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

To his written works he joined oral instructions during t space of forty-six years; for from 1761 he had replaced the first master, De Lisle, in the chair of astronomy, in the college of France, and gave a new lustre to this curious part of public instruction in a celebrated school, which possessed the most distinguished professors of very kind, and which enjoyed and merited the extraordinary privilege of out-living the tremendous storms of a revolution, and escaping the almost universal destruction which levelled all around it. As a professor, he taught with so much ability that his school became a seminary of disciples who peopled the different observatories of the world. In the midst of his other labours he drew up his “Voyage d' Italic,” the most complete collection of curious objects that travellers can consult; his “Traite* des Canaux” and his “Bibliographic Astronomique,” which is an immense catalogue of all the works that have appeared on the subject of that science.

The death of pope Urban happened at a period, as it was thought, critical to the affairs of the cardinal, as well as to those of the two kingdoms of England and France, as he had just appointed him to mediate a peace between them. But Gregory the Eleventh, who succeeded Urban, as sensible of his merit as his predecessor, confirmed his appointment, and even enlarged his powers. This treaty Tailing, as nad been foreseen by the cardinal, he proceeded from Melun, the place where he had met cardinal de Beauvois, to England with the sense of the French court upon the negotiation. Although unsuccessful in this business, he had, whilst abroad, an opportunity of displaying his diplomatic talents, wnich had a more fortunate issue. Through his (oediation a peace was made betwixt the king and the earl of Flanders, who had been at variance upon the account of the earl’s breaking his engagement to marry his daughter to Edmund earl of Cambridge, and betrothing her to Philip, the brother of Charles the Fifth, king of France. In the beginning of 1372, cardinal Langham left England in order to return to the pope; and when he arrived at Avignon, he found that his conduct had, during the course of his mission, been misrepresented to the pope, but he so amply satisfied his holiness on that point, that, in the same year, he elevated him to the dignity of cardinal bishop of Praeneste. On the death of Wittelsey, who succeeded him as archbishop of Canterbury, the monks endeavoured to persuade the king to allow Langham to return; but the king was enraged at their insolence, and in this was seconded by the pope, who preferred employing the cardinal at Avignon, where the affairs of the holy see rendered his presence necessary. From this situation, however, Langham had a strong desire to remove, and visit his native country, where he had projected some architectural plans, and meant to devote a large sum of money to the rebuilding of the abbey at Westminster. With this view he procured some friends at court to solicit leave to return, and their applications were successful; but before he could know the issue, he died suddenly of a paralytic stroke, July 22, 1376. His body was, according to 'the direction of his will, first deposited in a new-built church of the Carthusians, near the place of his decease, where it remained for three years. It was then with great state and solemnity removed to Saint Benet’s chapel, in Westminster abbey, where his tomb with his effigy upon it, and the arms of England, the monastery of Saint Peter, and the sees of Canterbury and Ely, engraved in tablets around it, still remains.

Towards the latter end of the year 1771, Dr. Langhorne went to reside for a few months at Potton, in Bedf. rdshire, where he wrote his “Origin of Ihe Veil,” which, however, was not published for some time after. In 1772, he paid a visit to his native country, and married a second wife, the daughter of Thomson, esq. a magistrate near Brough, and soon after took her with him on a tour through part of France and Flanders, the scenery of which afforded new topics for his muse. Late in the Spring he returned to Blagdon, where he was put into the commission of the peace: and having considered the usual practice of the duties of that office, he imparted his sentiments on the subject in a species of didactic and satirical poem, entitled “The Country Justice,” in three parts, published in 1774, 1775, and 1777. This humane endeavour to plead the cause of the poor and wretched against oppression and neglect does great honour to his feelings, which, indeed, in all his works, are on the side of benevolence and virtue. It is said to have been written in consequence of the suggestion, and as to facts, probably with the assistance, of Dr. Burn, the well-known author of a digest of the laws relating to justices of the peace. In 1772, Dr. Langhorne presented the public with a liberal translation of that part of Denina on the ancient republics of Italy which contains the author’s reflections on the admission of the Italian states to the franchises of Rome .

, a native of France, and minister of state to Augustus elector of Saxony, was born at Viteaux in 1518; and, having passed through his studies at home, went to Italy in 1547, to complete his knowledge in the civil law, of which he commenced doctor at Padua. Thence going to Bologna, he met with one of Melancthon’s works, which raised in him a desire to be acquainted with that eminent reformer; accordingly he made a tour into Germany, on purpose to visit him at Wittenberg in Saxony, where he arrived in 1549, and shortly after embraced the protestant religion. From this time there commenced a strict friendship between him and Melancthon, so that they became inseparable companions; and Melancthon, finding Languet well acquainted with the political interest of princes, and with the history of illustrious men, was wonderfully delighted with his conversation, and his extensive fund of information, in all which he was not only minutely correct as to facts, but intelligent and judicious in his remarks and conjectures.

In 1565, Augustus elector of Saxony invited him to his court, and appointed him envoy to that of France the same year, after which he sent him as his deputy to the diet of the empire, which was called by the emperor Maximilian in 1568, at Augsburg. Thence the same master dispatched him to Heidelberg, to negotiate some business with the elector palatine; and from Heidelberg he went to Cologne, where he acquired the esteem and confidence of Charlotte de Bourbon, princess of Orange. The elector of Saxony sent him also to the diet of Spires; and in 1570 to Stetin, in quality of plenipotentiary, for mediating a peace between the Swedes and the Muscovites, who had chosen this elector for their mediator. This prince the same year sent Languet a second time into France, to Charles IX. and the queen-mother Catharine of Medicis, in the execution of which commission he made a remarkably bold speech to the French monarch, in the name of the protestant princes in Germany. He was at Paris upon the memorable bloody feast of St. Bartholomew, in 1572, when he saved the life of Andrew Wechelius, the famous printer, in whose house he lodged; and he was also very instrumental in procuring the escape of Philip de Mornay count de Plessis; but, trusting too much to the respect due to his character of envoy, was obliged for his own safety to the good offices of John de Morvillier, who had been keeper of the seals. Upon his recal from Paris, he received orders to go to Vienna, where he was in 1574; and in 1575 he was appointed one the principal arbitrators for determining of the disputes, which had lasted for thirty years, between the houses of Longueville and Baden, concerning the succession of Rothelin.

, a French historian, was born September 7, 1638, at Montivilliers, of noble parents, who were Protestants. After having practised as an attorney some time in his native country, he went to Holland, was appointed historiographer to the States General, and settled afterwards at Berlin, where he had a pension from the elector of Brandenburg. He died March 17,1719, aged eighty. His principal works are, the “History of Augustus,” 1690, 12mo; “The History of Eleanor, queen of France, and afterwards of England,” 1691, 8vo; “A History of England,” 1697 to 1713, 4 vols. fol. the most valued of all Larrey’s works on account of the portraits, but its reputation has sunk in other respects since the publication of the history written by Rapin. He wrote also the history, or rather romance of “the Seven Sages,” the most complete edition of which is that of the Hague, 1721, 2 vols. 8vo; and “The History of France, under Louis XIV.” 3 vols. 4to, and 9 vols. 12mo, a work not in much estimation, but it was not entirely his. The third volume 4to was the production of la Martiniere.

, or, as he is called by the Italians, Orlando di Lasso, an eminent musician, was a native of Mons, in Hainault, born in 1520, and not only spent many years of his life in Italy, but had his musical education there, having been carried thither surreptitiously, when a child, on account of his fine voice. The historian Thuanus, who has given Orlando a place among the illustrious men of his time, tells us that it was a common practice for young singers to be forced away from their parents, and detained in the service of princes; and that Orlando was carried to Milan, Naples, and Sicily, by Ferdinand Gonzago. Afterwards, when he was grown up, and had probably lost his voice, he went to Rome, where he taught music during two years; at the expiration of which, he travelled through different parts of Italy and France with Julius Caesar Brancatius, and at length, returning to Flanders, resided many years at Antwerp, till being invited, by the duke of Bavaria, to Munich, he settled at that court, and married. He had afterwards an invitation, accompanied with the promise of great emoluments, from Charles IX. king of France, to take upon him the office of master and director of his band; an honour which he accepted, but was stopped on the road to Paris by the news of that monarach’s death. After this event he returned to Munich, whither he was recalled by William, the son and successor of his patron Albert, to the same office which he had held under his father. Orlando continued at this court till his death, in 1593, at upwards of seventy years of age. His reputation was so great, that it was said of him: “Hic ille Orlandus Lassus, qui recreat orbem.” As he lived to a considerable age, and never seems to have checked the fertility of his genius by indolence, his compositions exceed, in number, even those of Palestrina. There is a complete catalogue of them in Draudius, amounting to upwards of fifty different works, consisting of masses, magnificats, passiones, motets, and psalms: with Latin, Italian, German, and French songs, printed in Italy, Germany, France, and the Netherlands. He excelled in modulation, of which he gave many new specimens, and was a great master of harmony.

, a distinguished chemical philosopher, was born at Paris, on the 13th of August, 1743. His father, a man of opulence, sparing no expence on his education, he displayed very early proofs of the extent and success of his studies, especially in the circle of the physical sciences. In 1764, when the French government proposed a prize question, relative to the best method of lighting the streets of a large city, Lavoisier presented a dissertation on the subject, which was highly approved, printed at the expence of the academy of sciences, and obtained for him the present of a gold medal from the king, which was delivered to him by the president of the academy, at a public sitting, in April 1766. Two years afterwards, he was admitted a member of that learned body, of which he was constantly one of the most active and useful associates. About the same time, he was occupied in experimental researches on a variety of subjects such as the analysis of the gypsum found in the neighbourhood of Paris; the crystallization of salt; the properties of water; and in exploring the phsenomena of thunder, and of the aurora borealis: and he distinguished himself by several dissertations on these and other topics, practical and speculative, which appeared in different periodical works. In the Memoirs of the Academy for 1770 were published his observations on the nature of water, and on the experiments which had been supposed to prove the possibility of its conversion into earth. He proved, by a careful repetition of these experiments, that the earthy deposit, left after repeated distillations of water, proceeded solely from an abrasion of the vessels employed. Lavoisier performed several journeys into various parts of France, in company with M. Guettard; in the course of which he collected a store of materials for a lithological and mineralogical history of that kingdom, which he ingeniously arranged in the form of a chart. These materials were the basis of a great work on the revolutions of the globe, and on the formation of the strata of the earth: two interesting sketches of which were printed in the Memoirs of the Academy for 1772 and 1787.

The “Company of the West,” of which Law was of course director-general, in pursuance of his scheme, undertook the farm of tobacco at an advanced rent of upwards of two millions of livres; they soon after engrossed the charter and effects of the Senegal company, and in May 1719, actually procured the grant of an exclusive trade to the East Indies, China, and the South-sea^, with all the possessions and effects of the China and India companies, which were now dissolved on the condition of liquidating their debts. The price of actions soon rose from 550 to 1000 livres each. On July 25th, the mint was made over to this company, which now assumed the name of “The Company of the Indies” for a consideration of fifty millions of livres, and on Aug. 27, following, they also obtained a lease of the farms, for which they agreed to pay three millions and a half of livres advanced rent. Having thus concentered within themselves, not only the whole foreign trade and possessions of France, but the collection and management of the royal revenues, they promised an annual dividend of 200 livres per share, in consequence of which the price of actions rose to 5000 livres, and a rage for the purchase of their stock seems to have infatuated all ranks in the kingdom. The whole nation, clergy, laity, peers, and plebeians, statesmen, and princes, nay even ladies, who had, or could procure money for that purpose, turned stock-jobbers, outbidding each other with such avidity, that in November 1719, after some fluctuations, the price of actions rose to above 10,000 livres, more than sixty times the sum they originally sold for.

, a French historian and antiquary, was born at Auxerre in 1687, and became a member of the academy of belles lettres and inscriptions of Paris in 1750. He died in 1760, aged 73. Among his productions are, 1. “Recueil de divers Merits servant a Pe‘claircissement de l’histoire fie France,” 1738, 2 vols. 12mo. 2. “Dissertations sur l'histoire ecclésiastique et civile de Paris;” to which are added several matters that elucidate the history of France; 3 vols. 12mo. 3. “Traité historique et pratique sur le chant ecciesiastique,” 1741, 8vo. This was dedicated to Vintimille, archbishop of Paris, who had employed him in composing a chant for his new breviary and missal. 4. “M6moires sur l‘Histoire d’Anxerre,” 1743, 2 vols. 4to. 5. “Histoire de la ville et de tout le diocese de Paris,” 15 vols. 12mo. 6. Several dissertations dispersed in the journals, and in the memoirs of the academy of which he was member. The learned are indebted to him likewise for the discovery of a number of original pieces, which he found in various libraries, where they had long remained unknown. He was a man of extensive learning and laborious research; and undertook several journeys through the different provinces of France for the purpose of investigating the remains of antiquity. In such matters he was an enthusiast, and so engaged in them, as to know very little of the world, being content with the very small competency on which he lived.

In 1672, having made the tour of France, he returned to Paris, where he commenced an acquaintance with Mr. Marty n, apothecary to monsieur the prince; and making use of the laboratory which this apothecary had in the hotel de Conde, he performed several courses of chemistry, which brought him into the knowledge and esteem of the prince. At length he provided himself with a laboratory of his own, and might have been made a doctor of physic, but his attachment to chemistry induced him to remain an apothecary, and his lectures were frequented by so great a number of scholars, that he had scarce room to perform his operations. Chemistry was then coming into great vogue in that metropolis; and Lemery contributed greatly to its advancement, by treating it in a simple and perspicuous manner, divesting it of the jargon of mysticism in which it had been hitherto obscured, and, by the dexterity of his experiments, exhibiting the facts which it discloses to the comprehension of every understanding. By these means he established such a character for superior chemical skill, as enabled him to make a fortune by the sale of his preparations, which were in great request both in Paris and the provinces. One article in particular was the source of great profit, namely, the oxyd, or, as it was then called, the magistery of bismuth, and known as a cosmetic by the name of Spanish white, which no other person in Paris knew how to prepare. In 1675 he published his “Coura de Chymie,” which was received with general approbation and applause, and passed through numerous editions: indeed seldom has a work on a subject of science been so popular. It sold, says Fontenelle, like a novel or a satire; netf editions followed year after year; and it was translated into Latin, and into various modern languages. Its chief value consisted in the clearness and accuracy with which the processes and operations were detailed: the science was not yet sufficiently advanced for a rational theory of them. Indeed he seems to have worked rather with the view of directing apothecaries how to multiply their preparations, than as a philosophical chemist; and his materials are not arranged in the most favourable manner for the instruction of beginners "in the science. Nor did he divulge the whole of his pharmaceutical knowledge in this treatise; he kept the preparation of several of his chemical remedies secret, in order to obtain the greater profit by their sale.

, a learned French writer in the eighteenth century, was born at Bazoches, in Beausse, April 13, 1661. He was son of Paul Lenfant, minister at Chatillon, who died at Marbourg, in June 1686. He studied divinity at Saumur, where he lodged at the house of James Cappel, professor of Hebrew, by whom he was always highly esteemed; and afterwards went to Geneva, to continue his studies there. Leaving Geneva towards the end of 1683, he went to Heidelberg, where he was ordained in August, 1684. He discharged the duties of his function there with great reputation as chaplain of the electress dowager of Palatine, and pastor in ordinary to the French church. The descent of the French into the Palatinate, however, obliged him to depart from Heidelberg in 1688. Two letters which he had written against the Jesuits, and which are jnserted at the end of his “Preservatif,” ren r dered it somewhat hazardous to continue at the mercy of a society whose power was then in its plenitude. He left the Palatinate, therefore, in October 1688, with the consent of his church and superiors, and arrived at Berlin in November following. Though the French church of Berlin had already a sufficient number of ministers, the elector Frederic, afterwards king of Prussia, appointed Mr. Lenfant one of them, who began his functions on Easter-day, March the 21st, 1689, and continued them thirty-nine years and four months, and during this time added greatly to his reputation by his writings. His merit was so fully acknowledged, as to be rewarded with every mark of distinction suitable to his profession. He was preacher to the queen of Prussia, Charlotta-Sophia, who was eminent for her sense and extensive knowledge, and after her death he became chaplain to the king of Prussia. He was counsellor of the superior consistory, and member of the French council, which were formed to direct the general affairs of that nation. In 1710 he was chosen a member of the society for propagating the gospel established in England; and March the 2d, 1724, was elected member of the academy of sciences at Berlin. In 1707 he took a journey to Holland and England, where he had the honour to preach before queen Anne; and if he had thought proper to leave his church at Berlin, for which he had a great respect, he might have had a settlement at London, with the rank of chaplain to her majesty. In 1712, he went to Helmstad; in 1715 to Leipsic; and in 1725, to Breslaw, to search for rare books and manuscripts necessary for the histories which he was writing. In those excursions he was honoured with several valuable materials from the electress of Brunswic-Lunebourg, princess Palatine; the princess of Wales, afterwards Caroline queen of Great Britain; the count de Fleming; mons. Daguesseau, chancellor of France; and a great number of learned men, both protestants and papists, among the latter of whom was the abbé Bignon. It is not certain whether he first formed thedesign of the “Bibliotheque Germanique,” which began in 1720; or whether it was suggested to him by one of the society of learned men, which took the name of Anonymous; but they ordinarily met at his house, and he was a frequent contributor to that journal. When the king of Poland was at Berlin, in the end of May and beginning of June 1728, Mr. Lenfant, we are told, dreamt that he was ordered to preach. He excused himself that he was not prepared; and not knowing what subject he should pitch upon, was directed to preach upon these words, Isaiah XxxtiiL 1. “Set thine house in order, for thou shalt die, and not live.” He related this dream to some of his friends, and although not a credulous man, it is thought to have made some impression on him, for he applied with additional vigour to finish his “History of the War of the Hussites and the Council of Basil.” On Sunday July the 25tn following, he had preached in his turn at his church; but on Thursday, July the 29th, he had a slight attack of the palsy, which was followed by one more violent, of which he died on the 7th of the next month, in his sixtyeighthyear. He was interred at Berlin, at the foot of the pulpit of the French church, where he ordinarily preached since 1715, when his Prussian majesty appointed particular ministers to every church, which before were served by the same ministers in their turns. His stature was a little below the common height. His eye was very lively anil penetrating. He did not talk much, but always well. Whenever any dispute arose in conversation, he spoke without any heat; a proper and delicate irony was the only weapon he made use of on such occasions. He loved company, and passed but few days without seeing some of his friends. He was a sincere friend, and remarkable for a disinterested and generous disposition. In preaching, his voice was good; his pronunciation distinct and varied; his style clear, grave, and elegant without affectation; and he entered into the true sense of a text with great force. His publications were numerous in divinity, ecclesiastical history, criticism, and polite literature. Those which are held in the highest estimation, are his Histories of the Councils of Pisa, Constance, and Basil, each in 2 vols. 4to. These are written with great ability and impartiality, and they abound with interesting facts and curious researches. Lenfant, in conjunction with M. Beausobre, published “The New Testament, translated from the original Greek into French,” in 2 vols. 4to, with notes, and a general preface, or introduction to the reading of the Holy Scriptures, useful for students in divinity. He is known also by his “De iuquirenda Veritate,” which is a translation of Malebranche’s “Search after Truth” “The History of Pope Joan” “Poggiana or, the life, character,- opinions, c. of Poggio the Florentine, with the History of the Republic of Florence,” and the abovementioned “History of the Wars of the Hussites,” Utrecht, 1731, 2 vols. in 4to, dedicated by his widow to the prince royal of Prussia. This was the last work in which our author was engaged. He had revised the copy of the first volume, and was reading over that of the second, when he was seized with the apoplexy. But for this it appears to have been his intention to continue his History to about 1460. To this History is added monsieur Beausobre’s “Dissertation upon the Adamites of Bohemia.”

was a pontiff whose history is so connected with that of literature and the reformation, that more notice of him becomes necessary than we usually allot to his brethren, although scarce any abridgment of his life will be thought satisfactory, after the very luminous and interesting work of Mr. Roscoe. Leo was born at Florence in December 1475, the second son of Lorenzo de Medici, the Magnificent, and was christened John. Being originally destined by his father for the church, he was prorooted before he knew what it meant, received the tonsure at the age of seven years, two rich abbacies, and before he ceased to he a boy, received other preferments to the number of twenty-nine, and thus early imbibed a taste for aggrandizement which never left him. Upon the accession of Innocent VIII. to the pontificate, John, then thirteen years of age only, was nominated to the dignity of cardinal. Having now secured his promotion, his father began to think of his education, and when he was nominated to the cardinalate, it was made a condition that he should spend three years at the university of Pisa, in professional studies, before he was invested formally with the purple. In 145>2 this solemn act took place, and he immediately went to reside at Rome as one of the sacred college. His father soon after died, and was succeeded in his honours in the Florentine republic by his eldest son Peter. The young cardinal’s opposition to the election of pope Alexander VI. rendered it expedient for him to withdraw to Florence, and at the invasion of Italy by Charles VIII. he and the whole family were obliged to take refuge in Bologna. About 1500 he again fixed his residence at Rome, where he resided during the remainder of Alexander’s pontificate, and likewise in the early part of that of Julius II. cultivating polite literature, and the pleasures of elegant society, and indulging his taste for the fine arts, for music, and the chase, to which latter amusement he was much addicted. In 1505 he began to take an active part in public affairs, and was appointed by Julius to the government of Perugia. By his firm adherence to the interest of the pope, the cardinal acquired the most unlimited confidence of his holiness, and was entrusted with the supreme direction of the papal army in the Holj League against the French in 1511, with the title of legate of Bologna. At the bloody battle of Ravenna, in 1512, he was made prisoner, and wos conveyed to Milan, but afterwards effected his escape. About this time he contributed to the restoration of his family at Florence, by overthrowing the popular “constitution of that republic, and there he remained until the death of Julius II. in 1513, when he was elected pope in his stead, in the thirty-eighth year of his age. He assumed the name of Leo X. and ascended the throne with greater manifestations of goodwill, both from Italians and foreigners, than most of his predecessors had enjoyed. One of his first acts was to interpose in favour of some conspirators against the house of Medici, at Florence, and he treated with great kindness the family of Sodorini, which had long been at the head of the opposite party in that republic. He exhibited his taste for literature by the appointment of two of the most elegant scholars of the age, Bembo and Sadoleti, to the ffice of papal secretaries. With regard to foreign politics, he pursued the system of his predecessor, in attempting to free Italy from the dominion of foreign powers: and in order to counteract the antipapal council of Pisa, which was assembled at Lyons, he renewed the meetings of the council of Lateran, which Julius II. had begun, and he had the good fortune to terminate a division which threatened a schism in the church. Lewis XII. who had incurred ecclesiastical censure, made a formal submission, and received absolution. Having secured external tranquillity, Leo did not delay to consult the interests of literature by an ample patronage of learned studies. He restored to its former splendour the Roman gymnasium or university, which he effected by new grants of its revenues and privileges, and by filling its professorships with eminent men invited from all quarters. The study of the Greek language was a very particular object of his encouragement. Under the direction of Lascaris a college of noble Grecian youths was founded at Rome for the purpose of editing Greek authors; and a Greek press was established in that city. Public notice was circulated throughout Europe, that all persons who possessed Mss. of ancient authors would be liberally rewarded on bringing or sending them to the pope. Leo founded the first professorship in Italy of the Syriac and Chaldaic languages in the university of Bologna. With regard to the politics of the times, the pope had two leading objects in view, viz. the maintenance of that balance of power which might protect Italy from the over-bearing influence of any foreign potentate; and the aggrandizement of the house of Medici. When Francis I. succeeded to the throne of France, it was soon apparent that there would necessarily be a new war in the north of Italy.' Leo attempted to remain neuter, winch. being found to be impracticable, he joined the emperor, the Swiss, and other sovereigns against the French king and the state of Venice. The rapid successes of the French arms soon brought him to hesitate, and after the Swiss army had been defeated, the pope thought it expedient to abandon his allies, and form an union with the king of France. These two sovereigns, in the close of 1515, had an interview at Bologna, when the famous Pragmatic Sanction was abolished, and a concordat established in it stead. The death of Leo’s brother left his nephew Lorenzo the principal object of that passion for aggrandizing his family, which this pontiff felt full as strongly as any one of his predecessors, and to gratify which he scrupled no acts of injustice and tyranny. In 1516 he issued a monitory against the duke of Urbino, and upon his non-appearance, an excommunication, and then seized his whole territory, with which, together with the ducal title, he invested his nephew. In the same year a general pacification took place, though all the efforts of the pope were made to prevent it. In 1517 the expelled duke of Urbino collected an army, and, by rapid movements, completely regained his capital and dominions. Leo, excessively chagrined at this event, would gladly have engaged a crusade of all Christian princes against him. By an application, which nothing could justify, of the treasures of the church, he raised a considerable army, under the command of his nephew, and compelled the duke to resign his dominion, upon what were called honourable terms. The violation of the safe conduct, granted by Lorenzo to the duke’s secretary, who was seized at Rome, and put to torture, in order to oblige him to reveal his master’s secrets, imprints on the memory of Leo X. an indelible stain. In the same year his life was endangered by a conspiracy formed against him, in which the chief actor was cardinal Petrucci. The plan failed, and the cardinal, being decoyed to Rome, from whence he had escaped, was put to dt-ath; and his agents, as many as were discovered, were executed with horrid tortures. The conduct of Leo on this occasion was little honourable to his fortitude or clemency, and it was believed that several persons suffered as guilty who were wholly innocent of the crimes laid to their charge. To secure himself for the future, the pope, by a great stretch of his high authority, created in one day thirty-one nevr cardinals, many of them his relations and friends, who had not even risen in the.church to the dignity of. the episcopal office; but many persons also, who, from their talents and virtues, were well worthy of his choice. He bestowed upon them rich benefices and preferments, as well in the remote parts of Christendom, as in Italy, and thus formed a numerous and splendid court attached to his person, and adding to the pomp and grandeur of the capital. During the pontificate of Leo X. the reformation under Luther took its rise, humanly speaking, from the following circumstances. The unbounded profusion of this pope had rendered it necessary to devise means for replenishing his exhausted treasury; and one of those which occurred was the sale of indulgences, which were sold in Germany with such ridiculous parade of their efficacy, as to rouse the spirit of Luther, who warmly protested against this abuse in his discourses, and in a letter addressed to the elector of Mentz. He likewise published a set of propositions, in which he called in question the authority of the pope to remit sins, and made some very severe strictures on this method of raising money. His remonstrances produced considerable effect, and several of his cloth undertook to refute him. Leo probably regarded theological quarrels with contempt, and from his pontifical throne looked down upon the efforts of a German doctor with scorn; even when his interference was deemed necessary, he was inclined to lenient measures. At length, at the express desire of the emperor Maximilian, he summoned Luther to appear before the court of Rome. Permission was, however, granted for the cardinal of Gaeta to hear his defence at Augsburg. Nothing satisfactory was determined, and the pope, in 1518, published a bull, asserting his authority to grant indulgences, which would avail both the living, and the dead in purgatory. Upon this, the reformer appealed to a general council, and thus open war was declared, in which the abettors of Luther appeared with a strength little calculated upon by the court of Rome. The sentiments of the Christian world were not at all favourable to that court.” The scandal,“says the biographer,” incurred by the infamy of Alexander VI., and the violence of Julius II., was not much alleviated in the reign of a pontiff who was characterized by an inordinate love of pomp and pleasure, and whose classical taste even caused him to be regarded by many as more of a heathen than a Christian."

The warlike disposition of Selim. the reigning Turkish emperor, excited great alarms in Europe, and gave occasion to Leo to attempt a revival of the ancient crusades, by means of an alliance between all Christian princes; he probably hoped, by this show of zeal for the Christian cause, that he should recover some of his lost credit as head of the church. He had, likewise, another object in view, viz. that of recruiting his finances, by the contributions which his emissaries levied upon the devotees in different countries. By the death of Maximilian in 1519, a competition for the imperial crown between Charles V. and Francis 1. took place. Leo was decidedly against the claims of both the rival candidates, and attempted to raise a competitor in one of the German princes, but he was unable to resist the fortune of Charles. At this period he incurred a very severe domestic misfortune in the death of his nephew Lorenzo, who left an infant daughter, afterwards the celebrated Catherine de Medicis, the queen and regent of France. The death of Lorenzo led to the immediate annexation of the duchy of Urbino, with its dependencies, to the Roman see, and to the appointment of Julius, Leo’s cousin, to the supreme direction of the state of Florence. The issue of his contest with Luther will occur hereafter in our account of that reformer. It may here, however, be noticed that Leo conferred on Henry VIII. of England, the title of “Defender of the Faith,” for his appearance on the side of the church as a controversial writer. The tranquil state of Italy, at this period, allowed the pope to indulge his taste for magnificence in shows and spectacles. His private hours were chiefly devoted to indolence, or to amusements, frequently of a kind little suited to the dignity of his high station. He was not, however, so much absorbed in them as to neglect the aggrandizement of his family and see. Several cities and districts in the vicinity of the papal territories, and to which the church had claims, had been seized by powerful citizens, or military adventurers; some of these the pope summoned to his court to answer for their conduct; which not being able to do, he caused them to be put to death. Having next set his heart on the possession of the territory of Ferrara, he had recourse to treachery, and is thought to have even meditated the assassination of the duke, but his plot being discovered by the treachery of one whom he had bribed, he was disappointed in his plans. Another of his designs was the expulsion of the French from Italy,* and he had made some progress in this when he was seized with an illness which put an end to his life in a few days. He died Dec. 1, 1521, in the forty-sixth year of his age.

, a native of Mitylene, who flourished in the first century of the Christian aera, was a disciple of Timocrates, afterwards became a teacher of philosophy in his native city, and obtained a great number of scholars. He was author of many books of philosophy, and Photius says he had read sixteen orations written by him. Two of these were first published by Aldus, in his edition of the ancient orators, in 1513; afterwards by Henry Stephens, with the orations of JEschines, Lysias, and others; and in 1619, by Gruter. Lesbonax is said. to have been the author of a treatise “De Figuris Grammaticis,” printed with Ammonius, Leyden, 1739, 4to. He left a son named Potamon, an eminent rhetorician at Rome, in the reign of the emperor Tiberius. So sensible were the magistrates of Mitylene of his merits, and of the utility of his labours, that they caused a medal to be struck in his honour: one of which was discovered in the south of France about 1740, and an engraving of it, with a learned dissertation, published in the year 174-4, by M. Gary, of the Academy of Marseilles, but there seems some reason to think that Lesbonax the philosopher, and Lesbonax the grammarian, were different persons.

, peer, marechal, and constable of France, governor of Dauphiny, and one of the greatest generals of his age, was born April 1, 1543, at St. Bonnet de Chamsaut, in Dauphiny, of a noble and ancient family. He was among the chiefs of the protestants, for whom he took several places, and when Henry IV. ascended the throne, received fresh marks of his esteem, being appointed lieutenant-general of his forces in Piedmont, Savoy, and Dauphiny. Lesdiguieres defeated the duke of Savoy at the battle of Esparon, April 15, 1591, and in several other engagements; and when the king blamed him for having suffered that prince to build Fort Barreaux, he replied, “Let the duke of Savoy be at that expence; your majesty wants a fortress opposite to Montmelian, and when it is built and stored, we will take it.” He kept his word, and conquered Savoy. This brave man received the marechal’s staff in 1607, and his estate of Lesdiguieres was made a dukedom, as a reward for his services. At length he abjured protestantism at Grenoble, and was afterwards presented by his son-in-law, the maredial de Crequi, with letters, in which the king appointed him constable, July 24, 1622. He commanded the troops in Italy in 1625, and died at Valence in Dauphiny, Sept. 28, 1626, aged eighty-four. His secretary, Lewis Videl, has written his life, or rather his eulogy, 1638, folio. There were, however, many defects in his moral character, and his apostacy is said to have been founded in avarice.

, the celebrated bishop of Ross in Scotland, was descended from a very ancient family, and bora in 1527. He had his education in the university of Aberdeen; and, in 1547, was made canon of the cathedralchurch of Aberdeen and Murray. After this, he travelled into France; and pursued his studies in the universities of Thoulouse, Poictiers, and Paris, at which place he took the degree 01 doctor of laws. He continued abroad till 1554, when he was commanded home by the queen-regent, and made official and vicar-general of the diocese of Aberdeen; and, entering into the priesthood, became parson of Une, or Oyne. About this time the doctrines of the reformation having reached Scotland, were zealously opposed by our author; and, a solemn dispute being held between the protestants and papists in 1560, at Edinburgh, Lesley was a principal champion on the side of the latter, and had Knox for one of his antagonists. This, however, was so far from putting an end to the divisions, that they daily increased; which occasioning many disturbances and commotions, both parties agreed to send deputations, inviting home the queen, who was then absent in France. It was a matter of importance to be expeditious in this race of politic courtesy; and Lesley, who was employed by the Roman catholics, made such dispatch, that he arrived several days before lord James Stuart, who was sent by the protestants, to Vitri, where queen Mary was then lamenting the death of her husband, the king of France. Having delivered to her his credentials, he told her majesty of lord James Stuart’s (who was her natural brother) coming from the protestants in Scotland, and of his designs against the Roman catholic. religion; and advised her to detain him in France by some honourable employment till she could settle her affairs at home; thus infusing suspicions of her protestant subjects into the queen’s mind, with a view that she should throw herself entirely into the hands of those who were of her own religion. The queen, however, not at all distrusting the nobility, who had sent lord James, desired Lesley to wait, till she could consult with her friends upon the methods most proper for her to take. At first, the court of France opposed her return home; but, finding her much inclined to it, they ordered a fleet to attend her; and Lesley embarked with her at Calais for Scotland, Aug. 19, 1561.

At length, after several debates, five civilians, Lewis, Dale, Drury, Aubry, and Jones, were appointed to ejamine the bishop of Ross’s case, and to give in answers to the following queries. 1. Whether an ambassador, who raises rebellion against the prince to whom he is sent, should enjoy the privileges of an ambassador, and not rather be liable to punishment as an enemy? To this it was answered, that such an ambassador, by the laws of nations, and the civil law of the Romans, has forfeited the privileges of an ambassador, and is liable to punishment. 2. Whether the minister or agent of a prince deposed from his public authority, and in whose stead another is substituted, may enjoy the privileges of an ambassador? To this it was answered, if such a prince be lawfully deposed, his agent cannot challenge the privileges of an ambassador, since none but absolute princes, and such as enjoy a royal prerogative, can constitute ambassadors. 3. Whether a prince, who comes into another prince’s country, and is there kept prisoner, can have his agent, and whether that agent can be reputed an ambassador? To this it was answered, if such a prince have not lost his sovereignty, he may have an agent; but whether that agent may be reputed an ambassador, dependeth upon the authority of his commission. 4. Whether if a prince declare to such an agent, and his prince in custody, that he shall no longer be reputed an ambassador, that agent may, by law, challenge the privileges of an ambassador? To this it was answered, that a prince may forbid an ambassador to enter into his kingdom, and may command him to depart the kingdom, if he keep himself not within the bounds prescribed to an ambassador; yet in the mean while he is to enjoy the privileges of an ambassador Queen Elizabeth and her cdunsel being satisfied with these answers of the civilians, sent bishop Lesley prisoner to the isle of Ely, and afterwards to the Tower of London; but at length he was set at liberty in 1573, and being banished England, he retired to the Netherlands. The two following years he employed in soliciting the kings of France and Spain, and all the German princes, to interest themselves in the deliverance of his mistress. Finding them tardy in their proceedings, he went to Rome, to solicit the pope’s interference with them, but all his efforts being fruitless, he had recourse to his pen, and published several pieces to promote the same design. In 1579, he was made suffragan and vicar-general of the archbishopric of Rouen in Normandy, and, in his visitation of that diocese, was apprehended and thrown into prison, and obliged to pay three thousand pistoles for his ransom, to prevent his being given op to queen Elizabeth. He then remained unmolested under the protection of Henry III. of France; but, upon the accession of Henry IV. a protestant, who was supported in his claim to that crown by queen Elizabeth, he was apprehended, in his visitation through his diocese, in 1590; and, being thrown into prison, was again obliged to pay three thousand pistoles, to save himself from being given up to Elizabeth. In 1593, he was declared bishop of Constance, with licence to hold the bishopric of Ross, till he should obtain peaceable possession of the church of Constance and its revenues. Some time after this, he went and resided at Brussels; and when no hopes remained of his returning to his bishopric of Ross, by the establishment of the reformation under king James, he retired into a monastery at Guirtenburg, about two miles from Brussels, where he passed the remainder of his days, died May 31, 1596, and lies buried there under a monument erected to his memory by his nephew and heir, John Lesley.

, a learned French writer, who spent a long life in the study of history and general literature, was born at Paris, March 28, 1736. Of his private life we have no account; and our authority apologizes for this by assuring us that it contained none of those incidents that are interesting in biography, and that he was known only by his numerous publications. He was, however, in the course of his life, professor of morals and history in the college of France, a member of the old academy of inscriptions and belles-lettres, a member of the institute of the class of ancient history, and a knight of the legion of honour. He died at Paris, March 12, 1812, leaving the following proofs of his talents and industry. 1. “Le reves d‘Aristobule, philosophe Grec, suivis d’un abrege de la vie de Formose, philosophe Francais,” Paris, 1761, 12mo. 2. “Choix-de poesies de Petrarque,” translated from the Italian, 1774, 8vo, reprinted in 1787, 2 vols. 12mo. This translation is faithful, but wants the spirit and graces of the original. 3. “L'homme moral,” Amst. 1775, a work which has been often reprinted, and is said to have been written at Petersburgh, for the use of the Russian youth. Its object seems to be to take a survey of man in the savage and social state, and during all the modifications of the latter; and its contents are a series of remarks on all subjects connected with happiness, not always profound, but often striking, lively, and agreeable. From its being printed oftener in Holland than in France, it is probable that this work, as well as the following, was written with more freedom of sentiment than was then agreeable. 4. “L‘homme pensant, ou Essai sur l’histoire de l'esprit humain,” Amst. 1779, 12mo. 5. “Histoire de Russie,” Paris, 1785, 5 vols. 12mo. This is esteemed a very accurate sketch of Russian history and was followed by a sequel, 6. “Histoire des differens peuples soumis a la domination des Russes,” 2 vols. Both were reprinted in 1800, with a continuation to the end of the reign of Catherine, 8 vols. 8vo. In this last, he offers a very able vindication of the conduct of that empress in the early part of her reign. 7. “Eloge historique de l'abbé Mably,” Paris, 1787, 8vo. This obtained the prize of the academy of inscriptions and belles lettres. 8. “La France sous les cinq premier Valois,” Paris, 1788, 4 vols. 12mo. 9. “Dictionnaire des arts, de peinture, sculpture, et gravure,” Paris, 1792, 5 vols. 8vo. He compiled this dictionary in conjunction with Watelet, to whom our authority attributes the principal merit of it. 10. A translation, highly praised, of “Thucydides,” Paris, 1795, 4 vols. 4to. Levesque also contributed various essays to the memoirs of the institute, and wrote many of the articles in that collection of the ancient moralists which was published by Didot and Debure. Not long before his death he published “L‘etude de l’histoire de la Grece,” 4 vols. 8vo; not, as is said, a learned work, but a popular introduction to the knowledge of Grecian history.

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

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

He then retired to his own native seat at Isch, intending to devote himself entirely to letters; but the war, which was still raging, disturbed his plans, and he was obliged to go to Louvain, where he resumed the study of the civil law, though with no intent to practise. At Louvain he published his “Epistolicae Quaestiones,*' and some other things; but, being again obliged to quit his residence, went to Holland, and spent thirteen years at Leyden, during which time he composed and published, what he calls, his best works. These are,” Electorum Libri duo;“” Satyra Menippaea;“” SaturnalSum Libri duo;“” Commentarii pleni in Cornelium Taciturn;“” De Constanti& Libri duo;“” De Amphitheatre Libri duo;“”Ad Valerium Maximum Notae“” Epistolarum Centuriae duae“” Epistolica Institutio“” De recta Pronunciatione Linguae Latinas“” Animadversiones in Senecos Tragoedias“” Animadversiones in Velleium Paterculum“”Politicorum Libri sex“” De una Religione Liber.“These he call his best works, because they were written, he says, in the very vigour of his age, and when he was quite at leisure;” in flore aevi, & ingenii in alto otio;“and he adds too, that his health continued good till the latter part of his life;” nee valetudo, nisi sub extremos annos, titubavit.“The intolerant principles, however, which he divulged here, raised so much indignation against him that he was obliged to retire suddenly and privately from Leyden, in 1590; and, after some stay at Spa, went and settled at Louvain, where he taught polite literature, as he had done at Leyden, with the greatest credit and reputation. He spent the remainder of his life at Louvain, though he had received powerful solicitations, and the offers of vast advantages, if he would have removed elsewhere. Pope Clement V11I. Henry IV. of France, and Philip IL of Spain, applied to him by advantageous proposals. Several cardinals would gladly have taken him under their protection and patronage; and all the learned in foreign countries honoured him in the highest degree. The very learned Spaniard, Arias Montanus, who, at the command of Philip II. superintended the reprinting the Complutensian edition of the Bible at Plantin’s press. had such a regard for him, that he treated him as a son rather than a friend, and not only admitted him into all his concerns, but even offered to leave him all he had. Lipsius, nevertheless, continued at Louvain, and, among others, wrote the following works” De Cruce Libri tres;“”De Militia Romana Libri quinque“” Poliorceticon Libri quinque“” De Magnitudine llomana Libri quatuor“” Dissertatiuncula & Commentarius in Plinii Panegyricum;“” Manuductio ad Stoicam Philosophiam," &c. All his works have been collected and printed together, in folio, more than once. The best edition is that of Vesel, 1675, 4 vols. fol. usually bound in eight. His critical notes upon ancient authors are to be found in the best editions of each respective author; and several of his other pieces have, for their peculiar utility, been reprinted separately.

, historiographer and censor royal, and the first of a family of men of considerable eminence in France, was born Nov. 5, 1644, at Vaucouleurs. He gave private lectures on history and geography at Paris, and had not only the principal lords of the court among his pupils, but the duke of Orleans, afterwards regent of France, who always retained a particular value for him, and gave him frequent proofs of his esteem. He died at Paris, May 2, 1720, aged 76, leaving twelve children, of whom three sons will form the subject of the ensuing articles. His works are, “Relation historique du Roiaume de Siam,” 1684, 12mo; “An Abridgement of the Universal History,” 1731, 7 vols. 12mo-, and a Genealogical and Historical Atlas, on engraved plates.

, son to the preceding, and a very learned French geographer, was born at Paris Feb. 2$, 1675. His father being much occupied in the same way, young Lisle began at nine years of age to draw maps, and soon made a great progress in this art. In 1699 he first distinguished himself by executing a map of the world, and other pieces, which procured him a place in the academy of sciences, 1702. He was afterwards appointed geographer to the king, with a pension, and had the honour of instructing the king himself in geography, for whose particular use he drew up several works. De Lisle’s reputation was so great, that scarcely any history or travels came out without the embellishment of his maps. Nor was his name less celebrated abroad than in his own country. Many sovereigns in vain attempted to draw him out of France. The Czar Peter, when at Paris on his travels, paid him a visit, to communicate to him some remarks upon Muscovy; but especially, says Fontenelle, to learn from him, better than he could anywhere else, the extent Niceron, vol. XXIV. Bibl. Belg. Blount’s Censura. Brueker. Bufiart’s Academie des Sciences, vol. II. Saxii Onomast. and situation of his own dominions. De Lisle died of an apoplexy Jan. 25, 1726, at 51 years of age. Besides the excellent maps he published, he wrote many pieces in the Memoirs of the Academy of Sciences.

In 1698, he attended the earl of Portland in his embassy from king William to the court of France; and having the pleasure to see his “Synopsis Conchyliorum” in the king’s library, he presented that monarch with a second edition of the treatise, much improved, in 1699, not long after his return from Paris. Of this journey he published an account, with observations on the state and curiosities of that metropolis; which, containing some things of a trifling nature, was pleasantly ridiculed by Dr. Wm. King, in another, entitled “A Journey to London.” In 1709, upon the indisposition of Dr. Hannes, he was made second physician in ordinary to queen Anne; in which post he continued to his death, Feb. 2, 1711-12. He was buried in Claphamchurch, near the body of his wife Hannah, who died in 1695, leaving six children. One of his daughters, who died in 1758, was the wife of the rev. Owen Evans, of St. Martin’s, Canterbury. Besides the books already mentioned, he published, 1. “Historiae Animalium Angliae tres Tractatus,” &c. 1678. 2. “John Goedertius of Insects,” &c. 1682, 4to. 3. The same book in Latin. 4. “De Fontibus medicalibus AnglitE,” Ebor. 1682. There is an account of most of these in Phil. Trans. Nos. 139, 143, 144, and 166. 5. “Exercitatio anatomica, in qua de Cochleis agitur,” &c. 1694, 8vo. 6. “Cochlearum & Limacum Exercitatio anatomica; accedit de Variolis Exercitatio,” 1695, 2 vols. 8vo. 7. “Conchy liorum Bivalvium utriusque Aquae Exercitatio anatom. tertia,” &c. 1696, 4to. 8. “Exercitationes medicinales,” &c. 1697, 8vo. In his medical writings he is rather too much attached to hypotheses, and preserves too great a reverence for ancient and now untenable doctrines; but his reputation is well founded on his researches in natural history and comparative anatomy.

Bishop Lloyd lived to the age of ninety-one; but in the latter part of his life seems to have fallen into some imbecility of mind; as appears from the account given by Swift of the good old prelate’s going to queen Anne, “to prove to her majesty, out of Daniel, and the Revelations, that four years hence there would be a war of religion, that the king of France would be a protestant, and that the popedom should be destroyed.” He died at Hartlebury- castle, August 30, 1717, and was buried in the church of Fladbury, near Kvesham, in Worcestershire, of which his son was rector; where a monument is erected to his memory with a long inscription, setting him forth " as an excellent pattern of virtue and learning, of quick invention, firm memory, exquisite judgment, great candour, piety, and gravity; a faithful historian, accurate chronologer, and skilled in the holy scriptures to a miracle; very charitable, and diligent in a careful discharge of his episcopal

, or L'Obel (Matthias de), a botanist, was born in 1538, at Lisle, in Flanders, where his father practised in the law. He bad an early taste for plants, and had good opportunities of advancing his knowledge at Montpelier, where he studied physic under the learned Rondeletius, as well as by making some botanical excursions over the south of France. At Narbonne he became acquainted with Pena, afterwards his fellow^labourer in the “Adversaria,” the first edition of which was published, at London, in 1570, small folio, and dedicated to queen Elizabeth. The few cuts dispersed through this volume are mostly original, but inferior in style and accuracy, as well as in size, to those of Clusius, with whom he was contemporary. Before the publication of the “Adversaria,” our author had extended his travels to Switzerland, the Tyrol, some parts of Germany, and Italy; had settled as a physician -at Antwerp, afterwards at Delft; and had been appointed physician to the illustrious William prince of Orange, and to the States of Holland. Dr. Pulteney has not been able to ascertain the time of Lobel’s removal to England, but justly concludes it to have been before 1570, or most probably some years earlier. The aim of the authors of the “Adversaria” was to investigate the botany and materia medica of the ancients, and especially of Dioscorides. It was reprinted at Antwerp in 1576, the dedication being, of course, there suppressed, and new titlepages were printed to help the sale of the original in 1571 and 1572. Some copies of the Antwerp impression appear to have been made up into a new edition at London in 1605, with an ample Pharmacopeia, and an appendix. This volume is dedicated to Edward lord Zouch, whom Lobel had attended on his embassy to Denmark in 1592, and he calls himself, in the title, botanist to king James I. Dr. Pulteney observes, after Haller, that this work exhibits some traces of a natural distribution of plants, but without any remarks, and with little precision. His work is much more valuable for the accounts of new plants discovered by himself in England or elsewhere, although Ray accuses him of having made several mistakes, from having trusted too much to his memory.

, a surgeon of the sixteenth century, was born in Scotland. In a work entitled “A Discourse on the whole Art of Chirurgery,” published at Glasgow in 1612, he acquaints his readers, that he had practised twenty- two years in France and Flanders; that he had been two years surgeon- major to the Spanish regiment at Paris and had then followed his master, the king of France (Henry IV.) six years in his wars. In the titlepage of his book, he calls himself doctor in the faculty of surgery at Paris, and ordinary surgeon to the king of France and Navarre. It does not appear how long he had resided at Glasgow; but he mentions that, fourteen years before the publication of his book, he had complained of the ignorant persons who intruded into the practice of surgery, and that in consequence the king (of Scotland) granted him a privilege, under his privy seal, of examining all practitioners in surgery in the western parts of Scotland. He refers to a former work of his own, entitled “The Poor Man’s Guide,” and speaks of an intended publication concerning the diseases of women. He died in 1612. The “Discourse on Chirurgery” appears to have been in esteem, as it reached a fourth edition in 1654, but it is founded more on authority than observation. Ames mentions another work of his with the title “An easy, certain, and perfect method to cure and prevent the Spanish Sickness; by Peter Lowe, doctor in the Facultie of Chirurgerie at Paris, chirurgeon to Henry IV” London, 1596, 4to.

They experienced, however, from time to time, the strorigest opposition in several countries; in Spain, and particularly in France. No society ever had so many enemies as the Jesuits have had; the very books which have been written against them, would form a considerable library. Nor has this opposition been without the justest foundation. However serviceable they were to the see of Rome, to which they were always most devoutly attached, they were very pernicious in other countries, by propagating doctrines which have exposed sovereign princes to slaughter, and states to revolutions; and by corrupting religion and morality by mental reserves and logical distinctions to such a degree, that, according to them, the vilest and most profligate wretches in the world might do what they pleased, yet not offend against their rules; and for this they have often been thoroughly exposed, especially in the “Provincial Letters” of M. Pascal. They also became merchants, thinking by their riches to make dependents in every court, and, by that means to have absolute sway; while the individuals who, without gaining any particular advantage, laboured to aggrandize the body, were the victims of the infatuation of their superiors. The king of Portugal, persuaded that they instigated the assassins who attempted his life in 1758, drove them from his dominions in 1759. The king of France, considering this institution, which had been only tolerated in that kingdom, as being incompatible with its laws, suppressed it in 1763; and the king of Spain, for reasons which he concealed, for fear of raising troubles in his dominions, drove them out in 1767. The king of Naples, the duke of Parma, and the grand master of Malta followed his example in 1768; and pope Clement XIV. obliged to yield to the united power of the house of Bourbon, issued a bull for their final suppression, dated July 21, 1773.

, an Augustine friar, and geographer to the French king, was born at Paris, Jan. 29, 1624, took the monk’s habit early, passed through all the offices of his order, became provincial-general of the province of France, and at last assistant- general of the Augustine monks of France at Rome. He applied himself particularly to the subject of the benefices of France, and of the abbies of Italy, and acquired that exact knowledge which enabled him to compose, both in France and at Rome, ' The Geographical Mercury;“” Notes upon the Roman Martyrology, describing the places marked in it;“”A history of the French Abbeys;“” The present state of the Abbeys of Italy;“” Orbis Augustinianus, or an account of all the houses of his order;“with a great number of maps and designs, engraved by himself, a very curious work in oblong quarto. He also wrote notes upon” Plutarch’s Lives -,“and we have geographical tables of his, printed with the French translation of Plutarch by the abbe* Tallemant. He also prepared for the press notes to archbishop” Usher’s Chronology;“”A Description of Lapland;“and several other works; especially” A Geography of all the places mentioned in the Bible,“which is prefixed to” Usher’s Annalsi“He likewise wrote notes upon.” Stephanas de urbibus." He died in the convent of the Augustine fathers in St. Germain, at Paris, March 17, 1695, aged seventy-one.

, a learned orientalist, was born at Erfurt in Thuringia, June 15, 1624, of one of the best families in the city, then in reduced circumstances. He began his studies at home, under very insufficient masters, and having acquired some knowledge of the Greek and Latin languages, applied himself to the French, Italian, and Spanish, and afterwards to those of the East. He also made some progress in physic and law, but without any view to a profession. In 1645 he went to Leyden, a studied the languages under Erpenius, Golius, and other: eminent teachers, and likewise maintained some disputations in law. After residing here ahove a year, he was appointed travelling tutor to a young man of family, with whom he went to France, and at Caen contracted a friendship with Bochart, and taught t him the elements of the Ethiopic language. He afterwards went with his pupil to England but the rebellion being at its height at this time, he soon returned to Holland. The baron de Rosenhahn, ambassador from Christina queen of Sweden at the court of France, happened to have in his retinue a brother of Ludolf, who recommended our author to that nobleman so effectually, that he sent for him from Holland to Paris, to be preceptor to his two sons. Soon after, in 1619, he sent. him to Rome, to search for papers and memoirs, which John Magnus, archbishop of Upsal, was said to have conveyed formerly to Rome, and which Christina was desirous to recover. Ludolph performed this journey in company with two Polish gentlemen, of whom he learned their language. At Rome he found no manuscripts relating to Sweden; but this journey was not useless to himself, for by his conversation with four Abyssinians, then at Rome, be perfected himself in the knowledge of the Ethiopic language. Immediately after his return to Paris he was obliged to go to Sweden with the ambassador, where he found a great many learned men at queen Christina’s court, and had an opportunity of learning there the Portuguese, Moscovite, an. I Finland languages. In 1652, Ernest duke of Saxe-Gotha sent for him to his court, and made him his Aulic-counsellor, and governor to the princes his sons, and employed him in various political affairs and negociations. In 1678 he desired leave to retire, resolving upon a private life, and went to Fraucfort, where he had a commission from the dukes of Saxony to act in their names in the conferences held there in 1681 and 1682, in order to settle a pacification between the emperor, the empire, and France. The elector palatine likewise gave him the direction of some of his revenues; and the electors of Saxony honoured him with the titles of their counsellor and resident. But Abyssinia was the chief object of the attention of our author, who concerted measures to form an alliance between that remote nation and the powers of Europe. He had addressed himself for that purpose, in 1679, to the court of Vienna, who referred him to the English and Dutch, as more capable of contributing to that great design. He vyent, there- i fore, to England in 168,'i, but did not find any disposition there to execute his scheme for establishing a commerce with the Abyssinians, and although he found rather more encouragement in Holland, the scheme was defeated by the Abyssinians themselves. In 1684, Ludolph returned to Francfort, having passed through France, and began to apply himself vigorously to the writing of his “History of Ethiopia.” In 1690 he was appointed president of an academy of history, which was’ established in that city. He lived several years after, and died April 8, 1704, agfcd almost eighty years.

, a Spanish Jesuit and cardinal, was born Nov. 28, 1583, at Madrid. His talents began to appear so early, that it is said he was able, at three years of age, to read not only printed books, but manuscripts. He maintained theses at fourteen, and was sent to study the taw, soon after, at Salamanca; where he entered into the order f the Jesuits in 1603, against his father’s wish. After finishing his course of philosophy among the Jesuits of Pampeluna, and of divinity at Salamanca, he was sent to Seville by his superiors, on his father’s death, to take possession of his patrimony, which was very considerable, and Which he divided among the Jesuits of Salamanca. He then taught philosophy five years after which, he was professor of divinity at Valladolid. The success with which he filled this chair, convinced his superiors that he was worthy of one more eminent: accordingly he received orders, in the fifth year of his professorship, to go to Rome, to teach divinity there. He set out in March 1621, and arrived at Rome in June the same year, having met with Bjanv dangers in travelling through the provinces of France. He taught divinity at Rome for twenty years, and attended wholly to that employ, without making his court to the cardinals, or visiting any ambassadors.

Lulli, says Dr. Burney, was a fortunate man to arrive in a country where music had been so little cultivated, that he never had any rival, nor was there throughout the whole kingdom of France an individual who had the courage to doubt of his infallibility in his art. He was fortunate in so magnificent a patron, and still more fortunate in a lyric poet, who could interest an audience by all the powers of poetry, by the contexture of his fables, and variety and force of his characters. Lulli was rough, rude, and coarse in his manners, but without malice. His greatest frailties were the love of wine and money. There was found in his coffer 630,000 livres in gold, an exorbitant sum for the time in which he lived.

Luther, notwithstanding, was not himself altogether satisfied with these reasons. He did not think the step he bad taken could be sufficiently justified upon the principles of human prudence; and therefore we find him, in other places, endeavouring to account for it from a supernatural impulse. “The wise men amongst us are greatly proyoked,” says he; “they are forced to own the thing to be of God, but the disguise of the persons under which it is transacted, namely, of the young woman and myself, makes them think and say every thing that is wicked.” And elsewhere: “The Lord brought me suddenly, when I was thinking of other matters, to a marriage with Catherine (le Bore, the nun.” His party seem also to have favoured this supposition. Thus says Melancthon: “As for the* unreasonableness and want of consideration in this marriage, on which account our adversaries will chiefly slander us, we must take heed lest that disturb us: for perhaps there is some secret, or something divine couched under it, concerning which it does not become us to inquire too curiously; nor ought we to regard the scoffs of those who exercise neither piety towards God, nor virtue towards men.” Bnt whether there was any thing divine in it or not, Luther found himself extremely happy in his new state, and especially after his wife had brought him a son. “My rib Kate,” says he in the joy of his heart, “desires her compliments to you, and thanks you for the favour of your kind letter. She is very well, through God’s mercy. She is obedient and complying with me in all things, and more agreeable, I thank God, than I could have expected; so tuat I would not change my p iverty for the wealth of Croesus.” He was heard to say, Seckeiulorf tells us, “that he would not exchange his wile for the kingdom of France, nor for the riches of the Venetians, and that for three reasons: first, because she had been given him by God, at the time when he implored the assistance of the Holy Ghost in finding a good wife: secondly, because, though she was not without faults, yet she had fewer than other women: and, thirdly, because she religiously observed the conjugal fidelity she owed him.” There was at first a report, that Catherine de Bore was brought to bed soon after her marriage with Luther; but Erasmus, who wrote that news to one of his friends, acknowledged the falsehood of it a little after, in one of his letters, dated the 13th of March, 1526: “Luther’s marriage is certain; the report of his wife’s being so speedily brought to bed is false; but I hear she is now with child. If the common story be true, that antichrist shall be born of a monk and a nun, as some pretended, how many thousands of antichrists are there in the world already? I was in hopes that a wife would have made Luther a little tamer: but he, contrary to all expectation, has published, indeed, a most elaborate, but as virulent a book against me, as ever he wrote. What will become of the pacific Erasmus, to be obliged to descend upon the stage, at a time of life when gladiators are usually dismissed from the service; and not only to fight, but to fight with beasts!”

, a very celebrated general and mareschal of France, was a posthumous son of the famous Bouteville, who was beheaded under Louis XIII. for fighting a duel. He was born in 1628, and in 1643 was present at the battle of Rocroi, under the great Conde, whose pupil he was, and whom he followed in all his fortunes. He also resembled that great man in many of his eminent qualities, in acuteness of perception, thirst for knowledge, promptness in action, and ardour of genius. These qualities he displayed in the conquest of Franche-Comte in 1668, where he served as lieutenant-general. He served also in the Dutch campaign of 1672, took many towns, and gained some trophies in the field. He closed this expedition by a retreat more famous than his victories, which he accomplished with an awny of 20,000 men, against the opposition, of 70,000. After distinguishing himself in another expedition in Franche-Comte, he was advanced in 1675, to the dignity of mareschal of France. He fought, during the remainder of that war, with various success. In the second war of Louis XIV. against the allied powers in 1690, he gained the battle of Fleurus, and it was generally allowed that he prevailed in it chiefly by the superiority of his genius to that of his antagonist the prince of Waldeck. In the ensuing year, 1691,“he gained the battles of Leufen and Steinkirk; and, continuing to be opposed to king William of England, he was again successful, in the bloody battle of Nerwinde, where there fell on the two sides near 20,000 men. It was said in France that on this occasion they should not sing Te Deum, but De profundis, the mass for the dead. The duke of Luxembourg is said to have had an ordinary countenance and a deformed figure, in consequence of which William III. whose constant antagonist he was, is reported to have said once with some impatience,” What! shall I never beat this hump-backed fellow?“This speech being repeated to the duke,” How should he know,“said he,” the shape of my back? I am sure he never saw me turn it to him.“The last great action of the duke’s life was a second famous retreat, in the presence of superior forces, through a considerable extent of country, to Tournay. This was in 1694, and he died the following year, Jan. 4, at the age of sixty-seven. Notwithstanding the disadvantages of his person, Luxembourg is said to have been much involved in intrigues of gallantry. He had some powerful enemies, particularly the minister Louvois, who once had him confined very unjustly in the Bastille. Among other frivolous calumnies on which he was then interrogated, he was asked whether he had not made a league with the devil, to marry His son to the daughter of the marquis de Louvois. His answer was replete with the high spirit of French nobility.” When Matthew of Montmorenci,“said he,” married a queen of France, he addressed himself, not to the devil, but to the states-general; and the declaration of the states was, that in order to gain the support of the house of Montmorenci for the young king in his minority, it would be right to conclude that marriage." Idle as the accusations against him were, they cost him a confinement of fourteen months, and he had no subsequent redress.

In 1757 he had an opportunity again of rendering himself conspicuous in a political capacity, by the part which he took in the famous convention of Closter-seven, entered into between the duke of Richelieu, commander of the French forces, and the duke of Cumberland, who was then at the head of the allied army. In this, however, he met with many difficulties, as the history of that convention shows; and the king of France and his Britannic majesty at last refused their ratification. In March 1763 he was invested with the order of the elephant by Frederic V. the highest honour his sovereign could bestow; but some complaints being made against him on account of his administration, which were not altogether groundless, he resigned in Oct. 1765. The remainder of his life he passed in retirement at Lubennau, where he died of a dropsy of the breast, Nov. 1781, in the seventy-third year of his age. He was a man of considerable learning, elegant address, and various accomplishments. His works are, I. A translation of “Seneca de Beneficiis,” Hamburgh, 1753, 8vo. 2. A translation of Seneca on “The Shortness of Life,” 1754. 3. “Der Sonderling,” or “The Singular Man,” Hanover, 1761, 8vo, and in French, Copenhagen, 1777, 8vo, a work which, according to his biographer Busching, is well worth a perusal. 4. “Historical, Political, and Moral Miscellanies,” in four parts, 1775 1777, 8vo. 5 Paraphrases on “The Epistles,” printed at various times, 1754 1770. 6. “The real state of Europe in the year 1737,” and several other articles in Busching’s Magazine for History and Geography.

, a very learned French writer, was born Nov. 23, 1632, at Pierre-mont, on the frontiers of Champagne. He was educated in the university of Rheims, and afterwards entered into the abbey of the Benedictines of St. Remy; where he took the habit in 1653, and made the profession the year following. He was looked upon at first as a person that would do honour to his order; but a perpetual head-acb, with which he was afflicted, almost destroyed all the expectations which were conceived of him. He was ordained priest at Amiens in 1660; and afterwards, lest too much solitude should injure his health, which was not yet re-established, was sent by his superiors to St. Denis, where he was appointed, during the whole year 1663, to shew the treasure and monuments of the kings of France. But having there unfortunately broken a looking-glass, which was pretended to have belonged to Virgil, he obtained leave to quit an employment, which, as he said, frequently obliged him to relate things he did not believe. As the indisposition of his head gradually abated, he began to shew himself more and more to the world. Father d'Acheri, who was then compiling his “Spicilegium,” desiring to have some young monk, who could assist him in that work, Mabillon was chosen for the purpose, and accordingly went to Paris in 1664, where he was very serviceable to d'Acheri. This began to place his talents in a conspicuous light, and to shew what might be expected from him. A fresh occasion soon offered itself to him. The congregation of St. Maur had formed a design of publishing new editions of the fathers, revised from the manuscripts, with which the libraries of the order of the Benedictines, as one of the most ancient, are furnished. Mabillon was ordered to undertake the edition of St. Bernard, which he had prepared with great judgment and learning, and published at Paris, in 1667, in two volumes folio, and nine octavo. In 1690 he published a second edition, augmented with almost fifty letters, new preliminary dissertations, and new notes; and just before his death was preparing to publish a third. He had no sooner published the first edition of St. Bernard, than the congregation appointed him to undertake an edition of the “Acts of the Saints of the order of Benedictines;” the first volume of which, he published in 1668, and continued it to nine volumes in folio, the last of which was published in 1701. The writers of the “Journal de Trevoux” speak not improperly of this work when they say that “it ought to be considered, not as a simple collection of memoirs relating to monastic history, but as a valuable compilation of ancient monuments; which, being illustrated by learned notes, give a great light to the most obscure part of ecclesiastical history.” The prefaces alone,“say they,” would secure to the author an immortal reputation. The manners and usages of those dark ages are examined with great care; and an hundred important questions are ably discussed.“Le Clerc, in the place referred to above, from which we have chiefly drawn our account of Mahillon, has given us one example of a question occasionally discussed by him in the course of his work, concerning the use of unleavened bread, in the celebration of the sacrament. Mabillon shews, in the preface to the third age of his” Acta Sanctorum,“t'hat the use of it is more ancient than is generally believed; and, in 1674, maintained it in a particular dissertation, addressed to cardinal Bona, who was before of a contrary opinion. But the work which is supposed to have done him the most honour is his” De re diplomatica libri sex, in quibus quicquid ad veterum instrumentorum antiquitatem, materiam, scripturam et stilutn; quicqnid ad sigilla, monogrammata, subscriptiones, ac notas chronologicas; quicquid inde ad antiquariam, historicam, forensemque disciplinam pertinet, explicatur, et illustratur. Accedunt commentarius de antiquis regum Francorum palatiis, veterum scripturarum varia specimina tabulis LX. comprehensa, nova ducentorum et amplius monumentoruoi collectio," Paris, 1631, folio. The examination of almost an infinite number of charters and ancient titles, which had passed through his hands, led him to form the design of reducing to certain rules and principles an art, of which before there had been only very confused ideas. It was a bold attempt; but he executed it with such success, that he was thought tp have carried it at once to perfection.

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

, a celebrated political writer and historian, was born of a good family, at Florence, in 1469. He first distinguished himself as a dramatic writer, but his comedies are not formed on the purest morals, nor are the verses by which he gained some reputation about the same time, entitled to much praise. Soon after he had entered public life, either from the love of liberty, or a spirit of faction, he displayed a restless and turbulent disposition, which not only diminished the respect due to his abilities, but frequently endangered his personal safety. He involved himself in the conspiracy of Capponi and Boscoli, in consequence of which he was put to the torture, but endured it without uttering any confession, and was set at liberty by Leo X. against whose house that conspiracy had been formed. Immediately after the death of Leo, he entered into another plot to expel the cardinal de Medici from Florence. Afterwards, however, he was raised to hitjh honours in the state, and became secretary to the republic of Florence, the 'duties of which office he performed with great fidelity. He was likewise employed in embassies to king Lewis XII. of France; to the emperor Maximilian; to the college of cardinals; to the pope, Julius II., and to other Italian princes. Notwithstanding the revenues which must have accrued to him in these important situations, it would appear that the love of money had no influence on his mind, as he died in extreme poverty in June 1527. Besides his plays, his chief works are, 1. “The Golden Ass,” in imitation of Lucian and Apuleius 2. “Discourses on the first Decade of Livy” 3. “A History of Florence” 4. “The Life of Castruccio Castracani;” 5. “A Treatise on the Military Art;” 6. “A Treatise on the Emigration of the Northern Nations;” 7. Another entitled “Del Principe,” the Prince. This famous treatise, which was first published in 1515, and intended as a sequel to his discourses on the first decade of Livy, has created very discordant opinions between critics of apparently equal skill and judgment, some having considered him as the friend of truth, liberty, and virtue, and others as the advocate of fraud and tyranny. Most generally “the Prince” has been viewed in the latter light, all its maxims and counsels being directed to the maintenance of power, however acquired, and by any means; and one reason for this opinion is perhaps natural enough, namely, its being dedicated to a nephew of pope Leo X. printed at Rome, re*published in other Italian cities, and long read with attention, and even applause, without censure or reply. On the other hand it has been thought impossible that Machiavel, who was born under a republic, who was employed as one of its secretaries, who performed so many important embassies, and who in his conversation always dwelt on the glorious actions of Brutus and Cassius, should have formed such a system against the liberty and happiness of mankind. Hence it has frequently been urged on his behalf, that it was not his intention to suggest wise and faithlul counsels, but to represent in the darkest colours the schemes of a tyrant, and thereby excite odium against him. Even lord Bacon seems to be of this opinion. The historian of Leo considers his conduct in a different point of view; and indeed all idea of his being ironical in this work is dissipated by the fact, mentioned by Mr. Roscoe, that “many of the most exceptionable doctrines in” The Prince,“are also to be found in his” Discourses,“where it cannot be pretended that he had any indirect purpose in view; and in the latter he has in some instances referred to the former for the further elucidation of his opinions. In popular opinion” The Prince“has affixed to his name a lasting stigma; and Machiavelism has long been a received appellation for perfidious and infamous politics. Of the historical writings of Machiavel, the” Life of Castruccio Castracani“is considered as partaking too much of the character of a romance; but his” History of Florence," comprising the events of that republic, between 1205 and 1494, which was written while the author sustained the office of historiographer of the republic, although not always accurate in point of fact, may upon the whole be read with both pleasure and advantage. It has been of late years discovered tnat the diary of the most important events in Italy from 1492 to 1512, published by the Giunti in 1568, under the name of Biagio Buonaccorsi, is in fact a part of the notes of Machiavel, which he had intended for a continuation of his history; but which, after his death, remained in the hands of his friend Buonaccorsi. - This is a circumstance of which we were not aware when we drew up the account of this author under the name Esperiente.

Mons. Grosley, a lively French traveller, speaking of a city in the centre of France, “which at the beginning of the fifteenth century served as a theatre to the grandest scene that England ever acted in that kingdom,” mentions several English families as lately extinct, or still subsisting there. “This city,” he adds, “in return, has given the British dominions an illustrious personage, to whom they are indebted for the first prizes which have been there distributed for the encouragement of agriculture and arts. His name was Madain: being thrown upon the coast of Ireland by events of which I could never hear any satisfactory account, he settled in Dublin by the name of Madden, there made a fortune, dedicated part of his estate, which amounted to four or five thousand pounds a year, to the prizes which I have spoken of, and left a rich succession part of this succession went over to France to the Madains his relations, who commenced a law-suit for the recovery of it, and caused ecclesiastical censures to be published against a merchant, to whom they had sent a letter of attorney to act for them, and whom they accused of having appropriated to himself a share of their inheritance.”

, a famous preacher, and a cordelier, was a native of Paris, where he rose to the dignity of doctor in divinity. He was entrusted with honourable employments by Innocent VIII. and Charles VIII. of France, by Ferdinand of Arragon, &c. and is said to have served the latter prince, even at the expence of his master. He died at Toulouse June 13, 1502. His sermons, which remained in manuscript, are full of irreverent familiarities, and in the coarsest style of his times. His Latin sermons were printed at Paris, in seven parts, forming three volumes in 8vo; the publication commenced in 1711, and was continued to 1730. In one of his sermons for Lent, the words hem hem are written in the margin to mark the places where, according to the custom of those days, the preacher was to stop to cough. Niceron has given some amusing extracts from others of them, which, amidst all their quaintnesses, show him to have been a zealous reprover of the vices of thfe times, and never to have spared persons of rank, especially profligate churchmen. He even took liberties with Louis XI. of France to his face, and when one of the courtiers told him that the king had threatened to throw him into the river, “The king is my master,” said our hardy priest, “but you may tell him, that I shall get sooner to heaven by water, than he will with his post-horses.” Louis XI. was the first who established posting on the roads of France, and when this bon mot was repeated to him, he was wise enough to allow Maillard to preach what he would and where he would. The bon mot, by the way, appears in the “Navis Stultifera,” by Jodocus Badius, and was probably a current jest among the wits of the time.

, was the son of Nicolas Desmarets, controller-general of the finances towards the end of Louis XIV.'s reign, and was born in 1682. He first signalized himself in the war on the Spanish succession, and completed his reputation by two brilliant campaigns in Italy. He was afterwards sent against Corsica, which he reduced, but it threw off subjection immediately on his departure. This expedition obtained him the staff of mareschal of France. In the war of 1741, he gained new laurels in Germany and Italy: but in 1746, he was defeated by the famous count Brown, in the battle of Placentia. He died in February 1762, in the 80th year of his age. The account of his campaigns in Italy was published in 1775, in three volumes quarto, accompanied with a volume of maps. The author of this work was the marquis of Pezay, who executed it with great judgment.

In the mean time, her elevation was to her only a retreat. Shut up in her apartment, which was on the same floor with the king’s, she confined herself to the society of two or three ladies, as retired as herself; and even these she saw but seldom. The king came to her apartment every day after dinner, before and after supper, and continued there till midnight. Here he did business with his ministers, while madam de Maintenon employed herself in reading or needle-work, never shewing any eagerness to talk of state affairs, often seeming wholly ignorant of them, and carefully avoiding whatever had the least appearance of cahal and intrigue. She studied more to please him who governed, than to govern; and preserved her credit, by employing it with the utmost circumspection. She did not make use of her power, to give the greatest dignities and employments among her own relations Her brother count d'Aubigne, a lieutenant-general of long standing, was not even made a marshal of France; a blue ribbon, and some appropriations in the farms of the revenue, were all his fortune: which made him once say to the marshal de Vivone, the brother of madam de Montespan, that “he had received the staff of marshal in ready money.” It was rather high fortune for the daughter of this count, to marry the duke de Noailles, than an advantage to the duke. Two more nieces of madam de Maintenon, the one married to the marquis de Caylus, the other to the marquis de Villette, had scarcely any thing. A moderate pension, which Louis XIV. gave to madam de Caylus, was almost all her fortune; and madam de Villette had nothing but expectations. This lady, who was afterwards married to the celebrated lord Bolingbroke, often reproached her aunt for doing so little for her family; and once told her in some anger, that “she took a pleasure in her moderation, and in seeing her family the victim of it.” This Voltaire relates as a fact, which he had from M. de Villette herself. It is certain, that M. de Maintenon submitted every thing to her fears of doing what might be contrary to the king’s sentiments. She did not even dare to support her relation the cardinal de Noailles, against father le Tellier. She had a great friendship for the poet Kacine, yet did not venture to protect him against a slight resentment of the king’s. One day, moved with the eloquence with which he had described to her the people’s miseries in 1698, she engaged him to draw up a memorial, which might at once shew the evil and the remedy. The king read it; and, upon his expressing some displeasure at it, she had the weakness to tell the author, and not the courage to defend him. Racine, still weaker, says Voltaire, was so hurt, that it was supposed to have occasioned his xleath. The same natural disposition, which made her incapable of conferring benefits, made her also incapable of doing injuries. When the minister Louvois threw himself at the feet of Louis XIV. to hinder his marriage with the widow Scarron, she not only forgave him, but frequently pacified the king, whom the rough temper of this minister as frequently angered.

, a French philosopher, was born at Paris, Aug. 6, 1638, and was first placed under a domestic tutor, who taught him Greek and Latin. He afterwards went through a course of philosophy at the college of la Marche, and that of divinity in the Sorbonne; and was admitted into the congregation of the Oratory at Paris, in 1660, After he had spent some time there, he consulted father le Cointe, in what manner he should pursue his studies; who advised him to apply himself to ecclesiastical history. Upon this he began to read Eusebius, Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodoret; but soon grew weary of this study, and next applied himself to father Simon, who recommended Hebrew, Arabic, Syriac, rabbinical learning, and critical inquiries into the sense of the Scriptures. But this kind of study was not at all more suitable to his genius, than the former. At last, in 1664, he met with Des Cartes’s “Treatise upon Man,” which he read over with great satisfaction, and devoted himself immediately to the study of his philosophy; of which, in a few years, he became as perfect a master as Des Cartes himself. In 1699, he was admitted an honorary member of the royal academy of sciences. He died Oct. 13, 1715, being then seventy-seven years of age. From the time that he began to read Des Cartes, he studied only to enlighten his mind, and not to furnish his memory; so that he knew a great deal, though he read but little. He avoided every thing that was mere erudition; an insect pleased him much more than all the Greek and Roman history. He despised likewise that kind of learning, which consists only in knowing the opinions of different philosophers; since it was his opinion that a person may easily know the history of other men’s thoughts, without ever thinking at all himself. Such was his aversion to poetry, that he could never read ten verses together without disgust. He meditated with his windows shut, in order to keep out the light, which he found to be a disturbance to him. His conversation turned upon the same subjects as his books, but was mixed with so much modesty and deference to the judgment of others, that it was much courted. Few foreigners, who were men of learning, neglected to visit him when they came to Paris: and it is said, that an English officer, who was taken prisoner during die war between William III. and the king of France, was content with his lot, when he was. brought to Paris, because it gave him an opportunity to see Louis XIV. and father Malebranche.

, born at Paris, Dec. 16, 1721, was son of the chancellor of France, William de Lamoignon, a descendant of an illustrious family. He received his early education at the Jesuits’ college, and having studied law and political oeconomy, he was appointed a counsellor in the parliament of Paris, and in December 1750 he succeeded his father as president, of the “court of aids,” the duties of which were to regulate the public taxes. The superintendance of the press had been conferred upon Malesherbes by his father, at the same time that he received the presidentship of the court of aids; and this function he exercised with unusual lenity, promoting rather than checking those writings to which the subsequent miseries of his country have been attributed. His biographer classes it among his great merits that “to his care and benevolent exertions France is indebted for the Encyclopaedia, the works of Rousseau, and many other productions, which he sheltered from proscription;” and both Voltaire and D'Alembert acknowledged the obligation, and seem in their letters to hint that his partiality was entirely on their side. In this view of the subject, Malesherbes must be considered as in some degree instrumental in preparing the way for that revolution which has been the pregnant source of so many calamities.

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

, was one of the writers in the French Encyclopedic, and one of those whose articles are the most valuable in that work. They are chiefly on the subjects of divinity and belles lettres, and if only men as sound and judicious as the abbe Mallet had been employed, that publication would have proved as useful as it has been, found pernicious. He was born at Melun in 1713, and educated at the college of the Barnabites at Montargis. He was afterwards engaged as tutor in the family of a farmer general. In 1742 he was admitted into the faculty of theology at Paris, and was employed on a cure near his native town till 1751, when he was invited to be professor of divinity in the college of Navarre. The more he was known, the more his merits were perceived; and the charge of Jansenism, which had been circulated against him, was gradually cleared away. Boyer, then bishop of Mirepoix, as a testimony of his regard, presented him to a canonry of Verdun. He died at Paris in 1755. Besides his shara in the Encyclopedie, he wrote several works on the principles of poetry and eloquence. His style is neat, easy, and unaffected; and he has great skill in developing the merits of good writers, and illustrating his precepts by the most apposite examples from their works. He published also a history of the civil wars of France, under the reigns of Francois II. Charles IX. &c. translated from the Italian of D'Avila, and published at Amsterdam in 3 vols. 4to.

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

In 1700 he was employed under Cassini in prolonging the French meridian to the northern extremity of France, and had no small share in completing it. He next set out for Italy, where Clement the Xltli invited him to assist at the assemblies of the congregation then sitting in Rome to reform the calendar. Bianchini also availed himself of his assistance to construct the great meridian of the Carthusian church in that city. In 1718 Maraldi, with three other academicians, prolonged the French meridian to the southern extremity of that conntry. He was admitted a member of the academy of sciences of Paris in 1699, in the department of astronomy, and communicated a great multitude of papers, which are printed in t;heir memoirs, in almost every year from 1699 to 1729, and iisually several papers in each of the years; for he was indefatigable in his observation of every thing that was curious and useful in the motions and phenomena of the heavenly bodies. As to the catalogue of the fixed stars, it was not quite completed: just as he had placed a munil quadrant on the terras of the observatory, to observe some stars towards the north and the zenith, he fell sick, and died the 1st of December 1729.

, one of the greatest ornaments of the Gallican church, but a man of great inconsistency of character, was born in 1594, at Gant, in Bearn, of a very ancient family in that principality. He went through his course of philosophy among the Jesuits, and then studied the law for three years; after which he was received a counsellor in 1615, in the supreme council at Pau. In 1621 he was made president of the parliament of Bearn; and going to Paris in 1639, about the affairs of his province, was made a counsellor of state. In 1640 he published “The History of Bearn,” which confirmed the good opinion that was conceived of his knowledge and parts. He was thought, therefore, a very proper person to undertake a delicate and important subject, which offered itself about that time. The court of France was then at variance with the court of Rome, and the book which Peter de Puy published, concerning the liberties of the Gallican church, greatly alarmed the partisans of the court of Rome; some of whom endeavoured to persuade the world that they were the preliminaries of a schism contrived by cardinal Richelieu; as if his eminency had it in his head to erect a patriarchate in that kingdom, in order to render the Gallican church independent of the pope. A French divine, M. Hersent (see Hersent), who took the name of Optatus Gallus, addressed a book to the clergy upon the subject; and insinuated that the cardinal had brought over to his party a great personage, who was ready to defend this conduct of the cardinal; and this great personage was Peter de Marca. But an insinuation of this nature tending to make the cardinal odious, as it occasioned a rumour that he aspired to the patriarchate, the king laid his commands on de Marca to refute Hersent’s work, and at the same time to preserve the liberties of the Gallican church on the one hand, and to make it appear on the other that those liberties did not in the least diminish the reverence due to the holy see. He accepted of this commission, and executed it by his book “De Concordia sacerdotii & imperii, sive, de libertatibus ecclesisæ Gallicæ,” which he published in 1641. He declared in his preface, that he did not enter upon the discussion of right, but confined himself to the settling of facts: that is, he only attempted to shew what deference the Western churches had always paid to the bishop of Rome on the one side; and on the other, what rights and privileges the Gallican churclh had always possessed. But though he had collected an infinite number of testimonies in favour of the pope’s power, the work was of too liberal a cast not to give offence: perhaps even the very attempt to throw the subject open to discussion was not very agreeable and accordingly, the court of Rome made a great many difficulties in dispatching the bulls which were demanded in favour of de Marca, who had, in the end of 1641, been presented to the bishopric of Conserans. That court gave him to understand that it was necessary he should soften some things he had advanced; and caused his book to pass a very strict examination. After the death of Urban VIII. cardinal Bichi warmly solicited Innocent X. to grant the bulls in favour of the bishop of Conserans; but the assessor of the holy office recalled the remembrance of the complaints which had been made against his book “De Concordia,” which occasioned this pope to order the examination of it anew. De Marca, despairing of success unless he gave satisfaction to the court of Rome, published a book in 1646, in which he explained the design of his “De Coocordia,” &c. submitted himself to the censure of the apostolic see, and shewed that kings were not the authors, but the guardians of the canon laws. “I own,” says he, “that I favoured the side of my prince too much, and acted the part of a president rather than that of a bishop. I renounce my errors, and promise for the future to be a strenuous advocate for the authority of the holy see.” Accordingly, in 1647, he wrote a book entitled “De singulari primatu Petri,” in which he proved that St. Peter was the only head of the church; and this he sent to the pope, who was so pleased with it, that he immediately granted his bulls, and he was made bishop of Conserans in 1648. This conduct of de Marca has been noticed by lord Bolingbroke, in his posthumous works, with becoming indignation. He calls him “a time-­serving priest, interested, and a great flatterer, if ever there was one;” and adds, that, “when he could not get his bulls dispatched, be made no scruple to explain away all that he had said in favour of the state, and to limit the papal power.”

In 1644, de Marca was sent into Catalonia, to perform the office of visitor-general, and counsellor of the viceroy, which he executed to the year 1651, and so gained the affections of the Catalonians, that in 1647, when he was dangerously ill, they put up public prayers, and vows for his recovery. The city of Barcelona, in particular, made a vow to our lady of Montserrat, and sent thither in their name twelve capuchins and twelve nuns, who performed their journey with their hair hanging loose, and bare-footed. De Marca was persuaded, or rather seemed to be persuaded, that his recovery was entirely owing to so many vows and prayers; and would not leave Catalonia without going to pay his devotions at Montserrat, in the beginning of 1651, and there wrote a small treatise, “De origine & progressu cultûs beatæ Mariæ Virginis in Monteserato,” which he left in the archives of the monastery; so little did he really possess of that liberality and firmness of mind which is above vulgar prejudice and superstition. In August of the same year, he went to take possession of his bishopric; and the year after was nominated to the archbishopric of Toulouse, but did not take possession till 1655. In 1656 he assisted at the general assembly of the French clergy, and appeared in opposition to the Jansenists, that he might wipe off all suspicion of his not being an adherent of the court of Rome, for he knew that his being suspected of Jansenism had for a long time retarded the bull which was necessary to establish him in the archbishopric of Toulouse. He was made a minister of state in 1658, and went to Toulouse in 1659. In the following year he went to Roussillon, there to determine the marches with the commissaries of the king of Spain. In these conferences he had occasion to display his learning, as they involved points of criticism respecting the language of Pomponius Mela and Strabo. It was said in the Pyrenean treaty, that the limits of France and Spain were the same with those which anciently separated the Gauls from Spain. This obliged them to examine whereabouts, according to the ancient geographers, the Gauls terminated here; and de Marca’s knowledge was of great use at this juncture. He took a journey to Paris the same year, and obtained the appoiutment of archbishop of Paris; but died there June 29, 1662, the very day that the bulls for his promotion arrived. His sudden death, at this time, occasioned the following jocular epitaph:

, de Saint Sorlin, was a man of getiius, and a favourite of cardinal Richelieu, who used to receive him at his retired hours, and unbend his mind by conversing with him upon gay and delicate subjects. On. this account, and because he assisted the cardinal in the tragedies he composed, Bayle used to say, that “he possessed an employment of genius under his eminence;” which in French is a pun, as genie means genius and engineers/lip. He was born at Paris in 1595. He has left us himself a picture of his morals, which is by no means advantageous; for he owns that, in order to triumph over the virtue of such women as objected to him the interest of their salvation, he made no scruple to lead them into atheistical principles. “I ought,” says he, “to weep tears of blood, considering the bad use I have made of my address among the ladies; for I have used nothing but specious falsehoods, malicious subtleties, and infamous treacheries, endeavouring to ruin the souls of those I pretended to love. I studied artful speeches to shake, blind, and seduce them; and strove to persuade them, that vice was virtue, or at least a thing natural and indifferent.” Marets at length became a visionary and fanatic; dealt in nothing but inward lights and revelations; and promised the king of France, upon the strength of some prophecies, whose meaning be tells us was imparted to him from above, that he should have the honour of overthrowing the Mahometan empire. “This valiant prince,” says he, “shall destroy and expel from their dominions impiety and heresy, and reform the ecclesiastics, the courts of justice, and the finances. After this, in common agreement with the king of Spain, he shall summon together all the princes of Europe, with the pope, in order to re-unite all the Christians to the true and only catholic religion. After all the heretics are re-united to the holy see, the king, as’eldest son of the chu/ch, shall be declared generalissimo of all the Christians, and, with the joint forces of Christendom, shall destroy by sea and land the Turkish enapire, and law of Mahomet, and propagate the faith and dominion of Jesus Christ over the whole earth:” that is to say, over Persia, the empire of the great mogul, Tartary, and China.

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

, a Spanish historian, was born at Talavera, in Castille, in 1537; and entered into the order of Jesuits when he was seventeen. He was one of the most learned men of his age, an able divine, a considerable master of polite literature, admirably skilled in sacred and profane history, and a good linguist. In 1561 he was sent by his superiors to Rome, where he taught divinity, and received the order of priesthood; and at the end of four years weut to Sicily, where he continued the same profession two years more. He came to Paris in 1569, and read lectures publicly upon Thomas Aquinas for five years; then returned into Spain, and passed the remainder of his life at Toledo. He wrote many books in Latin. His piece “De rnonetse mutatione,” gave great offence to the court of Spurn; for Philip III. having altered and emr based the coin by the advice of the duke of Lerma, Mariana shewed, with great freedom, the injustice and disadvantage of this project; for which he was put into prison, and kept there about a year by that minister. But what made more noise still, was his tract De rege & regis institutione,“consisting of three books, which he published to justify James Clement, a young monk, for assassinating Henry III. of France. In this he argues against passive obedience and non-resistance; asserts the lawfulness of resisting” the powers that be,“where the administration is tyrannical; and founds his whole argument upon this principle,” that the authority of the people is superior to that of kings." This book of Mariana, though it passed without censure in Spain and Italy, was burnt at Paris, by an arret of parliament.

, an English author, who lived in the reigns of James I. and Charles I. but whose private history is involved in much obscurity, was son of Robert Markham, esq. of Gotham, in the county of Nottingham. He bore a captain’s commission under Charles I. in the civil wars, and was accounted a good soldier, as well as a good scholar. One piece of dramatic poetry which he has published will shew, says Langbaine, that he sacrificed to Apollo and the muses, as well as to Mars and Pallas. This play is extant under under the title of “Herod and Antipater,” a tragedy, printed in 1622. Markham published a great many volumes upon husbandry and horsemanship: one upon the latter, printed in quarto, without date, he dedicated to prince Henry, eldest son to James I. In husbandry he published “Liebault’s La Maison rustique, or the country -farm,” in 1616. This treatise, which was at first translated by Mr. Richard Surfleit, a physician, Markham enlarged, with several additions from the French books of Serris and Vinet, the Spanish of Albiterio, and the Italian of Grilli. He published other books of husbandry, particularly “The English Husbandman, in two parts,” Lond. 1613 1635, with the “Pleasures of Princes in the Art of Angling.” Granger mentions “The whole Art of Angling,” 1656, 4to, in which he says Markham very gravely tells us that an angler should “be a general scholar, and seen in all the liberal sciences; as a grammarian, to know how to write or discourse of his art in true and fitting terms. He should have sweetness in speech to entice others to delight in an exercise so much laudable. He should have strength of argument to defend and maintai n his profession against envy and slander,” &c. Markham also wrote a tract entitled “Hunger’s prevention, or the whole Art of Fowling,” 1621, 8vo. In military discipline he published “The Soldier’s Accidence and Grammar,” in 1635. But he appears to have been earliest distinguished by his talents for poetry. In 1597 he published “Devereux Vertues tears for the loss of the most Christian king Henry, third of that name king of France, and the untimely death of the most noble and heroical Walter Devereux, who was slain before Roan, in Fraunce,” a translation from the French, 4to. He was the author also of “England’s Arcadia, alluding his beginning from sir Philip Sydney’s ending,” 1607, 4to. The extracts from Markham in “England’s Parnassus,” are more numerous than from any other minor poet. The most remarkable of his poetical attempts appears to have been entitled “The Poem of Poems, or Sion’s Muse, contaynyng the diuine Song of king Salomon, deuided into eight eclogues,” J 596, 16mo. This is dedicated to “the sacred virgin, divine mistress Elizabeth Sydney, sole daughter of the everadmired sir Philip Sydney.” Bishop Hall, who was justly dissatisfied with much of the spiritual poetry with which his age was overwhelmed, alludes to this piece in his “Satires” (B. I. Sat. VIII.); and says that in Markham’s verses Solomon assumes the character of a modern sonneteer, and celebrates the sacred spouse of Christ with the levities and in the language of a lover singing the praises of his mistress. For this censure, Marston in his “Certayne Satires” (Sat. IV.) endeavours to retort upon Hall.

, an eminent protestant divine of the sixteenth century, and classed among the reformers, was born in the dukedom of Lorrain in 1506. He was educated in a monastery of the Augustine friars, where he made great proficiency in his studies, and appears to have conceived, from the licentious morals of the friars, a dislike to their religion, which he afterwards abandoned. Leaving the monastery he pursued his studies in France, and afterwards at Lausanne, where he made open profession of the protestant religion, and was admitted into orders. He was chosen pastor at Vevey. and then at Rouen in Normandy, where he contributed to the diffusion of the principles of the reformation. In 1561 he was present at the memorable conference held at Poissy between Beza and the cardinal of Lorrain, in which he distinguished himself by his ability and zeal in defence of the protestant cause. The year following the civil wars broke out in France, and Rouen being besieged and taken, Montmorency, constable of France, threw Marlorat into prison, as a seducer of the people. On this charge, of which no proofs were brought, he was condemned to be hanged, his head then to be set on a pole on the bridge of the city, and his goods and inheritance to be confiscated. He accordingly suffered this punishment Oct. 30, 1562, in. the fifty-sixth year of his age. His works were chiefly commentaries on the Holy Scriptures: 1. “Genesis, cum catholica expositione,” 1562, fol. 2. “Liber Psalmorum, et Cantica, &c.” 1562, fol. 3. “Jesaise Prophetia,” 1564, folio. 4. “Novum Testamentum,” 1605, 2 vols. folio, and a book of Common Places. Translations from most of these were published in England during the Elizabethan period.

, a French poet, was born near Caen, in Normandy, in 1463, with a strong inclination to the belles lettres and poetry, which he happily cultivated, although his education was much neglected. He was but in low circumstances, when his abilities and good behaviour recommended him to Anne of Bretagne, afterwards queen of France; a princess who greatly encouraged and patronized letters. She shewed a particular regard to Marot, by making him her poet; and by commanding him to attend Louis XII. to Genoa and Venice, that he might draw up a relation of those travels. He was afterwards in the service of Francis I. and died in 1523. He was a tolerable poet, but infinitely exceeded by his son Clement. His poems are to be found in the later editions of the works of Clement Marot.

The principal works of du Marsais are, 1. “An Explanation of the Doctrine of the Gallican church, with respect to the pretensions of the court of Rome,” 12mo. This esteemed work was undertaken by the desire of the president des Maisons, and was not published till after the death of the author. 2. “Explanation of a reasonable Method of learning the Latin language,” 1722, 12mo. This work, which was most highly commended by d'Alembert and others, was long very scarce, even in France. 3. “A treatise on Tropes,” 1730, 8vo, and 1731, 12mo; a tract much and justly admired for its original conceptions and logical precision. 4. “Les veritables Principes de la Grammaire,” &c. 1729, 4to only the preface toan intended Latin grammar. 5. “The Abridgment of Father Jouvenci'a Mythology,” disposed according to his method, 1731, 12mo. 6. “Logic,” or reflections on the operations of the mind; a very short work, in which is compressed almost the whole art of reasoning. It was reprinted at Paris, in 1762, in 12mo, with the articles which he furnished for the Encyclopedia. At length, his whole works were collected by Duchosal and Millon, and published at Paris, 1797, 7 vols. 8vd In 1804 the institute of France proposed his eloge as a prize essay, and the prize was gained by Degerando, who published it in 1805. That prefixed to his works was by D'Alembert, with whom, as well as with Voltaire, he was at one time too much connected for his reputation.

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

He continued at Oxford till queen Mary came to the throne; when he was suffered to depart the kingdom, and passed undiscovered through Brabant, and other popish territories, to Strasburg; though it is said, not without considerable risk. Thence he went to Zurich, upon an honourable invitation from the magistrates of that place, to be their divinity professor; and was accompanied thither by Jewel, afterwards bishop of Salisbury, who was then an exile for his religion. At Zurich Martyr lived seven years in high esteem with the inhabitants of the place, and in great friendship with Bullinger, and other learned men. He was afterwards invited to Geneva, to be pastor of the Italian church there; and in queen Elizabeth’s reign, when protestantism was re-established in England, bishop Jewel endeavoured to prevail on him to return, but in vain; he continued at Zurich to the time of his death, Nov. 12, 1562, in his sixty-third year. The year before he died, however, he was prevailed upon by letters from the queenmother of France, the king of Navarre, the prince of Conde", and other peers of that realm, to go over into France to the solemn conference at Poissy, where he disputed against the papists, with Beza and others. Not long after his arrival at Zurich, he took a second wife, who was recommended to him from the Italian church at Geneva, where she lived an exile for religion. He had two children by her, who both died very young, and before him; and he left her with child of a third, which proved a daughter.

The queen-mother being inclined to the interest of France, the young queen, by her care, was conveyed thither when but about six years old. After staying a few days with the king and queen at court, she was sent to a monastery, where the daughters of the chief nobility of the kingdom were educated. Here she spent her time in all the offices and duties of a monastic life; being constant in her devotions, and very observant of the discipline. She employed much of her study in learning languages; and she acquired so consummate a skill in Latin, that she spoke an oration of her own composing in that language, in the great guard- room at the Louvre, before the royal family and nobility of France*. She was naturally inclined to poetry, and made so great a progress in the art, as to be a writer herself. Her compositions were much esteemed by Ronsard, who was himself at that time accounted an excellent poet. She had a good taste for music, and played well upon several instruments; was a fine dancer, and sab a horse gracefully. But these last accomplishments she pursued rather out of necessity than choice; and, when she most followed her own inclinations, was employed among her women in needle-work.

All these accomplishments, added to a fine person, rendered her so amiable to Henry II. of France and his queen, as to make them desirous of marrying her to the dauphin, which was accordingly arranged: and the nuptials were solemnized the 20th of April, 1558. But this happy marriage, for such it seems to have been, lasted only a little while; as Francis II. as he then was, died Dec. 5, 1560. His disconsolate queen, being left without issue, returned soon after to Scotland; where she had not been long, before Charles archduke of Austria was proposed to her as an husband, by the cardinal of Lorrain. But queen Elizabeth interposed, and desired she would not marry with any foreign prince, but make choice of an husband out of her own nobility. She recommended to her either the earl of Leicester, or the lord Dandy; giving her to understand, that her succession to the crown of England would be very pred&rious, if she did not comply. Being thus overawed by Elizabeth, and not a little pleased with lord Darnly, who was extremely handsome, she consented to marry him; and creating him earl of Ross and duke of Rothesay, July 28, 1565, he was the same day proclaimed king at Edinburgh, and married to the queen the day after. By this husband she had one son, born at Edinburgh, June 19, 1566, who was afterwards James the Sixth of Scotland, and the First of England. Queen Elizabeth congratulated her upon this occasion; though, as Camden says, she inwardly grieved at being prevented by her rival in the honour of being a mother. She openly favoured her title to the succession; and the prince was commended to her majesty’s protection.

But however writers may differ about her moral conduct, they agree more cordially as to the variety of her accomplishments. She wrote poems on various occasions, in the Latin, Italian, French, and Scotch languages; “Royal advice to her son,” in two books, the consolation of her long imprisonment. A great number of her original letters are preserved in the king of France’s library, in the Royal, Cottonian, and Ashmolean libraries . We have in print, eleven to earl Bothwell, translated from the French by Edward Simmonds, of Christ-church, Oxford, and printed at Westminster in 1726. There are ten more, with her answers to the articles against her, in “Haynes’s StatePapers;” six more in “Anderson’s Collections;” another in the “Appendix” to her life by Dr. Jebb and some others dispersed among the works of Pius V. Buchanan, Camden, Udall, and Sanderson.

, a reformed minister, who died in Holland about 1750, was originally of France, but fled into England to enjoy that liberty in religion which his country refused him, and was employed as tutor in bishop Burnet’s family. In 1710 he travelled with his pupils, through Holland, and thence to France and Italy, according to Saxius, though we doubt whether the bishop had at that time any sons so young as to be only beginning their education. Be this as it may, he soon became known in. the literary world, and we should suppose must have often resided in Holland, as most of his publications were printed there. The first we can trace with certainty is his “Jani templum Christo nascente reseratum, seu Tractatus Chronologico-historicus vulgarem refellens opinionem existimantium, pacem toto terrarum orbe sub tempus Servatoris natale stabilitam fuisse,” &c. Rotterdam, 1700, 4to and 8vo. We are also indebted to him for, 1. “Histoire critique de la Republique des Lettres, from 1712 to 17 17,” in 15 vols. 12mo. 2. “Vitae Horatii, Oviciii, et Plinii junioris,” 3 vols. small 8vo, and printed abroad, though dedicated to Englishmen of rank: the first at Leyden, 1708, to lord Harvey; the second at Amsterdam, 1708, to sir Justinian Isham; the third at Amsterdam, 1709, to the bishop of Worcester. These lives are drawn up in a chronological order, very learnedly and very critically; and serve to illustrate the history, not only of these particular persons, but of the times also in which they lived. In the “Life of Horace,” Masson found occasion to interfere with M. Dacier; who, however, defended his own opinions, and prefixed his defence to the second edition of his Horace. 3. “Histoire de Pierre Bayle & de ses ouvrages,” Amsterdam, 1716, 12mo. This at least is supposed to be his, though at first it was given to M. la Monnoye. Many other critical dissertations by Masson are enumerated by Saxius.

The marriage of Charles IX. of France with Elizabeth, daughter of the emperor Maximilian, being celebrated in 1570 at Mezieres, Masson, who was present, wrote an elegant description of it, which was published the same year in 8vo, and was the first thing from which he derived literary reputation. He then resolved to apply to the law, and with this vie<v went to Angers to study under the celebrated Baudouin, or Balduinus. After two years he returned to Paris, and became librarian to the chancellor de Cheverney, a lover of literature, in which place he continued ten years. In 1576 he was made an advocate of parliament; yet never pleaded more than one cause, which however he gained with universal applause. The rest of his life appears to have been devoted to study, and when the troubles of France were at an end, he married the sister of a counsellor in parliament, with whom he lived thirty-four years, but had no children. The infirmities of age attacked him some time before his death, which happened Jan. 9, 1611. Rewrote, 1. “Annals of France,” a good work, the best edition of which is, 1598, 4to. 2. “Eulogies on illustrious Men,” 1656, 8vo. 3. “A Description of France by its Rivers,” 1685, 8vo. 4. “An Account of the French Bishoprics,” 8vo. “De Episcopis Urbis,” 4to, a history of the popes; and several other works, which discover great genius and learning. “Vita Joannis Calvini,” 4to, a well-written work, is also ascribed to him by some, and, by others, to James Gillot. The above-mentioned are all in Latin. His friend, M. de Thou, has written his life, which is prefixed to his Eulogies.

, a French historian, was born at Porentrui, in the diocese of Basle, Dec. 10, 1583, and was first principal of the college of Verceil, and afterwards an advocate at Lyons. He was a zealous partizan of the league, and much attached to the Guises. When he went to Paris, he quitted poetry, which he had followed hitherto, for history, to which he attached himself from that time. He acquired the esteem of Henry IV. who manifested it by giving him the title of historiographer of France, and furnishing him with all the memoirs necessary to make him so effectually. He attended Louis Xiji. to the siege of Montauhan; but, falling sick, was removed to Toulouse, where he died October 12, 1621, at the age of fifty-eight. Matthieu was only a moderate author: he wrote easily, but in an undignified style. He produced, l.“A History of the memorable Events which happened in the reign of Henry the Great,” 1624, 8vo. This contains some curious anecdotes communicated to the author by Henry himself; but the flatness of the style destroys, in a great measure, the interest of the work. 2. “The History of the deplorable Death of Henry the Great,” 1611 folio; 1612, 8vo. 3, “The History of St. Louis,” 1618, 8vo. 4. “The History of Louis XI.” in folio. This work is esteemed. 5, “The History of France,” from Francis I. to Louis XIII. inclusive, Paris, 1631, 2 vols, folio, published by his son, who added the reign of Louis XIII. 6. “Quatrains on Life and Death;” very languid and fatiguing, but often printed after those of Pibrac. 7. “La Guisiade,” the Guisiad, a tragedy, was published at Lyons, 1589, in 8vo. He was also the writer of some other tragedies, published in the same year in 2 vols. 12mo and of some other historical pieees of less note than what we have mentioned.

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

, baron of Albone, first physician to their Britannic majesties James I. and Charles I. was the son of Louis de Mayerne, author of a “General History of Spain,” and of the “Monarchic aristo-democratique,” dedicated to the States-general. His mother was Louisa, the daughter of Antoine le Masson, treasurer of the army to Francis I. and Henry II. in Piedmont. Louis de Mayerne retired to Geneva about the end of 1572, after having had two houses at Lyons pulled down on account of his religion. On Sept. 28, 1573, his son Theodore was born, and had for his godfather Theodore Beza. He learnt polite literature in his own country, and he was thence sent to Heidelberg, where he stayed some years; after which, as he had made choice of physic for his profession, he went to Montpellier, and there he took the degree of bachelor in 1596, and of doctor in 1597. Thence he went to Paris, where, by way of introducing himself into practice, he gave lectures in anatomy to the young surgeons, and in pharmacy to the apothecaries. He acquired reputation by his prescriptions, and became known to Riverius, first physician to Henry IV. who recommended him so effectually to the king, that he made him one of his physicians in ordinary; and, in 1600, appointed him to attend Henry duke of Rohan, in his embassies from France to the princes of Germany and Italy. Upon his return, he acquitted himself in the exercise of his office very much to his credit, and was in high favour with the king, who promised to do great things for him, provided he would change his religion; and, it is said, notwithstanding that obstacle, would have appointed him his first physician, if the Jesuits, who were aware of it, had not prevented him by the means of queen Mary de Medicis. Of this circumstance and intended favour, Mayerne knew nothing till he learnt it, in 1642, in England, from Caesar duke of Vendosme, a natural son of France. In 1607, he had under his care an Englishman of quality, who after his recovery carried him into England, where he had a private conference with king James. He then returned to Paris, and remained there till after the assassination of Henry IV. in May 1610. In the following year, the king of England caused him to be invited by his ambassador, to serve in quality of first physician to himself and his queen, and gave him a patent, sealed with the great seal of England; in which office he served the whole royal family with great honour and approbation, till the day of his death. He was admitted to the degree of doctor in both universities, and into the college of physicians, and treated with the greatest respect by these learned bodies. He incurred some obloquy on account of the fatal sickness of Henry prince of Wales, in October 1612; in the treatment of which he differed in opinion from the other physicians, with respect to the use of blood-letting. But his conduct obtained the approbation of the king and council, of which certificates, couched in the most satisfactory terms, were given him. He received the honour of knighthood from James, in 1624; and on the accession of Charles I. he was appointed first physician to him and his queen, and rose to high favour, particularly with the latter. During the civil commotions he still adhered to the royal party, for he was appointed first physician to Charles II. after the death of his father, although the office was not merely nominal. Thus he enjoyed the extraordinary honour of serving four kings successively in his medical capacity; and during all this period he -was most extensively employed by persons of the first rank in this kingdom, by which he accumulated a large fortune. He made an exact collection of his prescriptions. He composed a very curious dispensatory of medicines, galenical and chemical but never published any of his works, except an “Apology” for himself, against the faculty of physic at Paris, who had attacked him for his application to the practice of chemistry, which was greatly cried down by the physicians of that place. Guy Patin has given an account of this dispute; in which he has shewn himself greatly prejudiced against Mayerne, and calls him a quack, on account of his pretensions to chemistry. He died March 15, 1655, at Chelsea, of the effects of bad wine, a slow, which, says Granger, the weakness of old age rendered a quick poison. He foretold the time of his death to his friends, with whom he had been moderately drinking at a tavern in the Strand; and it happened according to his prediction. He was buried at St. Martin’s-in-the-tields. He left behind him one only daughter, who brought her great fortune in marriage to the marquis de Montpouvillan, grandson of the marshal duke de la Force; but she died in childbed at the Hague, in 1661.

Dr. Mead was twice married. By his first lady, whom we have mentioned, he had ten children (of whom three survived him, two daughters married to Dr. Wilmot and Dr. Nicholls, and his son Richard, heir to his father’s and uncle’s fortunes): by the second lady, Miss Anne Alston, sister to sir Rowland Alston of Odell in Bedfordshire (whom he married in 1724), he had no issue. Dr. Mead raised the medical character to a higher dignity than ever was known in this or any other country. During almost half a century he was at the head of his profession, which is said to have brought him in one year upwards of seven thousand pounds, and between five and six for several years. The clergy, and in general all men of learning, were welcome to his advice; and his doors were open every morning to the most indigent, whom he frequently assisted with money; so that, notwithstanding his great income, he did not die very rich. He was a most generous patron of learning and learned men, in all sciences, and in every country; by the peculiar munificence of his disposition, making the private gains of his profession answer the end of a princely fortune, and valuing them only as they enabled him to become more extensively useful, and thereby to satisfy that greatness of mind which will transmit his name to posterity with a lustre not inferior to that of the most distinguished characters of antiquity. To him the several counties of England, and our colonies abroad, applied for the choice of their physicians. No foreigner of any learning, taste, or even curiosity, ever came to England without being introduced to Dr. Mead; and he was continually consulted by the physicians of the continent. His large and spacious house in Great Ormond street became a repository of all that was curious in nature or in art, to which his extensive correspondence with the learned in all parts of Europe not a little contributed. The king of Naples sent to request a collection of all his works; presented him with the two first volumes of signor Bajardi, and invited him to his own palace: and, through the hands of M. de Boze, he frequently had the honour of exchanging presents with the king of France. He built a gallery for his favourite furniture, his pictures, and his antiquities. His library, as appears by the printed catalogue of it, consisted of 6592 numbers, containing upwards of 10,000 volumes, in which he had spared no expence for scarce and ancient editions. It was at that time mentioned as remarkable, although it will not be thought so now, that many of his books sold for much more than they had cost him. The sale of the whole amounted to 5500l. His pictures also were chosen with so much judgment, that they produced 3417l. 11s. about six or seven hundred pounds more than he gave for them; and the total amount of his books, pictures, coins, &c. &c. was 16,069l. 8s. Md. Nor did he make this great collection for his own use only, but freely opened it to public inspection. Ingenious men were sure of finding at Dr. Mead’s the best helps in all their undertakings; and scarcely any thing curious appeared in England but under his patronage. By his singular humanity and goodness, “he conquered even Envy itself;” a compliment which was justly paid him in a dedication, by the editor of lord Bacon’s Works, in 1730. But the most elegant compliment he received, or couid receive, was in the dedication written by Dr Johnson for Dr James, which we have inserted in vol. XVIII. art. James. Dr. Johnson once said of Dr. Mead, that “he lived more in the broad sunshine of life than almost any man.” He constantly kept in pay a great number of scholars and artists of all kinds, who were at work for him or for the public. He was the friend of Pope, of Halley, and of Newton; and placed their portraits in his house, with those of Shakspeare and Milton, near the busts of their great masters, the ancient Greeks and Romans. A marble bust of Dr. Harvey, the work of an excellent artist, from an original picture in his possession, was given by him to the college of physicians: and one of Dr. Mead, by Roubillac, was presented to the college in 1756, by the late Dr. Askew. A portrait of him was etched by Pond, another by Richardson; a mezzotinto by Houston, from a painting of Ramsay; and an engraved portrait by Baron. There was also a medal of him struck in 1773, long after his decease, by Lewis Pingo.

, a statesman and historian, was descended from an honourable family in Scotland, and born at Halhill in Fifeshire, in 1530. At fourteen, he was sent by the queen regent of Scotland, to be page to her daughter Mary, who was then married to the dauphin of France: but by her leave he entered into the service of the duke of Montmorenci, great constable and chief minister of France, who earnestly desired him of her majesty, having a high opinion of his promising talents. He was nine years employed by him, and had a pension settled on him by the king. Then, obtaining leave to travel, he went into Germany; where being detained by the elector palatine, he resided at his court three years, and was employed by him on several embassies. After this, prosecuting his intentions to travel, he visited Venice, Rome, and the most famous cities of Italy, and returned through Switzerland to the elector’s court; where, finding a summons from queen Mary, who had taken possession of the crown of Scotland, after the death of her husband Francis II. he set out to attend her. The queen-mother of France at the same time offered him a large pension to reside at her court; for she found it her interest, at that juncture, to keep up a good understanding with the protestant princes of Germany; and she knew sir James Melvil to be the properest person to negociate her affairs, being most acceptable to them all; but this he declined.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Besides his “History of Denmark,” he wrote an “Address to the House of Commons,” for the encouragement of agriculture; “Considerations for promoting Agriculture,” Dublin, 1723; and “A Letter relating to the Bill of Peerage,” 1719. He translated “Franco-Gallia,” a Latin treatise of the civilian Hottoman, giving an account of the free state of France, and other parts of Europe, before the loss of their liberties. The second edition of this work, with additions, and a new preface by the translator, came out in 1721, 8vo. He is likewise reputed the author of several tracts, written with great force of reason and masculine eloquence, in defence of his ideas of the constitution of his country, and the common rights of mankind: and it is certain, that few men of his fortune and quality were more learned, or more highly esteemed by men of learning. In the printed correspondence between Locke and Molyneux, there are letters which shew the high regard those gentlemen had for him.

, the celebrated comic writer of France, whose original name was Pocquelin, was born at Paris about 1620. He was both son and grandson to valets de chambres on one side, and tapissiers on the other, to Louis XIII. and was designed for the latter business, that of a domestic upholsterer, whose duty was to take care of the furniture of the royal apartments. But the grandfather being very fond of the boy, and at the same time a great lover of plays, used to take him often with him to the hotel de Bourgogne; which presently roused up Moliere’s natural genius and taste for dramatic representations, and created in him such a disgust to his intended employment, that at last his father consented to let him study under the Jesuits, at the college of Clermont. During the five years that he resided here, he made a rapid progress in the study of philosophy and polite literature, and, if we mistake not, acquired even now much insight into the varieties of human character. He had here also an opportunity of contracting an intimate friendship with Chapelle, Bernier, and Cyrano. Chapelle, with whom Bernier was an associate in his studies, had the famous Gassendi for his tutor, who willingly admitted Moliere to his lectures, as he afterwards also admitted Cyrano. When Louis XIII. went to Narbonne, in 1641, his studies were interrupted: for his infirm father, not being able to attend the court, Moliere was obliged to go there to supply his place. This, however, he quitted on his fathers death; and his passion for the stage, which had induced him first to study, revived more strongly than ever. Some have said, that he for a time studied the law, and was admitted an advocate. This seems doubtful, but, if true, he soon yielded to those more lively pursuits which made him the restorer of comedy in France, and the coadjutor of Corneille, who had rescued the tragic Muse from barbarism. The taste, indeed, for the drama, was much improved in France, after cardinal de Richelieu granted a peculiar protection to dramatic poets. Many little societies now made it a diversion to act plays in their own houses; in one of which, known by the name of “The illustrious Theatre,” Moliere entered himself; and it was then, in conformity to the example of the actors of that time, that he changed his name of Pocquelin for that of Moliere, which he retained ever after. What became of him from 1648 to 1652 we know not, this interval being the time of the civil wars, which caused disturbances in Paris; but it is probable, that he was employed in composing some of those pieces which were afterwards exhibited to the public. La Bejart, an actress of Champagne, waiting, as well as he, for a favourable time to display her talents, Moliere was particularly kind to her; and as their interests became mutual, they formed a company together, and went to Lyons in 1653, where Moliere produced his first play, called “L'Etourdi,” or the Blunderer, and appeared in the double character of author and actor. I his drew almo_st all the spectators from the other company of comedians, which was settled in that town; some of which company joined with Moliere, and followed him to Beziers in Languedoc, where he offered his services to the prince of Co'nti, who gladly accepted them, as he had known him at college, and was among the first to predict his brilliant career on the stage. He now received him as a friend; and not satisfied with confiding to him the management of the entertainments which he gave, he offered to make him his secretary, which the latter declined, saying, “I am a tolerable author, but I should make a very bad secretary.” About the latter end of 1657, Moliere departed with his company for Grenoble, and continued there during the carnival of 1658. After this he went and settled at Rouen, where he staid all the summer; and having made some journeys to Paris privately, he had the good fortune to please the king’s brother, who, granting him his protection, and making his company his own, introduced him in that quality to the king and queen-mother. That company began to appear before their majesties and the whole court, in Oct. 1658, upon a stage erected on purpose, in the hall of the guards of the Old Louvre; and “were so well approved, that his majesty gave orders for their settlement at Paris. The hall of the Petit Bourbon was granted them, to act by turns with the Italian players. In 1663, Moliere obtained a pension of a thousand livres: and, in 1665, his company was altogether in his majesty’s service. He continued all the remaining part of his life to give new plays, which were very much and very justly applauded: and if we consider the number of works which he composed in about the space of twenty years, while he was himself all the while an actor, and interrupted, as he must be, by perpetual avocations of one kind or other, we cannot fail to admire the quickness, as well as fertility of his genius; and we shall rather be apt to think with Boileau,” that rhime came to him,“than give credit to some others, who say he” wrote very slowly."

In 1591, he served a second time under the earl of Cumberland; and the commission was, as all the former were, to act against the Spaniards. They took several of their ships; and captain Monson, being sent to convoy one of them to England, was surrounded and taken by six Spanish gallies, after a long and bloody fight. On this occasion they detained him as an hostage for the performance of certain covenants, and carried him to Portugal, where he was kept prisoner two years at Cascais and Lisbon. Not discouraged by this ill-luck, he entered a third time into the earl’s service, in 1593; and he behaved himself in this, as in all other expeditions, like a brave and able seaman. In 1594, he was created master of arts at Oxford; in 151)5, he was married; in 1596, he served in the expedition to Cadiz, under Walter Devereux, earl of Essex, to whom he did great service by his wise and moderate counsel, and was deservedly knighted. He was employed in several other expeditions, and was highly honoured and esteemed during Elizabeth’s reign. Military men were not king James’s favourites: therefore, after the death of the queen, he never received either recompence or preferment, more than his ordinary entertainment or pay, according to the services he was employed in. However, in 1604-, he was appointed admiral of the Narrow Seas, in which station he continued till 1616: during which time he supported the honour of the English flag, against the insolence of the infant commonwealth of Holland, of which he frequently complains in his “Naval Tracts;” and protected our trade against the encroachments of France.

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

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

, senior member of the academy of sciences of France, was born July 16, 1714, at Angouleme. His family had been a long time rendered illustrious in arms by An. re* De Montalembert, count d'Esse“, lieutenant-general to the king, commander of his armies in Scotland, governor of Terouane near St. Omers, and who died on the breach, the 12th of June 1553. In 1732 the young Montalembert entered into the army, and distinguished himself at the sieges of Kehl and Philipsburg in 1736. He was afterwards captain of the guards to the prince of Conti. In peace he studied the mathematics and natural philosophy: he read a memoir to the academy of sciences, upon the evaporation of the water in the salt works at Turcheim, in the palatinate, which he had examined, and was made a member in 1747. There are in the volumes in the academy some memoirs from him upon the rotation of bullets, upon the substitution of stoves for fire-places, and upon a pool, in which were found pike purblind, and others wholly without sight. From 1750 to 1755 he established the forges at Angoumoisand Perigord. and there founded cannon for the navy. In 1777 three volumes were printed of the correspondence which he held with the generals and ministers, whilst he was employed by his country in the Swedish and Russian armies during the campaigns of 1757 and 1761, and afterwards in Britanny and the isle of Oleron, when fortifying it. He fortified also Stralsund, in Pomerania, against the Prussian troops, and gave an account to his court of the military operations in which it was concerned; and this in a manner which renders it an interesting part of the History of the Seven-years War. In 1776 he printed the first volume of an immense work upon Perpendicular Fortification, and the art of Defence; demonstrating the inconveniences of the old system, for which he substitutes that of casemates, which admit of such a kind of firing, that a place fortified after his manner appears to be impregnable. His system has been, however, uot always approved or adopted. His treatise was extended to ten volumes in quarto, with a great number of plates; the last volume was published in 1792, and will doubtless carry his name to posterity as an author as well as a general. He married, in 1770, Marie de Comarieu, who was an actress, and the owner of a theatre, for whom the general sometimes composed a dramatic piece. In 1784 and 1786 he printed three operatical pieces, set to music by Cambini and Tomeoni: they were,” La Statue,“” La Bergere qualite,“and” La Bohemienne." Alarmed at the progress of the revolution, he repaired to England in 1789 or 1790, and leaving his wife there, procured a divorce, and afterwards married Rosalie Louise Cadet, to whom he was under great obligation during the Robespierrian terror, and by whom he had a daughter born in July 1796. In his memoir published in 1790, it may be seen that he had been arbitrarily dispossessed of his iron forges, and that having a claim for six millions of livres clue to him, he was reduced to a pension, but ill paid, and was at last obliged to sell his estate at Maumer, in Angoumois, for which he was paid in assignats, and which were insufficient to take him out of that distress which accompanied him throughout his life. He was sometimes almost disposed to put an end to his existence, but had the courage to resume his former studies, and engaged a person to assist him in compleating some new models. His last public appearance was in the institute, where he read a new memoir upon the mountings (affect) of ship-guns. On this occasion he was received with veneration by the society, and attended to with religious silence: a man of eighty-six years of age had never been heard to read with so strong a voice. His memoir was thought of so much importance, that the institute wrote to the minister of marine, who sent orders to Brest for the adoption of the suggested change. He was upon the list for a place in the institute, and was even proposed as the first member for the section of mechanics, but learning that Bonaparte was spoken of for the institute, he wrote a letter, in which he expressed his desire to see the young conqueror of Italy honoured with this new crown. His strength of mind he possessed to the last, for not above a month before his death he wrote reflections upon the siege of St. John d'Acre, which contained further proofs of the solidity of his defensive system, but at last he fell ill of a catarrh, which degenerated into a dropsy, and carried him off March 22, 1802.

, was an Italian physician of so much reputation, that he was regarded by his countrymen as a second Galen. He was born at Verona in 1488, of the noble family of Monte in Tuscany, and sent to Padua by his father, to study the civil law. But his bent lay towards physic; which, however, though he made a vast progress in it, so displeased his father, that he entirely withdrew from him all support. He therefore travelled abroad, and practised physic in several cities with success, and increased his reputation among the learned, as an orator and poet. He lived some time at Home, with cardinal Hyppolitus; then removed to Venice; whence, having in a short time procured a competency, he retired to Padua. Here, within two years after his arrival, he was preferred by the senate to the professor’s chair; and he was so attached to the republic, which was always kind to him, that, though tempted with liberal offers from the emperor, Charles V. Francis I. of France, and Cosmo duke of Tuscany, he retained his situation. He was greatly afflicted with the stone in his latter days, and died in 15'5l. He was the author of many works; part of which were published by himself, and part by his pupil John Crato after his death. They were, however, principally comments upon the ancients, and illustrations of their theories; and have therefore ceased to be of importance, since the originals have lost their value. He translated into Latin the works of Aetius, which he published at the desire of cardinal Hyppolitus. He also translated into Latin verse the poem of Museus; and made translations of the Argonautics attributed to Orpheus, and of Lucian’s Tragopodagra.

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

In 1715 appeared his “Bibliotheca Cosliniana, olim Seguieriana, seu Mss. omnium Graecorum quae in ea conjinentur accurata descriptio,” Paris, folio. This contains a list of 400 Greek Mss. with the age of each, and often a specimen of the style, &c. In 1719, the year in which he was chosen a member of the academy of inscriptions and belles lettres, appeared his great work, and such as no nation had yet produced, entitled “L'Antiquite expliquee et representee en figures,” Paris, 5 vols. usually bound in 10; to which wa, added in 1724, a supplement, in 5 vob. the whole illustrated by a vast number of elegant, accurate, and expensive engravings, representing nearly 40,000 objects of antiquity, engraved from statues, medals, &c. in the various cabinets of Europe. In such a vast collection as this, it is as unnecessary to add that there are many errors, as it would be unjust to censure them with all the parade of criticism. In the case of a work which so many hundred recent scholars and antiquaries have quoted, and which laid the foundation for the improvements of later times, it would be fastidious to withhold the praises so justly due to the laborious author. Whole societies, indeed, would think much of their joint efforts, if they had accomplished a similar undertaking. It remains to be noticed, however, that the first edition of the above dates, is the most valuable. That reprinted in 1722 with the supplement of 1757 is by no means of equal reputation. Some copies made up from the edition in 10 vols. of 1719, and the supplement of 1757, are also in little esteem. This was followed by another interesting work, which is now become scarce, “Les Monumens de la monarchic Francoise, avec les fig. de chaque regne, que Pinjure du temps a epargnees,” Paris, 1729 1733, 5 vols. folio. This collection, of which he published a prospectus in 1725, may be properly called “The Antiquities of France,” and includes all those classes, civil, ecclesiastical, warlike, manners, &c. which form a work of that title in modern language. His last, and not the least important of his works, was published in 1739, 2 vols. folio, under the title of “Bibliotheca bibliothecarum Mss. nova, ubi quae innumeris pcene manuscriptorum bibliothecis continentur ad quod vis litteraturx genus spectantia et notatu digna, describuntur, et indicantur.” Two years after the learned author died suddenly at the abbey of St. Germain des Pres, Dec. 21, 1741, at the advanced age of eighty-seven. Besides the works above mentioned, Montfaucon contributed many curious and valuable essays on subjects of antiquity, &c. to the memoirs of the academy of inscriptions and belles lettres, and other literary journals.

, an able mathematician, was born at Paris in the year 1678, and intended for the profession of the law, to enable him to qualify for a place in the magistracy. From dislike of this destination, he withdrew into England, whence he passed over into the Low Countries, and travelled into Germany, where he resided with a near relation, M. Chambois, the plenipotentiary of France at the diet of Ratisbon. He returned to France in 1699, and after the death of his father, who left him an ample fortune, devoted his talents to the study of philosophy and the mathematics, under the direction of the celebrated Malehranche, to whom he had, some years before, felt greatly indebted for the conviction of the truth of Christianity, by perusing his work on “The Search after Truth.” In 1700 he went a second time to England, and on his return, assumed the ecclesiastical habit, and was made a canon in the church of Notre-Dame, at Paris. About this time he edited, at his own expence, the works of M. Guisnee on “The Application of Algebra to Geometry,” and that of Newton on the “Quadrature of Curves.” In 1703 he published his “Analytical Essay on Games of Chance,” and an improved edition in 1714. This was most favourably received by men of science in all countries. In 1715 he paid a third visit to England, for the purpose of observing a solar eclipse, and was elected a fellow of the Royal Society, to which learned body he soon afterwards transmitted an important treatise on “Infinite Series,'” which was inserted in the Philosophical Transactions for the year 1717. He was elected an associate of the Royal Academy of Sciences at Paris in 1716, and died at the early age of forty-one, of the small-pox. He sustained all the relations of Hie in the most honourable manner, and though subject to fits’ of passion, yet his anger soon subsided, and he was ever ashamed of the irritability of his temper. Such was his steady attention that he could resolve the most difficult problems in company, and among the noise of playful children. He was employed several years in writing “A History of Geometry,” but he did not live to complete it.

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

In 1523, he was chosen speaker of the House of Commons; and, soon after, shewed great intrepidity in frustrating a motion for an oppressive subsidy, promoted by cardinal Wolsey, who came to the house thinking that his presence would intimidate the members. On the contrary, the members refused to speak in his presence, and sir Thomas as speaker, gave him such an evasive answer as made him leave the house in a violent passion. This behaviour, the cardinal afterwards, in the gallery at Whitehall, complained of to him, and said, “Would to God you had been at Rome, Mr. More, when I made you speaker.” To which sir Thomas answered, “Your grace not offended, so would I too.” There was at this time no great cordiality between Wolsey and More, which has been attributed to the cardinal’s being jealous of More’s favour with the king. More, however, does not appear to have been afraid of him, and made him, on a remarkable occasion, the subject of one of his keenest witticisms. During a dispute in the privycouncil, Wolsey so far forgot himself as to call sir Thomas a fool, to which he immediately answered, “Thanks be to God, that the king’s majesty has but one fool in his right honourable council.” At length, to get rid of this rival, -in the gentlest way he could, and even under the mask of honouring his political talents, the cardinal persuaded the king to send him on the embassy into Spain in 1526: but against this sir Thomas pleaded the unfavourable climate of Spain, and the actual state of his health, which his majesty accepted as a sufficient plea, saying, “It is not our meaning, Mr. More, to do you any hurt, but to do you good; we will think of some other, and employ your service otherwise.” The following year he was joined, with several other officers of state, to cardinal Wolsey, in a splendid embassy to France. After his return he was appointed chancellor of the dutchy of Lancaster, and in July 1529, he and his friend bishop Tonstal were appointed ambassadors, to negociate a peace between the emperor, king Henry, and the king of France, which was accordingly concluded at Cambray. Sir Thomas acquitted himself in this negociation, in a manner which procured him the approbation of the king. It was sir Thomas’s custom, when in the course of these embassies he came to any foreign university, to desire to be present at their readings and disputations’, and he would sometimes dispute among them himself, and with so much readiness and learning, as to excite the admiration of the auditors; and when the king visited our own universities, where he was received with learned speeches, sir Thomas More was always appointed to make an extempore answer for the king, as the man of all his court the best qualified for the undertaking.

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

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

Among his lesser performances is a work entitled “Princeps Medicus,” Roctock, 1665, 4to, a dissertation on the cure of the king’s evil by the kings of France and England, which he supports as miraculous. He was answered by Zeingrave, a divine of Strasburgh; and we ought not to be very severe on Morhof s credulity in this respect, when we consider that the royal touch was practised by our own sovereigns for more than half a century after the date of his work. We can however less excuse him for his treatise “De transmutationemetallorum,” Hamburgh, 1673, 8vo, although even in this case it may be said that he was not the only man of learning who at that time had not forsaken the absurdities of alchemy. He published afterwards in German a valuable dissertation on “German Poetry;” another on the style of Livy “De Patavinitate Liviana;” and after his death appeared one of his most elegant dissertations, “De pura dictione Latina,” edited by Mosheim, in 1725, 8vo.

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

, a distinguished botanist of the seventeenth century, was born at Aberdeen in 1620. Being designed for the church, he devoted himself to the study of mathematics in that university; but was diverted from such pursuits by a taste for physic, and especially botany, which, however, was interrupted, for a time at least, by his loyalty, which induced him to become a soldier in the service of king Charles. After receiving a dangerous wound in the head, in the battle near the bridge of Dee, about two miles from Aberdeen, which for a while disabled him, he retired, like many of his countrymen after the ruin of the royal cause, to Paris. Here he became tutor to a young man of some fortune, while he sedulously cultivated the studies necessary for his profession, and took the degree of doctor of physic at Angers, in 1648. Botany, however, was still his favourite pursuit; and by means of M. Robin, who had then the care of the royul garden at Paris, he acquired the patronage of Gaston, duke of Orleans, and was entrusted with the care of that prince’s garden at Blois, accompanied by a handsome salary. He held this charge from 1650 to 1660, when the duke dieil. During that period he devoted himself to the study of theoretical as well as practical botany. He began to plan a system, on the subject of which his royal patron is reported to have delighted to confer with him. He was also dispatched on several botanical expeditions, to various parts of France, for the purpose of enriching the garden. A catalogue of this garden was printed in 1653, by Abel Brunyer, physician to the duke; of which Morison afterwards published at London, in. 1669, a new and enlarged edition, accompanied by a regular and professed criticism of the works of “Caspar and John Bauhin, which Haller has blamed more than it deserves. Morison gives to these great men all the rank and honour which their eminent learning and industry deserve; and while he points out their mistakes or imperfections, he expresses a wish to have his own likewise pointed out. The” Hortus Blesensis" is disposed in alphabetical order, and accompanied by a double dedication, to king Charles II. and James duke of York, to whom its author had become known in France. On the restoration he refused the most liberal offers to settle in France, and on his arrival in London received the titles of king’s physician, and royal professor of botany, with a salary of 200l. a year, and a house, as superintendant of the royal gardens, He was also elected a fellow of the college of physicans.

This book, which contains only thirty-four pages, is written in elegant and ornamented characters; but after this our author printed a book at Paris, with partly the same title, as far as “a la balance” after which it runs thus, “par le moyen d‘un nouveau piston, et corps de pompe, et d’un nouveau movement cyclo-elliptique, &c. avec huit problemes de rnechanique proposez aux plus babiles etaux plus s^avans du siecle, pour le bien public,” 4to. In the dedication to the king of France, he says, that as his majesty was pleased with the models and ocular demonstrations he had the honour to exhibit at St. Germains, he thought himself obliged to present this book as a tribute due to so great a monarch. He states that it contains an. abridged account of the best experiments he had made for the last thirty years respecting the raising of water, with figures, in profile and perspective, calculated to throw light on the mysteries of hydrostatics. It begins with a perpetual almanack, shewing the day of the month or week for the time past, present, and to come, and has various mathematical problems, tables, &c. but nothing respecting the action of fire. In the Phil. Trans, however, vol. IX. (1674), is a paper by him on a new method of raising water, which is not there explained, but was probably effected by some application of stearn similar to that which is described by Bradley in his book on gardening, p. 316. It appears that here also he was followed by Mr. Savery, to whom Bradley attributes the apparatus which he-describes, and illustrates by a plate. It contains evidently the principles of the steam-engine.

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

In 1572 he went into Flanders, to survey the situation, the strength, the fortifications, and garrisons, of that country, and afterwards passed, over to England, where he was graciously received by queen Elizabeth; for, his parts, his knowledge, his uncommon capacity for the management of great affairs, had spread his name far and wide, and made him courted, especially by the great. In 1575 he married, and published the same year a treatise “Concerning Life and Death;” for, though often employed in civil affairs, and oftener solicited to engage in them, yet he passed much of his time in reading and writing. Previously to his marriage he had engaged in an unsuccessful contest with part of the king’s troops; was wounded and taken prisoner; but after the confinement of a few days, and by assuming a false name, he was allowed to ransom himself on easy terms. In 1576, he again took arms, and now his adherents were so powerful, that the king’s partydeemed it expedient to propose a negociation, which was accepted. After this, he went to the court of the king of Navarre, afterwards Henry IV. of France, who received him very graciously, gave him one of the first places in his council, and, upon all occasions, paid great deference to his judgment. Du Plessis, on his part, did the king great services. He went into England to solicit the assistance of Elizabeth for him in 1577, into Flanders in 1578, and to the diet of Augsburg in 1579. In 1578 he published a treatise “Concerning the Church;” in which he explained his motives for leaving the popish, and embracing the protestant religion; and, in 1579, began his book “Upon the Truth of the Christian Religion.” But, before he had made any progress in this, he was seized with an illness, which was thought to be the efiect of some poison that had been given him at Antwerp the year before, with a view of destroying him. He recovered, though dangeronsly ill, and continued to do service to the king of Navarre and the protestant religion. From 1585, when the league commenced, he was more intimately connected with the affairs of the king; and, in 1590, was made his counsellor of state, after having been invested with the government of Sauinur the year before. In 1592, the king appointed him to confer with M. de Villeroy upon the subject of the king’s religion; but the extravagant demands of De Villeroy rendered their conference of no effect. Du Piessis, however, opposed the king’s embracing the popish religion, as long as he could and, when he could prevent it no longer, withdrew himself gradually from court, and resumed his studies.

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

He had before this, in the time of Edward IV. been employed in many important affairs of state; and so early as 1473 had the custody of the great seal committed to his care for a time, in the same year that he was constituted master of the rolls, which last office was renewed to him in May 1476. In 1474 he was sent ambassador to the emperor of Germany and to the king of Hungary, to concert a league with them against Lewis of France: and in, the next year he attended the king, who was in France with his army. At this time Lewis sent him proposals of a truce, which was agreed on; and soon after Morton, with Sir Thomas Howard and two others, were appointed commissioners in a negociation for peace, which they concluded on terms very honourable and advantageous for England.

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

, a native of France, was born in 1660, at Rouen, in Normandy, where also he received his education, on the revocation of the edict of Nantz he came over to England, and lived at first with his godfather and relation, Paul Dominique, esq. but afterwards grew a considerable trader himself, kept a large East-India warehouse in Leadenhall-street, and had a good place in the foreign post-office. During his residence in this kingdom, he acquired a great knowledge of the English language, and not only published a good translation of “Don Quixote,” but also wrote several “Songs,” “Prologues,” “Epilogues,” &c. dedicated a poem “On Tea,” to the Spectator, and, what was still more extraordinary, became a successful dramatic writer in the language of a country of which he was not a native. The respective titles of his numerous pieces of that kind may be seen in the “Biographia Dramatica.” Although married to a very beautiful woman, his morals were licentious, and he was one day found dead in a brothel in the parish of St. Clement Danes, not without suspicion of having been murdered; though other accounts state that he was in some measure accessary to his death. This happened Feb. 19, 1717-18, which, being his birth-day, exactly completed his fifty-eighth year. His body was interred in his parish-church, that of St. Andrew Undershaft, in the city of London.

, in Latin Molinæus, a celebrated lawyer, was born at Paris in 1500. His family was noble, and Papyrius mentions “that those of the family of Moulin were related to Elizabeth queen of England;” which she acknowledged herself in 1572, when conversing with Francis duke of Montmorency, marshal of France and ambassador to England. This relation probably came by Thomas Bullen, or Boleyn, viscount of Rochefort, the queen’s grandfather by the mother’s side; for Sanderus and others say, “that this Rochefort being ambassador to France, gave his daughter Anne of Bulloigne to a gentleman of Brie, a friend and relation of his, to take care of her education; and this gentleman is supposed to be the lord of Fontenay in Brie, of the family of du Moulin.” This branch came from Denys du Moulin, lord of Fontenay in Brie, archbishop of Thoulouse, patriarch of Antioch, and bishop of Paris, where he died in 1447. The subject of our memoir was at first educated at the university of Paris, and afterwards studied law at Poitiers and Orleans, at the latter of which cities he gave lectures on the subject in 1521. In the following year he was received as an advocate of parliament; but, owing to a defect in his speech, was obliged to give up pleading, and confine himself to chamber practice, and the composition of those works which gained him so much reputation. He was an indefatigable student, and set such a value on time, that, contrary to the custom of his age, he had his beard close shaven, that he might not lose any precious moments in dressing it; but in his latter days he permitted it again to grow. From the same love of study, he refused some valuable employments, and even took the resolution never to marry; and that he might be equally free from every other incumbrance, he gave the whole of his property to <rn elder brother, reserving only for his maintenance the profits of his studies. It was not long, however, before he had cause to repent of this uncommon liberality, as his brother behaved to him in a brutal and unnatural way. To revenge himself, he had recourse to an expedient suggested by his professional knowledge. He married, and having children, he resumed, according to the law, the possession of that property with which he had parted so freely when a bachelor. It was in 1538 that he married Louise de Beldon, daughter of the king’s secretary, a lady of a most amiable and affectionate temper, who, instead of being an incumbrance, as he once foolishly thought, proved the great comfort of his life, and in some respect, the promoter of his studies, by her prudent care of those domestic affairs of which literary men are generally very bad managers. She was also his consolation in the many difficulties in which he soon became embroiled. He was a man of an ardent mind and warm temper, totally incapable of concealing his sentiments, particularly in the cause of truth and justice, or regard to his country. Like many other eminent men of that age, he embraced the principles of the reformed religion, first according to the system of Calvin, but afterwards he adopted that of Luther, as contained in the Augsburgh confession. On this account it is said that the Calvinists endeavoured to make him feel their resentment, and even suspended their animosity against the Roman catholics, that they might join with the latter in attacking Du Moulin.

It was in 1552 that he first began to be involved in troubles, which lasted more or less during his whole life. Some years before, Henry II. had issued an edict to repress the frauds and abuses practised at Rome by the conveyancers of benefices, to the great detriment of the ecclesiastical order; and this having occasioned a dispute between his majesty and pope Julius II. he published a new edict forbidding money to be sent to Rome on any pretence. This gave great offence to the pope, who insisted that kings had no right to pass edicts which interfered with ecclesiastical jurisdiction, and that the authority of the holy see was injured by such proceedings. Yet, says Thuanus, our kings always had such a right, and now Du Moulin maintained it with all the force of his profound legal knowledge, and produced not only arguments, but precedents for it; and in treating of the spiritual power of the pope, he traced it to foundations which were by no means of the most honourable kind. This was, in that age, a very bold attempt, and in fact so disconcerted the pope, as to make him willing to listen to the pacific overtures made by the king. It was on this occasion that the marshal de Montmorency (afterwards constable of France) introduced Du Moulin to the king, with these words, “Sire, what your majesty has not been able to do with 300,000 men, has been effected by this little man (Du Moulin was of short stature) with his little book.” The court of Rome, however, never forgot the injury: Clement VIII. ordered his works to be burnt, and they were placed in the “Index expurgatorius,” in the first class of prohibited books. In the permissions which used to be given to read certain works in the Index, those of Machiavel and the impious Du Moulin“were always excepted. Those, however, who in the countries where the Index of prohibited books was respected, were unwilling to be thus totally deprived of the benefit arising from Du Moulin’s able writings on jurisprudence, contrived to have them reprinted under the fictitious name of Gaspar Caballinus de Cingulo; and it was under that name that they used to be quoted for many years. But it was not only at Rome where Du Moulin had to encounter the prejudices of the times; even in France, although his” Observa-f tionssur TEdit du Roi Henry II." (for such was the title of the work) was dedicated to the king, and printed with the royal privilege, it did not fail to render him very obnoxious to such of his countrymen as preferred the interests of Rome to the independent rights of the kingdom; and the authority of parliament was scarcely sufficient to protect him from their vengeance, which proceeded to such acts of violence, that after the mob had pillaged his house, and attempted his life, he was obliged to seek an asylum in Germany, where he was very kindly received. After residing for some time at Tubingen, where people flocked from all quarters for the benefit of his advice, he was encouraged to return to Paris, but had scarcely resumed his accustomed pursuits, when the religious commotions which broke out in that city, obliged him again to leave it, after seeing his house a second time pillaged. He now retired to Orleans, and afterwards to Lyons, where his enemies procured him to be imprisoned. On being released, he returned to Paris, where new troubles awaited him. He first became obnoxious to the Jesuits, whose society was now rising into consequence, and who wanted to be permitted to establish a college for education. This was opposed by the university oY Paris, and Du Moulin supported their opposition. The Jesuits, however, backed by the ciL.nceilor Hospital, gained their point, as the parliament was induced to believe that the mode of education among the Jesuits would be an effectual check to the introduction of the new errors, i. e. the principles of the reformation.

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

Though Henry IV. did not much relish Du Moulin’s endeavours to convert his sister, yet he had always a great regard for him, of which Du Moulin retained a very grateful remembrance; and after the death of Henry, in 1610, he publicly charged the murder of that monarch upon Cotton and the whole order of Jesuits. It had been said that Ravillac was excited to that desperate act by some opinions derived from the writings of the Jesuits, of Mariana in particular, touching the persons and authority of kings: upon which account father Cotton published an “Apologetical Piece,” to shew that the doctrine of the Jesuits was exactly conformable to the decrees of the council of Trent. This was answered by Du Moulin in a book entitled “Anticotton or, a Refutation of Father Cotton” in which he endeavoured to prove that the Jesuits were the real authors of that execrable parricide though some indeed have doubted whether he was the author of that book. In 1615, James I. who had long corresponded with Du Moulin by letters, invited him to England; but this invitation his church at Paris would not suffer him to accept till he had given a solemn promise, in the face of his congregation, that he would return to them at the end of three months. The king received him with great affection took him to Cambridge at the time of the commencement, where he was honoured with a doctor’s degree and, at his departure from England, presented him with a prebend in the church of Canterbury. Du Moulin had afterwards innumerable disputes with the Jesuits, who, when they found him deaf to their promises of great rewards, attempted more than once his life, so that he was obliged at length always to have a guard. In 1617, when the United Provinces desired the reformed churches of England, France, and Germany to send some of their ministers to the synod of Dort, Du Moulin and three others were deputed by the Gallican church, hut were forbidden to go by the king upon pain of death. In 1618 he had an invitation from Leyden to fill their divinity chair, which was vacant, but refused to accept of it. In 1620, when he was preparing to go to the national synod of the Gallican church, lord Herbert of Cherbury, then ambassador from Britain at the court of France, asked him to write to king James, and to urge him, if possible, to undertake the defence of his son-in-law the king of Bohemia, who then stood in need of it. Du Moulin at first declined the office; but the ambassador, knowing his interest with James, would not admit of any excuse. This brought him into trouble; for it was soon after decreed by an order of parliament, that he should be seized and imprisoned, for having solicited a foreign prince to take up arms for the protestant churches. Apprised of this, he secretly betook himself to the ambassador lord Herbert, who suspected that his letters to the king were intercepted; and who advised him to fly, as the only means of providing for his safety. He went to Sedan, where he accepted the divinity-professorship and the ministry of the church; both which he held to the time of his death, which happened March 10, 1658, in his ninetieth year. He took a journey into England in 1623, when cardinal Perron’s book was published against king James; and, at that king’s instigation, undertook to answer it. This answer was published at Sedan, after the death of James, under the title of “Novitas Papismi, sive Perronii confutatio, regisque Jacobi, sed magis sacrae veritatis de-< fensio.” He was the author of many other learned works, of whiph the principal are, “The Anatomy of Arminianism;” “A Treatise on the Keys of the Church” “The Capuchin, or History of the Monks” “A Defence of the Reformed Churches,” &c. &c.

, Hebrew professor of the Royal College of France, and one of the ablest scholars in that language, was born at Orleans in 1587. Few particulars are known of his life, except that he was educated for the church, and attained the preferments of canon and archdeacon of Soissons. His skill in the Hebrew language made him be considered as a proper person to succeed Cayet as Hebrew professor, and he was accordingly promoted by his majesty to that office in July 1614. He fulfelled its duties with great reputation for thirty years, and died in 1644, in the fifty-seventh year of his age. Dupin says, that he joined to a perfect knowledge of the Hebrevr, a solid and acute judgment, and wrote in a pure, concise, and easy style, and had such acquaintance with sacred history, and the fundamentals of religion, that few could be better qualified to interpret scripture. The most esteemed of his works is his commentary on the Psalms, “Commentarius litteralis et historicus in omnes Psalmos,” &c. 1630, fol. His whole works were published in two volumes folio, at Paris, 1650, including the above on the Psalms: his “Varia Sacra,” explaining the most difficult passages of the Old Testament from Genesis to Judges: his “Assertio yeVitatis Hebraicae,” against father Morin, &c. &c.

In the summer of 1763, Mr. Murphy went his first, the Norfolk, circuit; but with little success; and afterwards appeared occasionally as a pleader in London. The Muse, however, he confesses, “still had hold of him, and occasionally stole him away from ‘ Coke upon Littleton.’” In his law pursuits he continued till 1787, when, to his great astonishment, a junior to him on the Norfolk circuit was appointed king’s counsel. Disappointed at this, he sold his chambers in Lincoln’s-Inn, in July 1788, and retired altogether from the bar. The intermediate time, however, had been filled up by the production of his “Three Weeks after Marriage,” “Zenobia,” “The Grecian Daughter,” and other dramatic pieces, generally acted with great applause, and which are yet on the stock list. After he retired from the bar he bought a house at Hammersmith, and there prepared various publications for the press, among which, in 1786, was an edition of his works collectively, in seven volumes, octavo. In 1792, he appeared as one of the biographers of Dr. Johnson, in “An Essay on his Life and Genius;” but this was a very careless sketch, copied almost verbatim from the account of sir John Hawkins’s Life of Johnson, in the Monthly Review. In the following year he published a translation of Tacitus, in four volumes, quarto, dedicated to the late Edmund Burke. To this work, which is executed in a masterly manner, he added “An Essay on the Life and Genius of Tacitus;” with historical supplements and frequent annotations and comments. Mr. Murphy continued to write to an advanced age, and in 1798 he published his “Arminius,” intended to justify the war then carried on against the ambition of France, and which, with the majority of the nation, he considered as both just and necessary. Through his interest with lord Loughborough, he obtained the office of one of the commissioners of bankrupts, to which, during the last three years of his life, was added a pension of two hundred pounds a year. In his latter days, after he had published a “Life of Garrick,” a very sensible decay of mental powers became visible. He continued, however, to be occasionally cheered and assisted by a few friends, until his death, at his lodgings at Knightsbridge, June 18, 1805. From his biographer’s account it appears he had perfectly reconciled his mind to the stroke of death: when he had made his will, and given plain and accurate directions respecting his funeral, he said, “I have been preparing for my journey to another region, and now do not care how soon I take my departure.” On the day of his death he frequently repeated the lines of Pope:

, an able mathematician, was born at Paris in 1585, and was educated to the law. He became counsellor to the Chatelet, and afterwards treasurer of France in the generality of Amiens, but was too much attached to mathematical pursuits, and master of too ample a fortune, to pursue his profession as a source of emolument. He was the friend and acquaintance of Des Cartes, and entered into a vindication of him, in the dispute which he had with M. Fermat, and was afterwards a mediator of the peace which was made between those learned men in 1638. In the same year Mydorge published a Lutin treatise “On Conic Sections,” in four bt oks, which Meisenne has inserted in his “Abridgment of Universal Geometry.” In 1642, he and Des Cartes received an invitation from sir Charles Cavendish to settle in England, which he declined, on the approach of the rebellion. He died at Paris in 1647, in the sixty-third year of his age. He was a practical mechanic, as well as an able mathematician, and spent more than a thousand crowns on the fabrication of glasses for telescopes, burning mirrors, mechanical engines, and mathematical instruments.

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

, baron of Merchiston in Scotland, and the celebrated inventor of the Logarithms, was the eldest son of sir Archibald Napier of Merchiston, and born in 1550. After going through the ordinary course of education at the university of St. Andrew’s, he made the tour of France, Italy, and Germany. On his return he applied himself chiefly to the study of mathematics, to which he joined that of the Scriptures; and in both discovered the most extensive knowledge and profound penetration. His “Essay upon the book of the Apocalypse” indicates the most acute investigation; though time has discovered that his calculations concerning particular events had proceeded upon fallacious data. But what his fame now solely rests upon is his great and fortunate discovery of logarithms in trigonometry, by which the ease and expedition in calculation have so wonderfully assisted the science of astronomy and the arts of practical geometry and navigation. Napier, having much attachment to astronomy and spherical trigonometry, had occasion to make many numeral calculations of such triangles, with sines, tangents, &c. which being expressed in large numbers, occasioned a great deal of labour and trouble: To spare themselves part of this labour, Napier, and other authors about his time, endeavoured to find out certain short modes of calculation, as is evident from many of their writings. To this necessity, and these endeavours it is, that we owe several ingenious contrivances; particularly the computation by Napier’s Rods, or Bones, as they are called, and several other curious and short methods that are given in his “Rabdologia” and at length, after trials of many other means, the most complete one of logarithms, in the actual construction of a large table of numbers in arithmetical progression, adapted to a set of as many others in geometrical progression. The property of such numbers had been long known, viz. that the addition of the former answered to the multiplication of the latter, &c. but it wanted the necessity of such very troublesome calculations as those abovementioned, joined to an ardent disposition, to make such a use of that property. Perhaps also this disposition was urged into action by certain attempts of this kind which it seems were made elsewhere; such as the following, related by Wood 'in his “Athenae Oxonienses,” under the article Briggs, on the authority of Oughtred and Wingate, viz. “That one Dr. Craig, a Scotchman, coming out of Denmark into his own country, called upon John Neper baron of Marcheston near Edinburgh, and told him, among other discourses, of a new invention in Denmark, (by Longomontanus as ‘tis said) to save the tedious multiplication and division in astronomical calculations. Neper being solicitous to know farther of him concerning this matter, he could give no other account of it, than that it was by proportionable numbers. Which hint Neper taking, he desired him at his return to call upon him again. Craig, after some weeks had passed, did so, and Neper then shewed him a rude draught of that he called ’ Canon Mirabilis Logarithmorum.' Which draught, with some alterations, he printed in 1614; it came forthwith into the hands of our authorBriggs, and into thoseof William Oughtred, from whom the relation of this matter came.”

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

Having now rendered himself obnoxious to the popular party, he found it necessary to leave London, and for a time lay concealed at the house of Dr. Peter Heylin, at Minster-Lovel, near Burford; till, at length being discovered, he was imprisoned in Newgate, and would probably have been executed, had not iLenthal, the speaker of the house of commons, who knew him and his relations well, and Bradshaw, president of the high court of justice,' obtained his pardon. Thinking his talents useful, and caring* little whom they employed, they made such promises as easily induced him to write on the side of the independents. Needham had no scruples as to principle, and after accepting their offers, immediately published a third weekly paper, called “Mercurius Politicus,” which came out every Wednesday, in two sheets, 4to, commencing with the 9th of June 1649, and ending with 6th of June 1650, which being Thursday, he began again with Number I. from Thursday, June 6, to Thursday, June 13, 1650, beginning, “Why should not the commonwealth have a fool, as well as the king had,” &c. This paper, which contained many discourses against monarchy, and in behalf of a free state, at least, before Cromwell was made protector, was carried on without any interruption till about the middle of April 1660, when it was prohibited by an order of the council of state, and Needham fled the kingdorn, justly dreading what never was inflicted on him; for after the restoration, by means of a hired courtier of as little principle as himself, he obtained his pardon under the great seal. After this he practised physic, chiefly among the dissenters, and contrived to support himself, and keep up his fame for scurrility by some controversies with the faculty, until his death, which happened suddenly in 1678. Needham’s character may be gathered from the preceding short account. He had natural parts, not much improved by education, and wrote in that coarse and vulgar style of obloquy, which was suited to his readers, and, as we have seen in our own times, will find readers enough to reward the grossest prostitution of talents. Besides the “Mercuries 7 ' already mentioned, he published a great number of other things, the titles of which are worth transcribing, as a specimen of the style in which political controversy was then carried on 1.” A Check to the Checker of Britannicus,“&c. 1624 2, A sharp libel against his Majesty’s late message for Peace, anno 1645 in answer to which was published” The Refusers of Peace inexcusable, by his Majesty’s command,“1645; one sheet 4to. 3.” A Hue and Cry after the King, written after the King’s Defeat at Naseby, in 1645.“4.” The Case of the Kingdom, stated according to the proper interests of the several parties engaged,“&e. 'the third edition in 1647. 5.” The Levellers levelled or the Independents’ Conspiracy to root out Monarchy, an interlude,“1647. 6.” A Plea for the King and Kingdom, by way of answer to a late Remonstrance of the Army,“1648. 7.” Digitus Dei; or God’s justice upon treachery and treason, exemplified in the Life and Death of the late James duke of Hamilton,“&c. 1649. 8. The year before came out a book entitled” The manifold Practices and Attempts of the Hamiltons, &c. to get the Crown of Scotland,“1648, probably written by Needham, as the whole of it is contained in the” Digitus Dei.“9.” The Public Intelligencer,“&c. these came out weekly on Monday, but contained mostly the same matter that was in the” Political Mercuries.“10.” The Case of the Commonwealth of England stated,“&c. 1649. 11.” Discourse of the excellency of a Free State above Kingly Government,“1650, published with the former, and reprinted in 1768, by Richard Baron, a politician of the republican stamp. 12.” An Appendix added out of Claudius Salmasius’s Defensio Regis, and Mr. Hobbes’s de corpore politico.“13.” Trial of Mr. John Goodwin, at the bar of religion and right reason,“&c. 1657. In reply to this, Goodwin took occasion, in a piece entitled” The Triumviri,“to characterize our author as having a foul mouth, which Satan hath opened, '&c. 1658. 15.” Interest will not lye, &c. in refutation of c The Interest of England stated,“1659. 14.” The moderate Informer, &c. communicating the most remarkable transactions, both civil and military, in the Commonwealth of England,“&c. It commences with the 12th of May 1659, but was not carried on above two or three weeks. Needham, it seems, was dismissed from his place of writing the weekly news, in the time of Richard, by the influence of the Presbyteriaus, and John Can put in his room; yet, in spite of opposition, he carried on the writing of his” Mercuries.“16.” News from Brussels, &c. in a Letter dated 10 March, 1659;“but said to be written by our author against Charles II. and his court, and conveyed to the press by Praise-God Barebones. It was answered about a week after, in” The late News, or Message from Brussels unmasked.“17.” A short History of the English Rebellion completed, inverse,“1661; a collection of all such verses as he had printed before each of his” Mercurii Pragmatici.“To it he prefixed” The true Character of a rigid Presbyter;“and added the coat of arms of sir John Presbyter: but the * character was pot of his writing. It was reprinted in 1680, 4to. 18.” Discourse concerning Schools and School-masters,“1663. 19.” MedelaMedicinae,“&c. 1665 answered by two doctors of that faculty, fellows of the college of physicians, viz. John Twisden, in his” Medicina veterum vindtcata,“&c. and Robert Sprackling, in his” Medela Ignorantiæ.“20.” An epistolary Discourse“before” Medicina Instaurata, &c. by Edward Bolnest, M. D.“1665. 21.” A Pacquet of Advices tfnd Animadversions, &c. occasioned by a Letter from a person of quality to his friend in the country, written* By lord Shaftesbury,“1676. 22.” A second Palcquet of Advices, &c. in answer to some Considerations upon the Question whether the Parliament b& dissolved by Hs Prorogation for Fifteen Months?“and another, entitled” The Long Parliament dissolved,“written by Denzil lord Holies, but owned by his chaplain, a nonconformist, named Carey, or Carew, who was comAvitted prisoner to the Tower of London in the beginning of February, 1676. 23.” A Letter frona a person newly chosen to sit in this Parliament, to a Bencher in the Temple,“&c. 24.” A Narrative of the cause and manner of the Imprisonment of the Lords now close prisoners in the Tower of London.“Needham is said to have been encouraged to write these two Pacquets by lord Danby. 25.” Christianissimus Christianandus or Reasons for the Reduction of France to d more Christian state in Europe,“1678. 26.” A Preface to `A new idea of the Practice of Physic, written by Francis de la Boe Sylvius,'" 1675.

, a physician and anatomist of eminence, was born in London in 1699, where his father was a barrister. After receiving the rudiments of his education at a private school in the country, where his docility and sweetness of temper endeared him to his master and school- fellows, he was in a few years removed to Westminster, and thence to Oxford, where he was admitted a commoner of Exeter college, under the tuition of Mr. John Haviland, in 1714. He applied himself to the usual academical exercises with great assiduity, and took his degrees in arts at the accustomed periods, that of M. A. in 1721. He paid his greatest attention to natural philosophy, and after reading a few books on anatomy, engaged in dissections, which he pursued with so much reputation as to be chosen reader of anatomy in the university in 1726, about two years after taking his degree of B. M. In this office he used his utmost endeavours to introduce a zeal for this neglected study, and obtained a high and well merited reputation. His residence at Oxford, however, was only temporary; for at the close of his course he returned to London, where he bad determined to settle, after having made a short trial of practice in Cornwall, and a subsequent visit to the principal schools of France and Italy. At Paris, by conversing freely with the learned, he soon recommended himself to their notice and esteem. Winslow’s was the only good system of physiology at that time known in France, and Morgagni’s and Santorini’s, of Venice, in Italy. On his return to England he resumed his anatomical and physiological lectures in London, and they were frequented, not only by students from both the universities, but by many surgeons, apothecaries, and others. His reputation rapidly extended, and in 1728 he was elected a fellow of the royal society, to which he communicated several papers, which were published in the Philosophical Transactions, especially some observations on the nature of aneurisms, in which he controverted the opinion of Dr. Freind; and a description of a singular disease, in which the pulmonary vein was coughed up. He also made observations on a treatise by Helvetius, on the lungs. In 1729, he received the degree of M. D at Oxford, and became a fellow of the college of physicians in. 1732. In 1734 he was appointed to read the Gulstonian lectures at the college, and chose the structure of the heart, and the circulation of the blood, for his subjects. At the request of the president, Dr. Nichols again read the Gulstonian lectures in 1736, choosing for his topics the urinary organs, and the nature and treatment of calculous diseases; and in 1739 he delivered the anniversary Harveian oration. In 1743 he married one of the daughters of the celebrated Dr. Mead, by whom he had a son and daughter, both living.

His arduous application to polite literature enabled him to imitate the style of the best Latin authors, particularly that of Terence; but he is most admired as an elegant writer in his own language. In France he suffered much by undertaking the defence of Jansenius, whose opinions were condemned by the Sorbonne, the clergy of France, and indeed the whole church. His works are very numerous, consisting of not less than an hundred articles: the principal are, I.“Moral Essays,” 14 vols. 12mo, among which are three volumes of “Letters and Reflections on the Epistles and Gospels,” 5 vols, which joined to the “Theological Instructions on the Sacrament,” 2 vols, “on the Creed,” 2 vols.; “on the Lord’s Prayer,” 1 vol.; “on the Decalogue,” 2 vols. and the “Treatise on Prayer,” 2 vols, form the 23 volumes of what are called “Moral Essays.” 2. “Lettresimaginaires et visionaires,” 1667, 2 vols. 12mo. 3. The small “Perpetuity of the Faith,” with a defence of it. 4. The large “Perpetuity,” written in conjunction with M. Arnauld, 3 vols. 4to, but almost entirely by M. Nicole. 5. “Les Prejuges legitimes centre les Calvinistes,” 12mo. 6. “Tr. de PUnke* de l'Eglise,” against Jurieu. 7. “Les Pretendes Réformés convaincus de Schisme; Réfutation des principales erreurs des Quitistes.” Besides many other controversial pieces in defence of Jansenius and M. Arnauld, he published a selection of Latin epigrams, entitled “Epigrammaturn Delectus,” 1659, 12mo, and a Latin translation of the “Provincial Letters,” with notes, &c. under the assumed name of Wendrock. A history of the life and writings of M. Nicole was published in 1735, 12mo.

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

, cardinal and archbishop of Paris, commander of the order of the Holy Ghost, proviseur of the house and society of the Sorbonne, and superior of that of Navarre, was the second son of Anne dukede Noailles, peer of France, and born May 27, 1651. In consequence of his birth, he became lord of Aubrach, commander of the order of the Holy Ghost, duke of St. Cloud, and peer of France. He was bred with great care, and his inclination leading him to the church, he took holy orders; and proceeding in the study of divinity, he performed his exercise for licentiate in that science with reputation, and was created D. D. of the Sorbonne, March 14, 1676. Three years afterwards the king gave him the bishopric of Cahors, whence he was translated to Chalons on the Marne, in 1680. He discharged the duties of both these dioceses with a distinguished vigilance, and a truly pastoral charity; so that, the archbishopric of Paris becoming vacant in 1695, by the death of Francis de Harlay, his majesty chose the bishop of Chalons to fill that important see. Invested with this dignity; he applied himself wholly to the affairs of it, and made excellent rules for the reformation of the clergy.

As he considered that one principal branch of the episcopal province is to maintain sound doctrine, and to keep the flock committed to his care from being tainted with erroneous opinions, he vigorously opposed the growing errors of Quietism, which he had before condemned at Chalons; and now made it his business to root out of the capital of France. He proceeded against them, not only by judicial sentences, but likewise by instructions in his pastoral, charges. Among these he printed, in 1697, “A Pastoral Letter upon Christian Perfection, and the interior Life,” against the illusions of those mystics. At the same time, he testified an equal zeal against the errors of Jansenism; and in order to preserve his flock from that infection, he drew up a pastoral letter upon the questions then agitated concerning predestination and grace, cautioning them on one hand against the errors which were condemned by the popes, and explaining to them at large what was the rule of faith in relation to mysteries, according to the principles of St. Austin, and the fathers who embraced his doctrine.

So remarkable a prediction not a little increased the credulity of the public, and he was honoured shortly after with a visit from Emanuel duke of Savoy, and the princess Margaret of France, his consort. Charles IX. coming to Salon, being eager to see him, Nostradamus complained of the little esteem his countrymen had for him, on which the monarch publicly declared, that he should hold the enemies of Nostradamus to be his enemies. In passing, not Jong after, through the city of Aries, he sent for Nostradamus, presented him with a purse of 200 crowns, together with a brevet, constituting him his physician in ordinary, with the same appointment as the rest. But our prophet enjoyed these honours only for the space of sixteen, months, for he died July 2, 1566, at Salon. Besides his “Centuries,” we have some other pieces of his composition, and his prophetical works have been translated into English. He left three sons and three daughters John, his second son, exercised with reputation the business of a proctor in the parliament of Provence: he wrote the “Lives of the ancient Provencal Poets, called Troubadours,” which was printed at Lyons in 1575, 8vo. Cæsar, the eldest son, was born at Salon in 1555, and died in 1629: he left a “Manuscript giving an Account ofthe most remarkable events in the History of Provence, from 1080 to 1494,” in which he inserted the lives of the poets of that country. These memoirs falling into the hands of his nephew Caesar Nostradamus, gentleman to the duke of Guise, he undertook to complete the work; and being encouraged by a present, of 3000 livres from the estates of the country, he carried the account up to the Celtic Gauls the impression was finished at Lyons, in 1614, and published under the title of “Chronique de l'Histoire de Provence,” The next son of Michel is said to have imitated his father, and ventured to predict, that Pouzin, which was then besieged; would be destroyed by fire. In order to prove the truth of his prophecy, he was seen, during the tumult, setting fire to all parts of the town; which so much enraged M. De Saint Luke, that he rode over him with his horse, and killed him. But this story has been justly called in question,

, comptroller of the royal edifices of France, and an eminent planner of gardens, was born at Paris in 1613. We know little of him, except that he was brought up as a gardener under his father, until about 1653, when he was first employed by the superintendant Fouquet, to lay out the magnificent gardens of Vaux-le-Vicomte, celebrated by La Fontaine in his poems. In this work he was the creator of those porticoes, covered walks, grottoes, labyrinths, &c. which then were thought the greatest ornaments of gardens, and particularly gratified the taste of Louis XIV. who employed him in the decoration of his favourite residences at Versailles, Trianon, Fontainbleau, &c. Le Nostre went to Rome in 1678, and afterwards travelled through Italy; and it is said he found nothing in the most celebrated gardens equal to what he had himself executed. While at Rome, pope Innocent XI, was desirous of seeing le Notre, and gave him a long audience, at the conclusion of which the latter exclaimed, “I have now seen the two greatest men in the world your holiness, and the king, my master” “There is a great difference between them,” replied the pope “the king is a great and victorious prince, and I am a poor priest, servant of the servants of God.” Le Notre, delighted with this answer, and forgetting by whom it was made, clapped his hand on the pope’s shoulder, saying, “My reverend father, you are in good health, and will bury all the sacred college;” and Le Notre, more and more charmed with the sovereign pontiff’s kindness, and the particular esteem he expressed for the king, fell upon his neck, and embraced him. It was his custom thus to embrace all who praised Louis XIV.; and he embraced that prince himself every time he returned from the country. He was some time in England, and, probably on the invitation of Charles II. laid out St. James’s and Greenwich parks. In 1675, when he was again in France, his long services were rewarded by letters of noblesse, and the cross of St. Michael. The king would have given him a coat of arms, but he replied that he had one already, “consisting of three snails surmounted by a cabbage.” At the age of four-score he desired permission to retire, which the king granted him, on condition that he would sometimes come and see him. He died at Paris, in 1700, at the age of 87. He is said to have had a fine taste for the arts in general, especially for that of painting; and some pieces of his execution are mentioned as existing in the royal cabinet.

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

Hitherto Obrecht had professed the Protestant religion; but the king of France having made himself master of Strasburg, he was induced, by the persuasions of the Jesuits, who were established at Strasburg by Lewis XIV. to abjure his religion in 1648, at Paris. Upon his return to Strasburg, he w resumed his profession in the law; and it was about this time that he wrote the notes which we see in some editions of Grotius, “De jure belli ac pacis.” In 1685, the king of France nominated him to preside, in his majesty’s name, in the senate of Strasburg, with the title of praetor-royal, in imitation of the old Romans; and from that time Obrecht applied himself entirely to public affairs. The judges of Strasburg, according to the principles of the reformed religion, were empowered to dissolve marriages in case of adultery, and to enable the injured party to marry again. In opposition to this custom, Obrecht translated, into the German tongue, St. Austin’s book of adulterous marriages; and obtained from the king a prohibition, upon pain of death, either to tolerate or solemnize the marriage, for the future, of any persons that were separated or divorced for adultery. This edict was made in 1687; and, in 1688, Obrecht translated into High Dutch the treatise of Father Dez Primier, rector of the Jesuits at Strasburg, entitled “The Re-union of the Protestants of the Church of Strasburg to the Catholic Church.”

Although, by the rights of his praetorship, every thing done in the senate must necessarily pass through his hands, yet he was so expeditious, and so good a manager of time, that there was some left for his studies, which served to him. as a relaxation from public business. During these intervals. he published an edition of “Dictys Cretensis,” with notes, in 1691. He afterwards intended to give a more correct edition of “Quintilian,” by the help of an excellent manuscript which he had recovered. He finished it, and had prepared the notes for the press, which were afterwards added to BurmanrTs valuable edition of 1720, 2 vols. 4to. In 1698, Obrecht was deputed to the court of France, to manage the interests of the city of Strasburg, and the king appointed him in 1700 his commissary and envoy to Francfort, upon affairs relating to the succession of the duchess of Orleans. Here also he undertook a most arduous task, respecting the eventual succession of the duke of Anjou to the crown of Spain; and made it his business to collect all the pieces that had been written, either by civilians or historians, upon the subject of establishing or regulating the rights of succession to that vast monarchy: all with a design to prove that the pretensions of the house of Austria were not well founded. The title of his work was “Excerptorum historicorum et juridicorum dre natura successionis in Monarchiam Hispaniae, mense Dec. 1700,” in 4to. Our author likewise drew up the plan of a particular treatise upon the succession to the duchy of Milan: the impression of which waited only for the publication of the emperor’s manifesto. His last publication was “A Translation of the life of Pythagoras,” from the Greek of Jamblichus. The multiplicity of these labours at length impaired his health, and after he had passed sentence upon the rights of the duchess of Orleans, he ordered himself to be conveyed to Strasburgh, where he died Aug. 6, 1701.

, an eminent Polish divine, was descended from an ancient family in Prussia, and born about 1618. In the course of his studies, which were passed at Kalisch, he applied himself particularly to poetry; for which he had an early taste. After he had finished his courses of divinity and jurisprudence, he travelled to Italy; where he visited the best libraries, and took the degree of doctor of law at Rome. Thence he went to France, and was introduced at Paris to the princess Mary Louisa; who being about to marry Ladislaus IV. king of Poland, Olzoffski had the honour of attending her thither. On his arrival, the king offered him the secretary’s place; but he declined it, for the sake of following his studies. Shortly after he was made a canon of the cathedral church at Guesne, and chancellor to the archbishopric: in which post he managed all the affairs of that see, the archbishop being very old and infirm. After the death of this prelate, he was called to court, and made Latin secretary to his majesty; which place he filled with great reputation, being a complete master of that language. In the war between Poland and Sweden, he wrote a piece against that enemy to his country, entitled “Vindiciae Polonicae.” He attended at the election of Leopold to the imperial crown of Germany, in quality of ambassador to the king of Poland, and went afterwards in the same character to Vienna, to solicit the withdrawing of the imperial troops from the borders of the Polish territories. Immediately on his return he was invested with the high office of prebendary to the crown, and promoted to the bishopric of Culm. After the death of Ladislaus he fell into disgrace with the queen, because he opposed the design she had of setting a prince of France upon the throne of Poland however, this did not hinder him from being made vice-chancellor of the crown. He did all in his power to dissuade Casimir II. from renouncing the crown; and, after the resignation of that king, several competitors appearing to fill the vacancy, Olzoffski on the occasion published a piece, called “Censura,” &c. This was answered by another, entitled “Censura Censurse Candidatorum;” and the liberty which our vice-chancellor had taken in his “Censura” brought him into some danger. It was chiefly levelled against the young prince of Muscovy, who was one of the competitors, though no more than eight years of age; and the czar was highly incensed, and made loud complaints and menaces, unless satisfaction were given for the offence. Upon the election of Michel Koribut to the throne, Olzoffski was dispatched to Vienna, to negotiate a match between the new-elected king and one of the princesses of Austria; and, on his return from that embassy, was made grand chancellor of the crown. He did not approve the peace concluded with the Turks in 1676, and wrote to the grand vizir in terms of which the grand seignor complained to the king of Poland.

, a learned and pious prince of the s blood royal of France, was the son of Philip duke of Orleans, afterwards regent, and of Mary Frances of Bourfron. He was born at Versailles, Aug. 4, 1703, and appeared first at court at the time the prince his father became regent of France. After the death of the regent he married Augusta Maria, of Baden, in 1724; a princess whose amiable qualifications made her death justly lamented by her consort, and people of all denominations. She died in 1726, having been married only two years. The prince, deeply affected with his loss, and sensible of the infelicity of titles^ pre-eminence, and all earthly enjoyments, sought for that comfort in the exercises of religion which courts cannot bestow. In 1730 he toot, in the abbey of St. Genevieve, an apartment mean and inconvenient, and in a manner sequestered from the world. He first retired to it only at the solemn festival, but resided in it more frequently after 1735; and, when he left the court in 1742, took up his constant residence there, nor returned more to his palace, except to attend the council, from which he seldom absented himself. In his retirement he practised the most rigid austerities; slept on a rough straw bed, rose early, passed several hours in prayer, fasted, drank nothing but water, and constantly deprived himself of the convenience of fire, even in the most inclement seasons; and was, in all his actions, an example of severe self-denial. His charitable disposition led him to relieve the indigent of every nation, found several public charities, and send missionaries to the remotest parts of the world.

Soon after his arrival he contracted an intimacy with the infamous favourite of Jarnes I. Robert Carr, afterwards earl of Somerset. This man’s history is too well known to render it necessary to dwell upon it in this place. Intoxicated as he was with an advancement at court, of which he was so unworthy, he was not wholly insensible of his own ignorance and inexperience; and he found in sir Thomas Overbury a judicious and sincere adviser, who endeavoured to instill into him the principles of prudence and discretion; and so long as he was content to be ruled by Overbury’s friendly counsels, he enjoyed, what Hume says is rare, the highest favour of the prince, without being hated by the people. It is easy, therefore, to see what attached Carr to Overbury; and the latter, who could not but perceive the inferiority of the royal favourite, appears to have connected himself with him from motives of ambition, which, for a time, he had every prospect of gratifying. In 1608 he was knighted by the influence of Carr, and his father was appointed one of the judges for Wales. The year following, sir Tnornas made another tour on the continent, which is said to have produced “Observations upon the Provinces United; and on the State of France,” Lond. 1651, 12mo; but it is very doubtful whether he was the real author of this work.

In 1519, Maximilian died, and the kings of France and Spain immediately declared themselves candidates for the Imperial throne. Henry, encouraged by the pope, was also induced to offer himself as a candidate, and Pace was ordered to attend the diet of the empire, sound the opinions of the electors, and endeavour to form a judgment of the likelihood of his success. Pace, however, soon discovered that his royal master had started too late, and that tven the electors of Mentz, Cologn, and Triers, who were disposed to favour his pretensions, pleaded, with a shew of regret, that they were pre-engaged. The election fell on Charles V. In 1516, Pace was instituted treasurer of Lichfield, which he resigned in 1522, on being made dean of Exeter. In 1511), he succeeded Colet as dean of St. Paul’s; and some say, held also the deanery of Sarum, but this is not quite clear, although he is called dean of Salisbury by Herbert, in his “Life and Reign of Henry VIII.” In 1521, he was made prebendary of Combe and Harnham, in the church of Sarum, and we find mention of some other church preferments he held from 1516 to 1522, but they are so dubiously related that it is difficult to give them in due order.

, a famous Cordelier, and one of the ablest critics of his time, was born at Rognes, a small town in Provence, March 31, 1624. He took the monk’s habit in the convent of the Cordeliers at Aries, and professed himself there in 1641. After he had finished the usual course of studies in philosophy and divinity, he preached some time, and was at length made four times provincial of his order. These occupations did not hinder him from applying to chronology and ecclesiastical history, in which he excelled. He printed in the Journal des Savans, Nov. 11, 1686, a learned “Dissertation upon the Consular Office,” in which he pretends to have discovered the rules, according to which the Roman emperors took the dignity of consul at some certain times more than others, but in this he is not thought to have been successful. His most considerable work is “A Critique upon the Annals of Baronius;” in which he has rectified an infinite number of mistakes, both in chronology and in facts. He published the first volume of this work, containing the first four centuries, at Paris, in 1689; with a dedication to the clergy of France, who allowed him a pension. The whole work was printed after his death, in four volumes, folio, at Geneva, in 1705, by the care of his nephew, father Francis Pagi, of the same order. It is carried to the year 1198, where Baronius ends. Pagi was greatly assisted in it by the abbe* Longuerue, who also wrote the eloge of our author, which is prefixed to the Geneva edition. Another edition was published at Geneva in 1727. It is a work of great utility, but the author’s chronology of the popes of the first three centuries is not approved by the learned. He has also prefixed a piece concerning a new chronological period, which he calls “Graeco-Romana,” and uses for adjusting all the different epochas, which is not without its inconveniences. Our author wrote some other works of inferior note before his death, at Aix, in Provence, June 7, 1699. His character is that of 'a very able historian, and a learned and candid critic. His style has all the simplicity and plainness which suits a chronological narration. He held a correspondence with several learned men, as Stillingfleet, Spanheim, Cuper, Dodwell, the cardinal Noris, &c.

, an ingenious artist, was born at Agen in France, about 1524. He was brought up as a common labourer, and was also employed in surveying. Though destitute of education, he was a very accurate observer of nature; and in the course of his surveys, he conceived the notion that France had been formerly covered by the sea, and propagated his opinion at Paris, against a host of opponents, with the greatest boldness. It was considered as a species of heresy. For several years after, he employed himself in trying different experiments, in order to discover the method of painting in enamel. But some person presenting him with a beautiful cup of that kind of stone-ware called by the French faience, because it was first manufactured in a city of Italy called Faenza, the sight of this cup inflamed him with an insurmountable desire to discover the method of applying enamel to stoneware. At this time he was ignorant of even the first rudiments of the art of pottery, nor was there any person within, his reach from whom he could procure information. His experiments were, therefore, unsuccessful, and he wasted his whole fortune, and even injured his health, without gaining his object. Still he gave it up only for a time, and when a few years of industry and frugality had put it in his power, he returned to his project with more ardour than ever. The same fatigues, the same sacrifices, the same expences Were incurred a second time, but the result was different. He discovered, one after another, the whole series of operations, and ascertained the method of applying enamel to stone-ware, and of making earthenware superior to the best of the Italian manufacture. He was now treated with respect, and considered as a man of genius. The court of France took him under its protection, and enabled him to establish a manufactory, where the manufacture of the species of stone-ware which he had invented was brought to a state of perfection. The only improvement which was made upon it afterwards in France, was the application of different colours upon the enamel, and imitating the paintings which had been executed long before on porcelain vessels. This improvement scarcely dates farther back than thirty or forty years. It was first put in practice by Joseph Hanon, a native of Strasbourg, and was suggested by a German, who sold to Hanon the method of composing the colours applied upon the porcelain of Saxony. These vessels were soon after superseded by the Queen’s ware of the celebrated Wedgewood, which both in cheapness, beauty, and elegance of form, far surpassed any thing of the kind that had appeared in Europe.

, one of the wits of Italy, the son of Jerome Pallavicino, was born at Placentia about 1615, or from that to 1620. Less from inclination, than from some family reasons, he entered the congregation of the regular canons of Latran, and took the habit, with the name of Mark Anthony, in their house at Milan. After commencing his studies here with much success, he went to Padua for further proficiency. He then settled at Venice, where he was chosen a member of the academy of the Incogniti. Here he became captivated by a courtezan, whoso charms proved irresistible; and, in order to have the lull enjoyment of them without restraint, he obtained leave from his general to make the tour of France, but in fact continued privately at Venice, while he had the art to impose upon his friends, by sending them frequently, in letters, feigned accounts of his travels through France. He afterwards went to Germany, about 1639, with duke Amalfi in the character of his chaplain. During this residence in Germany, which lasted about sixteen months, he addicted himself to every species of debauchery; and having a turn for satire, employed his pen in repeated attacks on the court of Rome in general, and on the Barbarini family in particular. The chief vehicle of his satire was a publication called “The Courier robbed of his mail,” and this as well as his other works contained so many just censures of the abuses of the court of Rome, that he might have been ranked among those honourable men who had contributed to enlighten his countrymen, had he not been as remarkable for his indecencies, which were so gross that many of his works were obliged to be published under concealed names. His personal attacks on the pope, and the Barbarini family, naturally roused their indignation; and after much search for him, one Charles Morfu, a Frenchman of a vile character, engaged to ensnare him, and having insinuated himself into his friendship, at length exhorted him to go with him to France. He flattered him with the extraordinary encouragement which was given to men of letters by cardinal Richelieu; and, to deceive him the more, even produced feigned letters from the cardinal, inviting our author to France, and expressing a desire he had to establish in Paris an academy for the Italian tongue, under the direction of Pallavicino. Pallavicino, young, thoughtless, and desperate, and now fascinated by the prospect of gain, left Venice much against the advice of his friends, and went first to Bergamo, where he spent a few days with some of his relations, who entertained his betrayer. They then set out for Geneva, to the great satisfaction of our author, who proposed to get some of his works printed there, which he had not been able to do in Italy. But Morfu, instead of conducting him to Paris, took the road to Avignon; where, crossing the bridge of Soraces, in the county of Venaissin (in the pope’s territories), they were seized by officers on pretence of carrying contraband goods, and confined. Morfu was soon discharged, and liberally rewarded; but Pallavicini, being carried to Avignon, was thrown into prison; and, after being kept there for some months, was brought to trial, and was beheaded in 1643 or 1644. Those who are desirous of farther information respecting this young man’s unfortunate history, may be amply gratified in the prolix: articles drawn up by Bayle, and particularly Marclmnd. His works were first published collectively at Venice, in 1655, 4 vols. 12mo. This edition, according to Marchand, contains only such of his works as had been permitted to beprinted in his life-time. Those which had been prohibited were afterwards printed in 2 vols. 12 mo, at Villafranca, a fictitious name for Geneva, 1660. Among these is a piece called “II divortio Celeste,” which some deny to be his. It is a very coarse satire on the abuses of the Romish church, and was translated and published in English in 1679, under the title of “Ciirist divorced from the church of Rome because of their lewdness,” Lond. 8vo.

, a polite scholar, who flourished in the reigns of Henry VII. and VIII. was a native of London, and educated there in grammar. He afterwards studied logic and philosophy at Cambridge, at which university he resided till he had attained the degree of bachelor of arts; after which he went to Paris, where he spent several years in the study of philosophical and other learning, took the degree of master of arts, and acquired such excellence in the French tongue, that, in 1514, when a treaty of marriage was negotiated between Louis XII. kinpr of France, and the princess Mary, sister of king Henry VIII. of England, Mr. Palsgrave was chosen to be her tutor in that language. But Louis XII. dying almost immediately after his marriage, Palsgrave attended his fair pupil back to England, where he taught the French language to many of the young nobility, and was appointed by the king one of his chaplains in ordinary. He is said also to have obtained some church preferments, but we know only of the prebend of Portpoole, in the church of St. Paul’s, which was bestowed upon him in April 1514, and the living of St. Dunstan’s in the East, given to him by archbishop Cranmer in 1553. In 1531, he settled at Oxford for some time, and the next year was incorporated master of arts in that university, as he had before been in that of Paris; and a few days after was admitted to the degree of bachelor of divinity. At this time he was highly esteemed for his learning; and was the first author who reduced the French tongue under grammatical rules, or that had attempted to fix it to any kind of standard. This he executed with great ingenuity and success, in a large work which he published in that language at London, entitled “L'Eclaircissement de la Language Fran9ois,” containing three books, in a thick folio, 1530, to which he has prefixed a large introduction in English. This work is now extremely scarce. In the dedication he says that he had written two books on the subject before; one dedicated to his pupil Mary, the other to Charles Brandon duke of Suffolk. He made a literal translation into English of a Latin comedy called “Acolastus,” written by Fullonius, and published it in 1540. He is said also to have written some “Epistles.”

When the French revolution took place, the national convention passed a decree by which Corsica was numbered among the departments of France, and entitled to all the privileges of the new constitution, and Paoli was induced, by the promising appearance of affairs, and the solicitations of the French assembly, to return to the island. Accordingly he resigned his pension from the English court, took a grateful leave of the country in which he had been so hospitably entertained, and in the month of April 1790, presented himself at the bar of the national assembly at Paris, together with the Corsican deputies. Soon after this he embarked for Corsica, where he was received with an extraordinary degree of attachment and respect. He was elected mayor of Bastia, commander-in-chief of the national guard, and president of the department; and, in short, he at once acquired more authority in the island, than before its subjugation by the French. He was, however, not quite contented; he was ambitious of seeing Corsica wholly independent, which, upon the execution of Louis XVI. was the prevailing wish of the Corsicans. The French convention, however, meant nothing less, and at length declared Paoli a traitor. On this he resolved upon an expedient which, though it was a renunciation of independence, promised to secure all the advantages of real liberty. This was an union of Corsica with the crown of Great Britain; after effecting which, he returned to England, having unfortunately lost all his property, by the failure of a mercantile house at Leghorn, and passed the remainder of his life in great privacy. He died in London, February. 5, 1807, in the eighty-first year of his age. Few foreigners, however distinguished, have been so much caressed in England as general Paoli. By living in habits of familiarity with men of letters, his name and exploits acquired high celebrity: and Goldsmith, Johnson, and many others, equally eminent in the literary world, although differing in almost every thing else, cordially united in his praise. On the continent his reputation was greatly respected: it was usual to compare Paoli to Timoleon and Epaminondas. He was unquestionably a great man; but it is the opinion of those who have enjoyed the opportunity of studying his character, that he was a politician rather than a soldier: that he shone more in council than inarms; and that the leading feature of his public conduct was a certain degree of Italian policy, which taught him to refine and speculate on every event.

, an excellent physician and polite scholar, was born at Barnstaple, in Devonshire, in March 1705. His father, who was the youngest of nine sons of colonel Parsons, and nearly related to the baronet of that name, being appointed barrack-master at Bolton, in IreJand, removed with his family into that kingdom soon after the birth of his then only son, James, who received at Dublin the early part of his education, and, by the assistance of proper masters, laid a considerable foundation of classical and other useful learning, which enabled him to become tutor to lord Kingston. Turning his attention to the study of medicine, he went afterwards to Paris, where (to use his own words) " he followed the most eminent professors in the several schools, as Astruc, Dubois, Lemery, and others; attended the anatomical lectures of the most famous (Hunaud and Le Caf); and chemicals at the king’s garden at St. Come* He followed the physicians in both hospitals of the Hotel Dieu and La Charite, and the chemical lectures and demonstrations of Lemery and Bonlduc; and in botany, Jussieu. Having finished these studies, his professors gave him honourable attestations of his having followed them with diligence and industry, which entitled him to take the degrees of doctor and professor of the art of medicine, in any university in the dominions of France. Intending to return to England, he judged it unnecessary to take degrees in Paris, unless he had resolved to reside there; and as it was more expensive, he therefore went to the university of Rheims, in Champaign, where, by virtue of his attestations, he was immediately admitted to three examinations, as if he had finished his studies in that academy; and there was honoured with his degrees June 11, 1736. In the July following he came to London, and was first employed by Dr. James Douglas to assist him in his anatomical works, but after some time began to practise. He was elected a member of the royal society in 1740; and, after due examination, was admitted a licentiate of the college of physicians, April 1, 1751.

After the defeat of the armada in 1588, he used every means in his power to persuade the Spanish monarch to a second invasion; and when he failed in this, he endeavoured to raise a rebellion in England, urging the earl of Derby to appear at the head of it, who is said to have been poisoned, at his instigation, for refusing to acquiesce. Nor did he stop here. We find sir Ralph Winwood informing secretary Cecil from Paris, in 1602, of an attempt to assassinate the queen that year by another English Jesuit, at the instigation of father Parsons; and when all these plans proved abortive, he endeavoured to prevent the succession of king James by several means; one of which was, exciting the people to set up a democratic form of government, for which he had furnished them with principles in several of his books. Another was, to persuade the pope to make his kinsman the duke of Parma king of England, by joining with the lady Arabella, and marrying her to the duke’s brother, cardinal Farnese. Cardinal d'Ossat gives the king of France a large account of both these projects in one of his letters; and in another mentions a third contrivance which Parsons had communicated to him, and whose object was, that the pope, the king of France, and the king of Spain, should first appoint by common consent a successor for England, who should be a catholic; and then should form an armed confederacy to establish him on the throne.

His works are, 1. “A brief Discourse, containing the Reasons why Catholics refuse to go to Church,” with a Dedication to Queen Elizabeth, under the fictitious name of John Howlet, dated Dec. 15, 1530. 2. “Reasons for his coming into the Mission of England, &c.” by some ascribed to Campian. 3. “A brief Censure upon two Books, written against the Reasons and Proofs.” 4.“A Discovery of John Nichols, misreported a Jesuit” all written and printed while the author was in England. 5. “A Defence of the Censure given upon his two Books, &c.” 1583. 6. “De persecutione Anglicana epistola,” Rome and Ingolstadt, 1582. 7. “A Christian Directory,” 1583. 8. “A Second Part of a Christian Directory, &c.” 1591. These two parts being printed erroneously at London, Parsons published an edition of them under this title: “A Christian Directory, guiding men to their Salvation, &c. with m.my corrections and additions by the Author himself.” This book is really an excellent one, and was afterwards put into modern English by Dr. Stanhope, dean of Canterbury; in which form it has gone through eight or ten editions. 9. “Responsio ad Eliz. Reginse edictum contra Catholicos,” Romae, 1593, under the name of And. Philopater. 10. “A Conference about the next Succession to the Crown of England, &c.” 1594, under the feigned name of Doleman. This piece was the production of cardinal Allen, Inglefield, and others, who furnished the materials, which Parsons, who had a happy talent this way, put into a proper method. Parsons’s style is among the best of the Elizabethan period. 11. “A temperate Wardword to the turbulent and seditious Watchword of sir Fr. Hastings, knight, 7 ' &c. 1599, under the same name. 12.” A Copy of a Letter written by a Master of Arts at Cambridge, &c.“published in 1583. This piece was commonly called” Father Parsons’s Green Coat,“being sent from abroad with the binding and leaves in that livery, but there seems reason to doubt whether this was his (see Ath. Ox. vol. II. new edit, note, p. 74). 13.” Apologetical Epistle to the Lords of her Majesty’s Privy Council, &c.“1601. 14.” Brief Apology, or Defence of the Catholic Ecclesiastical Hierarchy erected by pope Clement VIII. &c.“St. Omers, 1601. 15.” A Manifestation of the Folly and bad Spirit of secular Priests,“1602. 16.” A Decachordon often Quodlibetical Questions/' 1602. 17. “De Peregrinatione.” 18. “An Answer to O. E. whether Papists or Protestants be true Catholics,” 1603. 19. “A Treatise of the three Conversions of Paganism to the Christian Religion,” published (as are also the two following) under the name of N. D. (Nicholas Doleman), in 3 *6ls. 12mo, 1603, 1604. 20. “A Relation of a Trial made before the king of France in 1600, between the bishop of Evreux and the lord Plessis Mornay/' 1604. 21.” A Defence of the precedent Relation, &c.“22.” A Review of ten public Disputations^ &c. concerning the Sacrifices and Sacrament of the Altar,“1604. 23.” The Forerunner of Bell’s Downfall of Popery,“1605. 24.” An Answer to the fifth Part of the Reports of Sir Edward Coke, &c.“1606, 4to, published under the name of a Catholic Divine. 25.” De sacris alienis non adeundis, questiones duae,“1607. 26.” A Treatise tending to Mitigation towards Catholic subjects in England, against Thomas Morton (afterwards bishop of Durham),“1607. 27.” The Judgment of a Catholic Gentleman concerning king James’s Apology, &c.“1608. 28.” Sober Reckoning with Thomas Morton,“1609. 29.” A Discussion of Mr. Barlow’s Answer to the Judgment of a Catholic Englishman concerning the Oath of Allegiance,“1612. This book being left not quite finished at the author’s death, was afterwards completed and published by Thomas Fitzherbert. The following are also posthumous pieces: 30.” The Liturgy of the Sacrament of the Mass,“1620. 31.” A Memorial for Reformation, &c.“thought to be the same with” The High Court and Council of the Reformation,“finished after twenty years’ labour in 1596, but not published till after Parsons’s death; and republished from a copy presented to James II. with an introduction and some animadversions by Edward Gee, under the title of,” The Jesuits Memorial for the intended Reformation of the Church of England under their first Popish Prince,“1690, 8vo. 32. There is also ascribed to him,” A Declaration of the true Causes of the great Troubles pre-supposed to be intended against the Realm of England, &c. Seen and allowed, anno 1581.“33. Parsons also translated from the English into Spanish,” A Relation of certain Martyrs in England,“printed at Madrid 1590, 8vo.Several of his Mss. are preserved in Baliol college library, particularly a curious one entitled” Epitome controversiarum, hujus temporis."

His works show considerable knowledge of ancient history, especially that of France; and he raised no little reputation by his attacks on the Jesuits in his “Les Recherches,” which was answered by father Garasse. His animosity to that order laid him in some measure open to this antagonist, for he very readily adopted any story, ever so improbable, which he heard of them from their bitterest enemies. All his works, however, are written with elegance and humour, and he appears to have been formed by nature equally for a poet and a lawyer. His works were first printed together at Trevoux, and passed through many editions, the last in 1665. They were afterwards printed along with those of his son Nicholas, at Amsterdam, in 1723, 2 vols. fol. Of his “Letters,” the best edition is that at Paris, in 1619, in 5 vols. 8vo. His “Poe.ns” consist of one book “Of Portraits;” six books of “Epigrams;” and a book of “Epitaphs.” But in this collection is wanting his “Catechism of the Jesuits” instead of which are inserted the letters of his son Nicolas. Among his pieces in verse, “La Pure” had at one time a fashidnable reputation. It is entitled “La, Puce des grands touii de and contains several poems upon a flea which Paquier spied on the breast of the learned Catharine de Roches, in a visit to her on the extraordinary sessions at Poitiers in 1569. Such are the trifles by which a. nation is sometimes amused. He left three sons, of whom the eldest, Theodore, was advocate-general in the chamber of accounts; Nicolas, master of requests, whose” Letters" were printed in 1623, at Paris, containing several discourses upon the occurrences in France in the time of Henry IV. and Louis XIII. and Guy, who was auditor of the accounts.

, a celebrated painter, was a native of France; but neither his Christian name, his age, nor the master under whom he studied, are known to the writers on these subjects. He has sometimes been called the French Claude, from his successful imitation of that master. In his figures he is clearly superior to him. The forms of his trees are elegant and free, his scenery rich, and his buildings and other objects designed in a very pleasing manner. His touch is light, yet firm; his colouring generally clear and natural. Two of his works have been engraved by Strange, and all of them prove that he studied nature with nice observation, and his choice from her productions was always agreeable. In France he is sometimes called, Paid le tue, or le bon Patd; and there was also a Patet le Jeune, of whom still less is known.

Patin died in 1672, with the character of a man df learning. He had a good library, and knew books well, but his judgment was not equal to his erudition; he projected some works in his profession, particularly a history of celebrated physicians, but executed little, except a life of Simon Pietre, which appears not to have been printed. His memory is preserved by his “Letters,” published irt six vols. 12mo, a miscellany of literary history, criticism, and satire, mixed with many of those loose opinions which have made some rank him among the philosophers of France. His great consolation on his death-bed was that he should meet in the other world with Aristotle, Plato, Virgil, Galen, and Cicero. His “Letters” were long read with avidity, but are not to be relied on in point of fact. Every thing of that kind is disfigured by prejudice. There is a collection of his sayings among the “Ana.”

, a worthy ecclesiastic of the Romish church, was born April 24, 1576, and studied at Toulouse, where he was ordained a priest in 1600. On his return to Narbonne from Marseilles, his ship was taken by the Turks, and he remained for a considerable time in slavery, under three masters, the last of whom he converted. Returning at length to France, Louis XIII. made him abbot of St. Leonard de Chaulme, and he had afterwards the care of the parish church of Clichy, which he completely repaired and furnished at his own expence. Towards the end of 1609, he went to reside in the house of Emmanuel de Goudy, as tutor to his children, but does not appear to have remained here long. He then obtained the curacy of Chatillon-les-Dombes, which he kept only five months. Compelled by the solicitations of numberless persons of the highest distinction, to return, to the Goudy family, he resigned himself wholly to his natural desire of relieving the poor and afflicted. Louis XIII. being made acquainted with his zeal, appointed him almonergeneral of the gall ies, 1619; and the following year, St. Francis de Sales, because, as he says, he “knew not a worthier priest in the church,”made him superintendant of the nuns of the visitation. On niadame de Goudy’s decease, M. Vincent retired to the college des Bon Knfans, cf which he, wasprincipal, and which he never quitted, but to perform the oftie of a missionary. Some years after, he accepted the house de St. Lazare, though with great reluctance. His life was a continued series of good works, and it is scarcely to be conceived how one man could plan so many, still less, how he could execute them. Among these were missions in all parts of France, as well as in Italy, Scotland, Barbary, Madagascar, &c. ecclesiastical conferences, at which the most eminent bishops of the kingdom were present spiritual retirements, as they were called, which were also gratuitous; an Hospital for Foundlings, for which his humane applications procured an income of 40,000 livres; the foundation of the Charitable Virgins, for the relief of sick poor; to which we may add, the hospitals de Bicetre, de la Salpetriere, de la Piti; those of Marseilles for galley-slaves; of St. Reine for pilgrims, and of le Saint Nom de Jesus, for old men, which are principally indebted to him for their establishment. In times of the greatest distress, he sent above two millions of livres into Lorraine in money and effects; nor did Picardy and Champagne experience much less of his bounty, when the scourges of heaven had reduced those provinces to the most deplorable indigence. During ten years that M. Vincent presided in the council of conscience, under Anne of Austria, he suffered none but the most worthy to be presented to benefices. Being a zealous patron of nunneries, he supported the establishment of the nuns de la Providence, de Sainte Genevieve, and de la Croix. He laboured with success for the reform of Grammorit, Premontre, and the abbey of St. Genevieve, as welt as for the establishment of the great Seminaries. Even those, who have doubted whether his talents were very extensive, have openly acknowledged that he was one of the most pious priests in the kingdom, and more useful to the poor and to the church, than most of those who are considered as great geniuses. This excellent man died loaded with years, labour, and mortifications, Sept.27,1660, aged near 85. He was canonized by Clement XII. on July 16, 1737. Those who wish to know more of St. Vincent de Paul, may consult his Life by M. Collet, 2 vols. 4to, and “PAvocat.du Diable,” 3 vols. 12mo.

, an ancient Greek writer, who has left us a curious description of Greece, lived in the second century, but very few particulars of his life are known. Suidas mentions two of this name: one of Laconia, who wrote concerning the Hellespont, Laconia, the Amphyclions, &c. another, who was a sophist or rhetorician of Cicsarea in Cappadocia, lived at the same time with Aristides, and is mentioned by Philostratus, in his Lives of the Orators. This last is supposed to be our Pausanias. He was, according to the same Philostratus, “a disciple of the famous sophist Herodes Atticus, whom he imitated in many respects, but especially in composing without premeditation. His pronunciation was according to the manner of the Cappadocians, who had a way of lengthening short syllables, and shortening long ones. The character of his composition was negligent, yet not without force. He declaimed a long time at Rome, where he died very old, though he continued all the while a member of the college at Athens.” His work is properly an account of a journey through Greece, in which the author noted every thing that was remarkable. All public monuments, as temples, theatres, tombs, statues, paintings, &c. came within his design: he took the dimensions of cities, which had formerly been great and famous, but were then in ruins; nor did he hastily pass over places that were memorable for illustrious transactions of old. By these observations he throws much light upon the history and antiquities of Greece; and clears up many passages in ancient authors, which would otherwise have remained very perplexed and obscure. His work has been recommended to modern travellers, and it is well known that Spon and VVheler made great use of it. Pausanias was first published at Venice in 1516, fol. by Aldus, who was assisted by Marcus Musurus: Muslims wrote a preface in Greek, which is prefixed to this edition, and addressed to John Lascaris, a learned Greek of the same age. Afterwards, in 1547, Romulus Amaseus published a Latin version of this work at Rome; and, three years after, an edition was printed at Basil, with a new Latin version by Abr. Loescherus. A better edition than had yet appeared, with the Greek text of Aldus corrected by Xylander, and the Latin version of Amaseus by Sylburgius, came out ut Francfort, 1583, in folio; from which that of Hanover, 1613, in folio, was printed word for word. But the best of all is that of Leipsic, 1696, in folio, with the notes of Kuhnius. This learned man had already given proof, by his critical labours upon JElian, D. Laertius, and Pollux, that he was very well qualified for a work of this nature and his notes, though short, are very good. When he undertook this edition of Pausanias he proposed great advantages from four manuscripts in the king of France’s library; but, upon consulting them on several corrupt and obscure passages, he found that they did not vary from Aldus’s copy. The main succours he derived were from some manuscript notes of Isaac Casaubon, upon the margin of Aldus’s edition; and, by the help of these, and his own critical skill, he was enabled to correct and amend an infinite number of places. A new edition, in 4 vols. 8vo, was published at Leipsic, in 1794 1797, by Jo. Frid. Facius, which by the few who have had an opportunity of examining it, is thought excellent. It has very correct indexes, and some aid from a Vienna and a Moscow manuscript. An English translation was published in 1794 by Mr. Thomas Taylor.

Soon after this, he made a purchase of the barony of Rians, which he completed in 1607; and in the same year, at the solicitation of his uncle, having approved himself before that assembly, he was received a senator on the 1st' of July. In the following year his uncle died. In 1616, he attended Du Vair to Paris; where, in 1618, he procured a faithful copy, and published a second edition of “The -Acts of the Monastery of Maren in Switzerland.” This was in defence of the royal line of France against the title of the Austrian family to the French crown by right of succession; and, upon this, he was nominated the same year, by Louis XIII. abbot of Guistres in Guienne. He remained in France till 1623, when, upon a message from his father, now grown old and sickly, he left Paris, and arrived at Aix in October. Not long after he presented to the court a patent from the king, permitting him to continue in the function of his ancient dignity, and to exercise the office of a secular or lay person, notwithstanding that, being an abbot, he had assumed the person of a churchman. The court of parliament, not assenting to this, decreed unanimously, that, being already admitted into the first rank, he should abide perpetually in it; not returning, as the custom of the court was, to the inferior auditory, in which trials are usually had of criminal cases. He obtained also, a rescript from the pope, to license him to be present at the judgment of capital causes, as even in the higher auditory some select cases of that nature wers customarily heard: but he never made use of this licence, always departing when they came to vote, without voting himself. In 1627, he prevailed with the archbishop of Aix, to establish a post thence to Lyons, and so to Paris and all Europe; by which the correspondence that ho constantly held with the literati every where, was much facilitated. Jn 1629, he began to be much tormented with complaints incident to a sedentary life; and, in 1631, having completed the marriage of his nephew Claude with Margaret D'Alries, a noble lady of the county of Avignon, he bestowed upon him the barony of Rians, together with a grant of his senatorial dignity, only reserving the function to himself for three years. The parliament not agreeing to this, he procured, in 1635, letters-patent from the king, to be restored, and to exercise the office for five years longer, which he did not outlive, for, being seized June 1637, with a fever, he died, on the 24th of that month, in his fifty-seventh year.

A very honourable funeral was provided for him by his nephew Claude, in the absence of his brother, who was then at Paris; but who, returning shortly to Provence, hastened to perform the funeral rites, and to be present at the obsequies. He also procured a block of marble from Genoa, from which a monument was made and erected to his memory, with an epitaph by Rigault. As he had been chosen in his life-time a member of the academy of the Humoristi at Rome, his eulogium was pronounced by John James Bouchier, of that learned society, in the presence of cardinal Barberini, his brother Antonio, cardinal Bentivoglio. and several other cardinals, and such a multitude of celebrated and learned men, that the hall was scarce able to contain them. Many copies of verses, in Italian, Latin, and Greek, were recited; which were afterwards printed together, with a collection of funeral elegies in forty languages, under the title of “Panglossia.” Peiresc was, in his person, of a middle size, and of a thin habit; his forehead large, and his eyes grey; a little hawk-nosed, his cheeks tempered with red the hair of his head yellow, as also his beard, which he used to wear long; his whole countenance bearing the marks of uncommon courtesy and affability. In his diet he affected cleanliness, and in all things about him; but nothing superfluous or costly. His clothes were suitable to his dignity; yet he never wore silk. In like manner, the rest of his house was adorned according to his condition, and very well furnished; but he neglected his own chamber. Instead of tapestry, there hung the pictures of his chief friends and of famous men, besides innumerable bundles of commentaries, transcripts, notes, collections from books, epistles, and such like papers. His bed was exceeding plain, and his table continually loaded and covered with papers, books, letters, and other things; as also all the seats round about, and the greatest part of the floor. These were so many evidences of the turn of his mind, which made the writer of his eulogium compare him to the Roman Atticus; and Bayle, considering his universal correspondence and general assistance to all the literati in Europe, called him “the attorney-general of the literary republic.” The multiplicity of his engagements prevented him from finishing any considerable work; but he left behind him a great number of Mss. on local history and antiquities, mathematics and astronomy, the medallic science, languages, &c. Of the writings of this scholar there have been published 48 Italian letters, addressed to Paul and John Baptist Gualdo, in the “Lettere d'uomini illustri;” a considerable number of letters among those of Camden, and a long and learned dissertation on an ancient tripod found at Frejus, in the “Mem. de Literature et de l'Histoire,” by Desmalets, in 1731. It is remarkable, that though Peiresc bought more books than any man of his time, yet the collection which he left was not large. The reason was, that as fast as he purchased, he kept continually making presents of them to learned men to whom he knew they would be useful. But the destruction of a multitude of his papers after his death, by some of his near relations, is mentioned by the learned with indignation and regret; they were applied to the vile uses of heating the oven and boiling the pot. Gassendi, another ornament of France, has given us his life iii detail, in elegant Latin, one of those delightful works, which exhibit a striking likeness of a great and good man at full length, and shew every feature and fold of the drapery in the strongest and clearest light.

In 1790, when the churches of France were stript of their bells, and it was proposed to extract the copper from them, Mr. Pelletier pointed out a method of scorifying the tin, which constitutes the other ingredient, by means of the black oxide of manganese. His first essays were made in Paris, but he demonstrated in the foundery of Romilly that his process succeeded also in the large way. Soon after he analyzed the blue pigment manufactured in England, and known in France by the name of cendres bleues d‘Angleterre, and gave a process for preparing it. Nothing more was necessary than to precipitate copper from nitrous acid by means of a sufficient quantity of lime. His next set of experiments consisted in an examination of strontian, and in a comparison of it with barytes. They confirmed the previous experiments of Dr. Hope and’ Mr. Klaproth. He had formerly examined a small specimen of. carbonat of strontian without finding in it any thing peculiar.

, a French author, whose character was not less esteemed for its candour and modesty, than his writings for their neatness of style and exactness of research, is most known for his continuation of the “Lives of illustrious men of France,” begun by D'Auvigne, but carried on by him, from the thirteenth volume to the twenty-third. He also wrote notes and prefaces to several works. His edition of the works of Bossuet was the best, till they were published by the Benedictines of St. Maur; and he was author of an esteemed life of Jerome Bignon, in 12mo, 1757. He died in March 1767, at the age of sixty-seven .

After this, he was sent with M. d'Ossat to Rome, to negotiate Henry’s reconciliation to the holy see; which at length*he effected more to the satisfaction of the king, than of his subjects; that part of them at least, who were zealous for Gallican liberties, and thought the dignity of their king prostituted upon this occasion. After a year’s residence at Rome, he returned to France; where, by such services as have already been mentioned, he obtained promotion to the highest dignities. He wrote, and preached, and disputed against the reformed; particularly against Du Plessis Mornay, with whom he had a public conference, in the presence of the king, at Fontainbleau. The king resolved to make him grand almoner of France, to give him the archbishopric of Sens, and wrote to Clement VIII. to obtain for him the dignity of a cardinal; which that pope conferred on him, in 1604, with singular marks of esteem. The indisposition of Clement soon after made the king resolve to send the French cardinals to Rome; where Du Perron was no sooner arrived, than he was employed by the pope in the congregations. He had a great share in the elections of Leo X. and Paul V. He assisted afterwards in the congregations upon the subject of Grace, and in the disputes which were agitated between the Jesuits and the Dominicans: and it was principally owing to his advice, that the pope resolved to leave these questions undecided. He was sent a third time to Rome, to accommodate the differences between Paul V. and the republic of Venice. This pope had such an opinion of the power of his eloquence and address, that he said to those about him, “Let us beseech God to inspire cardinal Du Perron, for he will persuade us to do whatever he pleases.”

The works of Du Perron, the greatest part of which had been printed separately in his life-time, were collected after his death, and published at Paris, 1620 and 1622, in 3 vols. folio. The first contains his great “Treatise upon the Eucharist,” against that of Du Plessis Mornay. The second, his “Reply to the Answer of the King of Great Britain.” The following was the occasion of that work: James I. of England sent to Henry IV. of France a book, which he had written himself, concerning differences in religion. Henry put it into the hands of Du Perron’s brother, who informed his majesty, from what the cardinal had observed to him, that there were many passages in that book, in which the king of England seemed to come near the catholics; and that it might be proper to send some able person, in hopes of converting him entirely. Henry accordingly, after taking the advice of his prelates in this affair, desired to know of the king of England, whether he would approve of a visit from the cardinal Du Perron? King James answered that he should be well pleased to confer with him, but for reasons of state could not do it. After this, Isaac Casaubon, who had been engaged in several conferences with Du Perron about religion, and seemed much inclined to that egregious absurdity, a reunion between the popish and reformed church, was prevailed on to take a voyage into England; where he spoke advantageously of Du Perron to the king, and presented some pieces of poetry to him, which the cardinal had put into his hands. The king received them kindly, and expressed much esteem for the author; which Casaubon noticing to Du Perron, he returned a letter of civility and thanks to his Britannic majesty; in which he told him, that, “except the sole title of Catholic, he could find nothing wanting in his majesty, that was necessary to make a most perfect and accomplished prince.” The king replied, that, “believing all things which the ancients had unanimously thought necessary to salvation, the title of Catholic could not be denied him.” Casaubon having sent this answer to Du Perron, he replied to it in a letter, dated the 15th of July, 1611, in which he assigns the reasons that obliged him to refuse the name of Catholic to his Britannic majesty. Casaubon sent him a writing by way of answer, in the name of the king, to all the articles of his letter; to which the cardinal made a large reply, which constitutes the bulk of the second volume of his works. The third contains his miscellaneous pieces; among which are, “Acts of the Conference held at Fontainbleau against Du Plessis Mornay;” moral and religious pieces in prose and verse, orations, dissertations, translations, and letters.

, an agreeable French writer and learned Orientalist, was born in 1654. After a suitable education he became the king of France’s secretary, and interpreter for Oriental languages, and succeeded his father in those offices, which, his countrymen inform us, he was eminently well qualified to fill. To a very considerable share of general learning, he added an integrity and firmness of mind which enabled him to resist the importunities of corruption in a very remarkable instance. He had great offers made to him if he would insert in the treaty between the Algerines and Lewis XIV. that the six hundred thousand livres, to be received by the latter, should be paid in Tripoli crowns, which would have made a difference of a sixth part. But this he rejected with contempt, although the trick could not have been discovered, or known to any except those who were to profit by it.

, a considerable mathematician and philosopher of France, was born at Montlugon, in the diocese of Bourges, in 1598, according to some, but in 1600 according to others. He first cultivated the mathematics and philosophy in the place of his nativity; but in 1633 he repaired to Paris, to which place his reputation had procured him an invitation. Here he became highly celebrated for his ingenious writings, and for his connections with Pascal, Des Cartes, Mersenne, and the other great men of that time. He was employed on several occasions by cardinal Richelieu; particularly to visit the sea-ports, with the title of the king’s engineer; and was also sent into Italy upon the king’s business. He was at Tours in 1640, where he married; and was afterwards made intendant of the fortifications. Baillet, in his Life of Des Cartes, says, that Petit had a great genius for mathematics; that he excelled particularly in astronomy; and had a singular passion for experimental philosophy. About 1637 he returned to Paris from Italy, when the dioptrics of Des Cartes were much spoken of. He read them, and communicated his objections to Mersenne, with whom he was intimately acquainted, and yet soon after embraced the principles of Des Cartes, becoming not only his friend, but his partisan and defender. He was intimately connected with Pascal, with whom he made at Rouen the same experiments concerning the vacuum, which Torricelli had before made in Italy; and was assured of their truth by frequent repetitions. This was in 1646 and 1647; and though there appears to be a long interval from this date to the time of his death, we meet with no other memoirs of his life. He died August 20, 1667, at Lagny, near Paris, whither he had retired for some time before his decease. Petit was the author of several works upon physical and astronomical subjects; the principal of which are, 1. “Chronological Discourse,” &c. 1636, 4to, in defence of Scaliger. 2. “Treatise on the Proportional Compasses.” 3. “On the Weight and Magnitude of Metals.” 4. “Construction and Use of the Artillery Calibers.” 5. “On a Vacuum.” 6. “On Eclipses.” 7. “On Remedies against the Inundations of the Seine at Paris.” 8. “On the Junction of the Ocean with the Mediterranean Sea, by means of the rivers Aude and Garonne.” 9. “On Comets.” 10. “On the proper Day for celebrating Easter.” 11. “On the nature of Heat and Cold,” &c.

, a celebrated painter, was born at Geneva in 1607, of a father who was a sculptor and architect, and who, after having passed part of his life in Italy, retired to that city. His son was designed to be a jeweller; and, by frequent employment in enamelling, acquired so fine a taste, and so precious a tone of colouring, that Bordier, who afterwards became his brother-in-law, advised him to attach himself to portrait, believing he might push his art on still to greater lengths; and though both the one and the other wanted several colours which they could not bring to bear the fire, yet they succeeded to admiration. Petitot painted the heads and hands, in which his colouring was excellent; Bordier painted the hair, the draperies, and the grounds. These two friends, agreeing in their work and their projects, set out for Italy. The long stay they made there, frequenting the best chemists, joined to a strong desire of learning, improved them in the preparation of their colours; but the completion of their success must be ascribed to a journey they afterwards made to England. There they found sir Theodore Mayerne, physician to Charles T. and a great chemist; who had by his experiments discovered the principal colours to be used for enamel, and the proper means of vitrifying them. These by their beauty surpassed all the enamelling of Venice and Limoges. Mayerne introduced Petitot, to the king, who retained him in his service, and gave him a lodging in Whitehall. Here he painted several portraits after Vandyck, in which he was guided by that excellent master, who was then in London; and his advice contributed greatly to the ability of Petitot, whose best pieces are after Vandyck. King Charles often went to see him work; as he took a pleasure both in painting and chemical experiments, to which his physician had given him a turn. Petitot painted that monarch and the whole royal family several times. The distinguished favour shewn him by that prince was only interrupted by his unhappy and tragical end. This was a terrible stroke to Petitot, who did not quit the royal family, but followed them in their flight to Paris, where he was looked on as one of their most zealous servants. During the four years that Charles II. stayed in France, he visited Petitot, and often eat with him. Then it was, that his name became eminent, and that all the court of France grew fond of being painted in enamel. When Charles II. returned to England, Louis XIV. retained Petitot in his service, gave him a pension, and a lodging in the gallery of the Louvre. These new favours, added to a considerable fortune he had already acquired, encouraged him to marry in 1661. Afterwards Bordier became his brother-in-law, and ever remained in a firm union with him: they lived together, till their families growing too numerous, obliged them to separate. Their friendship was founded on the harmony of their sentiments and their reciprocal merit, much more than a principle of interest. They had gained, as a reward for their discoveries and their labours, a million of livres, which they divided at Paris; and they continued friends without ever having a quarrel, or even a misunderstanding, in the space of fifty years.

Petitot may be called the inventor of painting in enamel; for though Bordier, his brother-in-law, made several attempts before him, and sir Theodore Mayerne had facilitated the means of employing the most beautiful colours, it was still Peiitot who completed the work; which under his hand acquired such a degree of perfection, as to surpass miniature, and even equal painting in oil. He made use of gold and silver plates, and rarely enamelled on copper. When he first came in vogue, his price was twenty louts a-head, which he soon raised to forty. His custom was, to carry a painter with him, who painted the picture in oil; after which Petitot sketched out his work, which he always finished after the life. When he painted the king of France, he took those pictures that most resembled him for his patterns; and the king afterwards gave him a sitting or two to finish his work. He laboured with great assiduity, and never laid down his pencil but with reluct, ance; saying, that he always found new beauties in his art to charm him.

By pope Innocent VI. Petrarch was treated at first with much neglect, or even contempt; but, in 1361, he had so far overcome his prejudices, as to offer the poet the place of apostolical secretary, which he declined, as he did also a very pressing invitation from John, king of France, to reside at his court. When pope Urban V. had succeeded to the pontifical chair, he gave him a canonry of Carpentras, and was very desirous of a personal interview with him; and, notwithstanding his age and infirmities, Petrarch set out for this purpose in 1370; but being unable to sustain the fatigue, he returned to his villa of Arqua, near Padua. His last journey was to Venice, in 1373, where he harangued the Venetian senate in favour of his patron, Francis de Carrara. On his return to Arqua, he fell into a state of languor, which terminated in a fit of some kind, in the night of July 18, 1374. He was found dead next morning in his library, with his head resting on a book. He survived his Laura many years, if the date of her death, April 6, 1348, be correct.

, an able mathematician of France, aud one of the most learned astronomers of the seventeenth century, was born at Fleche, and became priest and prior of Rillie in Anjou. Coming afterwards to Paris, his superior talents for mathematics and astronomy soon made him known and respected. In 1666 he was appointed astronomer in the Academy of Sciences. And five years after, he was sent, by order of the king, to the castle of Urani burgh, built by Tycho Brahe in Denmark, to make astronomical observations there; and from thence he brought the original manuscripts written by Tycho Brahe; which are the more valuable, as they differ in many places from the printed copies, and contain a book more than lias yet appeared. These discoveries were followed by many others, particularly in astronomy: he was one of the first who applied the telescope to astronomical quadrants: he first executed the work called “La Connoissance des Temps,” which he calculated from 1679 to 1683 inclusively: he first observed the light in the vacuum of the barometer, or the mercurial phosphorus: he also first of any went through several parts of France, to measure the degrees of the French meridian, and first gave a chart of the country, which the Cassini’s afterwards carried to a great degree of perfection. He died in 1682 or 1683, leaving a name dear to his friends, and respectable to his contemporaries and to posterity. His works are: 1. “A treatise on Levelling.” 2. “Practical Dialling by calculation.” 3. “Fragments of Dioptrics.” 4. “Experiments on Running Water.” 5. “Of Measurements.” 6. “Mensuration of Fluids and Solids.” 7. ' Abridgment of the Measure of the Earth.“8.” Journey to Uraniburgh, or Astronomical Observations made in Denmark.“9.” Astronomical Observations made in divers parts of France.“10” La Connoissance des Temps," from 1679 to 1683.

, an ingenious Frenchman, was born at Clameci, of a good family, in 1635 and was educated at Nevers, Auxerre, and Paris, and lastly studied divinity in the Sorbonne. In the mean lime, he cultivated the art of painting, which he was supposed to understand in theory as well as practice. The former accomplishment led him to an acquaintance with du Fresnoy, whose Latin poem upon painting he translated into French. Menage also became acquainted with his great merit, and procured him, in 1652, to be appointed tutor to the son of Mons Amelot: in which he gave such satisfaction, that, when his pupil was old enough to travel, he attended him to Italy. There he had an opportunity of gratifying his taste for painting; and upon his return to Paris, he devoted himself to the study of that art, and soon acquired a name among connoisseurs. In 1682, Amelot, his quondam pupil, being sent on an embassy to Venice, de Piles attended him as secretary; and, during his residence there, was sent by the marquis de Louvois into Germany, to purchase pictures for the king, and also to execute a commission relating to state affairs. In 1685, he attended M. Amelot to Lisbon; and in 1689 to Switzerland, in the same capacity. In 1692, he was sent to Holland, apparently as a picturecollector, but in reality to act secretly with the friends of France. On this occasion, however, he was discovered, and thrown into prison, where he continued till the peace of Ryswick, and amused himself with writing “The Lives of Painters.” In 1705, old as he was, he attended Amelot into Spain, when he went as ambassador extraordinary: but, the air of Madrid not agreeing with him, he was forced to return, and died in 1709, aged seventy-four.

, a French mathematician and astronomer, was born at Paris, in 1711. In 1727 he became a member of the canons regular of the congregation of France. He was intended for the church, hut the freedom of his opinions displeased his superiors, and after a few years’ study of theology, he devoted himself entirely to the sciences. In 1749 he was appointed a member of the academy of sciences in Rouen, and was elected to fill the office of astronomer, and attained to first-rate excellence. His earliest production, as an author, was the “Calculation of an Eclipse of the Moon,” on the 23d of December 1749. Lacaille had calculated it at Paris; but the calculations differed by four minutes: Lacaille., however confessed his error, and received Pingre into his friendship. In May 1753 he was elected correspondent of the Academy of Sciences at Paris, after having sent them an observation of the transit of Mercury, which he made at Rouen. He was next appointed librarian of the abbey of St. Genevieve, obtained the construction of an observatory, and was furnished by the abbot and chapter with a six-foot telescope, while he had the loan of an excellent quadrant from the academy. At the desire of Le Monnier, he next engaged in calculating “A Nautical Almanack,” to enable navigators more easily to ascertain the longitude by means of lunar observations. He calculated a table of the eclipses visible of the sun and moon from the commencement of the Christian aera to 1900, and afterwards a table of the eclipses visible from the northern pole to the equator, for a thousand years before our aera. The utility of these labours for verifying historical dates, induced the Academy of Inscriptions to insert a part of them in the forty-second volume of their Memoirs. He published the “State of the Heavens” for 1754: in this the moon’s place was calculated with the utmost exactness according to the tables of Dr. Halley for noon and midnight, with the right ascension in seconds of time twice a day. In 1753 he published “A Memoir relating to the Discoveries made in the South Sea, during the Voyages of the English and French round the World.” In 1760, Pingre left France for the island of Rodriguez, in the Indian ocean, to observe the transit of Venus, that was to take place in the following year; and on the 6th of June of that year he made his observations, from which he concluded that the parallax, of the sun was 10“. 2. At the same time the English astronomer Mason concluded, from the observations which he made at the Cape of Good Hope, that the parallax was 8”. 2. La Lande, in his “Astronomy,” published in 1764, adopted a medium between these conclusions, and supposed l,he parallax to be 9“, in which he was followed by astronomers in general, till more numerous observations, made on the transit of 1769, led to a different result. After the return of Pingre from the East, he published a description of Pekin, in which he shewed the position of that capital from the result of a number of calculations of eclipses; and ascertained its longitude by other calculations, with a degree of precision to which none of the labours of the scientific missionaries had any pretensions. In 1769 he sailed for the island of St. Domingo, on board the Isis man of war, to observe the transit of Venus, and performed the service committed to him in the most able and satisfactory manner possible. An account of this voyage, which proved of considerable importance to the science of geography, as well as astronomy, appeared in 1773, in two vols. 4to. After comparing the results of the immense number of calculations made by the observers of the transit in 1769J the sun’s parallax has been concluded to be about 8”. 6. In 1771, Pingre made another voyage, on board the Flora frigate, with a view of extending the interests of geographical and astronomical knowledge, having with him, as the companion of his pursuits, the chevalier de Borda, a celebrated engineer and geometrician. The account of their proceedings, observations, and experiments, was published in 1778, in two vols. 4to. In 1784, M. Pingre published his “Cometography, or historical and theoretical treatise on Comets,” in two vols. 4tc, which is his most considerable work, and contains calculations of the orbits of all the comets of which an. account has been preserved. After a long life, spent in the most important services to the world, he died in the month of May 179tf, leaving behind him a high character for integrity, having enjoyed the esteem of the public, as well as that of his friends. He was author of many other works besides those that have been already noticed.

, an English comic painter, was the son of a Kentish gentleman descended from a Walloon family. His father, having a plentiful estate, gave this his eldest son a liberal education, and would have had him bred a scholar, or else a merchant; but his genius leading him wholly to designing, he could not fix to any particular science or business but the art to which he naturally inclined. Drawing took up all his time and all his thoughts; and being of a gay facetious humour, his manner partook of it. He delighted in drawing ugly faces; and had a talent so particular for it, that he would by a transient view of any remarkable face he met in the street, retain the likeness so exactly in his memory, that it might be supposed the person had sat several times for it. It was said of him, that he would steal a face and a man, who was not handsome enough to desire to see his picture, sat in danger in his company. He had a fancy peculiar to himself in his travels: he would often go away, and let his friends know nothing of his departure; make the tour of France and the Netherlands, a-foot; and sometimes his frolic carried him as far as Grand Cairo. He never advertised his friends of his return, any more than he did of his intended absence, delighting to baffle their conjectures, or tantalize their feelings. In this manner he travelled, at several times, through Italy, France, Germany, the Netherlands, and Holland; in which several countries he examined the works of the several painters with pleasure and judgment, and formed to himself a manner of design which no man in that kind ever excelled, or perhaps equalled.

, an Italian by birth, but the author of many compositions in French prose and verse, was born at Venice about 1363, being the daughter of Thomas Pisan, of Bologna, much celebrated at that time as an astrologer. When she was five years old, her father settled with her in France, and her extraordinary beauty and wit procured her an excellent husband by the time she was fifteen. After ten years she lost this husband, Stephen Castel, by whom she was most tenderly beloved, and found her chief resource for comfort and subsistence in her pen; her husband’s fortune being entangled in several law-suits. Charles VI. of France, and other princes, noticed and assisted her on account of her talents, and provided for her children. When she died is uncertain. Some of her poems, which are full of tenderness, were printed at Paris in 1529, others remain in manuscript in the royal library. “The Life of Charles V.” written by desire of Philip the Good, duke of Burgundy, is considered as her best performance in prose. It is preserved in ms. in the library of the king of France, but a transcript was published by the abbé Le Beuf in the third volume of “Dissertations on the Ecclesiastical History of Paris,” where he gives a Life of Cnristina. She wrote also “An hundred Stories of Troy,” in rhyme “The Treasure of the City of Dames,” Paris, 1497 “The Long Way,” translated by John Chaperon, 1549, under the title of “Le Chemin de long etendue.” In the Harleian collection of Mss. (No. 219, 5) is a piece by Christina entitled “Epistre d'Otnea deese de Prudence a Hector, &c. Mis en vers Francois, et dedie a Charles V. de France.” Anthony WidviSle, earl Rivers, translated a work of hers, we know not whether included in any of the above, entitled “The Moral Proverbs of Christian of Pyse,” printed by Caxton. Lord Orford, who has noticed this work in his account of WidviUe, has also introduced an account of Christina, which, although written in his flippant and sarcastic manner, contains some interesting particulars of her history.

In 1786, when few could have foreseen its future importance, he introduced a bill for setting apart a million annually for the purchase of stock, which sum was to be augmented by the interest of the stock so purchased. Perseverance in this plan, with occasional improvements, has already, amidst all the pressure of public burdens, extinguished between two and three hundred millions of debt, and produced a very considerable revenue to be applied to the same purpose. These effects his enemies are ready to acknowledge, but with a view to detract from his merit, they tell us that this was the least efficient of three plans given to him by Dr. Richard Price, and that for such an obligation he did not think it worth his while to make the smallest public acknowledgement. Whatever may be in this, the general system of finance now established was soon powerfully aided by various alterations in the mode of collecting taxes, and by a commercial treaty with France, concluded in 1787, so much in favour of our merchants, as to occasion considerable dissatisfaction among those of France.

The third great æra in Mr. Pitt’s life, and which, beyond all preceding parts of his conduct, will determine his character with posterity, was the French revolution, an event the most momentous in its consequences that modern history records. The influence of this vast convulsion could not be viewed, by the politician and the minister of a great empire, but in a double light, as exerted upon France itself, and upon the neighbouring states. In both cases, Mr. Pitt took up the opinion that it afforded just cause for jealousy, and he was the more strengthened in this opinion from observing the effects which the conduct of the French had already produced in this country. It is allowed by his enemies that he did not precipitately rush into war with France, or interfere in the affairs of that country, while the French seemed to be operating a change by means which were rational; and while their only objects seemed to be a representative government and a limited monarchy. It was not until they had destroyed the freedom of their representatives by the terrifying influence of clubs and parties more powerful than their legalized assemblies, and until they had dragged their helpless sovereign to the scaffold, that he saw the danger that would accrue to every country where such measures should be considered as a precedent. In England, it might have been thought that the enormities which preceded and followed the execution of the French king, would have excited universal abhorrence; that a moral, thinking, and industrious people, prosperous beyond all other nations in arts and commerce, and secure beyond all others in the essentials of liberty, would have found no provocation to imitate the most inhuman barbarities of the darkest ages. It soon, however, appeared that although the majority of the nation was disposed to contemplate what had happened in France, with the abhorrence it was naturally fitted to create, a party was arising, selected indeed from the lower and illiterate orders, but guided by leaders of some knowledge, and of great activity and resolution, who seemed determined on a close imitation of all the licentiousness of France, and whose attacks were at once directed against the throne, the state, and the church. For some time their sentiments were considerably disguised. They affected moderation, and derived too much countenance from those who really were inclined to moderate changes, moderate reforms; and, with no little art, they revived the popular delusions of annual parliaments and universal suffrage; but moderation was neither the characteristic nor the object of this party: and finding themselves for some time unnoticed by government, they began to disdain the protection of their insignificance, and boldly avowed that they did not mean to leave the accomplishment of their projected changes to any of the legal authorities. In imitation of the French clubs, they were to produce the effect by self-created societies that should dictate to parliament, and when parliament was completely overawed, supply its place.

What has been termed the system or the principle of Mr. Pitt in commencing and continuing the war with France, cannot perhaps be better expressed than in the above language of lord Grenville. Mr. Pitt considered it as our duty to continue it, “while the French retained that turbulent and aggressive spirit which threatened danger to every nation in Europe,” and which at length actually destroyed the independence of every nation in Europe, and ended in an attempt at universal empire, and slavish subjection to the ruler of France. It was Mr. Pitt’s opinion, and the opinion of all who acted with him, of the great majority of parliament and of the people at large, that no peace could be permanent or secure with France until she had returned to her proper station among the nations of Europe, admitted of the independence of other nations, and contented herself with the territories she possessed at the commencement of the revolution. On this principle the war was instituted, and on this principle it was supported at a risk and an expense beyond all precedent, but with a success so inadequate to produce the wished-for result, that when the opposition represented the continuance of it as obstinacy and infatuation, they seemed to speak a language which events fully justified. On our own element, our success was so great as to raise the character of our navy beyond all precedent; under such men as Howe, St. Vincent, Duncan, and Nelson, the navies of France, Spain, and Holland were almost annihilated, while ours had become, humanly speaking, invincible. Mr. Pitt was therefore blamed for not confining himself to a naval war, and his sending troops to join the powers of Europe in league against France, was represented as a species of Quixotism which would soon prove its own absurdity. All this for some years seemed confirmed by events. The French armies not only out-numbered those sent against them, but acquired a military skill absolutely new in their history. So frequent and decisive were their victories that all resistance seemed in vain, and either by valour or treachery they were enabled to dissolve every confederacy formed against them. Still the English minister saw nothing in this to prove his original opinion to be wrong; France, he conceived, must be ruined at last by successes of which she did not know how to make the proper use. With every extension of territory, she carried a portion of tyranny and a system of plunder and destruction, that must one day excite an effectual resistance in the nations which she had deluded by offers of liberty and friendship. Mr. Pitt and his supporters, therefore, persisted in the opinion that France must at last yield to some confederacy or other; and when the state of Europe was such as to render it unwise to send English troops to join the confederates, he conceived that no better use could be made of the annual supplies than to subsidize the powers that were still willing to take the field. He even determined to continue the struggle when, in 1800, Bonaparte, the most successful of the French generals, had assumed the sovereign power, under the name of consul, and addressed a letter to our king intimating a desire for peace. The answer of our minister was, that it would be useless to negociate while the French seemed to cherish those principles which had involved Europe in a long and destructive war. And although he gave his assent to the experiment made by Mr. Addington in 1801, to conclude a peace with the French government, he soon had reason to revert to his former sentiments, and when recalled into office in 1804, again exerted all the vigour of his character to render the contest successful.

He did not, however, live to witness that glorious and wonderful termination which was at last brought about by a continuance of the same system he all along pursued, and which finally ended in the conquest of France, the annihilation of her armies, and the banishment of her ruler. The last event of importance in Mr. Pitt’s life-time was the fatal battle of Austerlitz, and he was at this time in a state of health ill calculated to meet this stroke. He had, from an early period of life, given indications of inheriting his father’s gouty constitution, with his talents, and it had been thought necessary to make the liberal use of wine a part of his ordinary regimen, a stimulant which, added to the cares and exertions of office during his long and momentous administration, brought on a premature exhaustion of the vital powers. In December 1805, he was recommended to go to Bath, but the change afforded him no permanent relief. On the 11th of January he returned to his seat at Putney, in so debilitated a state, as to require four days for the performance of the journey. The physicians, even yet, saw no danger, and they said there was no disease, but great weakness, in consequence of an attack of the gout. On the following Sunday he appeared better, and entered upon some points of public business with his colleagues in office: the subject was supposed to relate to the dissolution of the new confederacy, by the peace of Presburgh, which greatly agitated him. On the 17th, at a consultation of his physicians, it was agreed, that though it was not advisable he should attend to business for the next two months, yet there was hope he would be able to take a part in the House of Commons in the course of the winter. On the 20th, however, he grew much worse, and his medical friends now saw that he was in the most imminent danger, and that, probably, he had not many hours to live. The bishop of Lincoln, who never left him during his illness, informed him of the opinion now entertained by sir Walter Farquhar, and requested to administer to him the consolations of religion. Mr. Pitt asked sir Walter, who stood near his bed, “How long do you think I have to live?” The physician answered that he could not say, at the same time he expressed a faint hope of his recovery. A half smile on the patient’s countenance shewed that he placed this language to its true account. In answer to the bishop’s request to pray with him, Mr. Pitt replied, “I fear I have, like too many other men, neglected prayer too much, to have any ground for hope that it can be efficacious on a death-bed—but,” making an effort to rise as he spoke, “I throw myself entirely on the mercy of God.” The bishop then read the prayers, and Mr. Pitt appeared to join in them with a calm and humble piety. He desired that the arrangement of his papers and the settlement of his affairs might be left to his brother and the bishop of Lincoln. Adverting to his nieces, the daughters of earl Stanhope by his elder sister, for whom he had manifested the sincerest affection, he said, “I could wish a thousand or fifteen hundred a-year to be given them; if the public should think my long services deserving of it.” He expressed also much anxiety respecting major Stanhope, that youthful hero, who fell a sacrifice to his valour at Corunna, in company with his friend and patron, general sir John Moore, and his brother, who was also at Corunna at the same time, and who has been engaged in all the great battles in the peninsula, and more than once severely wounded in his country’s service. Mr. Pitt died about four o'clock in the morning of the 23d of January 1806, in the 47th year of his age. A public funeral was decreed to his honour by parliament, and 40,000l. to pay those debts which he had incurred in his country’s service. Public monuments have been since erected to his memory in Westminster-Abbey, in the Guildhall of the city of London, and by many public bodies in different parts of the kingdom.

Besides his great establishment at Antwerp, Plantin set up another at Leyden, notwithstanding the troubles which prevailed in Holland and a third at Paris. The king of France would have fain persuaded him to return to his native country, but he preferred remaining at Antwerp, where, as just noticed, the king of Spain for some time rendered his situation easy, and even splendid. The printing office at Leyden he bestowed on his son-in-law, Raphelengius and took into partnership at Antwerp John Moret, who had married his second daughter. He gave likewise to Giles Beys, a Parisian, the office he had established at Paris, as a portion with his third daughter. After all this, and the constant expences of his living and establishment, he was enabled to leave a considerable fortune to his daughters, for he had no son. He died in 1589, aged seventy-five, and was interred in the great church at Antwerp, where a monument was erected to his memory. His device was a pair of compasses, with the motto “Lahore et constantia.”

At length about the beginning of 1640, Mr. Pocock' s friends began to solicit his return; the archbishop in a letter dated March 4 of that year says, “I am now going to settle my Arabic lecture for ever upon the university, and I would have your name to 'the deed, which is the best honour I can do for the service.” Accordingly he embarked in August, but did not return home entirely by sea, but through part of France and Italy. At Paris he was introduced to many of the learned men of the time, particularly to Gabriel Sionita, the celebrated Maronite, and to Grotius, to whom he communicated a design he had of translating his treatise “De Veritate” into Arabic, for the benefit of the Mahometans, many of whom he believed were prepared for more light and knowledge than had yet been afforded them. Pocock at the same time candidly told Grotius, who very much approved the design, that there were some things towards the end of his book, which he could not approve, viz. certain opinions, which, though they are commonly in Europe charged on the followers of Mahomet, have yet no foundation in any of their authentic writings, and are such as they are ready on all occasions to disclaim. With this freedom Grotius was so far from being displeased, that he heartily thanked Mr. Pocock for it, and gave him authority, in the version he intended, to expunge and alter whatsoever he should think fit.

, a celebrated French physician, was born at Dijon, July 5, 1720. After studying medicine, he succeeded M. Dubois in 1746 as protessor of physic in the college de France. He was one of the first who gave a course of chemical lectures in Paris. In 1757 he was appointed first physic‘an to the French army, and the year following went to Russia to attend the empress Elizabeth in her illness. He remained two years in Russia, and assisted at the famous experiment relative to the congelation of quicksilver, of which he afterwards gave an account (inserted in their memoirs), to the Academy of sciences at Paris, who had elected him a member. Soon after he returned to France he was promoted to the rank of counsellor of state; and in 1764 was appointed inspectorgeneral of physic; surgery, and pharmacy, in the ports and colonies of France. His ingenious method of procuring fresh from sea-water, by distillation, procured him, in 1765, a pension of 12,000 livres a-year from the French government. In nil, he resigned his chair at the college of France; but, in conformity ’to an unanimous vote of the professors, continued to preside at their public meetings as long as his health would permit. M. Laiande says, that he did honour to this office “by a grand and striking figure: by the dignity of his speech the nobleness of his manner and the deservedly high estimation in which he was held by the public.” He was, during the reign of terror, imprisoned, with his whole family, by Robespierre but was liberated on the death of that monster. He died in September 1797 or 179S. He is said to have left behind him a very valuable collection of natural history, medals, and other curiosities. He wrote several treatises belonging to his profession, viz. on the fever of St. Domingo, the diseases of seamen, an abridgment of anatomy, &C.

About this time the pope, having resolved to call a general council for the reformation of the church, summoned several learned men to Rome, for that purpose, and among these he summoned Pole to represent England. As soon as this was known in that country, his mother and other friends requested him not to obey the pope’s summons; and at first he was irresolute, but the importunities of his Italian friends prevailed, and he arrived at Rome in 1536, where he was lodged in the pope’s palace, and treated with the utmost respect, being considered as one who might prove a very powerful agent in any future attempt to reduce his native land to the dominion of the pope. The projected scheme of reformation, in which Pole assisted, came to nothing; but a design was now formed of advancing him to the purple, to enable him the better to promote the interests of the papal see. To this he objected, and his objections certainly do him no discredit, as a zealous adherent to the order and discipline of his church. He was not yet in holy orders, nor had received even the clerical tonsure, notwithstanding the benefices which had been bestowed on him and he represented to the pope, that such a dignity would at this juncture destroy all his influence in England, by subjecting him to the imputation of being too much biassed to the interest of the papal see and would also have a natural tendency to bring ruin on his own family. He, therefore, intreated his holiness to leave him, at least for the present, where he was, adding other persuasives, with which the pope seemed satisfied but the very next day, whether induced by the imperial emissaries, or of his own will, he commanded Pole’s immediate obedience, and he having submitted to the tonsure, was created cardinal- deacon of S. Nereus and Achilleus, on Dec. 22, 1536. Soon after he was also appointed legate, and received orders to depart immediately for the coasts of France and Flanders, to keep up the spirit of the popish party in England and he had at the same time letters from the pope to the English nation, or rather the English catholics, the French king, the king of Scotland, and to the emperor’s sister, who was regent of the Low Countries. Pole undertook this commission with great readiness, and whether from ambition or bigotry, consented to be a traitor to his country. In the beginning of Lent 1537, he set out from Rome, along with his particular friend, the bishop of Verona, and a handsome retinue. His first destination was to France, and there he received his first check, for on the very day of his arrival at Paris, the French king sent him word that he conld neither admic him to treat of the business on which be came, nor allow him 'to make any stay in his dominions. Pole now learnt that Henry VIII. had proclaimed him a traitor, and set a price (50,000 crowns) on his head. Pole then proceeded to Cambray, but there he met with the same opposition, and was not allowed to pursue his journey. The cardinal bishop of Liege, however, invited him, and liberally entertained him in that city, where he remained three months, in hopes of more favourable accounts from the emperor and the king of France but nothing of this kind occurring, he returned to Ro'iki[ after an expedition that had been somewhat disgracefu and totally unsuccessful. In 1538 he again set out on a similar design, with as little effect, and was now impeded by the necessary caution he was obliged to preserve for fear of falling into the hands of some of Henry’s agents. In the mean time, he was not only himself attainted of high treason by the Parliament of England, but his eldest brother Henry Pole, lord Montague, the marquis of Exeter, sir Edward Nevil, and sir Nicholas Carew, were condemned and executed for high treason, which consisted in a conspiracy to raise cardinal Pole to the crown. Sir Geoffrey Pole, another brother of the cardinal’s, was condemned on the same account, but pardoned in cpnsequence of his giving information against the rest. Margaret, also, countess of Salisbury, the cardinal’s mother, was condemned, but not executed until two years after. The cardinal now found how truly he had said to the pope that his being raised to that dignity would be the ruin of his family but he appears to have at this time in a great measure subdued his natural affection, as he received the account of his mother’s death with great composure, consoling himself with the consideration that she died a martyr to the catholic faith. When his secretary Beccatelli informed him of the news, and probably with much concern, the cardinal said, “Be of good courage, we have now one patron more added to those we already had in heaven.”

a celebrated French cardinal, was born Oct. 11, 1661, at Puy, in Velay, and was the son of Louis Armand, viscount de Polignac, descended from one of the most ancient families in Languedoc. He was.sent early to Paris, where he distinguished himself as a student, and was soon noticed as a young man of elegant manners and accomplishments. In 1689, cardinal de Bouillon carried him to Rome, and employed him in several important negociations. It was at one of his interviews with pope Alexander VIII. that this pontiff said to him, “You seem always, sir, to be of my opinion, and yet it is your own which prevails at last.” We are likewise told that when, on his return to Paris, Louis XIV. granted him along audience, he said as he went out, <4 I have been conversing with a man, and a young man, who has contradicted me in every thing, yet pleased me in every thing.*' In 1693, he was sent as ambassador into Poland, where he procured the prince of Conti to be elected and proclaimed king in 1696; but, this election not having been supported, he was obliged to retire, and return to France, where he arrived in 1698, after losing all his equipage and furniture, which was seized by the Dantzickers. The king then banished him to his abbey at Bonport, but recalled him to court with great expressions of regard in 1702, and in 1706 appointed him auditor of the Rota. M. Polignac then set out again for Rome and cardinal de la Tremouille, who conducted the French affairs there, having the same opinion of him as cardinal de Bouillon had, employed him in several negociations. Going back to France three years after, his majesty sent him as plenipotentiary into Holland in 1710, with marechal d'Uxelles. He was also plenipotentiary at the conferences and peace of Utrecht, in 1712 and 1713. The king, satisfied with his services, obtained a cardinal’s hat for him the same year, and appointed him master of his chapel. During the regency, cardinal de Polignac was banished to his abbey of Anchin in 1718, and not recalled till 172L. In 1724, he went to Rome for the election of pope Benedict XIII. and remained there eight years, being entrusted with the affairs of France. In 1726, he was made archbishop of Auch, returned to his native country in 1732, and died at Paris, November 10, 1741, aged 80. He was a member of the French academy, the academy of sciences, and that of belles lettres. He is now chiefly remembered for his elegant Latin poem, entitled “Anti-Lucretius,” in which he refutes the system and doctrine of Epicurus, according to the principles of Descartes’ philosophy. This he left to a friend, Charles de Rothelin, who published it in 1747, 2 vols. 8vo. It has since been often reprinted, and elegantly translated by M. de Bougainville, secretary to the academy of belles lettres. His Life was published at Paris, 1777, 2 vols. 12mo, by F. Ghrysostom Faucher. The reviewer of this life very justly says, that the man who compiled the “Anti-Lucretius,” and proposed a plan for forming a new bed for the Tiber, in order to recover the statues, medals, basso-relievos, and other ancient monuments, which were buried there during the rage of civil factions, and the incursions of the barbarians, deserves an eminent place in literary biography. Few works have been more favourably received throughout Europe than the cardinal’s celebrated poem, although he was so much of a Cartesian. The first copy that appeared in England was one in the possession of the celebrated earl of Chesterfield, and such was its reputation abroad at that time, that this copy was conveyed by a trumpet from marshal Saxe to the Duke of Cumberland, directed for the earl of Chesterfield, It was sent to him both as a judge of the work, and a friend of the writer.

, a very learned Italian, was born at Cerreto, in Umbria, in 1426, and settled at Naples, where his merit procured him illustrious friends. He became preceptor to Alphonso the younger, king of Arragon, to whom he was afterwards secretary and counsellor of state. Having reconciled this prince to his father Ferdinand, and not being rewarded by the latter as he thought he deserved, he aimed against him “A Dialogue on Ingratitude,” in which also he launched out into the praises of Charles VIII. of France, his great enemy. Ferdinand had the magnanimity to despise his censures, and suffer him to hold his appointments. Pontanus died, according to Moreri, in 1503, at the age of seventy-seven; according to others two years later. His epitaph is famous, and, though vain enough in the beginning, concludes with a fine thought, which seems to have suggested the still more sublime close of Dr. Foster’s epitaph on himself.

, an eminent French engineer, is considered as the first military topographer, or rather as the inventor of that art, in the time of Louis XIV. It was his practice to follow the army, and construct upon the spot plans of the battles and sieges, with historical and perspective accompaniments. We find many of his plans in the “GEvre de Delle-Bella” but his most important work is entitled “Les glorieuses Conquetes de Louis-le-Grand ou Recueil de Plans et Vues des places assiegees, et de celles ou se sont donnee*s des batailles, avec des Discours,” 2 vols. folio. This work, one of the most magnificent of the kind, comprehends all the operations of war, from the battle of Rocroi, in 1643, to the taking of Namur, in 1692. De Pontault died in 1674; but the work was completed to the above date at the expence of his niece, the widow of the sieur Des Roches. This edition is usually called the Grand Beaulieu, to distinguish it' from one on a reduced scale, in oblong quarto, called the Petit fieaulieu, of which there are two series, one in three volumes, comprehending views of the actions in the Netherlands; the other in four, which includes those of France. From the death of this able draftsman, military topography is said to have been productive of very few good specimens in France, uptil within the last fifty years.

, a learnedwriter of the sixteenth century, was a native of Candia, where he was born in 1511, but was brought up at the court of Renee of France, daughter of Louis XII. and consort of Hercules II. duke of Ferrara, and afterwards taught Greek in that city. There also an acquaintance with Calvin induced him to embrace the reformed religion, for the quiet enjoyment of which he went to Geneva in 1561, and was appointed Greek professor, an office which he appears to have held until his death in 1581. He published commentaries and annotations upon Pindar, Sophocles, some of the works of Xenophon, Thucydides, Aristotle’s Rhetoric, Longinus, and some other writers, a Latin version of the Psalms, and the Hymns of Synesius, an improved edition of Constantine’s Greek Lexicon, a reply to Peter Charpentier’s defence of the massacre of St. Bartholomew, and other pieces.

, a learned Jesuit, was born at Mantua in 1534, of a good but decayed family. He was educated principally at Rome, and made such progress in learning, that the cardinal Hercules de Gonzaga made him his secretary, and intrusted him with the education of Francis and Scipio de Gonzaga, his nephews. After studying divinity at Padua, he was admitted into the society of Jesuits in 1559. As a preacher, he had distinguished success, both in Italy and France; and having a very uncommon talent both for languages and for negociation, he was employed by pope Gregory XIII. in important embassies to Poland, Sweden, Germany, and other parts of Europe. When he returned to Rome, he laboured to effect a reconciliation between Henry IV“. of France and the court of Rome. This, however, displeased the Spanish court, by whom he was compelled to leave that city. He died at Ferrara, Feb. 26, 1611, being then seventy-eight years old. Possevin, though so deeply skilled in politics and knowledge of mankind, was a man of profound erudition and exemplary piety. The most important of his works are, 1.” Bibliotheca selecta, de ratione studiorum,“published at Rome in 1593, folio, and reprinted at Venice in 1607, in 2 vols. folio, with many augmentations. This work was intended as a general introduction to knowledge; at once to facilitate the approach to it, and to serve as a substitute for many books, the perusal of which the author considered as dangerous for young minds. Tt treats distinctly of every science, with great extent of learning, but not always with sufficient correctness. 2.” Apparatus sacer,“Cologne, 1607, 2 vols. folio. The intention of this book was to give a general knowledge of the commentators on the Scriptures, and other theological writers. Though the catalogues it contains were from the first imperfect and ill-digested, it was much circulated, as the best book of the time, and it contains notices of above six thousand authors. It is now become almost entirely useless. 3.” Moscovia," 1587, folio; a description of Russia, the fruit of some of his travels. 4. Some controversial and other theological books. 5. Some smaller works, written and published in Italian. Possevin’s Life was published by father Dorigny at Paris, 1712, 12mo.

, a very ingenious but visionary man, was by birth a Norman, of a small hamlet called Dolerie where he was born in 1510. Never did genius struggle with more vigour against the extremes of indigence. At eight years old, he was deprived of both his parents by the plague when only fourteen, unable to subsist in his native place, he removed to another near Pontoise, and undertook to keep a school. Having thus obtained a little money, he went to Paris, to continue his studies but there was plundered and suffered so much from cold, that he languished for two years in an hospital. When he recovered, he again collected a little money by gleaning irv the country, and returned to Paris, where he subsisted by waiting on some of the students in the college of St. Barbe; but made, at the same time, so rapid a progress in knowledge, that he became almost an universal scholar. His acquirements were so extraordinary, that they became known to the king, Francis I. who, touched with so much merit, under such singular disadvantages, sent him to the East to collect manuscripts. This commission he executed so well, that on his return, he was appointed royal professor of mathematics and languages, with a considerable salary. Thus he might appear to be settled for life; but this was not his destiny. He was, unfortunately for himself, attached to the chancellor Poyet, who fell under the displeasure of the queen of Navarre and Postel, for no other fault, was deprived of his appointments, and obliged to quit France. He now became a wanderer, and a visionary. From Vienna, from Rome, from the order of Jesuits, into which he had entered, he was successively banished for strange and singular opinions; for which also he was imprisoned at Rome and at Venice. Being released, as a madman, he returned 10 Paris, whence the same causes again drove him into Germany. At Vienna he was once more received, and obtained a professorship; but, having made his peace at home, was again recalled to Paris, and re-established in his places. He had previously recanted his errors, but relapsing into them, was banished to a monastery, where he performed acts of penitence, and died Sept. 6, 1581, at the age of seventy-one. Postel pretended to be much older than he was, and maintained that he had died and risen again which farce he supported by many tricks, such as- colouring his beard and hair, and even painting his face. For the same reason, in most of his works, he styles himself, “Postellus restitntus.” Notwithstanding his strange extravagances, he was one of the greatest geniuses of his time; had a surprising quickness and memory, with so extensive a knowledge of languages, that he boasted he could travel round the world without an interpreter. Francis I. regarded him as the wonder of his age Charles IX. called him his philosopher; and when he lectured at Paris, the crowd of auditors was sometimes so great, that they could only assemble in the open court of the college, while he taught them from a window. But by applying himself very earnestly to the study of the Rabbins, and of the stars, he turned his head, and gave way to the most extravagant chimeras. Among these, were the notions that women at a certain period are to have universal dominion over men that all the mysteries of Christianity are demonstrable by reason that the soul of Adam had entered into his body that the angel Raziel had revealed to him the secrets of heaven and that his writings were dictated by Jesus Christ himself. His notion of the universal dominion of women, arose from his attachment to an old maid at Venice, in consequence of which he published a strange and now very rare and high-priced book, entitled “Les tres-marveilieuseS victoires des Femmes du Nouveau Monde, et comme elles doivent par raison a tout le monde commander, et me' me a; eeux qui auront la monarchic du Monde viel,” Paris, 1553, 16mo. At the same time, he maintained, that the extraordinary age to which he pretended ttf have lived, was occasioned hy his total abstinence from all commerce with that sex. His works are as numerous as, they are strange and some of them are very scarce, hut very little deserve to be collected. One of the most important is entitled “De orbis concordia,” Bale, 1544, folio. In this the author endeavours to bring all the world to the Christian faith under two masters, the pope, in spiritual affairs, and the king of France in temporal. It is divided into four books; in the first of which he gives the proofs of Christianity; the second contains a refutation of the Koran; the third treats of the origin of idolatry, and all false religions and the fourth, on the mode of converting Pagans, Jews, and Mahometans, Of his other works, amounting to twenty-six articles, which are enumerated in the “Dictionnaire Historique,” and most of them by Brunet as rarities with the French collectors, many display in their very titles the extravagance of their contents; such as, “Clavis absconditorum a, constitutione ixmndi,” Paris, 1547, 16mo; “De Ultimo judicio;” “Proto-evangelium,” &c. Some are on subjects of more real utility. But the fullest account of the whole may be found in a book published at Liege in 1773, entitled “Nouveaux eclaircissemens sur 3a Vie et les ouvrages de Guillaume Postel,” by father des Billons. The infamous book, “De tribus impostoribus,” has been very unjustly attributed to Postel, for, notwithstanding all his wildness, he was a believer.

, an eminent Italian painter, was descended from a noble family in Bologna, where he was born in 1490. His friends, perceiving that he had a strong inclination for design, permitted him to go to Mantua, where he was six years a disciple of Julio Romano, who was then ornamenting the apartments of the palace del Te. In this time he became so skilful, that he represented battles in stucco and basso relievo, better than any of the young painters at Mantua, who were Julio’s pupils. He assisted Julio in executing his designs and Francis I. of France sending to Rome for a man that understood working in stucco, Primaticcio was the person chosen for this service, and he adorned Fontainbleau, and most of the palaces in France, with his compositions. The king put such confidence in him, that he sent him to Rome to buy antiques, in 1540; on which occasion he brought back one hundred and fourscore statues, with a great number of busts. He had moulds made by Giacomo Baroccio di Vignola, of the statues of Venus, Laocoon, Commodus, the Tiber, the Nile, the Cleopatra at Belvidere, and Trajan’s Pillar, in order to have them cast in brass. After the death of Rosso-, who was his rival, he succeeded him in the place of superintendant of the buildings; and in a little time finished the gallery which his predecessor had begun. He brought so many statues of marble and brass to Fontainbleau, that it seemed another Rome, as well for the number of the antiques as for his own works in painting and in stucco. He was so much esteemed in France, that nothing of any consequence was done without him, which had relation to painting or building; and he even directed the preparations for all festivals, tournaments, and masquerades. He was made abbot of St. Martin at Troyes, and lived with such splendour, that he was respected as a courtier as well as a painter. He and Rosso taught the French a good style for, before their time, what they had done in the arts was very inconsiderable, and had something of the Gothic in it. He died in 1570, at the age of eighty, after having been favoured and caressed in four reigns.

, in Latin Priolus, author of an History of France from the death of Louis XIII. in 1643 to 1664, was born in 1602. He was descended from the Prioli, an illustrious family, some of whom had been doges of Venice. He underwent some difficulties from losing his father and mother, when young; but these did not abate his passion for learning, which he indulged day and night. He studied first at Orthez, next at Montauban, and afterwards at Leyden in which last city he profited by the lectures of Heinsius and Vossius. He went to Paris, for the sake of seeing and consulting Grotius and afterwards to Padua, where he learned the opinions of Aristotle and other ancient philosophers, under Cremoninus and Licetus. After returning to France, he went again into Italy, in order to be recognized by the house of Prioli, as one of their relations. He devoted himself to the duke of Rohan, then in the Venetian service, and became one of his most intimate confidents; but, uncertain what his fate would be after this duke’s death, he retired to Geneva, having married, three months before, a lady of a very noble family. The duke de Longueville drew him from this retirement, upon his being appointed plenipotentiary from the court of France for the treaty of Munster, as a person whose talents might be of service to him and Priolo resided with him a year at Munster, where he contracted a very intimate friendship with Chigi the nuncio, % who was afterwards pope Alexander VII. From Munster he returned to Geneva; whence he went to France, in order to settle at Paris. He stayed six months in Lyons, and there had frequent conferences with cardinal Francis Barberini the effect of which was, that himself and his whole family abjured the Protestant religion, and immediately received the communion from the hands of the cardinal. He was not, however, long easy at Paris for, the civil war breaking out soon after, he joined with the malecontents, which proved the ruin of his fortune. He was obliged to retire to Flanders, his estate was confiscated, and his family banished. Being afterwards restored to the favour of his sovereign, he resolved to lead a private life, and to devote himself to study. It was at this time, and to divert his melancholy, that he wrote, without the least flattery or partiality, his “History of France,” in Latin. It has gone through several impressions but the best edition is that of Leipsic, 1686, 8vo. He was again employed in negociations; and set out, in 1667, upon a secret affair to Venice; but did not arrive at the end of his journey, being seized with an apoplectic fit, of which he died in the archbishop’s palace at Lyons. He left seven children; who, by virtue of his name, and their own accomplishments and merit, rose to very flourishing circumstances.

His conduct at the Hague was so pleasing to king William, that he made him one of his gentlemen of the bedchamber; and he is supposed to have passed some of the next years in the quiet cultivation of literature and poetry. In 1695 he wrote a long ode on the death of queen Mary, which was presented to the king; and, in 1697, was again employed on public business, being appointed secretary to another embassy at the treaty of Ryswick, and received a present of 200 guineas for bringing that treaty over. In the following year he held the same office at the court of France, where he was considered with great distinction. We are told, that as he was one day surveying the apartments at Versailles, being shewn the victories of Louis, painted by Le Brun, and asked whether the king of England’s palace had any such decorations “The monuments of my master’s actions,” said he, “are to be seen every where but in his own house.” The pictures of Le Brun are not only in themselves sufficiently ostentatious, but were explained by inscriptions so arrogant, that Boileau and Racine thought it necessary to make them more simple.

We have already mentioned his first work his second was, 2. “De Statu Germanici Imperii liber unus,” which he published in 1667, under the name' of “Severini di Mozambano,” with a dedication to his brother Isaac Puffendorf, whom he styles “Laelio Signor de Trezolani.” Puffendorf sent it the year before to his brother, then ambassador from the court of Sweden to that of France, in order to have it printed in that kingdom. His brother offered it to a bookseller, who gave it Mezeray to peruse. Mezeray thought it worth printing, yet refused his approbation, on account of some passages opposite to the interests of France, and of others in which the pritfsts and monks were severely treated. Isaac Puffendorf then sent it to Geneva, where it was printed in 12mo. The design of the author was to prove that Germany was a kind of republic, the constituent members of which being ill-proportioned, formed a monstrous whole. The book and its doctrine, therefore, met with great opposition; it was condemned, prohibited, and seized in many parts of Germany; and written against immediately by several learned civilians. It underwent many editions, and was translated into many languages and, among the rest, into English by Mr. Bohun, 1696, in 12mo. 3. “De Jure Naturae & Gentium,” Leyden, 1672, 4to. This is Puffendorf’s greatest work and it has met with an universal approbation. It is indeed a body of the law of nature, well digested; and, as some think, preferable to Grotius’s book “De Jure Belli & Pacis,” since the same subjects are treated in a more extensive manner, und with greater order. It was translated into French by Barbeyrac, who wrote large notes and an introductory discourse, in 1706; and into English, with Barbeyrac’s notes, by Dr. Basil Kennet and others, in 1708. The fourth and fifth edition of the English translation have Mr. Barbeyrac’s introductory discourse, which is not in the three former. In the mean time Puffendorf was obliged to defend this work against several censurers the most enraged of whom was Nicholas Beckman, his colleague in the university of Lunden. This writer, in. order to give the greater weight to his objections, endeavoured to draw the divines into his party, by bringing religion into the dispute, and accusing the author of heterodoxy. His design in this was, to exasperate the clergy of Sweden against Puffendorf; but the senators of that kingdom prevented this, by enjoining his enemies silence, and suppressing Beckman’s book by the king’s authority. It was reprinted at Giessen; and, being brought to Sweden, was burned in 1675 by the hands of the executioner: and Beckman, the author, banished from the king’s dominions for having disobeyed orders in republishing it, Beckman now gave his fury full scope, and not only wrote virulently and maliciously against Puffendorf, but likewise challenged him to fight a duel he wrote to him from Copenhagen in that style, and threatened to pursue him wherever he should go, in case he did not meet him at the place appointed. Puffendorf took no notice of the letter, but sent, it to the consistory of the university yet thought it necessary to reply to the satirical pieces of that writer, which he did in several publications. Niceron gives a good account of this controversy in the 18th vol.- of his “Memoires.”

On the prosecution of Walpole for high breach of trust and corruption, Pulteney warmly vindicated his friend, for such he then was; and, on his commitment to the Tower, was amongst those who paid frequent visits to the prisoner, whom he, with the rest of the whigs, considered as a martyr to their cause. He also engaged with Walpole in defending the whig administration, and wrote the ironical dedication to the earl of Oxford, prefixed to Walpole' s account of the parliament. On the accession of George I. Mr. Pulteney was appointed privy-counsellor and secretary at war, in opposition to the inclination of the duke of Marlborough, who, as commander in chief, thought himself entitled to recommend to that post. He was chosen a member of the committee of secrecy, nominated, by the House of Commons, to examine and report the substance of the papers relating to the negociation for peace; and on. the suppression of the rebellion of 1715, he moved for the impeachment of lord Widrington, and opposed the motion to address the king for a proclamation, offering a general pardon to all who were in arms in Scotland, who should lay down their arms within a certain time. He was at this period so much connected with Stanhope and Walpole, that, in allusion to the triple alliance between Great Britain, France, and Holland, which was then negociating by general Stanhope, secretary of state, they were called the three “grand allies;” and a proverbial saying was current, “Are you come into the triple alliance?” But when Stanhope and Walpole took different sides, on the schism between the whigs, when Townsend was dismissed and Walpole resigned, Pulteney followed his friend’s example, and gave up his place of secretary at war. When Walpole made a reconciliation between the king and the prince of Wales, and negociated with Sunderland to form a new administration, in which he and lord Townsend bore the most conspicuous part, then were first sown those seeds of disgust and discontent which afterwards burst forth. The causes of this unfortunate misunderstanding may be traced from the authority of the parties themselves, or their particular friends. Pulteney was offended because Walpole had negociated with the prince of Wales and Sunderland, without communicating the progress to him, although he had told it to Mr. Edgcumbe, who indiscreetly gave a daily account to Pulteney. Another cause of disgust was, that Pulteney, who had hitherto invariably proved his attachment to Townsend and Walpole, expected to receive some important employment, whereas he was only offered a peerage; and, when he declined it, more than two years elapsed before any farther overtures were made; and though Pulteney, at length, solicited and obtained the office of cofferer of the household, he deemed that place far below his just expectations. Although, therefore, he continued to support the measures of administration for some time, the disdainful manner in which he conceived he had been treated by Walpole had made too deep an impression on his mind to be eradicated. Finding that he did not possess the full confidence of administration, or disapproving those measures which tended, in his opinion, to raise the power of France on the ruins of the house of Austria, and which, in his opinion, sacrificed the interests of Great Britain to those of Hanover, topics on which he afterwards expatiated with great energy and unusual eloquence in parliament, he became more and more estranged from his former friends, and expressed his disapprobation of their measures both in public and private. At length his dissontent arrived at so great a height, that he declared his resolution of attacking the minister in parliament.

It has been extremely unfortunate, says the same author, for our national taste and our national honour, that Orlando Gibbons, Pelham Humphrey, and Henry Purcell, our three best composers during the seventeenth century, were not blest with sufficient longevity for their genius to expand in all its branches, or to form a school, which would have enabled us to proceed in the cultivation of music without foreign assistance. Orlando Gibbons died 1625, at forty-four. Pelham Humphrey died 1674, at 'twentyseven; and Henry Purcell died 1695, at thirty-seven. If these admirable composers had been blest with long life, we might have had a music of our own, at least as good as that of France or Germany; which, without the assistance of the Italians, has long been admired and preferred to all others by the natives at large, though their princes have usually foreigners in their service. As it is, we have no school for composition, no well-digested method of study, nor, indeed, models of our own. Instrumental music, therefore, has never gained much by our own abilities; for though some natives of England have had hands sufficient to execute the productions of the greatest masters on the continent, they have produced but little of their own that has been much esteemed. Handel’s compositions for the organ and harpsichord, with those of Scarlatti and Alberti, were our chief practice and delight for more than fifty years; while those of Corelli, Geminiani, Albinoni, Vivaldi, Tessarini, Veracini, and Tartini, till the arrival of Giardini, supplied all our wants on the violin, during a still longer period. And as for the hautbois, Martini and Fisher, with their scholars and imitators, are all that we have listened to with pleasure. If a parallel were to be drawn between Purcell and any popular composer of a different country, reasons might be assigned for supposing him superior to every great and favourite contemporary musician in Europe.

, an English poet and poetical critic, flourished in the reign of queen Elizabeth. Very little is known of his life, and for that little- we are indebted to Mr. Haslewood, whose researches, equally accurate and judicious, have so frequently contributed to illustrate the history of old English poetry. By Ames, Puttenham was called Webster, but his late editor has brought sufficient proof that his name was George. He appears to have been born some time between 1529 and 1535. As his education was liberal, it may be presumed that his parents were not of the lowest class. He was educated at Oxford, but in what college, how long he resided, or whether he took a degree, remain unascertained. Wood had made none of these discoveries when he wrote his “Athense.” His career at court might commence at the age of eighteen, when he sought to gain the attention of the youthful king Edward VI. by an P^clogue, entitled “Elpine.” He made one or two tours on the continent, and proved himself neither an idle nor inattentive observer. He visited successively the courts of France, Spain, and Italy, and was at the Spa nearly about the year 1570. It is not improbable that he had a diplomatic appointment under Henry earl of Arundel, an old courtier, who, with the queen’s licence, visited Italy as he describes himself a beholder of the feast given by the duchess of Parma, to this nobleman, at the court of Brussels. His return was probably early after the above period, but nothing can be stated with certainty. It may however be inferred from his numerous adulatory verses addressed to queen Elizabeth, before the time of publishing his “Art of Poesie,” that he must have been a courtier of long standing, and was then one of her gentlemen pensioners.

, lieutenant-general under Louis XIII. and XIV. was of a noble family in Armagnac, and was born in the year 1600. He is one of those Frenchmen of distinction who have written memoirs of their own time, from which so abundant materials are supplied to their history, more than are generally found in other countries. His memoirs extend from 1617 to 1658. - They were first published at Paris, and at Amsterdam in 1690, under the inspection of Du Chene, historiographer of France, in 2 vols. 12mo, and are now republished in the general collection of memoirs. The life of iPuy-Segur was that of a very active soldier. He entered into the army in 1617, and served forty-three years without intermission, rising gradually to the rank of lieutenantgeneral. In 1636, the Spaniards having attempted to pass the Somme, in order to march to Pans, Puy-Segur was ordered to oppose them with a small body of troops. The general, the count de Soissons, fearing afterwards that he would be cut off, which was but too probable, sent his aidde-camp to tell him that he might retire if he thought proper. “Sir,”“replied this brave officer,” a man ordered upon a dangerous service, like the present, has no opinion to form about it. I came here by the count’s command, and shall not retire upon his permission only. If he would have me return, he must command it." This gallant man is said to have been at one hundred and twenty sieges, in which there was an actual cannonade, and in more than thirty battles or skirmishes, yet never received a wound. He died in 1682, at his own castle of Bernouille, near Guise. His memoirs are written with boldness and truth; contain many remarkable occurrences, in which he was personally concerned; and conclude with some very useful military instructions.

His son, of the same name, was born at Paris in 1655, entered into the army under his father, rose to the post of commander-in-chief in the French Netherlands, and at length to the still more important one of a marshal of France in 1734. He died at Paris in the year 1743, at the age of 88. He was author of a work “On the Art Military,” published by his only son James Francis, marquis of Chastenet, who died in 1782. He was the author of some political works.

, a celebrated French physician, was born at Merey, near Mont fort- Lamaury, a small town of the isle of France, in the year 1694. He was the son of a labourer, and worked in the fields till he was sixteen years of age; though he afterwards became first physician in ordinary to the king of France, a member of the Academy of Sciences at Paris, and of the Royal Society of London. He did not even learn to read till the period above-mentioned, when one of the books in which he first delighted was the “Maison Rustique.” The surgeon of the village gave him a slight knowledge of Greek and Latin, with some of the first principles of his art after which he repaired to the capital, where he completed his knowledge of it. Having obtained the requisite qualifications, he first practised his profession at Mantes but M. de la Peyronie, having discovered his talents, and thinking them lost in a small town, invited him to Paris, to be secretary to an academy of surgery, which he was desirous to establish. To the first collection of memoirs published by this society Quesnay prefixed a preface, which is considered as one of the compietest performances of the kind. The gout at length disqualified him for the practice of surgery, and he applied himself to medicine, wherein he became no less eminent. Towards the latter end of life his early taste for agricultural studies revived, and he became a leading man in the sect of ceconomists, who afterwards made so bad a use of their influence, by circulating democratical principles. Quesnay had many good qualities, among which were humanity and charity, with a strong mind and philosophical equality of temper, under the pains of the gout. He lived to the age of eighty, and in his very last years involved himself so deeply in mathematical studies that he fancied he had discovered at once the two great problems, of the trisection of an angle, and the quadrature of the circle. He died in December 1774. Louis XV“. was much attached to Quesnay, called him” son penseur,“his thinker; and, in allusion to that name, gave him three pansies, or” pensees," for his arms.

Arriving at Rome, he paid his respects frequently to the marshal D'Etre*es, the French ambassador and was soon after received into his service, as secretary of the embassy. He seems to have returned with the marshal to France, after the death of cardinal Richelieu. While he was at Rome, he began his poem called “Callipsedia” the first edition of which was printed at Leyden, 1655, with this title, “Calvidii Leti Callipsedia, seu de pulchrae prolis habendae ratione.” Calvidius Letus is almost an anagram of his name. It is not known, what cause of offence he had with cardinal Mazarine; but it is certain, that he reflected very severely upon his eminence in this poem. The cardinal, however, sent for him and, after some kind expostulations, assured him of his esteem, and dismissed him with a promise of the next good abbey that should fall; which he accordingly conferred upon him a few months after this effectually removed all Quillet’s dislike, and he dedicated the second edition of his book to the cardinal, after having expunged the passages which had given him offence. The second edition of “Callipoedia” was printed at Paris, 1656, with many additions, and Quillet’s proper name to it: and the author subjoined two other pieces of Latin poetry, one “Ad Eudoxum,” which is n. fictitious name for some courtier; another, “In obitum Petri Gassendi, insignis Philosophi & Astronomi.” These are all the productions of Quillet which ever came from the press; although he wrote a long Latin poem in twelve books, entitled “Henriados,” in honour of Henry IV. of France, and translated all the satires of Juvenal into French.

companies by drawing his sword on verdict, self-defence, persons whom, he did not know, came far from deserving censure. In the season of 1718-19, Mr. Quin performed in Buckingham’s “Scipio Africanus,” and in 1719-2O, “Sir Walter Raleigh,” in Dr. Sewell’s play of that name and in the year had, as it appears, two benefits, “The Provok'd Wife,” 31st of January, before any other performer, and again, “The Squire of Alsatia,” on the 17th of April. The succeeding season he performed in Buckingham’s “Henry the Fourth of France,” in “Richard II.” as altered by Theobald, and in “The Imperial Captives,” of Mottley. The season of 1720-21 was very favourable to his reputation as an actor. On the 22d of October, “The Merry Wives of Windsor” was revived, in which he first played Falstaff, with great increase of fame. This play, which was well supported by Ryan, in Ford; Spiller, in Dr. Cains; Boheme, in Justice Shallow; and Griffin, in Sir Hugh Evans; was acted nineteen times during the season, a proof that it had made a very favourable impression on the public. In the season of 1721-22, he performed in Mitchell’s* or rather Hill’s “Fatal Extravagance,” Sturmy’s “Love and Duty,” Philips’s “Hibernia freed.” The season of 1722-3 produced Fenton’s “Mariamne,” the most successful play that theatre had known, in which Mr. Quin performed Sohemus. In the next year, 1723-24, he acted in Jefferys’ “Edwin,” and in Philips’s “Belisarius.” The season of 1725 produced no new play in which Mr. Quin had any part but on the revival of “Every Man in his Humour,” he represented Old Knowell and it is not unworthy of observation, that Kitely, afterwards so admirably performed by Mr. Garrick, was assigned to Mr. Hippesley, the Shuter or Edwin of his day. In 1726, he performed in Southern’s “Money’s the Mistress” and, in 1727, in Welsted’s “Dissembled Wanton,” and Frowde’s “Fall of Saguntum.”

, or, in French, Cinq-Arbres (John), a learned Hebrew scholar, was born at Aurillac in Auvergne, about the beginning of the sixteenth century. He studied the Oriental languages under Francis Vatable, and became professor of Hebrew and Syriac in the college of France in 1554, and dean of the royal professors, which high office he held at the time of his death in 1587. In 1546 he published his “Hebrew Grammar,” to which was added a short treatise on the Hebrew points. This was often reprinted both in France and elsewhere in 4to, under the title “Linguae Hebraicae institutiones absolutissimae.” The edition of 1609, by father Vignal, besides valuable additions, a treatise on Hebrew poetry and syntax, has the advantage of a most beautiful type, cast by Lebé Quinquarboreus translated into Latin, with notes, the “Targum of Jonathan, son of Uziel, on Jeremiah,” which was published in 1549, and again in 1556, 4to, with additions, and the title “Targum in Osean, Joelem, Amosum,” &c. He also published in 1551 the gospel of St. Matthew in Hebrew, with the version and notes of Sebastian Munster, and translated into Latin several of the works of Avicenna.

Racine’s dramatic character embroiled him at this time with the gentlemen of Port Royal. Mr. Nicole, the Jeremy Collier of France, in his “Visionaires & Imagifiaires,” had thrown out occasionally soine poignant strokes against the writers of romance and poets of the theatre, whom he called the public poisoners, not of bodies, but of souls “des empoisonneurs publics, non des corps, mais desames.” Racine, considering himself as included in this censure, addressed a very animated letter to Nicole; in which, without entering deeply into a defence of his brethren, he endeavoured to turn into ridicule the solitaires and religious of the Port Royal. M. du Bois and Barbier Daucour having each of them replied to this letter, Racine opposed them in a second, all which, originally published in 1666, are to be found in the edition of Racine’s works 1728, and also in the last editions of the works of Boileau. In 1668, he published“Les Plaideurs,” a comedy, and a close imitation of Aristophanes and “Andromache,” a tragedy, which was much applauded and much criticised. Some however think it his first good tragedy. He continued to exhibit from time to time several excellent tragedies “Britannicus,” in 1670; “Berenice,” in 1671; “Bajazet,” in 1672 “Mithridates,” in 1673 “Iphigenia,” in 1675; “Phaedra,” in 1677. During this time, he met with all that opposition which envy and cabal are ever ready to set up against a superior genius; and one Pradon, a poet whose name is not otherwise worth remembering, was then employed by persons of the first distinction to have a “Phaedra” ready for the theatre against the time that Racine’s should appear.

, chevalier de St. Michel, composer to the king of France, and to l'Academic Royale de la Musique, or serious opera at Paris, was born at Dijon in 1683, He went early in his life to Italy, and at his return was appointed organist at Clermout en Auvergne, where his “Traite” de la Musique“was written, in 1722. He was afterwards elected organist of St. Croix de la Bretonnerie at Paris. Here his time was chiefly employed in teaching; however, he published harpsichord lessons, and several other theoretical works, without distinguishing himself much as a vocal composer, till 1733, when, at fifty years of age, he produced his first opera of” Hippolite et Aricie." The music of this drama excited professional envy and national discord. Party rage was now as violent between the admirers of Lulli and Rameau, as in England between the friends of Bononcini and Handel, or, in modern times, at Paris, between the Gluckists and the Piccinists. When the French, during the last century, were so contented with the music of Lulli, it was nearly as good as that of other countries, and better patronized and supported by the most splendid prince in Europe. But this nation, so frequently accused of more volatility and caprice than their neighbours, have manifested a steady persevering constancy in their music, which the strongest ridicule and contempt of other nations could never vanquish.

Rameau only answered his antagonists by new productions, which were still more successful; and, at length, he was acknowledged by his countrymen to be not only superior to all competition at Paris, but sole monarch of the musical world. From 1733 to 1760 he composed twentyone operas, of which the “names and dates are annually published in the” Spectacles de Paris," and in many other periodical works, Rameau’s style of composition, which continued in favour almost unmolested for upwards of forty years, though formed upon that of Lulli, is more rich in harmony, and varied in melody. The genre, however displeasing to all ears but those of France, which had been nursed in it, was carried by the learning and genius of Rameau to its acme of perfection; and when that is achieved in any style, it becomes the business of subsequent composers to invent or adopt another, in which something is still left to be done, besides servile imitation.

The subsequent course of his life received its direction from his friendship and connections with this prelate. Feiielon had been preceptor to the duke of Burgundy, heirapparent, after the death of his father the dauphin, to the crown of France; yet neither of them came to the possession of it, being survived by Lewis XIV. who was succeeded by his great grandson, son to the duke of Burgundy, and now Lewis XV. Ramsay, having been first governor to the duke de Charteau-Thiery and the prince de Turenne, was made knight of the order of St. Lazarus; and afterwards was invited to Rome by the chevalier de St. George, styled there James III. king of Great Britain, to take the charge of educating his children. He went accordingly to that court in 1724; but the intrigues and dissentions, which he found on his arrival there, gave him so much uneasiness, that, with the Pretender’s leave, he presently returned to Paris. Thence he returned to Scotland, and was kindly received by the duke of Argyle and Greenwich; in whose family he resided some years, and employed his leisure there in writing several of his works. In 1730 he had the degree of doctor of law conferred on him at Oxford, being admitted for this purpose of St. Mary hall in April of that year, and presented to his degree by the celebrated tory Dr. King, the principal of that house. After his return to France, he resided some time at Pontoise, a seat of the prince de Turenne, duke de Bouillon with whom he continued in the post of intendant till his death, May 6, 1743, at St. Germaiu-en-Laie, where his body was interred; but his heart was deposited in the nunnery of St. Sacrament at Paris.

, a statesman in queen Elizabeth’s reign, the son of Avery Randolph of Badlesmere in Kent, was born in that county in 1523. He was, according to his own account, a pupil of George Buchanan, but had his academical education at Christ Church, Oxford, then newly founded; where he took the degree of bachelor of law in 1547, about which time he was made a public notary. In Nov. 1549, he became principal of Broadgatehall (now Pembroke college), and continued in that office until 1553, when the persecution of the protestants under queen Mary, obliged him to retire to France. On the accession of queen Elizabeth, he came into high favour, and his talents recommended him to be employed in various embassies, particularly in Scotland during the commotions there: he was sent thrice to queen Mary, and afterwards seven times to her son and successor James VI. We find him also several times supporting the same character at the courts of Russia and France. Eiis first mission to Scotland, in 1561, had for its professed object to promote a mutual friendship between the two nations, and to endeavour that queen Mary, who hadj ust lost her husband, Francis II. king of France, should not again marry a foreigner; but according to Sir James Melvil and others, his real business was to intrigue between the two parties which then divided Scotland, and rather to increase than allay their animosities. In this plan secretary Cecil was supposed to be the director, and Randolph the executor. By a letter published by Mr. Lodge, who says that Randolph was a man of “a dark intriguing spirit, full of cunning, and void of conscience,” we learn that at one time he was confined in prison at Edinburgh; but probably for a short time, as the circumstance is not mentioned in any history. In Russia, to which he was sent in 1560, his conduct merits greater approbation, as in the following year, he brought to conclusion a commercial treaty highly advantageous to the English merchants, who were then enabled to establish the “Russia Company.” His secretary on this embassy was George Turberville the poet, who has described the manners and customs of the Moscovites in some epistles to his friends, which are inserted in Hakluyt’s voyages. In 1571, during one of his embassies to Scotland, he had the spirit to challenge Virac, the French ambassador in that kingdom, who had taken some liberties with queen Elizabeth’s character and with his own. For all these services the queen is accused of having rewarded Mr. Randolph rather niggardly, having bestowed on him only the order of knighthood, the office of chamberlain of the exchequer, and that of postmaster, to neither of which last was much profit annexed, and a few small estates. Yet with these he is said to have been content, although he had a large family. He died at his house on St. Peter’s hill, near Thames-street, London, June 8, 1590, in the sixty-seventh year of his age, and was buried in the church of St. Peter, Paul’s wharf. In his latter days he appears to have lived retired, “setting his mind,” as he expresses it, “upon the heavenly country, and reconciling himself to the divine mercy by a timely repentance.” Such likewise is the advice he gave to sir Francis Walsingham, whose sister he had married. He tells him, “how worthy. yea, how necessary a thing it was, that they should at length bid farewell to the tricks, he of a secretary, and himself of an ambassador.” Several of his letters and dispatches are in the Cotton collection in the British Museum, and among bishop More’s books in the public library at Cambridge. Two of his letters were published by James Oliphant, among Buchanan’s Letters, 1711, 8vo, and have been inserted since in the Leyden and Edinburgh edition of Buchanan’s works, one to Buchanan himself, and the ether to Peter Yonge, school- master to James VI. There are also some of his letters, instructions, and dispatches, printed in Strype’s “Annals,” Goodall’s “Examination of the Letters said to be written by Mary queen of Scots,” and in Robertson’s History of Scotland," &C.

, an eminent historian, was born at Castresin Languedoc, March 25, 1661. His family was originally from Savoy, and is supposed to have removed into France upon embracing the Protestant religion. Philibert de Rapin, his great-grandfather, who was of that persuasion, exposed himself so much to the indignation of the Roman catholics, and particularly to that of the parliament of Toulouse, that his head was struck off in 1563 by a sentence of theirs, at the very time that he came, by the king’s order, to have the treaty of peace registered there. Daniel the historian passes over this fact in silence; and his reason is supposed to have been, that he might exaggerate the disturbances raised by the Huguenots afterwards in the country about Toulouse. What then happened appears to have been the popular revenge for Philibert’s death, as the soldiers wrote on the ruins of the houses they had burned, “Vengeance for Rapin’s death.” James de Rapin, lord of Thoyras, was our author’s father. He applied himself to the study of the law, and was an advocate in the chamber of the edict of Nantes above fifty years. These chambers were courts of judicature erected in several towns of France, in behalf of the Huguenots, or Protestants; the judges of which were half of the Reformed, and half of the Roman catholic religion. Jane de Pelisson, his wife, was daughter to a counsellor of the chamber of Castres, and sister to George and Paul Pelisson; which lady, after having been Confined for some time in a convent, was at last sent, by the king’s order, to Geneva, where she died in 1705.

, an engraver, was a native of France, but came to England about 1750, and settled in London. In the latter part of his life he resided at Mother lied Cap’s, near Kentish Town, where he died in 1774. He was of an amiable disposition and much respected, and had the honour of instructing both Ryland and Hall in the art of engraving.

It had long been a received opinion, that Turquoise stones were found only in Persia; but Reaumur discovered mines of them in Languedoc; he ascertained the degree of heat necessary to give them their colour, and the pro­* That mode of uniting various threads into a cord, is undoubtedly the best which causes the tensions of the threads to be equal in whatever direction th cord is strained. per form and dimension of the furnace; he proved also that the Turquoise is no more than a fossil bone petrified, coloured by a metallic solution which fire causes to spread; and that the Turquoises of France are at least equal in beauty and size to those of the East. He also discovered the secret of making artificial pearls, and of the substance necessary to give them their colour, which is taken from a little fish called able, or ablette. He drew up, at the same time, a dissertation upon the true pearl, which he supposed to be a morbid concretion in the body of the animal.

Reaumur soon after published the History of the Auriferous rivers of France, in which he has given a very particular account of the manner of separating the grains of gold from the sand with which it is mixed. Among other memoirs he drew up the following: 1. Concerning the vast bank of fossil shells, which, inTouraine, is dug for manure called Falun: 2. Upon flints, proving that they are only more penetrated by a stony juice; or, if the expression may be allowed, more stonified than other stones, though less than rock crystal. 3. Upon the Nostoch, a singular plant, which appears only after hard rains in the summer, under a gelatinous form, and soon after disappears. 4. Upon the light of Dails, a kind of shell fish, which shines in the dark, but loses its lustre as it grows stale. 5. Upon the facility with which iron and steel become magnetic by percussion.

He now settled in his own country, near Dourden, about eleven leagues from Paris, and wrote a great many comedies, which were acted with success, particularly his “Gamester.” He was made a treasurer of France, and lieutenant of the waters and forests, which enabled him to indulge his taste for pleasure and gaiety. It has been said that he died of chagrin in his 52d year, Sept. 4, 1709, and that he even contributed himself to shorten his days; but both these reports are contradicted in the new edition of the Diet. Hist. (1811), and his death attributed to imprudent conduct after taking medicine. The best edition of his works, which consist of comedies and his travels, is that of Paris, 1730, 4 vols. 8vo, with notes.

, was a learned French Benedictine monk in the ninth century, and brought up in the abbey of St. Germain, at Auxerre, whence he derived that appendix to his name by which he is distinguished. Having made great proficiency in profane and sacred literature, he was appointed principal teacher in the schools belonging to his monastery, and afterwards taught at Rheims with great reputation, until he went to Paris, and opened the first public school in that city, after learning had sunk under the ravages of the Normans. His works are, 1. “Commentarius in omnes Davidis Psalmos,” Cologne, 1536, a methodized collection of opinions from the fathers. 2. “Enarrationes in posteriores XI. minores Prophetas,” Antwerp, 1545, with the “Commentaries” of Oecumenius upon the Acts of the Apostles, and their Epistles, and those of Aretbas upon the book of Revelation and “Expositio Missa;.” A “Commentary upon the Epistles of St. Paul,” has been also ascribed to him, but on doubtful authority. It is move certain that he left behind him “A Commentary on the Musical Treatise of Martianus Capella,” which is among the Mss. in the king of France’s library, No. 5304.

, an able naval architect, was born in 1652, in Beurn, descended from the ancient house of Elisagaray in Navarre. The count de Vermandois, admiral of France, engaged his services in 1679, by a pension of a thousand crowns; and his opinion concerning the construction of ships was preferred to that of M. Duguesne, even by that gentleman himself. In consequence of this, Renau received orders to visit Brest and the other ports, that he might instruct the ship-builders, whose sons of fifteen or twenty years old he taught to build the largest ships, which had till then required the experience of twenty or thirty years. Having advised the bombardment of Algiers in 1680, he invented bomb-boats for that expedition, and the undertaking succeeded. After the admiral’s decease, M. Vauban placed M. Renau in a situation to conduct the sieges of Cadaquiers in Catalonia, of Philipsburg, Manheim, and Frankendal. In the midst of this tumultuous life he wrote his “Theorie de la manoeuvre des Vaisseaux,” which was published 1689, 8vo. The king, as a reward for M. Renau’s services, made him captain of a ship, with orders that he should have free access to, and a deliberative voice in the councils of the generals, an unlimited inspection of the navy, and authority to teach the officers any new methods of his invention; to which was added a pension of 12,000 livres. The grand master of Malta requested his assistance to defend that island against the Turks, who were expected to besiege it; but the siege not taking place, M. Renau went back to France, and on his return was appointed counsellor to the navy, and grand croix of St. Louis. He died Sept. 30, 1719. He had been admitted an honorary member of the Academy of Sciences in 1699. He has left several Letters, in answer to the objections raised by Huygens and Bernouilli against his Theory abovementioned. He was a man of reflection, read little, but thought much; and, what appears a greater singularity, he meditated more deeply when in the midst of company, where he was frequently found, than in solitude, to which he seldom retired. He was very short, almost a dwarf, but adroit, lively, witty, brave, and the best engineer which France has produced, except M. de Vauban.

, a celebrated cardinal and minister of France, was the third son of Francis du Plessis, seigneur de Richelieu, knight of the king’s orders, and grand provost of France, and was born Sept. 5, 1585, at Paris. He was admitted into the Sorbonne at the age of twenty-two, obtained a dispensation from pope Paul V. for the bishopric of Lucon, and was consecrated at Rome in 1607. On his return, he acquired considerable interest at court, and was appointed by Mary de Medicis, then regent, her grand almoner; and in 1616 was raised to the post of secretary of state. After the death of one of his friends, the marshal D'Ancre, in 1617, when Mary was banished to Blois, he followed her thither; but, the duke de Luynes becoming jealous of him, he was ordered to retire to Avignon, and there he wrote his “Method of Controversy,” on the principal points of faith.

In 1619 the king recalled Richelieu, and sent him into Angouleme, where he persuaded the queen to a reconciliation, which was concluded in 1620; and in consequence of this treaty, the duke de Luynes obtained a cardinal’s hat for him from pope Gregory XV. Richelieu, continuing his services after the duke’s decease, was admitted, in 1624, into the council, through the interest of the queen, and almost against the will of the king, who, devout and scrupulous, considered him as a knave, because he had been informed of his gallantries. It is even said that he was insolent enough to aspire to queen Anne of Austria, and that the railleries to which this subjected him were the cause of his subsequent aversion to her. Cardinal Richelieu was afterwards appointed prime minister, head of the councils, high steward, chief, and superintendant-generai of the French trade and navigation. He preserved the Isle of Rhe in 1627, and undertook the siege of Rochelle against the protestants the same year. He completed the conquest of Rochelle in October 1628, in spite of the king of Spain, who had withdrawn his forces, of the king of England, who could not relieve it, and of the French king, who grew daily more weary of the undertaking, by means of that famous mole, executed by his orders, but planned by Lewis Metezeau and John Tiriot. The capture of Rochelle proved a mortal blow to the protestants, but in France was reckoned the most glorious and beneficial circumstance of cardinal Richelieu’s administration. He also attended his majesty to the relief of the duke of Mantua in 1629, raised the siege of Casal, and, at his return, compelled the protestants to accept the treaty of peace which had been concluded at Alais, and completed the ruin of their party. Six months after this, cardinal Richelieu, having procured himself to be appointed lieutenant-general of the army beyond the mountains, took Pignerol, relieved Casal a second time, which was besieged by the marquis Spinola, defeated general Doria, by means of the duke de Monttnorenci at Vegliana, July 10, 1630, and made himself master of all Savoy. Louis XIII. having returned to Lyons, in consequence of sickness, the queenmother, and most of the nobility, took advantage of this circumstance to form plots against Richelieu, and speak ill of his conduct to the king, which they did with so much success, that Louis promised the queen to discard him. The cardinal’s ruin now seemed inevitable, and he was actually preparing to set out for Havre-de Grace, which he had chosen for his retreat, when cardinal de la Valette, knowing that the queen had not followed her son to Versailles, advised him first to see his majesty. In this interview, he immediately cleared himself from all the accusations of his enemies, justified his conduct, displayed the advantages and necessity of his administration, and wrought so forcibly upon the king’s mind by his reasoning, that, instead of being discarded, he became from that moment more powerful than ever. He inflicted the same punishments upon his enemies which they had advised for him; and this day, so fortunate for Richelieu, was called “The Day of Dupes.” Those who had the misfortune to incur his displeasure, certainly did not all deserve the penalties to which he doomed them; but he knew how to make himself master of their fate, by appointing such judges to try them as were at his disposal. That abominable method of taking the accused from their lawful judges, had, in the preceding century, served as a means for the families of condemned persons to get their characters restored; after which the French had no reason to fear its revival; but Richelieu hesitated not to adopt it, though at the risque of general odium, as being favourable to his designs. By thus making himself master of the lives and fortunes of the mal-contents, he imposed silence even on their murmurs. This artful minister, being now secure of his lasting ascendancy over the king, and having already accomplished one of the two great objects which he had proposed to himself from the beginning of his administration, which were, the destruction of the protestants, and the humbling the too great power of the house of Austria, began now to contrive means for executing this second undertaking. The principal and most efficacious method employed by the cardinal with that view, was a treaty he concluded, January 23, 1631, with Gustavus Adolphus, king of Sweden, for currying the war into the heart of Germany. He also formed a league with the duke of Bavaria, secured to himself Lorrain, raised part of the German princes against the emperor, treated with Holland to continue the war wirh Spain, favoured the Catalonians and Portuguese when they shook off the Spanish yoke, and, in short, made use of so many measures and stratagems, that he completely accomplished his design. Cardinal Richelieu was carrying on the war with success, and meditating on that glorious peace, which was not concluded till 1648, when h died in his palace at Paris, worn out by his long toils, December 4,“1642, aged fifty-eight. He was buried at the Sorbonne, where his mausoleum (the celebrated Girardon’s master-piece) may be seen. He is considered as one of the most complete statesmen, and ablest politicians, that France ever had. Amidst all the anxieties which the fear of his enemies must necessarily occasion, he formed the most extensive and complicated plans, and executed them with great superiority of genius. It was cardinal Richelieu who established the throne, while yet shaken by the protestant factions, and the power of the House of Austria, and made the royal authority completely absolute, and independent, by the extinction of the petty tyrants who wasted the kingdom. In the mean time he omitted nothing which could contribute to the glory of France. He promoted arts and sciences; founded the botanical garden at Paris called the king’s garden; also the French academy, and the royal printing-office; built the palace since called the Palais Royal, and gave it to his majesty; rebuilt the Sorbonne (of which he was provisor) in a style of kingly magnificence; and prepared for all the splendour of Louis the Fourteenth’s reign. His enemies, says the abbe L'Atocat, unable to deny his great talents, have reproached him with great faults; irregularity of conduct, unbounded ambition, universal despotism, from which even the king, his master, did not escape; for he left him, as they express it, only the power of curing the evil; a vanity and ostentation which exceeded the dignity of the throne itself, where all was simplicity and negligence, while the cardinal’s court exhibited nothing but pomp and splendour; unexampled ingratitude to his benefactress, queen Mary de Medicis, whom he inhumanly compelled to end her da*ys in Germany, in obscurity and indigence; and, finally, his revengeful temper, which occasioned so many cruel executions; as those of Chalais, Grandier, the marechal de Marillac, M. de Montmorenci, Cinqmars, M. de Thou, &c. Even the queen, for having written to the duchess de Chevreuse, Richelieu’s enemy, and a fugitive, saw all her papers seized, and was examined before the chancellor Sequier. Mad. de la Fayette, mad. de Hautefort, and father Caussin, the king’s confessors, were all disgraced in consequence of having offended this despotic minister. But, says his apologist, there are many points to be considered with respect to these accusations: it appears certain, from a thousand passages in the life of this celebrated cardinal, that he was naturally very grateful, and never proceeded to punishment but when he thought state affairs required it; for which reason, when in his last sickness, his confessor asked” if he forgave his enemies?“he replied,” I never had any but those of the state.“At the head of his” Political Testament“may be seen his justification of himself on the subject of these bloody executions, with which he has been so much reproached. It is equally certain, that he never oppressed the people by taxes or exorbitant subsidies, notwithstanding the long wars he had to carry on; and that, if he was severe in punishing crimes, he knew how to distinguish merit, and reward it generously. He bestowed the highest ecclesiastical dignities on such bishops and doctors as he knew to be men of virtue and learning; placed able and experienced generals at the head of the armies, and entrusted public business with wise, punctual, and intelligent men. It was this minister who established a navy. His vigilance extended through every part of the government; and, notwithstanding the cabals, plots, and factions, which were incessantly forming against him during the whole course of his administration (and which must have employed great part of his time) he left sufficient sums behind him to carry on the war with glory; and France was in a more powerful and flourishing state at the time of his decease than when Louis XIV. died. After stating these facts, Richelieu’s enemies areinvited to determine whether France would have derived more advantage from being governed by Mary de Medicis, Gaston of Orleans, &c. than by this cardinal The estate of Richelieu was made a dukedom in his favour, in 1631, and he received other honours and preferments. Besides the” Method of Controversy“he wrote, 2.” The principal points of the Catholic Faith defended, against the writing addressed to the king by the ministers of Charenton.“3.” The most easy and certain Method of converting those who are separated from the Church.“These pieces are written with force and vivacity. He wrote also,” A Catechism,“in which he lays down the doctrine of the church, in a clear and concise manner and a treatise of piety, called,” The Perfection of a Christian.“These are his theological works; and they have been often printed: but that which is most read, and most worthy of being read, is his” Political Testament," the authenticity of which has been doubted by some French writers, particularly Voltaire. The cardinal also had the ambition to be thought a dramatic poet; and, says lord Chesterfield, while he absolutely governed both his king and country, and was, in a great degree, the arbiter of the fate of all Europe, he was more jealous of the great reputation of Corneille, than of the power of Spain; and more flattered with being thought (what he was not) the best poet, than with being thought (what he certainly was) the greatest statesman in Europe; and affairs stood still, while he was concerting the criticism upon the Cid.

, a learned French divine, was born September 30, 1560, at Chaource, in the diocese of Langres. He had been at first drawn into the party and sentiments of the Leaguers, and even ventured to defend James Clement, but soon hastened to acknowledge his legitimate sovereign, after having taken his doctor’s degree, 1590. Richer became grand master of the college of Le Moine, then syndic of the faculty of divinity at Paris, January 2, 1603, in which office he strenuously defended the ancient maxims of the doctors of this faculty, and opposed the thesis of a Dominican in 1611, who maintained the pope’s infallibility, and his superiority over the council. He published a small tract the same year, “On the Civil and Ecclesiastical Power,” 8vo, to establish the principles on which he asserted that the doctrine of the French church, and the Sorhonne, respecting papal authority, and the authority of the general council, were founded. This little book made much noise, and raised its author enemies in the Nuncio, and some doctors undertook to have him deposed from the syndicate, and his work condemned by the faculty of theology; but the parliament prohibited the faculty from interfering in that affair. In the mean time cardinal du Perron, archbishop of Sens, assembled eight bishops of his province at Paris, and made them censure Richer’s book, March 9, 1612. Richer entered an appeal (Comme tfabus) from this censure, to the parliament, and was admitted as an appellant; but the matter rested there. His book was also censured by the archbishop of Aix, and three bishops of his province, May 24, the same year, and he was proscribed and condemned at Rome. A profusion or pamphlets now appeared to refute him, and he received an express order from court, not to write in his defence. The animosity against Richer rose at length to such a height that his enemies obtained from the king and the queen regent letters, ordering the faculty to elect another syndic. Richer made his protestations, read a paper in his defence, and retired. A new syndic was chosen in 1612, and they have ever since been elected once in two years, although before that time their office was perpetual. Richer afterwards ceased to attend the meetings of the faculty, and confined himself to solitude, being wholly employed in study; but his enemies having involved him in several fresh troubles, he was seized, sent to the prisons of St. Victor, and would even have been delivered up to the pope, had no,t the parliament and chancellor of France prevented it, on complaints made by the university. He refused to attend the censure passed on the books of Anthony de Dominis in 1617, and published a declaration in 1620, at the solicitation of the court of Rome, protesting that he was ready to give an account of the propositions in his book “on the Ecclesiatical and Civil Power,” and explain them in an orthodox sense; and farther, that he submitted his work to the judgment of the Holy See, and of the Catholic church. He even published a second declaration; but all being insufficient to satisfy his adversaries, he was obliged to reprint his book in 1629, with the proofs of the propositions advanced in it, and the two declarations, to which cardinal Richelieu is said to have forced him to add a third. He died Nov. 28, 1631, in his seventy-second year. He was buried at the Sorbonne, where a mass used to be said annually for the repose of his soul. Besides his treatise on “Ecclesiastical Power,” reprinted with additions at Cologii in 1701, 2 vols. 4to, he was the author of a “History of general Councils,” 4 vols. 4to a “History of his Syndicate,” 8vo, and some other works, in which learning and great powers of reasoning are obvious. Baillet published a life of him in 12mo.

, a learned French writer, was born at Laval, in the province of Perche, about 1571. He wa* brought up in the family of the count de Laval, and for. some time followed the military profession, serving in Italy and in Holland. In 1603, Henry IV. appointed him one of the gentlemen of his bed-chamber. In 1605 he entered into tSie service of the emperor against the Turks: but ori his return he devoted himself to literary and scientific studies and in 1611 he was appointed preceptor to the young king, Lewis XIII. with a pension of 3000 livres, and the title of counsellor of state. An insult he received from his royal pupil obliged him to quit his office for some time. The king had a favourite dog, who was perpetually jumping on Rivault during his giving lessons, and Rivault one day gave him a kick. The king was so incensed as to strike Riv'lult, who retired; but it appears they were soon reconciled, and by the king’s orders Rivault accompanied ma* dame Elizabeth of France as far as Bayonne, on her way to be married to the king of Spain. On his return from that voyage he died at Tours, Jan. 1616, about the age of forty-five. He is spoken of with high esteem by several of the most celebrated writers of his time, particularly by Casaubon, Scaliger, Vossius, Erpenius, and Menage. His works consist of, 1. “Les Etats,” or “The States, or a discourse concerning the privileges of the prince, the nobles, and the Third Estate, &c.” 2. “Les Elemens d'Artillerie,” Paris, 1608, 8vo, a curious and very scarce work. 3. “Archimedis Opera quae extant, Gr. et Lat. novis detnonstrationibus illdstrata,” &c. Paris, 1615, folio; and ether pieces on education, &c.

, of the same family as the preceding, but descended from a catholic branch, was born October 30, 1683, at Confolens, a small town in Poictiers. He studied philosophy under the Jacobins at Poictiers, but an escape from very imminent danger determined him to put on the Benedictine habit, which he accordingly did at Marmoutier in 1704, and took his vows therein 1705. In 1716 he was transferred to the monastery of St. Cyprian, and summoned to Paris the year following, to assist some other monks in compiling a history of illustrious men of the Benedictine order; but this project failing, Rivet turned his thoughts entirely to the literary history of France, which he had before formed a design of writing, and which employed the rest of his trfe, He was-assisted in this work by three of his brethren, Joseph Duclou, Maurice Poncet, and John Colomb, who were all his particular friends, good critics, and accurate and industrious writers. In 1723 Rivet published at Amsterdam “Le Necrologe de Port Royal des Champs,” a work of which he was very fond, and added to it a long historical preface. This publication, joined to his warm opposition to the bull Unrgenitus, from which he had appealed, obliged him to retire -iiftb the abbey of St. Vincent at Mans, the same year, where he laboured assiduously during more than thirty years to complete his “Literary History of France.” >' He published the first volume in 1733, 4to, and was finishing the ninth, which contains the first years of the 12th century, when he died, February 7, 1749, in his sixty-sixth year, worn out with intense application, austerities, and the strict and rigorous observation of his rule, from which he never departed. His history was afterwards extended to 12 volumes, to which Clemencet added a 13th. It is a very useful work, but the French literati have never thought of completing it.

The following is said to be a complete list of her publications: 1. “Poems,” in two volumes, 8vo. 2. “Legitimate Sonnets, with Thoughts on Poetical Subjects, and Anecdotes of the Grecian Poetess, Sappho.” 3. “A Monody to the memory of the Queen of France.” 4. “A Monody to the memory of Sir Joshua Reynolds.” 5. “Modern Manners; a Satire, in two cantos,” 4to. 6. “The Sicilian Lover, a Tragedy, in five acts.” 7. “Sight; The Cavern of Woe; and Solitude; three Poems,” 4to. 8. A Pamphlet in vindication of the Queen of France; published without a name. 9. A Pamphlet entitled “Thoughts on the condition of Women, and the Injustice of Mental Subordination.” 10. “Vancenza, a Romance,” 2 vols. II. “The Widow,” a Novel, 2 vols. 12. “Angelina,” a Novel, 3 vols. 13. “Hubert de Sevrac,” a Romance, 3 vols. 14. “Walsingham,” a Novel, 4 vols. 15. “The false Friend,” a Novel, 4 vols. 16, “The Natural Daughter,” a Novel, 2 vols. 17. “Lyrical Tales,” 1 vol. crown 8vo. 18. “A Picture of Palermo, translated from Dr. Hager.” 19. “The Lucky Escape,” a farce, not published. 20. “Nobody,” a comedy, also not published.

, a celebrated naval commander, was the second son of Henry Rodney, esq. of Walton on Thames, and Mary, eldest daughter and coheir to sir Henry Newton, knight, envoy- extraordinary to Genoa, LL. D. judge of the high-court of admiralty, and chancellor of the diocese of London. His father, as a naval officer, commanded the yacht in which king George I. attended by the duke of Chandos, used to embark in going to or coming from Hanover, and in consequence, asked leave that his son might be called George Brydges. He was born in Dec. 1717. At the desire, or by the command, of his royal and noble god-fathers, he entered early into the navy, and in 1742 he was lieutenant in the Namur, commanded by admiral Matthews. In November of the same year, he was promoted by the admiral to the command of ili Plymouth, of shrty gtttts; on returning home he was removed into the Sheerness, a small frigate; and in 174i he was npp.iinied to the command of the Lucliowcastle, of furty-iour guns. In this ship he does not appear to have continued long, for in May 1746, he was captain of the Eagle, a new ship of sixty guns, then employed as a cruiser on the Irish station. While here he captured two large privateers. He continued in the Eagle during the remainder of the war, and was one of the commanders under the orders of rear-admiral Hawke, when in 1747 he defeated L'Etendiere’s squadron. On this occasion capt. Rodney behaved with much spirit, and may be said to have then laid the foundation of that popularity he afterwards in so high a degree possessed. On the conclusion of the war he was, in March 1749, appointed to the Rainbow, a fourth rate, and in May following was nominated governor and commander-in-chief in and over the island of Newfoundland. Immediately afterwards he proceeded thither with the small squadron annually sent there in time of peace, for the protection of the fishery. Some time after his return in 1753 he married Miss Compton, daughter of Charles Compton, esq. and sister to Spencer, then earl of Northampton. In 1757 he was engaged, under the command of admirals Hawke and Boscawen, to attempt a descent on the coast of France, near Rochefort; and in 1759 he was advanced rear-admiral of the blue. In this same year he was sent to bombard Havre de Grace, where a large force was collected for the purpose of attempting an invasion of this country. He executed the trust committed to him so completely, that the town itself was several times on fire, and the magazines of stores and ammunition burnt with fury upwards of six hours, notwithstanding the exertions used to extinguish it. Thus had admiral Rodney the happiness of totally frustrating the design of the French court; and so completely did he destroy their preparations, that the fort itself, as a naval arsenal, was no longer during the war in a state to annoy Great Britain. In 1761 admiral Rodney was very instrumental in the capture of the islands of St Pierre, Granada, St. Lucia, and St. Vincent, when the whole Caribbees came into the possession of the English. For his skill and bravery in the war, he was, after the conclusion of it, raised to the dignity of a baronet. In 1768, after an expensive, and to sir George Rodney a ruinous, contest with Mr. Howe, he was elected member of parliament for Northampton. In the month of October 1770 he was progressively advanced to be vice-admiral of the white and red squadrons, and in the month of August 1771, to be rear-admiral of Great Britain. In the very arly part of this year he resigned the mastership of Greenwich hospital, to which he had been appointed in 1765, and was immediately after made commander-in-chief on the Jamaica station, whither he repaired, having his flag on board the Princess Amelia of 80 guns. The appointment of this ship to that service was intended as a particular and pointed compliment, it being extremely unusual to send a three-decked ship on that station, except in time of actual war. It is said the command in India was offered to him, which he declined, entertaining hopes of being appointed governor of Jamaica in case of the death of sir William Trelawney; but in this he was disappointed. After his return to England at the expiration of the time allotted for the continuance of his command, he retired to France, where he lived some years in obscurity, hoping to retrieve the losses he had suffered at the Northampton election. It is said that the French king wished to take advantage of his pecuniary embarrassments, and through the duke de Biron made him the most unbounded offers if he would quit the English for the French service. In reply to this proposal he said,“My distresses, sir, it is true, have driven me from the bosom of my country, but no temptation can estrange me from her service. Had this offer been voluntary on your part, I should have deemed it an insult, but I am glad to learn it proceeds from a source that can do no wrong.” The duke was so struck with the patriotism of the admiral, that he became attached to him as a friend, and is said to have advanced him a sum of money to revisit England, and solicit a command.