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

Enter either the ID of an entry, or one or more words to find. The first match in each paragraph is shown; click on the line of text to see the full paragraph.

Currently only Chalmers’ Biographical Dictionary is indexed, terms are not stemmed, and diacritical marks are retained.

hool had got so far in arithmetic, as to be able to explain the square and cube roots to his master; who himself was ignorant of them. His memory at this time appears

, one of the religious society called Quakers, was born at Up-Husborn, Hants, about the year 1702. When he was about ten years of age, he was put to school to learn to read and write, and to be instructed in the rudiments of arithmetic. During the time allotted for these acquisitions, he gave proof of extraordinary genius; and being prevented for about six weeks, by nary genius and being prevented for about six weeks, by illness, from attending the school, he still applied himself to his learning, and on his return to the school had got so far in arithmetic, as to be able to explain the square and cube roots to his master; who himself was ignorant of them. His memory at this time appears to have been uncommonly vigorous, for he is said not only to have asserted that he could commit to memory in twelve hours, as many of the longest chapters in the Bible, but to have attempted it with success. Another account says, quoting it from Purver’s own mouth, that he so delighted in reading the Scriptures, as to commit six chapters to memory in one hour.

He was apprenticed to a shoemaker, who, like the master of George Fox, mentioned in this work, employed

He was apprenticed to a shoemaker, who, like the master of George Fox, mentioned in this work, employed his apprentice in keeping sheep. This gave our young student leisure for reading; and he occupied it in the indis-. criminate perusal of such books as came into his hands but the Scriptures had the preference in his mind. Among other books which came'in his way, was one written by Samuel Fisher, a Quaker, entitled “Rusticus ad Academicos,” in which some inaccuracies in the translation of the Bible being pointed out, Purver determined to examine for himself; and, with the assistance of a Jew, soon acquired a knowledge of the Hebrew language. About the 20th year of his age he kept a school in his native country; but afterwards, for the sake of more easily acquiring the means of prosecuting his studies, he came to London, where he probably resided when he published, in 1727, a book called “The Youth’s Delight.” The same year he returned to his native place, and a second time opened a school there; but previous to this, in London, he had embraced the principles, and adopted the profession of the Quakers. He is said to have been convinced of the truth of their tenets at a meeting held at the Bull and Mouth in Aldersgate-street; whether by means of the preaching of any of their ministers, we are not informed; but on the day month ensuing, he himself appeared as a minister among them, at the same meeting*house. On his second settling at Husborn, he began to translate the books of the Old Testament and applied himself also to the study of medicine and botany but, believing it his duty to travel in his ministerial function, he again quitted his school and his native place; not, however, probably, until after he had resided there some years; for his course was to London, Essex, and through several counties to Bristol; near which city, at Hambrook, he was in the latter part of 1738. At this place he took up his abode, at the house of one Josiah Butcher, a maltster, whose son he instructed in the classics, and there he translated some of the minor prophets, having before completed the book of Esther, and Solomon’s Song. Here he became acquainted with Rachael Cotterel, who, with a sister, kept a boardingschool for girls, at Frenchay, Gloucestershire; and whom, in 1738, he married, and soon after himself opened a boarding-school for boys at Frenchay. During his residence in Gloucestershire, (which was not at Frenchay all the time) he attempted to publish his translation of the Old Testament in numbers at Bristol; but he did not meet with sufficient encouragement; and only two or three numbers were published. In 1758, he removed to Andover, in Hampshire; and here, in 1764, he completed his translation of all the books of the Old and New Testament, a work which has not often been accomplished before by -the labour of a single individual. It consists of two volumes, folio, published in 1764, at the price of four guineas. It appears, that this work was originally intended to be printed in occasional numbers; for, in 1746, the late Dr. Fothergill wrote a letter to the Gentleman’s Magazine, in which he strongly recommended the author of a work then under publication, which was to be continued in numbers if it should meet with encouragement. This was a translation of the Scriptures, under the title of “Opus in sacra Biblia elaboratum.” Purver is not named, but that he was intended is known by private testimony. After speaking in high terms of his learning, Dr. Fothergill says, “As to his personal character, he is a man of great simplicity of manners, regular conduct, and a modest reserve; he is steadily attentive to truth, hates falsehood, and has an unconquerable aversion to vice; and to crown the portrait, he is not only greatly benevolent to mankind, but has a lively sense of the divine attributes, and a profound reverence of, and submission to the Supreme Being.” The mode of publication in numbers was probably unsuccessful, and soon dropped; yet he went on with his translation, which he completed, after the labour of thirty years. He was still unable to publish it, nor could he find a bookseller who would run the hazard of assisting him. At length his friend Dr. Fothergill generously interfered gave him a thousand pounds for the copy, and published it at his own expence. Purver afterwards revised the whole, and made considerable alterations and corrections for a second edition, which has not yet appeared but the ms. remains in the hands of his grandson. Purver appears, in this great work, a strenuous advocate for the antiquity, and even the divine authority, of the Hebrew vowel points. He is also a warm assertor of the purity and integrity of the Hebrew text, and treats those who hold the contrary opinion with great contempt; particularly Dr. Kennicott, of whom, and his publication on the state of the Hebrew text, he never speaks but with the greatest asperity. He has taken very considerable pains with the scriptural chronology, and furnishes his reader with a variety of chronological tables. He prefers the Hebrew chronology in all cases, to the Samaritan and Greek, and has throughout endeavoured to connect sacred and profane history. His version is very literal, but does not always prove the judgment or good taste of the author. Thus, he says, that “The Spirit of God hovered a top of the waters” and instead of the majestic simplicity and unaffected grandeur of “Let there be light, and there was light,” he gives us, “Let there be light, which, there was accordingly” Thus his translation, though a prodigious work for an individual, will rather be used for occasional consultation than regular perusal; and though it may afford many useful hints, will not supply the place of the established translation.

daughter, had been married to Isaac Bell, of London, by whom she had a son, named John Purver Bell, who was brought up by his grandfather.

He lived to about the age of seventy-five, his decease being in 1777, at Andover, where, in the burial-ground of the religious society with which he had professed, his remains were interred. His widow survived him; but a son and a daughter died before their parents. Hannah, the daughter, had been married to Isaac Bell, of London, by whom she had a son, named John Purver Bell, who was brought up by his grandfather.

m tenderly beloved by the count de Fuentes, governor of Milan and afterwards by the archduke Albert, who, having promoted him to Justus Lipsius’s chair, admitted him

Still he was allowed to have accumulated a great fund of learning. Bullart says, “It was the great learning of Puteanus, which, having won the heart of Urban VIII. deter* mined that great pope to send him his portrait in a gold medal, very heavy, with some copies of his works. It was that same learning, which engaged cardinal Frederic Borromeo to receive him into his palace, when he returned to Milan. It was also his learning, which made him tenderly beloved by the count de Fuentes, governor of Milan and afterwards by the archduke Albert, who, having promoted him to Justus Lipsius’s chair, admitted him also most honourably into the number of his counsellors. Lastly, it was his learning; which made him so much esteemed in the chief courts of Europe, and occasioned almost all the princes, the learned men, the ambassadors of kings, and the generals of armies, to give him proofs of their regard in the letters they wrote to him; of which above sixteen thousand were found in his library, all placed in a regular order. He had the glory to save the king of Poland’s life, by explaining an enigmatical writing drawn up in unknown characters, which no man could read or understand, and which contained the scheme of a conspiracy against that prince.” He was also, in his private character, a man of piety, of an obliging disposition, andremarkable not only for his kindness to his scholars, but for many good offices to his countrymen in every case of need. The archduke Albert, as Bullart notices, nominated him one of his counsellors, and entrusted him with the government of the castle of Louvain. He died at Louvain Sept. 17, 1646, in the seventy-second year of his age. Nicolas Vernulaeus pronounced his funeral oration, and his life was published by Milser with an engraved portrait.

e,” Milan, 1605, 8vo. This is an essay on the use of public libraries, and not a catalogue, as those who never saw it have asserted. It was afterwards reprinted in the

The works of this author are divided into six classes, eloquence, philology, philosophy, history, politics, and mathematics, which, according to Niceron’s list, amount to 98 articles, or volumes. Those on philology have been for the most part inserted in Graevius’s Antiquities. The others most worthy of notice in the opinion of his biographers, are, 1. “De usu fructuque Bibliothecae Ambrosianae,” Milan, 1605, 8vo. This is an essay on the use of public libraries, and not a catalogue, as those who never saw it have asserted. It was afterwards reprinted in the different editions of his “Suada Attica, sive orationes selectee.” 2. “Comus, sive Phagesiposia Cimmeria, de luxu somnium,” Louvain, 1608, 12mo, Antwerp, 1611, and Oxford, 1634. The French have a translation of this in considerable demand, under the title of “Comus, ou banquet dissolu des Cimmeriens.” 3. “Historise insubricae libri sex, qui irruptiones Barbarorum in Italiam continent, abanno 157 ad annum 975.” This has gone through several editions; one at Louvain, 1630, folio, another at Leipsic. It is rather superficial, but the archduchess Isabella was so much pleased with it that she made the author a present of a gold chain. 4. “Pietatis thaumata in Protheum Parthenicum unius libri versum et unius versus librum, Stella-? rum numeris sive formis 1022 variatum,” Antwerp, 1617, 4to. This is a remarkable sample of the trifles with which men of learning amused themselves in our author’s days. The whole is a repetition under different forms of the verse “Tot sibi sunt dotes, Virgo, quot sidera ccelo.” This poor verse he has turnedand twisted 1022 different ways, the number of the fixed stars but James Bernouilli has gravely told us that it admits of no less than 3312 changes, which, after all, is nothing to the following verse,

this he shewed himself better acquainted with the true interests of his catholic majesty, than they who applied themselves solely to state affairs’ but he was brought

for this, it is said, admits of 39,916,800 different combinations! 5. “Bruma, sive chimonopsegnion de laudibus hiemis, ut ea potissimum apud Belgas,” Munich, 1619, 8vo, yvith fine engravings by Sadeler, whicji constitute the principal value of this work. 6. “Circulus urbanianus, sive linea a^^ive compendio descripta,” Louvain, 1632, 4to. almost a copy of that of Bergier entitled “Point du jour,” but without acknowledgment. 7. “Belli et Pacis statera,1635, 4to. In this he shewed himself better acquainted with the true interests of his catholic majesty, than they who applied themselves solely to state affairs’ but he was brought into some trouble for speaking with too much freedom of things which policy should have kept secret. He was ordered to Brussels to explain his sentiments, but came off with honour. Caspar Baerle published a viplent satire against this work, entitled “Anti^Puteanus.” 8. “Auspicia Bibliothecae publicae Lovaniensis,” Louvain, 1639, 4to. and usually to be found at the end of the catalogue of that library.

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

, 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.

, a learned French historian, was the younger son of Claude Du Puy, an eminent French lawyer, who died in 1594, aijd who was celebrated by all the learned of

, a learned French historian, was the younger son of Claude Du Puy, an eminent French lawyer, who died in 1594, aijd who was celebrated by all the learned of his time in eloges, published collectively under the title of “Amplissimi viri Claudii Puteani Tumulus,” Paris, 1607, 4to. His son was born at Agen, Nov. 27, 1582, and was in early life distinguished for his proficiency in the languages, but principally for his knowledge of civil law and history. His talents produced Trim the esteem and friendship of the president De Thou, who was his relation, and of Nicholas Rigault and he was concerned in the publication of those editions of De Thou, which appeared in 1620 and 1626. When that great work met with opponents, he wrote, in concert with Rigault, a defence of it, entitled “Memoires et Instructions pour servir a justifier Pinnocence de messire Franc.ois-Auguste de Thou,” which was reprinted in 1734, at the end of the 15th volume of the French edition of the history. Our author was appointed successively counsellor to the king, and librarykeeper. Having accompanied Thumeri de Boissise, whom the king had sent on a political mission to the Netherlands and to Holland, he became acquainted, through his father’s reputation, with the learned men of those countries. On his return he was employed in researches respecting the king’s rights, and in making a catalogue of the charters. These scarce and valuable papers gave him so extensive an insight into every thing relative to the French history, that few persons have made such curious discoveries on the subject. He was also employed with Messrs. Lebret and Delorme, to defend his majesty’s rights over the three bishoprics of Metz, Toul, and Verdun, and produced a great number of titles and memoirs in proof of those rights. His obliging disposition made him feel interested in the labours of all the literati, and willing to communicate to them whatever was most valuable, in a vast collection of memorandums and observations, which he had been gathering together during fifty years. He died at Paris, December 14, 1651, aged 69. Among his numerous works, the French critics select the following as the most important 1. “Traité des Droits et des Libertes l'Eglise Gallicane, avec les Preuves,1639, 3 vols. folio. In this, as in all his works, he was an able defender of the rights of the Gajlican church, in opposition to the encroachments of the see of Rome. In 1651 he published an edition of the “Proofs,” in 2 vok. folio. 2. “Traités concernant l‘histoire de France, savoir la condemnation des Templiers, l’histoire du schisme d'Avignon, et quelques proces criminels,” Paris, 1654, 4to. 3. “Traité de la Majorite de nos rois et du regences du royaume, avec les preuves,” Paris, 1655, 4to. 4. “Histoire des plus illustres Favoris anciens et modernes,” Leaden, 1659, 4to and 12mo. In this curious list of favourites, Jbe has recorded only five French. He published also separate treatises on the rights of the king to the provinces of Burgundy, Artois, Bretagne, the three bishoprics before mentioned, Flanders, &c. &c. the titles of which it would be uninteresting to repeat. His life was published by Nicholas Rigault, Paris, 1652, 4to, and is inserted in that very useful volume, Bates’s “Vitae Selectorum aliquot virorum.

of the “Perroniana,” published in 1669 by Daille. He died in 1654. The other brother, James Du Puy, who died in 1656, was prior of St. Saviour’s, and librarian to the

Peter Du Puy had two brothers the eldest Christopher, was also a friend of Thuanus, and when at Rome, had influence enough to prevent the first part of his history from being put on the list of prohibited books. He was an ecclesiastic, had obtained some promotion, and would have received higher marks of esteem from pope Urban VIII. had he not taken part with his brothers in resisting the usurpations of the court of Rome. He is the author of the “Perroniana,” published in 1669 by Daille. He died in 1654. The other brother, James Du Puy, who died in 1656, was prior of St. Saviour’s, and librarian to the king, and assisted his brother in some of his works. To the royal library he was an important benefactor, bequeathing to it his own and his brother’s collection, amounting to 9000 volumes of printed books, and about 300 manuscripts. He published a very useful list of the Latiliized names in Thuanus’ history, at Geneva, in 1614, 4to, which was reprinted under the title of “Resolutio omnium difficultatum,” Ratisbon, 1696, 4to. He published also a catalogue of Thuanus’s library, and an improved edition of “Instructions et missives des Rois de France et de leurs ambassadeurs au Concile de Trente,” Paris, 1654, 4to.

Fourmont, whose house was the rendezvous of men of learning and learned foreigners. It was Fourmont who procured him the editorship of the “Journal cles Savans,” which

, perpetual secretary of the academy of inscriptions and belles lettres, was born at Bugey, Nov. 23, 1709, of an ancient family that had lost its titles and property during the wars of the league. Although the eldest of twelve children, his father destined him for the church, and he studied with great approbation and success at the college of Lyons, and had so much distinguished himself that when the tim'e came that he should study theology, two seminaries disputed which should have him. His own. determination was in favour of that of the Jesuits, in consequence of the superior having promised to remit a part of his expences in order that he might be able to purchase books. At the age of twenty-six he went to Paris to the seminary of Trente-Trois, where he became successively master of the conferences, librarian, and second superior. When he had finished his studies, he wanted the necessary supplies to enable him to travel from one diocese to another; and the archbishop of Lyons having t refused this, from a wish to keep him in his own diocese, Du Puy resolved to give up all thoughts of the church, and devote himself to the sciences and belles-lettres. He now sought the acquaintance of men of polite literature, and particularly obtained a steady friend in the academician Fourmont, whose house was the rendezvous of men of learning and learned foreigners. It was Fourmont who procured him the editorship of the “Journal cles Savans,” which he accordingly conducted for thirty years, and contributed many valuable papers and criticisms of his own. His knowledge was very various; he knew Hebrew, Greek, and mathematics, so as to have been able to make a figure in either, had he devoted himself wholly to one pursuit; but his reading and study were desultory, and it was said of him in mathematical language, that he was the mean proportional between the academy of sciences and that of inscriptions. In 1768 the prince de Soubise made him his librarian, a situation of course much to his liking, and which he filled for twenty years, until the derangement of the prince’s affairs made him inform a bookseller that he intended to part with his library. This came like a clap of thunder to poor Du Puy, and brought on a strangury, of which, after seven years of suffering, he died April 10, 1795.

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

, 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.

thor 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.

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 late English poet, was descended from a very ancient and respectable family, who are stated to have come into England with the Conqueror, and

, a late English poet, was descended from a very ancient and respectable family, who are stated to have come into England with the Conqueror, and settled at a place called the Meerd in Herefordshire. His greatgreat-grandfather was auditor of the exchequer to James I. His son, sir Robert Pye, a knight also, married Anne, the eldest daughter of John Hampden, the patriot, of whom the subject of this article was consequently the representative by the female line. The last male heir left the estate in Herefordshire, and the name, to the Trevors, descended from the second daughter; but sir Robert Pye purchased Faringdon in Berkshire, which county he twice represented in Parliament. Our author’s father, Henry Pye, esq. who occasionally resided there, was elected no less than five times, without opposition, for the same county.

on Shakspeare with preliminary observations on his genius and writings, and on the labours of those who have endeavoured to elucidate them,” 1807, 8vo. 27. “A Translation

From his earliest days Mr. Pye was devoted to reading. When he was about ten years old, his father put Pope’s Homer into his hand: the rapture which he received from this exquisite paraphrase of the Grecian bard was never to be forgotten, and it completely fixed him a rhymer for' life, as he pleasantly expressed it. To this early love of reading Mr. Pye was indebted for the various learning he possessed. His first literary production, probably, was an “Ode on the birth of the Prince of Wales,” published in the Oxford Collection and the following distinct publications have successively appeared from his prolific pen 1.“Beauty > a poetical essay,1766. 2. “'Elegies on different occasions,” 1768, 4to. 3. “The Triumph of Fashion, a vision,1771, 4to. 4. “Faringdon Hill, a poem in two books,1774, 4to. 5. “Six Olympic Odes of Pindar, being those omitted by Mr. West, translated into English verse, with notes,1775, 12mo. 6. “The Art of War, a poem, translated from the French of the king of Prussia,” written and published in 1778, at his leisure hours during the encampment at Coxheath. 7. “The Progress of Refinement, a poem, in three parts,1783, 4to; forming a history of the procedure of the human mind, in manners, learning, and taste, from the first dawnings of cultivated life to the present day. The poem displays the great knowledge of the author, the elegance of his genius, and the soundness of his judgment. His descriptions are just and beautiful, and his versification correct, polished, and harmonious. 8. “Shooting, a poem,1784, 4to. 9. “Poems on various Subjects,” in two vols. 8vo, in which several of the beforementioned pieces were collected, and a few new ones added, 1787. 10. “An elegant and very faithful English Translation of the Song of Harmodius and Aristogeiton, is to be found, among other excellent pieces, in this collection. 11.” A Translation of the Poetics of Aristotle, first published in an octavo volume in 1788, and afterwards prefixed to a Commentary on that Work, published in a quarto volume. 12. “Amusement, a poetical essay,1790. 13. “The Siege of Meaux, a tragedy, in three acts,” acted at Covent-Garden theatre, 1794, 8vo. 14. “The War Elegies of Tyrtseus imitated, and addressed to the people of Great Britain with some Observations on the Life and Poems of TyrtEeus,1795. 15. “The Democrat; interspersed with Anecdotes of well-known Characters,1795, 2 vols. 12mo. 16. “Lenore, a tale, translated from the German of Gottfried Augustus Burger,1796, 4to. Of the several translations of this tale which have appeared, Mr. Pye’s is esteemed the best but nei r ther English morals nor English taste are likely to be benefited by the translation of such poems as “Lenore.” 17. “Naucratia, or Naval dominion, a poem,” 2d edit. 1798. 18. “The Inquisitor, a tragedy in five acts, altered from the German by the late James Petit Andrews and Henry James Pye,1798, 8vo. 19. “The Aristocrat, by the author of the Democrat,1799, 2 vols. 12mo. 2O. “Carmen Seculare for the year 1800.” 21. “Adelaide, a tragedy,” acted at Drury-lane theatre, 1800, 8vo, but calculated rather for the closet than the stage. 22. “Alfred, an epic poem in six books,1802, 4to. 23. “Verses on several subjects, written in the vicinity of Stoke Park, in the summer and autumn of 1801,1802. sm. 8vo. 24. “A second Collection of his Poems, in two octavo volumes, comprising, besides several of those already mentioned, a volume of sketches on various subjects and a translation of Xenophon’s Defence of the Athenian Democracy, with, notes.” 25. “A Prior Claim, a comedy,” acted at Drurylane Theatre, 1805, 8vo, in which he was assisted by Mr. Samuel James Arnold, his son-in-law. 26. “Comments on the Commentators on Shakspeare with preliminary observations on his genius and writings, and on the labours of those who have endeavoured to elucidate them,1807, 8vo. 27. “A Translation of the Hymns and Epigrams of Homer,1810. He published also many occasional poems, besides his odes for the new year, for his majesty’s birthday, and for the anniversary of the Literary Fund, which are preserved in the magazines. Mr. Pye died Aug. 11, 1813, in the sixty-ninth year of his age.

. About 1698, he was examined for ordination by Mr. Whiston (at that time chaplain to bishop Moore), who says, in his own “Life,” that “Dr. Sydall and Mr. Pyle were

, an English divine, the son of the Rev, John Pyle, rector of Stodey, in Norfolk, was born there in 1674, and is said by Mr. Masters to have been educated at Caius-college, Cambridge but his name does not occur in the printed list of graduates. About 1698, he was examined for ordination by Mr. Whiston (at that time chaplain to bishop Moore), who says, in his own “Life,” that “Dr. Sydall and Mr. Pyle were the best scholars among the many candidates whom it was his office to examine.” It is supposed Mr. Pyle was first curate of Sr. Margaret’s parish in King’s Lynn, where he married in 1701, and the same year was appointed by the corporation to be minister or preacher of St. Nicholas’s chapel. Between the years 1708 and 1718 he published six occasional sermons, chiefly in defence of the principles of the Revolution, and the succession of the Brunswick family. He also engaged in the Bangorian controversy, writing two pamphlets in vindication of bishop Hoadly, who rewarded him with a prebend of Salisbury, and a residentiaryship in that cathedral.

ily. Three of his sons were clergymen; but not particularly distinguished. The youngest son, Philip, who died in 1799, published “One hundred and twenty popular Sermons,”

Many years after his death, “Sixty Sermons on plain and practical subjects,” were published by his younger son Philip, in 3 vols. 1773 1783, 8vo, and “Four Sermons on the Good Samaritan, and the nature of Christ’s kingdom,1777. That he himself had no design of committing them to the press is somewhat probable, from the following remarkable circumstance, which proves them to be his genuine offspring, namely, that he composed them with the greatest facility and expedition, amidst the interruptions of a numerous surrounding family. Three of his sons were clergymen; but not particularly distinguished. The youngest son, Philip, who died in 1799, published “One hundred and twenty popular Sermons,” 4 vols. 8vo, among which are some of his father’s.

duke of Buckingham, and in 1628 brought into the House of Commons a. charge against Dr. Main waring, who held some doctrines which he conceived to be equally injurious

, a noted republican in the time of Charles I. was descended of a good family in Somersetshire, and born in 1584. In his fifteenth year he entered as a gentleman-commoner of Broadgate’s-hall, now Pembroke-college, Oxford, where he had for his tutor Degory Wheare, but appears to have left the university without taking a degree, and, as Wood supposes, went to one of the inns of court. He appears, indeed, to have been intended for public business, as he was very early placed as a clerk in the office of the exchequer. He was likewise not far advanced when he was elected member of parliament for Tavistock, in the reign of James I. He uniformly distinguished himself by his opposition to the measures of the court, both in the reign of that king and of his successor. In 1626 he was one of the managers of the articles of impeachment against the duke of Buckingham, and in 1628 brought into the House of Commons a. charge against Dr. Main waring, who held some doctrines which he conceived to be equally injurious to the king and the kingdom. He was likewise a great opponent of Arnainianism, being himself attached to Calvinistic principles. In 1639, he, with several other cominoners and lords, held a very close correspondence with the commissioners sent to London by the Scotch covenanters; and in the parliament which met April 13, 1640, was one of the most active and leading members. On the meeting of the next, which is called the Long Parliament, he made an elaborate speech concerning the grievances of the nation, and impeached the earl of Strafford of high treason, at whose trial he was one of the managers of the House of Commons. His uncommon violence led the king to the unhappy measure of coming to the parliament in person, to seize him and four other members. Pym, however, continued firm to the interests of the parliament, but thought it necessary, some time before his death, to draw up a vindication of his conduct, which leaves it doubtful what part he would have taken, had he lived to see the serious consequences of his early violence. In Nov. 1643, he was appointed lieutenant of the ordnance, and probably would have risen to greater distinction, but he died at Derby-house, Dec. 8 following, and was interred with great solemnity in Westminster- abbey. He left several children by his lady, who died in 1620, and is said to have been a woman of rare accomplishments and learning. Many of his speeches were printed separately, and are inserted in the annals and histories of the times.

unsuspected integrity, and some of them strangers to Mr. Pym, if not of religion different from him, who were present at the opening of his body, and near a thousand

It is affirmed by lord Clarendon and some others, that he died in great torment of that loathsome disease called morbus pediculosus; that he was a very sad spectacle; and that none but select friends were admitted to him. But Mr. Stephen Marshal, in the sermon preached at his fune* fal, affirms, that no less than eight doctors of physic, of unsuspected integrity, and some of them strangers to Mr. Pym, if not of religion different from him, who were present at the opening of his body, and near a thousand people, who saw it, were witnesses to the falsehood of the report above mentioned; the disease of which he died, being no other than an imposthume in his bowels.

tutes and other law books were all printed at home. About 1525 he began his controversy with Redman, who had stolen one of his principal devices, and affixed it, without

, the third on the list of our early printers, was born in Normandy, as appears by king Henry’s patent of naturalization, in which he is styled “Richardus Pynson in partibus Normand. oriund.” There were, however, some of the same name in England, about his time. The few particulars recorded of his life are chiefly conjectural, as that he was either apprentice or son-in-law to Caxton. Mr. Ames intimates that he was in such esteem with the lady Margaret, Henry VIIth’s mother, and other great personages, that he printed for them all his days, and obtained a patent from the king to be his printer, in 1503, or before. He appears to have resided in the vicinity of Temple-bar, for some time on the city side, and for some time on the Westminster side of that ancient boundary. If he was made king’s printer so early as 1503, as asserted by Ames, he did not assume the title till 1503, when he first added it to his colophon. This honour seems to have been accompanied with some small salary, and the title of Esquire. Soon after his commencement in business, he employed one William Tailleur, a printer of Roan, to print Littleton’s Tenures, and some other law pieces for him because our laws being all made in the Norman French tiJl the beginning of the reign of Henry VII. and the printers of that country understanding the language better, were certainly more capable of printing them correct. Afterwards he, as well as others, had such helps, that the statutes and other law books were all printed at home. About 1525 he began his controversy with Redman, who had stolen one of his principal devices, and affixed it, without apology, to a number of the books printed by him. Redman he abuses in very gross terms, and even quibbles upon his name Redman quasi Rudem&n. Yet, notwithstanding this dispute, Redman succeeded Pynson, by removing into the very parish and house of Pynson.

Pynson was the first who introduced the Roman letter into this country. He appears to

Pynson was the first who introduced the Roman letter into this country. He appears to have had patrons who contributed to the expense of some of his undertakings. When he died is uncertain, nor is it ascertained what was the date of the last book printed by him. Some think he died before 1529, others later. Bertholet succeeded him as king’s printer in 1529, but it has been conjectured that Pynson only retired from business at that time. Pynson is esteemed inferior, upon the whole, as a printer, to Wynkyn de Worde; but, says Mr. Dibdiri, “in the choice and intrinsic worth of his publications, has a manifest superiority.” This is very high praise, and appears to be just. Symptoms of true, useful learning appear on Pynson’s list, which cannot be said of his predecessors, whatever value collectors may fix upon their productions.

y about the year B. C. 586, but this date has been much contested. His father, Mnemarchus, of Samos, who was an engraver by trade, and dealt in rings and other trinkets,

, one of the greatest men of antiquity, was born most probably about the year B. C. 586, but this date has been much contested. His father, Mnemarchus, of Samos, who was an engraver by trade, and dealt in rings and other trinkets, went with his wife to Delphi a few days after his marriage, to sell some goods during the feast and, while he stayed there, received an oracular answer from Apollo, who told him that if he embarked for Syria, the voyage would be very fortunate to him, and that his wife would there bring forth a son, who should be renowned for beauty and wisdom, and whose life would be a blessing to posterity. Mnemarchus obeyed the god, and Pythagoras was born at Sidon and, being brought to Samos, was educated there answerably to the great hopes that were conceived of him. He was called “the youth with the fine head of hair;” and, from the great qualities which appeared in him early, was soon regarded as a good genius sent into the world for the benefit of mankind.

iests of Heliopolis sent him to those of Memphis and they directed him to the ancients of Diospolis, who, not daring to disobey the king, yefc unwilling to break in

Samos, in the mean time, afforded no philosophers capable of satisfying his ardent thirst after knowledge; and therefore, at eighteen, he resolved to travel in quest of them elsewhere. The fame of Pherecydes drew him first to the island of Syros; whence he went to Miletus, where he conversed with Thales. Then he went to Phoenicia, and stayed some time at Sidon, the place of his birth and from Sidon into BJgypt, where Thales and Solon had been before him. Amasis, king of Egypt, received him very kindly and, after having kept him some time at his court, gave him letters for the priests of Heliopolis. The Egyptians were very jealous of their sciences, which they rarely imparted to strangers nor even to their own cpuntrymen, till they had made them pass through the severest probations. The priests of Heliopolis sent him to those of Memphis and they directed him to the ancients of Diospolis, who, not daring to disobey the king, yefc unwilling to break in upon their own laws and customs, received Pythagoras into a kind of noviciate, hoping he would soon be deterred from farther pursuits by the rigorous rules and ceremonies which were a necessary introduction to their mysteries. But Pythagoras went through all with wonderful patience, so far as even, according to some authors, to admit of circumcision.

Egyptians believed the secrecy they observed to be recommended to them by the example of their gods, who would never be seen by mortals but through the obscurity of

From Peloponnesus he passed into Italy, and settled at Croton; where the inhabitants, having suffered great loss in a battle with the Locrians, degenerated from industry and courage into softness and effeminacy. Pythagoras thought it a task worthy of him to reform this city; and accordingly began to preach to the inhabitants all manner of virtues; and, though he naturally met at first with great opposition, yet at length he made such an impression on his hearers, that the magistrates themselves, astonished at the solidity and strength of reason with which he spake, prayed him to interpose in the affairs of the government, and to give such advice as he should judge expedient for the good of the state. When Pythagoras had thus reformed the manners of the citizens by preaching, and established the city by wise and prudent counsels, he thought it time to lay some foundation of the wisdom he professed; and, in order to establish his sect, opened a school. It is not to be wondered that a crowd of disciples offered themselves N to a man, of whose wisdom such prodigious effects had been now seen and heard. They came to him from Greece and from Italy; but, for fear of pouring the treasures of wisdom into unsound and corrupt vessels, he received not indifferently all that presented themselves, but took time to try them for he used to say, “every soft of wood is not fit to make a Mercury” ex quowis ligno nonjit Mercurius that is, all minds are not alike capable of knowledge. He gave his disciples the rules of the Egyptian priests, and made them pass through the austerities which he himself had endured. He at first enjoined them a five years* silence, during which they were only to hear after that, leave was given them to propose questions, and to state their doubts. They were not, however, even then, to talk without bounds and measure; for he often said to them, u Either hold your peace, or utter things more worth than silence,; and say not a little in many words, but much in few.“Having gone through the probation, they were obliged, before they were admitted, to bring all their fortune into the common stock, which was managed by persons chosen on purpose, and called ceconomists and, if any retired from the society, he often carried away with him more than he brought in. He was, however, immediately regarded by the rest as a dead person, his obsequies made, and a tomb raised for him which sort of ceremony was instituted to deter others from leaving the school, by shewing, that if a man, after having entered into the ways of wisdom, turns aside and forsakes them, it is in vain for him to believe himself living—he is dead . The Egyptians believed the secrecy they observed to be recommended to them by the example of their gods, who would never be seen by mortals but through the obscurity of shadows. For this reason there was at Sais, a town of Egypt, a statue of Pallas, who was the same as Isis, with this inscription” I am whatever is, has been, or shall be; and no mortal has ever yet taken off the veil that covers me." They had invented, therefore, three ways of expressing their thoughts; the simple, the hieroglyphical, and the symbolical. In the simple they spoke plainly and intelligibly, as in common conversation; in the hieroglyphical they concealed their thoughts under certain images and characters; and in the symbolical they explained them by short expressions, which, under a sense plain and simple, included another wholly figurative. Pythagoras principally imitated the symbolical style of the Egyptians, which, having neither the obscurity of the hieroglyphics, nor the clearness of ordinary discourse, he thought very proper to inculcate the greatest and most important truths for a symbol, by its double sense, the proper and the figurative, teaches two things at once and nothing pleases the mind more, than the double image it represents to our view.

everal people and several tyrants. Phalaris, the tyrant of Sicily, is said to have been the only one who could withstand the remonstrances of Pythagoras and he, it seems,

In astronomy his inventions were many and great. It is reported he discovered, or maintained the true system of the world, which places the sun in the centre, and makes all the planets revolve about him; from him it is to this day called the old or Pythagorean system; and is the same as that revived by Copernicus. He first discovered that Lucifer and Hesperus were but one and the same, being the planet Venus, though formerly thought to be two different stars. The invention of the obliquity of the zodiac is likewise ascribed tt> him. He first gave to the world the name Kocr/xoj, Kosmos, from the order and beauty of all things comprehended in it asserting that it was made according to musical proportion for as he held that the sun, by him and his followers termed the fiery globe of unity, was seated in the midst of the universe, and planets moving around him, so he held that the seven planets had an harmonious motion, and their distances from the sun corresponded to the musical intervals or divisions of the monochord. We may also add, that among the works that are cited of him, there are not only books of physic, and books of morality, like that contained in what are called his “Golden VersesJ” but treatises of politics and theology. Ah these works are lost but the vastness of his mind, and the greatness of his talents, appear from the wonderful things he performed. He delivered, as antiquity relates, several cities of Italy and of Sicily from the yoke of slavery he appeased seditions in others and he softened the manners, and brought to temper the most savage and unruly humours, of several people and several tyrants. Phalaris, the tyrant of Sicily, is said to have been the only one who could withstand the remonstrances of Pythagoras and he, it seems, was so enraged at his lectures, that he ordered him to he put to death. But though the reasonings ol the philosopher could make no impression on the tyrant, yet they were sufficient to revive the spirit of the Agrigentines, and Phalaris was killed the very same day that he had fixed for the death of Pythagoras.

is father in his school, and was the master of Empedocles. He had likewise one daughter, named Damo, who was distinguished by her learning as well as her virtues, and

Pythagoras had a great veneration for marriage; and therefore at Croton, married Theano, daughter of Brontinus, one of the chief of that city. He had by her two sons, Arimnestus and Telauges which last succeeded his father in his school, and was the master of Empedocles. He had likewise one daughter, named Damo, who was distinguished by her learning as well as her virtues, and wrote an excellent commentary upon Homer. It is related that Pythagoras had given her some of his writings, with express commands not to impart them to any but those of his own family to which Damo was so scrupulously obedient, that even when she was reduced to extreme poverty, she refused a great sum of money for them. Some have indeed asserted, and Plutarch among them, that Pythagoras never wrote any thing; but this opinion is contradicted by others, and Plutarch is supposed to be mistaken. Whether he did or not, it is certain that whatever was written by his first disciples ought to be regarded as the work of himself; for they wrote only his opinions, and that so religiously, that they would not change the least syllable; respecting the words of their master as the oracles of a god; and alledging in confirmation of the truth of any doctrine only this, avrog t$a, t “He said so.” They looked on him as the most perfect image of the deitv among men. His house was called the temple of Ceres, and his courtyard the temple of the Muses; and, when he went into towns it was said he went thither, “not to teach men, but to heal them.

, finding in him much corruption and wickedness, refused to admit him. This extremely enraged Cylon, who sought nothing but revenge and, having rendered many persons

Pythagoras was persecuted in the last years of his life, and died a tragical death. There was at Croton a young man called Cylon, whom a noble birth and opulence had so puffed up with pride, that he thought he should do honour to Pythagoras in offering to be his disciple. The philosopher did not measure the merit of men by these exterior things; and therefore, finding in him much corruption and wickedness, refused to admit him. This extremely enraged Cylon, who sought nothing but revenge and, having rendered many persons disaffected to Pythagoras, came one day accompanied by a crowd of profligates, and surrounding the house where he was teaching, set it on fire. Pythagoras had the luck to escape, and flying, took the way to Locrisj but the Locrians, fearing the enmity of Cylon, who was a man of power, deputed their chief magistrates to meet him, and to request him to retire elsewhere. He went to Tarentum, where a new persecution soon obliged him to retire to Metapontum. But the sedition of Croton proved as it were the signal of a general insurrection against the Pythagoreans the flame had gained all the cities of Greece the schools of Pythagoras were destroyed, and he himself, at the age of above eighty, killed at the tumult of Metapontum, or, as others say, was starved to death in the temple of the Muses, whither he was fled for refuge.

-ages, there were here and there some disciples of Pythagoras hut they were only particular persons, who never made any society nor had the Pythagoreans any more a public

The sect of Pythagoras subsisted till towards the end of the reign of Alexander the Great. About that time the Academy and the Lyceum united to obscure and swallow up the Italic sect, which till then had held up its head with so much glory, that Isocrates writes: “We more admire, at this day, a Pythagorean when he is silent, than others, even the most eloquent, when they speak.” However, in after-ages, there were here and there some disciples of Pythagoras hut they were only particular persons, who never made any society nor had the Pythagoreans any more a public school. Notwithstanding the high encomiums bestowed upon this philosopher, Brucker, who has a very elaborate article on the subject, is of opinion that Pythagoras owed much of his celebrity and authority to imposture. Why did he so studiously court the society of Egyptian priests, so famous in antient times for their arts of deception; why did he take so much pains to be initiated in religious mysteries; why did he retire into a subterraneous cavern in Crete; why did he assume the character of Apollo, at the Olympic games why did he boast that his soul had lived in former bodies, and that he had been first Æthalides the son of Mercury, then Euphorbus, then Pyrrhus of Delos, and at last Pythagoras, but that he might the more easily impose upon the credulity of an ignorant and superstitious people His whole manner of life, as far as it is known, confirms this opinion. Clothed in a long white robe, with a flowing beard, and, as some relate, with a golden crown on his head, he preserved among the people, and in the presence of his disciples, a commanding gravity and majesty of aspect. He made use of music to promote the tranquillity of his mind frequently singing, for this purpose, hymns of Thales, Hesiod, and Homer. He had such an entire command of himself, that he was never seen to express, in his countenance, grief, or joy, or anger. He refrained from animal food, and confined himself to a frugal vegetable diet, excluding from his simple bill of fare, for sundry mystical reasons, pulse or beans. By this artificial demeanour, Pythagoras passed himself upon the vulgar as a being of an order superior to the common condition of humanity, and persuaded them that he had received his doctrine from heaven. We find still extant a letter of Pythagoras to Hiero, tyrant of Syracuse; but this letter is certainly supposititious, Pythagoras having been dead before Hiero was born. “The Golden Verses of Pythagoras,” the real author of which is unknown, have been frequently published, with the f< Commentary of Hierocles,“and a Latin version and notes. Mr. Dacier translated them into French, with notes, and- added the” Lives of Pythagoras and Hierocles“and this work was published in English, the” Golden Verses" being translated from the Greek by N. Rowe, esq. in 1707, 8vo.

here initiated into the Eleusinian mysteries, a persecution arose against the Christians. Quadratus, who had succeeded Publius, the martyred bishop, in order to stop

, an early Christian writer and apologist, was a disciple of the apostles, according to Eusebius and Jerome, and bishop of Athens, where he was born, or at least educated. About the year 125, when the emperor Adrian, then in the sixth year of his reign, wintered at Athens, and was there initiated into the Eleusinian mysteries, a persecution arose against the Christians. Quadratus, who had succeeded Publius, the martyred bishop, in order to stop the persecution, composed an “Apology for the Christian Faith,” and presented it to the emperor. This Apology, which happened to be accompanied by another from Aristides (see Aristides), had the desired effect, and was extant in Eusebius’ s time; who tells us, that it shewed the genius of the man, and the true doctrine of the apostles; but we have only a small fragment preserved by Eusebius, in the fourth book of his history, in which the author declares, that “none could doubt the truth of the miracles of Jesus Christ, because the persons healed and raised from the dead by him had been seen, not only when he wrought his miracles, or while he was upon earth, but even a very great while after his death so that there are many,” says he, “who were yet living in our time.” Valesius, and others upon his authority, will have the Quadratus who composed the Apology, to be a different person from Quadratus, the bishop of Athens; but his arguments do not seem sufficiently grounded, and are therefore generally rejected. Jerome affirms them to be the same. Nothing certain can be collected concerning the death of Quadratus; but it is supposed that he was banished from Athens, and then put to a variety of torments, under the reign of Adrian.

his grandfather, sir Robert Quarles, and his two wives and daughters, and James Quarles, his father, who died Nov. 16, 1642. He was clerk of the green cloth, and purveyor

, an English poet, was born in the year 1592, at Stewards, near Romford in Essex, and baptized on May 8 of that year. His family was of some consideration in the county of Essex, and possessed of several estates in Romford, Hornchurch, Dagenham, &c. In Romford church are registered the deaths of his grandfather, sir Robert Quarles, and his two wives and daughters, and James Quarles, his father, who died Nov. 16, 1642. He was clerk of the green cloth, and purveyor of the navy, to queen Elizabeth. Our poet was educated at Christ’s cbllege, Cambridge, and Lincoln’s-inn, London. His destination seems to have been to public life, for we are told he was preferred to the place of cup-bearer to Elizabeth, daughter of James 1. electress palatine and queen of Bohemia; but quitted her service, very probably upon the ruin of the elector’s affairs, and went over to Ireland, where he became secretary to archbishop Usher. Upon the breaking out of the rebellion in that kingdom, in 1641, he suffered greatly in his fortune, and was obliged to fly for safety to England. But here he did not meet with the quiet he expected; for a piece of his, styled “The Royal Convert,” having given offence to the prevailing powers, they took occasion from that, and from his repairing to Charles I. at Oxford, to hurt him as much as possible in his estates. But we are told, that what he took most to heart was, being plundered of his books, and some manuscripts which he had prepared for the press. The loss of these is supposed to have hastened his death, which happened Sept. 8, 1644, when he was buried in the church of St. Vedast, Foster-lane, London. Quarles was also chronologer to the city of London. What the duties of this place were, which is now abolished, we know not but his wife Ursula, who prefixed a short life of him to one of his pieces, says that “he held this place till his death, and would have given that city (and the world) a testimony that he was their faithful servant therein, if it had pleased God to blesse him with life to perfect what he had begun.” Mr. Headley observes, that Mr. Walpole and Mr. Granger have asserted, that he had a pension from Charles I. though they produce no authority and he thinks this not improbable, as the king had taste to discover merit, and generosity to reward it. Pope, however, asserted the same thing, and probably had authority for it, although he did not think it necessary to quote it:

e works were esteemed, and may be seen in different parts of Flanders and a nephew, Artus Quellinus, who was an excellent artist in sculpture, and who executed the fine

, an eminent painter, was born at Antwerp in 1607. He studied the belles-lettres and philosophy for some time; but his taste and inclination for painting forced him at length to change his pursuits. He learned his art of Rubens, and became a very good painter. History, landscape, and some architecture, were the principal objects of his application, and his learning frequently appeared in his productions. He painted several grand pictures in Antwerp, and the places thereabouts, for churches and palaces; and though he aimed at nothing more than the pleasure he took in the exercise of painting, yet when he died he left behind him a very great character for skill and merit in his art. He died in 1678, aged seventy-one. He left a son, John Erasmus Quellinus, called young Quellinus a painter whose works were esteemed, and may be seen in different parts of Flanders and a nephew, Artus Quellinus, who was an excellent artist in sculpture, and who executed the fine pieces of carved work in the town-hall at Amsterdam, engraved first by Hubert Quellinus. Young Quellinus was born in 1630, and died in 1715 and having studied at Rome, is generally thought to have surpassed his father.

660, 8vo, and in 4to, Wittemberg. This is esteemed his best work. 3. “A System of Divinity for those who who adopt the Confession of Augsburg,” 1685, 4 vols. folio.

, a Lutheran divine, and a strong opponent of the Roman Catholics, was born at Quedlimbourg, and died on May 22, 1688, at the age of seventy -one. He published, 1. A work entitled “Dialogus de Patriis illustrium virorum, Doctrina, et Scriptis,” Wittemberg, 1654 and 1691, 4to. This is an account of learned men, from Adam to the year 1600, but is superficial and inaccurate. 2. “Sepultura Veterum,1660, 8vo, and in 4to, Wittemberg. This is esteemed his best work. 3. “A System of Divinity for those who who adopt the Confession of Augsburg,1685, 4 vols. folio. 4. Several other works, more replete with proofs of learning than of correctness and good taste.

, a poet of Italy, who wrote both in his own language and in Latin, was born at Padua

, a poet of Italy, who wrote both in his own language and in Latin, was born at Padua in 1546, and manifested a very early genius. By means of a ready conception and vast memory, he soon made himself master of several languages, and of no small store of other knowledge. He was confidentially employed bjr several popes, and was secretary of the sacred college under no less than five. Clement VIII. made him a canon of Padua; but Paul V. recalled him to Rome, where he loaded him with honourable offices. Querenghi continued to hold his employments under the succeeding popes, till he died at Rome, Sept. 1, 1633, at the age of eightyseven. There is a volume of his Latin poems, which was printed at Rome in 1629; and Italian poetry, published also at Rome in 1616.

, and at a feast crowned him arch-poet so that he was not known afterwards by any other name. Leo X. who, upon certain occasions, was not averse to buffoonery, delighted

, an Italian poet, was born at Monopolis in the kingdom of Naples; and acquired in his early years a great facility in extempore verses. He went to Rome about 1514, with a poem of twenty thousand lines, called Alexias. Some young gentlemen of that city professed great friendship to him they treated him in the country, and at a feast crowned him arch-poet so that he was not known afterwards by any other name. Leo X. who, upon certain occasions, was not averse to buffoonery, delighted in his company, and caused him to be served with meat from his own table and Querno, being an excellent parasite, humoured him very exactly. He was obliged to make a distich extempore, upon whatever subject was given him even though he was at the time ill of the gout, with which he was extremely troubled. Once, when the fit was on him, he made this verse, “Archipoeta facit versus pro mille poetis,” and, as he hesitated in composing the second, the pope readily and wittily added, “Et pro mille aliis Archipoeta bibit.” Querno, hastening to repair his fault, cried, “Porrige, quod faciat mihi carmina docta, Falernum,” to which the pope instantly replied, “Hoc vinum enervat, debilitatque pedes,” alluding either to the gout in his feet, or to the feet of his verses. After the taking of Rome, he retired to Naples, where he suffered much during the wars in 1528, and died there in the hospital. He used to say, “He had found a thousand wolves, after he had lost one lion.

arly 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

, 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.

rn in 1610, of a noble family in Normandy. He was trained up to the marine service under his father, who was an experienced captain, and distinguished himself from the

, a brave French officer, was born in 1610, of a noble family in Normandy. He was trained up to the marine service under his father, who was an experienced captain, and distinguished himself from the age of seventeen. He went into Sweden in 1644, and was there made major-general of the fleet, and afterwards viceadmiral. In this last character, he engaged in the famous battle, when the Danes were entirely defeated, and took their admiral’s ship, called the Patience, in which the Danish admiral was killed. Being recalled to France in 1647, he commanded one of the squadrons sent on the Neapolitan expedition; and, in 1650, when the French navy was reduced to a very low state, fitted out several vessels, at his own expence, at the first commotions at Bourdeaux. The Spaniards arrived in the river at the same time, but be entered notwithstanding, to which circumstance the surrender of the town was principally owing and equal success attended him in the last wars of Sicily. He defeated the Dutch in three different engagements, in the last of which the famous Ruyter was killed by a cannon ball; and he disabled the Tripoli ships so as to compel that republic to conclude a peace very glorious for France. Some years after this he forced Algiers and Genoa to implore his majesty’s mercy, and set at liberty a great number of Christian slaves. In short, Asia, Africa, and Europe, were Witness to his valour, and resound still with his exploits. Though a protestant, the king rewarded his services by giving the territory of Bouchet, near d'Etampes, (one of the finest in the kingdom) to him and his heirs for ever, and raised it to a marquisate on condition that it should be called Du Quesne, to perpetuate this great man’s memory. He died February 2, 1688, aged 73, leaving four sons, who have all distinguished themselves. Henry, the eldest, published “Reflections on the Eucharist,1718, 4to, a work much valued by the Protestants. He died in 1722, aged 71 He had also several brothers, all of whom died in the service.

work originallyconsisted only of some devout meditations on our Saviour’s words; but M. de Lomenie, who, from being minister and secretary of state, had entered the

, a celebrated French ecclesiastic, was born July 14, 1634, at Paris. He entered the congregation of the Oratory, Nov. 17, 1657, and devoted himself wholly to the study of Scripture, and the Fathers, and the composition of works of piety. When scarcely twenty-eight, he was appointed first director of the Institution of his order, at Paris, under father Jourdain; and began, in that house, his famous book of “Moral Reflections” on each verse of the New Testament, for the use of young pupils of the Oratory. This work originallyconsisted only of some devout meditations on our Saviour’s words; but M. de Lomenie, who, from being minister and secretary of state, had entered the Oratory, the marquis de Laigue, and other pious persons, being pleased with this beginning, requested father Quesnel to make similar reflections on every part of the four Gospels. Having complied, M. de Laigue mentioned the book to Felix de Vialart, bishop of Chalons-sur-Marne and that prelate, who was. much celebrated for his piety, adopted the work in his diocese, and recommended the reading- of it by a mandate of November 9, 1671, after having had it printed at Paris by Pralard the same year, with consent of the archbishop Harlai, the royal privilege, and the approbation of the doctors. Father Quesnel afterwards assisted in a new edition of St. Leo’s works. When De Harlai banished father De Sainte Marthe, general of the Oratory, he obliged father Quesnel, who was much attached to him, to retire to Orleans 1681. The general assembly of the Oratory having ordered, in 1684, the signature of a form of doctrine, drawn up in 1678, respecting various points of philosophy and theology, father Quesnel refused to sign it, and withdrew into the Spanish Netherlands, in February 1685. He took advantage of the absurd mixture of philosophy and theology introduced into this form. After this he went to M. Arnauld at Brussels, residing with him till his death, and there finished the “Moral Reflections” on the whole New Testament; which, thus completed, was first published in 1693 and 1694, and approved in 1695, by cardinal de Noailles, then bishop of Chalons-sur-Marne, who recommended it by a mandate to his clergy and people. When the same prelate became archbishop of Paris, he employed some divines to examine these “Reflections” carefully and it was after this revisal that they were published at Paris, 1699. This edition is more ample than any other. The celebrated archbishop of Meaux was also engaged on the subject; and “The Justification of the Moral Reflections, against the Problem,” appeared under his name 1710. The famous Case of Conscience gave occasion for renewing the disputes about the signature of the Formulary, and the subject of Grace. Father Quesnel was arrested at Brussels, May 30, 1703, by order of the archbishop of Malines, and committed to prison but Don Livio, a young Spaniard, employed by the marquis d'Aremberg, released him September 13th following, and he remained concealed at Brussels till October 2; then quitted that place for Holland, where, arriving in April 1704, he published several pieces against the archbishop of Malines, who condemned him by a sentence dated November 10, 1704. This sentence father Quesnel attacked, and wrote in 1705 two tracts to prove it null one entitled, “Idee generale du Libelle, public en Latin,” &c. the other, “Anatomic de la Sentence de M. l'Archeveque de Malines.” Several pieces appeared, soon after, against the book of “Moral Reflections” two had been published before one entitled, “Le Pere Quesnel heretique” the other, “Le Pere Quesnel Seditieux.” These publications induced pope Clement XI. to condemn it altogether, by a decree of July 15, 1708; but this decree did not appease the contest, and father Quesnel refuted it with great warmth, 1709, in a work entitled “Entretiens sur le Décret de Rome, contre le Nouveau Testament de Chalons, accompagne de reflexions morales.” In the mean time, the bishops of Lucon, la Rochelle, and Gap, condemned his book by mandates, which were to be followed and supported by a letter addressed to the king, and signed by the greatest part of the French bishops. This was sent to them, ready drawn p but the plan was partly defeated for a packet intended by the abbe Bochart de Saron for the bishop of Clement, his uncle, and which contained a copy of the letter to the king, fell into the hands of cardinal de Noailles, and much contusion ensued. At length, the disputes on this subject still continuing, pope Clement XL at the solicitation of Louis XIV. published, September 8, 1713, the celebrated bull beginning with the words, “Unigenitus Dei Filius,” by which he condemned father Quesnel’s book, with 101 propositions extracted from it, and every thing that had been written, or that should be written, in its defence. This bull was received by the assembly of the French clergy, and registered in parliament, in 17 14, with modifications. Cardinal de Noailles, however, and seven other prelates refused, and lettres de cachet were issued by Louis XIV. against them but after his decease, the cardinal and several other bishops appealed from the bull to a general council, all which proceedings produced disputes in the French church that lasted nearly to the time of the revolution.

ich general title all his poetry is included, was collected by the care of Joseph Gonzales de Salas, who, besides short notes interspersed throughout, prefixed dissertations

, an eminent Spanish satirist, was born at Madrid in 157O; and was a man of quality, as appears from his being styled knight of the order of St. James, which is the next in dignity to that of the Golden Fleece. He was one of the best writers of his age, and excelled equally in verse and prose. He excelled too inall the different kinds of poetry his heroic pieces, says Antonio, have great force and sublimity his lyrics great beauty and sweetness and his humorous pieces a certain easy air, pleasantry, and ingenuity of tone, which is delightful to a reader. His prose works are of two sorts, serious and comic the former consist of pieces written npon moral and religious subjects the latter are satirical, full of wit, vivacity, and humour, but not without a considerable portion of extravagance. All his printed works, for ie wrote a great deal which was never printed, are comprised in 3 vols. 4to, two of which consist of poetry, a third of pieces in prose. The “Parnasso Espagnol, or Spanish Parnassus,” under which general title all his poetry is included, was collected by the care of Joseph Gonzales de Salas, who, besides short notes interspersed throughout, prefixed dissertations to each distinct species. It was first published at Madrid, in 1650, 4to, and has since frequently been printed in Spain and the Low Countries. The humorous part of his prose-works has been translated into English, particularly “The Visions,” a satire upon corruption of manners in all ranks which has gone through. several editions. The remainder of his comic works, containing, “The Night Adventurer, or the Day-Hater,” “The Life of Paul the Spanish Sharper,” “”The Retentive Knight and his Epistles,“”The Dog and Fever,“”A Proclamation by Old Father Time,“” A Treatise of allThings whatsoever,“” Fortune in her Wits, or the Hour of all Men,“were translated from the Spanish, and published at London, in 1707, 8vo. Stevens, the translator, seems to have thought that he could not speak too highly of his author; he calls him” the great Quevedo, his works a real treasure the Spanish Ovid, from whom wit naturally flowed without study, and to whom it was as easy to write in verse as in prose." The severity of his satires, however, procured him many enemies, and brought him into great troubles. The count d'Olivares, favourite and prime minister to Philip IV. of Spain, imprisoned him for making too free with his administration and government; nor did he obtain his liberty till that minister was disgraced. He died in 1645, according to some; but, as others say, in 1647. He is said to have been very learned; and it is affirmed by his intimate friend, who wrote the preface to his volume of poems, that he understood the Hebrew, Greek, Latin, Italian, and French languages.

chronology of the Septuagint against that of the Hebrew text, found a powerful adversary in Le Quien who published a book in 1690, and afterwards another, against his

, a French Dominican, and a very learned man, was born at Boulogne in 1661. He was well acquainted with the Greek, Arabic, and Hebrew languages and was critically skilled in the Holy Scriptures. Father Pezron, having attempted to establish the chronology of the Septuagint against that of the Hebrew text, found a powerful adversary in Le Quien who published a book in 1690, and afterwards another, against his “Amiquité des Terns rétablie,” a well-written work. Quien called his book “Antiquite des Terns detruite.” He applied himself assiduously to the study of the eastern churches, and that of England and wrote against Courayer upon the validity of the ordinations of the English bishops. In all this he was influenced by his zeal for popery, and to promote the glory of his church but he executed a work also for which both protestantism and learning were obliged to him, and on which account chiefly he is here noticed, an excellent edition in Greek and Latin of the works of Joannes Damascenus, 1712, 2 vols. folio. This did him great honour; and the notes and dissertations, which accompany his edition, shew him to have been one of the most learned men of his age. His excessive zeal for the credit of the Roman church made him publish another work in 4to, called “Panoplia contra schisma Graecorum” in which he endeavours to refute all those imputations of pride, ambition, avarice, and usurpation, that have so justly been brought against it. He projected, and had very far advanced, a very large work, which was to have exhibited an historical account of all the patriarchs and inferior prelates that have filled the sees in Africa and the East; and the first volume was printed at the Louvre, with this title, “Oriens Christianus in Africa,” when the author died at Paris in 17 S3.

to England, entered himself of Lincoln’s-inn, and was called to the bar; but his father, Mark Quin, who had been lord-mayor of Dublin in 1676, dying about that period,

, a celebrated actor, was born in Kingstreet, Covent-garden, the 24th Feb. 1693. His ancestors were of an ancient family in the kingdom of Ireland. His father, James Quin, was bred at Trinity-college, Dublin, whence he came to England, entered himself of Lincoln’s-inn, and was called to the bar; but his father, Mark Quin, who had been lord-mayor of Dublin in 1676, dying about that period, and leaving him a plentiful estate, he quitted England in 1700, for his native country; taking with him his son, the object of the present article.

his son, as probably very much to influence his destination in life. His mother was a reputed widow, who had been married to a person in the mercantile way, and who

The marriage of Mr. Quin’s father, was attended with circumstances which so materially affected the subsequent interest of his son, as probably very much to influence his destination in life. His mother was a reputed widow, who had been married to a person in the mercantile way, and who left her, to pursue some traffic or particular business in the West-Indies. He had been absent from her near seven years, without her having received any letter from, or the least information about him. He was even given out to be dead, which report was universally credited; she went into mourning for him; and some time after Mr. Quin’s father, who is said to have then possessed an estate of 1000l. a-year, paid his addresses to her and married her. The offspring of this marriage was Mr. Quin. His parents continued for some time in an undisturbed state of happiness, when the first husband returned, claimed his wife, and had her. Mr. Quin the elder retired with his son, to whom he is said to have left his property. Another, and more probable account is, that the estate was suffered to descend to the heir at law, and the illegitimacy of Mr. Quin being proved, he was dispossessed of it, and left to provide for himself.

nerally admitted, that he was deficient in literature and it has been said, that he laughed at those who read books by way of inquiry after knowledge, saying, he read

Quin received his education at Dublin, under the care of Dr. Jones, until the death of his father in 1710, when the progress of it was interrupted, we may presume, by the litigations which arose about his estate. It is generally admitted, that he was deficient in literature and it has been said, that he laughed at those who read books by way of inquiry after knowledge, saying, he read men that the world was the best book. This account is believed to be founded in truth, and will prove the great strength of his natural understanding, which enabled him to establish so considerable a reputation as a man of sense and genius.

f Nov. 1716—7 It had accordingly been got up with great magnificence. On the third night, Mr. Mills, who performed Bajazet, was suddenly taken ill, and applicatioa was

Accident, however, had just before procured him an opportunity of displaying his talents, which he did not neglect. An order had been sent from the lord-chamberlain to revive the play of “Tamerlane” for the 4th of Nov. 1716—7 It had accordingly been got up with great magnificence. On the third night, Mr. Mills, who performed Bajazet, was suddenly taken ill, and applicatioa was made to Quin to read the part a task which he executed so much to the satisfaction of the audience, that he received a considerable share of applause. The next night he made himself perfect, and performed it with redoubled proofs of approbation. On this occasion he was complimented by several persons of distinction and dramatic taste, upon his early and rising genius. It does not appear that he derived any other advantage at that time from his success. Impatient, therefore, of his situation, and dissatisfied with his employers, he determined upon trying his fortune at Mr. Rich’s theatre, at Lincoln’s-Inn-fields, then under the management of Messrs. Keene and Christopher Bullock; and accordingly in 1717 quitted Drury-lane, after remaining there two seasons. Chetwood insinuates, that envy influenced some of the managers of Drury-lane to depress so rising an actor. Be that as it may, he continued at the theatre he had chosen seventeen years, and during that period supported, without discredit, the same characters which were then admirably performed at the rival theatre.

observed, that his opponent had no occasion to value himself on his performance, since Mr. Johnson, who had but seldom acted it, represented Jacomo, in “The Libertine,”

Soon after he quitted Drury-lane, an unfortunate transaction took place, which threatened to interrupt, if not entirely to stop his theatrical pursuits. This was an unlucky rencounter between him and Mr. Bowen, which ended fatally to the latter. From the evidence given at the trial it appeared, that on the 17th of April, 1718, about four or five o'clock in the afternoon, Mr. Bowen and Mr. Quin met aecidentlly at the Fleece-tavern in Cornhill. They drank together in a friendly manner, and jested with each other for some time, until at length the conversation turned upon their performances on the stage. Bowen said, that Quin had acted Tamerlane in a loose sort of a manner; and Quin, in reply, observed, that his opponent had no occasion to value himself on his performance, since Mr. Johnson, who had but seldom acted it, represented Jacomo, in “The Libertine,” as well as he who had acted it often. These observations, probably, irritated them both, and the conversation changed, but to another subject not better calculated to produce good humour the honesty of each party. In the course of the altercation, Bowen asserted, that he was as honest a man as any in the world, which occasioned a story about his political tenets to be introduced by Quin and both parties being warm, a wager was laid on the subject, which was determined in favour of Quin, on his relating that Bowen sometimes drank the health of the duke of Ormond, and sometimes refused it at the same time asking the referee how he could be as honest a man as any in the world, who acted upon two different principles. The gentleman who acted as umpire then told Mr. Bowen, that if he insisted upon his claim to be as honest a man as any in the world, he must give it against him. Here the dispute seemed to have ended, nothing in the rest of the conversation indicating any remains of resentment in either party. Soon afterwards, however, Mr. Bowen arose, threw down some money for his reckoning, and left the company. In about a quarter of an hour Mr. Quin was called out by a porter sent by Bowen, and both Quin and Bowen went together, first to the Swan tavern, and then to the Pope’s-head tavern, where a rencounter took place, and Bowen received a wound, of which he died on the 20th of April following. In the course of the evidence it was sworn, that Bowen, after he had received the wound, declared that he had had justice done him, that there had been nothing but fair play, and that if he died, he freely forgave his antagonist. On this evidence Quin was, on the 10th of July, found guilty of manslaughter only, and soon after returned to his employment on the stage*.

wound which occasioned his death on Kelly in the left side, who fell down,

wound which occasioned his death on Kelly in the left side, who fell down,

Kelly who had before terrified several jury having probably brought in

Kelly who had before terrified several jury having probably brought in their

gement of Drury-lane theatre into raw and unexperienced hands. Mr. Highmore, a gentleman of fortune, who had been tempted to intermeddle in it, had sustained so great

On the 7th of December, 1732, Covent-garden theatre was opened, and the company belonging to Lincoln’s-inn fields removed thither. In the course of this season, Mr. Quin was called upon to exercise his talents in singing, and accordingly performed Lycomedes, in Gay’s posthumous opera of “Achilles,” eighteen nights. The next season concluded his service at Covent-garden. At this juncture the deaths of Wilks, Booth, and Oldfield, and the succession of Gibber, had thrown the management of Drury-lane theatre into raw and unexperienced hands. Mr. Highmore, a gentleman of fortune, who had been tempted to intermeddle in it, had sustained so great a loss, as to oblige him jto sell his interest to the best bidder. By this event the Drury-lane theatre came into the possession of Charles Fleetwood, esq. who, it is said, purchased it in concert with, and at the recommendation of Mr. Rich. But a difference arising between these gentlemen, the former determined to seduce from his antagonist his best performer, and the principal support of his theatre. Availing himself of this quarrel, Mr. Quin left Covent-garden, and in the beginning of the season 1734-5 removed to the rival theatre, “on such terms,” says Gibber, “as no hired actor had before received.

e of Garrick in 1741, he was generally allowed the foremost rank in his profession. The elder Mills, who succeeded to Booth, was declining; and Milward, an actor of

From the time of Quin’s establishment at Drury-lane until the appearance of Garrick in 1741, he was generally allowed the foremost rank in his profession. The elder Mills, who succeeded to Booth, was declining; and Milward, an actor of some merit, had not risen to the height of his excellence, which, however, was not at the best very great and Boheme was dead. His only competitor seems to have been Delane, whose merits -were soon lost in indolent indulgence. In the Life of Theophilus Gibber, just quoted, the character of this actor, compared with that of Quin, is drawn in a very impartial manner.

ion of many persons living. “The commencement of it,” says Dr. Johnson, “is very honourable to Quin, who is reported to have delivered Thomson (then known to him only

Quin had the honour to enjoy the intimacy and esteem of Pope and other emiment men of his time. The friendship between Thomson and him is yet within the recollection of many persons living. “The commencement of it,” says Dr. Johnson, “is very honourable to Quin, who is reported to have delivered Thomson (then known to him only for his genius) from an arrest, by a very considerable present; and its continuance is honourable to both, for friendship is not always the sequel of obligation.

e expressed himself well pleased with his entertainment; and particularly addressed himself to Quih, who was greatly flattered with the distinction paid him by so great

of Solyman the magnificent, and Rustan his vizier. On the night of its exhibition were assembled all the chiefs in opposition to the court and many speeches were applied by the audience to the supposed grievances of the times, and to persons and characters. The play was in general well acted particularly the parts of Solyman and Mustapha by Quin and Milward. Mr. Pope was present in the boxes, and at the end of the play went behind the scenes, a place which he had not visited for some years. He expressed himself well pleased with his entertainment; and particularly addressed himself to Quih, who was greatly flattered with the distinction paid him by so great a man and when Pope’s servant brought his master’s scarlet cloke, Quin insisted upon the honour of putting it on.

he 9th of March, that Mr. Quin was engaged in another dispute with one of his brethren; which by one who had already been convicted of manslaughter (however contemptible

It was in the year 1739, on the 9th of March, that Mr. Quin was engaged in another dispute with one of his brethren; which by one who had already been convicted of manslaughter (however contemptible the person who was the party in the difference might be) could not be viewed with indifference. This person was no other than the celebrated Mr. Theophilus Gibber, who at that period, owing to seme disgraceful circumstances relative to his conduct to his wife, was not held in the most respectable light. Quin’s sarcasm on him was too gross to be here inserted. It may, however, be read in the “Apology for Mr. Gibber’s Life,” ascribed to Fielding. The circumstances of the duel we shall relate in the words of one of the periodical writers of the times. “About seven o‘clock a duel was fought in the Piazza, Covent Garden, between Mr. Quin and Mr. Gibber; the former pulling the latter out of the Bedford coffee-house, to answer for some words he had used in a letter to Mr. Fleetwood, relating to his refusing to act a part in King Lear for Mr. Quin’s benefit on Thursday se’nnight. Mr. Gibber was slightly wounded in the arm, and Mr. Quin wounded in his fingers after each had their wounds dressed, they came into the Bedford coffee-house and abused one another; but the company prevented further mischief.

in Feb. 1741-2, and on the 25th of March assisted the widow and four children of Milward the actor (who died the 6th of February preceding), and performed Cato for

He left Dublin in Feb. 1741-2, and on the 25th of March assisted the widow and four children of Milward the actor (who died the 6th of February preceding), and performed Cato for their benefit. On his arrival in London he found the attention of the theatrical public entirely occupied by the merits of Mr. Garrick, who in October preceding had begun his theatrical career, and was then performing with prodigious success at Goodman’s-fields. The fame of the new performer afforded no pleasure to Quin, who sarcastically observed that “Garrick was a new religion, and that Whitefield was followed for a time; but 'they would all come to church again.” This observation produced a well-known epigram by Mr. Garrick. In the season of 1742-3, Quin returned to his former master, Rich, at Covent-garden theatre, where he opposed Garrick at Drurylane it must be added, with very little success. But though the applause the latter obtained from the public was not agreeable to Quin, yet we find that a scheme was proposed and agreed to, though not carried into execution, in the summer of 1743, for them to perform together for their mutual benefit a few nights at Lincoln’s-inn-fields theatre. On the failure of this plan, Quin went to Dublin, where he had the mortification to find the fame of Mr. Sheridan, then new to the stage, more adverse to him than even Garrick’s had been 'in London. Instead of making a profitable bargain in Dublin, as he hoped, he found the managers of the theatres there entirely indisposed to admit him. After staying there a short time, he returned to Londorj, without effecting the purpose of his journey, and in no good humour with the new performers.

ay have united. It was some of these periods of relaxation that gave occasion to his friend Thomson, who had been gradually writing the “Castle of Indolence” for fourteen

In the season of 1743-4, Quin, we believe, passed without engagement; but in that of 1744-5 he was at Coventgarclen again, and performed King John, in Gibber’s “Papal Tyranny.” The next year seems to have been devoted to repose whether from indolence, or inability to obtain the terms he required from the managers, is not very apparent. Both may have united. It was some of these periods of relaxation that gave occasion to his friend Thomson, who had been gradually writing the “Castle of Indolence” for fourteen or fifteen years, to introduce him in a stanza in the Mansion of Idleness.

was offered to Mr. Quin, but be refused it and in consequence it fell to the lot of Mr. Bridgewater, who obtained great reputation by his performance of it.

It was this season also in which “The Suspicious Husband” appeared. The part of Mr. Strickland was offered to Mr. Quin, but be refused it and in consequence it fell to the lot of Mr. Bridgewater, who obtained great reputation by his performance of it.

1748-9 he was engaged again, and on the 13th of January 1749 the tragedy of Coriolanus, by Thomson, who died in the preceding August, was brought out at Covent-garden.

For the season of 1748-9 he was engaged again, and on the 13th of January 1749 the tragedy of Coriolanus, by Thomson, who died in the preceding August, was brought out at Covent-garden. Quin, whose intimacy with him. has been already mentioned, acted the principal part, and spoke the celebrated prologue, written by lord Lyttelton. When he pronounced the following lines, which are in themselves pathetic, all the endearments of a long friendship rose at once to his imagination, and he justified them by his real tears.

. He has been represented by some persons as stern, haughty, luxurious, and avaricious. Dr. Smollet, who probably knew him well, says of him, in his Humphrey Clinker,

It remains to say a few words on the character of Quin. He has been represented by some persons as stern, haughty, luxurious, and avaricious. Dr. Smollet, who probably knew him well, says of him, in his Humphrey Clinker, “How far he may relax in his hour of jollity I cannot pretend to* say; but his general conversation is conducted by the nicest rules of propriety, and Mr. James Quin is certainly one-of the best-bred men in the kingdom. He is not only a most agreeable companion, but fas I am credibly informed) a very honest man highly susceptible of friendship warm, steady, and even generous in his attachments disdaining flattery, and incapable of meanness and dissimulation. Were I to judge, however, from Quin’s eye alone, I should take him to be proud, insolent, and cruel. There is something remarkably severe and forbidding in. his aspect, and I have been told he was ever disposed to insult his inferiors and dependents. Perhaps that report tias influenced my opinion of his looks. You know we are the fools of prejudice.” It appears that the unfavourable parts of his character have been generally exaggerated, and that he had many excellent qualities. His wit was strong, but frequently coarse, though it is probable that many of the gross things which have been repeated as his, have been invented to suit his supposed manner. Perhaps the following character, which is said to have been written, by one of the last of his friends, approaches more nearly to truth than any other. \- "'

assions and a bad temper yet in good-humour he was an excellent companion, and better bred than many who valued themselves upon good-manners. It is true, when he drank

"Mr. Quin was a man of strong, pointed sense, with strong passions and a bad temper yet in good-humour he was an excellent companion, and better bred than many who valued themselves upon good-manners. It is true, when he drank freely, which was often the case, he forgot himself, and there was a sediment of brutality in him when you shook the bottle; but he made you ample amends by his pleasantry and good sense when he was sober. He told a story admirably and concisely, and his expressions were strongly marked; however, he often had an assumed character, and spoke in blank verse, which procured him respect from some, but exposed him to ridicule from others, who had discernment to see through his pomp and affectation. He was sensual, and loved good eating, but not so much as was generally reported with some exaggeration; and he was luxurious in his descriptions of those turtle and venison feasts to which he was invited. He was in his dealing a very honest fair man, yet he understood his interest, knew how to deal with the managers, and nevef made a bad bargain with them in truth, it was not an easy matter to over-reach a man of his capacity and penetration, united with a knowledge of mankind. He was not so much an ill-natured as an ill-humoured man, and he was capable of friendship. His airs of importance and his gait was absurd so that he might be said to walk in blank verse as well as talk but his good sense corrected him, and he did not continue long in the fits. I have heard him represented as a cringing fawning fellow to lords and great men, bat I could never discover that mean disposition in him. I observed he was decent and respectful in high company, and had a very proper behaviour, without arrogance or diffidence, which made him more circumspect, and consequently less entertaining. He was not a deep scholar, but he seemed well acquainted with the works of Dryden, Milton, and Pope and he made a better figure in company, with his stock of reading, than any of the literary persons I have seen him with.

ted by Lulli to write for the opera, that he silenced all his enemies, except Boileau and his party, who envied him his success. The French nation knew no better music

, a celebrated French poet, was born in 1636, and was one of a family that had produced some dramatic performers. He had but little education, and is said to have been servant to Tristan D'Hermile, from whom he imbibed some taste for poetry. The lessons of Tristan were probably of some use to him, as that author had had long experience in theatrical matters but Quiuault owed still more to nature. Before he was twenty years old, he had distinguished himself by several pieces for the stage, which had considerable success: and before he was thirty, he produced sixteen dramas, some of which were well received, but not all equally. It is supposed that some of these early pieces prejudiced Boileau against Quinault early in his career. There was neither regularity in the plan, nor force in the style: romantic lovers and common-place gallantry, in scenes which required a nervous pencil and vigorous colouring. These were defects not likely to escape the lash of the French Juvenal. He covered the young poet with ridicule; reproached him with the affectedly soft and languishing dialogue of his lovers, by whom even / hate you was said tenderly. Quinault, born with great sensibility, was so wounded by his seventy, that he applied to the magistrates, not only to silence Boileau, but oblige him to remove his name from his satires but the attempt was vain and it was not till after Quinault was inlisted by Lulli to write for the opera, that he silenced all his enemies, except Boileau and his party, who envied him his success. The French nation knew no better music than that of Lulli, and thought it divine. Quinault’s was thought of secondary merit, till after his decease and then, in proportion as the glory of Lulli faded, that of Quinault increased. After this his writings began to be examined and felt; and of late years, his name is never mentioned by his countrymen without commendation. His operas, however, though admirable to read, are ill-calculated for modern music; and are obliged to be new written, ere they can be new set, even in France. Marmontel, who had modernized several of them for Piccini to set in 1788, gave M. Laborde a dissertation on the dramatic writings of Quinault for music which is published in the fourth volume of his “Essai sur la Musique.” He begins by asserting that Quinault was the creator of the French opera upon the most beautiful idea that could be conceived; an idea which he had realized with a superiority of talent, which no writer has since approached. His design was to form an exhibition, composed of the prodigies of all the arts; to unite on the same stage all that can interest the mind, the imagination, and the senses. For this purpose a species of tragedy is necessary, that shall be sufficiently touching to move, but not so austere as to refuse the enchantments of the arts that are n-ecessary to embellish it. Historical tragedy, in its majestic and gloomy simplicity, cannot b.e sung with any degree of probability, nor mixed with festivals and dances, or be rendered susceptible of that variety, magnificence, show, and decoration, where the painter and the machinist ought to exhibit their enchantments.

In the year 68, upon the death of Nero, Galba returned to Rome, and took Quintilian with him who there taught rhetoric at the expence of the government, being

In the year 68, upon the death of Nero, Galba returned to Rome, and took Quintilian with him who there taught rhetoric at the expence of the government, being allowed a salary out of the public treasury. His career was attended with the highest reputation, and he formed many excellent orators, who did him great honour; among whom was the younger Pliny, who continued in his school to the year 78. After teaching for twenty years he obtained leave of Domitian to retire, and applied himself to compose his admirable book called “Institutiones Oratorise.” This is the mpst complete work of its kind which antiquity has left us; and the design of it is to form a perfect orator, who is accordingly conducted through the whole process necessary to attain eminence in that art. Few books abound more with good sense, or discover a greater degree of just and accurate taste. Almost all the principles of good criticism are to be found in it. He has digested into excellent order all the ancient ideas concerning rhetoric, and is at the same time himself an eloquent writer. “Though some parts of his work,” says Blair, “contain too much of the technical and artificial system then in vogue, and for that reason may be thought dry aiui tedious, yet I would not advise the omitting to read any part of his ‘ Institutions.’ To pleaders at the bar, even these technical parts may prove of some use. Seldom has any person of more sound and distinct judgment than Quintilian, applied himself to the study of the art of oratory.” The first entire copy of the “Institutiones Oratorio,” for the Quiutilian then in Italy was much mutilated and imperfect, was discovered by Poggius, as we have already noticed in his article, in the monastery of St. Gall, at the time of holding the council of Constance. The most useful editions of this work are those of Burman, 1720, 2 vols. 4to of Capperoperius, Paris, fol. 1725; of Gesner, Gottingen, 1738, 4to, beautifully reprinted in 1805, at Oxford, 2 vols. 8vo.

curious. He will not allow them to be Quintilian’s, but subscribes to the judgment of those critics, who suppose them to be the productions of different rhetoricians

Quintilian not only laid down rules for just speaking, but exhibited also his eloquence at the bar. He pleaded, as he himself tells us, for queen Berenice in her presence, and grew into such high repute that his pleadings were written down in order to be frequently transcribed and circulated, but these were executed in a very erroneous manner. The “Declamationes,” which still go under his name, and have frequently been printed with the “Institutiones Gratorise,” are of doubtful authority. Burman tells us in his preface, that he subjoined them to his edition, not because they were worthy of any time and pains, but that nothing might seem wanting to the curious. He will not allow them to be Quintilian’s, but subscribes to the judgment of those critics, who suppose them to be the productions of different rhetoricians in different ages; since, though none of th,em can be thought excellent, some are rather more elegant than others.

urishing, yet he laboured under many domestic afflictions. In his forty-first year he married a wife who was but twelve years old, and lost her when she was nineteen.

Quintilian spent the latter part of his life with great dignity and honour. Some imagine that he was consul but the words of Ausonius, on which they ground their supposition, shew that he did not possess the consulship, but only the consular ornaments“honestamenta nominis potius quam insignia potestatis” and we may add, that no mention is made of his name in the “Fasti Consulares.” It is certain that he was preceptor to the grandsons of the emperor Domitian’s sister. Though Quintilian’s outward condition and circumstances were prosperous and flourishing, yet he laboured under many domestic afflictions. In his forty-first year he married a wife who was but twelve years old, and lost her when she was nineteen. He bestows the highest applauses on her, and was inconsolable for her loss. She left him two sons, one of whom died at five years old, and the other at ten, who was the eldest, and possessed extraordinary talents. He soon after, however, married a second wife, and by her he had a daughter, whom he lived to see married who also, at the time of her marriage, received a handsome dowry from the younger Pliny, who had been his scholar, in consideration, as we are told, that she was married to a person of superior rank, who of course required more with her than her father’s circumstances would admit. Quintilian lived to be fourscore years of age, or upwards, as is pretty certainly determined although the time of his death is not recorded. He appears, from his works, and from what we are able to collect of him, to have been a man of great innocence and integrity of life. His “Oratorial Institutions” contain a great number of excellent moral instructions; and it is a main principle inculcated in them, that “none but a good man can make a good orator.

tain supereminent splendour of virtues. This sort of panegyric must needs be highly offensive to all who have read the history of that detestable emperor nor can any

One blemish, however, there lies upon Quintilian’s character, which cannot be passed over; and that is, his excessive flattery of Domitian, whom he calls a God, and says, that he ought to be invoked in the first place. He calls him also a most holy censor of manners, and says, that there is in him a certain supereminent splendour of virtues. This sort of panegyric must needs be highly offensive to all who have read the history of that detestable emperor nor can any excuse be made for Quintilian, but the necessity he was under, for the sake of self-preservation, of offering this incense to a prince most greedy of flattery and who might probably expect it the more from one on whom he had conferred particular favours, as he certainly had on Quintilian. Martial, Statius, and Julius Frontinus, have flattered this emperor in the same manner.

lways had a strong inclination. He read Columella, Varro, Virgil, and all authors ancient or modern, who had written on the subject and gained new lights by a journey

, a famous French gardener, was born at Poietiers in 1626. After a course of philosophy, he applied himself to the law, and went to Paris in order to be admitted an advocate. He had much natural eloquence, improved by learning; and acquitted himself so well at the bar as to gain the admiration and esteem of the chief magistrates. Tamboneau, president of the chamber of accounts, being informed of his merit, engaged him to undertake the preceptorship of his only son, which Quiutinie executed entirely to his satisfaction applying his leisure hours in the mean time to the study of agriculture, towards which he always had a strong inclination. He read Columella, Varro, Virgil, and all authors ancient or modern, who had written on the subject and gained new lights by a journey which he made with his pupil into Italy. All the gardens in Rome and about it were open to him; and he never failed to make the most useful observations, constantly joining practice with theory. On his return to Paris, Tamboneau entirely gave up to him his garden, to manage as he pleased; and Quintinie applied himself to so intense a study of the operations of nature in this way, that he soon became famous all over France. He made many curious and useful experiments. He was the first who proved it useless to join fibres to the roots of trees when transplanted, and discovered a sure and infallible method of pruning trees, so as to make them not only bear fruit, but bear it in whatever part the owner chuses, and even produce it equally throughout all the branches; which had never before been tried, nor even believed to be possible. The prince of Condé, who is said to have joined the pacific love of agriculture to a restless spirit for war, took great pleasure in conversing with Quintinie. He came to England about 1673; and, during his stay here paid a visit to Mr.Evelyn, who prevailed on him to communicate some directions concerning melons, for the cultivation of which Quintinie was remarkably famous. They were transmitted to Mr. Evelyn from Pans; and afterwards, in 1693, published by him in the Philosophical Transactions. Charles II. or, as his biographers say, James II. made Quintinie an offer of a considerable pension if he would stay and take upon him the direction of his gardens; but Quintinie chose to serve his own king, Louis XIV. who erected for him a new office of director-general of all his majesty’s fruit and kitchen gardens. The royal gardens, while Quintinie lived, were the admiration of the curious; and when he died, the king himself was much affected, and could not forbear saying to his widow, that “he had as great a loss as she had, and never expected to have it repaired.” Quintinie died veryold, but we know not in what year. He greatly improved the art of gardening, and transplanting trees and his book, entitled " Directions for the Management of Fruit and Kitchen Gardens, 7 ' 1725, 2 vols. 4to, contains precepts which have been followed by all Europe.

, or rather Quintus Smyrneus, was a Greek poet, who wrote a supplement to Homer’s Iliad, in 14 books, in which a

, or rather Quintus Smyrneus, was a Greek poet, who wrote a supplement to Homer’s Iliad, in 14 books, in which a relation is given of the Trojan war from the death of Hector to the destruction of Troy. He is supposed, from the style of his work, to have lived in the fifth century, but nothing certain can be collected concerning his person and country; but some say he was a native of Smyrna, and hence the name of Smyrneus. His poem was first made known by cardinal Bessarion, who discovered it in St. Nicholas’ church, near Otranto in Calabria, from which circumstance the author was named Quintus Calaber. It was published at Venice, by Aldus, but there is no date attached to the title-page; it is supposed to be 1521. The other editions are those of Freigius, Basil, 1569; of Rhodomannus, Hanover, 1604; of De Pauw, Leyden, 1734; and of Bandinius, Gr. Lat. et Ital. Florence, 1765.

“Cornmentarius in Epistolas Sancti Pauli,” and several other works. He left a son of the same name, who was born at Rostock in 1624, and died in 1669. He became pastor,

, a German Lutheran divine and professor, was born at Rostock in 1584, and studied first at home, and then at Berlin, and at Frankfort on the Oder. He afterwards travelled through Holland, Brabant, and Flanders, as tutor to the son of a patrician of Lubeck. In 1614, his learning and abilities having pointed him out as a fit person to fill the divinity chair at Rostock, he was created doctor of divinity, and paid a visit to the universities of Leipsic, Wirtemberg, Jena, &c. He obtained other preferments in the church, particularly the archdeaconry of St. Mary’s at Rostock. In 1645, he was appointed pastor of the same church, and superintendant of the churches in the district of that city. During Grotius’s last fatal illness at Rostock he was called in as a clergyman, and from him we have the particulars of the last moments of that celebrated scholar some of which particulars, Burigny informs us, were misrepresented or misunderstood. Quistorp died May 2, 164S, at the age of sixtyfour. He was the author of “Annotationes in omnes Libros Biblicos;” “Cornmentarius in Epistolas Sancti Pauli,” and several other works. He left a son of the same name, who was born at Rostock in 1624, and died in 1669. He became pastor, professor of divinity, and rector of the university of that city, and published some works, “Catechesis Anti-papistica,” “Pia desideria,” &c. Another John Nicholas Quistorp, probably of the same family, died in 1715, and left some works on controversial subjects.

1503, curiously ornamented. Of the frontispiece the first figure is that of Albinus, abbot of Fulda, who presents Rabanus to the pope, with a poetical piece entitled

, a celebrated archbishop of Mentz, and one of the most learned divines in the ninth century, was born in the year 785 at Mentz, or rather at Fulda, and descended from one of the most noble families in that country. Mackenzie, however, has inserted him among his Scotch writers, but without much apparent authority. The parents of Rabanus sent him, at ten years old, to the monastery of Fulda, where he was instructed in learning and virtue, and afterwards studied underthe famous Alcuinus, at Tours. In this situation he made so rapid a progress, as to acquire great reputation from his writings at the age of thirty. On his return to Fulda he was chosen abbot there, and reconciled the emperor Louis le Débonnaire to his children. Rabanus wrote a letter of consolation to this prince when unjustly deposed, and published a tract on the respect due from children to their parents, and from subjects to their princes, which may be found in “Marca de Concordiâ,” published by Baluze. He succeeded Orgar, archbishop o Mentz, in the year 847, but was so much a bigot, as to procure the condemnation of Godeschalc. He died at his estate of Winsel, in the year 856, aged sixty-eight, after having bequeathed his library to the abbeys of Fulda and St. Alban’s, leaving a great number of works printed at Cologn, 1627, 6 vols. in 3 folio. The principal are, 1. “Commentaries on the Holy Scriptures,” the greatest part of which are mere extracts from the fathers, as was the usual method among commentators in his time. 2. A poem in honour of the holy cross, of which there is a neat edition printed at Augsburg, 1605, in folio; but the most rare is that printed at Phorcheim, in ædibus Thomæ Anselim, 1503, curiously ornamented. Of the frontispiece the first figure is that of Albinus, abbot of Fulda, who presents Rabanus to the pope, with a poetical piece entitled “Intercessio Albini;” Rabanus appears next, presenting his book to the pope, with a poetical piece, entitled “Commendatio Papæ,” Then follows a kind of dedication to the emperor Louis le Débonnaire, who is delineated on this dedication holding a shield in one hand, and a cross in the other, his head surrounded with glory all the letters comprised in these ornamented lines, form a discourse foreign to the dedication. The poem is in the same style on each of the 28 pages of which it consists, are figures of the cross, stars, cherubim, seraphim, &c. The last represents a cross, with the author adoring it; the letters comprised in this cross form various pious exclamations. 3. A treatise on “the Instruction of the Clergy.” 4. A treatise on “the Ecclesiastical Calendar,” in which he points out the method of distinguishing the leap years, and marking the inductions. 5. A book “on the sight of God, purity of Jieart, and the manner of doing penance.” 6. A large work, entitled “De Universe, sive Etymologiarum Opus.” 7. “Homilies.” 8. “A Martyrology,” &c. But a treatise on “Vices and Virtues,” which is attributed to Rabanus Maurus, was written by Halitgarius bishop of Orleans. His treatise “against the Jews,” may be found in Martenne’s “Thesaurus;” and some other small tracts in the “Miscellanea” of Baluze, and Father Sirmond’s works. Rabanus was unquestionably one of the most learned men of his age, and his character in this respect has been highly extolled both by Dupin and Mosheim.

s, deputed him to Paris to obtain the restitution of them, by application to the chancellor Du Prat, who was so pleased with him, and so much admired his accomplishments,

, a celebrated French wit, was the son of an apothecary, and born about 1483, at Chinon, in the province of Touraine. He was bred up in a convent of Franciscan friars in Poictou, the convent of Fontenaile-Comte, and received into their order. His strong inclination and taste for literature and the sciences made him transcend the bounds which restrained the learned in his times so that he not only became a great linguist, but an adept in all branches of knowledge. His uncommon capacity and merit soon excited the jealousy of his brethren. Hence he was envied by some others, through ignorance, thought him a conjuror; and all hated and abused him, particularly because he studied Greek; the novelty of that language making them esteem it, not only barbarous, but antichristian. This we collect from a Greek epistle of Budaeus to Rabelais, in which he praises him highly for his great knowledge in that tongue, and exclaims against the stupidity and malice of the friars. Having endured their persecutions for a long time, he obtained permission of pope Clement VII. to leave the society of St. Francis, and to enter into that of St. Benedict but his mercurial temper prevailing, he did not find any more satisfaction among the Benedictines, than he had found among the Franciscans, so that after a short time he left them also. Changing the regular habit for that which is worn by secular priests, he rambled up and down for a. while and then fixed at Montpellier, where he took the degrees in physic, and practised with great reputation. He was universally admired for his wit and great learning, and became a man of such estimation, that the university of that place, when deprived of its privileges, deputed him to Paris to obtain the restitution of them, by application to the chancellor Du Prat, who was so pleased with him, and so much admired his accomplishments, that he easily granted all that he solicited. He returned to Montpellier and the service he did the university upon this occasion, is given as a reason why all the candidates for degrees in physic there, are, upon their admission to them, formally invested with a robe, which Rabelais left; this ceremony having been instituted in honour of him.

atherine of Spain, and passing through Lyons, carried Rabelais with him, in quality of his physician who returned home, however, in about six months. He had sometime

In 1532, he published at Lyons some pieces of Hippocrates and Galen, with a dedication to the bishop of Mailezais in which he tells him, that he had read lectures upon the aphorisms of Hippocrates, and the “ars medica” of Galen, before numerous audiences in the university of Montpellier. This was the last year of his cootinuance in that place for the year after he went to Lyons, where he became physician to the hospital, and joined lectures with practice for some years following. John du Bellay, bishop of Paris, and afterwards cardinal, with whom he had been acquainted in his early years, going to Rome in? 1534, upon the business of Henry VIITs divorce from Catherine of Spain, and passing through Lyons, carried Rabelais with him, in quality of his physician who returned home, however, in about six months. He had sometime before quitted his religious connections for the sake of leading a life more suitable to his taste and humour; but now renewed them, and in a second journey to Rome, obtained in 1536, by his interest with some cardinals, a brief from pope Paul III. to qualify him for holding ecclesiastical benefices. John du Bellay, had procured the abbey of St. Maur near Paris to be secularized; and into this was Rabelais, now a Benedictine monk, received as a secular canon. Here he is supposed to have begun his famous romance, entitled “The lives, heroic deeds, and sayings of Gargantua and Pantagruel.” He continued ifi this retreat till 1545, when Du Bellay, his friend and patron, and now a cardinal, nominated him to the cure of Meudon, which he is said to have filled with great zeal and application to the end of his life. His profound knowledge and skill in physic made him doubly useful to the people under his care and he was ready upon all occasions to relieve them under indispositions of body as well as mind. He died in 1553. As he was a great wit, many witticisms and facetious sayings are laid to his charge, of which he knew nothing and many ridiculous circumstances are related of him by some of his biographers, to which probably little credit is due.

ude to persons or events, that no commentary can easily satisfy the reader’s curiosity *. The monks, who were supposed to be the chief object of his satire, gave some

He published several productions but his chef tfteuvre is “The History of Gacgantua and Pantagruel;” a most extravagant satire, in the form of a romance, upon monks, priests, popes, and fools and knaves of all kinds. Wit and learning are scattered here in great profusion, but in a manner so wild and irregular, and with a strong mixture of obscenity, coarse and puerile jests, profane allusions, and low raillery, that, while some have regarded it as a firstrate effort of human wit, and, like Homer’s poems, as an inexhaustible source of learning, science, and knowledge, others have affirmed it to be nothing but an unintelligible rhapsody, a heap of foolish conceits, without meaning, without coherence a collection of gross impieties and obscenities. There seems to be much truth in both these opinions, and throughout the whole such a degree of obscurity, where he is supposed to allude to persons or events, that no commentary can easily satisfy the reader’s curiosity *. The monks, who were supposed to be the chief object of his satire, gave some opposition to it when it first began to be published, for it was published by parts

is best friends had made on his mind, and by his disgust at the impertinence of some of his readers; who, though he had avoided every thing personal, were continually

, a German satirist, was born in 1714, at Wachau, an estate and manor near Leipsic, of which his father was lord. As he was educated for the law, and was employed for the greatest part of his life in public 'business, his literary performances must have been the amusement of his leisure hours. He appeared first in print, in 1741, as an associate in a periodical work jentitled “Amusements of Wit and Reason,” to which some of the most eminent men of his age were contributors, and among these Gellert, with whom he had a lasting friendship. About this time, he was made comptroller of the taxes in the district of Leipsic, an office which required constant attention, and obliged him to be frequently riding from place to place; and on these journeys, as a relaxation from business of a very different kind, he says, in one of his letters, all his satires were written. He published four volumes of them, and in his preface to the last, which is dated 1755, he professes his resolution to publish no more during his life. This determination, he says, is extorted from him by the multiplicity of business in which he is involved, by the impression which the loss of his best friends had made on his mind, and by his disgust at the impertinence of some of his readers; who, though he had avoided every thing personal, were continually applying his general characters to individuals. He had then been made secretary to the board of taxes at Dresden, and was afterwards involved in the calamities which that city suffered when besieged by the king of Prussia. During this siege, his house, his manuscripts, and alf his property, were destroyed; which misfortune he bore with a temper of mind truly philosophical and his letters on this occasion, which were afterwards published without his knowledge, show that it did not deprive him of his usual cheerfulness nor did this disposition deject him even in his last illness. He died of an apoplexy in March 1771. He is represented by his biographer Weiss, as an amiable and virtuous man, strict in his own conduct, but indulgent to that of others. He had a deep sense of religion, which he could not bear to hear ridiculed: and whenever any thing of this kind was attempted in his presence, he generally punished the scoffer with such sarcastic raillery as rendered him an object of contempt. He was remarkably temperate, though very fond of lively and cheerful conversation, in which he excelled; but he never would accept of any invitation which he thought was given with a view to exhibit him as a man of wit, and he was averse to all compliments paid to him as such; he knew how to preserve the respect due to him even while he promoted mirth and conviviality, for he never suffered these qualities to exceed the bounds of virtue and decency.

“The amorous History of the Gauls,” containing the amours of two ladies (d'Olonne, and de Chatillon) who had great influence at court. It has since been joined to other

, a distinguished French officer and wit, was born April 3, 1618, at Epiry in Nivernois, descended from a family which ranks among the most noble and ancient of the duchy of Burgundy. He served in his father’s regiment from twelve years old, and distinguished himself so much by his prudent conduct in several sieges and battles, that he would certainly have risen to the rank of marechal, had he not as much distinguished himself by indiscriminate satire, and hy immoral conduct. Being left a widower, 1648, he fell violently i love with Mad. de Miramion, and carried her off, but could not prevail on her to return his passion. He was admitted into the French academy in 1665, and the same year a scandalous history in ms. was circulated under his name, which is called “The amorous History of the Gauls,” containing the amours of two ladies (d'Olonne, and de Chatillon) who had great influence at court. It has since been joined to other novels of that time, and printed in Holland, 2 vols. 12mo, and at Paris, under the title of Holland, 5 vols. 12mo. This ms. being shown to the king, his majesty was extremely angry, and to satisfy the offended parties, sent De Bussy to the Bastile, April 7, 1665. From thence he wrote several letters acknowledging that he was the author of the history, but had entrusted the original to the marchioness de la Baume, who had betrayed his confidence by taking a copy; alleging also that the characters had been changed and spoilt, for the purpose of raising up enemies to him. The king did not believe one word of this, but tired with his repeated importunities, granted his request and De Bussy obtained leave to stop a month in Paris, after which he retired to his own estate, where he remained in banishment till 1681. The king then permitted him to return to Paris, and not only recalled him to court in 1682, but even suffered him to attend his levee, at the duke de Saint- Aignan’s earnest solicitation. He soon perceived, however, that the king showed him no countenance, and he therefore retired again to his estate. In 1687, he revisited the court for his children’s interests, and returned home the year following but ceased not to offer his services to the king, from whom he obtained several favours for his family. He died April 9, 1693, at Autun, aged 75. His works are, 1. “Memoires,” 2 vols, 4to, or 12mo, concerning his adventures at court, and in the army, and what happened after his disgrace. 2. “Letters,” 7 vols. 3. A small piece, entitled “Instructions for the conduct of Life,” which he gave his sons, when he sent one to the academy, and the other to college. This is said to do credit to his principles, which appear to have been better than his practice. The only work of his now read in France is that which produced all his misfortunes, the “Histoire amoureuse des Gaules,” the last edition of which was printed at Paris in 1754, 5 vols. 12mo. He has been called very unjustly the French jetronius, for he has neither the indecency nor the elegance of that writer. The French critics are very favourable to him, in asserting that although in the above work we may discover symptoms of malignity, there are none of exaggeration or falsehood.

Henry IV. and, as he began to amuse himself with writing verses, he became acquainted with Malherbe, who, amidst his advices, reproached him with being too negligent

, a French poet, was born at Roche-Racan in Touraine in 1.589. At sixteen, he was made one of the pages to Henry IV. and, as he began to amuse himself with writing verses, he became acquainted with Malherbe, who, amidst his advices, reproached him with being too negligent and incorrect in his versification but Boileau, who has passed the same censure on him, affirms that he had more genius than his master; and was as capable of writing in the Epic as in the Lyric style, in which last he was allowed to excel. Menage has also spoken highly of Racan, in his additions and alterations to his " Remarques sur les Poesies de Malherbe. >T Racan had little or no education, and no learning. On quitting the office of page, he entered into the army but this, more to obligee his father, the marquis of Racan, than out of any inclination of his own and therefore, after two or three campaigns, he returned to Paris, where he married, and devoted himself to poetry. His works, the best edition of which is that of Paris, 1724, 2 vols. 8vo, consist of sacred odes, pastorals, letters, and memoirs of the life of Malherbe, prefixed to many editions of the works of that poet. He was chosen one of the members of the French academy, at the time of its foundation; and died in 1670, aged eighty-one.

the Jesuits, for his attachment to the anti-constitutionists, retired to M. Colbert at Montpellier, who employed him in superintending the college of Lunel. This situation

, a French ecclesiastical historian, was born November 25, 1708, at Chauny. He completed his studies at the Mazarine college at Paris, where he acquired great skill in Latin, Greek, Hebrew, and ecclesiastical history, and was sent for by M. de la Croix-Castries, archbishop of Albi, in 1729, to re-establish the college at Rabastens. Here he remained two years, and under his care the college became flourishing but, being afterwards banished by the intrigues of the Jesuits, for his attachment to the anti-constitutionists, retired to M. Colbert at Montpellier, who employed him in superintending the college of Lunel. This situation he privately quitted in a short time, to avoid some rigorous orders and, going to Paris, undertook the education of some young men at the college of Harcourt but this place too he was obliged to quit in 1734, by cardinal Fleury’s order; from which time he lived sequestered from the world, wholly occupied in his retreat in study and devotion. M. de Caylus, bishop of Auxerre, being determined to attach M.Racine to himself, gave him a canonryat Auxerre, and admitted him to sacred orders, all which, however, occasioned no change in. his way of life. He died at Paris, worn out by application, May 15, 1755, aged 47, and was buried at St. Severin. His principal works are, four tracts relative to the dispute which had arisen concerning “Fear and Confidence,” written with so much moderation, that they pleased all parties; and an “Abridgment of Ecclesiastical History,” 13 vols. 12mo and 4to. This work has been extremely admired, particularly by the opponents of the bull Unigenitus, and of the Jesuits, who are treated in it with great severity, as they had been the cause of all his troubles. He intended to have continued his Abridgment down to the year 1750 at least, had he lived longer; and a history of the first 33 years of the eighteenth century has been published by one of his friends, 2 vols. 12mo; and some Reflections, by M. Racine, on Ecclesiastical History, have also appeared, 2 vols. 12mo, which are a summary of his Abridgment.

of his death. The narrowness of his circumstances had obliged him to retire to Usez, where an uncle, who was canon regular and vicar general there, offered to resign

Leaving Port Royal, he went to Paris, and studied logic some time in the college of Harcourt. He had already composed some little pieces of French poetry, but it was in 1660, when all the poets were celebrating the marriage of the king, that he first discovered himself to the public. His “La Nymphe de la Seine,” written upon that occasion, was highly approved by Chapelain and so powerfully recommended by him to Colbert, that the minister sent Racine a hundred pistoles from the king, and settled a pension on him, as a man of letters, of 600 livres, which was paid him to the day of his death. The narrowness of his circumstances had obliged him to retire to Usez, where an uncle, who was canon regular and vicar general there, offered to resign to him a priory of his order which he then possessed, if he would become a regular; and he still wore the ecclesiastical habit, when he wrote the tragedy of “Theagenes,” which he presented to Moliere and that of the “Freres Ennemis,” in 1664, the subject of which was given him by Moliere.

poets and poetry, do not always meet in the same person.” It was certainly singular advice to a man who was to become Corneille’s legitimate successor, and sole rival

In the mean time, the success of his ode upon the king’s marriage led him to loftier attempts, which ended in his becoming a writer for the theatre. In 1666, he published his tragedy of “Alexandra;” concerning which Mr. de Valincour relates a fact, which he had from Racine himself. Reading this play to Corneille, he received the highest encomiums from that great writer; but at the same time was advised by him to apply himself to any other kinds of poetry, as more proper for his genius than dramatic. “Corneille,” adds de Valincour, “was incapable of low jealousy if he spoke so to Mr. Racine, it is certain that he thought so. But we know that he preferred Lucan to Virgil whence we must conclude, that the art of writing excellent verse, and the art of judging excellently of poets and poetry, do not always meet in the same person.” It was certainly singular advice to a man who was to become Corneille’s legitimate successor, and sole rival in the French drama.

for ever although he was still in full vigour, being not more than thirty-eight and the only person who was capable of consoling Paris for the old age of Corneille.

After the publication of “Phaedra,” he took a resolution to quit the theatre for ever although he was still in full vigour, being not more than thirty-eight and the only person who was capable of consoling Paris for the old age of Corneille. But he had imbibed in his infancy a deep sense of religion; and this, though it had been suppressed for a while by his connections with the theatre, and particularly with the famous actress Champmel6, by whom he had a son, now returned in full force. While under this impression that his past life had been erroneous, he resolved to write no more plays, and according to the kind of penitence which he thought prescribed by his religion, actually formed a design of becoming a Carthusian friar. His religious director, however, distrusting perhaps this extraordinary zeal, advised him to moderate it, to marry, and settle in the world, with which proposal Racine complied and immediately took to wife the daughter of the treasurer of Amiens, by whom he had seven children. His next concern was to reconcile himself, as he did very sincerely, with the gentlemen of Port Royal, whose censures on dramatic writers he acknowledged to be most just. He made peace at first with Nicole, who received him with open arms and Boiieau introduced him to Arnaud, who also embraced him tenderly, and forgave all his satire.

more with poetry, yet he was again invited to resume his dramatic character by madame de Maintenon, who intreated him to compose some tragedy fit to be played by her

Though Racine had made it a point of conscience never to meddle any more with poetry, yet he was again invited to resume his dramatic character by madame de Maintenon, who intreated him to compose some tragedy fit to be played by her young ladies at the convent of St. Cyr, and to take the subject from the Bible. Racine accordingly composed “Esther” which, being first represented at St. Cyr, was afterwards acted at Versailles, before the king, in 1689. “It appears to me very remarkable,” says Voltaire, “that this tragedy had then universal success and that two years after, l Athaliah,‘ though performed by the same persons, had none. It happened quite contrary, when these pieces were played at Paris, long after the death of the author and when prejudice and partiality had ceased. ’ Athaliah,‘ represented in 1717, was received, as it deserved to be, with transport; and ’Esther,‘ in 1721, inspired nothing but coldness, and never appeared again. But at that time there were no courtiers who complaisamly acknowledged 4 Esther’ in madam de Maintenon, and with equal malignity saw Vashti” in madam de Montespan ‘ Human’ in M. de Louvois and, above all, the persecution of the Hugoriots by this minister, in the proscription of the Hebrews.“This author goes on, in his own style, censuring the story of Esther itself, as uninteresting, and, he is pleased to say, improbable, and then adds” But, notwithstanding the badness of the subject, thirty verses of ‘ Esther’ are of more value than many tragedies which have had great success."

ower of medicine; for he died of it, after being grievously afflicted with pains, in 1699. The king, who was sensible of his great merit, and always loved him, sent

Offended at the bad reception of “Athaliah,” he was more disgusted than' ever with poetry, and now renounced it totally. He spent the latter years of his life in composing a History of the house of Port Royal, the place of his education which is well drawn up, in an elegant style, and was published in 1767, in two vols. 12mo. Too great sensibility, say his friends, but more properly an impotence of spirit, shortened the days of this poet. Though he had conversed much with the court, he had not learned to disguise his real sentiments. Having drawn up a well-reasoned and well-written memorial upon the miseries of the people, and the means of relieving them, he one day lent it to Madam de Maintenon to read when the king coming in, and demanding what and whose it was, commended the zeal of Racine, but disapproved of his meddling with things that did not concern him; and said, with an angry tone, “Because he knows how to make good verses, does he think he knows every thing and would he be a minister of state, because he is a great poet” These words hurt Racine greatly he conceived dreadful ideas of the king’s displeasure, and this brought on a fever, which surpassed the power of medicine; for he died of it, after being grievously afflicted with pains, in 1699. The king, who was sensible of his great merit, and always loved him, sent often to him in his illness; an-d finding, after his death, that he had died poor, settled a handsome pension upon his family. He was interred at Port Royal, according to his will and, upon the destruction of that monastery in 1708, his remains were carried to St. Stephen du Mont, at Paris. He was middle-sized, and of an agreeable and open countenance; was a great jester, but was restrained by piety, in the latter years of his life, from indulging this talent; and, when warmed in conversation, had so lively and persuasive an eloquence, that he himself often lamented his not having been an advocate in parliament. Of his works his countrymen have reason to be proud no modern stage has been honoured, in such quick succession, by two such writers as Corneille and Racine. Fonteneiie’s parallel between them we have already given (see Corneille, vol. X. p. 269.), but it is thought too partial to Corneille. We shall content ourselves with saying, after Perrault, that “If Corneille surpassed Racine in heroic sentiments and the grand character of his personages, he was inferior to him in moving the passions, and in purity of language.

rning; and, in the prosecution of physic, he rarely looked further than to the pieces of Dr. Willis, who was then practising in London with a very distinguished character.

, an eminent English physician, was born at Wakefield in Yorkshire, where his father possessed a moderate estate, in 1650. He was taught Greek and Latin at a school in the same town and, at fifteen years of age, was sent to University college, in Oxford. In 1669, he took his first degree in arts; but no fellowship becoming vacant there, he removed to Lincoln college, where he was elected into one. He applied himself to physic, and ran through the necessary courses of botany, chemistry, and anatomy in all which, having excellent parts, he quickly made a very great progress. He took the degree of M. A. in 1672, and then proceeded in the medical faculty. It is remarkable, that he recommended himself more by ready wit and vivacity, than by any extraordinary acquisitions in learning; and, in the prosecution of physic, he rarely looked further than to the pieces of Dr. Willis, who was then practising in London with a very distinguished character. He had few books of Any kind so few, that when Dr. Bathurst, head of Trinity college, asked him once in a surprise, “where his study was” RadclifTe, pointing to a few phials, a skeleton, and an herbal, replied, <* Sir, this is Radclitfe’s library.“In 1675 he proceeded M. B. and immediately began to practise. He never paid any regard to the rules universally followed, but censured them, as often as he saw occasion, with great freedom and acrimony which drew all the old practitioners upon him, with whom he waged an everlasting war. Yet his reputation increased with his experience and before he had been two years established, his business was very extensive, and among those of the highest rank. About this time, Dr. Marshall, rector of Lincoln college, opposed his application for a faculty-place in the college, which was to serve as a dispensation from taking holy orders, which the statutes required him to do, if he kept his fellowship. This was owing to some witticisms which Raclclirle, according to his manner, had pointed at the doctor. The church, however, being inconsistent with his present situation and views, he chose to resign his fellowship, which he did in 1677. He would have kept his chambers, and resided there as a commoner; but Dr. Marshall being still irreconcilable, he quitted the college, and took lodgings elsewhere, tn 1682 he went out M.D. but continued two years longer at Oxford, increasing both in wealth and fame. In 1684 he went to London, and settled in Bow-street, Covent-garden. Dr. Lower was there the reigning physician but his interest beginning to decline on account of his whig principles, as they were called, Radcliffe had almost an open field and, in less than a year, got into high practice, to which perhaps his conversation contributed as much as his reputed skill in his profession, for few men had more pleasantry and ready wit. In 1686, the princess Anne of Denmark made him her physician. In 1687, wealth jlo wing in upon him very plentifully, he had a mind to testify his gratitude to University college, where he had received the best part of his education; and, with this intent, caused the East window, over the altar, to be put up at his own expence. It is esteemed a beautiful piece, representing the nativity of our Saviour, painted upon glass; and appears to be his gift, by the following inscription under it:” D. D. Joan. Radcliffe, M. D. hujus Collegii quondam Socius, A. D. M.DCLXXXVII.“He is called” Socius;" not that he was really a fellow, but, being senior scholar, had the same privileges, though not an equal revenue, with the fellows. In 1638, when prince George of Denmark joined the prince of Orange and the princess, his consort, retired to Nottingham, the doctor was pressed, by bishop Compton, to attend her in quality of his office, she being also pregnant of the duke of Gloucester; but, not choosing to declare himself in that critical state of public affairs, nor favouring the measures then in agitation, he excused himself on account of the multiplicity of his patients.

eep immediately, and it is concluded now (April 1) that he may do well so that the town- physicians, who expected to share his practice, begin now to think themselves

In 1703, Radcliffe was himself taken ill (on Wednesday, March 24), with something like a pleurisy neglected it; drank a bottle of wine at sir Justinian Isham’s on Thursday, took to his bed on Friday and on the 30th was so ill, tiiat it was thought he could not live till the next day. Dr. Stanhope, dean of Canterbury and Mr. Whitfield (then queen’s chaplain, and rector of St. Martin, Ludgate, afterwards vicar of St. Giles, Cripplegate), were sent for by him, and he desired them to assist him. By a will, made the28th, he disposed of the greatest part of his estate to charity; and several thousand pounds, in particular, for the relief of sick seamen set ashore. Mr. Bernard, the serjeant-surgeon, took from him 100 ounces of blood and on the 31st he took a strange resolution of being removed to Kensington, notwithstanding his weakness, from which the most pressing entreaties of his friends could not divert him. In the warmest time of the day he rose, and was carried by four men in a chair to Kensington, whither he got with difficulty, having fainted away in his chair. “Being put to bed,” says Dr. Atterbury, on whose authority we relate these particulars, “he fell asleep immediately, and it is concluded now (April 1) that he may do well so that the town- physicians, who expected to share his practice, begin now to think themselves disappointed.” Two days after, the same writer adds, “Dr. Radclitfe is past all danger: his escape is next to miraculous. It hath made him not only very serious, but very devout. The person who faath read prayers to him often (and particularly this day) tells me, he never saw a man more in earnest. The queen asked Mr. Bernard how he did and when he told her that he was ungovernable, and would observe no rules, she answered, that then nobody had reason to take any thing ill from, him, since it was plain he used other people no worse than he used himself.

nd of his days always carrying on, as we have before observed, war with his brethren the physicians, who never considered him in any other light than that of an active,

He continued, however, in full business, increasing in wealth and eccentric temper, to the end of his days always carrying on, as we have before observed, war with his brethren the physicians, who never considered him in any other light than that of an active, ingenious, adventuring empiric, whom constant practice brought at length to some skill in his profession. One of the projects of “Martin Scriblerus” was, by a stamp upon blistering-plasters and melilot by the yard, to raise money for the government, and give it to Radcliffe and others to farm. In Martin’s “Map of Diseases,” which was “thicker set with towns than any Flanders map,” Radcliffe was painted at the corner, contending for the universal empire of this world, and the rest of the physicians opposing his ambitious designs, with a project of a treaty of partition to settle peace.

gust, four days after the queen’s death, a member of the House of Commons, a friend of the doctor’s, who was also a member, and one who always voted on the same side,

In 1713 he was elected into parliament for the town of Buckingham. In the last illness of queen Anne, he was sent for to Carshalton, about noon, by order of the council. He said, “he had taken physic, and could not come.” Mr. Ford, from whose letter to Dr. Swift this anecdote is taken, observes, “In all probability he had saved her life for I am told the late lord Gower had been often in the same condition, wtth the gout in his head.” In the account that is given of Dr. Radcliffe in the “Biographia Britannica,” it is said, that the queen was struck with death the twenty-eighth of July that Dr. Radcliffe’s name was not once mentioned, either by the queen or “any lord of the council” only that lady Masham sent to him, without their knowledge, two hours before the queen’s death. In this letter from Mr. Ford to dean Swift, which is dated the thirty-first of July, it is said, that the queen’s disorder began between eight and nine the morning before, which was the thirtieth and that about noon, the same day, Radcliffe was sent for by an order of council. These accounts being contradictory, the reader will probably want some assistance to determine what were the facts. As to the time when the queen was taken ill, Mr. Ford’s account is most likely to be true, as he was upon the spot, and in a situation which insured him the best intelligence. As to the time when the doctor was sent for, the account in the Biog. Brit, is manifestly wrong for if the doctor had been sent for only two hours before the queen’s death, which happened incontestably on the first of August, Mr. Ford could not have mentioned the fact on the 31st of July, when his letter was dated. Whether Radcliffe was sent for by lady Masham, or by order of council, h therefore the only point to be determined. That he was generally reported to have been sent for by order of council is certain but a letter is printed in the “Biographia,” said to have been written by the doctor to one of his friends, which, supposing it to be genuine, will prove, that the doctor maintained the contrary. On the 5th of August, four days after the queen’s death, a member of the House of Commons, a friend of the doctor’s, who was also a member, and one who always voted on the same side, moved, that he might be summoned to attend in his place, in order to be censured for not attending on her majesty. Upon this occasion the doctor is said to have written the following letter to another of his friends

ch, and assure him from me, that his zeal for her majesty will not excuse his ill usage of a friend, who has drank many a hundred bottles with him, and cannot, even

"I could not have thought that so old an acquaintance and so good a friend, as sir J n always professed himself, would have made such a motion against me. God knows my will to do her majesty any service has ever got the start of my ability; and I have nothing that gives me greater anxiety and trouble than the death of that great and glorious princess. I must do that justice to the physicians that attended her in her illness, from a sight of the method that was taken for her preservation by Dr. Mead, as to declare nothing was omitted for her preservation but the people about her (the plagues of Egypt fall on them) put it out of the power of physic to be of any benefit to her. I know the nature of attending crowned heads in their last moments too well to be fond of waiting upon them, without being sent for by a proper authority. You have heard of pardons being signed for physicians, beforea sovereign’s demise however, ill as I was, I would have went to the queen in a horse-litter, had either her majesty, or those in commission next to her, commanded me so to do. You may tell sir J n as much, and assure him from me, that his zeal for her majesty will not excuse his ill usage of a friend, who has drank many a hundred bottles with him, and cannot, even after this breach of a good understanding that ever was preserved between us, but have a very good esteem for him. I must also desire you to thank Tom Chapman for his speech in my behalf, since I hear it is the first he ever made, which is taken more kindly and to acquaint him, that I should be glad to see him at Carshalton, since I fear (for so the gout tells me) that we shall never more sit in the House of Commons together. I am, &c.

only extremely desirable, but the enjoyment of it will be a great happiness and satisfaction to him, who is, &c.

"I give you, and your brother, many thanks, for the favour you intend me to-morrow; and if there is any other friend that will be agreeable to you, he shall meet with a hearty welcome from me. Dinner shall be on the table by two, when you may be sure to find me ready to wait upon you. Nor shall I be at any other time from home, because I have received several letters, which threaten me with being pulled to pieces, if ever I come to London. After such menaces as these, it is easy to imagine, that the conversation of two such very good friends is not only extremely desirable, but the enjoyment of it will be a great happiness and satisfaction to him, who is, &c.

of sir John Holt he attended, in a bad illness, with unusual diligence, out of pique to the husband, who was supposed not to be over-fond of her.

The lady of sir John Holt he attended, in a bad illness, with unusual diligence, out of pique to the husband, who was supposed not to be over-fond of her.

When Mr. Harley was stabbed by Guiscard, Swift complains, that, by the caprice of Radcliffe, who would admit none but his own surgeon, he had “not been well

When Mr. Harley was stabbed by Guiscard, Swift complains, that, by the caprice of Radcliffe, who would admit none but his own surgeon, he had “not been well looked after;” and adds in another place, “Mr. Harley has had an ill surgeon, by the caprice of that puppy Dr. Radcliffe; which has kept him back so long.

love with her; but was rejected. The story is thus related in the “Biographia Britannica” “The lady who made the doctor, at this advanced age, stand in need of a physician

In 1709, he was ridiculed by Steele, in the “Tatler,” under the title of “the mourning Æsculapius, the languishing hopeless lover of the divine Hebe, emblem of youth and beauty.” After curing the lady of a severe fever, he fell violently in love with her; but was rejected. The story is thus related in the “Biographia Britannica” “The lady who made the doctor, at this advanced age, stand in need of a physician himself, was, it is said, of great beauty, wealth, and quality and too attractive not to inspire the coldest heart with the warmest sentiments. After he had made a cure of her, he could not but imagine, as naturally he might, that her ladyship would entertain a favourable opinion of him. But the lady, however grateful she might be for the care he had taken of her health, divulged the secret, and one of her confidants revealed it to Steele, who, on account of party, was so ill-natured as to write the ridicule of it in the Tatler.

dy,” adds Mr. Richardson, “ever practised this rule, * of using all mankind ill,' kss than Dr. Mead (who told me himself the story, and) who, as I have been informed

This article shall be closed with an extract from the Richardsoniana “Dr. Radcliffe told Dr. Mead, ‘ Mead, I love you, and now I will tell you a sure secret to make your fortune; use all mankind ill.’ And it certainly was his own practice. He owned he was avaricious, even to spunging, whenever he any way could, at a tavern reckoning, a sixpence, or shilling, among the rest of the company, under pretence of * hating (as he ever did) to change a guinea, because (said he) it slips away so fast.‘ He could never be brought to pay bills without much following and importunity nor then if there appeared any chance of wearying them out. A paviour, after long and fruitless attempts, caught him just getting out of his chariot at his own door, in Bloomsbury-square, and set upon him. ’ Why, you rascal,‘ said the doctor, * do you pretend to be paid for such a piece of work why you have spoiled my pavement, and then covered it over with earth to hide your bad work.’ ‘ Doctor,’ said the paviour, 4 mine is not the only bad work that the earth hides’ ‘ You dog you,’ said the doctor, ‘ are you a wit you must be poor, come in’ and paid him. Nobody,” adds Mr. Richardson, “ever practised this rule, * of using all mankind ill,' kss than Dr. Mead (who told me himself the story, and) who, as I have been informed by great physicians, got as much again by his practice as Dr. Radcliffe did.

When Marc Antonio quitted Venice he went to Rome, where his merit soon recommended him to Raphael, who not only employed him to engrave a considerable number of his

When Marc Antonio quitted Venice he went to Rome, where his merit soon recommended him to Raphael, who not only employed him to engrave a considerable number of his designs, but assisted him in tracing and correcting the outlines upon the plates. Raphael was so pleased with his performances that he sent many specimens of them, as a complimentary present to Albert Durer, which he thought well worthy of his acceptance. Antonio’s great reputation brought many young artists to Rome, where he formed a school that soon eclipsed those of Germany; and in the process of time it was considered to be as necessary for an engraver, as for a painter, to visit Italy the Italian style of engraving became the standard of excellence, and at the conclusion of the sixteenth century, the German manner was almost totally disused. Among his scholars the most successful was Agostino de Musis, and Marc de Ravenna.

lptor. The exquisite merit of his “martyrdom of St. Laurence,” at length reconciled the pope to him, who pardoned his offence entirely, and took him under his protection.

After the death of Raphael, Marc Antonio was employed by Julio Romano. This connection was unfortunate, for he disgraced himself and his profession by engraving that painter’s abominable designs to accompany Aretine’s infamous verses. For this pope Clement VII. sent him to prison, from which he was released with great difficulty by the interest of the cardinal Julius de Medici and Baccio Bandinelli, the sculptor. The exquisite merit of his “martyrdom of St. Laurence,” at length reconciled the pope to him, who pardoned his offence entirely, and took him under his protection. He had now attained his highest reputation, and had accumulated wealth, but lost the latter entirely in 1527, when Rome was taken by the Spanish army. After this misfortune he retired to Bologna, where perhaps he died, but when is not known. The last print we have of his is dated 1539, after which he cannot be traced with certainty. Strutt considers him as one of the most extraordinary engravers that ever lived. The purity of his outlines, the correctness with which the extremities of his figures are marked, and the beauty and character which appear in the heads, prove him to have been a man of great taste and solid judgment, as well as a perfect master of drawing. These beauties, without doubt, appear most striking in his works from Raphael, a circumstance which seemsr greatly to confirm the report of his being much assisted by that great master. Strutt has given a list of the best of Marc Antonio’s prints, which however are rarely to be met with in their original state.

e married Rebecca Allen, daughter of the rev. David Allen, rector of Ludbrough, a very learned lady, who had been successfully taught Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, by her

, a pious and exemplary bishop of Carlisle, was born April 20, 1608, at Bliton, a village in Lincolnshire near Gainsborough. His father, Thomas, was at this time rector of Bliton, and afterwards of Wintringham in the same county; both which preferments he owed to the Wrays of Glentworth. He married Rebecca Allen, daughter of the rev. David Allen, rector of Ludbrough, a very learned lady, who had been successfully taught Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, by her father. Under such parents he had the advantage of a religious as well as learned education. For the latter purpose he was sent first to Fillingham, and next, in 16 19, to the public school of Gainsborough, whence, in April 1620, he was removed to Peterborough in Northamptonshire, and put under the tuition of Dr. John Williams, afterwards archbishop of York, but then a prebendary of Peterborough, and a good friend of old Mr. Rainbow. In order to have the farther advantage of this gentleman’s protection, he was sent, in June 1621, to Westminster school, Dr. Williams being then dean of Westminster. In all these places his progress was marked by great diligence and proficiency in his studies, and a conduct which did credit to the instructions of his parents.

ambridge, in order to enjoy one of the scholarships then founded by the countess dowager of Warwick, who herself nominated him to the same. In 1627 he took his degree

In July 1623, he was entered of Corpus Christi college, Oxford, of which his elder brother was now a member, and afterwards died a fellow. Here he remained until June 1, 1625, when he removed to Magdalen college, Cambridge, in order to enjoy one of the scholarships then founded by the countess dowager of Warwick, who herself nominated him to the same. In 1627 he took his degree of B. A. and that of M. A. in 1630, and soon after was appointed by the great patron, of his family, sir John Wray, to be master of the free-school at Kirton, three or four miles from Bliton, his native place. Hi* testimonials from the university proved that he was more than sufficient foe this situation. He had indeed, while at college, distinguished himself on one or two occasions by an uncommon display of talent, particularly when the Tripos delivered a scurrilous speech, and being interrupted, Mr. Rainbow was ordered, without any preparation, to take his place. On this occasion he delivered an extempore speech with so much delicacy of wit, and chastened satire, as to receive universal approbation.

re too, as in the case of the tripos, he was suddenly called upon to supply the place of a gentleman who was unexpectedly absent, and acquitted himself with great credit,

Kirton school; to which he had now removed, was never much to his liking, and he therefore soon left it, and came to London. When he was admitted to orders does not appear, but we first hear of his preaching at Glentworth in 1632. In London he first took up his residence in Eulier’s Rents, but in three months removed to Sion college for the sake of the library there. He also became a candidate for the preachership of Lincoln’s-inn, but was not successful. In June of that year, however, he was appointed curate at the Savoy, and being invited back to his college by Dr. Smith the master, and some others of the society, he was, in 1634, admitted to a fellowship. After his return to the university, he appears to have resided occasionally, or for some stated time, annually, at London, where, in the year above mentioned, he preached one sermon, printed at the request of his friends, and another in 1639 hut it was at the university that his sermons were most admired, and his hearers most numerous. Here too, as in the case of the tripos, he was suddenly called upon to supply the place of a gentleman who was unexpectedly absent, and acquitted himself with great credit, in an extempore discourse. He does not, however, appear to have reviewed his early sermons with much pleasure, finding that he had indulged too much in a declamatory kind of style, which he did not think becoming in such compositions, nor to be preferred to the plain exposition of the doctrinal parts of the Holy Scriptures. With the same conscientious feeling, when he became a college tutor in 1635, he added to other branches of instruction, a knowledge of the foundation and superstructure of religion and so acceptable was his mode of teaching, that the master of the college recommended to his care, the sons of some noblemen, particularly Theophilus earl of Suffolk. In 1639, he was chosen dean of his college, and the following year attended James earl of Suffolk, son to Theophilus, to the Long parliament. In 1642, on the death of Dr. Smith, he was elected master of Magdalen college, with the concurrence of the earl. In 1646 he took his degree of D. D. and chose for the subject of his thesis a defence of the principles of the church of England, as containing every thing necessary to salvation. For some time he does not appear to have been molested for this attempt to support a church which the majority were endeavouring to pull down. In 1650, however, when he refused to sign a protestation Against the king, he was deprived of the mastership, which he was very willing to give up rather than comply with the party in power. His steady friend, however, the earl of Suffolk, gave him the small living of Little Chesterford near Audley Inn in Essex, in 1652, but this he held only by his lordship’s presentation, as he determined never to submit to an examination by the republican triers, as they were called.

20, 1760. He received the first rudiments of his education under his father, the rev. Matthew Raine, who was for many years a schoolmaster of ability and reputation

, an eminent scholar and teacher, was born May 20, 1760. He received the first rudiments of his education under his father, the rev. Matthew Raine, who was for many years a schoolmaster of ability and reputation at Hackforth near Richmond in Yorkshire. In June 1772, he was admitted on the foundation of the Charter-house, to which he was nominated by the king at the request of lord Holderness. After distinguishing himself, as a boy, he was elected, in 1778, to a Charter-house exhibition at Trinity college, Cambridge, of which he became a fellow in 1783, having taken the degree of B. A. in 1782. He engaged for some time in tuition at the university, and had several distinguished pupils. In 1791, he was elected schoolmaster of the Charter-house, his only opponent being Charles Burney, D. D. whose talents as a scholar were even then generally acknowledged, and are now perhaps unrivalled.

is twenty-seventh year, we find him opposing the giving the degree of D. D. to Corrano (See Corrano) who was suspected of being unsound in certain doctrinal points.

A story is told by Fuller and others, that Mr- Rainolds was at first a zealous papist, and his brother William a professed protestant; but that having frequently disputed together, the issue was a change* of principles on both sides, John becoming a zealous protestant, and William a papist. As no time is specified when this change took place, we may be permitted to entertain some doubts of its authenticity. John Rainolds entered the university at a very early age, and at a time when the reformed religion was so fully established and guarded there, that had he been a zealous papist, he could not have escaped censure but of this nothing is upon record on the contrary, his first public appearances were all in support of the doctrines of the reformation, and his established character appears to have given great weight to his opinions on matters in dispute at Oxford. In 1576, when he was only in his twenty-seventh year, we find him opposing the giving the degree of D. D. to Corrano (See Corrano) who was suspected of being unsound in certain doctrinal points. Wood has preserved a long letter of his on this subject, which shows him well versed in religious controversy, and decidedly for the doctrines of the reformers.

ignity was not conferred upon him until 1593, (not 1598 as Wood says). It was the gift of the queen, who was much pleased with the report of his services in opposing

In June 1579, he took the degree of bachelor of divinity, and in June 1585 that of doctor, and on both occasions maintained theses which had for their subject, the defence of the church of England in her separation from that of Rome. This was a point which he had carefully studied by a perusal of ecclesiastical records and histories. He held also a controversy with Hart, a champion for popery and on this, as well as well as every other occasiqn, acquitted himself with so much ability, that in 1586, when a new divinity lecture watf founded at Oxford by sir Francis Walsingham, principal secretary of state, he desired that Dr. Rainolds might be the first lecturer, and he was accordingly chosen. Wood and Collier, whose prejudices against the reformation are sometimes but thinly disguised, represent the design of the founder and of others in the university with whom he consulted, as being “to make the difference between the churches wide enough”-*-“to make the religion of the church of Rome more odious, and the difference betwixt them and the protestants to appear more irreconcileable,” &c. The intention, however, plainly was, to counteract the industry of the popish party in propagating their opinions and seducing the students of the university, in which they were too frequently successful. And Wood allows that the founder o? this lecture, “that he might not fail of his purpose to rout the papists and their religion,” could not have chosen a fitter person, for Rainolds was a man of infinite reading, and of a vast memory. He accordingly read this lecture in the divinity school thrice a week in full term, and had a crowded auditory. Wood says erroneously, that when appointed to this lecture he was dean of Lincoln; but this dignity was not conferred upon him until 1593, (not 1598 as Wood says). It was the gift of the queen, who was much pleased with the report of his services in opposing popery, and offered him a bishopric but he preferred a college life, where he thought he could do most good by training up a race of defenders of the reformation, a measure then of great importance. That he might have no temptation to relax in this care, he, in 1598, exchanged the deanery of Lincoln for the presidentship of Corpus Christ! college, and was elected Dec. 11 of that year, and soon after removed to the president’s lodgings at Corpus, from some chambers which he had been allowed in Queen’s college. To Corpus Christ! he became an eminent benefactor by restoring their finances, which had been impoverished by the neglect or avarice of some of his predecessors, at the same time that he made more effectual provision for the scholars, chaplains, and clerks, that he might retain in college such as were useful. He also repaired the chapel, hall, and library; but his more particular attention was paid to the rules of discipline, and the proficiency of the students in learning and religion.

ters of correction, and anno 1584 and 1589, not in matters of instance, but to be done only by them, who had the power of the keys.” He then desired, that according

In 1603, when the Hampton-court conference took place, we find him ranged on the puritan side; on this occasion, he was their spokesman, and it may therefore be necessary to give some account of what he proposed, as this will enable the reader in some measure to determine how far the puritans of the following reign can claim him as their ancestor. At this conference, he proposed, 1. “That the Doctrine of the Church might be preserved in purity, according to God’s word.” 2. “That good Pastors might be planted in all churches to preach the same.” 3. “That the Church*government might be sincerely ministred according to God’s word.” 4. “That the book of Common Prayer might be fitted to the more increase of Piety.” With regard to the first he moved his majesty, that the book of “Articles of Religion” concluded in 1562, might be explained in places obscure, and enlarged where some things were defective. For example, whereas Art. 16, the words are these, “After we have received the Holy Ghost, we may depart from Grace;” notwithstanding the meaning may be sound, yet he desired, that because they may seem to be contrary to the doctrine of God’s Predestination and Election in the 17th Article, both these words might be explained with this or the like addition, “yet neither totally nor finally v and also that the nine assertions orthodoxall, as he termed them, i. e. the Lambeth articles, might be inserted into that book of articles. Secondly, where it is said in the 23d Article, that it is not lawful for any man to take upon him the office of preaching or administering the Sacraments” in the. congregation,“before he be. lawfully called, Dr. Rainolds took exception to these words,” in the congregation,“as implying a lawfulness for any whatsoever, * 4 out of the congregation,” to preach and administer the Sacraments, though he had no lawful calling thereunto. Thirdly, in the 25th Article, these words touching “Confirmation, grown partly of the corrupt following the Apostles,” being opposite to those in the collect of Confirmation in the Communion-book, “upon whom after the example of the Apostles,” argue, said he, a contrariety each to other; the first confessing confirmation to be a depraved imitation of the Apostles; the second grounding it upon their example, Acts viii. 19, as if the bishop by confirming of children, did by imposing of hands, as the Apostles in those places, give the visible Graces of the Holy Ghost. And therefore he desired, that both the contradiction might be considered, and this ground of Confirmation examined. Dr. Rainolds afterwards objected to a defect in the 37th Article, wherein, he said, these words, “The Bishop of Rome hath no authority in this land,” were not sufficient, unless it were added, “nor ought to have.” He next moved, that this proposition, “the intention of the minister is not of the essence of the Sacrament,” might be added to the book of Articles, the rather because some in England had preached it to be essential. And here again he repeated his request concerning the nine “orthodoxall assertions” concluded at Lambeth. He then complained, that the Catechism in the Common-Prayer-book was too brief; for which/reason one by Nowel, late dean of St. Paul’s, was added, and that too long for young novices to learn by heart. He requested, therefore, that one uniform Catechism might be made, which, and none other, might be generally received. He next took notice of the profanation of the Sabbath, and the contempt of his majesty’s proclamation for reforming that abuse; and desired some stronger remedy might be applied. His next request was for a new translation of the Bible, because those which were allowed in the reign of Henry VIII. and Edward VI. were corrupt and not answerable to the original of which he gave three instances. He then desired his majesty, that unlawful and seditious books might be suppressed, at least restrained, and imparted to a few. He proceeded now to the second point, and desired that learned ministers might be planted in every parish. He next went on to the fourth point relating to the Common -Prayer, and jcomplained of the imposing Subscription, since it was a great impediment to a learned ministry; and in treated, that “it might not be exacted as formerly, for which many good men were kept ont, others removed, and many disquieted. To subscribe according to the statutes of the realm, namely, to the articles of religion, and the king’s supremacy, they were not unwilling. Their reason of their backwardness to subscribe otherwise was, first, the books Apocryphal, which the Common-Prayer enjoined to be read in the church, albeit there are, in some of those chapters appointed, manifest errors, directly repugnant to tjie scriptures. . The next scruple against subscription was, that in the Common-Prayer it is twice set down, ‘Jesus said to his Disciples,’ when as by the text original it is plain, that he spake to the Pharisees. The third objection against subscription were ‘ Interrogatories in Baptism,’ propounded to infants.” Dr. Rainolds owned “the use of the Cross to have been ever since the Apostles time; but this was the difficulty, to prove it of that ancient use in Baptism.” He afterwards took exceptions at those words in the Office of Matrimony, “With my body I thee worship” and objected against the churching of women by the name of Purification. Under the third general head touching Discipline he took exception to the committing of ecclesiastical censures to lay-chancellors. “His reason was, that the statute made in king Henry’s time for their authority that way was abrogated in queen Mary’s time, and not revived in the late queen’s days, and abridged by the bishops themselves, 1571, ordering that the said lay-chancellors should not excommunicate in matters of correction, and anno 1584 and 1589, not in matters of instance, but to be done only by them, who had the power of the keys.” He then desired, that according to certain provincial constitutions, they of the clergy might have meetings once every three weeks first, in rural deaneries, and therein to have the liberty of prophesying, according as archbishop Grindal and other bishops desired of her late majesty. Secondly, that such things, as could not be resolved upon there, might be referred from thence to the episcopal synods, where the bishop with his Presbyteri should determine all such points as before could not be decided. Notwithstanding our author’s conduct at this conference, Dr. Simon Patrick observes, that he professed himself a conformist to the church of England, and died so. He remarks, that Dr. Richard Crakanthorp tells the archbishop of Spalato, that the doctor was no Puritan (as the archbishop called him). “For, first, be professed, that he appeared unwillingly in the cause at Hampton-court, and merely in obedience to the king’s command. And then he spoke not one word there against the hierarchy. Nay, he acknowledged it to be consonant to the word of God in his conference with Hart. And in an answer to Sanders’ s book of the ‘ Schism of England 7 (which is in the archbishop’s library) he professes, that he approves of the book of * consecrating and ordering bishops, priests, and deacons.’ He was also a strict observer of all the orders of the church and university both in public and his own college; wearing tbte square cap and surplice, kneeling at the Sacrament, and he himself commemorating their benefactors at the times their statutes appointed, and reading that chapter of Ecclesiasticus, which is on such occasions used. In a letter also of his to archbishop Bancroft (then in Dr. Crakanthorp’s hands), he professes himself conformable to the church of England, ‘ willingly and from his heart,’ his conscience admonishing him so to be. And thus he remained persuaded to his last breath, desiring to receive absolution according to the manner prescribed in our liturgy, when he lay on his death-bed which he did from Dr. Holland, the king’s professor in Oxford, kissing his hand in token of his love and joy, and within a few hours after resigned up his soul to God.

fter his death that on Jlaggai was published during the rebellion to enlist him on the side of those who were enemies to the church establishment, to which he ever appears

It must not be forgotten that this year died Dr. John Rainolds, president of Corpus, Christi college, one of so prodigious a memory that he might have been called a walking library; of so virtuous and holy life and conversation (as writers say) that he very well deserved to be redlettered so eminent and conspicuous, that as Nazianzen, speaketh of Athanasius, it might be said of him 'to name Rainolds is to commend virtue itself. 7 He had turned over (as I conceive) all writers, profane, ecclesiastical and divine, all the councils, fathers, and histories of the church. He was most excellent in all tongues which might be any way of use, or serve for ornament to a divine. He was of a sharp and nimble wit, of a grave and mature judgment, of indefatigable industry, exceeding therein Origen surnamed Adamantius. He was so well seen in all arts and sciences, as if he had speiit his whole time in each of them. Eminent also was he accounted for his conference had with king James and others at Hampton Court, though wronged by the publisher thereof, as he was often heard to say. A person also so much respected by the generality of the academicians for his learning and piety, that happy and honoured did they account themselves that could have discourse with him. At times of leisure he delighted much to talk with young towardly scholars, communicating his wisdom to the encouraging them in their studies, even to the last; A little before his death, when he could not do such good offices, he ordered his executors to have his books (except those he gave to his college and certain great persons), to be dispersed among them. There was no house of learning then in. Oxford, but certain scholars of each (some to the number of twenty, some less,) received of his bounty in that kind, as a catalogue of them (with the names of the said scholars) which I have lying by me sheweth.” This catalogue Wood prints in a note. It records the dispersion of a very considerable library among the students of the different colleges, to the amount of two hundred and eighty, many of whom became afterwards men of great eminence in the church. He also bequeathed some books to the Bodleian, and some to his relations. He was interred with great solemnity in the chapel of Corpus Christi college, where a monument was erected to his memory by his successor in the presidentship, Dr. Spenser, with the following inscription “Virtuti sacrum. Jo. Rainoldo S. Theol. D. eruditione, pietate, integritate incomparabile, hujus Coll. Pxaeses, qui obiit, c. Jo. Spenser auditor, successor, virtutum et sanctitatisadmirator H. M. amoris ergaposuit.” Dr. Rainolds wrote some controversial works published in his life-time, enumerated by Wood, and sermons on the prophecies of Obadiah and Haggai, which with some other pieces appeared after his death that on Jlaggai was published during the rebellion to enlist him on the side of those who were enemies to the church establishment, to which he ever appears to have been attached; although he may be ranked among doctrinal puritans. Motives for publication like these throw an air of suspicion upon the works, and incline us to doubt whether they now appear as he left them.

iscredited by Wood and Dodd gives farther reason to question it, on the authority of father Parsons, who was tokl by Rainolds himself, that his first doubts on the subject

His brother, William Rainolds, above mentioned, was educated in Winchester school, and became fellow of New college in 1562. The story of his turning Roman Catholic in consequence of a dispute with his brother John, seems discredited by Wood and Dodd gives farther reason to question it, on the authority of father Parsons, who was tokl by Rainolds himself, that his first doubts on the subject were occasioned by perusing Jewell’s Works, and examining the authors quoted by that learned prelate. It is certain, however, that he left a benefice he had in Northamptonshire, and went to Rheims, where he could have the free exercise of his adopted religion, and was made professor of divinity and Hebrew. At last he returned to Antwerp, where he died in 1594. He wrote against Whitaker, and other works in the popish controversy. Two letters to him are printed with his brother John’s “Orationes,” Oxon. 16 14, 1628, 4to. There was a third brother, Edmund, educated at Corpus college, Oxford, who was ejected for popery in 1568. Dodd thinks the converting conference between the brothers was more likely to have been held between this Edmund and John, than between William and John. Edmund died in 1630, and was buried at Wolvercote, near Oxford, where he had an estate, and probably lived in privacy.

as at the battle of Rimenant, fought on Aug. 1. The following year, 1579, when sir Humphrey Gilbert, who was his brother by his mother’s side, had obtained a patent

, or Raleigh, or'Rawlegh, an illustrious Englishman, was the fourth son, and the second by a third wife, of Walter Ralegh, esq. of Fardel, near Plymouth. His father was of an ancient knightly family, and his mother was Catharine, daughter of sir Philip Champernoun, of Modbury in Devonshire, relict of Otho Gilbert, of Compton, the father, by her, of sir Humphrey Gilbert, the celebrated navigator. Mr. Ralegh, upon his marriage with this lady, had retired to a farm called Hayes, in the parish of Budiey, where sir Walter was born in 1552. After a proper education at school, he was sent to Oriel college, Oxford, about 1568, where he soon distinguished himself by great force of natural parts, and an uncommon progress in academical learning but Wood is certainly mistaken in saying he stayed here three years for in 1569, when only seventeen, he formed one of the select troop of an hundred gentlemen whom queen Elizabeth permitted Henry Champernoun to transport to France, to assist the persecuted Protestants. Sir Walter appears to have been engaged for some years in military affairs, of which, however, we do not know the particulars. In 1575 or 1576, he was in London, exercising his poetical talents; for there is a commendatory poem by him prefixed, among others, to a satire called “The Steel Glass,” published by George Gascoigne, a poet of that age. This is dated from the Middle Temple, at which he then resided, but with no view of studying the law for he declared expressly, at his trial, that he had never studied it. On the contrary, his mind was still bent on military glory; and accordingly, in 1578, he went to the Netherlands, with the forces which were sent against the Spaniards, commanded by sir John Norris, and it is supposed he was at the battle of Rimenant, fought on Aug. 1. The following year, 1579, when sir Humphrey Gilbert, who was his brother by his mother’s side, had obtained a patent of the queen to plant and inhabit some Northern parts of America, he engaged in that adventure; but returned soon after, the attempt proving unsuccessful. In 1580, the pope having incited the Irish to rebellion, he had a captain’s commission under the lord deputy of Ireland, Arthur Grey, lord Grey de Wilton. Here he distinguished himself by his skill and bravery. In 1581, the earl of Ormond departing for England, his government of Munster was given to captain Ralegh, in commission with sir * William Morgan and captain Piers Ralegh resided chiefly at Lismore, and spent all this summer in the woods and country adjacent, in continual action with the rebels. At his return home, he was introduced to court, and, as Fuller relates, upon the following occasion. Her majesty, taking the air in a walk, stopped at a splashy place, in doubt whether to go on when Ralegh, dressed in a gay and genteel habit of those tirhes, immediately cast off and spread his new plush cloak on the ground n which her majesty gently treading, was conducted 6ver clean and dry. The truth is, Ralegh always made a very elegant appearance, as well in the splendor of attire, as the politeness of address; having a commanding figure, and a handsome and well-compacted person a strong natural wit, and a better judgment and that kind of courtly address which pleased Elizabeth, and led to herfaTOur. Such encouragement, however, did not reconcile hirn to an indolent life. In 1583 he set out with his brother sir H. Gilbert, in his expedition to Newfoundland but within a few days was obliged to return to Plymouth, his ship’s company -being seized with an infectious distemper and sir H. Gilbert was drowned in coming home, after he had taken possession of that country. These expeditions, however, being much to Ralegh’s taste, he still felt no discouragement; but in 1584 obtaining letters patent for discovering unknown countries, he set sail to America, and took possession of a place, to which queen Elizabeth gave the name of Virginia.

third. It was this colony of Virginia which first brought tobacco to England; and sir Walter Ralegh, who first introduced it into use. Queen Elizabeth had no objection

Upon his return, he was elected member of parliament for Devonshire, and soon after knighted; an honour (says his late biographer), which, from the sparing hand of that monarch, was- considered as high distinction. About this period, also, he was favoured by a licence to sell wines throughout the kingdom. In 1585, he appears several ways engaged in the laudable improvements of navigation; for, he was one of the colleagues of the fellowship for the discovery of the North-west passage. The same year, he sent his own fleet upon a second voyage to Virginia, and afterwards upon a third. It was this colony of Virginia which first brought tobacco to England; and sir Walter Ralegh, who first introduced it into use. Queen Elizabeth had no objection to it, as a valuable article of commerce but her successor, James I. held it in such abhorrence, as to use his utmost endeavours to explode the use of it. About the same time sir Walter was made seneschal of Cornwall and lord warden of the Stannaries.

ression of the rebellion in Munster, when the forfeited lands were divided in signories, among those who had been active in its reduction, he obtained a grant of 12,000

On 'the suppression of the rebellion in Munster, when the forfeited lands were divided in signories, among those who had been active in its reduction, he obtained a grant of 12,000 acres in the counties of Cork and Waterford which he planted at his own expence; and, at the end of this reign, sold to Richard Boyle, afterwards the great earl of Cork, who owned this purchase to have been the first step to his future vast fortune.

Sir Walter was now become such a favourite with the queen, that they who had at first been his friends at court began to be alarmed,

Sir Walter was now become such a favourite with the queen, that they who had at first been his friends at court began to be alarmed, and to intrigue against him, particularly the earl of Leicester, his former patron, who is said to have grawn jealous of his influence with her majesty, eind ta have set up, in opposition to him, Robert Devereux, the young earl of Essex. To this he appears to have paid little attention, but constantly attended his public charge and employments, whether in town or country, as occasion required. He was, in 1586, a member of that parliament which decided the fate of Mary queen of Scots, in which he probably concurred. But still speculating on the consequences of the discovery of Virginia, he sent three ships upon a fourth voyage thither, in 1587. In 1588 he sent another fleet, upon a fifth voyage, to Virginia and the same year took a brave part in the destruction of the Spanish armada, sent to invade England. About this time he made an assignment to divers gentlemen and merchants of London, of all his rights in the colony of Virginia. This assignment is dated March 7, 1588-9.

romulgatum Londini, Nov. 29, 1591; et Andr. Philopatris ad idem responsio.“In this piece the writer, who was the Jesuit Parsons, inveighs against sir Walter Ralegh’s”

In April 1589, he accompanied don Antonio, the expelled king of Portugal, then in London, to his dominions, when an armament was sent to restore him and for his conduct on this occasion, was honoured by the queen with a gold chain. On his return to England, the same year, he touched upon Ireland, where he visited Spenser the poet, whom he brought to England, introduced into the queen’s favour, and encouraged by his own patronage, himself being no inconsiderable poet. Spenser has described the circumstances of sir Walter’s visit to him in a pastoral, which about two years after he dedicated to him, and entitled <: Colin Clout’s come home again.“In 1592 he was appointed general of an expedition against the Spaniards at Panama. Soon after this we find him again in the House of Commons, where he made a distinguished figure, as appears from several of his printed speeches. In the mean time, he was no great favourite with the people, and somewhat obnoxious to the clergy, not only on account of his principles, which were not thought very orthodox, but because he possessed some lands which had been taken from the church. His enemies, knowing this, ventured to attack him; and, in 1593, he was aspersed with atheism, in a libel agairfst several ministers of state, printed at Lyons with this title:” Elizabeths Reginse Angliae Edictum, promulgatum Londini, Nov. 29, 1591; et Andr. Philopatris ad idem responsio.“In this piece the writer, who was the Jesuit Parsons, inveighs against sir Walter Ralegh’s” School of Atheism“insinuating, that he was not content with being a disciple, but had set up for a doctor in his faculty. Osborn accounts for this aspersion thus:” Ralegh,“says he,” was the first, as I have heard, who ventured to tack about, and sail aloof from the beaten track of the schools; and who, upon the discovery of so apparent an error as a: torrid zone, intended to proceed in an inquisition after more solid truths till the mediation of some, whose livelihood lay in hammering shrines for this superannuated study, possessed queen Elizabeth, that such a doctrine was against God no less than her father’s honour, whose faith, if he owned any, was grounded upon school-divinity. Whereupon she chid him, who was, by his own confession, ever after branded with the title of Atheist, though a known asserter of God and providence." That he was such an assert er, has been universally allowed yet Wood not only adopts the unfavourable opinion of his principles, but pretends to tell us from whom he imbibed them.

n Mr. Cayley’s late “Life of Ralegh.” His second attempt on Guiana was conducted by Lawrence Keymis, who sailed in Jan. 1596, and returned in June following. An account

About the same time, 1593, Ralegh had an illicit amour with a beautiful young lady, Elizabeth, daughter of sir Nicolas Throgmorton, an able statesman and ambassador which so offended the queen, that they were both confined for several months and, when set at liberty, forbidden the court. Sir Walter afterwards made the most honourable reparation he could, by marrying the object of his affection; and he always lived with her in the strictest conjugal harmony. The next year he was so entirely restored to the queen’s favour, that he obtained a grant from her majesty of the manor of Sherborne, in Dorsetshire, which had been alienated from the see of Salisbury by bishop Caldwell, and was doubtless one of those church- lands, for accepting which he was censured, as mentioned above. During his disgrace he projected the discovery and conquest of the large, rich, and beautiful empire of Guiana, in South America; and, sending first an old experienced officer to collect information concerning it, he went thither himself jn 1595, destroyed the city of San Joseph, and took the Spanish governor. Upon his return, he mote a discourse t)f his discoveries in Guiana, which was printed in 1596, 4to, and afterwards inserted in the third volume of Hakluyt’s voyages, in Birch’s works of Ralegh, and in Mr. Cayley’s late “Life of Ralegh.” His second attempt on Guiana was conducted by Lawrence Keymis, who sailed in Jan. 1596, and returned in June following. An account of this also is to be found in Hakluyt. The same year, sir Walter had a chief command in the Cadiz action, under the earl of Essex, in which he took a very able and gallant part. In the “Island Voyage,” in 1597, which was aimed principally at the Spanish plate-fleets, Ralegh was one of the principal leaders and would have been completely successful, had he not been thwarted by the jealousy and presumption of Essex. This unhappy nobleman’s misfortunes were now coming on and Ralegh, who had long been at variance with him, contributed to hasten his fall, particularly by a most disgraceful and vindictive letter which he wrote to sir Robert Cecil, to prevent his showing any lenity to Essex. Sir E. Brydges, who has lately reprinted this letter, in his elegant memoir of sir Walter Ralegh, observes, that it exhibits an awful lesson for “Ralegh, in this dreadful letter, is pressing forward for a rival that snare by which he afterwards perished himself. He urges Cecil to get rid of Essex! By that riddance he himself became no longer necessary to Cecil, as a counterppise to Essex’s power.” “Then, I have no doubt it was,” adds sir Egerton, “that Cecil, become an adept in the abominable lesson of this letter, and conscious of his minor talents, but more persevering cunning, resolved to disencumber himself of the ascendant abilities, and aspiring and dangerous ambition of Ralegh.” But whatever share \ftalegh had in defeating the designs of Essex, his sun set at queen Elizabeth’s death, which happened March 24, 1602-3.

sufficient to have incensed the king against Ralegh was, his joining with that party of Englishman, who, jealous of the concourse of Scotchmen who came to court, wished

Upon the accession of king James, he lost his interest at court; was stripped of his preferments, and even accused, tried, and condemned for high treason. Various causes have been assigned for this strange reverse of fortune. In the first place, it has been observed, that the earl of Essex, in his life-time, had prejudiced king James against him and, after the earl’s death, there were circumstances implying, that secretary Cecil had likewise been his secret enemy. For, though Cecil and Ralegh joined against Essex, yet, when he was overthrown, they divided; and when king James came to England, sir Walter presented to him a memorial, in which he reflected upon Cecil in the affair of Essex ', and, vindicating himself, threw the whole blame upon the other. He farther laid open, at the end of it, the conduct of Cecil concerning Mary queen of Scots, his majesty’s mother and charged the death of that unfortunate princess on him which, however, only irritated Cecil the more againstRalegh, without producingany efFecton the king. But, what seems alone sufficient to have incensed the king against Ralegh was, his joining with that party of Englishman, who, jealous of the concourse of Scotchmen who came to court, wished to restrict his majesty in the employment of these his countrymen. We are toid, however, that the king received him for some time with great kindness; but this time must have been short, for on July 6, 1603, he was examined before the lords of the council at Westminster, and returned thence a private prisoner to his own house. He was indicted at Staines, September 21, and not long after committed to the Tower of London; whence he was carried to Winchester, tried there November 17, and condemned to die. That there was something of a treasonable conspiracy, called “Ralegh’s plot,” against the king was generally believed yet it never was proved that he was engaged in it and perhaps the best means to prove his innocence may be found in the very trial upon which he was condemned; in which the barbarous partiality and foul language of the attorney-general Coke broke out so glaringly, that he was exposed for it, even upon the public theatre. After this, Ralegh was kept near a month at Winchester, in daily expectation of death; and that he expected nothing less, is plain from an excellent letter he wrote to his wife, which is printed among his Works.

bert Carr, afterwards earl of Somerset. Ralegh found a great friend in Henry, the king’s eldest son, who laboured to procure him his estate, and had nearly effected

He was however reprieved, and committed prisoner to the Tower of London, where he lay many years, his lady living with him, and bringing him a second son, named Carew, within the year. His estate was at first restored to him, but taken again, and given to the king’s minion Robert Carr, afterwards earl of Somerset. Ralegh found a great friend in Henry, the king’s eldest son, who laboured to procure him his estate, and had nearly effected it; but, that hopeful and discerning prince dying in 1612, all his views were at an end. The prince is reported to have said, that “no king but his father would keep such a bird in a cage.” During his confinement, he devoted the greatest part of his time to reading and writing, and indeed the productions, of his pen at this time are as many, a if original writing and compilation had been the whole pursuit of his life. His writings have been divided into poetical, epistolary, military, maritimal, geographical, political, philosophical, and historical. But, however excellent these miscellanies are allowed by others to be written, he considered them as trivial amusements compared to his grand work “The History of the World;” the first volume of which was published in 1614, folio, and extends to the end of the Macedonian empire. As to a report respecting the second volume of this history, which, it is said, he burned because the first had sold so slowly that it had ruined his bookseller, it is scarcely worth notice; for it appears that there was a second edition of it printed by the same bookseller, within three years after the first. According to his own evidence, he had certainly planned a second and third volume; but was persuaded to lay them aside by the death of prince Henry, to whose use they were dedicated, and the course of his life afterwards left no room for a labour of this magnitude. Of the “History” it has been said, that the design was equal to the great-ness of his mind, and the execution to the strength of his parts, and the variety of his learning. His style is pure, nervous and majestic; and much better suited to the dignity of history, than that of lord Bacon. Ralegh seems to have written for posterity, Bacon for the reign of James I. This admirable work of Ralegh has been thought a just model for the reformation of our language, yet is now little read or consulted.

t he was offered a formal pardon for Too/, but this he declined, by the sdvice of sir Francis Bacon, who said, “Sir, the knee-timber of your voyage is money. Spare your

Some have fancied, that the merit of this work procured his releasement from the Tower; but there seems little foundation for that opinion, since king James is known to have expressed some dislike to it. It is more likely that the king’s hopes from the mine-adventure to Guiana produced this effect; and accordingly we find sir Walter at large, after twelve years confinement, in March 1616. In August he received a commission from the king to go and explore the golden mines at Guiana. It is said that he was offered a formal pardon for Too/, but this he declined, by the sdvice of sir Francis Bacon, who said, “Sir, the knee-timber of your voyage is money. Spare your purse in this particular; for upon my life you have a sufficient pardon for all that is past already the king having, under his broad seal, made you admiral of your fleet, and given you power of martial law over your officers and soldiers.” Sir Walter set off from Plymouth July 1617 but his design, being by some secret means betrayed to the Spaniards, was defeated and, his eldest son Walter being killed by the Spaniards at St. /Thome, the town was burnt by captain Keymis, who, being reproached by Sir Walter for his ill conduct in this affair, committed suicide. On this, the Spanish ambassador Gundomar making heavy complaints to the king, as if the peace had been broken between Britain and Spain, a proclamation was published immediately against Ralegh and his proceedings, threatening punishment in an exemplary manner. Notwithstanding this, Ralegh, who landed at Plymouth in July 1618, and heard that the court was exasperated by the Spanish ambassador, firmly resolved to go to London. In this, however, he was anticipated by being arrested on his journey thither and finding, as he approached, that no apology could save him, repented of not having made his escape while he had it in his power. He attempted it indeed after ie was confined in the Tower, but was seized in a boat upon the Thames. It was found, however, that his life could not be touched for any thing which had been done at Guiana: therefore a privy seal was sent to the judges, forthwith to order execution, in consequence of his former attainder.

xt day, Thursday Oct. 29, 1618, in Old Palace-yard, when he suffered with great magnanimity. To some who deplored his misfortunes, he observed, that “the world itself

This manner of proceeding was thought extrajudicial at first; but at length he was brought, October 28, to the king’s bench bar at Westminster, and there asked, if he could say any thing why execution should not be awarded? To this he said, that “he hoped the judgment he received to die so long since could not now be strained to take away his life; since, by his majesty’s commission for his late voyage, it was implied to be restored, in giving him power as marshal upon the life and death of others:” repeating the words of sir Francis Bacon. Notwithstanding this, sentence of death was passed upon him; and he was beheaded the next day, Thursday Oct. 29, 1618, in Old Palace-yard, when he suffered with great magnanimity. To some who deplored his misfortunes, he observed, that “the world itself is but a larger prison, out of which some are daily selected for execution.” When brought up for sentence, he had an ague fit, to which he now alluded, when on the scaffold, informing the spectators, that as he was the day before taken out of his bed in a strong fit of a fever, which much weakened him, if any disability of voice or dejection of countenance should appear in him, they would impute it rather to the disorder of his body than any dismayedness of mind. He concludes his speech with these words “And now I intreat, that you will all join with me in prayer to the great God of Heaven, whom I have grievously offended, being a man full of all vanity, who has lived a sinful life in such callings as have been most inducing to it; for I have been a soldier, a sailor, and a courtier, which are courses of wickedness and vice that his Almighty Goodness will forgive me; that he will cast away my sins from me, and that he will receive me into everlasting life. So I take my leave of you all, making my peace with God.

e scaffold, he prepared himself for death, giving away his hat and cap and money to some attendants, who stood near him. When he took leave of the lords and other gentlemen,

The mode of his execution is thus related “Proclamation being made, that all men should depart the scaffold, he prepared himself for death, giving away his hat and cap and money to some attendants, who stood near him. When he took leave of the lords and other gentlemen, he intreated the lord Arundel to desire the king, that no scandalous writings to defame him might be published after his death; concluding, ‘I have a long journey to go; therefore must take leave.’ Then having put off his gown and doublet, he called to the headsman to shew him the axe which not being suddenly done, he said, ‘ I pr’ythee let me see it dost thou think that I am afraid of it?‘ Having fingered the edge of it a little, he returned it, and said smiling to the sheriff, ’ This is a sharp medicine, but it is a sound cure for all diseases’ and having intreated the company to pray to God to assist him and strengthen him, the executioner kneeled down and asked him forgiveness, which Ralegh, laying his hand upon his shoulder, granted. Then being asked, which way he would lay himself on the block, he answered, * So the heart be right, it is no matter which way the head lies.' - As he stooped to lay himself along, and reclined his head, his face being towards the east, the executioner spread his own cloak under him. After a little pause, he gave the sign, that he was ready for the stroke, by lifting up his hand, and his head was struck off at two blows, his body never shrinking nor moving. His head was shewed on each side of the scaffold, and then being put into a red leather bag, with his velvet night-gown thrown over it, was afterwards conveyed away in a mourning coach of his lady’s. His body was interred in St. Margaret’s Westminster; but his head was preserved by his family many years. The sacrificing such a man to the will of the court of Spain, a power detestable for the attempt of the armada, and contemptible by its defeat, has ever since been mentioned with general indignation. Burnet, speaking of certain errors in James I.'s reign, proceeds thus:” Besides these public actings, king James suffered much in the opinion of all people, by his strange way of using one of the greatest men of that age, sir Walter Ralegh; against whom the proceedings at first were censured, but the last part of them was thought both barbarous and illegal.“Arid a little farther:” the first condemnation of him was very black; but the executing him after so many years, and after an employment that had been given him, was counted a barbarous sacrificing him to the Spaniards."

But that the pleasure of Spain, and that only, was the cause, was confessed by one of the ministers, who wrote to Cottingham, our agent then in Spain, desiring him to

Sir Walter’s death gave such disgust to the people, that the king published a declaration, in justification of the measure, which only increased the odium naturally generated by such highly disgraceful acts. But that the pleasure of Spain, and that only, was the cause, was confessed by one of the ministers, who wrote to Cottingham, our agent then in Spain, desiring him to represent to that court, “in how many actions of late, his majesty had strained upon the affections of his people, and especially in this last concerning sir Walter Ralegh,” whose character Cottingham was likewise desired to magnify, that Spain might see at what price James was willing to purchase her favour.

sed for his restoration, a pension of 400l. a year was granted to him after the death of his mother, who had that sum paid during life in lieu of her jointure. About

His son, Carew, incidentally noticed above, was born in the Tower of London, in 1604, and was edupated at Wadham college, Oxford, After spending five years in the university he went to court; but meeting with no encouragement there, his friend, the earl of Pembroke, advised him to travel, as he did till the death of James, which happened about a year after. On his return he petitioned Parliament to restore him in blood; but, while this was under consideration, the king sent for him, and told him that he had promised to secure the manor of Sherborn to the lord Digby, it having been given by king James to that nobleman on the disgrace of Carr earl of Somerset. Mr. Ralegh, therefore, was under the necessity of complying with the royal pleasure, and to give up his inheritance. On this submission an act was passed for his restoration, a pension of 400l. a year was granted to him after the death of his mother, who had that sum paid during life in lieu of her jointure. About a year after this he married the widow *of sir Anthony Ashley, by whom he had two sons and three daughters, and soon after he was made one of the gentlemen of the king’s privy chamber. In 1645 he wrote a vindication of his father against some misrepresentations which Mr. James Howel had made relative to the mine-affair of Guiana. After the death of the king he again applied to Parliament for a restoration of his estate; but was not successful, although he published, in order to enforce the necessity of his claim, “A brief relation of sir Walter Ralegh’s Troubles.” In 1656 he printed his *' Observations on Sanderson’s History of king James," which were replied to by that historian with considerable asperity. In 1659, by the favour of General Monk, Mr. Ralegh was appointed governor of Jersey. King Charles II. would have conferred some mark of favour upon him, but he declined it. His son Walter, however, received the honour of knighthood from that monarch. Mr. Ralegh died in 1666, and was buried in his father’s grave at St. Margaret’s, Westminster. Anthony Wood says that he had seen some sonnets of his composition, and certain ingenious discourses in ms.

e favour of continuing prisoner in his own house. But as soon as the generals marched, Henry Jeanes, who was solicitous for his rectory of Chedzoy, and afterwards succeeded

, an eminent English divine in the seventeenth century, was second son of sir Carew Ralegh (elder brother of the celebrated sir Walter Ralegh.) His mother was relict of sir John Thynne, of Longleate, in Wiltshire, and daughter of sir William Wroughton, viceadmiral under sir John Dudley (afterwards duke of Northumberland) in the expedition against the Scots in 1544. He was born at Downton, in Wiltshire, in 1586, and educated in Winchester-school, whence he was sent to Magdalen college, Oxford, of which he became a commoner in Michaelmas term, 1602. In June 1605, he took the degree of B. A. and in June 1608, that of master and being a noted disputant, was made junior of the public act the same year, in which he distinguished himself to great advantage. About that time he entered into holy orders, and became chaplain to William earl of Pembroke, in whose family he spent about two years, when he was collated by his lordship to the rectory of Chedzoy, near Bridgewater, in Somersetshire, in the latter end of 1620. Being settled here, he married Mary, the daughter of sir Richard Gibbs, and sister of Dr. Charles Gibbs, prebendary of Westminster. He was afterwards collated to a minor prebend in the church of Wells, and to the rectory of Streat, with the chapel of Walton in Wiltshire. About the time of the death of his patron, the earl of Pembroke, which happened in 1630, he became chaplain in ordinary to king Charles I, and by that title was created D. D. in 1636. January the 13th, 1641, he was admitted dean of Wells on the death of Dr. George Warburton. During the rebellion he was sequestered on account of his loyalty, and afterwards treated with the utmost barbarity. It being his month to wait on the king as his chaplain, the committee of Somersetshire raised the rabble, and commissioned the soldiers to plunder his parsonage-house at Chedzoy and in his absence they seized upon all his estate spiritual and temporal, drove away his cattle and horses, which they found upon his ground, and turned his family out of doors. His lady was forced to lie two nights in the corn-fields, it being a capital crime for any of the parishioners to afford them lodging. After this she went to Downton, in Wiltshire, the seat of sir Carew Ralegh, where her husband met her. The king’s party having had some success in the West, Dr. Ralegh had an opportunity to return to his family, and resettle at Chedzoy but the parliament party soon gained the ascendant by the defeat of the lord Goring, and he was obliged to take refuge at Bridgewater, then garrisoned by the king. Here he continued till that town was surrendered to Fairfax and Cromwell, when he was taken prisoner, and after much severe usage set upon a poor horse, with his legs tied under the belly of it, and so carried to his house at Chedzoy, which was then the head -quarters of Fairfax and Cromwell and being extremely sick through his former ill treatment, obtained the favour of continuing prisoner in his own house. But as soon as the generals marched, Henry Jeanes, who was solicitous for his rectory of Chedzoy, and afterwards succeeded him in it, entered violently into the house, took the doctor out of his bed, and carried him away prisoner with all his goods. His wife and children were exposed to such necessities, that they must have perished if colonel Ash. had not procured them the income of some small tenements, which the doctor had purchased at Chedzoy, After this Dr. Ralegh wa& sent prisoner to Ilchester, the county-gaol; thence to Banwell-house, and thence to the house belonging to the deanery in Wells, which was turned into a gaol and here, while endeavouring to secrete a letter which he had written to his wife, from impertinent curiosity, he was stabbed by David Barrett, a shoe-maker of that city, who was his keeper, and died of the wound October 10, 1646, and was interred on the 13th of the same month before the dean’s stall, in the choir of the cathedral of Wells. His papers, after his death, such as could be preserved, continued for above thirty years in obscurity, till at last coming into the hands of Dr. Simon Patrick (afterwards bishop of Ely) he published them at London, 1679, in 4to, under this title: “Reliquiae Raleghanae, being Discourses and Sermons on several subjects, by the reverend Dr. Walter Ralegh, dean of Wells, and chaplain in ordinary to his late majesty king Charles the First.” This editor tells us, that “besides the quickness of his wit and ready elocution, he was master of a very strong reason which won him the familiarity and friendship of those great men -who were the envy of the last age, and the wonder of this, the lord Falkland, Dr. Hammond, and Mr. Chillingvvorth the last of which was wont to say (and no man was a better judge of it than himself) that Dr. Ralegh was the best disputant that ever he met withal; and indeed there is a very great acuteness easily to be observed in his writings, which would have appeared more if he had not been led, by the common vice of those times, to imitate too far a very eminent man (meaning, perhaps, bishop Andrews) rather than follow his own excellent genius.” He is said to have been a believer in the millenium, or reign of Christ on earth for a thousand years, and to have written a book on that subject, which is lost. In 1719 the rev. Lawrence Howell published at Lond. 8vo, “Certain Queries proposed by Roman catholics, and answered by Dr. Walter Ralegh,” &c. which appears to be authentic.

ast, from the Memoirs of Benjamin Franklin we learn that he became acquainted with that eminent man, who gives a favourable account of him, as being “ingenuous and shrewd,

, a political and poetical writer of considerable note, is said to have been descended of mean parentage, and was born probably in America. There at least, from the Memoirs of Benjamin Franklin we learn that he became acquainted with that eminent man, who gives a favourable account of him, as being “ingenuous and shrewd, genteel in his addre3, and extremely eloquent.” Franklin appears to have considered him, however, as a man who might be imposed on, and acknowledges “that he had a hand in unsettling his principles,” The first effect of this was Ralph’s leaving 1 a wife and children in America, in 1725, and regardless of what became of them, forming another female connexion, by marriage, as it would appear, soon after he arrived with Franklin in England, fie is also said to have assumed Franklin’s name for some time, until a quarrel dissolved their friendship, such as it was. In 1728 he published his “Night,” and in 1729, “Zeuma, or the Love of Liberty.

the subject of such messages. Nor indeed do his talents as a politician seem much inferior to those who employed him. He had like-r wise before this acquired considerable

At length he became an attendant on the “levees of great men,” and luckily applied himself to political writing, for which he was well qualified. When the duchess of Marlborough, about 1742, published memoirs of her life, Ralph was employed to write an answer, which he called “The other side of the question.” This, says Davies, was written with so much art, and made so interesting, by the author’s management, that it sold very well. His pamphlets and political papers at length appeared of so much importance^ that towards the latter end of the Walpole administration, it was thought proper to buy him off with an income. Whether his paper called “The Remembrancer,” recommended him to Doddington, lord Melcombe, or was written in consequence of his acquaintance with that statesman, does not appear but from Doddington’s celebrated (< Diary,“we learn that he was much in the confidence of the party assembled round the prince of Wales, and was not only constantly employed to carry messages and propositions to the leaders of the party, but was frequently, consulted as to the subject of such messages. Nor indeed do his talents as a politician seem much inferior to those who employed him. He had like-r wise before this acquired considerable fame by his” Use and Abuse of Parliaments,“174-4, 2 vols. 8vo, and still more by his” History of England, during the reign of William III.; with an introductory review of the reigns of Charles II. and James II.“1744 6, 2 vols. folio, written upon principles avowed by his party. This was always considered as an useful work. Ralph had read a great deal, and was very conversant in the history and politics of this country. He applied himself, with great assiduity, to the study of all writings upon party matters: and had collected a prodigious number of pamphlets relating to the contests of whig and tory, the essence of which he incorporated in his work so as to make it a fund of curious information and opinions, of which more regular historians might afterwards avail themselves. Mr. Fox, in his late” Historical Work,“pronounces him” an historian of great acuteness, as well as diligence, but who falls sometimes into the common error of judging too much from the event."

Notwithstanding his importance with his party, who, we may suppose, provided for him while he was of service to

Notwithstanding his importance with his party, who, we may suppose, provided for him while he was of service to them, his turn for the stage had not left him, and he was continually teazing Garrick (to whom he had been introduced by Doddington), to encourage him in his error. Garrick saw that he was not qualified to write for the stage, and was candid enough to tell him so. Davies also says that Garrick had so much friendship for him, that he prevailed upon the minister, Mr. Pelham, to settle a pension upon him. The editor of DoddingtoiVs “Diary” relates this in a different way. After some remarks on Doddington’s selfish motives, he adds, “But all this may be strictly honourable within the verge of a court and on this account, I could patiently hear his lordship recommend Mr. Ralph as a very honest man, and in the same pages inform us, that he was ready to be hired to any cause; that he actually put himself to auction to the two contending parties (the Bedford and Pelhams), and that, after several biddings, the honest Mr. Ralph was bought by the Pelhams.” If, however, Garrick was in any way the means of closing this bargain, Ralph soon forgot the obligation, and in his “Case of Authors by profession,” published in 1,758, conveys many insinuations against Garrick, as a manager. Garrick was so irritated, that he never spoke to him afterwards, nor would go into any company where there was a chance of meeting him.

e written by himself under the title of “The History of Prince Titi.” The late Dr. Rose of Chiswick, who was Ralph’s executor, gave up those papers to the earl of Bute,

On the death of George II. Ralph, according to Mr. Davies’s account, attained the summit of his wishes by the interest of the earl of Bute, a pension of 600l. per annum was bestowed upon him, but he did not live to receive above one half year’s income. A fit of the gout proved fatal to him at his house at Chiswick, Jan. 24, 1762. He died almost in the arms of lord Elibank and sir Gilbert Elliot, from whom Mr. Davies had this information. His character may be gathered from the preceding particulars. He left a daughter, to whom a pension of 150l. was granted in consequence of some papers found in her father’s possession, which belonged to the prince of Wales, and contained a history of his life, said to be written by himself under the title of “The History of Prince Titi.” The late Dr. Rose of Chiswick, who was Ralph’s executor, gave up those papers to the earl of Bute, and the pension was granted to Miss Ralph, who died, however, about a month after her father. It has been thought, with much probability, that “The History of Prince Titi” was the composition of Ralph himself. Besides the above daughter, he left a son, if we may rely on the following paragraph in all the papers of May 22, 1770, erroneous certainly in other particulars “Mr. Ralph, who died a few days since, was the son of that great historian. He enjoyed a pension of 150l. a year, which the late and present king settled on his father for writing the History of Scotland.

stor and Pollux“in 1754, after the victory obtained by his friends over the Italian burletta singers who had raised such disturbance by their performance of Pergolesi’s

The successful revival of his opera of tc Castor and Pollux“in 1754, after the victory obtained by his friends over the Italian burletta singers who had raised such disturbance by their performance of Pergolesi’s intermezzo, the” Serva Padrona,“was regarded as the most glorious event of his life. The partizans for the national honour could never hear it often enough.” This beautiful opera,“says M. de la Borde,” without any diminution in the applause or pleasure of the audience, supported a hundred representations, charming at once the soul, heart, mind, eyes, ears, and imagination of all Paris."

eath, in 1767, at eighty-four years of age, Rameau’s glory was complete. The royal academy of music, who all regarded themselves as his children, performed a solemn

From this sera to the time of his death, in 1767, at eighty-four years of age, Rameau’s glory was complete. The royal academy of music, who all regarded themselves as his children, performed a solemn service in the church of the oratory, at his funeral. And M. Philidor had a mass performed at the church of the Carmelites, in honour of a man whose talents he so much revered.

of his lead-mines. His mother, Alice Bower, was daughter of Allan Bower, a gentleman of Derbyshire, who, on account of his great skill in mining, had been invited by

, one of the extraordinary instances of the power of uncultivated genius, was born at Leadhills, Oct. 13, 1685. His father, John Ramsay, descended of the Rarnsays of Cockpen, an ancient and respectable family in Mid- Lothian, was factor to the earl of Hopeton, and superintendant of his lead-mines. His mother, Alice Bower, was daughter of Allan Bower, a gentleman of Derbyshire, who, on account of his great skill in mining, had been invited by sir James Hope of Hopeton to set his valuable mines in motion.

t soon produced a great number of other pieces upon the same musical plan. Amongst the rest, Ramsay, who had always been a great admirer of Gay, especially for his ballads,

Soon after the first edition, in octavo, of this pastoral was published, and about the time of the publication of his second volume in quarto, the “Beggar’s Opera” made its appearance, with such success that it soon produced a great number of other pieces upon the same musical plan. Amongst the rest, Ramsay, who had always been a great admirer of Gay, especially for his ballads, was so far car-r ried away by the current as to print a new edition of his pastoral, interspersed with songs adapted to the common Scotch tunes. He did not reflect at the time that the “Beggar’s Opera” was only meant as a piece of ironical satire, whereas his “Gentle Shepherd” was a simple imitation of nature, and neither a mimickry nor mockery of any other performance. He was soon, however, sensible of his error, and would have been glad to have retracted those songs; but it was too late; the public was already in possession of them, and as the number of singers is always greater than that of sound critics, the many editions since printed of that pastoral have been almost uniformly in this vitiated taste. He comforted himself, however, with the thought that the contagion had not infected his second volume in quarto, where the “Gentle Shepherd” is still to be found in its original purity.

To those who look upon poetry as an affair of labour and difficulty, it must

To those who look upon poetry as an affair of labour and difficulty, it must appear very strange that any man should compose so much of it, with so little view either to fame or profit. But the fact is, that writing verse cost Ramsay no trouble at all, and as it lightly came it lightly went. In the “Ever Green,” already mentioned, there is what is called a “Fragment of Hardiknnte,” of which almost one half made its first appearance in that publication. But this was a forgery which could not be supposed to lie very heavy upon his conscience, as he knew that the original “Fragment” so justly admired, was not of above ten or fifteen years greater antiquity than his own additions to it. For it had been ushered into the world by a lady Wardlaw, who produced it, by two or three stanzas at a time, saying she had taken them down in writing from an old woman, who sung them while she was spinning at her distaff. But as lady Wardlaw had given sufficient proofs of her poetical genius, by several smaller compositions, and as this spectre of an old woman had never appeared to any body but herself, none of her acquaintance ever doubted of her being the true author. What parts of this pretended fragment, as printed in the “Ever Green,” were lady Wardlaw’s, and what were Ramsay’s, his son, from whom we likewise hud this anecdote, could not precisely remember, and said, that they were all too much of the same texture for his critical skill alone to make the distinction: but that it was a point which might be easily ascertained by comparing what is in the “Ever Green” with the copies of “Hardiknute,” printed before 1724. In the “Ever Green,” the whole of this poem is printed in the spelling of the 15th century, which, though the flimsiest of all disguises, has a wonderful effect in imposing upon the bulk of readers.

the barons of the Exchequer, a gentleman eminent for his learning and taste in the polite arts, and who had known and esteemed Mr. Ramsay from the time of his first

Great part of every summer he passed with his friends in the country, but chiefly with sir John Clerk of Pennycuik, one of the barons of the Exchequer, a gentleman eminent for his learning and taste in the polite arts, and who had known and esteemed Mr. Ramsay from the time of his first appearance. The death of this valuable friend, in 1756, was a great grief to him; which was, however, much alleviated by the continuation of the same friendship in his son and successor, sir James, who, upon Mr. Ram­$ay’s death, which happened Jan, 1, 1758, erected near his seat of Pennycuik, a stately obelisk of hewn stone to his memory, with this inscription:

London, and acquired a considerable degree of reputation in his profession, and much esteem from all who knew him, as a scholar and a gentleman. By the interest of lord

, son of the preceding, and a distinguished portrait-painter, was born at Edinburgh in 1709, and having devoted himself to painting, went at an early period to study in Italy, where he received some instructions from Solimene, and Imperiali, two artists of great celebrity there. After his return he practised for some time in Edinburgh, but chiefly in London, and acquired a considerable degree of reputation in his profession, and much esteem from all who knew him, as a scholar and a gentleman. By the interest of lord Bute, he was introduced to his present majesty, when prince of Wales, whose portrait he painted both at whole length, and in profile, and both were engraved, the former by the unhappy Ryland, and the latter by Woollett. There are also several jnezzotinto prints after pictures which he painted of some of the principal personages among his countrymen. He practised with success for many years, and, a,t the death of Mr. Shalcelton, in March 1767 was appointed principal painter to the crown, a situation which he retained till his death, though he retired from practice about eight years after his appointment. He visited Rome at four different times, “smit,” as Mr. Fuseli says, “with the love of classic lore, to trace, on dubious vestiges, the haunts of ancient genius and learning.” On his return from his last visit to Italy, in which he was accompanied by his son, the present majorgenral Ramsay, he died a few days after landing at Dover, August 10, 1784.

d among his contemporary artists; and it may justly be allowed, that he was among the first of those who contributed to improve the degenerate style of portrait painting.

Mr. Ramsay’s portraits possess a calm representation of nature, that much exceeds the mannered affectation of squareness, which prevailed among his contemporary artists; and it may justly be allowed, that he was among the first of those who contributed to improve the degenerate style of portrait painting. Walpole says, “Reynolds and Ramsay have wanted subjects, not genius.” Mons. Rouquet, in his pamphlet, entitled “The present state of the Arts in England,” published in 1755, mentions Mr. Ramsay as “an able painter, who, acknowledging no other guide than nature, brought a rational taste of resemblance with him from Italy; he shewed even in his portraits, that just, steady spirit, which he so agreeably displays in his conversation.” He was a man of much literary taste, and was the founder of the “Select Society” of Edinburgh in 1754, to which all the eminently learned men of that city belonged, he wrote himself some ingenious pieces- on controverted topics of history, politics, and criticism, published under the title of “Investigator.” He wrote also a pamphlet on the subject of Elizabeth Canning, which attracted much, attention at the time, and was the means of opening the eyes of the public, and even of the judges, to the real truth and explanation of that mysterious event. Mr. Ramsay was a good Latin, French, and Italian scholar, and, like Cato, learned Greek in his old age. He is frequently mentioned by Boswell, as being of Dr. Johnson’s parties, who said of him, “You will not find a man in whose conversation there is more instruction, more information, and more elegance than in Ramsay’s.

s; and resolved, for farther satisfaction, to consult the celebrated Fenelon, archbishop of Camhray, who had long imbibed the fundamental principles of that theology.

, frequently styled the Chevalier Ramsay, a title by which he frequently signed his letters, was a Scotsman of an ancient family, and was born at Ayr in that kingdom, June 9, 1636. He received the first part of his education at Ayr, and was then removed to Edinburgh; where, distinguishing himself by good parts and uncommon proficiency, he was sent for to St. Andrew’s, in order to attend a son of the earl of Wemyss in that university. After this, he travelled to Holland, and went to Leyden; where, becoming acquainted with Poiret, the mystic divine, he became tinctured with his doctrines; and resolved, for farther satisfaction, to consult the celebrated Fenelon, archbishop of Camhray, who had long imbibed the fundamental principles of that theology. Before he left Scotland, he had conceived a disgust to all the forms of religion in his native country, and had settled in a species of deism, which became confirmed during his abode in Holland, yet not without leaving him sometimes in a considerable state of perplexity. On his arrival at Cambray in 1710, he was received with great kindness by the archbishop, who took him into his family, heard with patience and attention the history of his religious principles, entered heartily with him into a discussion of them, and, in six months’ time, is said to have ^made him as good a catholic as himself.

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,

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.

so strongly recommended to the bishop of London, that on his coming home with sir Charles Middleton, who warmly joined in the recommendation, he was admitted into orders;

The humanity which he displayed on this occasion gained him the friendship and esteem of sir Charles Middleton, which no future action of his life had the smallest tendency to impair; but the fracture of his thigh-bone, and his subsequent lameness, determined him to quit the navy, and once more turn his thoughts towards the church. Accordingly, while the Arundel lay at St. Christopher’s, he opened his views to some of the principal inhabitants of the island, hy whom he was so strongly recommended to the bishop of London, that on his coming home with sir Charles Middleton, who warmly joined in the recommendation, he was admitted into orders; after which he immediately returned to St. Christopher’s,* where he was presented by the governor to two rectories, valued at Too/, a year.

obably recent in the memory of many of our readers. He defended himself with great ability; but they who could not answer his arguments, could at least invent calumnies:

Although caressed by both the admirals under whom he served, and having such influence with lord Rodney as to be able to render essential services to the Jews and other persons whom he thought harshly treated at the capture of St. Eustatius, Mr. Ramsay once more quitted the sea-service, and retired to his pastoral charge in the island of St. Christopher’s. There, however, though the former animosities against him had entirely subsided, and his friendship was now solicited by every person of consequence in the island, he remained but a little while. Sick of the life of a planter, and of the prospect of the slavery around him, he resigned his livings, bade adieu to the island, and returned to England with his wife and family in the end of 1781. Immediately on his arrival, he was, through the interest of his steady friend sir Charles Middleton, presented to the livings of Teston and Nettlestead in the county of Kent. Here he was soon determined, by the advice of those whom he most respected, to publish what had been written many years before, an “Essay on the Treatment and Conversion of African Slaves in the British Sugar Colonies.” The controversy in which this publication involved him, is probably recent in the memory of many of our readers. He defended himself with great ability; but they who could not answer his arguments, could at least invent calumnies: and sorry we are to add, that they were not unsuccessful in removing one powerful advocate for the abolition of that abominable traffic, of which all Europe seems now ashamed. The agitation given to his mind by these calumnies, and the fatigues he underwent in his endeavours to rescue from misery the most helpless portion of the human race, contributed to shorten a life in no common degree useful. He had been for some time afflicted with a pain in his stomach, for which he was prevailed upon, though with great reluctance, to try the effects of air and exercise, by attempting a journey ef 100 miles. But in London, being seized with a violent vomiting of blood, he was unable either to proceed or to be removed home; and in the house of sir Charles Middleton he ended his days, July 20, 1789. He may be justly accounted one of the first and most active of those benevolent men who roused the attention of the nation to the degradation of its character in continuing the slave-trade, although he did not live to witness the completion of his wishes. Hif works, besides those to which we have alluded, consist of a volume of “Sea-Sermons,” preached on board his majesty’s ship the Prince of Wales; a “Treatise on Signals,” and various pamphlets in answer to his opponents on the subject of the slave-trade.

of spleen and calumny, they prosecuted this anti- peripatetic before the civil magistrate, as a man who was at war with religion and learning. The cause was then carried

, or La Ramme'E, a celebrated French mathematician and philosopher, was born in 1515, in a village of Vermandois, in Picardy, of a family so greatly reduced by the ravages of war, that his grandfather, having lost all his possessions, was obliged to turn collier for a livelihood. His father followed husbandry, but appears to have been unable to give any education to this son, whose 4 arly years were spent in mean occupations. At length he obtained the place of servant in the college of Navarre, at Paris, where he picked up the rudiments of learning, and became acquainted with the logic of Aristotle. All his leisure time he devoted to study, so that what is related in the first Scaligerana of his living to nineteen without learning to read, and of his being very dull and stupid, is totally inconsistent with the truth. On the contrary, his talents and perseverance at last procured him to be regularly educated in the college, and having finished classical learning and rhetoric, he went through a course of philosophy, which took him up three years and a half. The thesis which he made for his master’s degree denied the authority of Aristotle, and this he maintained with great ability, and very ingeniously replied to the objections of the professors. This success inclined him to examine the doctrine of Aristotle more closely, and to combat it vigorously: but he confined himself principally to his logic. All this, however, was little less than heresy; and the two first books he published, the one entitled “Institutiones Dialecticae,” the other “Aristotelicse Animadversiones,” so irritated the professors of the university of Paris, that, besides many effusions of spleen and calumny, they prosecuted this anti- peripatetic before the civil magistrate, as a man who was at war with religion and learning. The cause was then carried before the parliament of Paris, but his enemies dreading either the delay or the fairness of a trial there, brought it before the king, Francis I. who ordered that Ramus, and Antony Govea, who was his principal adversary, should chuse two judges each, to pronounce on the controversy after they should have ended their disputation; while he himself appointed an umpire. Ramus, in obedience to the king’s orders, appeared before the five judges, though three of them were his declared enemies. The dispute lasted two days; and Govea had all the advantage he could desire, Ramus’s books being prohibited in all parts of the kingdom, and their author sentenced not to write or teach philosophy any longer. This sentence, which elated his enemies beyond all bounds of moderation, was published in Latin and French in all the streets of Paris, and in all parts of Europe, whither it could be sent. Plays were acted with great pomp, in which Ramus was ridiculed in various ways amidst the applauses and acclamations of the Aristotelians. This happened in 1543. The year after, the plague made great havoc in Paris, and forced most of the students to quit the university, and cut off several of the professors. On their return, Ramus, being prevailed upon to teach in it, soon drew together a great number of auditors, and through the patronage and protection of the cardinal of Lorrain he obtained in 1547 from Henry II. the liberty of speaking and writing, and the royal professorship of philosophy aad eloquence in 1551. The parliament of Paris had, before this, maintained him in the liberty of joining philosophical lectures to those of eloquence; and this arret or decree had put an end to several prosecutions, which Ramus and his pupils had suffered. As soon as he was made regius professor, he was fired with new zeal for improving the sciences; and was extremely laborious and active on this occasion, notwithstanding the machinations of his enemies. He bore at that time a part in a very singular aflair, which deserves to be mentioned. About 1550 the royal professors corrected, among other abuses, that which had crept into the pronunciation of the Latin tongue. Some of the clergy followed this regulation; but the Sorbonnists were much offended at it as an innovation, and defended the old pronunciation with great zeal. Things at length were carried so far, that a clergyman who had a good living was ejected from his benefice for having pronounced qm’squis, quanquaw, according to the new way, instead of kiskis, kankam, according to the old. The clergyman applied to the parliament; and the royal professors, with Ramus among them, fearing he would fall a victim to the credit and authority of the faculty of divines, for presuming to pronounce the Latin tongue according to their regulations, thought it incumbent on them to assist him. Accordingly they went to the court of justice, and represented in such strong terms the indignity of the prosecution, that the person accused was acquitted, and the pronunciation of Latin recovered its liberty.

om the chapel of his college. This naturally increased the number as well as bigotry of his enemies, who now succeeded in compelling him to leave the university. He

Ramus was bred up in the catholic religion, but afterwards deserted it, and began to discover his new principles in 1552, by removing the images from the chapel of his college. This naturally increased the number as well as bigotry of his enemies, who now succeeded in compelling him to leave the university. He still appears to have had a friend in the king, who gave him leave to retire to Fontainbleau; where, by the help of books in the royal library, he pursued geometrical and astronomical studies. As soon as his enemies knew where he was, he found himself nowhere safe; so that he was forced to go and conceal himself in several other places. During this interval the excellent and curious collection of books he had left in the college was plundered; but, after a peace was concluded in 1563, between Charles IX. and the protestauts, he again took possession of his employment, maintained himself in it with vigour, and was particularly zealous in promoting the study of the mathematics. This lasted till the second civil war in 1567, when he was forced to leave Paris and shelter himself among the protestants, in whose army he was at the battle of St. Denys. Peace having been concluded some months after, he was restored to his professorship; but, foreseeing that the war would soon break out again, he obtained the king’s leave to visit the universities of Germany. He accordingly undertook this journey in 1568, and received much respect and great honours wherever he came. He returned to France after the third war in 1571; and lost his life miserably, in the massacre of St. Bartholomew’s day, 1572. Charpentaire, a professor of mathematics, who had been eclipsed by the superior talents of Ramus, seized the opportunity of being revenged upon his rival, and employed assassins to murder him. Ramus gave them money in order to procure his escape, but in vain; for, after wounding him in many places, they threw him out of a window; and, his bowels gushing out in the fall, some Aristotelian scholars, encouraged by their masters, spread them about the streets; then dragged his body in a most ignominious manner, and threw it into the Seine.

e the foundations of that authority which Aristotle had so long possessed in the schools; and no one who will take the trouble to examine the manner in which he laid

Few persons in the present day will be inclined to doubt whether Ramus did right in attempting to undermine the foundations of that authority which Aristotle had so long possessed in the schools; and no one who will take the trouble to examine the manner in which he laid open the defects and inconsistencies of the Organ on, will hesitate in allowing him considerable merit in this part of his design. In attempting a new logical institute, Ramus was not, however, equally successful. The general outline of his plan, according to Brucker, is this: " Considering dialectics as the art of deducing conclusions from premises, he endeavours to improve this art by uniting it with that of rhetoric. Of the several branches of rhetoric, he considers invention and disposition as belonging equally to logic. Making Cicero his chief guide, he divides his treatise on dialectics into two parts, the first of which treats of the invention of arguments, the second, of judgments. Arguments he derives not only from what the Aristotelians call middle terms, but from any kind of proposition, which, connected with another, may serve to prove any assertion. Of these he enumerates various kinds. Judgments he divides into axioms, or self-evident propositions, and dianoea, or deductions by means of a series of arguments. Both these he divides into various classes; and illustrates the whole by examples from the ancient orators and poets.

cause, it is certain that he retired from the world, and refused even to be assistant to his uncle, who was archbishop of Tours. He then founded a monastery, the fraternity

, the celebrated abbe and reformer of the monastery of La Trappe, was born January 9, 1626, at Paris. He was nephew of Claudius le Bouthillier de Chavigny, secretary of state, and superintendant of the finances. In classical learning he made so rapid a progress that, with some direction from his tutor, he published, at the age of twelve or thirteen years, a new edition of “Anacreon,” in Greek, with notes, 1639, 8vo. This curious volume, which was dedicated to his godfather Cardinal Richelieu, was reprinted in 1647, and both editions are now scarce. At ten years old, according to the absurd custom then prevalent, he was appointed canon of Notre Dame in Paris, and became possessed of several benefices in a short time. He afterwards took a doctor of divinity’s degree in the Sorbonne, February 10, 1654, and appearing then in a public character, soon became distinguished not only for taste and politeness, but for those amiable qualifications which are of use in society. He was not however without his frailties, and it is said that he refused the bishopric of Leon from a motive of vanity. He was then appointed almoner to the duke of Orleans, and made a shining figure in the assembly of the clergy in 1655, as deputy from the second order. At length becoming conscious how little splendour and preeminence avail to happiness, he bad adieu to all, and devoted his days to religious exercises. It has been said, that this resolution was the consequence of a visit he paid to a favourite lady, from whom he had been absent for some time, and whom on entering her apartment he found dead in her coffin, and frightfully disfigured with the smallpox. This anecdote is taken from “Les veritables Motifs de la Conversion de l'abbé de la Trappe,” published by Daniel de la Roque, Cologn, 1685, 12mo; but some of his biographers treat it as fabulous. One of them, Marsollier, with greater appearance of probability, attributes his conversion to his having narrowly escaped being killed by the ball of a firelock, which struck his gibeciere, or pouch, on which he immediately exclaimed, “Alas! where should I have been, had not my God had compassion on me.” Whichever of these incidents was the cause, it is certain that he retired from the world, and refused even to be assistant to his uncle, who was archbishop of Tours. He then founded a monastery, the fraternity belonging to which practise the utmost self-denial. Their diet is merely vegetable. They allow not themselves wine, flesh, fish, nor eggs; they enter into no conversation with strangers, and for some days are wholly silent. They have each a separate cell, and used to pass some part of every day in digging their own graves in the garden of the convent. De Ranee placed this new establishment of the monks of La Trappe in the hands of the fathers of the strict Cistertian observance. He also sold his estate at Veret for 100,000 crowns, which sum he gave to the H6tel Dieu at Paris, and took the monastic habit in the abbey of Notre Dame de Perseigne, where he made profession, June 6,1664. He afterwards took possession of the abbey de la Trappe, and introduced those regulations above mentioned, which long made it the admiration of all travellers. In this retreat he lived devoted to his austere observances, until 1695, when he died on his straw pallet, in presence of the bishop of Seez, and the whole community, October 26, 1700, aged 74, leaving many pious works; among which the principal are, a book “de la Saintété des Devoirs de l'Etat monastique,” 1683, 2 vols. 4to “Eclaircissemens sur ce Livre,1685, 4to; “Explication sur la Regie de S. BenoSt,” 12mo; “lieflexions morales sur les quatre Evangiies,” 4 vols. 12mo; “Conferences sur les Evangiies,” 4 vols. 12mo “Instructions et Maximes,” 12mo; “Concluite Chretienue,” written for Mad. de Guise, 12mo; a greafnumber of “Spiritual Letters,” 2 vols. 12 mo; “Accounts of the Lives and Deaths of some Monks of la Trappe,” 4 vols. 12tno, continued to 6 vols.; lastly, “The Constitutions and Rules of the Abbe of la Trappe,1701, 2 vols. 12mo. His life has been written by several Romish authors, particularly by M. de Maupeou, M, Marsollier, and Le Nain, brother of M. de Tillemont, 2 vols. 12mo.

n learning. He was an excellent Greek and Latin scholar; and, if we may believe M. Pithou, it was be who composed the Dictionary which goes under the name of Charles

, a native of Perigueux, or, according to Menage, of Bourdeaux, was the son of an advocate in the last mentioned city. He was well skilled in the Roman law, philosophy, mathematics, and antiquities; and was appointed president of the parliament of Paris, after having been counsellor to that of Bourdeaux. His mode of life was singular. He seldom read in the daytime; but used to take a light supper, go to rest early, and rise, after his first sleep, about the time that the monks say matins; then, covering his head like a capuchin, he spent four hours in study, and, going to bed again, finished, after a quiet sleep, what he had meditated upon during the night. By this plan, he used to say that the most rapid progress might be made in learning. He was an excellent Greek and Latin scholar; and, if we may believe M. Pithou, it was be who composed the Dictionary which goes under the name of Charles Stephens. Pithou adds, that, when cardinal de Lorraine assembled the parliament of Paris to take their advice as to the punishment of heretics, Ranconet was so imprudent as to read that passage in which Sulpitius Severus touches upon the execution of Priscillian; and the cardinal being displeased, sent him to the Bastille, where he died of grief, 1558, aged above 60. Others say that Ranconet’s confinement proceeded from his having been falsely accused of a capital crime. He left in ms. “Le Tresor de la Langue Franchise, taut ancienne que nioderne;” which was the foundation of the Dictionaries of Nicot and Monet.

was born in 1715. He was brought up in the king’s chapel, and was one of the children of that choir who first performed in Handel’s oratorio of Esther, at the house

, music professor in the university of Cambridge, was probably a native of London, where he was born in 1715. He was brought up in the king’s chapel, and was one of the children of that choir who first performed in Handel’s oratorio of Esther, at the house of Bernard Gates, master of the boys in James-street, Westminster, on Wednesday, February 23, 1731, when it was performed in action, previous to its having been heard in public, or any where but at Cannons, the magnificent seat of the duke of Chandos, for whose chapel it was composed in 1720. Dr. Randal was never rated very high in his profession, but was regarded as a slight organ-player, and had never distinguished himself as a composer. He obtained his degree at the installation of the duke of Grafton in the university of Cambridge, for which he composed the ode written by Gray. To the astonishment of all the musical profession, he undertook to have this composition performed by the musicians resident in the university, without the expence of additional hands and voices from London, as Drs. Greens and Boyce had thought necessary on former occasions at Cambridge, and Dr. William Hayes at Oxford. As Dr. Randal’s professional life was unmarked by talents, his death, which happened March 18, 1799, in the eightyfourth year of his age, was hardly noticed, except by the candidates for the professorship, and his organist’s places.

sed 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

, 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.

ssion in all companies, and especially recommended him to the intimacy and friendship of Ben Jonson, who admitted him as one of his adopted sons in the Muses, and held

, an English poet, was the son of a steward to Edward lord Zouch, and born in Northamptonshire (Wood says, at Newnham, nearDaintry; Langbaine,atHoughton) June 15, 1605. He was educated at Westminster-school, whence, being a king’s scholar, he was elected to Trinity college,Cambridge, in 1623. Here he obtained a fellowship, and afterwards commenced master of arts, in which degree he was incorporated at Oxford. Very early in life he gave proofs of good talents, and was not only esteemed and admired by the learned at the university, but grew in equal favour with the wits and poets of the metropolis. His learning, gaiety of humour, and readiness of repartee, gained him admirers, procured him admission in all companies, and especially recommended him to the intimacy and friendship of Ben Jonson, who admitted him as one of his adopted sons in the Muses, and held him in equal esteem with Cartwright.

ith, in which, as well in his whole conduct, he acquitted himself to the great satisfaction of those who were set over him; having in view throughout the sacred profession,

, archdeacon of Oxford, and president of Corpus Christi college, the son of Herbert Randolph, esq. recorder of the city of Canterbury, was born August 30, 1701. He received his school education at the king’s school in Canterbury, then in great repute, under the rev. Mr. Jones. At the early age of fourteen, being then a good proficient in classical learning, he was elected into a county scholarship in Corpus Christi college, Oxford. There he entered upon a course of academical studies under the tuition of the rev. Mr. Smith, in which, as well in his whole conduct, he acquitted himself to the great satisfaction of those who were set over him; having in view throughout the sacred profession, td which he had been destined from his early youth. He proceeded regularly through the degree of B. A. to that of M. A. the latter in 1722. In 1724 he was ordained deacon, and in the following year priest. At the same time he entered upon the duty of his profession, and undertook a cure at such a moderate distance from the university, as that he might discharge the duties of it, and not be obliged to give up his residence, and the farther prosecution of his studies there. This course of life he continued for a few years, and then returned to a more strict residence in the university; nor was he intent on his own improvement only, but occasionally took part in the education of others, and in the government of his college, in which he succeeded to a fellowship in 1723. He took the degree of B. D. in 1730, and that of D. D. in 1735. In the mean time his reputation as an able divine introduced him to the notice of Dr. Potter, then bishop of Oxford, who soon after his translation to Canterbury, collated him to the united vicarages of Perhatn and Waltham in Kent. He also shortly after recommended him to Dr. Rye, regius professor of divinity, as a person (it to act as his deputy, who appointed him accordingly. This appointment will appear the more honourable, as the divinity disputations are esteemed a trial of the skill and learning of the senior part of the university; and Dr. Randolph acquitted himself in such a manner, that on a vacancy for the professorship in 1741, his friends thought him amply qualified to succeed but on this occasion the superior interest of Dr. Fanshaw carried the election; and Dr. Randolph retired to his living of Perham.

on of Christ. It has sometimes been invidiously urged by the enemies of our religious establishment, who with great professions of liberality are by no means scrupulous

Dr. Randolph’s whole attention was confined to his profession, and his station in the university. Being convinced that the province allotted to him, if its duties were faithfully discharged, was sufficient for his own employment, and for the rendering him an useful member of society, he was not disposed to wander beyond it. He was a zealous supporter of the doctrines of the church of England, from a conviction that they were those of the religion of Christ. It has sometimes been invidiously urged by the enemies of our religious establishment, who with great professions of liberality are by no means scrupulous of the terms in which they speak of the doctrines, discipline, or members of our church, that its supporters act from interested views. In answer to this charge thrown out against himself in common with others, Dr. Randolph says, in a preface to an intended work, “One of these writers is now near fourscore years of age, who neither hopes for, nor will solicit for any thing farther in this world: he fights under no banner but that of his Lord and Saviour, from whom alone he expects his reward.

daughter of William Honywood, esq. of Cheriton, one of the family of Honywood in Kent. By this lady, who died in Dec. 1783, he had three sons and three daughters, of

Dr. Randolph married Miss Thomasina Honywood, daughter of William Honywood, esq. of Cheriton, one of the family of Honywood in Kent. By this lady, who died in Dec. 1783, he had three sons and three daughters, of whom there survived him, the three sons, Thomas, Herbert, and John; and one daughter, Thomasina.

neral circulation, their sense of what is due from the public, and themselves, to the. memory of one who was a constant and assiduous promoter of this salutary institution,

, the late bishop of London, was the younger son of the preceding, and was born July 6, 1749. He became a student of Corpus Christi college, Oxford, and took his degrees at the usual periods that of M. A. in 1774; B. D. in 1782 D. D. by diploma, in 1783. In 1776 he was appointed prselector of poetry, and in 1782 regius professor of Greek. In the same year he was presented to a prebend of Salisbury; and in 1783 became canon of Christ church, regius professor of divinity, and rector of Ewelnoe. In the year 1799 he was elevated to the bishopric of Oxford; translated to that of Bangor in 1807; and thence to London in 1809. He was elected F. R. S. in 1811. He passed a great part of his life in the university of Oxford, and it was generally believed that when he was raised to the see of Oxford, the university was complimented with the nomination by the crown. His lordship was author of many single sermons, and charges delivered on different occasions: also of “De Grsecae Linguae Studio Prselectio habita in Schola Linguarum,1783, and “Concio ad Clerum in Synodo Provinciali Cantuariensis Provincial ad D. Pauli,1790. One of his last works was a report of the progress made by the National School Society, to which the general committee referred in terms of gratitude, at their first meeting after his lordship’s decease. They notice his lordship as one “whose latest employment had been to state, for the information qf the public, the progress of a work to which he had contributed his time, his labour, and his counsels. The committee therefore could not fail to entertain a common sentiment of profound regret for the loss which they have sustained, and to cherish in their minds the liveliest recollection of the service which has been so successfully fulfilled by him in this second report. They wish, therefore, to add to this document, designed for general circulation, their sense of what is due from the public, and themselves, to the. memory of one who was a constant and assiduous promoter of this salutary institution, from its first establishment to the last hour of his life. The committee trust, that this testimony, though limited to a single object in the large field of pastoral duty in which he was incessantly engaged, may serve to denote the benefits which have resulted from his prompt, unwearied, and effectual exertions.” The following is the character drawn of him by Mr. archdeacon Jefferson, and which alludes to his zeal for the church, of which he was an active member: “Fearless now of being censured for mercenary adulation, or reproved by unconscious merit, a just tribute may be paid to the character of that departed and exalted prelate, who is, and will be, most lamented where he was best and most entirely known. This opportunity, therefore, is willingly embraced of offering a heartfelt condolence to the ministry of the diocese on the affecting and important loss, which, in these perilous times of contending sects and unsettled opinion, has arisen to them, and to the church: To them, in the premature privation of a diocesan, firm in his support of ecclesiastical authority, but considerate in its application; eminently versed in the letter of ecclesiastical law, but liberal in its practical construction, reluctant in interference, but determined in duty, slow in the profes-. sion of service, but prompt in its execution; disinterested, in patronage, unwavering in measures, correct in judgment, attentive in council, and kind and compassionate to distress: To the church, in the premature privation of a father, diligent in her rites and services, but unostentatious in piety and devotion; sound and unrelaxing in her doctrines and faith, but discreet in zeal, and comprehensive in charity; ever vigilant in defending her interests, ever forward in asserting her privileges, and ever able in the assertion and the defence.” This high character, how-, ever, has been thought capable of abatement. It was perhaps unfortunate that he succeeded a prelate of the mild and conciliating temper of Dr. Porteus, and that he undertook the government of a diocese, which, above all others, requires such a temper. It was, perhaps, not less unfortunate that in his first charge to the clergy of this diocese, he betrayed no little ignorance of the state of religious opinions, and the creeds of those sectaries against whom he wished to warn his clergy.

io, was born in the city of Urbino, March 28, 1483. He was the only child of John Sanzio, a painter, who, though of no great professional celebrity, encouraged his son’s

, or Raffaello, whose family name was Sanzio, was born in the city of Urbino, March 28, 1483. He was the only child of John Sanzio, a painter, who, though of no great professional celebrity, encouraged his son’s inclination for the art, and after having taught him what he could, had the good sense and diffidence in his own talents, to place him under the care of Peter Perugino, when in his thirteenth year. Perugino, who, from his style of design, pronounced that he would be a great man, regarded him with peculiar affection, and Raphael, during the three years that he remained with this artist, so perfectly adopted his manner, that his works were not to be distinguished from those of his master; which was so far from creating any jealousy in the mind of the latter, that on the return of Raphael to Perugia, after his visit to Florence, he was the first to admire his works and proclaim his improvement.

rchitecture under Bramante, and in chastity of design was not inferior to that distinguished artist, who in full confidence of his abilities, recommended him as his

Raphael, though possessing pre-eminent powers as a painter, had not suffered that profession alone to absorb his mind; he had studied architecture under Bramante, and in chastity of design was not inferior to that distinguished artist, who in full confidence of his abilities, recommended him as his successor, to conduct the great work of St. Peter’s, to which recommendation his holiness paid due attention. According to the pope’s brief on this occasion, dated August 1515, his salary was fixed at three hundred golden crowns, or 150l. per annum. For so important an undertaking this sum would seem to be a very inadequate remuneration but, as his biographer observes, in our own country, one hundred and sixty years subsequent to this period, sir Christopher Wren did not receive more than 200l. per annum, for the building of St. Paul’s, which included draughts, models, making estimates and contracts, examining and adjusting all bills and accounts, with constant personal superintendance, and giving instructions to the artificers in every department. St. Peter’s, which cost more than a century to complete, underwent so many changes by the various architects employed, that it would be now extremely difficult to particularize with any degree of certainty the different parts of it which were executed by Raphael. It appears, however, that it is to him we are indebted for the general plan of the church as it now exists. In 1515, Raphael went with the pope to Florence, and made a design for the facade of the church of St. Lorenzo: and, according to Vasari, he was also the architect of a magnificent house for the bishop of Troja, which still exists in the street of St. Gallo in that city; but of the different buildings designed or executed by Raphael, that on which his reputation as an artist is thought principally to rest, is the Caffarelli palace at Rome. The other buildings of Raphael still existing are, a palace for M. Giovanni Baptista dell' Aquila, opposite to the church of S. Maria della Vallicella, in Rome; a villa for cardinal Julius de Medici, afterwards pope Clement VII.; and for the prince Ghigi he built a set of stables in the Longara, and a chapel in the church of S. Maria del Popolo. This prince was a distinguished patron of Raphael, and much employed him. For him he painted in fresco, in one of the rooms of his Casino in the Longara, now called the Farnesina, a picture of Galatea drawn by dolphins, and surrounded with tritons, &c. which would appear to have been much admired and praised by his friend count Castiglione, from a letter still existing by Raphael to that nobleman, which the reader may see in our principal authority. For prince Ghigi he painted in fresco, on the spandrels of an arch in front of the Ghigi chapel in the church of S. Maria della Pace, a large allegorical subject of Sibyls delivering their prophecies for the confirmation of the revealed religion. This work was highly esteemed when finished; but is now unfortunately much injured, and parts are entirely effaced. For his Casino in the Longara, Raphael made a series of designs from Apuleius’s history of Cupid and Psyche, which were painted by himself and his scholars on a ceiling of a spacious hall. What part was painted by himself it would not be easy at this time to ascertain, as the work has suffered much by being originally exposed to the open air, as the loggia of the Vatican is at present, and by being repainted and repaired.

works. This dispute concerning the price is said to have been referred to Michael Angeio to adjust, who settled it in one word, by telling the fathers that the knee

In the church of St. Auguslin, Raphael painted in fresco, on one of its piers, the prophet Isaiah, intended as the commencement of a series of pictures to ornament that church, but some dispute arising concerning the expence, the fathers relinquished their design; a loss much to be regretted, as the style of this picture is equal to his best works. This dispute concerning the price is said to have been referred to Michael Angeio to adjust, who settled it in one word, by telling the fathers that the knee alone was worth more money. Raphael also decorated his own villa in Rome, which now belongs to the cardinal Doria, with arabesque ornaments, a group of figures shooting at a target, and a small historic;*! subject, called the Marriage of Roxana.

rs of the purple, which is the alleged cause for his not marrying the niece of cardinal di Bibbiena, who was desirous of the alliance.

In the midst of his professional reputation, Raphael was equally caressed by the learned and the great, many instances of which are given by his late biographer, Mr. Duppa, whose elaborate narrative we principally follow. LeoX. regarded Raphael with the highest esteem; he was much about his person, was made groom of the chamber, and is even said to have had reason to expect the honours of the purple, which is the alleged cause for his not marrying the niece of cardinal di Bibbiena, who was desirous of the alliance.

discussion on the art. We might refer likewise to Opie’s lectures, Barry’s works, and other authors who have professedly or incidentally treated of Raphael. The present

In his will, after leaving to his mistress a sufficiency to live independent, he bequeathed the rest of his property to a relation at Urbino, and to two of his scholars, Julio Romano, and Francesco Penni; appointing an intimate friend Turini da Pescia his executor. His body lay in state in the tall of his own house, and the celebrated picture of the Transfiguration, which he had just finished, was placed at the head of the room. His remains were afterwards removed with great funeral pomp to the Pantheon, where the last ceremonies were performed, and at the request of Leo X. cardinal Bembo wrote an inscription, to honour his memory, and mark the place of his interment. These particulars we have selected from the best life of this great artist that has appeared in this country, written by R. Duppa, esq. and prefixed to his splendid publication of “Heads from the Fresco pictures of Raffaello in the Vatican,1802, as a companion to his “Heads of Michael Angela*” Mr. Duppa concludes with a critical essay on the merits of Raphael, too long for our limits, and too valuable to be injured by abridgment. In Sir Joshua Reynolds’ lectures are many interesting and important observations on the same subject, which in truth must enter deeply into every discussion on the art. We might refer likewise to Opie’s lectures, Barry’s works, and other authors who have professedly or incidentally treated of Raphael. The present professor of painting has a note on the subject which may not form an improper conclusion to our article, as he appears to have on this occasion exerted his highest powers of discriminative criticism.

ce oftener with sternness than awe, the gods of Raphael are sometimes too affable and mild, like him who speaks to Jacob in a ceiling of the Vatican; or too violent,

“Such was the felicity and propriety of Raphael when employed in the dramatic evolutions of character both suffered when he attempted to abstract the forms of sublimity and beauty; the painter of humanity not often wielded with success superhuman weapons. His gods never rose above prophetic or patriarchal forms; if the finder of Michael Angelo impressed the divine countenance oftener with sternness than awe, the gods of Raphael are sometimes too affable and mild, like him who speaks to Jacob in a ceiling of the Vatican; or too violent, like him who separates light from darkness in the Loggia of the same place. But though, to speak with Mengs, he was ohiefly made to walk with dignity on earth, he soared above it in the conception of Christ on Tabor, and still more in the frown of the angelic countenance that withers the strength of Heliodorus.

rite French blank verse, in the manner of Greek and Latin verse; but succeeded no better than Ba'if, who had made the same trial before him. He was one of those concerned

, a French poet, was born at Fontenai-le-comte, in Poitou, in 1535. He was vice-seneschal of his native province, and went afterwards to Paris, where Henry III. made him provost of the high-constable’sjurisdiction, which office he held till 1598. In his old age he determined to retire to Fontenai-le-Comte, and died at Poitiers, February 15, 1609, aged seventy-four, leaving a family. His biographers differ very much in their character of this author, as may be seen by comparing our authorities. A considerable part of his Latin poems may be found in torn. III. of “Les Devices des Poetes Latins Francois;” and his Epigrams are particularly admired: the best among his French ones are, “Les Plaisirsdu Gentilhomme Champetre,” printed in 1583; and those which he wrote on mademoiselle de Roche’s Flea, which are inserted in the collection of poems on that foolish subject, printed at Paris, in 1582, 4to. Rapin also attempted to write French blank verse, in the manner of Greek and Latin verse; but succeeded no better than Ba'if, who had made the same trial before him. He was one of those concerned in the famous Satire " Menippee. All his works were printed at Paris, 1610, 4to.

ertatio de nova doctrina, seu Evangelium Jansenistarum.” He had also a contest with father Vavassor, who wrote against his “Reflections on Aristotle’s Poetics,” yet

He died at Paris, Oct. 27, 1687; and in his eulogium, written by father Bouhours, he is represented, there is reason to think deservedly, as possessed of all the qualities that can adorn a man of probity. Zeal for the honour of his society made him undertake an “History of Jansenism,” against which he had published a Latin work, in 1658, under the title of “Dissertatio de nova doctrina, seu Evangelium Jansenistarum.” He had also a contest with father Vavassor, who wrote against his “Reflections on Aristotle’s Poetics,” yet pretended to be ignorant, as there was no name to them, that Rapin was the author.

moved 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

, 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.

on, before he was visited by a French abbé of distinguished quality, a friend of his uncle Pelisson, who introduced him to Barrillon, the French ambassador. These gentlemen

In 1685, his father died; and two months after, the edict of Nantes being revoked, Rapin with his mother and brothers retired to a country-house; and, as the persecution in a short time was carried to the greatest height, he and his youngest brother, in 1686, departed for England. He was not long in London, before he was visited by a French abbé of distinguished quality, a friend of his uncle Pelisson, who introduced him to Barrillon, the French ambassador. These gentlemen persuaded him to go to court, assuring him of a favourable reception from the king; but he declined this honour, not knowing what the consequences might be in that very critical state of affairs. His situation indeed was not at all agreeable to him; for he was perpetually pressed, upon the subject of religion, by the French Catholics then in London; and especially by the abbe“, who, though he treated him with the utmost complaisance, always turned the discourse to controversy. Having no hopes of any settlement in England at that time, he went over to Holland, and enlisted in a company of French volunteers, then at Utrecht, under the command of Mr. Rapin, his cousin-german. Pelisson, the same year, published his” Reflections on the difference of Religions," which he sent to his nephew Rapin, with a strict charge to give him his opinion impartially of the work, which it is said he did, although nothing of this kind was found among his papers, nor was he influenced by his uncle’s arguments. He remained with his company, till he followed the prince of Orange into England; where, in 1689, he was made an ensign. In that rank he went to Ireland, and distinguished himself so bravely at the siege of Carrick-fergus, that he was the same year promoted to a lieutenancy. He was also present at the hattle of the Boyne; and, at the siege of Limerick, was shot through the shoulder with a musket-ball. This wound, which was cured very slowly, proved very detrimental to his interest; as it prevented him from attending general Douglas into Flanders, who was very desirous of having him, and could have done him considerable service: he had, however, a company given him.

ed. All the favour shown him was, that he had leave to resign his commission to his younger brother, who died in 1719, after having been made lieutenant-colonel in a

In the end of 1693, he was ordered for England without any reason assigned; but a letter informed him, that he was to be governor to the earl of Portland’s son. Having never bad any thoughts of this kind of employment, he could not imagine to whom he owed the recommendation; but at last found it to be lord Galway. He immediately went to London, and entered upon this charge, losing, however, with it those preferments in the army which several of his fellow-officers soon after attained. All the favour shown him was, that he had leave to resign his commission to his younger brother, who died in 1719, after having been made lieutenant-colonel in a regiment of English dragoons. Indeed the king gave him a pension of 100l. per annum, “till such time as he should provide for him better;” which time never came: and after enjoying this pension during the king’s life, a post of small value was given him in its stead.

Lord Halifax, a great promoter of this noble work, sent the volumes, as they came out, to Le Clerc, who generously lent them to our author as long as he had occasion

He lived to publish the eighth volume of his history, which ends with the death of Charles I. The two remaining volumes, which bring the history down to the proclamation of William and Mary, came out in 1724. They were printed at the Hague in quarto; and have twice been translated into English; by the Rev. Nicholas Tindal, M. A. first in octavo, then, much improved in style, in folio; and by John Kelly of the Inner Temple, esq. in two vols. folio. Tindal has given a Continuation of Rapin’s history to 1760, and added useful notes to the whole. When Rapin first set about this work, it was not his intention to write a complete history of England; but curiosity and much leisure led him on from one step to another, till he came to the reign of Henry II.; and then, when he was upon the point of stopping, an unexpected assistance came forth, which not only induced him to continue his history, but to do it in a more full and particular manner than at first he intended. This was Rymer’s “Fœdera,” or “Collection of Public Acts,” which began to be published at the expence of government about 1706. In 1708, six volumes in folio were completed, which were afterwards increased to seventeen, and then to twenty. Lord Halifax, a great promoter of this noble work, sent the volumes, as they came out, to Le Clerc, who generously lent them to our author as long as he had occasion for them. That he did actually use this collection, appears from the pains he took to abridge the whole seventeen volumes, except the first, which was done by Le Clerc: in which abridgment we have all the important acts pointed ut, a well-connected series of events to which they relate, and the use to be made of them in clearing up the history of England. This abstract lies scattered up and down in the several volumes of Le Clerc’s “Bibliotheque Choisie;” and was thence translated and published in English, in 1727, in four volumes octavo, with portraits. Rapin also, to let us see what a thorough knowledge he had of our parties and factions in England, published, in 1717, a little treatise, entitled “A Dissertation on the Whigs and the Tories;” which is subjoined to his history, and has likewise been translated and published in English.

al edition is so scarce that one perfect copy only is known, which formerly belonged to lord Orford, who gave it to James West, esq. and is now in the king’s library;

, one of our early printers, is said by Bale to have been a citizen of London, and by Pits a native of that city. Wood says he was educated in grammar and philosophy at Oxford, and that returning to London he set up the trade of printing, which was then, as Wood adds, “esteemed a profession fit for any scholar or ingenious man.” By whom he was taught the art, or whether he was at first employed only as a corrector, does not appear. His residence was at the sign of the Mermaid “at Fowl’s gate,” next Cheapside. He married Elizabeth, sister to sir Thomas More, with whom he became intimate, according to Wood, by his piety and learning. Bale and Pits assign different causes for this intimacy; the one, because he was a bold champion for popery, which the other terms his great zeal for the glory of God. Herbert thinks it was most likely that he was at first introduced to his acquaintance by means of printing sir Thomas’s “Dialogues,” and that his acquaintance was afterwards cemented into friendship, as was natural, by their mutual principles and opinions. The date, therefore, of this acquaintance may be 1528 or 1529. Wood says that Rastall, by frequent conferences with sir Thomas, improved his knowledge in various sorts of learning, which is probable; but he omits to notice what is more important, that Rastall became a convert to the reformed religion by means of a controversy with John Frith. Rastall published “Three Dialogues,” the last of which treats on purgatory, and was answered by Frith. On this Rastall wrote his “Apology against John Frith,” which the latter answered with such strength of argument as to make a convert of his opponent. Rastall also wrote a book called “The Church of John Rastall,” which being in the list of prohibited books published by bishop Bonner, annexed to his injunctions in 1542, is supposed to have contained some retraction of his former opinions, at least of what he had written concerning purgatory. Herbert questions whether this book be not the same which Bale mentions by the title of “Abrasio Papismi.” Both Bale and Pits attribute other works to Rastall, not now known, except his “Anglorum regnum Chronicon, or Pastime of the People,” printed by him in 1529. This having lately been reprinted (1B11) among the rest of the English Chronicles, by a select number of the booksellers of London, it is not necessary to describe its contents. The original edition is so scarce that one perfect copy only is known, which formerly belonged to lord Orford, who gave it to James West, esq. and is now in the king’s library; and of imperfect copies, bibliographers mention only three or four.

was buried in the church of St. Peter, on the north side of the altar of the Virgin Mary. His wife, who died in 1553, on their first going to Louvain, at the age of

John Rastail died at London in 1536, leaving two sons, William and John. William was born in London in 1508, and about 1525 was sent to Oxford, which he left without taking a degree, and entered of Lincoln’s Inn for the study of law. In the first of Edward VI. he became autumn or summer reader of that house; but on the change of religion he retired with his wife to Louvain, whence he returned on the accession of queen Mary. In 1554 he was made a serjeant at law, one of the commissioners for the prosecution of heretics, and a little before Mary’s death, one of the justices of the common pleas. Queen Elizabeth renewed his patent as justice, but he preferred retiring to Louvain, where he died Aug. 27, 1565, and was buried in the church of St. Peter, on the north side of the altar of the Virgin Mary. His wife, who died in 1553, on their first going to Louvain, at the age of twenty-six, was the daughter of Dr. John Clement, one of the physicians sent by Henry VIII. to Cardinal Wolsey during his last illness. She was a lady of considerable learning, and well acquainted with Greek and Latin.

William Rastall, but were written by a John Rastall, no relation, as far as we know, of this family, who became a Jesuit, and died abroad in 1600.

Herbert ascribes some law publications to William Rastall, but doubtfully. He carried on the printing business from 1530 to 1534. When Justice Rastall he published “A collection (abridged) of the Statutes in force and use,” in 1557, often reprinted. It contains copies of statutes not elsewhere extant, and in some instances more complete transcripts of several acts than are commonly printed in the Statutes at large and it seems to be a republication and enlargement of the abridgment which was printed by his father in 1519. The other son, John, was commonly, but improperly called Mr. Justice Rastall, from having been a justice of the peace. Some works, in controversy with bishop Jewell, have been attributed to William Rastall, but were written by a John Rastall, no relation, as far as we know, of this family, who became a Jesuit, and died abroad in 1600.

eth, daughter of Thomas Wriothesley, earl of Southampton, by whom he had two sons, Henry and Thomas, who died young; secondly, to Frances, daughter of sir William Sydney,

, Earl of Sussex, a statesman of the sixteenth century, was the eldest son of Henry Ratcliffe, the second earl of Sussex, by Elizabeth, one of the daughters of Thomas Howard, second duke of Norfolk. His first public service was in an honourable embassy to the emperor Charles the Fifth, to treat of the projected marriage of Queen Mary to Philip, which he afterwards ratified with the latter in Spain. Upon his return he was appointed lord deputy of Ireland, and chief justice of the forests north of Trent. The order of the garter, and the office of captain of the pensioners, were likewise conferred on him in that reign, a little before the conclusion of which he succeeded to his father’s honours. Elizabeth continued him for a while in the post of lord deputy, and recalled him to assume that of the president of the North, a situation rendered infinitely difficult by the delicacy of her affairs with Scotland, and the rebellious spirit of the border counties. The latter, however, was subdued by his prudence and bravery in 1569; and the assiduity and acuteness with which he studied the former, will appear from his own pen. The unfortunate affair of the duke of Norfolk, to whom he was most firmly attached, fell out in the course of that year, and would have ended happily and honourably if the duke had followed his advice. That nobleman’s last request was, that his best george, chain, and gafter, might be given to my lord of Sussex. He was the prime negociator in those two famous treaties of marriage with the archduke Charles and the duke of Alenson, Elizabeth’s real intentions in which have been so frequently the subject of historical disquisition. In 1572, he retired from the severer labours of the public service, in which he had wasted his health, to the honourable office of lord chamberlain, and the duties of a cabinet minister; and died at his house in Bermondsey, June 9, 1583, leaving little to his heirs but the bright example of a character truly noble. The earl of Sussex was twice married; first, to Elizabeth, daughter of Thomas Wriothesley, earl of Southampton, by whom he had two sons, Henry and Thomas, who died young; secondly, to Frances, daughter of sir William Sydney, afterwards the celebrated foundress of Sydney-Sussex college in Cambridge; by whom having no children, he was succeeded by Henry, his next brother.

is great man’s conduct,” says Mr. Lodge, “united all the splendid qualities of those eminent persons who jointly rendered Elizabeth’s court an object of admiration to

This great man’s conduct,” says Mr. Lodge, “united all the splendid qualities of those eminent persons who jointly rendered Elizabeth’s court an object of admiration to Europe, and was perfectly free from their faults. Wise and loyal as Burghley, without his blind attachment to the monarch; vigilant as Walsingham, but disdaining his low cunning; magnificent as Leicester, but incapable of hypocrisy; and brave as Ralegh, with the piety of a primitive Christian; he seemed above the common objects of human ambition, and wanted, if the expression may be allowed, those dark shades of character which make nien the 1 heroes of history. Hence it is, probably, that our writers have bestowed so little attention on this admirable person, who is but slightly mentioned in most historical collections, unless with regard to his disputes with Leicester, whom he hated almost to a fault.” Mr. Lodge justly esteems himself peculiarly fortunate in having been the instrument of disclosing the earl of Sussex’s letters to the public. They form a very valuable part of the “Historical Illustrations,” and, a small number excepted, are the only ones to be met with in print. These letters display both his integrity and ability in a very striking light, and are written in a clear and manly style. Four of them are particularly curious two to the queen, onthe treaty of marriage with the archduke of Austria; one to sir William Cecil, on the state of parties in Scotland; and one to her Majesty, concerning the duke of Alen$on. The letter on the affairs of Scotland is considered by Mr. Lodge as an inestimable curiosity. Farther light will be thrown on the earl of Sussex’s character, by transcribing the manly language in which he complains that his services were neglected, and declares his purpose of retiring to private life. It is in a letter to sir William Cecil. “I was firste a Lieuten‘te; I was after little better than a Marshal; I had then nothing left to me but to direct hanging matters (in the meane tyme all was disposed that was w th in my comission), and nowe I ame offered to be made a Shreif’s Bayly to deliver over possessions. Blame me not, good Mr. Secretarie, though my pen utter somewhat of that swell in my stomake, for I see I ame kepte but for a brome, and when I have done my office to be throwen out of the dore. I ame the first nobel man hathe been thus used. Trewe service deserveth honor and credite, and not reproche and open defaming; but, seeing the one is ever delivered to me in the stede of the other, I must leave to serve, or lose my honor; w^h, being continewed so long in my howse, I wolde be lothe shoolde take blemishe wth me. These matters I knowe procede not from lacke of good and honorable meaning in the Q,’ ma 1 towards me, nor from lacke of dewte' and trewthe in me towards her, which grevethe me the more and, therefore, seing I shall be still a camelyon, and yelde no other shewe then as it shall please others to give the couller, I will content my self to live a private lyfe. God send her Mate others that meane as well as I have done; and so I comitt you to th* Almightie.” From the next letter it appears that the queen had too much wisdom to part with so faithful a counsellor and servant. The earl of Sussex had a high regard and esteem for Lord Burghley. In one of his letters, dated June 28, 1580, he expresses himself, to that great statesman, in the following terms: “The trevve fere of God w^h yo r actyons have alwayes shewed to be in yo r harte, the grete and deepe care wch you have always had for the honor and salfty of the Q‘. Ma*’s most worthy p’son; the co‘tinual troubell w ch yqu have of long tyme taken for the benefyting of the com’on-welthe and the upryght course wich ye have alwaye’s taken, respectying the mattr and not the p’son, in all causes (wch be the necessary trusts of him that ferethe God trewly, s’rveth his Soverayne faythfully, and lovethe his countrey clerely) have tyed me to yo r L. in that knotte w cli no worldly fraylty can break; and, therfor, I wyll never forbere to runne any fortune that may s’rve you, and further you' godly actyons. And so, my good L. forberyng to entrobell you w th words, I end; and wysh unto you as to my self, and better, yf I may.

ts authenticity was clearly proved afterwards by Mabillon, M. Boileau, and a doctor of the Sorbonne, who published an excellent edition in Latin and French, 1686, 12mo,

, Ratram, or Bertramn, a celebrated monk, and priest of the abbey of Corby, flourished in the 9th century, in the reign of Charles the Bald. He appears to have been well acquainted with the Greek and Latin classics, and with the Holy Scriptures. Of all Ratramn’s works, his treatise “On the Body and Blood of Christ” made the most noise. This treatise was written in answer to Paschasius Radbert, and so much appeared to favour the protestant opinion respecting the real presence in the Eucharist, that many learned catholics considered it either as heretical or spurious; but its authenticity was clearly proved afterwards by Mabillon, M. Boileau, and a doctor of the Sorbonne, who published an excellent edition in Latin and French, 1686, 12mo, reprinted with a defence in Latin only, 1712, 12mo, and according to catholic writers, has also shewn the work to be orthodox. But this is ably controverted in the English translation published in Dublin in 1753. His other works, which are less interesting, are mostly inserted in D'Acheri’s Spicilegium. The time of his death is not known.

mentions an anecdote much to the credit of Raulin. When he was only a licentiate, some ecclesiastics who were filling their pockets by the stile of indulgences, offered

, a French divine, was born at Toul in 1443, of a good family. He studied at Paris, and rereived the degree of doctor of divinity in 1479, having before given proof of his learning and talents, by a commentary on the logic of Aristotle; and his pulpit oratory. In 1481 he vvas chosen grand master of the college of Navarre, and performed the duties of that office in a manner which procured him universal esteem. In 1497 he fancied he had a special call to leave the world, and therefore relired to the abbey of Cluny, the order of which he vvas commissioned to reform by cardinal D'Amboise; and here too he was a very frequent preacher. He died Feb. 6, 1514, in his seventy-first year. Major mentions an anecdote much to the credit of Raulin. When he was only a licentiate, some ecclesiastics who were filling their pockets by the stile of indulgences, offered to pay all the expences of taking his doctor’s degree, if he would join them and preach up their trade, which he rejected with indignation. Many iarge volumes ofRaulin’s sermons were printed after his death, composed in a miserably bad taste, which, however, was the taste of his age. It is perhaps a sufficient character of them, that Rabelais took some of his ludicrous stories from them. The only useful publication of RauSin is his volume of correspondence, “Epistolse,” Paris, 1529, 4to, which, like most collections of the kind, throws some light on the literature of the age.

, an active English musician and publisher, who flourished from the beginning of the 17th century to 1635, was

, an active English musician and publisher, who flourished from the beginning of the 17th century to 1635, was the editor and composer of the best collection of psalm tunes in four parts, which had till then appeared in England. He was a bachelor of music, and a professor not only well acquainted with the practice of the art, but seems to have bestowed much time in the perusal of the best authors, and in meditation on the theory. This book published in small octavo, 1621 and 1633, contains a melody for every one of the hundred and fifty psalms, many of them by the editor himself, of which a considerable number is still in use; as Windsor, St. David’s, Southwell, and Canterbury. There are others, likewise, which are sung by the German, Netherlandish, and French Protestants. To these the base, tenor, and counter-tenor parts have been composed by twenty-one English musicians: among whom we find the names of Tallis, Dowlajid, Morley, Bennet, Stubbs, Farnaby, and John Milton, the father of our great poet. The tunes which are peculiar to the measure of the lOOdth psalm, the 113th, and 119th, were originally Lutheran, or perhaps of still higher antiquity. And though Ravenscroft has affixed the name of Dr. John Dowland to the parts which have been st to the lOOdth psalm, yet, in the index, he has ranked the melody itself with the French tunes; perhaps from having seen it among the melodies that were set to the French version of Clement Marot and Theodore Beza’s Psalms, by Goudimel and Claude le Jeune. Ravenscroft, in imitation of these harmonists, always gives the principal melody, or, as he calls it, the playn-song, to the tenor. His publication is, in some measure, historical: for he tells us not only who composed the parts to old melodies, but who increased the common stock, by the addition of new tunes; as well as which of them were originally English, Welch, Scots, German, Dutch, Italian, French, and imitations of these.

eign schools, he came to Oxford in 1638, about which time he addressed a letter to archbishop Usher, who, conceiving a high opinion of him, gave him an invitation to

, a learned orientalist, was born at Berlin, in 1613, and alter studying for eight years at Rostock and other foreign schools, he came to Oxford in 1638, about which time he addressed a letter to archbishop Usher, who, conceiving a high opinion of him, gave him an invitation to Dublin, with offers of preferment. In the mean time becoming likewise known to Grotius, the latter, unknown to archbishop Usher, introduced him to cardinal Richelieu, who offered to employ him as his agent in the east. Ravins, however, pleaded his pre-engagement to the English nation, and especially to Usher; and the cardinal, with great liberality, admitted his motive, and dismissed him with a handsome present. He then, under the patronage of Usher, began his travels in the East, but fortunately for himself, arrived at Constantinople with a strong recommendation from archbishop Laud; for, according to Dr. Pocock’s account, who was then in that city, Ravius “came thither, without either cloaths befitting him (of which he said he had been robbed in France) or money, or letters of credit to any merchant. He had letters of recommendation from some of the states to the Dutch ambassador, who was departed before his arrival. Sir Sackville Crow, the English ambassador, finding that he brought the archbishop’s recommendation, generously took him into his house and protection, and gave him all due furtherance; requiring of him that, if occasion so present itself, England may enjoy the benefit of what time he shall here employ in the study of the eastern tongues. His desire,” Dr. Pocock adds, “seems to be, to be employed in setting forth books in the Arabic language, and to be overseer of the press in that kind, for which he would be very fitting.

He had a brother, John Ravius, who was professor of philosophy at Rostock, and the author of a

He had a brother, John Ravius, who was professor of philosophy at Rostock, and the author of a commentary on Cornelius Nepos, and some other works.

rpe in Norfolk, and was instituted to it Dec. 10, 1612. In 1616, by the favour of sir Francis Bacon, who procured the living for him of the college, he obtained the

, a learned English divine, and editor of lord Bacon’s works, was born at Norwich about 1588. He was admitted a Bible-clerk in Bene't college, Cambridge, under the tuition of Mr. Chapman, on the 22d of January, 1660, and took both the degrees in arts before the 19th of March, 1609, when he was elected a fellow of the house. Upon this he commenced tutor, and was ordained deacon by the bishop of Ely, at Downham, September 22, 1611; not long after which, he was presented by the university of Cambridge to the rectory of Bowthorpe in Norfolk, and was instituted to it Dec. 10, 1612. In 1616, by the favour of sir Francis Bacon, who procured the living for him of the college, he obtained the rectory of Landbeach. He had commenced B. D. the year before, and upon his patron’s being made lord-keeper of the great seal, was appointed his domestic chaplain. While Mr. Rawley was in this situation, he proceeded D. D. in 1621. He was of great use to his master, in writing down, compiling, digesting, and publishing his works; to many of which he wrote prefaces and dedications, as well as translated several of them into Latin. These, with some other pieces committed to his care, he collected together, and printed, after his lordship’s decease, London, 1638, folio, with a dedication to king Charles, one of whose chaplains he then was. In 1657, he published at London, in folio, under the title of “Resuscitatio,” several others of lord Bacon’s tracts; to which at the request of many foreigners, and natives of the kingdom, he prefixed some account of his patron’s life. This, which is thought to be drawn up in a clear and manly style, shews Dr. Rawley to have been an able writer. It was likewise translated into Latin, and placed before the “Opuscula varia Posthuma,” printed in 8vo the year following, which, he tells us, were the last things he had in his hands. However, he republished the “Resuscitatio,” with some additions, in 1661; at which time he was chaplain in ordinary to his majesty king Charles II. He was so great a favourite with lord Bacon, that, after his resignation of the seals, he recommended Dr. Rawley to his successor, bishop Williams, for farther preferment. This the bishop promised, and desired lord Bacon to point out in what he would wish him to promote Dr. Rawley but his lordship modestly declining this, and referring the choice to the lord- keeper, Dr Rawley appears to have derived no advantage from his friend’s recommendation. Lord Verulam, besides the care of his writings, left the doctor by will, as a farther testimony of his regard, one hundred pounds, with the king of Spain’s Polyglot. After the publication of his master’s works, in 1638, Dr. Ravvley resided upon his rectory at Landbeach. He married Barbara, the daughter of Mr, John Wicksted, alderman of Cambridge, by whom he had two children. His daughter^ Mary, died in her infancy; but his son, William, became fellow of Corpus Christi college, and was buried at Landbeach, on the 3d of July, 1666. Dr. Rawley lost his son, his wife, and his servants, all in the same year, of the plague; which probably affected him so much as to bring down his grey hairs with sorrow to the grave. He died on the 18th of June, 1667, in the seventy-ninth year of his age, after haying been pastor at Landbeach fifty years, and throughout the whole of the troubles. His remains were deposited near the Communion-table, in the chancel of his own church, under a black marble, with a Latin inscription to his memory. Dr. Rawley was proctor in convocation for the clergy of the diocese of Ely, in 1661, and as such subscribed to the Book of Common-Prayer, upon its revisal. He had the appellation of the lord Bacon’s learned chaplain; and that this title was justly bestowed upon him, is evident from the testimonies of several considerable men, both at home and abroad. He presented lord Bacon’s works, as he published them, to the library of Corpus Christi college, Cambridge; and bequeathed to it “Camden’s Britannia,” with “Ciceronis Opera,” in 2 vols. and Plato, in 3 vols. folio. These books were delivered by his executor Mr. John Rawley, to whose care we are indebted for those Remains of lord Bacon which were published by Dr. Tenison.

khalL in Lancashire, esq. an able Saxon scholar, the only son of Curwen Rawlinson of the same place, who died in 1689, and descended from a family of long standing in

, of CarkhalL in Lancashire, esq. an able Saxon scholar, the only son of Curwen Rawlinson of the same place, who died in 1689, and descended from a family of long standing in High Furness, and very numerous in the parish of' Hawkshead and Colton, was collaterally related to the subjects of the three following articles. He was born in 1677, educated at Queen’s college, Oxford, made upper commoner May 10, 1695, and eminently distinguished for his application to Saxon and Northern literature. He published, whilst at Queen’s college, a beautiful edition of king Alfred’s Saxon translation of “Boethius de Consolatione Philosophise,” Oxon. 1698, 8vo, from a transcript, by Franciscus Junius of a very ancient ms. in the Bodleian library, collated with one in the Cotton library. The “Grammatica Anglo-Saxonica, ex Hickesiano Thesauro excerpta,” printed at Oxford in 1711, is dedicated to this gentleman, in the following words “Viro eximio Christophoro Rawlinson Armigero, Literaturae Saxonicae Fautori egregio, hasce breviculas Institutiones Grammaticas dicat, dedicat, Editor.” He left behind him a large collection of Mss. among which are many relating to Westmorland and Cumberland, of which copies are at sir Michael le Fleming’s at Rydal. He ordered his under-coffin to be heart of oak, and covered with red leather; and died January 8, 1732-3, aged fiftyfive. At the north end of the north transept of the abbeychurch of St. Alban’s is a white marble sarcophagus, with a figure of History sitting on it, reclining on her left arm, holding in her hand a pen, with which she writes in a book, while two other books lie under her feet. Below is this epitaph:

24-5, aged sixty-three. He died in his own parish, November 2, 1705, and was buried with his father, who died in 1679, aged sixty-six, Of his children, four daughters,

, knt eldest surviving son of Daniel Rawlinson, citizen and wine-merchant of London, descended from the ancient family of that name at Graisdale, in the county of Lancaster, was born in the parish of St. Dionis Backchurch, in Fenchurch-street, London, March 1647 appointed sheriffof London by James II. 1687, colonel of the white regiment of trainee! bands, and govt rnor of Bridewell and Bethlem hospitals, 1705; and, in 1706, lord mayor of London, when he beautified and repaired Guildhall, as appears by an inscription in the great porch. He married Mary, eldest daughter of Richard Taylor, esq. of Turnham-green, with whom he lived 27 years, and by whom he had 15 children. She died at Chelsea, Feb. 21, 1724-5, aged sixty-three. He died in his own parish, November 2, 1705, and was buried with his father, who died in 1679, aged sixty-six, Of his children, four daughters, Anne- Maria, Mary, Margaret, Susan; and two sons, both named Daniel, died before him. William died in 1732, and was buried at Antwerp. John, of Little Leigh in Cheshire, esq. died January 9, 1753. Tempest, the youngest son, by profession a dry-salter, died January 1, 1737. Sir Thomas Rawlinson, it maybe added, had been foreman of the grand jury at the trial of alderman Cornish; and was elected sheriff by royal mandate. His eldest son, Thomas, for whom Mr. Addison is said to have intended his character of Tom Folio, in the Taller, No. 158, but with infinitely too satirical a vein, was a great collector of books; and himself a man of learning, as well as patron of learned men. Mattairehas dedicated to him his edition of Juvenal; and Hearne’s publication, entitled “Aluredi Beverlacensis Annales, &c.” was printed from the original ms. in this gentleman’s possession. Very numerous indeed were the communications that editor received from Mr. Thomas Rawlinson, for all which he takes every opportunity of expressing his gratitude. While Mr. Rawlinson lived in Gray’s inn, he had four chambers so completely filled with books, that his bed was removed out into the passage. He afterwards removed to London-house, the ancient palace of the bishops of London, in Aldersgate-­street, where he died August 6, 1725, aged forty-four, and was buried in the church of St. Botolph Aldersgate. In London-house his library was sold after his decease; and there also lived and died his brother Richard, who left a portrait of his brother Thomas in crayons, another of himself, and another of Nicolas Salmon, LL. D. the antiquary, to the Society of Antiquaries, all afterwards revoked. His Mss. took sixteen days to sell, from March 4, 1733-4. The catalogue of his library consists of nine parts. The amount of the fiva first parts was 2409l. Mr. Charles Marsh, late bookseller at Charing-cross, used to say, that the sale of Mr. Thomas Rawlinson’s library was one of the first events he remembered upon engaging in business; and that it was the largest collection at that time known to have been offered to the public.

When the head of counsellor Layer, who was executed for being concerned in the plot of 1722*, and fixed

When the head of counsellor Layer, who was executed for being concerned in the plot of 1722*, and fixed on Temple-bar, was blown off, and taken up by Mr. John Pearce, an eminent attorney of Tooke’s-court, and agent for the nonjuring party, Dr, Rawiinson purchased it of him at a high price, preserved it as a valuable relic, and directed that it should be buried in his right hand. It is said, however, that he was imposed upon, and that a head was sold to him which was not Layer’s.

, an ingenious and worthy man, who is described as possessed of learning, but ignorant of the world;

, an ingenious and worthy man, who is described as possessed of learning, but ignorant of the world; indolent and thoughtless, and often very absent; was a native of $palding, where he was educated under Dr. Neve, and afterwards admitted of St. John’s college,

and mail in Gosberkirke, alias Gosberton chapel, now a school at Surfleet, to belong to Nicolas Rie, who was sheriff of Lincolnshire 5 and 6 Edw. I. 1278, and died 1279

d, and received sentence of death. Tindal’s Contin. of Rapin, IV. 666. Cambridge. He was perpetual curate of Surfleef, of which he gave an account to the Spalcling Society; and curate of Cowbitt, which is a chapel to Spalding, in the gift of trustees. His hermitage of osiers and willows there was celebrated, by William Jackson of Boston, in a ms heroic poem. He communicated to the Royal Society an account of a water-spout raised off the land in Deeping fen, printed in their “Transactions,” vol. XLVII. p. 447, and of an ancient coin, to “Gent. Mag. 1744.” There are several dissertations by him in that miscellany. He was secretary to the Spalding society in 1735. Mr. Pegge, about 1758, had a consultation with Dr. Taylor, residentiary of St. Paul’s, and a friend of Ray’s, to get him removed to a better situation, and the doctor was inclined to do it; but, on better information and mature consideration, it was thought then too late to transplant him. He died a bachelor at Spalding in 1760. See his communications to the society, in the Reliquiae Galeanae, pp. 57, 58, 3. He also communicated, in ms. “The Truth of the Christian Religion demonstrated from the Report that was propagated throughout the Gentile World about the Birth of Christ, that a Messiah was expected, and from the Authority of Heathen Writers, and from the Coins of the Roman Emperors to the beginning of the second general persecution under Domitian,” in ten sections, never printed. Also a ms catalogue of household goods, furniture, and ten pictures, removed out of the presence-chamber, 26 Charles II. 14 Dec. 1668, from Mr. Brown, and of others taken out of the cupboard in the chamber, 25 Dec. 1668, by Mr. Church. These were in number 69. (Percy Church, esq. was some time page of honour and equerry to the queen-mother Henrietta Maria.) A ms catalogue of Italian princes, palaces, and paintings, 1735, now in the Society’s Museum. In 1740, a large and well-written history of the life and writings of the great botanist, his namesake, by Mr. Dale, which was read, and approved. John Ray’s account of Cuba, where he was on shore some months. Mr. Johnson calls him his kinsman, and says, in honour of him, he finds an inscription on the lower ledge of an altar-tomb, on which lies a mutilated alabaster knight in armour and mail in Gosberkirke, alias Gosberton chapel, now a school at Surfleet, to belong to Nicolas Rie, who was sheriff of Lincolnshire 5 and 6 Edw. I. 1278, and died 1279 or 80.

ellow, when he had completed his master’s degree. The learned Duport, famous for his skill in Greek, who had been his tutor, used to say, that the chief of all his pupils,

, an eminent English natural philosopher, was the son of a blacksmith at Black Notley, near Braintree, in Essex, and was born there Nov. 29th, 1628. He was bred a scholar at Braintree school; and sent thence, in 1644, to Catharine-hall in Cambridge. Here he continued about two years, and then removed, for some reason orother, to Trinity-college with which, says Derham, he was afterwards much pleased, because in Catharine-hall they chiefly addicted themselves to disputations, while in Trinity the politer arts and sciences were principally cultivated. In Sept. 1649 he was chosen a minor fellow along with his ingenious friend Isaac Barrow, and was chosen major fellow, when he had completed his master’s degree. The learned Duport, famous for his skill in Greek, who had been his tutor, used to say, that the chief of all his pupils, and to whom he esteemed none of the rest comparable, were Mr. Ray and Dr. Barrow. In 1651, Mr. Ray was chosen the Greek lecturer of the college; in 1653, the mathematical lecturer; in 1655, humanity-reader; which three appointments shew the reputation he had acquired, in that early period of his life, for his skill in languages, polite literature, and the sciences. After he had been of greater standing, he was chosen into the respective offices of the college, as praelector primarius, in 1657; junior dean in 1658; and twice college-steward, in 1659 and 1660.

s, and all good men.” There having been the sincerest friendship between Mr. Willoughby and Mr. Ray, who were men of similar dispositions and tastes, from the time of

In 1671 he was afflicted with a feverish disorder, which terminated in the yellow jaundice; but he was soon cured of it, and resumed his botanical pursuits. The year after, his beloved friend Mr. Willoughby died, in his 37th year, at Middleton-hall, his seat in Yorkshire; “to the infinite and unspeakable loss and grief,” says Mr. Ray, “of myself, his friends, and all good men.” There having been the sincerest friendship between Mr. Willoughby and Mr. Ray, who were men of similar dispositions and tastes, from the time of their being fellow-collegians, Mr. Willoughby not only confided in Mr. Ray in his life-time, but also at his death; for, he made him one of the executors of his will, and charged him with the education of his sons, Francis and Thomas, leaving him also for life 60l. per ann. The eldest of these young gentlemen not being four years of age, Mr. Ray, as a faithful trustee, betook himself to the instruction of them; and for their use composed his “Nomenclator dassicus,” which was published in 1672, and is far more exact, especially in the names of natural objects, than any that had previously appeared. Francis, the eldest, dying before he was of age, the younger became lord Middleton. Not many months after the death of Mr. Willoughby, Mr. Ray lost another of his best friends, bishop Wilkins; whom he visited in London, November 13, 1672, and found expiring. Mr. Ray having thus lost some of his best friends, and being in a manner left destitute, endeavoured to consoler himself with female society; and in June, 1673, married a young lady, not half his age, being only 20 years of age, the daughter of Mr. Oakeley, of Launton in Oxfordshire. Towards the end of this year came forth his “Observations, Topographical, Moral, &c.” made in foreign countries; to which was added his “Catalogus Stirpium in exteris regionibus observatarum” and, about the same time, his “Collection of unusual or local English words,” which he had gathered up in his travels through the counties of England. In 1674, Mr. Oldenbufgh, the secretary of the Royal Society, renewed his correspondence with Mr. Ray^, which had been some time intermitted, and sent him letters almost every month. Mr. Ray’s accounts in these letters were published by Oldenburgh in the Philosophical Transactions. Oldenburgh had a farther view in his correspondence with Mr. Ray; it was to engage him with those leading members, who had agreed to entertain the society with a philosophical discourse at their meetings, so that the burthen might not lie among too few of the members. Mr. Ray complied, and accordingly sent him “A Discourse concerning Seeds, and the Specific Differences of Plants;” which, Oldenburgh tells him, was so well received by the president and fellows, that they returned him their thanks, and requested he would repeat his favours of that kind.

g learned enough to use it with facility, for want of figures, and a popular nomenclature; and those who are, seldom requiring its assistance. A mere catalogue or index,

The first fruit of our author’s leisure and retirement here, was his “Met hod us Plantarum Nova,” published in 1682, making au octavo volume. His principles of arrangement are chiefly derived from the fruit. The regularity and irregularity of flowers, which take the lead in the system of Rivinus, make no part of that of Ray. It is remarkable that he adopts the ancient primary division of plants, into trees, shrubs, and herbs, and that he blamed Rivious for abolishing it, though his own prefatory remarks tend to overset that principle, as a vulgar and casual one, unworthy of a philosopher. That his system was not merely a commodious artificial aid to practical botany, but a philosophical clue to the labyrinth of Nature, he probably, like his fellow-labourers, for many years, in this department, believed; yet he was too modest, and too learned, to think he had brought this new and arduous design to perfection; for whatever he has incidentally or deliberately thrown out, respecting the value of his labours, is often marked with more diffidence on the subject of classification, than any other. He first applied his system to practical use in a general “Historia Plantarum,” of which the first volume, a thick folio, was published in 1686, and the second in 1687. The third volume of the same work, which is supplementary, came out in 1704. This vast and critical compilation is still in use as a book of reference, being particularly valuable as an epitome of the contents of various rare and expensive works, which ordinary libraries cannot possess, such as the “Hortus Malabaricus.” The description of species is faithful and instructive; the remarks original, bounded only by the whole circuit of the botanical learning of that day nor are generic character! neglected, however vaguely they are assumed. Specific differences do not enter regularly into the author’s plan, nor has he followed any uniform rules of nomenclature. So ample a transcript of the practical knowledge of such a botanist, cannot but be a treasure; yet it is now njucli neglected, few persons being learned enough to use it with facility, for want of figures, and a popular nomenclature; and those who are, seldom requiring its assistance. A mere catalogue or index, like the works of Tournefort and Caspar Bauhin, which teach nothing of themselves, are of readier use. The Species Plantarum of Linnseus unites the advantages of the clearest most concise specific definition, and, by the help of Bauhin, of an universal index. Nor was Mr. Ray less mindful of Mr. Willoughby’s collections, where there were noble, though rude and indigested, materials; but spent much time and pains in reducing them to order, and fitting them for the press. He had published his “ObserTations upon Birds” in 1678; and, in 1685, he published his “History of Fishes:” and, though these works were then the completest in their kinds, yet they lost much of their perfection by the miscarriage of Mr. Willoughby’s and Mr. Ray’s papers in their travels. They had very accurately described all the birds, fishes, &c. which they saw as they passed through Germany, especially those in and upon the Danube and the Rhine; but lost their accounts in their return home. This loss Mr. Ray laments in the philosophical letters above cited.

enlarged, he published in 1691, 8vo. This book is the basis of all the labours of following divines, who have made the book of nature a commentary on the book of revelation;

Having thus published many books on subjects which he took to be somewhat foreign to his profession, he at length resolved to edify the world like a divine. With this view he completed his Demonstration of the Being and Attributes of God, which he calls, “The Wisdom of God manifested in the Works of the Creation.” The rudiments of this work were laid in some college-lectures, read in the chapel, and called common places; which, having much enlarged, he published in 1691, 8vo. This book is the basis of all the labours of following divines, who have made the book of nature a commentary on the book of revelation; a confirmation of truths, which Nature has not authority, of herself to establish! In it the author inculcates the doctrine of a constantly superintending Providence; as weil as the advantage, and even the duty, of contemplating the works of God. This, he says, is part of the business of a sabbath-day, as it will be, probably, of our employment through that eternal rest, of which the sabbath is a type. He was next encouraged to publish another of a similar kind, whose foundation was also laid at Cambridge, in some sermons which he had preached before the university. This was his “Three Physico-Theologicai Discourses concerning the Chaos, Deluge, and Dissolution of the World,1692, 8vo. Both these works have been often reprinted with large additions, and continued to be very popular books until within the last thirty or forty years.

The study of insects was probably the last that engaged the attention of this great and wise man; who, though on the verge of eternity, in the full possession of

The study of insects was probably the last that engaged the attention of this great and wise man; who, though on the verge of eternity, in the full possession of himself, and in the anticipation of the most glorious manifestations of his Creator, did not disdain or neglect to contemplate him in his least and lowest works. His last letter to Dr. Derham, who had just been to visit him, is dated August 16, 1704. He speaks of having lately obtained Mr. Willoughby’s entomological papers, and describes himself as then entering on his History of Insects. How well he employed his time during the autumn, is evident from what we have related concerning this work, for he never saw another spring. He died at Black Notley, in a house of his own building, Jan. 17, 1705, in the 77th year of his age. His character is thus concisely given by Derham: In his dealings, no man more strictly just; in his conversation, no man more humble, courteous, and affable; towards God, no man more devout; and towards the poor and distressed, no man more compassionate and charitable, according to his abilities.“The friend who wrote this eulogium, in his” Life of Mr. Ray," asserts, that he was buried, according to his own desire, in the church of Black Notley; but the authors of the Biographia Britannica are probably more correct, in saying, that he declined the offer made him by the rector, of a place of interment in the chancel, choosing rather to repose with his ancestors, in the church-yard; and this account is confirmed by the original situation of his monument, erected at the expence, in part at least, of bishop Compton. The long and elegant Latin epitaph has often been published. Its author was the rev. William Coyte, M. A., father of the late Dr. Coyte of Ipswich, and the original manuscript in possession of sir E. J. Smith, contains the information that Ray was interred in the church-yard. In 1737, the monument in question, which seems to have been a sort of altar-tomb, being nearly ruined, was restored at the charge of Dr. Legge, and removed for shelter into the church; where therefore it became a cenotaph, as an inscription added on this occasion terms it. Forty-five years afterwards the tomb again underwent a repair, by the care of the present sir Thomas Gery Cullum and others, who subjoined a third inscription.

re indeed supposed to supply, in a great measure, this defect; they having been collected by persons who had frequent communication with Ray, and were well acquainted

A more lasting monument was dedicated to the memory of our great English naturalist, in the genus of plants which bears his name, the Raiana. It must be lamented that he made, as far as we can learn, no collection of dried plants, which might serve to ascertain, in every case, what he described. The great Herbariums of Buddie, Uvedale, &c. still kept in the British Museum, are indeed supposed to supply, in a great measure, this defect; they having been collected by persons who had frequent communication with Ray, and were well acquainted with his plants. Whatever be had preserved relative to any branch of natural history, he gave, a week before his death, to his neighbour Mr. Samuel Dale, author of the “Pharmacologia.” Nothing is said of his library, which was probably inconsiderable.

, Lord, one of those many eminent men who have risen to the peerage from the profession of the law, was

, Lord, one of those many eminent men who have risen to the peerage from the profession of the law, was the son of sir Thomas Raymond, a justice of the King’s Bench, and author of “Reports of divers special cases in the court of King’s-Bench, Common Pleas, and Exchequer, from 12 to 35 Car. II.” first printed In 1696, and lastly in 1803, 8vo. His son was solicitor general to queen Anne, and attorney-general to George I. by whom he was appointed one of the commissioners of the great seal. He succeeded sir John Pratt as chief justice of the court of King’s-bench, and was created baron Raymond of Abbot’s Langley, Hertfordshire, in 1730. He died in 1732, leaving one son, by whose death, in 1753, the title became extinct.

at law, appeared in 1790, 3 vols. 8vo. Lord Raymond’s “Rubrics,” translated by Mr. serjeant Wilson, who edited the third edition of the “Reports,” in 1775, 3 vols.

His “Reports of Cases in the courts of King’s-bench and Common Pleas, in the reigns of king William III. queen Anne, king George I. and George II.” were first printed in 1743, and secondly in 1765, two volumes folio. The last and much-improved edition, with marginal notes and additional references by John Bayley, esq. serjeant at law, appeared in 1790, 3 vols. 8vo. Lord Raymond’s “Rubrics,” translated by Mr. serjeant Wilson, who edited the third edition of the “Reports,” in 1775, 3 vols. folio, were published separately in 1765, folio.

n incited to the undertaking, and to have been furnished with part of his materials, hy some persons who opposed the measures of the English government, and secretly

After his settling at Paris, he appears to have become an author by profession, as we do not find that he had any place or preferment. His first piece, published the same year in which he quitted the society of the Jesuits, was entitled “Histoire du Stadhouderat.” He next published “Histoire du Parlement d'Angleterre,” which gained him much reputation, though it had little claim to the title of history, and was tinged with many prejudices, religious and political. He also composed “Anecdotes Literaires,” in three volumes, 12mo; and “Memoires de Ninon de PEnclos;” and was much employed in the “Mercure de France.” But the work upon which his fame is chiefly built, is his “Political and Philosophical History of the European Settlements in the East and West Indies.” That this history is written in an animated style, and that it contains many just reflections, both political and philosophical, is known to all Europe for it has been translated into every European language. Its beauties, however, are deformed by many sentiments that are irreligious, and by some that are impure. It was followed, about 1780, by a small tract, entitled “The Revolution of America,” in which the author pleads the cause of the revolted colonists with a degree of zeal, censures the conduct of the British government with a keenness of asperity, and displays a knowledge of the principles and intrigues of the 'different factions which at that period divided the English nation, that surely was not natural to the impartial pen of a philosophic foreigner. Hence he has been supposed to have been incited to the undertaking, and to have been furnished with part of his materials, hy some persons who opposed the measures of the English government, and secretly fomented the American cause. Be this as it may, he propagated, both in this tract and in his history, a number of licentious opinions respecting government and religion, of which he lived to regret the consequences.

h so little severity, that he had sufficient time to retire to the dominions of the king of Prussia, who afforded him the protection he solicited, although his majesty’s

A prosecution was instituted against him by the French government, on account of his History of the East and West Indies; but it was conducted with so little severity, that he had sufficient time to retire to the dominions of the king of Prussia, who afforded him the protection he solicited, although his majesty’s character was treated by the author in his book with no great degree of veneration. Raynal also experienced the kindness of the empress of Russia; and it is not a little remarkable of this singular personage, that although he was always severe in discussing the characters of princes, yet the mostdepoiic among these heaped upon him many marks of favour and generosity. The abbe also received a very unusual mark of respect from a British House of Commons. It was once intimated to the speaker, that Raynal was a spectator in the gallery. The business was immediately suspended, and the stranger conducted to a more convenient and honourable station.

One consequence of this letter was very singular. Those who could not answer it, nor resist the conviction of its arguments,

One consequence of this letter was very singular. Those who could not answer it, nor resist the conviction of its arguments, wreaked their vengeance on liaynal, by endeavouring to prove that he did not write the celebrated History of the Indies; and this became the cant of the day. To illustrate this, we shall give the following extract of a letter from an English gentleman then in Paris, addressed to the editor of one of the London newspapers.

e history of the European settlements to Perrijeat la Roque, Dubreuil, Diderot, Nargion, or Holbach, who were all concerned, as well as the abbe Raynal."

I am sorry to add,” says this gentleman, f ' that the reputation of the abbe Raynal in Paris, where he is personally known, is very different from what he enjoys in London, where he is only known as an author. That Philosophical history which you ascribe to him, is really, in no proper sense, his work; but was produced by a combination of the labours of several ingenious men, among whom I am inclined to think, he contributed the smallest part. We might indeed give him some credit for lending his name to a book, which contained so many bold truths, which it was then dangerous to publish; but even here, there is need of caution; for under the ancient system, deceit and fraud were carried to such a pitch of refinement, that it was not uncommon for men of letters to concert stratagems with ministers, to get themselves put into the Bastile, to raise their reputation, and to make their fortune in the world. Whatever be in this, you may ascribe the history of the European settlements to Perrijeat la Roque, Dubreuil, Diderot, Nargion, or Holbach, who were all concerned, as well as the abbe Raynal."

This letter was written by Mr. Thomas Christie, who wrote a volume some time after on the French revolution; but

This letter was written by Mr. Thomas Christie, who wrote a volume some time after on the French revolution; but when our readers consider that he was then intoxicated with the fallacious prospects of that revolution, and that this accusation against the abbe Raynal was not produced until he had written against the proceedings of the assembly, they will easily be able to appreciate the information that he was not the author of the celebrated history.

ular, and treated in a singular and extravagant manner, his books sold slowly at first, and Boissat, who printed them, was ruined, and died in an hospital. Most of his

, a celebrated Jesuit, was born in 1583, at Sospello, in the county of Nice. He resided almost wholly in France; and though his singular opinions, joined to a temper naturally morose and satirical, involved him in many disputes with his society, he would not quit it. He died at Lyons, October 31, 1663, aged eighty, and the Carmelites paid him funeral honours in all their convents on account of the book he had written on the Scapulary. A complete collection of his works was printed at Lyons; in 1665, 20 vols. fol. Tom. XX is not numbered so, but entitled “Apopompaeus,1669, and falsely marked Cracow; it contains those works which father Raynaud did not choose to own. They discover uncommon learning and extent of reading; but as almost all the subjects he has chosen are singular, and treated in a singular and extravagant manner, his books sold slowly at first, and Boissat, who printed them, was ruined, and died in an hospital. Most of his works had been published separately, and their author suffered the mortification of seeing some of them put into the Index. Two of the best and most remarkable among them are, “Erotema cle bonis et mails Libris,” i. e. Questions concerning good and bad books; and “Symbola Antoiiiana,” Rome, 1648, 8vo, relative to St. Anthony’s fire.

was afterwards appointed chaplain in ordinary to Charles I. He was one of those doctrinal puritans, who opposed, as much as any churchman of opposite religious sentiments,

, an English divine, was a native of Buckinghamshire, where he was born in 1588. He was admitted a student of Magdalen-hall, Oxford, in 1604. He took his degree of M. A. in 1610, and then entered himself a commoner of Alban-hall. In 1612 he was ordained deacon, and in 1614 priest, by the bishop of Oxford. About this time he became chaplain to Edward lord Zouch of Haringworth, warden of the cinque ports, and governor of Dover-castle. Having accompanied this nobleman to Dover, his preaching was so much admired, that at the request of the parishioners he was made minister of St. Mary’s, in December 1616. He was afterwards appointed chaplain in ordinary to Charles I. He was one of those doctrinal puritans, who opposed, as much as any churchman of opposite religious sentiments, the violent proceedings of the authors of the rebellion, and had exposed them so frequently in his sermons, that he was soon marked out for vengeance. In April 1612, his library at Dover was plundered, and in November following he was dragged from his house by the soldiers, and imprisoned for a year and seven months. In January of the above mentioned year, archbishop Laud, then a prisoner in the Tower, had, at his majesty’s request, bestowed on him the living of Chartham in Kent; but from that the usurping party took care he should receive no advantage. He was also with as little effect made a prebendary of Canterbury. In 1644, however, sir William Brockman gave him the living of Cheriton in Kent, which he was not only allowed to keep, but was likewise appointed by the assembly of divines, to be one of the nine divines who were to write annotations on the New Testament for the work afterwards published, and known by the title of the “Assembly’s Annotations.

me time. In March 1650, he held a public disputation in Folkstone church with Fisher, an anabaptist, who argued against the necessity of ordination, and quoted as his

His sufferings, however, were not yet at an end; for soon after this apparent favour, upon a suspicion that he was concerned in a plot for the seizing of Dover-castle, he was apprehended and carried to Leeds-castle, where he was imprisoned for some time. In March 1650, he held a public disputation in Folkstone church with Fisher, an anabaptist, who argued against the necessity of ordination, and quoted as his authority some passage in bishop Taylor’s “Discourse of the liberty of Prophesying,” which obliged Mr. Reading to write a tract on the subject. On the restoration, when Charles II. landed at Dover, Mr. Reading was deputed by the corporation to address his majesty, and present him with a large Bible with gold clasps, in their name. He was now replaced in the prebend of Canterbury and the living of Chartham. Here he died Oct. 26, 1667, and was buried in the chancel of the church.

It had been long asserted by those who lived on the sea coast, or the banks of great rivers, that when

It had been long asserted by those who lived on the sea coast, or the banks of great rivers, that when craw-fish, crabs, and lobsters, happen to lose a claw, nature produces another in its stead: this, however, was disbelieved by all but the vulgar, till Reaumur put the matter out of dispute, and traced the re-production through all its circumstances, which are even more singular than the thing itself. M. Reaumur also, after many experiments made with the torpedo, or numb-fish, discovered that its effect was not produced by an emission of torporific particles, as some have supposed, but by the great quickness of a stroke given by this fish to the limb that touches it, by muscles of a most admirable structure, which are adapted to that purpose. These discoveries, however, are chiefly matters of curiosity; those which follow are of use.

y produce till their transformation. The author then proceeds to the history of wasps, as well those who live separate, as in companies, to that of the lion-pismire,

The bee is not the only fly that makes honey, many species of the same genus live separate, or in little societies. The history of these begins the sixth and last volume, and contains a description of the recesses in which they deposit and secure their eggs, with proper nourishment for the worms they produce till their transformation. The author then proceeds to the history of wasps, as well those who live separate, as in companies, to that of the lion-pismire, the horse-stinger, and lastly, to the fly called an ephemeron, a very singular insect, which, after having lived in the water three years as a fish, lives as a fly only one day, during which it suffers its metamorphosis, couples, lays its eggs, and leaves its dead carcass upon the surface of the water which it had inhabited. To this volume there is a preface, containing the discovery of the polype, an animal that multiplies without coupling, that moves with equal facility upon its back or its belly, and each part of which, when it is divided, becomes a complete animal, a property then thought singular, but since found to be possessed by several other animals.

, aged sixty-four. In 1750 he married Sarah, daughter of Mr. John Watson, of Stockton, flax-dresser, who died many years before him, and by whom he left issue John Watson

, a dramatic and miscellaneous writer, was born at Stockton, in the county of Durham, in March 1723, and succeeded his father in the business of a ropemaker, which he carried on in that country until 1757, when he removed to Sun Tavern fields at Stepney near London, and there pursued the same occupation with great credit and probity until his death, Aug. 15, 1787, aged sixty-four. In 1750 he married Sarah, daughter of Mr. John Watson, of Stockton, flax-dresser, who died many years before him, and by whom he left issue John Watson Reed, late of Ely-place, Holborn, attorney at law, who died Jan. 31, 1790; Shakspeare, who succeeded him in his business; and Sarah, who married Gilbert Wilson, and died his widow a few days before her brother.

the world with many miscellanies in prose and verse of very considerable merit. The late Mr. Ritson, who had for Mr. Reed, what he extended to very few, a high respect,

Notwithstanding a due attention to business, Mr. Reed found leisure to amuse himself and the world with many miscellanies in prose and verse of very considerable merit. The late Mr. Ritson, who had for Mr. Reed, what he extended to very few, a high respect, intended to have edited some of these miscellanies, in a volume or volumes, of which the following were to have been the contents: 1. “Madrigal and Trulletta, a mock tragedy,1758. 2. “The Register Office,1761, a farce, or rather a dramatic satire. 3. The same; the second edition. 4. “Tom Jones,” a comic opera, 1769. 5. “Dido,” a tragedy, 1767, printed for the first time by Messrs. Nichols in 1808, but the whole impression having been destroyed by the fire which consumed their premises in February of that year, it has not been reprinted. 6. The “Retort Courteous,” to the manager of the theatre. 7. An “Epitaph on the Earl of Chatham.” 8. “St. Peter’s Lodge,” a serio-comic legendary tale. 9. “A Rope’s end for Hempen monopolists.” Besides the above articles, Mr, Reed was the author of, 10. “A Poem, in imitation of the Scottish dialect, on the death of Mr. Pope,” printed in the Gentleman’s Magazine for August 1744. 11. “The Superannuated Gallant,” a farce, Newcastle, 1745, 12mo. 12. “A British Philippic, inscribed to the right hon. the earl of Granville,” London, 1756, 4to. 13. “A Sop in the Pan for a physical critic, in a letter to Dr. Smollett, occasioned by a criticism (in the Critical Review) on Madrigal and Trulletta/' 1759. 14.” A humorous account of his own Life,“printed in the Universal Museum for 1764. 15.” The Tradesman’s Companion, or Tables of Averdupois weight, &c.“London, 1762, 12mo. 16.” The Impostors, or a Cure for Credulity,“a farce, acted for the benefit of Mr. Woodward, March 19, 1776, with an excellent prologue, not printed. To these may be added, several tragedies, comedies, and farces, never acted or printed; a few unpublished poems; and some numbers of the” Monitor,“a political paper published in the administration of the earl of Bute, and” Letters“under the signature Benedict, in defence of Mr. Garrick, on the publication of Kenrick’s” Love in the Suds," printed originally in the Morning Chronicle, and afterwards added to the fifth edition of that poem.

ether we shall ever see a collection dispersed, in all respects so well suited to the taste of those who are ambitious of possessing literary curiosities, or of enlarging

His collection of books, chiefly English, was perhaps one of the most extensive in that series; and most of them were enriched by his ms notes. They were sold in November 1807 by Messrs. King and Lochee, in a sale which lasted thirty-nine days, and produced more than 4000l. Few collections have attracted more attention of late years, and it may be doubted whether we shall ever see a collection dispersed, in all respects so well suited to the taste of those who are ambitious of possessing literary curiosities, or of enlarging their knowledge of English literature.

y other language. Several other valuable tracts, which are entirely lost, were written by Dr. Rhese, who was accounted one of the great luminaries of ancient British

, an English physician and philologist, was born at Llanvaethly in the isle of Anglesea, in 1534. After residing two or three years at Oxford, he was elected student of Christ church, but inclining to the study of medicine, went abroad, and took the degree of doctor in that faculty at Sienna in Tuscany. He acquired so perfect a knowledge of the Italian language, that he was appointed public moderator of the school of Pistoia in Tuscany, and wrote books in that tongue, which were much esteemed by the Italians themselves. On his return, with a high reputation for medical and critical learning of all kinds, he retired to Brecknock, where he passed the greater part of his life in literary pursuits and the practice of his profession, and where he died about 1609. Wood says he died a Roman catholic; and Dodd, upon that authority, has included him among his worthies of that religion, but there seems some reason to doubt this. One of Rhese’s publications was a Welsh grammar, “CambroBritannicae, Cymeraecaeve, linguse Institutiones et Rudimenta, &c. ad intelligend. Biblia Sacra iiuper in CambroBritannicum sermonem eleganter versa,” Lond. 1592, folio. Prefixed to this is a preface by Humphrey Prichard, in which he informs us that the author made this book purposely for the better understanding of that excellent translation of the Bible into Welsh, and principally for the sake of the clergy, and to make the scriptures more intelligible to them and to the people; a measure which a Roman catholic in those days would scarcely have adopted. Prichard also says that he was “sincere religionis propaganda avidissimus;” and as Prichard was a protestant, and a minister of the church of England, he must surely mean the protestant religion. Rhese’s other works are, “Rules for obtaining the Latin Tongue,” written in the Tuscan language, and printed at Venice; and “De Italicae linguae pronunciatione,” in Latin, printed at Padua. There was likewise in Jesus college library a ms compendium of Aristotle’s Metaphysics in the Welsh language by our author, in which he asserts, what every ancient Briton will agree to, that this tongue is as copious and proper for the expression of philosophical terms, as the Greek or any other language. Several other valuable tracts, which are entirely lost, were written by Dr. Rhese, who was accounted one of the great luminaries of ancient British literature. By Stradling in his epigrams, he is styled “novum antiques linguae lumen;” and by Camden, “clarissimus et eruditissimus vir Joannes David,” for he was sometimes called John David, or Davis.

honoured, as his auditors, by the magistrates, the learned, the ecclesiastics, and even the ladies, who all affected to abjure the ancient philosophy. In 1680, he returned

, a French philosopher, and great propagator of Cartesianism, was born in Agenois, in 1632. He cultivated the languages and philosophy under the Jesuits at Cahors, and afterwards divinity in the university of that town, being designed for the church. He made so uncommon a progress, that at the end of four years he was offered a doctor’s degree without the usual charges; but he did not think it became him to accept of it till he had studied also in the Sorbonne at Paris. He went thither, but was soon disgusted with theology; and, as the philosophy of Des Cartes was at that time drawing public attention, through the lectures of Rohault, he became attached to it, and went to Toulouse in 1665, where he read lectures on the subject. Having a clear and fluent manner, and a facility in making himself understood, he was honoured, as his auditors, by the magistrates, the learned, the ecclesiastics, and even the ladies, who all affected to abjure the ancient philosophy. In 1680, he returned to Paris; where the concourse about him was such, that the Aristotelians applied to the archbishop of Paris, who thought it expedient, in the name of the king, to put a stop to the lectures; and they were accordingly discontinued for several months. The whole life of Regis, however, was spent in propagating the new philosophy. In 1690, he published a formal system of it, containing logic, metaphysics, physics, and morals, in 3 vols. 4to, and written in French. It was reprinted, the year after, at Amsterdam, with the addition of a discourse upon ancient and modern philosophy. He wrote afterwards several pieces in defence of his system in which he had disputes with M. Huet, Du Hamel, Malebranche, and others. His works, though abounding with ingenuity and learning, have been disregarded in consequence of the great discoveries and advancement in philosophic knowledge that have been since made. He died in 1707. He had been chosen member of the academy of sciences in 1699.

ool of Lindau, and afterwards at that of Fribourg, where he lived with Zasius, a celebrated civilian who encouraged his diligence, and admired him for his extraordinary

, or Le Roi, a name he thought proper to change, as it was liable to be applied in ridicule, was a learned Reformer of the 16th century, and born at Langenargen, or Arga Longa, in the territories of the counts of Mountfort. Having received a very liberal education, first at the school of Lindau, and afterwards at that of Fribourg, where he lived with Zasius, a celebrated civilian who encouraged his diligence, and admired him for his extraordinary proficiency and amiable manners, he went to Basil for farther improvement, but was soon attracted to Ingoldstadt, at that time a very famous university, and under the direction of the no less famous John Eckius. Here Regius read lectures, but unfortunately was induced to superintend the education of some youths of noble families, and provide them with books and other necessaries, which their parents neglecting to pay, he was obliged to give up what little property he had for the benefit of his creditors, and in despair of assistance to carry on his studies, enlisted as a common soldier. In this plight, however, he happened to be discovered by Eckius, who procured his discharge, and prevailed on the parents of his pupils to discharge all arrears due to him.

In 1530 there was a diet held at Augsburg, at which the duke of Brunswick was present, who prevailed on Regius to go to Lunenburg in his dominions, to

In 1530 there was a diet held at Augsburg, at which the duke of Brunswick was present, who prevailed on Regius to go to Lunenburg in his dominions, to take care of the church there. The duke highly esteemed him, and declared to the people of Augsburgh, who petitioned for his return, that he would as soon part with his eyes as with Regius, and made him chief pastor of all the churches in his dominions, with an ample and liberal salary. Here he passed the greater part of a useful and active life in preaching, writing, and religious conferences. He died May 23, 1541, when on a journey with the duke to Haguenau; the place of his death is said to be Zell; but we have no account of his age. He had often wished that he might die a sudden and easy death, which happened to be the case. His works were collected in 3 vols. folio: the first two contain the pieces he published in Latin, the other his German compositions. This last volume was afterwards translated into Latin, and published under the title of “Vita Opera Urbani Regii, reddita per Ernest. Regium,” Norib. 1562. Some of his pieces were translated in the 16th century into English, as “The Sermon which Christ made on the way to Emmaus, &c.1578, 4to. “A declaration of the twelve articles of the Christen faythe, &c.1548. “An Instruccyon of Christen fayth, &c.1588, translated by Fox the martyrologist. “The Olde Learnyng and the New compared, &c.1548, 8vo. “Exposition on the 87th Psalm,1594, 8vo. “A homily of the good and evil Angell, &c.1590, 8vo, and others. Besides what are included in the three volumes mentioned above, John Freder of Pomerania published, after the au^ thor’s death, a work of his, entitled “Loci Theologici ex patribus & scholasticis neotericisque collect!.

fire. Regnard, however, was saved from either punishment, by the intervention of the French consul, who having just received a large sum for his redemption, sent him

, one of the best French comic writers after Moliere, was born at Paris in 1647. He had scarcely finished his studies, when he was seized with a passion for travelling, and an ardent desire to see the different countries of Europe. He went to Italy first, but was unfortunate in his return thence; for, the English vessel bound for Marseilles, on which he embarked at Genoa, was taken in the sea of Provence by the Barbary Corsairs; and he was carried a slave to Algiers. Having some acquaintance with the art of French cookery, he procured an office in his master’s kitchen. His amiable manners and pleasant humour made him a favourite with all about him, and not a little so with the women; but being detected in an intrigue with one of them, his master insisted upon his submitting to the law of the country, which obliged a Christian, convicted of such an offence, either to turn Mahometan, or to suffer death by fire. Regnard, however, was saved from either punishment, by the intervention of the French consul, who having just received a large sum for his redemption, sent him home, about 1681.

fterwards to Sweden. Having done some singular piece of service to the king of Sweden, this monarch, who perceived that he was travelling out of pure curiosity, told

He had not been long at Paris, before he set out to visit Flanders and Holland, whence he passed to Denmark, and afterwards to Sweden. Having done some singular piece of service to the king of Sweden, this monarch, who perceived that he was travelling out of pure curiosity, told him, that Lapland contained many things well worthy of observation; and ordered his treasurer to accommodate him with whatever he wanted, if he chose to proceed thither. Regnard embarked for Stockholm, with two other gentlemen that had accompanied him from France; and went as far as Torneo, a city at the bottom of the Bothnic Gulph. He went up the river Torneo, whose source is not far from the Northern cape; and at length penetrated to the Icy sea. Here, not being able to go farther, he and his companions engraved these four lines upon a rock:

uire into the pretended magic of the country and he was shewn some of the learned in this black art, who, not succeeding in their operations upon him, pronounced him

While he was in Lapland, his curiosity led him to inquire into the pretended magic of the country and he was shewn some of the learned in this black art, who, not succeeding in their operations upon him, pronounced him a greater magician than themselves. After his return to Stockholm, he went to Poland, thence to Vienna, and from Vienna to Paris, after a ramble of almost three years.

He was the first among the French who succeeded in satire; and, if Boileau has had the glory of raising

He was the first among the French who succeeded in satire; and, if Boileau has had the glory of raising that species of composition to perfection among them, it may be said of Regnier, that he laid the foundation, and was perhaps more an original writer than Boileau. He is supposed to have taken Juvenal and Persius for his model: it is certain, that he has in some places imitated Ovid, and borrowed largely from the Italians. While pretending, however, to expose vice, much of that impurity, which ran through his life, crept also into his writings. Seventeen of his satires, with other poems, were printed at Rouen in 1614. There is a neat Elzevir edition of his works at Leyden, 1652, 12mo; but the best are those of Rouen, 1729, 4to, with short notes by M. Brossette and of London, 1733, with notes by Lenglet du Fresnoy, one of Tonson’s handsome books 4to, of which there are large paper copies.

French academy. In 1684, he was made perpetual secretary, after the death of Mezeray; and it was he who drew up all those papers, in the name of the academy, against

, or Des-Marais (Francis Seraphin), a French writer, was born at Paris in 1632 and, at fifteen, distinguished himself by translating the “Batrachomyomachia” into burlesque verse. At thirty, he went to Rome as secretary to an embassy. An Italian ode of his writing procured him a place in the academy de la Crusca in 1667; and, in 1670, he was elected a member of the French academy. In 1684, he was made perpetual secretary, after the death of Mezeray; and it was he who drew up all those papers, in the name of the academy, against Furetiere. In 1668, the king gave him the priory of Grammont, which determined him to the ecclesiastical function: and, in 1675, he had an abbey. His works are, an Italian translation of Anacreon’s odes, which he dedicated to the academy de la Crusca in 1692; a French grammar and two volumes of poems, in French, Latin, Italian, and Spanish. He translated, into French, Tully “De Divinatione, & de Finibus” and Rodrigue’s “Treatise of Christian perfection,” from the Spanish. He died in 17 Is, aged 82. “He has done great service to language,” says Voltaire, “and is the author of some poetry in French and Italian. He contrived to make one of his Italian pieces pass for Petrarch’s but he could not have made his French verses pass for those of any great French poet.

modesty, were conspicuous from his childhood; and it was foretold of him by the parish schoolmaster, who initiated him in the first principles of learning, “that he

It does not appear that Dr. Reid gave any early indications of future eminence. His industry, however, and modesty, were conspicuous from his childhood; and it was foretold of him by the parish schoolmaster, who initiated him in the first principles of learning, “that he would turn out to be a man of good and well-wearing parts,” a prediction which, although it implied no flattering hopes of those more brilliant endowments which are commonly regarded as the constituents of genius, touched not unhappily on that capacity of patient thought, which contributed so powerfully to the success of his philosophical researches. His residence at the university was prolonged beyond the usual term, in consequence of his appointment to the office of librarian, which had been endowed by one of his ancestors about a century before. The situation was acceptable to him, as it afforded an opportunity of indulging his passion for study, and united the charms of a learned society with the quiet of an academical retreat.

resting objects which the metropolis had to offer to his curiosity. At Cambridge he saw Dr. Bentley, who delighted him with his learning, and amused him with his vanity;

In 1736, he resigned this office, and, accompanied by Dr. John Stewart, afterwards professor of mathematics in Marischal college, and author of a “Commentary on Newton’s Quadrature of Curves,” on an excursion to England. They visited together London, Oxford, and Cambridge, and were introduced to the acquaintance of many persons of the first literary eminence. His relation to David Gregory procured him a ready access to Martin Folkes, whose house concentrated the most interesting objects which the metropolis had to offer to his curiosity. At Cambridge he saw Dr. Bentley, who delighted him with his learning, and amused him with his vanity; and enjoyed repeatedly the conversation of the blind mathematician Saunderson; a phenomenon in the history of the human mind, to which he has referred more than once in his philosophical speculations. With the learned and amiable Dr. Stewart he maintained an uninterrupted friendship till 1766, when Mr. Stewart died of a malignant fever. His death was accompanied with circumstances deeply affecting to Dr. Reid’s sensibility; the same disorder proving fatal to his wife and daughter, both of whom were buried with him the same day in the same grave.

Previous Page

Next Page