to oppose the designs of the prince of Orange, he was in a particular manner intrusted and employed in the measures then carrying on amongst the most considerable officers of the fleet in favour of that prince; and was the person confided in by them to carry their secret assurances of obedience to his highness, to whom he was privately introduced, at Sherburn, by admiral Russel, afterwards earl of Orford. After his return to the fleet, lord Dartmouth sent him with capt. Aylmer, and capt. Flastings, to carry a message of submission to the prince at Windsor; and made him captain of the Constant Warwick, a ship of the fourth rate. In 1690 he commanded the Hope, a third rate, and was second to sir George Rooke, in the battle off Beachy head. In the years 1691 and 1692, he was captain of the Royal Oak, and served under admiral Russel, who commanded in chief their Majesty’s fleet. In F693, that great officer distinguished him in a particular manner, by promoting him to the rank of his first captain; in which station he served in 1694 and 1695 in the Mediterranean, where the designs of the French against Barcelona were prevented: and also the next year, 1696, in the Channel, to oppose the intended invasion of king James with a French army from the coast of France; which, upon the appearance of the fleet, was laid aside. In 1702, upon the breaking out of the war, he accepted of the command of the Nassau, a third rate, and was at the taking and burning of the French and Spanish fleets at Vigo. The year following he was made rearadmiral of the red, and served in the fleet commanded by *ir Cloudesley Shovel, in the Mediterranean; who detached him with a squadron to Algiers, where he renewed and improved our treaties with that government. In 1704 he served in the grand fleet in the Mediterranean, and commanded the squadron that attacked and cannonaded Gibraltar; and, by landing the seamen, whose valour was very remarkably displayed on this occasion, the town was taken. He was in the battle of Malaga, which followed soon after, and, for his behaviour in that action, had the honour of knighthood conferred on him by his Majesty. In the winter of this year he was sent oat with a squadron to cruise against the French, which he^ did with great success, taking about twenty of their largest privateers in about two months time, with the Thetis, a French man of war of fifty guns. In 1705 he was made vice-admiral of the blue: and upon the election of a new parliament, was returned burgess for Plymouth, which place he represented in every succeeding parliament to the year 1721, when he was advanced to the peerage.

During the summer of 1705, he commanded in chief a squadron in the channel, and blocked up the French fleet in Brest, with a much inferior strength. In 1706, king Charles of Spain, the late emperor, being closely beseiged in Barcelona, by sea and land, by the duke of Anjou, and the place reduced to great extremity, and our fleet in the Mediterranean being too weak to relieve it, sir George Byng was appointed to command a strong squadron fitting out in England; in the hastening of which service, he used such diligence and activity, and joined our fleet with such unexpected dispatch, that the saving of that city was entirely owing to it. He assisted at the other enterprizes of that campaign, and commanded the ships detached for the reduction of Carthagena and Alicant, which he accomplished. In 1707 he served in the second post under Sir Cloudesley Shovel, at the seige of Toulon: and the year following was made admiral of the blue, and commanded the squadron which was fitted out to oppose the invasion designed against Scotland by the pretender with a French army from Dunkirk; which he fortunately prevented, by arriving off the Frith of Edinburgh before their troops could land, and obliged them to betake themselves to flight. On his return from this expedition, he was offered by the queen the place of one of the prince of Denmark’s council in the admiralty, which he then declined. He continued to command all that summer in the channel, and upon the marriage of the queen of Portugal, had the honour of conducting her majesty to Lisbon, where a commission was sent to him to be admiral of the white. In 1709 he commanded in chief her majesty’s fleet in the Mediterranean; and, after his return to England, was made one of the commissioners of the admiralty, and continued so till some time before the queen’s death; when, not falling in with the measures of the court, he was removed, but upon the accession of George I. he was restored to that station. In 1715, upon the breaking out of the rebellion which was at first secretly supported with arms "and warlike stores from France, he was appointed to command a squadron, with which he kept such a watchful eye along the French coast, by examining ships even in their ports, and obtaining orders from the court of France to put on shore at Havre de Grace great quantities of arms and ammunition shipped there for the pretender’s service; that, in reward for his services, the king on Nov. 15, 1715, created him a baronet, and gave him a ring of great value, and other marks of his royal favour. In 1717, upon the discovery of some secret practices of the ministers of Sweden against this kingdom, he was sent with a squadron into the Baltic, and prevented the Swedes appearing at sea. In 1718 he was made admiral and commander in chief of the fleet, and being sent with a squadron into the Mediterranean for the protection of Italy, according to the obligation England was under by treaty, against the invasion of the Spaniards, who had the year before surprized Sardinia, and had this year landed an army in Sicily, he gave a total defeat to their fleet near Messina: for which action he was honoured with a letter from the king, written with his own hand, and received congratulatory letters from the emperor and the king of Sardinia; and was further honoured by his imperial majesty with his picture set in diamonds. He remained for some time in these seas, for composing and adjusting the differences between the several powers concerned, being vested with the character of plenipotentiary to all the princes of Italy; and that year and the next he supported the German arms in their expedition to Sicily; and enabled them, by his assistance, to subdue the greatest part of that island. After performing so many signal services, he attended his majesty, by his command, at Hanover, who made him rear-admiral of England, and treasurer of the navy, and, on his return to England, one of his most honourable privy-council; and on Sept 19, 1721 he was called to the peerage by the title of baron Byng, of Southill, in the county of Bedford, and viscount Torrington, in Devonshire; and 1725 was made one of the knights of the bath on the revival of that order. In 1727, his late majesty, on his accession to the crown, placed him at the head of his naval affairs, as first lord of the admiralty, in which station he died, Jan. 17, 1732-3; and was interred at Southill, in Bedfordshire. Lord Torrington married, in 1691, Mary, daughter of James Master, of East Langdon, in the county of Kent, esq. by whom (who died in 1756) he had eleven sons and four daughters. His fourth son, was the unfortunate John Byng, admiral of the blue, who was condemned by the sentence, of a court-martial in 1757, and shot at Portsmouth March 14th of that year, for a breach of the twelfth article of war. From the best accounts published on this affair, it may be concluded that he was a sacrifice to popular clamour artfully directed to the wrong object.

, an eminent landscape engraver, was born in 1742, and educated under an uncle, who engraved heraldry on plate; but young Byrne having succeeded in a landscape after Wilson, which obtained a premium from the society for the encouragement of arts, it was regarded as the precursor of talent of a superior order, and he was sent to Paris, at that time the chief seminary in Europe for the study of engraving. There he studied successively under Aliamet and Wille: from the former of whom he imbibed the leading traits of that style of engraving which he afterwards adopted as his own r under the latter he engraved a large plate of a storm after Vernet; but the manual dexterity of Wille was alien to his mind, and probably contributed not rnuch to his improvement, although he alw r ays spoke of Wille’s instructions with respect. When he returned to England, the success of Woollett, as a landscape engraver, had set the fashion in that department of the art; but Byrne, disdaining to copy what he did not feel, or perhaps scorning the infiuence of fashion in art, preserved the independence of his style; and continued to study, and to recommend to his pupils*, nature, Vivares, and the best examples of the French school. His larger performances are after Zuccarelli and Both: but his principal works (containing probably his best engraving) are the “Antiquities of Great Britain,” after Hearne; a set of “Views of the Lakes,” after Farringdon; and Smith’s “Scenery of Italy.” His chief excellence consisting in his aerial perspective, and the general effect of his chiaroscuro, he was more agreeably and more beneficially employed, in finishing than in etching, and hence he generally worked in conjunction with his pupils, who were in his later years his own sons and daughters. His manners were unassuming; his professional industry unremitting; and his moral character exemplary. This ingenious artist died at his house in Great Titchfield street, Sept. 24, 1805.

, a French physician of considerable eminence, the son of Mons. Cabanis, an able agriculturist, was born about 1756 and in his youth shewed much taste for scientific as well as polite literature, which he pursued with success; although having caught the revolutionary phrensy, his studies became interrupted by his polkical engagements. He is said, however, to have had no hand in any of the excesses which arose out of the fury of contending parties. He was connected with Alirabeau, and attended him in his professional capacity on his death-bed. He was also one of the Council of Five Hundred; and it was in consequence of a motion made by him, that the Directory was dissolved. His principles, however, do not appear to have been much more steady and consistent than those of his brethren. He published, 1. “Observations sur les Hopitaux,” Paris, 1790, 8vo. 2. “Journal de la maladie et de la mort de Mirabeau,” ibid. 1791, 8vo. 3. “Travail sur I'education publique,” a posthumous work of Mirabeau, edited by Cabanis, 1791, 8vo. 4. “Melanges de Litterature Allemande,” 1796, 8vo. 5. “Dudegrede certitude delamedecine,”1797, 8vo,republishedin 1802, with the addition of the first two articles in this list. 6. “Quelques considerations sur l'organization sociale en generale,” &c. 1799, 12mo. 7. “Des rapports du physique et du morale de Pnomme,” 1803, 2 vols. 8vo, reprinted with additions in 1804. On the merit of this work the French critics are divided we may, however, form some idea of it from the circumstance of its having been praised by the philosophers, and censured by the divines. 8. “Coup d'ceil sur les revolutions et la reforme de la medicine,” 1803. 9. “Observations sur les affections Catarrhales,” &c. 1807. He wrote also some curious articles in the “Magazin Encyclopedique;” and in the Moniteur for 1799 are many of his speeches in the Jegislative body. He was connected, we are told, wkh a great part of the writers and philosophers who contributed to enlighten the eighteenth century. During his last years he inhabited a country-house at Auteuil, bequeathed him by his friend madame Helvetius. He died at Meulan, May 5, 1808; and was at the time of his death a member of the institute, of the philomatic society, and of the medical society.

It was this disappointment which is supposed to have induced Sebastian Cabot to leave England, and go over into Spain. There he was treated with great respect, and appointed pilot-major, or chief pilot of Spain; and by his office entrusted with the reviewing of all projects for discovery; which at that period were numerous and important. His great capacity and reputation as a navigator, induced many opulent merchants to treat with him, in 1524, about a voyage to be undertaken at their expence by the new-found passage of Magellan to the Moluccos; and Cabot accordingly agreed to engage in the voyage. He set sail from Cadiz, with four ships, about the beginning of April 1525, first to the Canaries, then to the Cape Verd islands, and from thence to Cape St. Augustine, and the island of Patos, or Geese; and near Bahia de Todos los Santos, or the bay of All Saints, he met a French ship. When he came to the island just mentioned, he was in great want of provisions; but the Indians treated him with much kindness, and supplied him with provisions for all his ships. This he returned by an act of base ingratitude, carrying off with him by force four sons of the principal persons of the island. He then proceeded to the river of Plate, having left ashore, on a desert island, Martin Mendez, his vice-admiral, captain Francis do Rojas, and Michael de Rojas, because they censured his conduct. He was now prevented from prosecuting his original design of going to the Spice Islands, both by a scarcity of provisions, and a mutiny among his men. He sailed, however, up the river of Plate; and about thirty leagues above the mouth he found an island, which he called St. Gabriel, about a league in compass, dnd half a league from the continent towards Brazil. There he anchored; and, rowing with the boats three leagues higher, discovered a river he called San Salvador, or St. Saviour, very deep, and a safe harbour for the ships on the same side; whither he brought up his vessels, and unloaded them, because there was not much water at the mouth of the river. Having built a fort, and left some men in it, he determined to proceed up that river with boats, and a flat-bottomed caravel, in order to make discoveries; for he thought his voyage might thereby be rendered beneficial, though he did not pass through the Straits to the Spice Islands. When he had advanced thirty leagues, he came to a river called Zarcarana; the inhabitants in the neighbourhood of which he found to be intelligent, and not unfriendly; and here he erected another fort, calling it Santi Spiritus, i. e. of the Holy Ghost, and his followers by another name, viz. Cabot’s Fort. He then discovered the shores of the river Parana, where he found several islands and rivers, and at length came to the river Paraguay, in the neighbourhood of which he found people tilling the ground; a circumstance which had not occurred to him before in that part of the world. But here the natives opposed him with so much vigour, that he advanced no farther, though he had killed many of the Indians; but they slew twenty-five of his Spaniards, and took three of them, who went out to gather palmetos.

, first earl of Cadogan, the son of Henry Cadogan, a counsellor at law, by Bridget, daughter to sir Hardress Waller, knt. was educated to a military life, and in 1701 was made quarter-master-general of the army. In 1703 he was constituted colonel of the second regiment of horse, and on August 25, 1704, brigadiergeneral, having that year behaved with great gallantry at the attack of Schellenberg, and the battle of Hochstet. In June 1705 he was elected member of parliament for Woodstock; and on July 18th of the same year, at the forcing of the French lines near Tirlemont, he behaved with remarkable bravery at the head of his regiment, xvhich first attacking the enemy had such success, that they defeated four squadrons of Bavarian guards, drove them through two battalions of their foot, and took four standards. He was also in the battle of Ramilies, fought on May 12, 1706; after which the duke of Marlborough sent from his camp at Meerlebeck, on June 3, brigadier Cadogan, with six squadrons of horse, and his letter to the governor of Antwerp, to invite him and the garrison to the obedience of king Charles III. and having reported to his grace that ten battalions were in the city and castle of Antwerp, who seemed inclined to surrender on honourable terms, the duke sent him authority to treat with them. And after some conferences, they complied, and the garrison, consisting of six French and six Spanish regiments, were allowed to march out in three days, and be conducted to Quesnoy. But of the Walloon regiment, consisting of 600 men each, only 372 men marched out; the rest entering into the service of king Charles, except some few who were not in condition to serve, and returned to their respective dwellings. Afterwards, towards the close of the campaign that year, he was taken prisoner when on a foraging party, and was carried into Tournay, but he remained there only three days, the duke of Vendosme sending him, on August 19, to the duke of Marl bo rough’s camp, upon his parole and five days after he was exchanged for the baron Palavicini, a major-general in the French service, taken at the battle of Ramilies. On Jan. 1, 1706-7, he was promoted to the rank of major-general of her majesty’s forces. On Mr. Stepney’s decease in 1707, he succeeded him as minister plenipotentiary in the government of the Spanish Netherlands. And he soon after, in conference, brought to a conclusion the negotiation for the speedy exchange of prisoners; and, having shared in the most difficult enterprizes throughout the war, was constituted a lieutenant-general on January 10, 1708-9.

On September 10, 1709, the day before the battle of Tanniers, near Mons, when the two armies were in sight of each other, and an officer from the French having made a signal for a truce, several of both sides met in a friendly manner, and the French, inquiring for an officer of distinction, desired him to^acquaint the duke of Marlborough, that the marshal de Villars had some affairs of importance to propose to his grace, and that he would be pleased to send a trusty person, to whom he might communicate the same. On this his grace sent general Cadogan to know what marshal Villars had to offer, whereby being nearer the French army, than otherwise he could have been, he improved the opportunity so effectually, that, by viewing their intrcnchmcuts in the corner of the wood at Tanniers, he directed the colonel of the artillery, whom he took with him, to ohserve wbere he dropped his glove, and there, in the night, to plant his cannon; which, by enfilading their lines the next morning, greatly contributed to the forcing them, and was the principal means of obtaining that victory. Also an the siege of Mons, which ensued, being (as he ever had been) indefatigable in serving the common cause, and going voluntarily into the trenches to animate the troops that were in the attack of a ravelin, he received a dangerous wound in his neck; his aid-de-camp being also wounded by his side, of which he soon expired. In March 1711, he was at the Hague, at the desire of the council of state of the States General, to assist in consulting the operations of the ensuing campaign.

, an eminent French Inathematician and astronomer, was born at Rumigiiy in the diocese of Rheims on March 15, 1713. His father having quitted the army, in which he had served, amused himself in his retirement with studying mathematics and mechanics, in which he proved the author of several inventions of considerable use to the public. From this example of his father, our author “almost in his infancy took a fancy to mechanics, which proved of signal service to him in his maturer years. At school he discovered early tokens of genius. He came to Paris in 1729; where he studied the classics, philosophy, and mathematics, and afterwards divinity in the college de Navarre, with a view to the church, but he never entered into priest’s orders, apprehending that his astronomical studies, to which he had become much devoted, might too much interfere with his religious duties. His turn for astronomy soon connected him with the celebrated Cassini, who procured him an apartment in the observatory; where, assisted by the counsels of this master, he soon acquired a name among the astronomers, in 1739 he was joined with M. Cassini de Thury, son to M. Cassini, in verifying the meridian through the whole extent of France; and in the same year he was, named professor of mathematics in the college of Mazarine. In 1741 or author was admitted into the academy of sciences as an adjoint member for astronomy and had many excellent papers inserted in their memoirs; beside which he published several useful treatises, viz. Elements of Geometry, Astronomy, Mechanics, and Optics. He also carefully computed all the eclipses of the sun and moon that had happened since the Christian sera, which were printed in the work entitled” L'Art de verifier les dates,“&c. Paris, 1750, 4to. He also compiled a volume of astronomical ephemerides for the years 1745 to 1755; another for the years 1755 to 1765 and a third for the years 1765 to 1775 as also the most correct solar tables of any; and an excellent work entitled” Astronomic fundamenta novissimis solis et stellarum observationibus stabilita."

M. de la Caille returned to France in the autumn of 1754, after an absence of about four years; loaded, not with the spoils of the east, but with those of the southern heavens, beiore then almost unknown to astronomers. Upon his return, he first drew up a reply to some strictures which the celebrated Euler had published relative to the meridian: after which he settled the results of the comparison of his observations for the parallaxes, with those of other astronomers that of the sun he fixed at 9|“; of the naoon at 56 56”; of Mars in his opposition, 36“of Venus 3.” He also settled the laws by which astronomical refractions are varied by the different density or rarity of the air, by heat or cold, and by dry ness or moisture. And lastly he shewed an easy and practicable method of finding the longitude at sea, by means of the moon. His fame being now celebrated every where, M. de la Caille was soon elected a member of most of the academies and societies of Europe, particularly of those of London, Bologna, Petersburg!], Berlin, Stockholm, and Gottingen. In 1760 he was attacked by a severe fit of the gout, which, however, did not interrupt the course of his studies; for he then planned out a new and large work, no less than a history of astronomy through all ages, with a comparison of the ancient and modern observations, and the construction and use of the instruments employed in making them. Towards the latter part of 1761, his constitution became greatly reduced; though his mind remained unaffected, and he resolutely persisted in his studies to the last. He died March 21, 1762, in the forty-ninth year of his age. Besides the publications before mentioned, he had a vast number inserted in the Memoirs of the French academy, from 1711 to 1763. In most of the volumes of those years are two or more of his papers.

, a celebrated Spanish dramatic poet, was chevalier of the order of St. James, and at first distinguished himself as a soldier. This profession he quitted, and became an ecclesiastic, and was made priest and canon of Toledo. There are several dramatical pieces by him in 9 vols. 4 to, Madrid, 1689; not to mention several others that have not been printed. The imagination of Calderoni, however, was too fertile to allow him to be regular and correct. The rules of the drama are violated in almost all his works. We perceive in his tragedies the irregularity of Shakspeare, his elevation and his degradation, flashes of genius as strong, comic turns as much out of place, an inflation no less capricious, and the same bustle of action and incident. Some of his pieces are still performed on the Spanish stage, and some have been translated into French. This poet flourished about the year 1640.

, a French mathematician, was born on the 25th of October 1744, at Versailles, where he received a good education, and acquired an early taste for the mathematics. In 1768 he came to Paris, where he had an opportunity of being more thoroughly instructed. In 1774 he formed some distinguished pupils for the school of engineers, where the examinations were strict, and admission difficult to be obtained. In 1779 he gained the prize proposed by the society of arts at Geneva, for escapements. In 1783 he completed his edition of “Gardiner’s Tables of Logarithms,” which were exceedingly convenient, of great utility, and very correct; and which possessed advantages above all the others. In 1788 he was appointed professor of hydrography at Vann.es, afterwards at Dunkirk; and in 1792 he returned to Paris, and was for a few years professor des ingenieurs geographes at the depot of war. This place having been suppressed, he continued to teach in Paris, where he was always considered as one of the best mathematical masters lo whom pupils could apply. In 1795 he published the new stereotype edition of the “Tables of Logarithms,” considerably enlarged with logarithmic tables of the sines, according to the new decimal division of the circle. These are the first which ever appeared. Towards the end of 3797 he presented to the National Institute the plan of a new telegraph and a telegraphic language, accompanied with a dictionary of 12,000 French words adapted to it by A combination worthy of so able a mathematician. These labours had injured his health, and he had been a long time asthmatic, but, notwithstanding his condition, he published that year an excellent memoir on finding the longitude at sea, under the modest title of “A Supplement to the Trigonometry and Navigation of Bezout.” He died on the 14th of November, 1798, leaving behind him a daughter, born at Vannes in 1793. According to a tradition in the family, he was descended from Descartes.

The “Life of Alexander,” said to have been written by Callisthenes, often referred to by the ancients, has been long since lost; but a Greek life of Alexander, under the adopted name of Callisthenes, at present exists, and is no uncommon manuscript in good libraries. There is one copy in the Bodleian, and another in the royal library at Paris. It was written in Greek, being a translation from the Persic by Simeon Seth, styled magister and protovestiary or wardrobe-keeper of the palace of Antiochus at Constantinople, about the year 1070, under the emperor Michaei Ducas. It was most probably soon after translated from the Greek into the Latin, and at length from thence into French, Italian, and German. But it is unnecessary to say more of a work which does not belong to our Callisthenes. He is said to have written other works, as “A History of Greece,” a “History of the Trojan war,” &c. but no traces of them are now to be found.

, a celebrated French philosopher, was a native of Mesnil-Hubert, near Argenton, in the diocese of Seez. About 165.5, he studied philosophy at Caen, and afterwards divinity at Paris, but philosophy was his favourite pursuit, and the foundation of his fame. In 1660 he taught in the college du Bois, in Caen, and became there acquainted with Huet, afterwards bishop of Avranches, who acknowledged the assistance he derived from Cally in his studies. Their intimacy, however, was interrupted by Cally’s avowal of adherence to ttie Cartesian system. CaJly was the first in France who had the courage to profess himself a Cartesian, in defiance of the prejudices and numbers of those who adhered to the ancient philosophy. He first broached his Cartesianism in the way of hypothesis, but afterwards taught it more openly, which procured him many enemies. Huet, although then very young, ventured to censure him; and father Valois, the Jesuit, who was a contemporary professor of philosophy, attacked both Cally and his opinions in a work which he published under the name of Louis de la Ville, in 1680, entitled “Sentimens de M. Descartes, touchant Pessence et les proprietes des corps, opposes a la doctrine de Peglise, et conformesaux erreurs de Calvin sur I'eucharistie.” Cally, not thinking there was much in this, did not answer it until pressed by his friends, when he wrote an answer in Latin, which, however, was not at this time published. When the duke de Montausier was appointed by Louis XIV. to provide eminent classical scholars to write notes on the classics published for the use of the Dauphin, Cally was selected for the edition of “Boethius de Consolatione,” which he published, accordingly, in 1680, in 4to, now one of the scarce quarto Delphin editions. In 1674 he published a short introduction to philosophy, “Institutio philosophica,” 4to, which he afterwards greatly enlarged, and published in 1695 under the title “Universae philosophise institutio,” Caen, 4 vols. 4to. In 1675 he was appointed principal of the college of arts in Caen, on which he began a new course of philosophical lectures, and laid out ten or twelve thousand francs on rebuilding a part of the college which had fallen into ruin. In 1684 he was appointed curate of the parish of St. Martin, in Caen, and the Protestants who were then very numerous in that city, flocked to his sermons, and he held conferences once or twice a week in his vestry, which they attended with much pleasure, and we are told he 'made many converts to the Popish religion. But this success, for which every Catholic ought to have been thankful, excited the envy of those who had quarrelled with him before on account of his Cartesianism, and by false accusations, they procured him to be exiled to Moulins in 1686, where he remained for two years. Finding on his return that the Protestants were still numerous in Caen, and that they entertained the same respect for him as before, he wrote for their use a work entitled “Durand cornmente, ou Paccord de la philosophie avec la theologie, tonchaut la transubstantialion.” In this, which contained part of his answer to father Valois, mentioned above, he revives the opinion of the celebrated Durand, who said, if the church decided that there was a transubstantiation in the eucharist, there must remain something of what was bread, to make a difference between the creation and production of a thing which was not, and annihilation or a thing reduced to nothing. Cally sent this work in ms. to M. Basnage, who had been one of his scholars, but received no answer. la the mean time, unwilling to delay a work which he hoped would contribute to the conversion of the Protestants, “he engaged with a bookseller at Caen to print only sixty copies, which he purposed to send to his friends at Paris, and obtain their opinion as to a more extended publication. The bookseller, however, having an eye only to his own interest, undertook to assure Cally that the work would be approved by the doctors of the Sorbonne, and he therefore would print eight hundred. Cally unfortunately consented, and the work no sooner appeared, than he who fondly hoped it would convert heretics, was himself treated as a heretic. M. de Nesmond, then bishop of Bayeux, condemned the work in a pastoral letter March 30, 1701, and Cally in April following made his retractation, which he not only read in his own church, but it was read in all other churches; and he also destroyed the impression, so that it is now classed among rare books. It was a small vol. 12mo, 1700, printed at Cologne, under the name of Pierre Marteau. Cally also published some of his sermons, but they were too philosophical and dry for the closet, although he had contrived to give them a popular effect in the pulpit. A work entitled” Doctrine heretique, &c. touchant la primauté du pape, enseignee par les Jesuites dans leur college de Caen," is attributed to him, but as it bears date 1644, he must have then been too young. He died Dec. 31, 1709.

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

, an eminent but unfortunate French minister, was born at Douay in 1734. His father was president of the parliament of Flanders, and descended from a noble family, originally of Tournay, and well known in the history of that city, which makes honourable mention of his ancestors in the remotest times. Having finished his studies at the university of Paris with extraordinary success, young Calonne was appointed, in histwenty-third year, advocate or solicitor- general of the superior council of Artois and before he had attained the age of twenty -five, was promoted to the office of procurator-general of the parliament of Flanders, the duties of which he performed with distinguished ability for six years. He was then called as rapporteur to the king’s council, to report to his majesty the most momentous affairs of administration, of which arduous and laborious task he acquitted himself in a manner that evinced his profound knowledge of the government, constitution, history, and jurisprudence of France, and established his reputation as a writer of no less perspicuity and judgment, than elegance and energy of diction.

, a French dramatic and romance writer, was born in the chateau of Toulgon in Perigord, in the diocese of Cahors, about the year 1612, and became gentleman in ordinary to the king. He is said to have conciliated the good opinion of the court by his happy talent for telling agreeable stories. When a very young man he wrote several tragedies and comedies which procured him some reputation, particularly his “Mithridates” and the “Earl of Essex,” but he was most celebrated for his romances, particularly “Cassandra,” “Cleopatra,” and “Pharamond,” which gave place, however, to a better taste in the course of some years, and are now thought intolerable by their insipidity and tediousness. Calprenede had an excellent opinion of himself, and when the cardinal Richelieu said of some of his verses, that they were dull, he replied that “nothing dull belonged to the family of Calprenede.” He died in 1663.

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

, Lord Baltimore, a descendant of the preceding, and eldest son of Charles, the sixth lord, was born in 1731, and succeeded to the title on the death of his father in 1751, and also to the proprietorship of Maryland. After returning from his travels he married lady Diana Egerton, youngest daughter of the duke of Bridgwater. In 1768 he was indicted at the Kingston assizes for a rape, but acquitted. He went soon after to reside on the continent, and died at Naples, Sept. 14, 1771, without issue by marriage, leaving his fortune to his sister, Mrs. Eden. In 1767, he published “A Tour to the East in the years 1763 and 1764, with remarks on the city of 'Constantinople and the Turks. Also select pieces of Oriental wit, poetry, and wisdom,” Lond. 1767. This book abounds with quotations from the Roman classics, many of which his lordship has translated into very indifferent prose. He also published, but in a confined way, a collection, the title of which is “Gaudia Poetica, Latina, Anglica, et Gallica, Lingua composita, anuo 1769. Augustse Litteris Spathianis, 1770.” It is dedicated, in Latin, to Lin­Ikeiis, and consists of various pieces in Latin, French, and English, prose and verse, of very little merit. A copy, the only one said to be known in this country , was sold at Mr. Isaac Reed’s sale, who likewise had another performance of his lordship’s, equally rare, and valued only for its rarity, entitled “Coelestes et Inferi,” Venetiis, 1771, 4to. The former was sold for 6l. 10s. and the latter for half a guinea.

, one of the chief reformers of the church, was born at Noyon in Picardy, July 10, 1509. He was instructed in grammar at Paris under Maturinus Corderius, to whom he afterwards dedicated his Commentary on the first epistle of the Thessalonians, and studied philosophy in the college of Montaigu under a Spanish professor. His father, uho discovered many marks of hitf early piety, particularly in his reprehensions of the vices of his companions, designed him for the church, and got him presented, May 21, 1521, to the chapel of Notre Dame de la Gesine, in the church of Noyon. In 1527 he was presented to the rectory of Marteville, which he exchanged in 1529 fortlie rectory of Pont I‘Eveque near Noyon. His father afterwards changed his resolution, and would have him study law; to which Calvin, who, by reading the scriptures, had conceived a dislike to the superstitions of popery, readily consented, and resigned the chapel of Gesine and the rectory of Pont l’Eveque in 1534. He had never, it must here be observed, been in priest’s orders, and belonged to the church only by having received the tonsure. He was sent to study the law first under Peter de l'Etoile (Petrus Stella) at Orleans, and afterwards under Andrew Alciat at Bourges, and while he made a great progress in that science, he improved no less in the knowledge of divinity by his private studies. At Bourges he applied to the Greek tongue, under the direction of professor Wolmar. His father’s death having called him back to Noyon, he staid there a short time, and then went to Paris, where he wrote a commentary on Seneca’s treatise “De dementia,” being at this time about twenty- four years of age. Having put his name in Latin to this piece, he laid aside his surname Cauvin, for that of Calvin, styling himself in the title-page “Lucius Calvinus civis Romanus.” He soon made himself known at Paris to such as had privately embraced the reformation, and by frequent intercourse with them became more confirmed in his principles. A speech of Nicholas Cop, rector of the university of Paris, of which Calvin furnished the materials, having greatly displeased the Sorbonne and the parliament, gave rise to a persecu^ tion against the protestants; and Calvin, who narrowly escaped being taken in the college of Forteret, was forced to retire to Xaintonge, after having had the honour to be introduced to the queen of Navarre, who allayed this first storm raised against the protestants. Calvin returned to Paris in 1534. This year the reformed met with severe treatment, which determined him to leave France, after publishing a treatise against those who believe that departed souls are in a kind of sleep. He retired to Basil, where he studied Hebrew; at this time he published his “Institutions of the Christian Religion,” a work well adapted to spread his fame, though he himself was desirous of living in obscurity. It is dedicated to the French king, Francis I. This prince being solicitous, according to Beza, to gain the friendship of the Protestants in Germany, and knowing that they were highly incensed by the cruel persecutions which their brethren suffered in France, he, by advice of William de Bellay, represented to them that he had only punished certain enthusiasts, who substituted their own imaginations in the place of God’s word, and despised the civil magistrate. Calvin, stung with indignation at this wicked evasion, wrote this work as an apology for the Protestants who were burnt for their religion in France. The dedication to Francis I. is one of the three that have been highly admired: that of Thuanus to his history, and Casaubon’s to Polybius, are the two others. But this treatise, when first published in 1555, was only a sketch of a larger work. The complete editions, both in Latin and in French, with the author’s last additions and corrections, did not appear till 1558. After the publication of this work, Calvin went to Italy to pay a visit to the duchess of Ferrara, a lady of eminent piety, by whom he was very kindly received. Prom Italy he came back to France, and having settled his private affairs, he purposed to go to Strasbourg, or Basil, in company with his sole surviving brother Antony Calvin; but as the roads were not safe on account of the war, except through the duke of Savoy’s territories, he chose that road. “This was a particular direction of Providence,” says Bayle; “it was his destiny that he should settle at Geneva, and when he was wholly intent on going farther, he found himself detained by an order from heaven, if I may so speak.” William Farel, a man of a warm enthusiastic temper, who had in vain used many entreaties to prevail with Calvin to be his fellow-labourer in that part of the Lord’s vineyard, at last solemnly declared to him, in the name of God, that if he would not stay, the curse of God would attend him wherever he went, as seeking himself and not Christ. Calvin therefore was obliged to comply with the choice which the consistory and magistrates of Geneva made of him, with the consent of the, people, to be one of their ministers, and professor of divinity. It was his own wish to undertake only this last office, but he was gbliged to take both upon him in August 1536. The year following he made all the people declare, upon oath, their assent to a confession of faith, which contained a renunciation of Popery: and because this reformation in doctrine did not put an entire stop to the immoralities that prevailed at Geneva, nor banish that spirit of faction which had set the principal families at variance, Calvin, in concert with his colleagues, declared that they could not celebrate the sacrament whilst they kept up their animosities, and trampled on the discipline of the church. He also intimated, that he could not submit to the regulation which the synod of the canton of Berne had lately made *. On this, the syndics of Geneva summoned an assembly of the people; and it was ordered that Calvin, Farel, and another minister, should leave the town in two days, for refusing to administer the sacrament. Calvin' retired to Strasbourg, and established a French church in that city, of which he was the first minister; he was also appointed to be professor of divinity there* During his stay at Strasbourg, he continued to give many marks of his affection for the church of Geneva; as appears, amongst other things, by the answer which he wrote in 1539, to the beautiful but artful letter of cardinal Sadolet, bishop of Carpentras, inviting the people of Geneva to return into the bosom of the Romish church. Two years after, the divines of Strasbourg being very desirous that he should assist at the diet which the emperor had appointed to be held at Worms and at Ratisbon, for accommodating religious differences, he went thither with Bucer, and had a conference with Melancthon. In the mean time the people of Geneva (the syndics who promoted his banishment being now some of them executed, and others forced to fly their country for their crimes), entreated him so earnestly to return to them, that at last he consented. He arrived at Geneva, Sept. 13, 1541, to the great satisfaction both of the people and the magistrates; and the first measure ha adopted after his arrival, was to establish a form of church, discipline, and a consistorial jurisdiction, invested with, the power of inflicting censures and canonical punishments,

The inflexible rigour with which Calvin asserted, on all occasions, the rights of his consistory, procured him many enemies; but nothing daunted him; and one would hardly believe, if there were not unquestionable proofs of it, that amidst all the commotions at home, he could take so much care as he did of the churches abroad, in France, Germany, England, and Poland, and write so many books and letters. He did more by his pen than his presence; yet on some occasions he acted in person, particularly at Francfort, in 1556, whither he went to put an end to the disputes which divided the French church in that city. He, was always employed, having almost constantly his pen in his hand, even when sickness confined him to his bed; and he continued the discharge of all those duties, which his zeal for the general good of the churches imposed on him, till the day of his death, May 27, 1564.

On the commencement of the war with France in 1756, in the events of which he appears to have taken a more lively interest than could have been expected from a man of his retired disposition, he was induced to undertake a history of the rise and progress of the British power in India, in order to enlighten the public mind in the nature and importance of that acquisition. At first he intended that this work should be on a very large scale, but as recent events demanded such information as could be immediately procured, and promised to be useful, he produced his “History of the War upon the Coast of Coromandel,” which was published in 1761. He then resumed his original design, and obtained permission from the East India Company to inspect such of their papers as might "be requisite. He had also a promise of Mr. Orme’s papers, but that gentleman happening to return from India at this juncture, with an intention to publish himself the history which afterwards appeared, Mr. Cambridge considered that his own work would now be in a great measure superfluous, and therefore relinquished the further prosecution of his plan. What he had published, however, was considered as an important memoir of the period it embraced, and as a fair and correct statement of the French proceed' ings in India; and it served to introduce him more into the study of India affairs, in which he ever afterwards delighted. It led him also to an intimate acquaintance with lord Clive, general Carnac, Mr. Scrafton, major Pearson, Mr. Varelst, general Calliaud, Mr. Hastings, and others, who had gained distinguished reputation by their services in the East.

His impartiality has been attacked on several parts of this work. He has been charged with being influenced in his account of the queen of Scots by complaisance for her son, and with contradictions in the information given by him to M. deThou, and his own account of the same particulars. It is not to be wondered if James made his own corrections on the ms. which his warrant sets forth he had perused before he permitted it to be published. It was no easy matter to speak the truth in that reign of flattery in points where filial piety and mean ambition divided the mind of the reigning monarch. An English historian in such a reign could not indulge the same freedom as Thuanus. The calumnies cast upon him for his detail of Irish affairs were thought by him beneath the notice his friends wanted to take of them. But though he declined adding his own justification to that which the government of Ireland thought proper to publish of their own conduct, we have the letters he wrote on the subject to archbishop Usher and others and it had this effect on him, that he declined publishing in his life-time the second part of his history, which he completed in 1617. He kept the original by him, which was preserved in the Cottonian library, and sent an exact copy of it to his friend Mr. Dupuy, who had given him the strongest assurances that he would punctually perform the duty of this important trust, and faithfully kept his word. It was first printed at Leyden, 1625, 8vo, again London, 1627, folio, Leyden, 1639, 8vo, &c. But the most correct edition of the whole is that by Hearne from Dr. Smith’s copy corrected by Mr. Camden’s own hand, collated with another ms. in Mr. Rawlinson’s library. Both parts were translated into French by M. Paul de Belligent, advocate in the parliament of Paris; and from thence into English with many errors, by one Abraham D'Arcy, who did not understand English. The materials whence Camden compiled this history are most of them to be found in the Cottonian library. We learn from a ms letter of Dr. Goodman’s, that he desired them as a legacy, but received for answer, that they had been promised to archbishop Bancroft, upon whose death he transferred them to his successor Abbot, and archbishop Laud said they were deposited in the palace at Lambeth, but whereever they were archbishop Sancroft could not find one of them.

His labours in the literary republic were prodigious. He wrote a vast number of books, among which are the lives of Melancthon and Hessius, and “Commentaries on the NewTestament, grammatical and critical,” printed with Beza’s Greek Testament, Cambridge, 1642, fol. He likewise published a catalogue of the bishops of the principal sees; Greek epistles; itineraries in Latin verse; epigrams of the ancient Greek poets; a commentary on Plautus, &c. But he was perhaps a greater benefactor to the students of his time by the translations he made from many of the ancient authors. Greek was but little understood, and to facilitate the learning of that language, he translated Herodotus, Demosthenes, Xenophon, Euclid, Homer, Theocritus, Sophocles; Lucian, Theodoret, Nicephorus, &c. Melchior Adam says, that “he studied incessantly, within doors and without, up and in bed, on a journey, and in hours even of recreation; that he learned French and Italian when he was old; that he had but a smattering of Hebrew; that he understood Greek well; and that in Latin he was inferior to none.” Turnebus, Henry Stephens, Lipsius, Beza, Scaliger, Thuanus, and Vossius, all speak of him in the highest terms. Erasmus only said he owed more to industry than to nature, which might, however, apply to the uncommon care he took in remedying her defects; but this opinion does not correspond with that of any of his contemporaries. In private character he was a man of great goodness of disposition, great humanity, candour, and. sincerity in his searches after truth.

, one of the most famous divines of the seventeenth century, among the French Protestants, was born at Glasgow, in Scotland, about the year 1580, and educated at the university of his native city. After reading lectures on the Greek language for a year, he began his travels in 1600, and at Bourdeaux evinced so much ability and erudition, that the ministers of that city appointed him master of a college which they had established at Bergerac, for teaching Greek and Latin; and from this the duke de Bouillon removed him to the philosophical professorship at Sedan, where he remained for two years. He then went to Paris, and from Paris to Bourdeaux, where he arrived in 1604, and began his divinity studies, and in 1608 was appointed one of the ministers of Bourdeaux, and officiated there with such increasing reputation, that the university of Saumur judged him worthy to succeed Gomarus in the divinity chair. Having accepted this offer, he gave his lectures until 1620, when the university was almost dispersed by the civil war. He now came over to England with his family, and was recommended to king James, who appointed him professor of divinity at Glasgow, in the room of Robert Boyd, of Trochrig, (whom Bayle and his translators call Trochoregius), because he was supposed to be more attached to the episcopal form of church government. This situation, however, not suiting his taste, he returned to Saumur in less than a year; but even there he met with opposition, and the court having prohibited his public teaching, he was obliged to read lectures in private. After a year passed in this precarious state of toleration, he went in 1624 to Montauban, where he was chosen professor of divinity, but having declared himself too openly against the party which preached up the civil war, he created many enemies, and among the rest an unknown miscreant who assaulted him in the street, and wounded him so desperately as to occasion his death, which took place, after he had languished a considerable time, in 1625. Bayle says, he was a man of a great deal of wit and judgment, had a happy memory, was very learned, a good philosopher, of a chcarful temper, and ready to communicate not only his knowledge, but even his money: he was a great talker, a long preacher, little acquainted with the works of the fathers, obstinate in his opinions, and somewhat troublesome. He frankly owned to his friends, that he found several things still to reform in the reformed churches. He took a delight in publishing particular opinions, and in going out of the beaten road; and he gave instances of this when he was a youth, in his theses “De Tribus Frederibus,” which he published and maintained at Heidelberg, although yet but a proposant, or candidate for the ministry. He also mixed some novelties in all the theological questions which he examined; and when in explaining some passages of the holy scripture, he met with great difficulties, he took all opportunities to contradict the other divines, and especially Beza; for he pretended that they had not penetrated into the very marrow of that science. It was from him that monsieur Amyraut adopted the doctrine of universal grace, which occasioned so many disputes in France, and will always be found, at least upon Amyraut’s principles, to be too inconsistent for general belief. Cameron’s works are his “Theological Lectures,” Saumur, 1626 1628, 3 vols. 4to, published by Lewis Capellus, with a life of the author, and afterwards at Geneva in one vol. folio, with additions, by Frederick Spanheim. Capellus also published, in 1632, Cameron’s “Myrothecium Evangelicum.”

Camoens wrote a variety of poetical compositions, some of which have been lately very elegantly translated into English by lord viscount Strangford, who has also prefixed a life of the author, from which we have extracted some remarks. According to the researches his lordship has made into the character of Camoens, he appears to have possessed a lofty and independent spirit, with a disposition to gallantry which may probably have involved him in difficulties. His genius, however, appears principally io the “Lusiad,” the subject of which is the first discovery of the East Indies by Vasco de Gama the poem is conducted according to the epic plan: both the subject and the in r cidents are magnificent, but the machinery is perfectly extravagant. Not only, says Blair, is it formed of a singular mixture of Christian ideas and pagan mythology, tout it is so conducted, that the pagan gods appear to be the true deities, and Christ and the blessed Virgin, to be subordinate agents. One great scope of the Portuguese expedition, our author informs us, is to propagate the Christian faith, and to extirpate Mahometanism. In this religious undertaking, the great protector of the Portuguese is Venus, and their great adversary is Bacchus, whose displeasure is excited by Vasco’s attempting to rival his tame in the Indies. Councils of the gods are held, in which Jupiter is introduced, as foretelling the downfall of Mahometanism, and the propagation of the gospel Vasco, in a great distress from a storm, prays most seriously to God; implores the aid of Christ and the Virgin; and begs for such assistance as was given to the Israelites, when they were passing through the Red Sea; and to the apostle Paul, when he was in hazard of shipwreck. In return to this prayer, Venus appears, who, discerning the storm to be the work of Bacchus, complains to Jupiter, and procures the winds to be calmed. Such strange and preposterous machinery, shews how much authors have been misled by the absurd opinion, that there could be no epic poetry without the gods of Homer. Towards the end of the work, indeed, the author gives us an awkward salvo for his whole mythology: making the goddess Thetis inform Vasco, that she, and the rest of the heathen deities, are no more than names to describe the operations of Providence. There is, however, says the same judicious critic, some fine machinery of a different kind in the Lusiad. The genius of the river Ganges, appearing to Emanuel king of Portugal, in a dream, inviting that prince to discover his secret springs, and acquainting him that he was the destined monarch for whom the treasures of the East were reserved, is a happy idea. But the noblest conception of this sort is in the fifth canto, where Vasco is recounting to the king of Melinda all the wonders which he met with in his navigation. He tells him, that when the fleet arrived at the Cape of Good Hope, which never before had been doubled by any navigator, there appeared to them on a sudden, a huge and monstrous phantom rising out of the sea, in the midst of tempests and thunders, with a head that reached the clouds, and a countenance that filled them with terror. This was the genius, or guardian, of that hitherto unknown ocean. It spoke to them with a voice like thunder: menaced them for invading those seas which he had so long possessed undisturbed, and for daring to explore those secrets of the deep, which never had been revealed to the eye of mortals; required them to proceed no farther: if they should proceed, foretold all the successive calamities that were to befall them: and then, with a mighty noise, disappeared. This is one of the most solemn and striking pieces of machinery that ever was employed, and is sufficient to show that Camoens is a poet, though of an irregular, yet of a bold and lofty imagination. The critical student will find a more severe censure of Canioens in Rapin, Dryden, and Voltaire. But the Lusiad lias generally been considered as a poem of very superior merit, and has been often reprinted and translated into several languages, once into French, twice into Italian, four times into Spanish; and lately, with uncommon excellence, into English, by Mr. Mickle; but it had beea translated in the 17th century by sir Richard Fanshaw. Mickle’s translation will be considered in his life. It was translated into Latin by Thomas de Faria, bishop of Targa in Africa; who, concealing his name, and saying nothing of its being a translation, made some believe that the Lusiadas was originally in Latin. Large commentaries have been written upon the Lusiadas; the most considerable of which are those of Emanuel Faria de Sousa, in 2 vols. folio, Madrid, 1639. These commentaries were followed the year after with the publication of another volume in folio, written to defend them; besides eight volumes of observations upon the miscellaneous poems of Camoens, which this commentator left behind him in manuscript.

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

After remaining nine years in this country parish, he was chosen one of the ministers of Aberdeen in June, 1757, where his various and extensive talents were appreciated by those who knew best their worth, and where his fame was most likely to be rewarded. Accordingly in 1759, he was presented by his majesty to the office of principal of Marischal college, and soon made it appear that he was worthy of this dignity. Hume had recently published his “Essay on Miracles,” and despised his opponents until principal Campbell published his celebrated “Dissertation on Miracles,” which deservedly raised his character as an acute metaphysician and an able polemical writer. This “Dissertation” was originally drawn up in the form of a sermon, which he preached before the provincial synod of Aberdeen, Oct. 9, 1760, and which, on their requesting him to publish it, he afterwards enlarged into its present form. Some circumstances attended the publication which are rather singular, and which we shall relate in the words of his biographer. “Before it was published, he sent a copy of his manuscript to Dr. Blair of Edinburgh, with a request that, after perusing it, he would communicate the performance to Mr. Hume. The learned aud judicious Blair read the dissertation both as a friend, and as a critic, then showed it to his opponent, and afterwards wrote to Mr. Campbell both what had occurred to himself, and what Mr. Hume chose at first to write on the subject. It soon appeared, that this sceptical philosopher, with all his affected equanimity, felt very sensibly, on reading so acute, so learned, and so complete an answer to his essay on miracles. He complained of some harsh expressions, and stated a few objections to what Mr. Campbell had advanced, shewing, in some cases, where his meaning had been misunderstood. Instead of being displeased, his generous adversary instantly expunged, or softened, every expression that either was severe, or was only supposed to be offensive, removed every objection that had been made to his arguments, and availed himself of the remarks both of his friend, and of his opponent, in rendering his dissertation a complete and unanswerable performance. Thus corrected and improved, it was put to the press, and a copy of it sent to Mr. Hume. That philosopher was charmed with the gentlemanly conduct of Mr. Campbell, confessed that he felt a great desire to answer the dissertation, and declared that he would have attempted to do something in this way, if he had not laid it down as a rule, in early life, never to return an answer to any of his opponents. Thus principal Campbell, from a rnanly and well-bred treatment of his adversary, rendered his own work more correct, gained the esteem of his opponent, and left an example worthy to be imitated by all polemical writers.” How far such an example is worthy to be imitated, may surely be questioned; in Mr. Campbell’s conduct we see somewhat of timidity and irresolution, nor does he seem to have been aware of the impropriety of gratifying Hume by personal respect; and after all no good was produced, for Hume reprinted his essay again and again without any notice of Campbell or any other of his opponents, a decisive proof that in this respect he had no title to the character of philosopher. The “Dissertation on Miracles” was published in 1763, previously to which the author received the degree of D.D. from King’s college, Old Aberdeen. The sale of the work was in proportion to its merit, most extensive in Great Britain, and being translated into the French, Dutch, and nan languages, the name of Dr. Campbell was from this time always mentioned with the highest respect among the learned men of Europe.

In his seventy-second year, he was seized with a severe illness, from which he unexpectedly recovered, and though his bodily strength was impaired, resumed his former occupations. Some years before his death, he made. a dis^ interested and unsolicited offer of resigning his professorship of divinity, provided that any one of three gentlemen whom he named, and to whom he applied for their consent, should succeed him; but this offer not being accepted by the patrons of the professorship, he continued to hold his office, lest an improper person should in his life-time be chosen as his successor. But afterwards application was made to him, and also to the patrons of the professorship, in Lehalf of Dr. William Laurence Brown, late minister of the English church, and professor of moral philosophy, &c. in the university of Utrecht. This gentleman had been driven from these offices by the French invasion of Holland, on account of his attachment to the house of Orange, and his native country; and because, in some of his writings, he had opposed the progress of French principles, and maintained the cause of religion. Dr. Campbell, knowing the excellence of his character, instantly resigned the offices of professor of divinity, and minister of Gray Friars church, which were worth 160l. a year, and soon after his resignation, government, desirous of testifying in a public manner, the high respect so justly entertained of his abilities and services, offered him, on condition of resigning the principalship of Marischal college, a pension of 300l. a year. Dr. Campbell accepted this token of his majesty’s munificence, and was succeeded in the office of principal also by Dr. Brown. This pension, however, he did not long live to enjoy, though he continued writing till within a week of his death; an event which he expected with great tranquillity and composure. On the 31st of March, 1796, after some previous symptoms of uneasiness, he was struck with the palsy, which deprived him of speech, and under which he languished for a few days till he died. He had long accustomed himself to prepare for death; and in a former illness he had given the testimony of a dying man in favour of religion. A funeral sermon was preached on occasion of his death, by Dr. Brown, in which he has given a sketch of his character as a public teacher, as the head of a public seminary of learning, and as a private Christian. His character is thus summed up in a few sentences by his biographer, Dr. Keith: “His imagination was lively and fertile his understanding equally acute and vigorous and his erudition was at once very deep and wonderfully diversified. His piety was unfeigned his morals unimpeached his temper chearful and his manners gentle and unassuming. His love of truth was even more remarkable than the uncommon success with which he sought after it. Where intuitive faculties could be of service to any man, he saw at once if he saw at all. But his deep perspicacity was not satisfied with a superficial view of any thing; his piercing eye darted to the bottom of every sul/ic < i to which discernment could be applied. Where study aud reflection were necessary, he could bestow as much time on patient thinking, as if he had been possessed of no genius at all, and had acquired only a small share of erudition. And when once he began to examine any subject, he was never satisfied till he had viewed it in every light in which it could be seen. He always sought for truth in the love of truth, but he could not bear to be suspected of deviating from it for he neither courted those who might support, nor feared those who did oppose him. The tone of his mind was high, and he would not let it down from the elevation of truth and of virtue. Whether engaged in conversation, or employed in study, he could pass easily from the lightest subject to the most serious one. And the reach of his mind was so great, as to comprehend a great variety of subjects. He could explore the causes of that pleasure which arises in the mind from dramatic entertainments, and lay down the rules of Scripture criticism. He could illustrate the whole theory of evidence, or detect the false reasonings of Mr. Hume. He could explain the spirit of the Gospel, marking the extremes of superstition and enthusiasm; and both as a philosopher and a divine, declare the nature, extent, and importance of the duty of allegiance. While he zealously contended for the faith, he could warn the Christian against imbibing a persecuting spirit, and yet shew the influence of religion upon civil society, warning his countrymen against infidelity, before they had seen its dreadful effects. He could with manly eloquence describe the success of the fishermen of Galilee, while preaching the doctrine of the cross to prejudiced Jews, learned Greeks, and ambitious Romans; and at the same time, with well -applied erudition, he could delineate the characters of the pretended successors of the apostles, and trace the progress of the hierarchy through all the dark and middle ages, until the reformation of religion. As the principal of a college, a professor of divinity, or a minister of the Gospel, as a true patriot, a good man, and a sincere Christian, qwndo ullum invenies 'par tin”

honour of claiming a descent from the poet Waller. Our anthor was their fourth son; and at the age of five years, was brought to Windsor from Scotland, which country he never saw afterwards. At a proper age he was placed out as clerk to an attorney, being intended for the law; but whether it was that his genius could not be confined to that dry study, or to whatever causes besides it might be owing, it is certain that he did not pursue his original designation: neither did he engage in any other profession, unless that of an author, in which he did not spend his time in idleness and dissipation, but in such a close application to the acquisition of knowledge of various kinds, as soon enabled him to appear with great advantage in the literary world. What smaller pieces might be written by Mr. Campbell in the early part of his life, we are not capable of ascertaining, but, in 1736, before he had completed his thirtieth year, he gave to the publick, in 2 vols. folio, “The military history of prince Eugene, and the duke of Marlborough; comprehending the history of both those illustrious persons to the time of their decease.” This performance was enriched with maps, plans, and cuts, by the best hands, and particularly by the ingenious Claude de Bosc. The reputation hence acquired by our author, occasioned him soon after to be solicited to take a part in the “Ancient Universal History.” In this work Dr. Kippis says he wrote on the Cosmogony; but Dr. Johnson assigns him the history of the Persians, and of the Constantinopolitan empire. Whilst employed in this capital work, Mr. Campbell found leisure to entertain the world with other productions. In 1739 he published the “Travels and adventures of Edward Brown, esq.” 8vo. In the same year appeared his “Memoirs of the bashaw duke de Rippercla,” 8vo, reprinted, with improvements, in 1740. These memoirs were followed, in 1741, by the “Concise history of Spanish America,” 8vo. In 1742 he was the author of “A letter to a friend in the country, on the publication of Thurloe’s State papers;” giving an account of their discovery, importance, and utility. The same year was distinguished by the appearance of the 1st and 2d volumes of his “Lives of the English Admirals, and other ^eminent Britisii ^eamen.” The two remaining volumes were completed in 1744; and the whole, not long after, was translated into German. This, we believe, was the first of Mr. Campbell’s works to which he prefixed his name; and it is a performance of great and acknowledged merit. The good reception it met with was evidenced in its passing through three editions in his own life-time; and a fourth was afterwards given to the public, under the inspection of Dr. Berkenhout. In 1743 he published “Hermippus Revived” a second edition of which, much improved and enlarged, came out in 1749, under the following title “Hermippus Redivivus or, the sage’s triumph over old age and the grave. Wherein a method is laid down for prolonging the life and vigour of man. Including a commentary upon an ancient inscription, in which this great secret is revealed; supported by numerous authorities. The whole interspersed with a great variety of remarkable and well-attested relations.” This extraordinary tract had its origin in a foreign publication, under the title of “Hermippus Redivivus,” Coblentz, 1743, but it was much improved by our author, and is a singular mixture of gravity and irony. The “great secret” is no other than inhaling the breath of young females, by which, we learn from an inscription in Reinesius’s Supplement to Gruter, one Hermippus prolonged his life to the age of 115. Mr. Campbell, in 1744, gave to the public in 2 vols. fol. his “Voyages and Travels,” on Dr. Harris’s plan, being a very distinguished improvement of that collection, which had appeared in 1705. The work contains all the circumnavigators from the time of Columbus to lord Anson; a complete history of the East Indies; historical details of the several attempts made for the discovery of the northeast and north-west passages; the commercial history of Corea and Japan; the Russian discoveries by land and, sea; a distnct account of the Spanish, Portuguese, British, French, Dutch, and Danish settlements in America; with other pieces not to be found in any former collection. The whole was conducted wijh eminent skill and judgment, and the preface is acknowledged to be a master-piece of composition and information. The time and care employed by Mr. Campbell in this important undertaking did not prevent his engaging in another great work, the Biographia Britannica, which began to be published in weekly numbers in 1745, and the first volume of which was completed in 1746, as was the second in 1748.

When the late Mr. Dodsley formed the design of “The Preceptor,” which appeared in 1748, Mr. Campbell was requested to assist in the undertaking, and the parts written by him were, the Introduction to chronology, and the Discourse on trade and commerce, both of which displayed an extensive fund of knowledge upon these subjects. In 1750 he published the first separate edition of his “Present state of Europe;” a work which had been originally begun in 1746, in the “Museum,” a very valuable periodical performance, printed for Dodsley. There is no production of our author’s that has met with a better reception. It has gone through six editions, and fully deserved this encouragement. The next great undertaking which called for the exertion of our author’s abilities and learning, was “The modern Universal History.” This extensive work was published irom time to time in detached parts, till it amounted to 16 vols. tol. and a 2d edition of it in 8vo, began to make its appearance in 1759. The parts of it written by Campbell, were the histories of the Portuguese, Dutch, Spanish, French, Swedish, Danish, and Ostend settlements in the East Indies; and the histories of the kingdoms of Spain, Portugal, Algarve, Navarre, and that of France, foin Clovis to 1656. As our author had thus distinguished himself in the literary world, the degree of LL. D. was very properly and honourably conferred upon him, June 18, 1754, by the university of Glasgow. With regard to his smaller publications, there are several, Dr. Kippis apprehends, that have eluded his most diligent inquiry; but the following account, we believe, is tolerably accurate: In early life, he wrote: 1. “A Discourse on Providence,” 8vo, the third edition of which was printed in 1748. In 1742 he published 2. “The Case of the Opposition impartially stated,” 8vo. Mr. Reed had a copy of this pamphlet, with various corrections and additions in Dr. Campbell’s own hand, evidently written with a view to a second impression. He published in 1746, 3. “The Sentiments of a Dutch patriot; being the speech of Mr. V. H***n, in an august assembly, on the present state of affairs, and the resolution necessary at this juncture to be taken for the safety of the republic,” 8vo. The history of this little tract, the design of which was to expose the temporising policy of the states of Holland, is somewhat amusing. His amanuensis, when he was going to write the pamphlet, having disappointed him, he requested, after tea in the afternoon, that Mrs. Campbell, when she had ordered a good fire to be made, would retire to bed as soon as possible, with the servants; and, at the same time, leave him four ounces of coffee. This was done, and he wrote till 12 o‘clock at night, when, finding his spirits flag, he took two ounces. With this assistance he went on till six in the morning, when again beginning to grow weary, he drauk the remainder of the coffee. Hence he was enabled to proceed with fresh vigour till nine or ten o’clock in the morning, when he finished the pamphlet, which had a great run, and was productive of considerable profit. Mr. Campbell having succeeded so well in a performance hastily written, expected much greater success from another work, about which he had taken extraordinary pains, and which had cost him a long time in composing. But when it came to be published, it scarcely paid the expence of advertising. Some years afterwards, a book in French was brought to him that had been translated from the German; and he was asked whether a translation of it into English would not be likely to be acceptable. Upon examining it, he found that it was his own neglected work, which had made its way into Germany, and had there been translated and published, without any acknowledgement of the obligation due to the original writer. But it is rather singular that his biographers have not told us what work this was.

In 1749, he printed, 4. “Occasional thoughts on moral, serious, and religious subjects,” 8vo. In 1754, he was the author of a work, entitled, 5. “The Rational Amusement, comprehending a collection of letters on a great variety of subjects, interspersed with essays, and some little pieces of humour,” 8vo. 6. “An exact and authentic account of the greatest white-herring-fishery in Scotland, carried on yearly in the island of Zetland, by the Dutch only,” 1750, 8vo. 7. “The Highland Gentleman’s Magazine, for Jan. 1751,” 8vo. 8. “A Letter from the Prince of the infernal legions, to a spiritual lord on this side the great gulph, in answer to a late invective epistle levelled at his highness,” 1751, 8vo. 9. “The naturalization bill confuted, as most pernicious to these united kingdoms,” 1751, 8vo. 10. “His royal highness Frederick late prince of Wales deciphered: or a full and particular description of his character, from his juvenile years until his death,” 1751, 8vo. 11. “A Vade Mecum: or companion for the unmarried ladies: wherein are laid down some examples whereby to direct them in the choice of husbands,” 1752, 8vo. 12. “A particular but melancholy account of the great hardships, difficulties, and miseries, that those unhappy and much to be pitied creatures, the common women of the town, are plunged into at this juncture,” 1752, 8vo. 13. “A full and particular description of the Highlands of Scotland,” 1752, 8vo. 14. “The case of the publicans, both in town and country, laid open,” 1752, 8vo. 15. “The Shepherd of Banbury’s rules,” a favourite pamphlet with the common people; and “The history of the war in the East-Indies,” which appeared in 1758 or 1759, under the name of Mr. Watts, are supposed to have been of Mr. Campbell’s composition. Upon the conclusion of the peace of Paris, our author was requested by lord Bute to take some share in the vindication of that peace. Accordingly, he wrote “A description and history of the new Sugar Islands in the West-Indies,” 8vo, the design of which was to shew the value and importance of the neutral islands that had been ceded to us by the French. The only remaining publication of Dr. Campbell’s, that has hitherto come to our knowledge, is, “A Treatise upon the Trade of Great-Britain to America,” 1772, 4to. His last grand work was “A political survey of Britain being a series of reflections on the situation, lands, inhabitants, revenues, colonies, and commerce of this island. Intended to shew that they have not as yet approached near the summit of improvement, but that it will afford employment to many generations, before they push to their utmost extent the natural advantages of Great Britain.” This work, which was published in 1774, in 2 vols. royal 4to, cost Dr. Campbell many years of attention, study, and labour. As it was his last, so it seems to have been his favourite production, upon which he intended to erect a durable monument of his sincere and ardent love to his country, but in the success of it, he is said to have been greatly disappointed; yet a more truly patriotic publication never appeared in the English language. The variety of information it contains is prodigious and there is no book that better deserves the close and constant study of the politician, the senator, the gentleman, the merchant, the manufacturer; in short, of every one who has it in any degree in his power to promote the interest and welfare of Great-Britain; and this praise it may be allowed to deserve, although the accuracy of many of his facts may be disputed, and much of his reasoning appear ill-founded. Among other encomiums produced by Dr. Kippis on the literary merit of his predecessor, that of Mr. Burke, the author of the “Account of the European settlements in America,” is perhaps the most honourable . Dr. Campbell’s reputation was not confined to his own country, but extended to the remotest parts of Europe. As a striking instance of this, we may mention, that in the spring of 1774, the empress of Russia was pleased to honour him with the present of her picture, drawn in the robes rom in that country in the days of Ivan Vassiilievitch, grand duke of Russia, who was contemporary with queen Elizabeth. To manifest the doctor’s sense of her imperial majesty’s goodness, a set of the “Political survey of Britain,” bound in Morocco, highly ornamented, and accompanied with a letter descriptive of the triumphs and felicities of her reign, was forwarded to St. Petersburg, and conveyed into the hands of that great princess, by prince Gregory Orloff, who had resided some months in this kingdom. The empress’s picture, since the death of our author, has been presented by his widow to lord Macartney.

Let us now advert a little to Dr. Campbell’s personal history. May 23, 1736, he married Elizabeth, daughter of Benjamin Vobe, of Leominster, in the county of Hereford, gentleman, with which lady he lived nearly forty years in the greatest conjugal harmony and happiness. So wholly did he dedicate his time to books, that he seldom went abroad: but to relieve himself, as much as possible, from the inconveniencies incident to a sedentary life, it was his custom, when the weather would admit, to walk in his garden; or, otherwise, in some room of his house, by way of exercise. By this method, united with the strictest temperance in eating, and an equal abstemiousness in drinking, he enjoyed a good state of health, though his constitution was delicate. His domestic manner of living did not preclude him from a very extensive and honourable acquaintance. His house, especially on a Sunday evening, was the resort of the most distinguished persons of all ranks, and particularly of such as had rendered themselves eminent hy their knowledge, or love of literature. He received foreigners, who were fond of learning, with an affability and kindness, which excited in them the highest respect and veneration; and his instructive and cheerful, conversation made him the delight of his friends in general. On March 5, 1765, Dr. Campbell was appointed his majesty’s agent for the province of Georgia, in North America, which employment he held till his decease. His last illness was a decline, the consequence of a life devoted to severe study, and which resisted every attempt for his relief that the most skilful in the medical science could devise. By this illness he was carried off, at his house in Queen-square, Ormond-street, on Dec. 28, 1775, when he had nearly completed the 68th year of his age. His end was tranquil and easy, and he preserved the full use of all his faculties to the latest moment of his life. On Jan. 4th following his decease, he was interred in the new burying- ground, behind the Foundling-hospital, belonging to St. George the Martyr, where a monument, with a plain and modest inscription, has been erected to his memory. Dr. Campbell had by his lady seven children, one of whom only survived him, but is since dead. Dr. Campbell’s literary knowledge was by no means confined to the subjects on which he more particularly treated as an author. He was well acquainted with the mathematics, and had read much in medicine. It has been with great reason believed, that, if he had dedicated his studies to the last science, he would have made a very conspicuous figure in the physical profession. He was eminently versed in the different parts of sacred literature; and his acquaintance with the languages extended not only to the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin among the ancient, and to the French, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, and Dutch, among the modern; but, likewise, to the oriental tongues. He was particularly fond of the Greek language. His attainment of such a variety of knowledge was exceedingly assisted by a memory surprisingly retentive, and which, indeed, astonished every person with whom he was conversant. A striking instance of this has been given by the honourable Mr. Daines Barrington, in his tract, entitled, “The probability of reaching the north pole discussed .” In communicating his ideas, our author had an uncommon readiness and facility; and the style of his works, which had been formed upon the model of that of the celebrated bishop Sprat, was perspicuous, easy, flowing, and harmonious. Should it be thought that it is sometimes rather too diffusive, it will, notwithstanding, indubitably be allowed, that it is, in general, elegant.

, a French physician, was born at Paris in 1722, and died in the same city in 1772, at 50 years of age. He practised medicine there with great success, and wrote, 1. “Medicine de l'esprit,” Paris, 1753, 2 vols. 12mo, in which his reasonings are not always just; but his conjectures are in general very ingenious, and may be of great service. 2. “Abdeker,” or the art of preserving beauty, 1756, 4 vols, small twelves; a romance in which the author introduces a variety of receipts and precepts for the benefit of the ladies. The true cosmetics are exercise and temperance. A translation of part of this appeared in English, but before the above date, 1754, in one vol. 12mo. 3. “Memoires sur divers sujets de medicine,” 1760, 8vo. 4. “Memoire sur Tetat actuel de la Pharmacia,” 1765, 12mo. 5. “Projet d'aneaniirla Petiteverole,” 1767, 12mo. 6. “Medicine pratique,” 3 vols. 12mo, and 1 vol. 4to. 7. “Amphitheatrum poeticum,” a poem, 1745, 4to. He also was editor of the “Journal Economique,” from 1753 to 1765, and exhibited in all his works various talents, and considerable powers of fancy as well as of science. One of his brothers, Nicolas Camus de Mezieres, was a skilful architect, and published some works on that subject particularly “Dissertations sur le bois de charpente,” Paris, 1763, 12mo. “Le Genie d'Architecture,” ibid. 1780, 8vo; “Traite de la force de bois,” 1782, 8vo; and “Le guide de reux qui veulent batir,” 2 vols. 8vo. He died July 24, 177.9. Another brother, Armand Gaston Camus, who died in 1804, was a very active agent in all the revolutionary measures of the different French assemblies, and being sent to arrest Dumourier in 1793, was delivered by him to the Austrians, and afterwards exchanged for the daughter of Louis XVI. His political conduct belongs to the history of those turbulent periods. In 1800 he was commissioned to inspect the libraries and collections of the united departments, and particularly examined the library of Brussels, which is rich in Mss. He was a man of some learning, and extensive knowledge of books; and published, 1. “Observations sur la distribution et le classement des livres d'une bibliotheque.” 2. “Memoire sur un livre Allemand,” the famous Tewrdannckhs. 3. “Memoire sur Thistoire et les procédés du Polytypage et de la Stereotype.” 4. “Rapport sur la continuation de la collection des Historiens de la France, et de celle des Chartres et Diplomes.” 5. “Notice d'un livre imprim6 a Bamberg in 1462,” a very curious memoir of a book, first described in the Magasin Hist. Litt. Bibliog. 1792. 6. “Memoire sur la collection des grands et petits voyages,” 1802, 4to. In the “Notices des Mss. de la Bibl. Nationale,” vol. VI. is an interesting memoir by him, relating to two ancient manuscript bibles, in 2 vols. fol. adorned with 5152 pictures, each of them having a Latin and French verse beautifully written and illuminated beneath.

, a celebrated French mathematician, examiner of the royal schools of Artillery and engineers, secretary and professor of the royal academy of architecture, honorary member of that of the marine, and fellow of the royal society of London, was, born at Cressy en Brie, Aqgust 25, 1699. His early ingenuity in mechanics and his own intreaties induced his. parents to send him to study at a college in Paris, at ten, years of age; where in the space of two years his progress was so great, that he was able to give lessons in mathematics, and thus to defray his own expences at the college without any farther charge to his parents. By the assist^ ance of the celebrated Varignon, young Camus soon ran through the course of the higher mathematics, and acquired a name among the learned. He made himself more particularly known to the academy of sciences in 1727 by his memoir upon the subject of the prize which they had proposed for that year, viz. “To determine the most advantageous way of masting ships;” in consequence of which he was named that year adjoint mechanician to the academy; and in 1730 he was appointed professor of architecture. In less than three years after, he was honoured with the secretaryship of the same; and the 18th of April 1733, he obtained the degree of associate in the academy, where he distinguished himself by his memoirs upon living forces, or bodies in motion acted upon by forces, on the figure of the teeth of wheels and pinions, on pump work, and severa^ other ingenious memoirs.

In 1736 he was sent, in company with messieurs Clairaut, Maupertuis, and Monnier, upon the celebrated expedition, to measure a degree at the north polar circle; in which he rendered himself highly useful, not only as a mathema~= tician, but also as a mechanician and an artist, branches, for which he had a remarkable talent. In 1741 Camus had the honour to be appointed pensioner geometrician in the academy; and the same year he invented a gauging-rod and sliding-rule proper at once to gauge all sorts of casks, and to calculate their contents. About the year 1747 he was named examiner of the schools of artillery and engineers; and, in 1756, one of the eight mathematicians appointed to examine by a new measurement, the base which had formerly been measured by Picard, between. Villejuive and Juvisi; an operation in which his ingenuity and exactness were of great utility. In 1765 M. Camus was elected a fellow of the royal society. of London; and died the 4th of May 1768, in the sixty -ninth year o.f his age; being succeeded by the celebrated d'Alembert in his office of geometrician in the French academy; and leaving behind him a great number of manuscript treatises on various branches of the mathematics. The works published by M. Camus are, 1. “Course of Mathematics for the use of -the Engineers,” 4 vols. 8vo. 2. “Elements of Mechanics.” 3. “Elements of Arithmetic.” And his memoirs printed in the volumes of the academy are, 1. “Of accelerated motions by living forces,” vol. for 1728. 2. 4< Solution of a geometrical problem of M. Cramer,“1732. 3.” On the figure of the teeth and pinions in Clocks,“1733. 4.” On the action of a musket-ball, piercing a pretty thick piece of wood, without communicating any considerable velocity to it,“1738. 5.” On the best manner of employing Buckets for raising Water,“1739. 6.” A problem in Statics,“1740. 7.” On an Instrument for gauging of vessels,“1741. 8.” On the Standard of the Ell measure,“1746. 9.” On the Tangents of points common to several branches of the same curve,“1747. 10.” On the operations in measuring the distance between the centres of the pyramids of Villejuive and Juvisi, to discover the best measure of the degree about Paris,“1754. 11.” On the Masting of Ships;“Prize Tom. II. 12.” The Manner of working Oars;“Mach. torn. II. 13.” A Machine for moving many Colters at once;" Mach. torn. II.

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

, a French historian, was born at Troyes in 1575. In his eighteenth year he was promoted to a canonry in the cathedral of his native city, but appears to have devoted himself chiefly to the study of history and antiquities. He died Jan. 20, 1655, in the eightieth year of his age, after publishing, 1. “Chronologia ab origine orbis, usque adann. 1200, auctore anonymo, sed ccenobii S. Mariani apud Altissiodorum (Auxerre) regulu? Praemonstratensis inonacho,” with an appendix to the year 1223; Trecis (Troyes) 1608, 4to. 2. “Promptuarium sacrarum antiquitatum Tricassinse dicecesis, &c.” 1610, 8vo, a work of great utility to those who have the curiosity to study the history of ecclesiastical discipline. 3. “Historia Albigensiuoi, &c. auclore Petro, coenobii Vallis-Sarnensis ordinis Cisterciensis in dioecesi Parisiensi monacho,” Trccis, 1618, 8vo. This history, which Camusat first published from the original ms. was translated into French by Arnaud Sorbin, Paris, 1615. 4. “Melanges historiques, ou recueii de plusieurs actes, traits, et lettres missives, depuis Pan 1390 jusqu'a Tan 1580,” ibid. 1619, 8vo, Some of his historical communications are in Duchesne’s collection of French historians, and in other collections.

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

, a man of considerable learning in classical criticism, was born Nov. 1, 1645, in the diocese of Rouen, and entered the society of the Jesuits in 1664, completing his vows in 1679. His immoderate and incessant application to study, operating upon a delicate constitution, shortened his days, and he diedin the Jesuits’ college at Paris, Dec. 6, 1684. He was one of the French literati employed in preparing the Delphin classics, and edited Justin in 1677, 4to, and Valerius Maximus in 1679, enriched with six dissertations, on the names, families, inagistrates, &c. of the Romans. He published also, 1. “De Rouiana llepublica, de re militari et civiii Romanorum,” Paris, 1684, 12mo, and thrice reprinted at Utrecht, 1691, 1696, 1707, the last with plates, taken from Justus Lipsius and Onuphrius Panvinius. This has always been considered as an excellent abridgment of the Roman antiquities. 2. “Metropolitanarum urbium historia civilis et ecclesiastica, tomus primus, &c.” Paris, 1684, 8vo.

, an eminent linguist and philologer, was born at Utrecht of an ancient and reputable family in 1542; and educated in the belles lettres under the inspection of his parents, till he was 12 years of age. He was then sent to Cornelius Valerius at Lou vain, with whom he continued four years; and gave surprising proofs of his progress in Greek and Latin literature, by writing letters in those languages, by translations, and by drawing up some dramatic pieces. Having an uncommon taste for the Greek, he removed in 1559 from Lou vain to Paris, for the sake of learning that language more perfectly from John Auratus, under whom he studied till 1562, and then was obliged to leave France on account of the civil wars. He travelled next into Germany and Italy, and visited the several universities of those countries; Bononia particularly, where he became known to the famous Carolus Sigonius, to whom he afterwards dedicated his eight books “Novarum Lectionum.” Venice he had a great desire to see, not only for the beauty and magnificence of the place, but for the opportunity he should have of purchasing manuscripts; which the Greeks brought in great abundance from their own country, and there exposed to sale: and from Venice he purposed to go to Rome. But, not being able to bear the heat of those regions, he dropped the pursuit of his journey, and returned through Germany to l^ouvain, where in about eight years’ time excessive study brought on a lingering consumption, of which he died in 1*75, when he was only in his 33d year. Thuanus says, that he deserved to be reckoned among the most learned men of his age; and that he would certainly have done great things, if he had not died so very immaturely. He understood six languages, besides that of his native country, viz. the Latin, Greek, Hebrew, French, Italian, and German.

, a native of Tipperary in Ireland, lived principally in Paris, where he was made doctor in medicine in 1742. The same year he published a translation into French of the account of Mrs. Stephens’s medicine for dissolving the stone in the bladder; and in 1746 an account of sir Hans Sloane’s medicines for diseases of the eyes; also some severe strictures on the practice of propagating the small pox by inoculation; and in the Philosophical Transactions, London, No. 453, an account of a double child, a boy. He died at Paris, July 11, 1764.

, an eminent French protestant and learned divine, was born at Sedan, a town in Champagne, about 1579. He was professor of divinity and of the Oriental languages in the university of Saumur; and so very deeply skilled in the Hebrew, that our learned bishop Hall calls him “magnum Hebraizantium oraculurn in Gallia,” the great oracle of all that studied Hebrew in France. He was the author of some very learned works; but is now chiefly memorable for the controversy he had with the younger Buxtorf concerning the antiquity of the Hebrew points. Two opinions have prevailed concerning the true date and origin of these points both of which have been very warmly espoused. The first is, that the points are coeval with the language, and were always in use among the Jews: the second, that the points were not known to the Jews before their dispersion from Jerusalem, but invented afterwards by modern rabbis to prevent the language, which was every day decaying, from being utterly lost; viz. that they were invented by the Masoreth Jews of Tiberias, about 600 years after Christ . This opinion of their late invention was taken up by Capellus, who defended it in a very excellent and learned treatise entitled “Arcanum punctuationis revelatum,” &c. which work, after being refused a licence in France and at Geneva, was printed in Holland, and caused a great clamour among the protestants, as if it had a tendency to hurt their cause. It is, however, certain, that Luther, Calvin, Zuinglius, and others, had espoused the same notion as well as the Scaligers, Casaubons, Erpenius, Salmasius, Grotius, and the Heinsii; and therefore it could not be said, that Capellus introduced any novelty, but only more solidly established an opinion, which had been approved of by the most learned and judicious protestants. The true reason, perhaps, why the German protestants in general so warmly opposed Capellus’s opinion, was, that they had been accustomed to follow that of the two Buxtorfs, whom they considered as oracles in Hebrew learning. Buxtorf the father had written a little treatise in defence of the antiquity of the points; and as Buxtorfs credit was justly great among them, they chose rather to rely upon his authority than to examine his arguments, in so abstruse an inquiry. Buxtorf the son wrote against Capellus, and maintained his father’s opinion. Capellus, however, has been generally supposed to have put the matter beyond any father dispute; on which account his scholars Bochart, Grotius, Spanheim, Vossius, Daille, and almost all the learned in Hebrew since, have very readily acceded to his opinion.

, a native of Mantua, who died in 1548, made himself famous by a work entitled “The Stratagems of Charles IX. against the Huguenots,” which he published in Italian at Rome, 1572, 4to, and a French translation was printed 1574. He describes the massacre of St. Bartholomew, and relates some very remarkable particulars respecting the motives and consequences of that outrage, which very naturally gave offence to the French court.

, an eminent Lutheran reformer, was born at Hagenau in Alsace, in 1478. His father was of the senatorian rank, and being averse to the lives of the divines of his time, had him brought up to the profession of physic at Basil, where he took his doctor’s degree, and likewise made great proficiency in other studies. After his father’s death, however, in 1504, he studied divinity, and also civil law, under Zasius, an eminent civilian, and took a degree in that faculty. At Heidelberg he became acquainted with Oecolampadius, with whom he ever after preserved the strictest intimacy and friendship. On their first acquaintance they studied Hebrew together under the tuition of one Matthew Adrian, a converted Jew, and Capito then became a preacher, first at Spire and afterwards at Basil, where he continued for some years. From thence he was sent for by the elector Palatine, who made him his counsellor, and sent him on several embassies, and Cliarles V. is said to have conferred upon him the order of knighthood. From Mcntz he followed Bucer to Strasburgh, where he astonished his hearers by preaching the reformed, or rather reforming religion, at 8t. Thomas’s church in that city, beginning his ministry by expounding St. Paul’s epistle to the Colossians. The fame of Capito and Bucer spread so wide, that James Faber and Gerard Rufus were sent privately from France to hear him, by Margaret queen of Navarre, sister to the French king; and by this means the protestant doctrine was introduced into France. Capito was a man of great learning and eloquence, tempered with a prudence which gave weight to his public services as well as to his writings. In all disputes, he insisted on brotherly love and peaceable discussion.

* In a biographical account of the Carew, which was without his knowfamily placed on the back of a picture ledge and consent, and intended to of lord Totness, in the possession of disinherit her but, upon an accidental his descendant, the late Boothby Clop- conversation with captain Carew, found ton, esq. this lady’s name is Anne, and him a gentleman of superior genius not Joyce: and it is added, that Mr. and fine address, *nd settled his estate, Clopton was extremely displeased with which was very considerable, upon him his daughter’s marriage with captain and his dmjghter. library: and made collections, notes, and extracts for writing The History of the reign of king Henry V. which were inserted in J. Speed’s Chronicle. Sir James Ware says, that the earl of Totness translated into English “A History of the affairs of Ireland,” written by Maurice Regan, servant and interpreter to Dermot, son of Murchard king of Leinster, in 1171, and which had been turned into French verse by a friend of Regan. Bishop Nicolson describes this history as extant in the duke of Chandos’s library, under the title of “Mauritii Regani, servi et interpretis Dermitii, filii Murchardi, &c. Historian de Hibernia fragmentum Anglice redditum a D. Georgio Carew, Memoniae preside sub Elizabetha;” and Mr. Harris mentions another ms copy among the bishop of Clogher’s Mss. in the college library, Dublin. Nicolson also informs us that this learned nobleman wrote forty-two volumes relating to the affairs of Ireland, which are in the Lambeth library, and four more of collections from the originals in the Cotton library.

, brother to Richard, hereafter mentioned, and second son of Thomas Carew, esq. and Elizabeth his wife, was probably born at his father’s seat at East Anthony, but in what particular year we are not able to ascertain. He was educated in the university of Oxford, after which he studied law in the inns of court, and then set out on his travels. On his return to his native country he was called to the bar, and after some time was appointed secretary to sir Christopher Hatton, lord chancellor of England, by the especial recommendation of queen Elizabeth, who gave him a pro thonotary ship in the chancery, and conferred upon him the honour of knighthood. In 1597, being then a master in chancery, he was sent ambassador to the king of Poland. In the next rei.gn, he was one of the commissioners for treating with the Scotch concerning an union between the two kingdoms; after which he was appointed ambassador to the court of France, where he continued from the latter end of the year 1605 till 1609. During his residence in that country, he was regarded by the French ministers as being too partial to the Spanish interest, but probably ttoeir disgust to him might arise from his not being very tractable in some points of his negotiation, and particularly in the demand of the debts due to the king his master. Whatever might be, his political principles, it is certain, that he sought the conversation of men of letters; and formed an intimacy with Thuanus, to whom he communicated an account of the transactions in Poland, whilst he was employed there, which was of great service to that admirable author in drawing up the 12lst book of his History. After sir George Caret’s return from France, he was advanced to the post of master of the court of wards, which honourable situation he did not long live to enjoy; for it appears from a letter written by Thuanus to Camden, in the spring of the year 1613, that he was then lately deceased. In this letter, Thuanus laments his death as a great misfortune to himself; for he considered sir George’s friendship not only as a personal honour, but as very useful in his work, and especially in removing the calumnies and misrepresentations which might be raised of him in the court of England. Sir George Carew married Thomasine, daughter of sir Francis Godolphin, great grandfather of the lord treasurer Godolphin, and had by her two sons and three daughters. Francis, the elder son, was created knight of the bath at the coronation of king Charles the First, and Attended the earl of Denbigh in the expedition for the relief of ilochelle, where he acquired great reputation by his courage and conduct; but, being seized with a fit of sickness in his voyage homeward, he died in the Isle of Wight, on the 4th of June, 1628, at the age of twenty-seven.

When sir George Carew returned in 1G09 from his French embassy, he drew up, and addressed to king James the First, “A Relation of the state of France, with the characters of Henry the Fourth, and the principal persons of that court;” which reflects great credit upon his sagacity and attention as an ambassador, and his abilities as a writer. In this piece are considered, 1. The name of France. 2. Its ancient and modern limits. 3. Its quality, strength, and situation. 4. Its riches. 5. Its political ordeis. 6. Its disorders and dangers. 7. The persons governing, with those who are likely to succeed. 8. In what terms the French live with their bordering neighbours. And lastly, the state of matters between the king of England’s dominions and theirs. These heads are divided, as occasion requires, into other subordinate ones. The characters are drawn from personal knowledge and close observation, and might be of service to a general historian of that period. The composition is perspicuous and manly, and entirely free from the pedantry which prevailed in the reign of king James I. his taste having been formed in a better aera, that of Queen Elizabeth. The valuable tract we are speaking of lay for a long time in manuscript, till happily falling into the hands of the late earl of Hardwicke, it was communicated by him to Dr. Birch, who published it in 1749, at the end of his “Historical view of the Negotiations between the Courts of England, France and Brussels, from the year 1592 to 1617.” That intelligent and industrious writer justly observes, that it is a model, upon which ambassadors may form and digest their notions and representations and the late celebrated poet, Gray, spoke of it as an excellent performance.

, of the Carews of Beddington, in Surrey, was the son of sir Richard Carew, knight banneret, and Magdalen, daughter of sir Robert Oxenbridge. At an early age he was introduced to the court of king Henry VIII. where he soon became a favourite, and was made one of the gentlemen of the privy chamber. Having been employed upon some public business in France, he became, as many other young men have been, so enamoured of French fashions and amusements, that, when he returned to his own country, he was continually makino- invidious comparisons to the- disadvantage of the English court. His majesty, who was too much of a Briton not to be disgusted at this behaviour, removed him from his person, and sentenced him to an honourable banishment, appointing him governor of Ruysbank in Picardy; to which government he was forthwith commanded to repair, much against his inclination. This little offence^ however, was soon passed over, and we find him again employed by the king, and for several years his constant companion, and a partaker with him in all the justs, tournaments, masques, and other diversions of the same kind, with wh'rch that reign abounded, and which are described very much at large in Hall’s Chronicle: and as a more substantial mark of his favour, the king appointed him master of the horse, an office of great honour, being reckoned the third in rank about the king’s household, and afterwards created him knight of the garter* His promotion may probably be attributed in some measure to the interest of Anne Bullen, to whom he was related through their common ancestor, lord Hoo. His good fortune was not of long continuance; for in 1539 he engaged in a conspiracy, as we are told by our historians, with the marquis of Exeter, the lord Montacute, and sir Edward Neville; the object of which was to set cardinal Pole upon the throne. The accuser was sir Geffrey Poole, lord Montacute’s brother; the trial was summary, and the conspirators were all executed. Sir Nicholas Carew was beheaded on Tower-hill, March 3, 1539, when he made, says Holinshed, “a godly confession, both of his fault and superstitious faith.” Fuller mentions a tradition of a quarrel which happened at bowls between the kipg and sir Nicholas Carew, to which he ascribes his majesty’s displeasure, and sir Nicholas’s death. The monarch’s known caprice, his hatred of the papists, to whom sir Nicholas was zealously attached, the absurdity of the plot, and the improbability of its success, might incline us to hearken to Fuller’s story, if sir Nicholas alone had suffered; but as he had so many partners in his punishment, with whom it is not pretended that the king had any quarrel, it will be more safe, perhaps, to rely upon the account given by our annalists. Sir Nicholas Carew was buried in the church of St. Botolph, Aldersgate, in the same tomb with Thomas lord Darcy, and others of his family.

, author of the Survey of Cornwal, and brother of the preceding sir George Carew, the ambassador, was the eldest son of Thomas Carew, of Mast Anthony, esq. by Elizabeth Edgecombe, daughter of Richard Edgecombe, of Edgecombe, esq. both in the same county, and was born in 1555. When very young, he became a gentleman commoner of Christ Church college, Oxford; and at fourteen years of age had the honour of disputing, extempore, with the afterwards famous sir Philip Sydney, in the presence of the earls of Leicester, Warwick, and other nobility. After spending three years at the university, he removed to the Middle Temple, where he also resided three years, and then travelled into France, and applied himself so diligently to the acquisition of the French language, that by reading and conversation he gained a complete knowledge of it in three quarters of a year. Not long after his return to England he married, in 1577, Juliana Arundel, of Trerice. In 1581, Mr. Carew was made justice of the peace, and in 1586 was appointed high sheriff of the county of Cornwal; about which time he was, likewise, queen’s deputy for the militia. In 1589 he was elected a member of the college of antiquaries, a distinction to which he was entitled by his literary abilities and pursuits. What particularly engaged his attention was his native county, his “Survey” of which was published in quarto, at London, in 1602. It has been twice reprinted, first in 1723, and next in 1769. Of this work Camden speaks in high terms, and acknowledges his obligations to the author. In the present improved state of topographical knowledge, and since Dr. Borlase’s excellent publications relative to the county of Cornwall, the valae of Mr. Carew’s “Survey” must have been greatly diminished. Mr. Gough remarks, that the history and monuments of this county were faintly touched by Mr. Carew; but it is added, that he was a person extremely capable of describing them, if the infancy of those studies at that time had afforded him light and materials. Another work of our author was a translation from the Italian, but originally written by Huarte in Spanish, entitled “The Examination of Men’s Wits. In which, by discovering the variety of natures, is shewed for what profession each one is apt, and how far he shall profit therein.” This was published at London in 1504, and afterwards in 1604; and, thouo-h. Richard Carew’s name is prefixed to it, has been principally ascribed by some persons to his father. According to Wood, Mr. Carevv wrote also “The true and ready way to learn the Latin Tongue,” in answer to a query, whether the ordinary method of teaching the Latin by the rules of grammar, be the best mode of instructing youths in that language? This tract t is involved in Mr. Samuel Hartlib’s book upon the same subject, and with the same title. It is certain that Mr. Carew was a gentleman of considerable abilities and literature,and that he was held in great estimation by some of the most eminent scholars of his time. He was particularly intimate with sir Henry Spelman, who extols him for his ingenuity, virtue, and learning. Amongst his neighbours he was celebrated as the most excellent manager of bees in Cornwall. He died Nov. 6, 1620, and was buried with his ancestors, in the church of St. Anthony, where a splendid monument, with a large inscription, in Latin, was erected to his memory. In an epigram written upon him he was styled “another Livy, another Maro, another Papinian,” epithets somewhat too high fot his real merit. An English translation of “Godfrey of Bulloigne,” from Tasso, by him, was published in 1594, 4to. Of this an ample specimen has lately been given in the Bibliographer.

, earl of Monmouth, was the eldest son of Robert, the first earl of Monmouth, who died in 1639, and whose “Memoirs,” written by himself, and containing some curious particulars of secret history of the Elizabethan period, were published from a manuscript in the possession of the late earl of Corke and Orrery, in 1759, 8vo. Henry, his son, was born in 1596, admitted a fellow commoner of Exeter college, Oxford, at the age of fifteen, and took the degree of B. A. in 1613, after which he was sent to travel into foreign countries. In 1616 he was made a knight of the bath at the creation of Charles prince of Wales. In 1625 he was known by the name of lord Lepington, his father’s title before he was created earl of Monmouth, and was noted, Wood says, as “a person well skilled in modern languages, and a general scholar.” This taste for study was his consolation when the depression of the nobility after the death of Charles I. threw many of them into retirement. He died June 13, 1661. In Chauncey’s Hertfordshire is the inscription on his monument in the church at Rickmansworth, which mentions his living forty-one years in marriage, with his countess, Martha, daughter of the lord treasurer Middlesex. He was a most laborious writer, but chiefly of translations, and, as lord Orford observes, seems to have distrusted his abilities, and to have made the fruits of his studies his amusement rather than his method of fame. Of his lordship’s publications we have, 1. “Romulus and Tarquin; or De Principe et Tyranno,” Lond. 1637, 12mo, a translation from Malvezzi, in praise of which sir John Suckling has some verses in his “Fragmenta Aurea,” and others were prefixed by Stapylton, Davenant, Carew, &c. It came to a third edition in 1648. 2. “Speech in the house of peers, Jan. 30, 1641, upon occasion of the present distractions, and of his Majesty’s removal from Whitehall,” London, 1641. 3. “Historical relations of the United Provinces, and of Flanders,” London, 1652, fol. translated from Bentivoglio. 4. “History of the Wars in Flanders,” ibid. 1654, fol. from the same author, with a portrait of the translator. 5. Cf Advertisement from Parnassus, in two Centuries: with the politic touchstone,“ibid. 1656, fol. from Boccalini. 6.” Politic Discourses, in six books,“ibid. 1657, fol. 7.” History of Venice,“ibid. 1658, fol. both from Paul Paruta, a noble Venetian. 8.” The use of Passions,“ibid. 1649 and 1671, 8vo, from the French of J. F. Senault. 9.” Man become guilty or the corruption of his nature by sin,“ibid, from the same author. 10.” The History of the late Wair of Christendom,“1641, fol. which lord Orford thinks is the same work with his translation of” Sir Francis Biondi’s History of the Civil Wars of England, between the houses of York and Lancaster.“11.” Capriata’s “History of Italy,” 1663, fol. His lordship began also to translate from the Italian “Priorato’s History of France,” but died before he could finish it. It was completed by William Brent, esq. and printed at London, 1677.

On his arrival in Holland, he was soon involved in the disputes which then raged between the Arminians and Galvinists; and as the French supported the pensionary Banievelt, sir Dudley took the part of prince Maurice. His situation here, owing to the politics of the duke of Buckingham and other events, which belong to the history of the times, was one of peculiar delicacy and difficulty; yet he appears to have conducted himself as ambassador from England, with great wisdom, firmness, and prudence. Thinking that such services merited some reward, and as every thing of that kind depended on the duke of Buckingham, sir Dudley addressed his grace on the subject in a strain of servility and adulation, which might diminish our respect for his character, if we were to forget the relative state of the parties. We do not find, however, that his application was at this time successful.

In December 1625, soon after his return to England, he was appointed vice chamberlain of his majesty’s household, and at the same time was joined with earl Holland in an embassy to France, respecting the restitution of the ships, which had been lent to Louis XIII. and were employed against the Rochellers; to obtain a peace for the French protestants agreeably to former edicts, and to obtain the French accession to the treaty of the Hague. Although all these objects were not attained in the fullest intention, yet the ambassadors were thought entitled to commendation for their firm and prudent management of the various conferences. On their return in March 1625-6, they found the parliament sitting, and the nation inflamed to the highest degree at the mismanagement of public affairs. At this crisis, sir Dudley Carleton, who represented Hastings in Sussex, endeavoured to mitigate the violence of the commons in their impeachment of the duke of Buckingham; but his arguments, although not well suited to the humour of the time, were acceptable at court, and immediately after he was called up to the house of peers by the style and title of Baron Carleton of Imbercourt in the county of Surrey: and his next employment was more fully adapted to his talents. This was an embassy-extraordinary to France to justify the sending away of the queen of England’s French servants, which he managed with his usual skill.

With regard to the general abilities and character of lord Dorchester, it appears from alt his political remains, that he was a judicious, faithful, and diligent minister, and better qualified for his department than any who were his immediate predecessors or successors in the same office. King Charles himself, who was a good judge of his servants’ abilities, used to say, as sir P. Warwick relates in his Memoirs, “that he had two secretaries of state, the lords Dorchester and Falkland; one of whom was a dull man in comparison of the other, and yet pleased him the best for he always brought him his own thoughts in his own woreds: the latter cloathed them in so fine a dress, that he did not always know them again.” Allowing for some defects of stiffness and circumlocution, which are common to all the writings of that time, lord Dorchester’s dispatches are drawn up in that plain, perspicuous, and unaffected stile which was fittest for business. Domestic concerns were no part of his province, but entirely managed by the lord treasurer Weston and archbishop Laud. He held the pen singly in foreign affairs, and was regretted by those who were used to receive the instructions of government from a secretary of state, upon whom they could depend that he would make a just report of their services, and that he would not mislead or misrepresent the ministers with whom he corresponded. That he died much lamented by the public in general, and with the reputation of an honest and well-deserving statesman, is declared by sir Thomas Roe, in a manuscript letter to a friend in Holland. The earl of Clarendon’s assertion, that lord Dorchester was unacquainted with the government, laws, and customs of his own country, and the nature of the people, is disputed by Dr. Birch, in his “Review of the Negociations,” who considers it as absolutely incompatible with the experience which he must have acquired in the house of commons. But, not to mention that the noble historian, who had no prejudice against his lordship, could not well be deceived in the fact, it is, we think, confirmed by the figure he made in the parliament of 1626, and by his acquiescence in all the obnoxious measures of Buckingham, Weston, and Laud. The following articles are attributed to his pen, by Anthony Wood and lord Orford: 1. “Balance pour peser en toute equite & droicture la Harangue fait vagueres en L'Assemblee des illustres & puissans Seignoures Messeigneurs les Estats generaux des Provinces Unies du Pais has, &c.” 1618, 4to. 2. “Harangue fait au Counseile de Mess, les Estats generaux des Provinces Unies, touchant le Discord & le Troubles de PEglise & la Police, causes par la Doctrine d'Arminius,” 6 Oct. 1617, printed with the former. 3. Various Letters in the “Cabala, or Scrinia sacra,” London, 1663, fol. 4. Various Letters to George, duke of Buckingham, in “Cabala, or Mysteries of State,” London, 1654, 4to. 5. Several French and Latin Letters to the learned Vossius, printed in “Ger. Jo. Vossii & clarorum Virorum ad.eum Epistoiae,” London, 1690, fol. 6. Several Speeches in Parliament, in 1626, in Rushworth’s Collections. 7. Several Letters in the three volumes of “Sir Ralph Winwood’s Memorials,” published at London, in folio, 1725. 8. A Letter to the earl of Salisbury, printed in “Howard’s Collection.” 9. Memoirs for Dispatches of political Affairs relating to Holland and England, arm. 1618; with several Propositions made to the States. Manuscript. 10. Particular Observations of the military Affairs in the Palatinate, and the Low Countries, annis 1621, 1622. Manuscript. 11. Letters relating to State Affairs, written to the king and viscount Rochester, from Venice, ann. 1613. Manuscript. The manuscript pieces here mentioned, are probably no more than parts of the collections preserved in the Paper office. The letters from and to sir Dudley Carleton, during his embassy in Holland, from January 1615-16, to December 1620, properly selected, and as occasion required, abridged, or only noted, were published by the late earl of Hardwicke, in 1757, in one vol. 4to, with an historical preface. The second edition of the same work, with large additions to the historical preface, appeared in 1775, and has been twice reprinted since. These letters, if some allowances be made for party violences and prejudices, contain more clear, accurate, and interesting accounts of that remarkable period of Dutch history to which they relate, than are anj where extant. There are, likewise, discussed in the course of them, many points of great importance, at that time, to the English commerce. Lord Hardwicke’s excellent preface has furnished the materials of the present sketch.

In 1775, when the American war broke out, general Carleton had an ample field for the display of his military talents. The American congress, having resolved to resort to arms, began soon to turn their eyes to Canada, where they knew the late acts were very unpopular, not only among the British settlers, but the French Canadians themsi-lvrs, who having experienced the difference between a French and British constitution, gave the preference to the latter. To co-operate with the disaffected in Canada, and to anticipate the probable and suspected designs of general Carleton, the congress formed the bold project of invading this province. General Montgomery, their commander, headed the expedition, and proceeded with such vigour, that he compelled the fort of St. John’s to surrender at discretion on the 2d of November. Hence, crossing St. Laurence, he proceeded to Montreal, which being incapable of defence against the American force, general Carleton evacuated ir, and retired to" Quebec. Having taken possession of Montreal, Montgomery made dispositions for advancing to besiege the capital of Canada, and there were several circumstances favourable to his hopes of success. The works of the town had been neglected for a long time of peace; the garrison did not exceed 1100, of which few were regulars, and the majority of the inhabitants were disaffected to the framers of their new constitution, and particularly to general Carleton, who was supposed to have had a chief hand in that measure. While he was endeavouring to defend Quebec amidst all these disadvantages, the American generals Montgomery and Arnold summoned him to surrender, which he treated with contempt, and refused to hold any correspondence with rebels. The inhabitants too, displeased as they were with their new constitution, joined the British troops with cordial unanimity, and the American commander, unprepared for a regular siege, endeavoured to take the place by storm. In this attempt Montgomery fell at the head of his troops, whom the garrison, after an obstinate resistance, drove from the town with great loss; and although Arnold encamped on the heights of Abraham, where he fortified himself, and continued the siege of Quebec in the following year, 1776, he thought proper to retire on the arrival of an English squadron. General Carleton being now reinforced by troops, which, added to what he had, formed a body of 13,Ooo, prepared for offensive operations, and the Amer cans evacuated their conquests, stationing themselves at Crown Point, whither the British commander did not follow them for the present. An armament was now prepared for crossing Lake Champlain, in order to besiege Crown Point and Ticonderago. The Americans had a considerable fleet on Lake Champlain, whereas the British had not a single vessel. The general, therefore, used every effort to procure the requisite naval force; but October was begun before this was ready to oppose the enemy. On Oct. 11, the British fleet, commanded by capt. Pringle, and under the general direction of Carleton, discovered the American armament; and engaging them, the conflict continued on both sides for several hours with great intrepidity, but a contrary wind preventing the chief British ships from taking a part, and night coming on, it was thought prudent to discontinue the action, and Arnold took advantage of the night to retreat. The British pursued them the next day and the following, and overtook them a few leagues from Crown Point; where, after a furious battle of two hours, they yielded to our superior force and skill. General Carleton remained at Crown Point till Nov. 3, and as the winter was commencing, did not think proper to besiege Ticonderago. He returned therefore to St. John’s, whence he distributed his army into winter quarters.

, baron of Killaghy in the kingdom of Ireland, descended from an ancient and good family in Herefordshire, was born at Pitchers Ocul in that county, February 10, 1657. His father was Mr. Warncomb Carpenter, sixth son of Thomas Carpenter, esq, of the Homme or Holme, in the parish of Dilwyn in Herefordshire. His mother was daughter to Mr. Taylor of the same county, and widow to Mr. John Hill, by whom she had one son. George lord Carpenter was the youngest of seven children, whom his father left at his death, and was educated at a private school in the country. In 1672 he went into the third troop of guards as a private gentleman, and was afterwards appointed quarter-master to the regiment of horse commanded by the earl of Peterborough, and went through the several posts of cornet, lieutenant, captain, &c. till he was advanced to that of lieutenant-colonel of the regiment, in which commission he continued thirteen years, though the regiment was almost coastantly in service. In 1693 he married Alice, daughter of William lord viscount Charlemont, who having a considerable jointure from her first husband James Margetson, esq. by the sale of part of it for her life he was enabled to purchase the regiment of dragoons which he commanded till his death. He served in all the first wars in Ireland and Flanders, and the last in Spain, with unblemished honour and reputation, and distinguished himself to great advantage by his courage, conduct, and humanity. At the unfortunate battle of Almanza in Spain he commanded the rear, and brought up the last squadron in the retreat, which saved the baggage of the army. At the battle of Almenara he was wounded, but received the compliments of Charles then king of Spain, and afterwards emperor of Germany, for his conduct in the engagement. He was again desperately wounded in defending the breach at Britmega against the whole French and Spanish army, where they "were at last taken prisoners. In 1705 he was made a brigadier-general; in 1708 major-general; and in 1710 lieutenant-general. In 1714 he was chosen member of parliament for Whitchurch in Hampshire; and the year following was appointed envoy extraordinary and plenipotentiary to the emperor, whose personal regard and esteem he had gained while he served under that prince in Spain. But the rebellion breaking out that year, he was sent into the North, where he not only prevented the rebels from seizing Newcastle, and marching into Yorkshire, but having overtaken them at Preston, where they were invested by major-general Wills, he, by altering the disposition which that general had made, cut off entirely both their escape and their receiving any supplies, which immediately reduced them to a capitulation. In the beginning of February 1715-16 he sent a challenge to general Wills, but they were prevented from fighting by the interposition of the dukes of Marlborough and Montague. In 1716 he was appointed governor of 'Minorca, and commander in chief of his majesty’s forces in Scotland; and in 1719 was created baron Carpenter of Killaghy in the kingdom of Ireland. In 1722 he was chosen member of parliament for the city of Westminster, and upon all occasions voted for what he thought to be the real good of his country, without any regard to party. In October 1731 being near seventy-four years of age, he began to labour under the failure of appetite, and having had a fall, by which his teeth were loosened on that side which had not been wounded, he was capable of taking but little nourishment, which together with old age, and a decay of nature, put an end to his life February 10, 1731-2. He was interred near his beloved wife in the chancel of the parish church of Owselbury in Hampshire, where a monument of marble was erected to his memory by his son, the late lord Carpenter, who was the only issue he left.

, one of those French philosophers and statesmen to whom the revolution gave a shortlived importance, was born at Pont-de-Vesle in Dombes, of poor parents. He early discovered an impetuous and ungovernable temper, and even his youth is said to have been stained with crimes. He travelled into Moldavia and Walachia, and wrote an account of those countries, which is the most unexceptionable of his works. On the commencement of the revolution he came to Paris, with all the talents requisite to give him consequence, a violent hatred of the royal family, and confused and ill-digested notions of political freedom. Mirabeau, during his short life, appears to have discerned and despised his character; but in 1792 he acted without controul, and was one of the chiefs of the revolt on the 10th of August, and gloried in having laid the plan of that fatal day. When the unhappy king was brought to trial, he was among the most active in preventing any change in the sentence, or any access to the voice of clemency. His triumph, however, was very short. Having fallen out with Robespierre and his colleagues, he joined the party of the Gironde, was implicated in their fate, and guillotined Nov. 1, 1793. The convention afterwards honoured him as a martyr to liberty, but his countrymen now seem disposed to revive his real character. As a writer, they tell us, he first acquired notice by some bad articles in the Encyclopaedia. His separate publications were, 1. “Systeme de la Raison,” a declamation against royalty; said to have been printed at London in 1773. 2. “Esprit de la Morale et de la Philosophic,” 1777, 8vo; in which the principles of infidelity are unblushingly brought forward. 3. “Histoire de la Moldavie et de la Valachie,” 1778, 12mo. 4. “Nouveaux principes de Physique,” 1782, 2 vols. 8vo, a work in which he has pretty nearly ascertained how far the imagination, without the aid of knowledge or experiment, can carry conjecture and paradox. 5. “Essai sur la nautique aerienneV' 1784, in which he assumes the merit of a plan. to guide air-balloons with safety and speed which in point of utility may be classed with the following 6.” Examen physique du magnetisme animal,“1785, 8vo. 7.” Dissertation elementaire sur la nature de la lumiere, de la chaleur, du feu, et de Pelectricite,“1787, 8vo. 8.” Un mot de reponse a M. de Calonne, sur s;i Kcquete au roi.“9.” L'Orateur des Etats-Generawx,“1781;, 8vo. 10.” Annales politiques,“a sort of newspaper, if we mistake not, at the time when every party had its newspaper. 1.” Mernoires historiques sur la Bastille," 1790, 3 vols. 8vo; and many anonymous pamphlets.

, was born in 1663, in the province of Brie in France. His father, a substantial farmer, intended him for the church. But young Carre, after going through, the usual course of education for that purpose, having an utter aversion to it, refused to enter upon that function; by which he incurred his father’s displeasure. His resources being thus cut off, he was obliged to quit the university, and look out into the world for some employment. In this exigency he had the good fortune to be engaged as an amanuensis by the celebrated father Malebranche; by which he found himself transported at once from the mazes of scholastic darkness, to the source of the most brilliant and enlightened philosophy. Under this great master he studied mathematics and metaphysics, and after seven years spent in this excellent school, M. Carré found it necessary, in order to procure himself some less precarious establishment, to teach mathematics and philosophy in Paris; but especially that philosophy which, on account of its tendency to improve our morals, he valued more than all the mathematics in the world. And accordingly his greatest care was to make geometry serve as an introduction to his well-beloved metaphysics. Most of M. Carrels pupils were of the fair sex. The first of these, who soon perceived that his language was rather the reverse of elegant and correct, told him pleasantly, that, as an acknowledgment for the pains he took to teach her philosophy, she would teach him French; and he ever after owned that her lessons were of great service to him. In general he seemed to set more value upon the genius of women than that of men.

M. Carré, although he gave the preference to metaphysics, did not neglect mathematics and while he taught both, he took care to make himself acquainted with all the new discoveries in the latter. This was all that his constant attendance on his pupils would allow him to do, till the year 1697, when M. Varignon, so remarkable for his extreme scrupulousness in the choice of his eleves, took M. Carre* to him in that station. Soon after, viz. in 1700, our author thinking himself bound to do something that might render him worthy of that title, published the first complete work on the integral calculus, under the title of “A method of measuring surfaces and solids, and finding their centres of gravity, percussion, and oscillation.” He afterwards discovered some errors in the work, and was candid enough to own and correct them in a subsequent edition. In a little time M. Carre became associate, and at length one of the pensioners of the academy. And as this was a sufficient establishment for one who knew so well how to keep his desires within just bounds, he gave himself up entirely to study; and as he enjoyed the appointment of Mechanician, he applied himself more particularly to mechanics. He took also a survey of every branch relating to music; such as the doctrine of sounds, the description of musical instruments; though he despised the practice of music, as a mere sensual pleasure. Some sketches of his ingenuity and industry in this way may be seen in the Memoirs of the French Academy of Sciences. M. Carre also composed some treatises on other branches of natural philosophy, and some on mathematical subjects all which he bequeathed to that illustrious body; though it does not appear that any of them have yet been published. It is not unlikely that he was hindered from putting the last hand to them by a train of disorders proceeding from a bad digestion, which, after harassing him during the space of five or six years, at length brought him to the grave in 1711, at forty-eight years of age.

Besides the works mentioned, he was the author of the following publications: 1. “A collection of original letters and papers, concerning the affairs of England, from 1641 to 1660,” 1739, 2 vols. 8vo. 2. “The History of the Revolutions of Portugal, from the foundation of that kingdom to the year 1567, with letters of sir Robert Southwell, during his embassy there, to the duke of Ormonde; giving a particular account of the deposing don Alphonso, and placing don Pedro on the throne,” 1740, 8vo. 3. “A full Answer to the Letter from a bystander,” a pamphlet, 1742, 8vo. 4. “A full and clear vindication of the full answer to a Letter from a bystander,” ditto, 1743. The letter from a bystander, was written by the late Corbyn Morris, esq. 5. “Catalogue des rolles Gascons, Normans, et Francois, conserves dans les archives de la Tour de Londres; tire* d‘apres celui du Garde* desdites archives; & contenant la precis & le sommaire de tous les titres qui s’y trouvent concernant la Guienne, la Normandie, & les autres provinces de la France, sujettes autres fois auX rois d’Angleterre, &c.” Paris, 1743, 2 vols. folio, with two most exact and correct indexes of places and persons. This valuable collection, being calculated for the use of the French, is introduced with a preface in that language. 6. “A preface to a translation, by Mrs. Thompson, of the history of the memorable and extraordinary calamities of Margaret of Anjou, queen of England, &c. by the chevalier Michael Baudier,” London, 1736, 8vo. 7. “Advice of a Mother to her son and daughter,” translated from the French of the marchioness de Lambert. This has gone through several editions. 8. “Farther reasons, addressed to parliament, for rendering more effectual an act of queen Anne, relating to the vesting in authors the right of copies, for the encouragement of learning, by R. H.” about 1737. Mr. Carte wrote, also, a paper (the ms. of which is in Mr. Nichols’s possession), recommending a public library to be formed at the Mansion-house, and that the twelve great companies of the city of London should each of them subscribe 2,000l. for that purpose. No notice appears to have been taken of this proposal at the time, but very lately, 1806, in the mayoralty of sir James Shaw, bart. and at the suggestion of that magistrate, the foundation of a library at the Mansion-house was laid, and a fine collection of English classics deposited there, by a vote of the court of aldermen, under the direction of John Nichols, esq. then a member of the corporation, who was assisted in the selection by the late very learned professor Porson. A translation, of Mr. Carte’s General History of England into French, was undertaken by several gentlemen in conjunction, but was never completed. Some parts of the translation were in Dr. Ducarel’s possession. Mr. Carte left behind him, in ms. a Vindication of Charles I. with regard to the Irish massacre. In 1758 was published a book, partly upon the same subject, entitled “The case of the royal martyr considered with candour,” in 2 vols. 8vo, the author of which acknowledges his obligations to Mr. Carte. It was written by the rev. J. Boswell, M. A. a clergyman and a schoolmaster, at Taunton, in Somersetshire, and the author of a “Method of Study, or a useful library,” printed in 1738, in 8vo, a work of no distinguished merit; and of two pamphlets, called “Remarks on the Free and Candid Disquisitions,” which appeared in 1750 and 1751.

, an English lady of profound learning and genius, was the eldest daughter of the rev. Dr. Nicholas Carter, a clergyman in Kent, who, with other preferment, held the cure of the chapel of Deal, where this daughter was born, Dec. 16, 1717, and educated by her father. At first she discovered such a slowness of faculties, as to make him despair of her progress ia intellectual attainment, even with the aid of the greatest industry, and the most ardent desire, which characterized her efforts. She herself, however, though mortified and sorrowful at her own difficulties, resolved to persevere, and her perseverance was crowned with unexampled success. She early became mistress of Latin, Greek, French, German, and afterwards understood Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, and Hebrew, and last of all acquired something of Arabic. Before she was seventeen years of age, many of her poetical attempts had appeared, particularly in the Gentleman’s Magazine for 1734, with the signature of Eliza. This extraordinary display of genius and acquirements procured her immediate celebrity, and the learned flocked about her with admiration. In 1738, when she was about twenty, Cave, the proprietor of the Gentleman’s Magazine, published some of her poems in a quarto pamphlet, now little known, as it was published without her name. It is probable she did not think many of these worthy of her; as in 1762, when she published a small collection with her name, she admitted only two from the former publication, the “Lines on her birth-day,” and the “Ode of Anacreon.”

, a loyalist in the time of Charles f. of uncommon firmness and bravery, the descendant of an ancient family, originally from Normandy, but afterwards settled at Guernsey and Jersey, was born at Jersey in 1599, his father Ilelier Carteret, esq. being at that time deputy governor of the island. He entered early into the sea service, and had acquired the character of an experienced officer, when king Charles I. ascended the throne. This circumstance recommending him to the notice and esteem of the duke of Buckingham, he was appointed, in 1626, joint governor of Jersey, with Henry, afterwards lord Jermyn and, in 1C '6 9, he obtained a grant of the office and place of comptroller of all his Majesty’s ships. At the commencement of the civil war, when the parliament resolved to send out the earl of Warwick as admiral of the fleet, they also resolved, that captain Carteret should be vice-ad miral. But he, thinking that he ought not to accept the command without knowing the royal pleasure, addressed himself to the king for direction, who ordered him to decline the employment; and captain, Batten, surveyor-general, was substituted in his place. His Majesty was probably mistaken in this advice; for, if captain Carteret had accepted of the charge, he might probably have prevented the greater part of the fleet from engaging in the cause of the parliament. Captain Carteret, however, likewise quitted the post of comptroller, and retired, with his family, to the island of Jersey, the inhabitants of which were confirmed by him in their adherence to the king; and desirous of more active service, he transported himself into Cornwall, with the purpose of raising a troop of horse. When he arrived in that country, finding there was a great want of powder, he went into France to procure that and other necessary supplies; and was so successful, that, through the remainder of the war, the Cornish army was never destitute of ammunition. This was so important and seasonable a service, that the king acknowledged it by particular approbation; and by conferring upon him, at Oxford, the honour of knighthood, which was speedily followed by his being advanced, on the 9th of May 1645, to the dignity, of a baronet. Returning the same year into Jersey, he found that several of the inhabitants had been induced to embrace the cause of the parliament, on which account he threw some of them into confinement. This was so alarming and offensive to the members at Westminster, that an order was made, that if, for the future, he should put to death any of the island whom he should take prisoners, for every one so slain, three of the king’s men should be hung up. From the words here used, it seems implied that sir George Carteret had actually executed some one or more of the people of Jersey who had appeared for the Parliament; a step highly injudicious, whence, in all the subsequent propositions for peace with the king, sir George was excepted from pardon. When the prince of Wales, and many persons of distinction with him, came into Jersey in 1646, and brought with them very little for their subsistence, they were all chear fully entertained, and at a large expence, by sir George Carteret who, being sensible how much it behoved him to take care for supplies, equipped about half a score small frigates and privateers, which soon struck a terror through the whole channel, and made a number of captures. Upon the prince’s leaving the island, at the positive command of the queen, several of the council chose to stay with sir George; au<=! the chancellor of the exchequer (afterwards earl of Clarendon) resided with him above two years. After the death of the king, sir George Carteret, though the republican party was completely triumphant, and though Charles II. was at the Hague in a very destitute condition, immediately proclaimed him at Jersey, with all his titles. Some months afterwards his Majesty determined to pay a second visit to the island of Jersey, and arrived in the latter end of September 1649, accompanied by his brother the duke of York, with several of the nobility. Here they were supplied by sir George with all necessaries. The king, when prince of Wales, had procured his father’s leave for making sir George Carteret his vice-chamberlain, and he now appointed him treasurer of his navy; which however, at this time, chiefly consisted of the privateers that sir George hue! provided, and of the men of war with prince Rupert. Charles II. staid in the island till the latter end of March 1650, when he embarked for Holland, in order to be more commodiously situated for treating with the Scots, who had invited him into that kingdom. This defiance of sir George Carteret in harbouring the king, and taking many of their trading vessels, enraged the republicans so much, that they determined to exert every nerve for the reduction of Jersey. A formidable armament being prepared, it put to sea in October 1651, under the command of admiral Blake, and major-general Holmes, to the last of whom the charge of the forces for the descent was committed. In this crisis, sir George Carteret prevented the landing of the republican army as long as possible; and when that was effected, and the remaining forts of the island were taken, he retired into Elizabeth castle, resolving to hold it out to the last extremity. The king being safely arrived in France, after the, fatal battle of Worcester, sir George informed him of the state of the garrison, but the king not being able to assist him, he advised sir George Carteret, rather to accept of a reasonable composition, than, by too obstinate a defence, to bring himself and the loyal gentlemen who were with him into danger of being made prisoners of war. Sir George was ambitious that Elizabeth castle should be the last of the king’s garrisons (as was in fact the case) which should yield to the prevailing powers. He determined, therefore, to conceal his majesty’s permission to treat, that the knowledge of it might not renew the cry for a surrender. But, at length, provisions growing scarce, the number of defenders lessening daily by death and desertion, and there being no possibility of supplies or recruits, Elizabeth castle was surrendered in the? latter end of December, and sir George went first to St. Maloes, and afterwards travelled through several parts of Europe. To facilitate his reception at the different courts and places he might be disposed to visit, he obtained from his royal master a very honourable and remarkable certificate of recommendation. In 1657, sir George had given such offence to Oliver Cromwell, by some hostile design or attempt against the English vessels trading to the French ports, that, by the Protector’s interest with cardinal Mazarine, he was committed prisoner to the Bastile from which he was, after some time, released by the intercession of his friends, upon condition of his quitting France. In 1659, however, we find him at Rheims, from whence, he repaired to the king at Brussels, and followed him to Breda. Upon his majesty’s being restored to his kingdoms, sir George Carteret rode, with him in his triumphant entry into the city of London, on the 2<nh of May 1660, and next day he was declared vice-chamberlain of the hoiishold, an-d sworn of the privy council. He was also constituted treasurer of the navy; and at the coronation of the king, he had the honour of being almoner for the day. In the first parliament called by Charles II. in May, 1661, sir George Carteret was elected representative for the corporation of Portsmouth; and it appears, that he was au active member of the house. When the duke of York, 1673, resigned the office of high admiral of England, sir George was constituted one of the commissioners of the admiralty; and“in 1676, he was appointed one of the lords of the committee of trade. He was also vice-treasurer of Ireland, and treasurer of the military forces there. At length, in consequence of his merit and services, the king determined to raise him to the dignity of a peerage; but before the design could be accomplished, he departed this life, on the 14th of January, 1679, being nearly eighty years of age. On the 11th of February following, a royal warrant was issued, in which it is recited,” That whereas sir George Carteret died before his patent for his barony was sued out, liis Majesty authorizes Elizabeth, his widow, and her youngest children, James Carteret, Caroline, wife of sir Thomas S<:ot, kut. and Louisa, wife of sir Robert Atkins, knt. to enjoy their precedency and pre-eminency, as if the said sir George Carterei hail actually been created a baron." Sir George’s rldest son, by his jady Elizabeth, who was his cousin-gr nnan, being the daughter of sir PhiUp Carteret, was ijained Philip after his grandfather. This gentleman eminently distinguished himself in the civil wars, and was khighted by Charles II on his arrival in Jersey. After the king’s restoration, sir Philip Carteret married Jemima, daughter of Edward Montague, the first earl of Sandwich, and perished with that illustrious nobleman, in the great sea-fight with the Dutch, in Solbay, on the 28th of May, 1672. Sir Philip determined, whilst many others left the ship, to share the fate of his father-in-law. His eldest son George was the first lord Carteret, and father to the subject of the following article.

Few men have ever been so praised and regretted by their contemporaries, who have left so little to perpetuate their fame. During his sickness, the king and queen, who were then at Oxford, made anxious inquiries about the progress of his disorder. His majesty wore black on the day of his funeral, and being asked the reason, answered that since the muses had so much mourned for the loss of such a son, it had been a shame that he should not appear in mourning for the loss of such a subject. His poems and plays, which were published in 1651, are preceded by fifty copies of verses by the wits of the time, and all in a most laboured style of panegyric. His other encomiasts inform us that his person was as handsome as his mind, and that he not only understood Greek and Latin, but French and Italian, as perfectly as his mother tongue. Dr. Fell, bishop of Oxford, said of him, “Cartwright is the utmost man can come to;” and Ben Jonson used to say, “My son Cartwright writes all like a man.”

, another unfortunate author in our own country, was a native of America. His grandfather, William Joseph Carver, of Wigan in Lancashire, a captain in king William’s army, was rewarded for his services in Ireland with the government of Connecticut in New England, in which province our author was born in. 1732, and where his father, a justice of the peace, died in 1747. Soon after, being designed for the study of physic, he was placed with a practitioner at Elizabeth-town; but this not suiting his enterprising spirit, he purchased, in. 1750, an ensigncy in the Connecticut regiment, and behaved so well as to obtain the command of a company. Nothing more is known of him till 1757, when being in general Webb’s army, he fortunately escaped the dreadful massacre at Fort William Henry, an instance of Indian ferocity and French perfidy which he has pathetically described in his “Travels.” In the five succeeding campaigns he served also, first as lieutenant and afterwards as captain of provincials, with a high reputation, not only for bravery, but also for piety and morals. On the conclusion of the peace in 1763, captain Carver, with a view to make that vast acquisition of territory gained by Great Britain advantageous to her, determined to explore the most unknown parts of North America, particularly the vast continent which extends from the Atlantic to the Pacific ocean. His failure in this is now less to be regretted, as captain Cook has since shewn the impracticability of a north-west passage in those parts. Captain Carver, however, penetrated farther north-westward than any other European, except father Hennepin in 1680, viz. to the river St. Francis. The utmost extent of his travels to the west was towards the head of the river St. Pierre, in the country of the Naudowessies of the plains, whose language he learned, and among whom he wintered in 1766, and resided seven months. In 1769 he came over to England, in hopes of a reimbursement from government for the sums he had expended in their service; but in this he was disappointed, and reduced to great difficulties. In 1778, he published “Travels through the interior parts of North America in the years 1766, 1767, and 1768,” 8vo, a work considered as peculiarly interesting. In the following year, he published also “A Treatise on the Culture of the Tobacco Plant.” Both these ought unquestionably to have procured him employment as a man of talents, but unfortunately no notice was taken of him. About this time he was induced to lend his name to a compilation entitled “The New Universal Traveller,” published in weekly numbers, but this afforded a scanty supply. Through the winter of 1779, he preserved his existence by acting as a clerk in a lottery office until Jan. 31, 1780, a putrid fever supervening a long-continued dysentery, brought on by mere want, put an end to the life of a man whose public services and character deserved a better fate. We know not, however, that he perished in vain. His case attracted the notice of Dr. Lettsom, who, in some excellent letters in the Gentleman’s Magazine, recommended it to the public attention with such effect, that while a temporary provision was made for captain Carver’s widow and children, by the publication. of a new edition of his “Travels,” a salutary impression was made on the public mind, to which, strengthened by other instances, we now owe that excellent institution, “The Literary Fund.”

, the surname of Kemaleddin Abulganem Abdalrazzak ben Yemaleddin, a famous doctor, classed by Yafei among the mussulman saints, is the author of several works, and among them one entitled “Esthelahah al Sosiah,” of the practices and mode of speaking of the sophis, or monks of the mussulmans, of whom he was one of the chiefs. That which bears the title of “Menazel ai sairin,” the lodgings for travellers, is another spiritual book of the same author. “Tavilat al Koran al hakim,” commentaries on the Koran, are likewise by him, and were in the French king’s library, number 641. The Rabi al Abrar relates, that this doctor, who was the oracle of his time, preaching one day at Medina, a contemplative person retired to a corner of the mosque for the purpose of meditation, without paying any attention to the discourse of Caschi. One of the audience asking him why he did not hearken like the rest, this spiritual man replied: “When the master speaks, it is not reasonable to listen to what the servant says.” The two following lines of Persian poetry are quoted from Caschi:

, a painter, was born at Paris in 1676, where he also died in the month of June 1754. He had for masters in his art Houasse, and afterwards Bon Boullogne. He obtained the grand prize of painting in 1699, and was received member of the academy in 1704. Cases may be considered as one of the first painters of the French school. His drawing is correct, and in the grand style, his compositions bear marks of genius; he excels in draperies, and possesses a knowledge of the chiaroscuro to a very high degree. His strokes are mellow, and his pencil brilliant. There is much freshness in his tints. This famous artist worked with great industry; but his performances are not all of equal beauty. Towards the latter end of his life, the coldness of age and the weakness of his organs, occasioned him to produce pictures which betray the decline of his powers. Some of his works may be seen at Paris, in the church of Notre Dame, in the college of Jesuits, at the house of charity, at the petit St. Antoine, at the chapel of la Jussienne, at the abbey of St. Martin, and particularly at St. Germain-des. Prs, where he has represented the lives of St. Germain and of St. Vincent. A holy family at St. Louis de Versailles, is much admired, and is one of his best productions. Cases mostly excelled in pictures with horses. The king of Prussia has two fine pieces by this painter, which have been compared for their execution with the works of Correggio. The celebrated Le Moine was a scholar of Cases.

, a doctor of divinity, born at Nismes in 1633, was son of Michael Cassagnes, master of the requests to the duke of Orleans, afterwards treasurer to the demesne of the Seneschally of Nismes. He was admitted into the French academy at the age of twenty-seven, in consequence of an ode written in its praise, 1660; and the poem he published the year following, in which he introduces Henry IV. giving instructions to Louis XIV. gained him the friendship of M. Colbert. This minister procured him a pension from the court, appointed him keeper of the king’s library, and nominated him one of the first four academicians, who originally composed the academy of inscriptions. The abbe Cassagnes was preparing to preach at court, when Boileau placed his name by that of Cotin in his third satire: this satirical stroke made him renounce the pulpit, and preyed on a mind probably vain and weak. Imagining, afterwards, that he had entirely lost the esteem of the public, he thought to recover his reputation by publishing a multiplicity of works; but too great application, joined to a morose temper, and many disappointments, impaired his understanding, and his friends were obliged to place him at St. Lazare, where he died, May 19, 1675, aged 46. He left odes, which are printed separately, and in collections a translation of Cicero’s Rhetoric, 12mo, and of Sallust, 12mo, and other forgotten works.

, was a celebrated solitary, a native of Scythia, of the fifth century, who spent part of his life in the monastery of Bethlehem with the monk Germain, his friend. They engaged openly in the defence of St. Chrysostom, against Theophilus, patriarch of Alexandria. Cassian went to Rome, and from thence to Marseilles, where he founded two monasteries, one of men, the other of virgins. He ranks among the greatest masters of the monastic life, and died about the year 448. He left “Collations,” or conferences of the fathers of the desert, and “Institutions,” in 12 books, translated iHto French by Nic. Fontaine, 1663, 2 vols. 8vo; and seven books upon the Incarnation. These are all written in Latin, with a clearness and simplicity of style excellently calculated to inspire the heart with virtuous dispositions. They were printed at Paris, 1642, and at Leipsic, 1722, folio, and are in the library of the fathers. St. Prosper has written against the “Conferences.” Cassian is reckoned among the first of the Semi-Pelagians, of which sect Faustus of Riez, Vincent of Lerins, Gennadius of Marseilles, Hilerias of Aries, and Arnobius the younger, were the principal defenders. The semi-pelagians were opposed by the whole united forces of St. Augustin and Prosper, without being extirpated, or overcome by them. This sect was condemned by some synods, and was rejected by the church.

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

, a celebrated French astronomer, and member of the several academies of sciences of France, England, Prussia, and Bologna, was born at Paris Feb. 18, 1677, being the younger son of the preceding, whom he succeeded as astronomer at the royal observatory, the elder son having lost his life at the battle of La Hogue.

Although astronomy was the principal object of our author’s consideration, he made occasional excursions into other fields. We owe also to him, for example, Experiments on Electricity, or the light produced by bodies by friction; Experiments on the recoil of fire-arms; Researches on the rise of the mercury in the barometer at different heights above the level of the sea; Reflections on the perfecting of burning-glasses; and other memoirs. The French academy had properly judged that one of its most important objects was the measurement of the earth. In 1669, Picard measured a little more than a degree of latitude to the north of Paris; but as that extent appeared too small from which to conclude the whole circumference with sufficient accuracy, it was resolved to continue that measurement on the meridian of Paris to the north and south, through the whole extent of the country. Accordingly, in 1683, the late M. de la Hire continued that on the north side of Paris, and the older Cassini that on the south side. The latter was assisted in 1700 in the continuation of this operation by his son, our author. The same work was farther continued by the same academicians; and finally the part left unfinished by de la Hire in the north, was finished in 1718 by our author, with the late Maraldi, and de la Hire the younger.

These operations produced a considerable degree of precision. It appeared also, from this measured extent of six degrees, that the degrees were of different lengths in different parts of the meridian; and in such sort that our author concluded, in the volume published for 17 18^ that they decreased more and more towards the pole, and that therefore the figure of the earth was that of an oblong spheroid, or having its axe longer than the equatorial diameter. He also measured the perpendicular to the same meridian, and compared the measured distance with the differences of longitude as before determined by the eclipses of Jupiter’s satellites; from whence he concluded that the length of the degrees of longitude was smaller than it would be on a sphere, and that therefore again the figure of the earth was an oblong spheroid; contrary to the determination of Newton by the theory of gravity. In consequence of these assertions of our author, the French government sent two different sets of measurers, the one to measure a degree at the equator, the other at the polar circle; and the comparison of the whole determined the figure to be an oblate spheroid, contrary to Cassini’s determination.

, a celebrated French astronomer, director of the observatory, pensioner astronomer, and member of most of the learned societies of Europe, was born at Paris, June 17, 1714, being the second son of the preceding, whose occupations and talents our author inherited and supported with great honour. He received his first lessons in astronomy and mathematics from Messieurs Maraldi and Camus. He was hardly ten years of age when he calculated the phases of the total eclipse of the sun of 1727. At the age of eighteen he accompanied his father in his two journeys undertaken for drawing the perpendicular to the observatory meridian from Strasbourg to Brest. From that time a general chart of France was devised; for which purpose it was necessary to traverse the country by several lines parallel and perpendicular to the meridian of Paris, and our author was charged with the conduct of this business. He did not content himself with the measure of a degree by Picard; suspecting even that the measures which had been taken by his father and grandfather were not exempt from some errors, which the imperfections of their instruments at least would be liable to, he again undertook to measure the meridian of Paris, by means of a new series of triangles, of a smaller number, and more advantageously disposed. This great work was published in 1740, with a chart shewing the new meridian of Paris, by two different series of triangles, passing along the sea-coasts to Bayonne, traversing the frontiers of Spain to the Mediterranean and Antibes, and thence along the eastern limits of France to Dunkirk, with parallel and perpendicular lines described at the distance of 6000 toises from one another, from side to side of the country. Jn 1735 he had been received into the academy as adjoint supernumerary, at twenty-one years of age.

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

He published in 1546, a translation of the Sibylline verses into Latin heroic verse, and of the books of Moses into Latin prose, with notes. This was followed, in 1547, by his Latin version of the psalms of David, and of all the other songs found in scripture. In 1548, he printed a Greek poem on the life of John the baptist, and a paraphrase on the prophecy of Jonah, in Latin verse. He translated some passages of Homer, and some books of Xenophon and St. Cyril. He also turned into Latin several treatises of the famous Ochinus, particularly the thirty dialogues, some of which seem to favour polygamy. He advanced some singular notions in his notes on the books of Moses; as for instance, that the bodies of malefactors ought not to be left on the gibbets; and that they ought not to be punished with death, but with slavery. His reason for these opinions was, that the political laws of Moses bind all nations. His notes on the Epistle to the Romans were condemned by the church of Basil, because they opposed the doctrine of predestination and efficacious grace. He began his Latin translation of the Bible at Geneva in 1542, and finished it at Basil in 1550. It was printed at Basil in 1551, and dedicated by the author to Edward VI. king of England. He published a second edition of it in 1554, and another in 1556. The edition of 157& is most esteemed. The French version was dedicated to Henry II. of France, and printed at Basil in 1555, and in this he is accused of having made use of low and vulgar terms. Those who have indulged their invectives against- Calvin and Beza for their dislike of Castalio’s translations, do not seem to advert to the serious consequences of exhibiting bad translations to the people, who had but just been admitted to the privilege of reading the scriptures in any shape.

The “Vrai systeme de physique generate de Newton,” 1743, 4to, did him more honour in the opinion of several of the learned, though it was displeasing to others. He reverenced the English philosopher, though his doctrine appeared to him but little adapted to reveal the true system of the universe. “Newton and Descartes,” said he, tt are nearly on a par in regard to invention; but the latter had more facility and elevation; the other, with less facility, was more profound. Such is pretty nearly the character of the two nations: the French genius builds upwards, the English genius downwards. Each of them had the ambition to make a world, as Alexander had that of conquering it, and both had grand ideas of nature.“Other papers by him are in the Memoires de Trevoux, in which he was for some time concerned. The style of Castel partook of the fire of 'his genius and the wanderings of his imagination. The conversation turning one day, in presence of Fontenelle, on the marks of originality in the works of this scholar, somebody said,” But he is mad.“” I know it,“returned Fontenelle,” and I am sorry for it, for it is a great pity! But I like him better for being original and a little mad, than I should if he were in his senses without being original.“Castel died the llth of January, 1757, at the age of 68. The abbe dela Porte published in 1763, 12mo, at Paris under the imprint of Amsterdam,” L'esprit, les saillies, & singularites du pere Castel." The author treats, on a great number of subjects; and though he enters deeply into none, yet he thinks much, and sometimes verjr well. The life of Castel was exemplary and edifying he! was ever assiduous in performing the duties of his station, and had the highest reverence for religion.

, a French nobleman of high character and abilities, was frequently employed in the sixteenth century by Charles IX. and Henry III. of France in negociations of great importance; and among other destinations, he was five times ambassador in England, and the first time resided above ten years. The “Memoirs of his Negociations” published by Le Laboreur in 1669, 2 vols. fol. and reprinted at Brussels in 1731, 3 vols. fol. afford much interesting and authentic information respecting the history of his time. He died in 1592. His Memoirs were translated into English by the rev. Mr. Kelly, Lond. 1724, fol.

, an eminent French physician and surgeon, was born at Blerancourt, between Noyon and Coucy, Sept. 6, 1700. If chirurgical skill be hereditary, his claims were considerable, as he was descended both by the father’s and mother’s side from eminent practitioners. His parents, however, first intended him for the church; but after completing his philosophy course, he applied himself to the study of medicine, not altogether with his inclination. From his infancy he had amused himself with making geometrical figures, and without the aid of a master, used to make drawings of military architecture with considerable accuracy, and at one time seems to have had an inclination for the bar, but at last he had no alternative but the church, or the profession of his ancestors, and having determined in favour of the latter, he went to Paris for education in the different branches of the healing art. The first publication by which he was known, was a curious dissertation, which he printed in his twenty-fourth year, on the mechanism of the buttresses of the church of St. Nicaise at Rheuns: these buttresses have always been an object of curiosity, as a motion is perceptible in them, which has never affected their solidity. la 1729, he was appointed surgeon and physician to M. de Tressan, archbishop of Rouen. He did not take his degree, however, until 1732, when he took it at Rheims, to avoid the heavy expence of 6000 livres, which it would have cost at Paris. In 1733, he settled at Rouen, and began to give a course of anatomical lectures, and there first he established a high reputation for his dextrous method of operation for the stone. In 1731 he obtained the reversion of the place of surgeon-major to the hospital at Rouen; and when the royal academy of surgery was established, he gained the first prize, and continued to gain all the prizes of that academy to the year 17:58 inclusive, when they paid him the high compliment of requesting that he would no longer become a candidate, but leave to others a chance of obtaining these rewards. Flattering as this seemed, M. Le Cat was aware that the academicians had it in their power to prevent his contending for prizes in a more effectual way, by electing him one of their body, and accordingly stood for the prize of 1739 with his usual success: about the end of the year, however, he was elected into the academy, and pursued his career of fame by those numerous publications on which it was so justly founded.

Peter’s conduct, on the other hand, was mere infatuation. He permitted his mistress the countess Woronzoff to have the most complete ascendancy over him, and this woman had the hardihood to claim the performance of a promise which he had made when grand duke, to marry her, place her, in the room of Catherine, on the throne, and bastardize his son Paul, whose place he was to supply by adopting prince Ivan, who had been dethroned by the empress Elizabeth. Whatever ground he might have for expecting success to this wild project, he had not the sense to conceal it; and his mistress openly made her boast of it. Such indiscretion was, no doubt, in favour of Catherine^ but still the part she had to play required all her skill. It was no less than a plot to counteract that of her husband, and dethrone him. The minute details of this would extend too far in a sketch like the present; her conspirators were numerous, secret, and well prepared, and by their means she, who had been confined at Peterhof by her husband, was enabled to enter Petersburgh July 9, 1762, where she was received as empress, and where, while the enthusiasm was fresh in the minds of her troops and subjects, she was crowned in the church of Kazan, by the archbishop of Novogorod, who proclaimed her with a loud voice, sovereign of all the Russias, by the title of Catherine II. and declared at the same time the young grand duke, Paul Petrovitch, her successor. But of all this Peter III. had yet no suspicion. Such was his security, that he set out, after having received some intimations of the conspiracy, from Oranienbaum in a calash with his mistress, his favourites, and the women of his court, for Peterhof; but in the way, Gudovitch, the general aidede-camp, met one of the chamberlains of the empress, by whom he was informed of her escape from Peterhof; and upon his communicating the intelligence to Peter, he turned pale, and appeared much agitated. On his arrival at Peterhof, his agitation and confusion increased, when he found that the empress had actually left the palace, and he soon received the certain tidings of the revolution that had been accomplished; and the chancellor Worouzof offered his services to hasten to Petersburgh, engaging to bring the empress back. The chancellor, on entering the palace, found Catherine surrounded by a multitude of people in the act of doing homage; and forgetting his duty, he took the oath with the rest. He was permitted, however, at his earnest request, to return to his house, under the guard of some trusty officers; and thus secured himself from the vindictive spirit of the partisans of Catherine, and from the suspicions of the czar. After the departure of the chancellor, Peter became a prey to the most distressing anxieties, and he every instant received some fresh intelligence of the progress of the revolution, but knew not what steps to pursue. Although his Holstein guards were firmly attached to him, and the veteran marshal Munich offered to risk every thing for his service, he remained hesitating and undetermined; and after some fruitless attempts, he found it absolutely necessary to submit unconditionally to her will, in consequence of which he was compelled to sign a most humiliating act of abdication, in which he declared his conviction of his inability to govern the empire, either as a sovereign, or in any other capacity, and his sense of the distress in which his continuance at the head of affairs would inevitably involve it, and in the evening an officer with a strong escort came and conveyed him prisoner to Ropscha, a small imperial palace, at the distance of about 20 versts from Peterhof. He now sent a message to Catherine, requesting, that he might retain in his service the negro who had been attached to him, and who amused him with his singularities, together with a dog, of which he was fond, his violin, a Bible, and a few romances; assuring her, that, disgusted at the wickedness of mankind, he would henceforward devote himself to a philosophical life. Not one of these requests was granted. After he had been at Ropscha six days without the knowledge of any persons besides the chiefs of the conspirators, and the soldiers by whom he was guarded, Alexius Orlof, accompanied by Teplof, came to him with the news of his speedy deliverance, and asked permission to dine with him. While the officer amused the czar with some trifling discourse, his chief rilled the wine-glasses, which are usually brought in the northern countries before dinner, and poured a poisonous mixture into that which he intended for the prince. The czar, without distrust, swallowed the potion; on which he was seized with the most excruciating pains; and on his being offered a second glass, on pretence of its giving him relief, he refused it with reproaches on him that offered it. Being pressed to take another glass, when he called for milk, a French valet-de-chamhre, who was greatly attached to him, ran in; and throwing himself into his arms, he said in a faint tone of \oice, “It was not enough, then, to prevent me from reigning in Sweden, and to deprive me of the crown of Russia! I must also be put to death.” The valet-dechamhre interceded in his behalf; but the two miscreant forced him out of the room, and continued their ill treatment of him. In the midst of the tumult, the younger of the princes Baratinsky, who commanded the guard, entered; Orlof, who in a struggle had thrown down the emperor, was pressing upon his breast with both his knees, and firmly griping his throat with his hand. In this situation the two other assassins threw a napkin with a running knot round his neck, and put an end to his life by suffocation, July 17th, just one week after the revolution; and it was announced to the nation, that Peter had died of an haemorrhoidal colic. When Catherine received the news of Peter’s death, she appeared at court, whither she was going, with a tranquil air; and afterwards shut herself up with Orlof, Panin, Rasumofsky, and others who had been concerned in her counterplot, and resolved to inform the senate and people next day of the death of the emperor. On this occasion she did not forget her part, but rose from her seat with her eyes full of tears, and for some days exhibited all the marks of profound grief. The best part of her conduct was, that she showed no resentment to the adherents of Peter, and even pardoned the countess Woronzoff.

In the following year, 1783, she augmented the splendour of her court, by instituting the new order of St. Wolodimir, or Vladimir, and this year, having acquired, without a war, the sovereignty of the Crimea, of the isle of Taman, and a great part of the Kuban, she called the former of these countries Taurida, and the other Caucasus. Thus Catherine gained a point of much importance towards the main object of her ambition, i. e. the destruction of the Turkish empire in Europe; in the view of which she had named the grand duke’s second son Constantine, and had put him into the hands of Greek nurses, that he might be thoroughly acquainted with the language of his future subjects. Instigated by Potemkin, the empress formed a design in 1787 of being splendidly crowned in her new dominions “queen of Taurida;” but the expence being objected to by some of her courtiers, she contented herself with making a grand progress through them. At her new city of Cherson, she had a second interview with the emperor Joseph. She then traversed the Crimea, and returned to Moscow, having left traces in her progress of her munificence and condescension. This ostentatious tour was probably one cause of the new rupture with the Turkish court, in which the emperor of Germany engaged as ally to Russia, and the king of Sweden as ally to the Porte. The latter prevented the empress from sending a fleet into the Mediterranean; and even endangered Petersburgh itself by a sudden incursion into Finland. The danger, however, was averted by the empress’s own vigorous exertions, by the desertion of some of Gustavus’s troops, who would not fight against the Russians, and by an attack of Sweden, on the part of the prince of Denmark, who proceeded as far as Gottenburgh. The Turkish army, though superior to that of the empress, could not resist the efforts of the Russian generals. Potemkin at the head of a numerous army, and a large train of artillery, laid siege to Otchakof, and it was at length taken by storm, with the loss of 25,000 Turks and 12,000 Russians, but the issue of the war was upon the whole unfavourable, and all parties consented to the peace signed in 1792, by which the Dniester was declared to be in future the limit of the two empires. Mr. Pitt at this time had a strong desire to compel Russia to restore Otchakof to the Turks, but not being supported by the nation, this point was conceded. When the French revolution took place, the empress finding Prussia and Austria engaged in opposing it by force of arms, turned her attention to Poland, marched an army thither, overturned the new constitution the Poles had formed, and finally broke the spirit of the Poles by the dreadful massacre made on the inhabitants of the suburbs of Warsaw by her general Suvarof: a new division took place of this illfated country, between Russia, Austria, and Prussia, and afforded precedents for other divisions which the two latter powers little suspected.

Misled by an extravagant confidence in her own abilities, she was desirous of emulating the literary talents of Frederic of Prussia, at one time the first royal author in Europe. With this view she wrote her celebrated “Instructions for a Code of Laws,” which she translated herself from the German, and printed at Petersburg, 1769, but not for sale. It was afterwards reprinted in French, Latin, German, and Husse, at Petersburg!), 1770, 4to. She wrote also several moral tales and allegories, for the education of her grandchildren; and a number of dramatic pieces and proverbs, which were acted and admired at the Hermitage, and published under the title of “The Theatre of the Hermitage,” 2 vols. 8vo. She likewise had a -design of collecting a number of words from 300 different languages, and forming them into a dictionary, but this was never executed. <>t all her writings, her letters to Voltaire are certainly the best. Catherine was neither fond of poetry nor of music; and she often confessed it. She could not even endure the noise of the orchestra between the acts of a play, and therefore commonly silenced it. At her Tauridan palace she constantly dined with the two pictures of the sacking of Otchakof and Ismail before her eyes, in which Cazanova has represented, with hideous accuracy, the blood flowing in streams, the limbs torn from the bodies, and still palpitating, the demoniac fury of the slaughterers, and the convulsive agonies of the slaughtered. It was upon these scenes of horror that her attention and imagination were fixed, while Gasparini and Mandini were displaying their vocal powers, or Sarti was conducting a concert in her presence.

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

, one of the ablest generals under Louis XIV. the son of the dean of the counsellors of parliament, was born at Paris, Sept. 1, 1637, and began his career at the bar; but having lost a cause that had justice on its side, he renounced the profession for that of arms. He first served in the cavalry, where he never omitted an opportunity of distinguishing himself. In 1667, in the presence of Louis XIV. at the attack on the counterscarpe of Lisle, he performed an action so honourable both to his judgment and his courage, that it procured him a lieutenantcy in the regiment of guards. Gradually rising to the first dignities in the army, he signalized himself at Maestricht, at Besangon, at Senef, at Cambray, at Valenciennes, at St. Omer’s, at Ghent, and at Ypres. The great Comic“set a proper value on his merit, and wrote to him, after the hattle of Senef, where Catinat had been wounded:” No one takes a greater interest in your wound than I do; there are so few men like you, that in losing you our loss would be too great.' 7 Having attained to the rank of lieutenant-general, in 1688, he beat the duke of Savoy at Staffarde and at the Marsaille, made himself master of all Savoy and a part of Piedmont; marched from Italy to Flanders, besieged and took the fortress of Ath in 1697. He had been marechal of France from 1693, and the king, reading the list of the marechals in his cabinet, exclaimed, on coming to his name: “Here valour has met with its deserts!” The war breaking out again in 1701, he was put at the head of the French army in Italy against prince Eugene, who commanded that of the emperor. The court, at the commencement of this war, was undecided on the choice of the generals, and hesitated between Catinat, Vendome, and Villeroi. This circumstance was talked of in the emperor’s council. “If Villeroi has the command,” said Eugene, “I shall beat him; if Vendome be appointed, we shall have a stout struggle; if it be Catinat, 1 shall be beaten.” The bad state of the army, the want of money for its subsistence, the little harmony there was between him and the duke of Savoy, whose sincerity he suspected, prevented him from fulfilling the prediction of prince Eugene. He was wounded in the atfair of Chiari, and forced to retreat as far as behind the Oglio. This retreat, occasioned by the prohibition he had received from the court to oppose the passage of prince Eugene, was the source of his subsequent mistakes and misfortunes. Catinat, notwithstanding his victories and his negociations, was obliged to serve under Villeroi; and the last disciple of Turenne and Conde was no longer allowed to act but as second in command.' He bore this injustice like a man superior to fortune. “I strive to forget my misfortunes,” he says in a letter to one of his friends, “that my mind may be more at ease in executing the orders of the marechal de Villeroi.” In 1705 the king named him to be a chevalier; but he refused the honour intended him. His family testifying their displeasure at this procedure, “Well, then,” said he to his relations, “strike me out of your genealogy” He increased as little as possible the crowd of courtiers. Louis XIV. once asking him why he was never seen at Marli; and whether it was some business that prevented his coming? “None at all,” returned the marechal; “but the court is very numerous, and I keep away in order to let others have room to pay their respects to you.” He died at his estate of St. Gratian, Feb. 25, 1712, at the age of 74, with the same sedateness of mind that had accompanied him through life. Numberless anecdotes are related of him, which shew that this calmness of temper never forsook him. After an ineffectual attack at the unfortunate affair of Chiari, rallying his troops, an officer said to him: “Whither would you have us to go? to death?” “It is true,” replied Catinat, “death is before us; but shame is behind.” He had qualities yet more estimable than bravery. He was humane and modest. The part of his labours most interesting to humanity, was a regular correspondence with marechal Vauban, on the administration of the revenues of the various countries which they had visited during their military expeditions. They did not seek for means of increasing the revenues of their sovereign beyond measure; but they endeavoured to find the most equitable repartition of the taxes, and the cheapest way of collecting them. Catinat, on account of his cautiousness and judgment, was, by the soldiers under his command, significantly called Pere la Pensee, “Father Thought,” a sirname which he appears to have deserved in his peaceable retreat, not less than in his military expeditions.

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

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

His grace’s works are, 1. “La methode nouvelle de dresser les Chevaux,” &c. Antwerp, 1658, fol. It was first written in English, and translated into French by a Walloon. 2 “A new method and extraordinary invention, to dress Horses, and work them according to nature; as also to perfect nature by the subtlety of art,” Lond. 1667, fol. This, the author informs the reader, is “neither a translation of the first, nor an absolute necessary addition to it; and may be of use without the other, as the other hath been hitherto, and still is, without this: but both together will, questionless, do best.” His other works are plays, 1. “The Exile.” 2. “The Country Captain,” Antwerp, 1649. 3. “Variety,” 1649, 12mo. 4. “The Humourous Lovers,” 1677, 4to. 5. “The Triumphant Widow,” 1677, 4to. These are all comedies, but in the Biog. Dramatica it is doubted whether the first exists. His poems are scattered among those of his duchess, in whose plays too he wrote many scenes; and a few prose articles are noticed by Mr. Park, in his excellent edition of the “Royal and Noble Authors.”

, duchess of Newcastle, and second wife of the preceding, was born at St. John’s, near Colchester in Essex, about the latter end of the reign of James I. Her father, of whom she was the youngest daughter, was sir Charles Lucas, a gentleman of a very ancient and honourable family, and who was himself a man of great spirit and fortune. Dying young, he left the care of his children to his widow, a lady of exquisite beauty and admirable accomplishments, who took upon herself the education of her daughters, and instructed them in needlework, dancing, music, the French tongue, and other things that were proper for women of fashion. As, however, she had from her infancy an inclination for literature, and spent much of her time in study and writing, her biographers have lamented that she had not the advantage of an acquaintance with the learned languages, which might have improved her judgment, and have been of infinite service to her in the numerous productions of her pen. In 1643 she obtained permission from her mother to go to Oxford, where the court then resided, and where she could not fail of meeting with a favourable reception, on account of the distinguished loyalty of her family, as well as of her own accomplishments. Accordingly, she was appointed one of the maids of honour to Henrietta Maria, the royal consort of Charles I.; and in that capacity accompanied her majesty to France, when the queen was obliged by the civil war to quit England. At Paris Miss Lucas first saw the marquis of Newcastle, then a widower, who admiring her person, disposition, and ingenuity, was married to her at that place, in 1645. The marquis had heard of the lady’s character before he met with her in France; for having been a friend and patron of her gallant brother lord Lucas, he took occasion one day to ask his lordship in what respect he could promote his interest. To this his lordship replied, that he was not solicitous about his own affairs, as being prepared to suffer either exile or death in the royal cause; but that he was chiefly concerned for his sister, on whom he could bestow no fortune, and whose beauty exposed her to danger. At the same time, he represented her other amiable qualities in so striking a light, as raised the marquis’s curiosity to see her. After their marriage, the marquis and marchioness of Newcastle went from Paris to Rotterdam, where they resided six months, and from that to Antwerp, which they fixed upon as the place of their residence during the time of their exile. In this city they enjoyed as quiet and pleasant a retirement as their ruined fortunes would permit. Though the marquis had much respect paid him by all men, as well foreigners as those of his own country, he principally confined himself to the society of his lady, who, both by her writings and her conversation, proved a most agreeable companion to him during his melancholy recess. The exigency of their affairs obliged the marchioness once to come over to England. Her view was to obtain some of the marquis’s rents, in order to supply their pressing necessities, and pay the debts they had contracted; but she could not procure a grant from the rulers of those times, to receive one penny out of her noble husband’s vast inheritance: and had it not been for the seasonable generosity of sir Charles Cavendish, she and her lord must have been exposed to extreme poverty. At length, however, having obtained a considerable sum from her own and the marquis’s relations, she returned to Antwerp, where she continued with him till the restoration, and employed herself in writing several of her works.

, a French Jesuit, and confessor to Lewis XIII. was born at Troyes, in Champagne, in 1580, and entered into the order of Jesuits when he was twentysix years of age. He taught rhetoric in several of their colleges; and afterwards began to preach, by which he gained very great reputation, and increased it not a little by his publications. At length he was preferred to bje confessor to the king; but, although pious and conscientious, did not discharge this office to the satisfaction of cardinal Richelieu, and the cardinal used every effort to get him removed. A little before his death, he is said to have delivered into the hands of a friend some original letters; from short extracts of which, since published, it appears that he "fell into disgrace because he would not reveal some things which he knew by the king’s confession; nor even take advice of his superiors how he was to behave himself in the direction of the king’s conscience, when he could not do it without breaking through the laws of confession. There are also some hints in the same extracts, which shew that he did not approve Lewis the Thirteenth’s conduct towards the queen his mother; and there is a probability that he caballed to get Richelieu removed. If we may believe the abbe Siri in his memoirs, this Jesuit, in his private conversations with the king, insisted upon the cardinal’s removal, for the four following reasons: 1. Because Mary de Meclicis, the queen-mother, was banished. 2. Because he left Lewis only the empty name of king. 3. Because he oppressed the nation. 4. Because he powerfully assisted the Protestants to the prejudice of the Catholic church. According to this author, he even engaged to maintain these four articles against the cardinal in the king’s presence; and he offered the cardinal’s place to the duke of Angouleme. This plot was the occasion of his disgrace, according to the abbe* Siri. Others have asserted, that the queen-mother obliged him to leave Paris, to gratify cardinal Mazarine, whom he had displeased; and that his disgrace was occasioned by his Latin piece concerning the kingdom and bouse of God, published in 1650, in which be had freely spoken of the qualities with which princes ought to be adorned. It is certain, however, that he was deprived of his employment, and banished to a city of Lower Britanny. He got leave to return to Paris aftr the cardinal’s death, and died there in the convent oi the Jesuits, July 1651.

None of his works did him more honour in his day, than that which he entitled “La cour sainte,” or “The holy court,” a moral work, illustrated by stories well known once to the readers of old folios in this country. It has been often reprinted and translated into Latin, Italian, Spanish, Portugueze, German, and English. He published several other books, both in Latin and French particularly, 1. “De Kloquentia sacra et humana,” 1619, 4to, which* was several times reprinted. It exhibits numerous examples of different styles in writing. 2. “Klectorum Symbolorum et Parabolarum historicarum Syntagmata,” 1618, 4to. 3. “Disputes sur les quatre livres des Hois, touchant l'Education des Princes,” fol. 4. “Tragedise Sacra,” 1620. 5. “Apologie pour les Religieux de la Compagnie de Jesus,” 1644, 8vo. 6. “La Vie neutre des Filles devotes,” &c. 1G44-. 7. “Symbolica ^gyptiorum Sapientia,” 1647, 4to; and some other works of devotion and controversy, of which his “Christian Diary” was printed in English, 1648, 12mo. There is a strange singularity related of father Caussin by one of his eulogists, which was, that he had a very extraordinary sympathy with the heavens, especially with the sun, which he called his star; and which had very remarkable effects both upon his body and mind, according as it was more or less distant, or as it shined bright or was covered with clouds. The effects of the sun upon him were not transient, but appeared constantly by the sparkling of his eyes, and the lively colour of his face, in which there was something that made a very strong impression upon Henry IV. of France. Caussin, when very young, attended father Gonteri, a famous preacher of his time, to court, and there that king observed him very attentively. He had never seen him before, nor heard of him; but as soon as he perceived him, he went to him, took him by the hand, and treated him with so much kindness, that Caussin was as much ashamed as the by-standers were astonished. But the king said, that he had distinguished this youth among the crowd, and expected that he would serve him and his family very faithfully. Then, turning to father Gonteri, he spoke with a loud voice, “Father, you have here an attendant, who, if I am not mistaken, will become in time one of the greatest ornaments in your society.”

, a puritan clergyman of the church of England, exiled for his loyalty during the rebellion, was born at Rainham in Norfolk in 1605, of parents who were not in circumstances to give him an education suited to his capacity and their wishes, but were so much respected as to procure the patronage of sir Roger Townsend, knt. who not only sent him to school, but took the pains to assist him in his tasks, particularly in the Greek. By the same interest he was sent to Cambridge, and entered of Queen’s college, and made a distinguished figure, not only in the usual studies preparatory to the ministry, but in that of the languages, acquiring an uncommon acquaintance with the oriental languages, the Saxon, high and low Dutch, and the Italian, French, and Spanish. His religious principles he imbibed from Drs. Preston and Sibbs, and Mr. Herbert Palmer, puritans of great reputation at that time. After taking orders, he resided for four years in the house of sir William Armine of Orton in Huntingdonshire; and his old patron sir Roger Townscncl, just before his death in r presented him to the living of \V ivcnhoc in Essex. Alter he had been on this living about seven years, a violent and long continued tit of ague rendered it necessary to try a change of air, and in compliance with the advice of his physicians, he removed to London, where, by the interest of sir Ilai bottle Grirnston, he was promoted to the valuable rectory of St. Bartholomew, Exchange. He had not been here above five years when Charles I. was put to death. A few weeks after, Mr. Gawton was called upon to preach before the lord mayor and aldermen of London, at Mercers’ chapel, when he delivered himself in such plain terms against the hypocrisy of the predominant powers, that he was first sent for to Westminster, and then committed to the Gatehouse. This served only to raise his character among the loyal presbyterians, who, when Charles II. had thoughts of entering England, and asserting his right, intrusted him, with Mr. Christopher Love, and some other worthy persons, with the money raised by them for his majesty’s service, for which Mr. Love was imprisoned, and afterwards executed. Mr. Cawton then betook himself to a voluntary exile, and retiring to Rotterdam, became minister of the English church there, and died Ang. 7, 1659. His son, th.e subject of our next article, took care to preserve a just account of his merits and sufferings by writing “The Life nnd Death of that holy and reverend man of God Mr. Thomas Cawton, some time minister of St. Bartholomew,” &c. To which is added, his father’s Sermon, entitled “God’s Rule for a godly Life, from Philippians i. 27.” which is the sermon for the preaching of which he was imprisoned, London, 1662, 8vo. This account is an artless picture of a man who did great honour to his profession, and was a pattern of virtue in every social relation. His life is important in another respect, as proving that the ambition of civil power was as much the cause of the trpu-f bles of that time, as any want of liberty of conscience in matters of religion. Cawton knew how to unite the puritan with the loyalist. His biographer informs us that when he first received the sacrament, he ever afterwards expressed the profoundest reverence, and the most elevated devotion at that solemnity.

Of his pursuits and travels abroad nothing further is known with certainty, except that in his peregrinations, he declares that he confined himself “for the most part to the countries of Brabant, Flanders, Holland, and Zealand and in France was never.” It is, however, reasonable to suppose that he preserved the same respectable character in foreign countries which he had acquired in his own; and that, whilst he was indulging his favourite literary passion in the perusal of histories and romances, to which he seems to have been excited by his friend Bolomyer, canon of Lausanne, he was placed by his sovereign, or his sister, the lady Margaret, on the household establishment of the Jatter, when she came with a splendid retinue to Bruges to offer her hand to Charles, duke of Burgundy; and Caxton was, without doubt, privy to all the splendid spectacles and festivities of this marriage. In what rank or Duality he served the duchess is not known; but the freedom with which she used Mr. Caxton, in finding fault with his English, and ordering him to correct it, &c. seems to shew that the place he had in her grace’s family was no mean or ordinary one. Lewis and Oldys, in Mr. Dibdiu'.s opinion, are incorrect in saying that he was employed by the duchess to translate into English Kaoul Le Fevre’s French History of Troy t the fact was, that Caxton had commenced the translation voluntarily, without her knowledge, and had proceeded as far as five or six quires when he for some reason gave it up. About this time, having mentioned to Jady Margaret the progress he had made, she desired to see his manuscript, and it was on this occasion that she found fault with his English, but commanded him at the same time to finish the translation, and amply rewarded him on the completion of it. From the prologues and epilogues of this work we learn several particulars of the author, as that, at the time of finishing the performance, iiis eyes “were dimmed with over-much looking on the white paper; that his courage was not so prone and ready to labour as it had been; and that age was creeping on him daily, and enfeebling all his body: that he had practised and learnt, at his great charge and expense, to ordain this said book in print, after the manner and form as v.e there see it: and that it was not written with pen and ink as other books be.” Hence we discover that he was now adyanced in years, and that he had learnt to exercise the art of printing, but by what steps he had acquired this knowledge his biographers have not been able to discover. It appears, as already noticed, that the original of Ilaonl’s Trojan History was the first book Caxton printed: “The Oration of John llussel on Charles duke of Burgundy being created a Knight of the Garter,” was the second, and Caxton’s translation of Raoul, the third; and this third was most probably printed in 1471. That he was particularly curious to know, and inquisitive after, the invention of printing, can scarcely be doubted, but his inquiries as well as his experience seem to have been con lined to such specimens as the presses of the Low Countries produced, and he does not appear to have seen any of the beautiful productions of the Roman, Venetian, and Parisian presses before he caused his own fount of letters to be cut. The types used by Caxion in the French and English editions of Raoul Le Fevre’s history, as well as those in the “Game of Chess,” resemble, in character and form, rather than in size, the types of Ulric Zel and other printers in the Low Countries. Nor is it at all improbable that Caxton consulted Zel and Olpe, the earliest typographical artists in the city of Cologne, about the formation of his own letters, as those able men are supposed to have learnt the art of printing in the office of Gutenberg and Fust. Colard Mansion, a printer at Bruges, might also have assisted him in the necessary materials for his office.

There is no account whatever of the typographical labours of Caxton from the year 1471 to 1474; although it is extremely probable that a curious and active mind like his, just engaged in the exercise of a newly-discovered and important art, would have turned its attention to a variety of objects for publication. Of the exact period of his return to his native country no information has yet been obtained, and what Oldys and Lewis have advanced on this subject amounts to mere conjecture: still less credit is to be given to the fabricated story of Henry VI. paving sent a person to Holland who brought si way Frederick Corsellis, a vorkxnan, and that Caxton had a hand in this seduction. All that is certainly known is, that previously to the year 1477, Caxton, after printing there the three works nentioncd, had quitted the Low Countries, and taken up his residence in the vicinity of Westminster-abbey, vhen Thomas Milling, bishop of Hereford, held the abbctship of St. Peter’s in commendam; and he had no doubt brought over with him all the necessary implements and materials of his trade. The particular spot where Caxton first sxercised his business, if we may credit Stowe, was an old chapel about the entrance of the abbey, and Oldys, somewhat whimsically, concludes that the name of chapel, which is sometimes given to a printing room, is derived from this circumstance; but what is called a chapel, in a printing-office, is not a building, but a convocation of journeymenprinters, to inquire into and punish certain faults in each other. Where the place occurs in any of Caxton’s publications, Westminster is mentioned generally, but the greater number of the productions of his press specify only the. date of their execution. According to Bagford, Caxton’s ofHce was afterwards removed into King-street, but whereabouts is not known; and we have yet to regret, as of more importance, that the precise period of his first essay in the art of printing is a matter of conjecture. Mr, Dibdin has summed up the evidence with precision and judgment; and to his valuahle work we must refer the reader, as well as for a chronological detail of the works which issued from the Caxton press. Exclusive of the labours attached to the working of Caxton’s press, as a new art, he contrived, though “well stricken in years,” to translate no fewer than 5000 closely printed folio pages; and, as Oldys expivsses it, “kept preparing copy for the press to the very last.” From the evidence of Wynkyn de Worde, in the colophon of his edition of the “Vitas Patrum,” 1495, it appears that these lives of the fathers were “translated out of French into English by William Caxton, of Westminster, late dead,” and that he finished it “at the last day of his life.” He might have chosen this work as his final literary effort, from a consideration, according to Oldys, that “from the examples of quiet and solemn retirement therein set forth, it might farther serve to wean his mind from all worldly attachments, exalt it above the solicitudes of this life, and inure him to that repose and tranquillity with which he seems to have designed it.”

The erudition of Caxton appears to be deserving of better treatment than Bale and others have bestowed upon it. That he had a far greater claim to intellectual reputation than that of possessing the mere negative excellence of “not being downright stupid or slothful,” (Bale’s words,) must be allowed by the most fastidious reader of his numerous prologues and translations. That he was not a poet, however, must be conceded, for nothing can be more barbarous than the couplets for which he has been admitted, by Ritson, into the list of English poets. At the same time, whoever reads his criticism upon Chaucer, must not only allow that he was a better judge, than writer, of poetry; but that it will be difficult to find a criticism upon our venerable bard, in the whole compass of our language, which is more sober and just; more clearly and forcibly expressed. As to Caxton’s knowledge of languages, that seems to have been extremely creditable to him; for he was, in all probability, a complete master of the Dutch, German, and French, and considering his long absence from England (in the prime of his life), he wrote his own language with fluency, simplicity, and occasional melody and force.

Caxton, Mr. Warton observes, by translating, or procuring to be translated, a great number of books from the French, greatly contributed to promote the state of literature in England. It was only in this way that he could introduce his countrymen to the knowledge of many valuable publications, at a time when an acquaintance with the learned languages was confined to a few ecclesiastics. Ancient learning had as yet made too little progress among us, to encoumge him to publish the Roman authors in their original tongue. Indeud, had not the French furnished Caxton with materials, it is not probable, that Virgil, Ovid, Cicero, and many other good writers, vtoukl by the means of his press have been circulated in the English language, so early as the close of the fifteenth century. It is remarkable, that from the time in which Caxton began ta print, down to the year 1540, during which period the English press flourished greatly under the conduct of many indnstrious, ingenious, and even learned artists, only a few classics, some of which scarcely deserve that name, were printed in England. The university of Oxford, during this period, produced only the first book of “Tully’s Epistles,” at the expence of cardinal Wolsey, without date or printer’s name. The university of Cainbridge cannot boast, during the term specified, the honour Of having printed a single classic. No Greek book, of any kind, had hitherto appeared from an English press. It is believed, that the first Greek characters used in any work printed in England, are in Linacet’s translation of “Galen de Temperamentis,” printed at Cambridge in 15LM. In. this book a few Greek words, and abbreviatures, are here and there introduced. In the same author’s treatise, “De emendata Structura Latini Sermonis,” printed by Pinson in 1522, many Greek characters are intermixed; and in the sixth book there are seven lines together in that language. But the printer apologises for his imperfections and unskilfulness in the Greek types. These, he says, were but recently cast, and not in a sufficient quantity for such a work. The same embarrassments appear to have happened with regard to Hebrew types, as might still ipore be expected, from that language’s being much less known. Doctor Robert Wakefield, chaplain to Henry the Eighth, published in 1522, his “Oratio de Laudibus & Utilitate trium Linguarum Arabicae, Chaldaicse, & Hebraicae;” but he was obliged to omit his whole third part, because the printer, who was Wynkyn de Worde, had no Hebrew types. There are, however, some few Hebrew and Arabic characters introduced; but they are extremely rude, and evidently cut in wood. They are the first of the sort used in England. It was a circumstance favourable at least to English literature, that the illiteracy of the times obliged our first printers to employ themselves so little on books written in the learned languages. Most of the works printed by Caxton and his immediate successors were English. The multiplication of English copies multiplied English readers, and these again produced new vernacular writers; the existence of a press inducing many persons to turn authors, who were only qualified to write in their native tongue.

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

Some Spanish ships, having great treasure on board, put into the English ports to secure it from the French, and afterwards landed it, the queen’s officers assisting, and the Spanish ambassador solemnly affirming it was his master’s money, and that he was sending it into the Netherlands for the pay of his army. The secretary, in the mean time, received advice that this was not true, and that it was the money of some Genoese bankers, who were in the greatest terror lest the duke of Alva should convert the same to his master’s use, in order to carry on some great design, which the court of Spain kept as an impenetrable secret. Cecil therefore advised the queen to take the money herself, and give the Genoese security for it, by which she would greatly advantage her own affairs, distress the Spaniards, relieve the Netherlands, and wrong nobody. The queen took his advice, and when upon this the duke of Alva seized the effects of the English in the Netherlands, she made reprisals, and out of them immediately indemnified her own merchants. The Spanish ambassador at London behaved with great violence upon this occasion, giving secretary Cecil ill language at the council-table, and libelling the queen, by appealing to the people against their sovereign’s administration. This produced a great deal of disturbance, and Leicester and his party took care to have it published every where, that Cecil was the sole author of this counsel. While things were in this ferment, Leicester held a private consultation with the lords he had drawn to his interest, wherein he proposed that they should take this occasion of removing a man whom they unanimously bated. Some of the lords inquiring how this could be 4one? sir Nicholas Throgmorton answered, “Let him be charged with some matter or other in council when the queen is not present, commit him to the Tower thereupon, and when he is once in prison we shall find things enow against him.” It so happened, that about this time a flagrant libel being published against the nobility, lord Leicester caused Cecil to be charged before the council, either with being the author of it, or it’s patron; of which he offered no other proof than that it had been seen on Cecil’s table. This the secretary readily confessed, but insisted that he looked upon it in the same light they did, as a most scandalous invective; in support of which he produced his own copy with notes on the margin, affirming that he had caused a strict inquiry to be made after the author and publisher of the work. All this, however, would have been but of little use to him, if the queen had not had private notice of their design. While therefore the secretary was defending himself, she suddenly and unexpectedly entered the council-room, and having in few words expressed her dislike of such cabals, preserved her minister, and shewed even Leicester himself that he could not be overthrown. The affair of the duke of Norfolk’s ruin followed, not long after he had been embarked in the faction against Cecil; and therefore we find this minister sometimes charged, though very unjustly, with being the author of his misfortunes, a calumny from which he vindicated himself with candour, clearness, and vivacity, as equally abhorring the thoughts of revenge, and hazarding the public safety to facilitate his private advantage. Cecil, indeed, had no greater share in the duke’s misfortune, than was necessarily imposed upon him by his office of secretary, and which consequently it was not in his power to avoid; to which we may add, that the duke himself was in some measure accessary thereto, by acting under the delusive influence of his capital enemy as well as Cecil’s. The duke’s infatuated conduct, after having once received a pardon, rendered his practices too dangerous to be again forgiven. It cannot be doubted that this great nobleman was the tool of the views of the catholic party: and there is reason to believe that the previous design of ruining Cecil was to get rid of him before this plan was ripe, from a just fear of his penetration, and his power to defeat it. Cecil’s fidelity was followed by much, public and some severe private revenge. His sonin-law, lord Oxford, put his threat into execution of ruining his daughter, by forsaking her bed, and wasting the fortune of her posterity, if the duke’s life was not spared.

Besides these lesser failings of this great man, he has been accused of illiberality to the poet Spenser, which perhaps may be attributed to his dislike of Leicester, under whose patronage Spenser had come forward, but perhaps more to his want of relish for poetry. On the other hand, our historians are generally agreed in their praises of his high character. Smollett only has endeavoured to lessen it, but as this is coupled with a disregard for historical truth, the attempt is entitled to little regard, and the advocates for Mary queen of Scots cannot be supposed to forgive the share he had in her fate. Lord Orford has given lord Burleigh a place among his “Royal and Noble Authors,” but at the same time justly observes, that he is one of those great names, better known in the annals of his country than in those of the republic of letters. Besides lord Burleigh’s answer to a Latin libel published abroad, which he entitled “Slanders and Lies,” and “A Meditation of the State of England, during the reign of Queen Elizabeth,” lord Orford mentions “La Complainte de PAme pecheresse,” in French verse, extant in the king’s library; “Car mina duo Latina in Obitum Margaretae Nevillee, Reginoe Catherine a Cubiculis;” “Carmen Latinum in Memoriain Tho. Challoneri Equitis aurati, prsefixum ejusdem Libro de restaurata Republica;” “A Preface to Queen Catherine Parr’s Lamentation of a Sinner.” When sir William Cecil accompanied the duke of Somerset on his expedition to Scotland, he furnished materials for an account of that war, which was published by William Patten, under the title of “Diarium Expeditions Scoticae,” London, 1541, 12mo. This is supposed to be the reason why lord Burleigh is reckoned by Holinshed among the English historians. “The first paper or memorial of sir William Cecil \ anno primo Eliz.” This, which is only a paper of memorandums, is printed in Somers’s tracts, from a manuscript in the Cotton library. “A Speech in Parliament, 1592.” This was first published by Strype in his Annals, and has since been inserted in the Parliamentary History. “Lord Burleigh’s Precepts, or directions for the well-ordering and carriage of a man’s life,” 1637. “A Meditation on the Death of his Lady.” Mr. Ballard, in his Memoirs of British Ladies, has printed this Meditation from an original formerly in the possession of James West, esq. but now in the British Museum. Lord Burleigh was supposed to be the author of a thin pamphlet, in defence of the punishments inflicted on the Roman catholics in the reign of queen Elizabeth: it is called “The Execution of Justice in England, for maintenance of public and Christian peace, against certain stirrers of sedition, and adherents to the traitors and enemies of the realm, without any persecution of them for questions of religion, as it is falsely reported, &c.” London, 1583, second edition. Other political pieces were ascribed to him, and even the celebrated libel, entitled “Leicester’s Commonwealth,” It was asserted, that the hints, at least, were furnished by him for that composition. But no proof has been given of this assertion, and it was not founded on any degree of probability. His lordship drew up also a number of pedigrees, some of which are preserved in the archbishop of Canterbury’s library at Lambeth. These contain the genealogies of the kings of England, from William the Conqueror to Edward the Fourth; of queen Anne Boleyn; and of several princely houses in Germany.

, a voluminous French biographer, was born at Bar-le-duc in 1688, and was soon noted for learning and piety. He attached himself to the congregation of the Benedictines of St. Vanne and St. Hidulphe, and after he took the habit of that order, was intrusted with various business belonging to it, and became titular prior of Flavigni. He died in 1761. He published “Histoire generale des auteurs sacres et ecclesiastiques,” 1729 1763, 23 vols. 4to, containing their lives, a critical account of their works, the history of councils, &c. This compilation is accurate, rather more so, his countrymen think, than that of Dupin; but he had not Dupin’s art of arranging and compressing, nor, we suspect, his candour. That it is diffuse heyond all patience appears from these twenty-three volumes extending no farther than the time of St. Bernard in the twelfth century. His numerous extracts and translations are, however, Useful to those who cannot read the fathers in the original languages. In 1782 an index to this work was published at Paris, 2 vols. 4to, a proof that the work still holds its reputation. His only other publication was “Apologie de la Moraledes Peres contre Barbeyrac,” 1718, 4to, a learned treatise badly written. Cellier was fond of retirement and study, and conciliated the affections of hi-s brethren by his amiable personal character.

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

, a French botanist, and member of the Institute, was born at Versailles in 1745, and having been early introduced into the office of one of the farmersgeneral, acquired the once lucrative place of receiver. Amidst the duties of this office, he found leisure for study, and became so fond of books, as to attempt a new arrangement of libraries, which he published in 1773, under the title of “Coup-d‘ceil eclaire d’une grande bibliotheque a Tusage de tout possesseur de livres,” 8vo. He became also partial to the study of botany, and formed an extensive botanical garden, which he enriched by correspondence and exchanges with other horticulturists. When the revolution took place, he retired to the village of Montrouge near Paris, and confined himself entirely to the cultivation and selling of plants. The principal works on descriptive botany which have appeared in France, as those of Heretier, Decandolle, Redouté, &c. have been indebted to his assistance but it is to Ventenat that Gels’ future fame will be due, who published the “Description des plantes rare du jardin de M. Cels.” Cels died May 13, 1806.

It was at this period of her life that she commenced dramatic author; to which she was probably in some degree induced by the narrowness of her circumstances. Some of her earlier pieces were published under the name of Carrol. Her first attempt was in tragedy, in a play called “The Perjured Husband,” which was performed at Drurylane Theatre in 1700, and published in 4to the same year. In 1703, she produced “The Beau’s Duel, or a Soldier for the Ladies, a comedy;” and “Love’s Contrivances,” which is chiefly a translation from Moliere; and the following year another comedy, entitled “The Stolen Heiress, or the Salamanca Doctor outwitted.” In 1705, her comedy of “The Gamester” was acted at Lincoln’sinn-fields, which met with considerable success, and has since been revived at Drury-lane. The plot of this piece “was chiefly borrowed from a French comedy, called” Le Dissipateur." The Prologue was written by Mr. Rowe.

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

, a French Jesuit, was born at Paris in 1670, and was early distinguished by spirit, vivacity, and a turn for poetry, which, while he wrote in Latin, procured him considerable reputation. This, however, he forfeited by his French verses, in imitation of Marot, in which he mistook burlesque and trifling, for the familiar and simple. He wrote also some theatrical pieces of an inferior order but was more successful in his “Defense de la Poesie Francoise,” and other dissertations on the same subject. He wrote also, 1. “L'Histoire de Thamas Kouli-Kan, sophi de Perse,” Amsterdam, 1741, 2 vols. 12mo. 2. “Histoire de la Conjuration de Rienzi,” 12mo, which was completed by father Brumoy. 3. A criticism on the abbé Boileau’s “History of the Flagellants.” He contributed also a great many papers to the Journal de Trevoux, and was long engaged in a controversy with one of the authors of the Journal des Savans, occasioned by two dissertations printed at the end of the second volume of Sannadon’s Horace, relative to a passage in Horace concerning the music of the ancients. This produced from Cerceau some valuable essays on the subject. His Latin poetry was published in 1696, 12mo, under the title “Varia de variis argumentis Carmina a multis e societate Jesu.” The other authors in this volume are Vaniere and Tarillon. In 1807, his dramatic pieces were reprinted at Paris, in 3 vols. 18mo, under the title “Theatre à l'usage des colleges,” He died suddenly in 1730, at Veret, near Tours.

The editions of Don Quixote have been so many as to render it impossible to give a correct list nor of a work so easily accessible, isit, perhaps, necessary. The English public have been long familiarized with it in the translations of Jarvis and Smollett, the comparative merits of which are so admirably adjusted in the late lord VYoodhouselee’s Essay on Translation. The French have also good translations.

Mr. D'Israeli, in his“” Curiosities of Literature,“has published an anecdote from the” Segraisiana,“which seems to have escaped the biographers of Cervantes.” M. du Boulay accompanied the French ambassador to Spain when Cervantes was yet alive. He has told me, that the ambassador one day complimented Cervantes on the great reputation he had acquired by his Don Quixote; and that Cervantes whispered in his ear, “Had it not been for the Inquisition, I should have made my book much more entertaining.” In what manner he would have done so it would be useless to conjecture.

, a French poet and miscellaneous writer, was born at Turin in 1738, and after being educated among the Jesuits, joined their order, and became professor of their college at Lyons. In 1761 he gained two academical prizes at Toulouse and Dijon; the subject of the one was “Duelling,” and the other an answer to the question “Why modern republics have acquired less splendour than the ancient.” This last, before Cerutti was known as its author, was attributed to Rousseau. It was printed at the Hague in 1761, 8vo, and reprinted at Paris in 1791. When the order of the Jesuits was about to be abolished, Cerutti wrote in their defence “L'Apologie de Pinstitut des Jesuites,” 1762, two parts, 8vo, the materials being furnished by the two Jesuits Menoux and Griffet. Some time after, he was obliged to appear before the procurator-general of the parliament of Paris, to abjure the order which he had defended. It is said that after he had taken the prescribed oath, he asked if there was any thing to subscribe, to which the magistrate answered, “Yes, the Alcoran.” His “Apology,” however, was much admired, and recommended him to the Dauphin, who welcomed him to court. Here he contracted an unhappy and violent passion for a lady of the first rank, which brought on a tedious illness, from which the friendship of the duchess of Brancas recovered him, and in her house at Fleville he found an honourable asylum for fifteen years. This lady, who appears to have been somewhat of the romantic kind, as soon as she received him into her house, put a ring on his finger, telling him that friendship had espoused merit. When the revolution broke out, he came to Paris, and became a zealous partizan, and was much employed by Mirabeau in drawing up reports. His Memoir on patriotic contributions procured him a place in the legislative body, but he died in 1792, after which the municipality of Paris honoured him by giving his name to one of the new streets. Besides the works already mentioned, he published 1. “L'Aigle et le hibou,” an apologue in verse, Glasgow and Paris, 1783, 2. <c Recueil de quelques pieces de literature en prose et en vers,“ibid. 1784. The best of these is a dissertation on antique monuments, occasioned by some Greek verses discovered on a tomb at Naples, in 1756. 3.” Les Jardins de Betz,“a descriptive poem, 1792, 8vo. 4.” Lettre sur les avantages et l'origine de la gaiete“Francaise,” Lyons, 1761, 12mo; Paris, 1792, 8vo. 5. An essay on the question “Combien un esprit trop subtil ressemble a un esprit faux,” 1750, 8vo. 6. “Les vrais plaisirs ne sont faits que pour la vertu,” 1761, 4to. These two last were honoured with the academical prizes of Montauban. 7. “Pourquoi les arts utiles ne sont-ils pas cultives preferablement aux arts agreables,” 1761, 4to. 8. “Sur l'origine et les effets du desir de transmettre son nom a la posterite,” Hague, 1761, 8vo Paris, 1792, 8vo. 9. “Traduction libre de trois odes d'Horace,” 1789. 10. “De Tinteret d'un ouvrage dans le sujet, le plan, et le style,” Paris, 1763, 8vo. Besides these, he published some tracts on the subjects which arose out of the revolution, and was joint editor with Rabaut de St. Etienne, of the “Feuille. villageoise,” a paper calculated to spread the revolutionary delusions among the country people, but his style was not sufficiently simple and popular. In 1793, a collection of his works was published in an 8vo volume. Those which are on subjects of literature are ingenious and interesting, but as a poet he cannot be allowed to rank high.

, a French writer of eminence in polite literature, is said to have been born in America, of French parents, in 1730, and died in Paris July 12, 1792, but our only authority does not give his Christian name, nor have we been able to discover it in any of the French catalogues. He was a member of the French academy, and of that of the belles-lettres, a dramatic author, an indifferent poet, but much esteemed for his writings respecting criticism and elegant literature. His principal works are: 1. “Eponine,” a tragedy, 1762, which did not succeed. 2. “Eloge de Rameau,” 1764, 8vo. 3. “Sur le sort de la poesie, en ce siecle philosophe, avec un dissertation sur Homere,” 1764, 8vo. 4. “Euxodie,” a tragedy, 1769, 12mo. 5. “Discours sur Pindar,” with a translation of some of his odes, 1769, 8vo. 6. “Les Odes Pithiques de Pindare,” translated, with notes, 1771, 8vo. This, in the opinion of Voltaire, is an excellent translation. 7. “Vie de Dante,” 1775, 8vo. 8. “Sabinus,” a lyric tragedy, but unsuccessful, 1775. 9. “Epitre sur la manie des jardins Anglois,” 1775, 8vo. The design of this is to modify, or rather to attack the principle that engages many to respect all the caprices of nature, and to shew that this principle, or at least its unrestrained application, may be prejudicial to the arts, but he displays more ingenuity than taste in this discussion. 10. “Idylles de Theocrite,” a new translation, 1777, 8vo. The most valuable part of this volume is a judicious and elegant essay on the Bucolic poets, in which, however, he is thought to treat Fontenelle and madame Deshoulieres with too much severity. 11. “Vers sur Voltaire,” 1778, 8vo. 12. “De la Musique considereé en elle meme, et dans ses rapports avec la parole, les langues, la poesie, et la theatre,” 1788, 2 vols. 8vo. The first volume, if we mistake not, was published in 1735. In this, says Dr. Burney, he discovers a refined taste, nice discernment, much meditation and knowledge of the subject, and an uncommon spirit of investigation; and although Dr. Burney’s sentiments are not always in unison with the opinions and reasoning of M. de Chabanon, yet there are such enlarged views and luminous and elegant observations in analysing the sensations which music excites, in assigning reasons for the pleasures which this art communicates to ears that vibrate true to musical intervals and concordant sounds, that he thinks its perusal will generate reflections on the art, and set the mind of a musician at work, who had never before regarded music but as a mere object of sense. This book was written in the midst of the war of musical opinions between the Gluckists and Piccinists. The author is said to have been not only an excellent judge of instrumental composition and performance, but among dilettanti ranked high as a performer on the violin. 13. The “Discours” he pronounced on his admission into the academy Jan. 20, 1780, 4to. In 1795 was published from his manuscript, “Tableau de quelques circonstances de ma vie,” 8vo, containing a faithful but not very pleasing disclosure of his conduct and sentiments. It appears that in his youth he was a devot, as serious as madame Guyon, but that afterwards he went into the other extreme, no uncommon transition with his countrymen.

, member of the supreme council of Bouillon, and advocate in the parliament of Paris, died in that capitol in 1785. Born to no fortune, his days were shortened by difficulties and cares. His works give proof of considerable talents, and his manners are said to have attracted universal esteem. His book entitled “Of the French monarchy and its laws,” 1785, 2 vols. 12mo, displays a novelty in the design, and a variety of knowledge in the execution. He is thought to have taken Montesquieu for his model, whose energy and precision he copies, as well as his dryness. He obtained in 1782 the prize of the French academy for the encouragement of literature. Diderot proposed him to Catherine II. of Russia as a proper person to assist her in her new code of laws, and as one profoundly versed in the subject, but Chabrit died before her imperial majesty returned an answer.

, was also a native of Athens, who flourished in the latter part of the fifteenth century, but nothing farther is known of his history, and his name is perpetuated only by his work “De Origine et' rebus gestis Turcoman,” Paris, 1650, fol. containing, in ten books, a history of the Turks from 1298 to 1462. He describes the ruin of the empire of Constantinople, and at the end are the “Annales Sultanorum,” translated into Latin by Leunclavius. There is a French translation of it by Blaise de Vignere, 1660, 2 vols. fol. continued by Mezerai and others. It is esteemed a work of considerable authority.

, in Latin Calventius, president of the Inquests of the parliament of Toulouse, was born in May 1523. He was brought to Paris in 1539 by Mr. Lizet his uncle, at that time advocate-general in the parliament of Paris, who kept him six years to his studies under Orontius Fineus, Tusan, Buchanan, and some other learned persons. He went to Toulouse in 1546, to learn the civil law, and lodged in the same house with Turnebus, Mercerus, and Govea. He travelled into Italy in 1550, in order to pursue his studies, and was Alciat’s disciple at Pavia, and Socinus’s at Bologna. Being returned to France, he went to Toulouse, and there completed his course of law-studies, and was associated with Roaldes and Bodinus, reading law lectures together in the public schools with reputation. Having taken his doctor’s degree in that university, he resolved to go to Paris, in order to make his fortune; but though this resolution of his was strengthened by some letters he received from Mr. Lizet, yet he chose rather to settle in Toulouse, where he married, in 1552, Jane de Bernuy, daughter of the lord de Palficat, baron of Villeneufve. He was admitted counsellor in the parliament of that city in 1553, afterwards created judge of French poesy, and maintainer of the floral sports. He was appointed president of the inquests by the parliament in 1573. Being of a peaceable temper, he retired to his house in Auvergne, during the first and last furies of the civil wars, in order that he might not be an eye-witness of the confusions which he saw would break out in Toulouse. It was in this retirement he studied and translated Seneca, to administer some consolation to himself during the wild havock that was then making, and to employ his leisure to advantage. His attachment to his sovereign gained him the particular esteem of Henry IV. who in 1603 appointed him counsellor of state and privy counsellor. The year after, he resigned his dignity of president to Francis Chalvet sieur de Fenouiliet, one of his sons, and retired from business to spend the remainder of his days in peace and among his books. He spent two years in this -retirement, with so much satisfaction to himself, that he used frequently to declare to his relations, that he could not say he had lived during the previous years of his life. He died at Toulouse the 20th of June, 1607, being seventy-nine years of age. Several authors have honoured him with eulogiums. His “Translation of Seneca,” was published at Paris, 1604, folio, and reprinted there in 1638, with a life of the translator, and some encomiastic verses in French and Latin. Chalvet himself wrote much French and Latin poetry, which was not published. Huet, in his treatise “De claris interpretibus,” thinks that his translation of Seneca is too diffuse.

, esq. was born about the middle of January 1552, and was educated at Cambridge. To the knowledge of the learned languages, which he cultivated there, he added that of the French and Italian. He enjoyed great intimacy with the most considerable men in England, with sir Henry Savile, bishop Andrews, sir Thomas Boclley, sir Thomas Edmondes, sir Dudley Carleton, and sir Ralph Win wood. In the confidence of the last of these he had a very great share, while that honest and able minister was secretary of state, and the character of the latter appears in a very advantageous light in the letters of Mr. Chamberlain. Having a fortune sufficient to satisfy a quiet and unambitious temper, he enjoyed the satisfactions of private life in the society of his friends till a good old age, dying after the year 1626, and before April 1631, for his name does not appear among those of the commissioners for the repairing of St. Paul’s, in the second commission dated the 10th of that month, though he had been appointed a commissioner in the first. His correspondence is in the British Museum.

, son to the preceding, was admitted into Trinity college, Oxford, 1685; but it does not appear that he took any degree. He continued his father’s “Angliae Notitia,” or “Present State,” as long as he lived, and it was continued after his death until 1755, which, we believe, is the last edition. He translated, 1. from French and Spanish, “The manner of making Tea, Coffee, and Chocolate, London,” 1685, 8vo. 2. From Italian into English, “A Treasure of Health,” London, 1686, 8vo, written by Castor Durant de Gualdo, physician and citizen of Rome. 3. “The Arguments of the books and chapters of the Old and New Testament, with practical observations written originally in French, by the rev. Mr. Ostervald, professor of divinity, and one of the ministers of the church at Neufchatel in Swisserland, and by him presented to the society for promoting Christian knowledge,” Lond. 1716, &c. 3 vols. 8vo. Mr. Chamberlay ne was a member of that society. 4. “The Lives of the French Philosophers, translated from the French of M. de Fontenelle, republished since in 1721, under the title of” Memoirs of the Royal Academy of Sciences in Paris, epitomized, with t[ie lives of the late members of that society,“8vo. 5.” The Religious Philosopher; or, the right use of contemplating the works of the Creator, &c. translated from the original Dutch of Dr. Nieuwentyt,“Lond. 1713, &c. 3 vols. 8vo, reprinted several times since in 8vo, and once in 4to. 6.” The History of the Reformation in and about the Low Countries, translated from the Dutch of Gerrard Brandt,“Lond. 1721, &c. 4 vols. fol. 7.” The Lord’s Prayer in 100 languages, 8vo, which is erroneously attributed by Mr. Whiston the bookseller, in a ms note in his copy of this Dictionary, to a Thomas Chamberlayne. 8. “Dissertations historical, critical, theological, and moral, on the most memorable events of the Old and New Testaments; wherein the spirit of the sacred writings is shewn, their authority confirmed, and the sentiments of the primitive fathers, as well as the modern, critics, with regard to the difficult passages therein, considered and compared; vol. I. comprising the events related in the Books of Moses to which are added, chronological tables, fixing the date of each event, and connecting the several dissertations together,” 1723, folio. He likewise was elected F. R. S. in 1702, and communicated three pieces, inserted in the Philosophical Transactions one, concerning the effects of thunder and lightning at Sampford Courtney in Devonshire, Oct. 7, 1711. 2. An account of the sunk Islands in the Humber, recovered from the sea. 3. Remarks on the Plague at Copenhagen in 1711. It was said of him, that he understood ten languages but it is certain that he was master of the Greek, Latin, French, Dutch, German, Portuguese, and Italian. Though he was well qualified for employment, he had none but that of gentleman usher to George prince of Denmark. After a useful and well-spent life, he died in Oct. 1723. He was then in the commission of the peace for Middlesex and Westminster. He was a very pious and good man, and earnest in promoting the advancement of religion and the interest of true Christianity: for which purpose he kept a large correspondence abroad, in his capacity as secretary to the society for promoting Christian knowledge. By one of bishop Atterbury’s letters it appears that he once endeavoured to obtain the state- paper office, but did not succeed. At this time, in 1702, the bishop, somewhat superciliously, calls him “one Chamberlayne, secretary to the reformers, and to the committee for propagating religion in the Indies.” There are some of tylr. Chamberlayne’s letters in bishop Nicolson’s “Epistolary Correspondence” lately published. The bishop wrote a preface to Mr. Chamberlayne’s “Lord’s Prayer in 100 Languages.”

Although the “Cyclopædia” was the grand business of Mr. Chambers’s life, and may be regarded as almost the sole foundation of his fame, his attention was not wholly confined to this undertaking. He was concerned in a periodical publication entitled “The Literary Magazine,” which was begun in 1735, and continued for a few years, containing a review of books on the analytical plan. In this work he wrote a variety of articles, and particularly a review of Morgan’s “Moral Philosopher.” He was engaged likewise, in conjunction with Mr. John Marty n, F. R. S. and professor of botany at Cambridge, in preparing for the press a translation and abridgment of the “Philosophical history and memoirs of the royal academy of sciences at Paris or an abridgment of all the papers relating to natural philosophy which have been published by the members of that illustrious society.” This undertaking, when completed, was comprised in five volumes, 8vo, which did not appear till 1742, some time after our author’s decease, when they were published in the joint names of Mr. Martyn and Mr. Chambers. Mr. Marty n, in a subsequent publication, passed a severe censure upon the share which his fellow-labourer had in the abridgment of the Parisian papers; which, indeed, he appears to have executed in a very slovenly manner, and to have been unacquainted with the French terms in natural history. The only work besides, that we find ascribed to Mr. Chambers, is a translation of the “Jesuit’s Perspective,” from the French; which was printed in 4to, and has gone through several editions. How indefatigable he was in his literary and scientific collections, is manifest from a circumstance which used to be related by Mr. Airey, who was so well known to many persons by the vivacity of his temper and conversation, and his bold avowal of the principles of infidelity. This gentleman, in the very early part of his life, was five years (from 1728 to 1733) amanuensis to Mr. Chambers; and, during that time, copied nearly 20 folio volumes, so large as to comprehend materials, if they had been published, for printing 30 volumes in the same size. Mr. Chambers however acknowledged, that if they were printed, they would neither be sold nor read. His close and unremitting attention to his studies at length impaired his health, and obliged him occasionally to take a lodging at Canonbury-house, Islington. This not having greatly contributed to his recovery, he made an excursion to the south of France, of which he left an account in ms. but did not reap that benefit from the journey which he had himself hoped and his friends wished. Returning to England in the autumn of 1739, he died at Canonbury-house, and was buried at Westminster; where the following inscription, written by himself, is placed on the north side of the cloisters of the abbey:

We have already mentioned that the “Cyclopædia” came to a fifth edition in 1746. After this, whilst a sixth edition was in agitation, the proprietors thought that the work might admit of a supplement, in two additional folio volumes: this supplement, which was published in the joint names of Mr. Scott and Dr. Hill, though containing a number of valuable articles, was far from being uniformly conspicuous for its exact judgment and due selection; a small part only of it being executed by Mr. Scott, and Dr. Hill’s task having been discharged with his usual rapidity. Thus the matter rested for some years, when the proprietors determined to combine the whole into one work; and after several ineffectual efforts for accomplishing their plan, the business devolved on the rev. Dr. Abraham Rees, F. R. S. who derived from the favour of the public, and the singularly rapid and extensive sale of the work, a recompense, which, independently of every other consideration, he reckoned amply adequate to his labour. This edition began to be published in weekly numbers in 1778, and the publication was continued without a single interruption, till it was completed in the year 1785. The work was dedicated and presented to his majesty. The popularity of the “Cyclopædia” gave rise to a variety of similar publications; of many of which it may be truly said, that most of the articles which compose them, are extracted verbatim, or at least with very few alterations and additions, from this dictionary; and that they manifest very little labour of research, or of compilation. One defect seems to have been common to them all, with hardly any exception; and that is, that they do not furnish the reader witli references to the sources from which their materials are derived, and the authorities upon which they depend. This charge was alleged by the editors of the French Encyclopedic, with some justice, but at the same time with unwarrantable acrimony, against Mr. Chambers. The editors of that work, while they pass high encomiums on Mr. Chambers’s Cyclopædia, blend with them censures that are unfounded. They say, e. g. that the “merited honours it has received would, perhaps, never have been produced at all, if, before it appeared in English, we had not had in our own tongue those works, from which Chambers has drawn without measure, and without selection, the greatest part* of the articles of which his dictionary is composed. This being the case, what must Frenchmen think of a mere translation of that work? It must excite the indignation of the learned, and give just offence to the public, to whom, under a new and pompous title, nothing is presented but riches of which they have a long time been in possession?” They add, however, after appropriate and justly deserved commendation; “We agree with him, that the plan and the design of his dictionary are excellent, and that, if it were executed to a certain degree of perfection, it would alone contribute more to the progress of true science, than one half of the books that are known.” However, what their vanity has led them to assert, viz. that the greatest part of Chambers’s Cyclopædia is compiled from French authors, is not true. When Mr. Chambers engaged in his great undertaking, he extended his researches for materials to a variety of publications, foreign and domestic, and in the mathematical articles he was peculiarly indebted to Wolfius: and it cannot be questioned, that he availed himself no less of the excellent writers of his native land than those of France. As to the imperfections of which they complain, they were in a great measure removed, as science advanced, by subsequent improvements; nor could the work, in its last state, be considered as the production of a single person. Nevertheless it cannot be conceived, that any scientific dictionary, comprised in four volumes, should attain to the full standard of human wishes and human imagination. The proprietors, duly sensible of this circumstance, and of the rapid progress of literature and science in the period that has elapsed since the publication of Chambers’ s “Cyclopædia,” have undertaken a work on a much larger scale, which, with the encouragement already received and further reasonably expected, will, it is hoped, preclude most of the objections urged against the former dictionary. Of this a very considerable proportion has already been published, and the editor bids fair to accomplish what was once thought impossible. The learned Mr. Bowyer once conceived an extensive idea of improving Chambers’s Cyclopædia, on which his correspondent Mr. Clarke observes, “Your project of improving and correcting Chambers is a very good one; but alas! who can execute it? You should have as many undertakers as professions; nay, perhaps as many antiquaries as there are different branches of ancient learning.” This, in fact, which appeared to Mr. Clarke so impracticable, has been accomplished under Dr. Rees’s management, by combining the talents of, gentlemen who have made the various sciences, arts, &c. their peculiar study. Of the contemporary Cyclopædias, or Encyclopaedias, it may be sufficient to notice in this place, that printed at Edinburgh under the title of “Encyclopaedia Britannica,” the plan of which is different from that of Dr. Rees, but which has been uncommonly successful, a third edition (in twenty vols. 4to) being now in the press; and one begun by Dr. Brewster on a lesser scale, seems to be edited with care and accuracy.

, a native of Mans, and king’s physician in ordinary. He was received into the French academy 1635, afterwards into that of sciences. Chancellor Sequier and cardinal Richelieu gave him public testimonies of their esteem; and he acquired great reputation by his knowledge in physic, philosophy, and the belles-lettres. He died November 29, 1669, at Paris, aged seventy-five, and left many works, the principal oif which are: “Les Characteres des Passions,” 4 vols. 4to; or Amsterdam, 1658, 5 vols. 12mo. “L'Art de connoitre les Hommes.” “De la Connoissance des Betes.” “Conjectures sur la Digestion.” “De l'Iris.” “De la Lumiere.” “Le Systeme de l'Ame.” “Le Debordement du Nil,” each 1 vol. 4to. Peter de la Chambre, his second son, was curate of St. Bartholomew, and one of the forty members of the French academy, and died 1693, leaving several panegyrics, printed separately in 4to.

, an ingenious French writer, and one of the victims of the revolution, was born in 1741, in a bailiwick near Clermont, in Auvergne. In supporting a revolution which levelled all family distinctions, he had no prejudices to overcome, being the natural son of a man whom he never knew. This circumstance, however, did not diminish his affection for his mother, who was a peasant girl, to supply whose wants he often denied himself the necessaries of life. He was taken at a very early age into the college des Prassins at Paris, as a bursar, or exhibitioner, and was there known by his Christian name of Nicolas. During the first two years he indicated no extraordinary talents, but in the third, out of the five prizes which were distributed annually, he gained four, failing only in Latin verses. The next year he gained the whole, and used to say, “I lost the prize last year, because 'I imitated Virgil; and this year I obtained it, because I took Buchanan, Sarbievius, and other moderns for my guides.” In Greek he made a rapid progress, but his petulance and waggish tricks threw the class into so much disorder, that he was expelled, and not long after left the college altogether. Thrown now on the world, without friends or money, he became clerk to a procurator, and afterwards was taken into the family of a rich gentleman of Liege, as tutor. After this he was employed on the “Journal Encyclopedique,” and having published his Eloges on Moliere and La Fontaine, they were so much admired as to be honoured with the prizes of the French academy, and that of Marseilles. About this time he had little other maintenance than what he derived from the patronage of the duke de Choiseul and madame Helvetius, and therefore was glad to take such employment as the booksellers offered. For them he compiled a “French Vocabulary,” and a “Dictionary of the Theatres.” While employed on this last, he fancied his talents might succeed on the stage, and was not disappointed. His tragedy of “Mustapha,” acted in 1778, was acknowledged to have great beauties; and Voltaire, who witnessed the performance, said with an exclamation, that he Was reminded of Racine. This was followed by two comedies, fugitive pieces of poetry, letters, epigrams, translations of the Anthology, and of Martial, all which contributed very considerably to his reputation. His poetical “Epistle from a father to a son, on the birth of a grandson,” gained him the prize of the French academy, although it appears inferior to his “L'Homme de Lettres, discours philosop.hic|iic en vers.” At length he gained a seat in the academy, on the death of St. Palaye, on whom he wrote an elegant eloge. His tragedy of “Mustapha” procured him the situation of principal secretary to the prince of Conde, but his love of liberty and independence prevented him from long discharging its duties. After resigning it, he devoted himself wholly to the pleasures of society, where he was considered as a most captivating companion. He also held some considerable pensions, which, however, he lost at the revolution.

, an eminent French protestant divine, was born in Dauphiny, and was long minister at Montelimart, in that province, from whence he removed in 16 12 to Montaubon, to be professor of divinity; and was killed at the siege of that place by a cannon ball in 1621. He was no less distinguished among his party as a statesman than as a divine. No man opposed the artifices employed by the court to distress the protestants with more steadiness and inflexibility. Varillas says it was he who drew up the edict of Nantz. Though politics took up a great part of his time, he acquired a large fund of extensive learning, as appears from his writings. His treatise “De œcumenico pontifice,” and his “Epistolæ Jesuiticæ,” are commended by Scaliger. Hjs principal work is his “Catholica Panstratia, or the Wars of the Lord,” in which the controversy between the protestants and Roman catholics is learnedly handled. It was written at the desire of the synod of the reformed churches in France, to confute Bellarmine. The synod of Privas, in 1612, ordered him 2900 livres to defray the charges of the impression of the first three volumes. Though this work makes four large folio volumes, it is not complete: for it wants the controversy concerning the church, intended for a fifth volume, which the author’s death prevented him from finishing. This body of controversy was printed at Geneva in 1626, under the care of Turretin, professor of divinity. An abridgment of it was published in the same city in 1643, in one vol. folio, by Frederick Spanheim, the father. His “Corpus Theologicum,” and his “Epistolae Jesuiticae,” were printed in a small folio volume, 1693, but there are 8vo editions of the latter, one Genev. 1599, and the “De cecumenico pontifice” was also published in 8vo, Genev. 1601.

, a learned French antiquary, was born at Bourges, in 1656. In 1673 he entered among the Jesuits, and according to their custom, for some time taught grammar and philosophy, and was a popular preacher for about twenty years. He died at Paris, in 1730. He was deeply versed in the knowledge of antiquity. He published: 1. A learned edition of “Prudentius” for the use of the Dauphin, with an interpretation and notes, Paris, 1687, 4to, in which he was much indebted to Heinsius. It is become scarce. 2. Dissertations, in number eighteen, on several medals, gems, and other monuments of antiquity, Paris, 1711, 4to. Smitten with the desire of possessing something extraordinary, and which was not to be found in the other cabinets of Europe, he strangely imposed on himself in regard to two medals which he imagined to be antiques. The first was a Pacatianus of silver, a medal unknown till his days, and which is so still, for that it was a perfect counterfeit has been generally acknowledged since the death of its possessor. The other medal, on which he was the dupe of his own fancy, was an Annia Faustina, Greek, of the true bronze. The princess there bore the name of Aurelia; whence father Chainillnrd concluded that she was descended from the family of the Antonines. It had been struck, as he pretended, in Syria, by order of a Quirinus or Cirinus, descended, he asserted, from that Quit-in us who is spoken of by St. Luke. Chamillard displayed his erudition on the subject in a studied dissertation; but while he was enjoying his triumph, a dealer in antiques at Rome declared himself the father of Annia Faustina, at the same time shewing others of the same manufacture.