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

, born in Saintonge, was sent by Henry IV. on a voyage to the newly-discovered continent of America, in quality of captain of a man of war. In this expedition he signalized himself not less by his courage than his prudence, and may be considered as the founder of New France. It was he who caused the town of Quebec to be built; he was the first governor of that colony, and greatly exerted himself in the settling of a new commercial company at Canada. This company, established in 1628, was called the company of associates, and the cardinal de Richelieu put himself at their head. He published: “Voyages de la Nouvelle France, dite Canada,” 1632, 4to. He goes back to the first discoveries made by Verazani, coming down to the year 1631. This work is excellent in regard to material points, and the simple and natural manner in which they are exhibited. If he is censurable for any thing, it is for rather too much credulity. The author seems to be a person of sound judgment and strong resolution; disinterested, and zealous for the religion and interests of his country. He was expelled, with the French, from the colony in 1631, but when restored at the peace, he returned again in 1634, and was appointed governor-general. He died about 1635. Lake Champlain in North America had its name from him, He discovered it in 1608, and before his time it was called Corlaer’s lake.

Dr. Chandler’s other works were: 1. “Reflections on the Conduct of the Modern Deists, in their late writings against Christianity,” 1727. 2. “A Vindication of the Antiquity and Authority of Daniel’s Prophecies,” 1728, 3. A translation of Limborch’s “History of the Inquisition,” 1731, 2 vols. 4to. To this he prefixed “A large introduction, concerning the rise and progress of persecution, and the real and pretended causes of it.” This was attacked by Dr. Berriman, in a pamphlet entitled “Brief Remarks on Mr. Chandler’s Introduction to the History of the Inquisition.” Our author published, in the form of a letter, an answer to these “Remarks,” which engaged Dr. Berriman to write “A Review of his Remarks,” to which Mr. Chandler replied in “A second Letter to William Berriman, D. D. &c. in which his Review of his Hemarks on the Introduction to the History of the Inquisition is considered, and the Characters of St. Athanasius, and Martyr Laud, are farther stated and supported.” This publication was soon followed by another, entitled “A Vindication of a passage of the Right Reverend the Lord Bishop of London, in his second Pastoral Letter, against the misrepresentations of William Berriman, D. D. in a Letter to his Lordship;” and here the controversy ended. 4. “The Dispute better adjusted about the proper time of applying for a repeal of the Corporation and Test Acts,” &c.“1732, 8vo. 5.” A Paraphrase and critical Commentary on the prophecy of Joel,“1735, 4to. This was part of a commentary on the whole of the prophets, which he did not live to finish. 6.” The History of Persecution,“1736, 8vo. 7.” A Vindication of the History of the Old Testament,“in answer to Morgan’s” Moral Philosopher,“1741, 8vo. 8.” A Defence of the Prime Ministry and Character of Joseph,“1742, 8vo. 9.” The Witnesses of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ re-examined, and their Testimony proved consistent,“1744, 8vo. 10.” The Case of Subscription to explanatory articles of faith, &c. calmly considered,“1748, 8vo. 11.” A Letter to the rev. Mr. John Guyse, occasioned by his two sermojis on Acts ix. 20. in which the scripture notion of preaching Christ is stated and defended, and Mr. Guyse’s charges against his brethren are considered and proved groundless,“1729, 8vo. 12.” A second Letter to the rev. Mr. John Guyse, in which Mr. Guyse’s latitude and restrictive ways of preaching Christ are proved to be entirely the same; the notion of preaching Christ is farther cleared and defended; the charge alledged against 'him of defaming his brethren is maintained and supported; and his solemn arts in controversy are considered and exposed,“1730, 8vo. 13.” A Letter to the right hon. the Lord Mayor; occasioned by his lordship’s nomination of five persons, disqualified by act of parliament, as fit and proper persons to serve the office^ of Sheriffs, in which the nature and design of the corporation act is impartially considered and stated,“1738, 8vo. 14.” An Account of the Conferences held in Nicholas-lane, Feb. 13, 1734, between two Romish priests and some protestant divines; with some remarks on a pamphlet entitled The Conferences, c. truly stated/ 7 1735, 8vo. 15. “Cassiodori Senatoris Complexiones in Epistolas, Acta Apostolorum, & Apocalypsin, e vetustissimis Canonicorum Veronensium membranis nuper erutee. Editio altera ad Florentinam fideliter expressa, opera & cura Samuelis Chandleri,” 1722, 12mo. 16. “A short and plain Catechism, being an explanation of the Creed, Ten Commandments, and the Lord’s Prayer, by way of question and answer,” 1742, 12mo. 17. “Great Britain’s Memorial against the Pretender and Popery; to which is annexed, the method of dragooning the French protestants after the revocation of the edict of Nantes,” 1715, 12mo. This piece was thought so seasonable at the time of the rebellion, that it passed through ten editions. 18. “Many occasional sermons.” Dr. Chandler also wrote about fifty papers in the weekly publication called “The Old Whig, or Consistent Protestant.” In 1768, 4 vols. of his sermons were published by Dr. Amory, according to his own directions in his last will; to which was prefixed a neat engraving of him, from an excellent portrait by Mr. Chamberlin. He also expressed a desire to have some of his principal pieces, reprinted in 4 vols. 8vo; proposals were accordingly published for that purpose, but did not meet with sufficient encouragement. But in 1777, another work of our author was published, in 1 vol. 4to, “A Paraphrase and Notes on the Epistles of St. Paul to the Galatians and Ephesians, with doctrinal and practical Observations; together with a critical and practical Commentary on the two Epistles of St. Paul to the Thessalonians.” In this there are some valuable criticisms, but all are not entitled to that praise. Dr. Chandler also left in his interleaved Bible, a large number of critical notes, chiefly in Latin, and which were intended to be published; but the design has not yet been executed, and the four gentlemen to whom they were intrusted, Dr. Kippis, Mr. Farmer, Dr. Price, and Dr. Savage, are all dead, nor have we heard in what manner they disposed of the copy.

, a learned French antiquary, was born at Paris, Sept. 12, 1538, and became highly distinguished for general erudition, and especially for his knowledge of civil and canon law, history, politics, and the belles lettres. Nor was he less admired for the excellence of his private character. Louis XIII. made him intendant of the fortifications of the gabelles, or excise on salt, &c. in the principality of Sedan, and lastly intendant of the finances of the duchies of Bar and Lorrain. He compiled, from original records, “Historical Memoirs of the Houses of Lorrain and Bar;” the first part of which only was published at Paris, 1642, folio. He also published other works on detached parts of French history; and after his death, his son published his “Treatise on Fiefs,” 1662, folio, in which he maintains an opinion, which has been thought to be erroneous, viz. that hereditary fiefs commenced only after the time of Hugh Capet. He died at Paris in 1658.

, an ingenious French writer, the son of an advocate, was born at Paris in 1741, and became teacher of the French language in a military school in Spain, where he published a French grammar, entitled “Arte de Hablar bien Frances,” Madrid, 4ta, which went through six editions. On his return to France he was appointed professor of history in the central school of Gers, and afterwards in the imperial school at Fountainbleau. He died at Auch, Oct. 15, 1808. His works were, 3. “Dictionnaire des mots et usages introduits par la resolution,” 8vo, a curious medley of cant phrases, which he published under the name of M. L'Epithete of Politicopolis. 2. “Voyage dans les trois royaumes d‘Angleterre, d’Ecosse, et d'Irlande:” this journey he took in 1788 and 1789, and the work appeared in 1792, 3 vols. 8vo. 3. “Lettres ecrites de Barcelonne a un zelateur de la liberte” qui voyage en Allemande,“1792, 8vo. 4.” Voyage philosophique, politique, et litteraire, fait en Russie pendant les annees 1788 and 1789, &c.“2 vols. 8vo, replete with curious and original information. 5.” Essai didactique sur la forme que doivent avoir les livres elementaires faits pour les ecoles nationales,“1795, 8vo. 6.” Tables chronologiques,“a translation of Blair’s Chronology, 1797, 4to. 7. The Index to Beau marc hais’s edition of Voltaire’s works, which forms the 71st and 72d volume of that edition. 8.” Rudimens de i'histoire,“a work of very considerable merit. 9.” La Science de I'histoire,“1803, et seqq. 4 vols. 4to. This work is peculiarly happy in the plan, and judicious and accurate in its execution. 10.” Histoire de France abregee ct chronologique depuis les Gaulois et les Francs jusqu'en 1808," 2 vols. 8vo.

, a celebrated French poet, was born at Paris Dec. 4, 1595, and having been educated under Frederic Morel, Nicholas Bourbon, and other eminent masters, became tutor to the children of the marquis de la Trousse, grand marshal of France, and afterwards steward to this nobleman. During an abode of seventeen years in this family, he translated “Guzman d'Alfarache,” from the Spanish, and directed his particular attention to poetry. He wrote odes, sonnets, the last words of cardinal Richelieu, and other pieces of poetry; and at length distinguished himself by his heroic poem called “La Pucelle,” or “France delivree.” Chapelain was thought to have succeeded to the reputation of Malherbe, and after his death was reckoned the prince of the French poets. Gassendi, who was his friend, has considered him in this light; and says, that “the French muses have found some comfort and reparation for the loss they have sustained by the death of Malherbe, in the person of Chapelain, who has now taken the place of the defunct, and is become the arbiter of the French language and poetry.” Sorbiere has not scrupled to say, that Chapelain “reached even Virgil himself in heroic poetry;” and adds, that “he was a man of great erudition as well as modesty.” He possessed this glorious reputation for thirty years; and, perhaps, might have possessed it now, if he had suppressed the “Pucelle:” but the publication of this poem in 1656, ruined his poetical character, in spite of all attempts of his friends to support it. He had employed a great many years about it; the expectation of the public was raised to the utmost; and, as is usual in such cases, disappointed. The consequence of this was, that he was afterwards set as much too low in his poetical capacity as perhaps before he was too high.

Chapelain died at Paris, Feb. 22, 1674, aged seventynine. He was of the king’s counsellors; very rich, and had some amiable qualities, but was covetous. “Pelisson and I,” says Menage, “had been at variance a long time with Chapelain; but, in a fit of humility, he called upon me and insisted that we should go and offer a reconciliation to him, for that it was his intention,” as much as possible, to live in peace with all men.“We went, and I protest I saw the very same billets of wood in the chimney which I had observed there twelve years before. He had 50,Ooo crowns in ready cash by him; and his supreme delight was to have his strong box opened and the bags taken out, that he might contemplate his treasure. In this manner were his bags about him when he died; which gave occasion to a certain academician to say,” there is our friend Chapelain just dead, like a miller among his bags.“He had no occasion therefore to accept of cardinal Richelieu’s offer. Being at the height of his reputation, Richelieu, who was fond of being thought a wit as well as a statesman, and was going to publish something which he would have pass for an excellent performance, could not devise a better expedient than prefixing Chapelain’s name to it.” Chapelain,“says he,” lend me your name on this occasion, and I will lend you my purse on any other.“The learned Huet endeavoured to vindicate his great poem, but could not succeed against the repeated attacks of Boileau, Racine, and Fontaine. Chapelain, however, was a man of learning, and a good critic, and he has found an able defender in the abbe cT Olivet, in his History of the French Academy, It was at the desire of Malherbe and Vaugelas that Chapelain wrote the famous preface to the” Adone“of Marino; and it was he who corrected the very first poetical composition of Racine, his” Ode to the Queen," who introduced Racine to Colbert, and procured him a pension, for which Racine repaid him by joining the wits in decrying his poem.

, a celebrated French poet, called Chapelle from the place of his nativity, a village between Paris and St. Denys, was born in 1621. He was the natural son of Francis Lullier, a man of considerable rank and fortune, who was extremely tender of him, and gave him a liberal education. He had the celebrated Gassendi for his master in philosophy; but he distinguished himself chiefly by his poetical attempts. There was an uncommon ease in all he wrote; and he was excellent in composing with double rhymes. We are obliged to him for that ingenious work in verse and prose, called “Voyage de Bachaumont,” which he wrote in conjunction with Bachaumont. Many of the most shining parts in Moliere’s comedies it is but reasonable to ascribe to him: for Moliere consulted him upon all occasions, and paid the highest deference to his taste and judgment. He was intimately acquainted with all the wits of his time, and with many persons of quality, who used to seek his company: and we learn from one of his own letters to the marquis of Chilly, that he had no small share in the favour of the king, and enjoyed, probably from court, an annuity of 8000 livres. He is said to have been a very pleasant, but withal a very voluptuous man. Among other stories in the Biographia Gallica, we are told that Boileau met him one day; and as he had a great value for Chapelle, ventured to tell him, in a very friendly manner, that “his inordinate love of the bottle would certainly hurt him.” Chapelle seemed very seriously affected; but this meeting happening unluckily by a tavern, “Come,” says he, “let us turn in here, and I promise to attend with patience to all that you shall say.” Boileau led the way, in hopes of converting him, but both preacher and hearer became so intoxicated that they were obliged to be sent home in separate coaches. Chapelle died in 1686, and his poetical works and “Voyage” were reprinted with additions at the Hague in 1732, and again in 1755, 2 vols. 12mo.

, the descendant of a noble family, was born at Bourges in 1655, and came to Paris in his youth, where he was trained up to business, and obtained the place of receiver-general of the finances at Rochelle. During this employment he found leisure to indulge his taste for polite literature, and the prince of Conti having heard of his merits made him one of his secretaries in 1687. The prince also sent him into Svvisserland on political business, and the king being afterwards informed of his talents, employed him in the same capacity. La Chapelle disclosed his knowledge of the politics of Europe in a work printed at Paris in 1703, under the disguise of Basil, in 8 vols. 12mo, entitled “Lettres d'un Suisse a un Francois,” explaining the relative interest of the powers at war. He wrote also “Memoires historiques sur la Vie d'Armand de Bourbon, prince de Conti,” 16$9, 4to, and, if we are not mistaken, translated and published in English in 1711, 8vo. He also wrote poetry, and some dramas, in which last he was an unsuccessful imitator of Racine. In 1688 he was admitted a member of the French academy. He died at Paris in 1723.

, an ingenious English lady, was the daughter of Thomas Mulso, esq. of Tvvy well in Northamptonshire, and was born Oct. 27, 1727. At a very early age she exhibited proofs of a lively imagination and superior understanding. It is said that at nine years of age she composed a romance, entitled “The Loves of Amoret and Melissa,” which, we are told, exhibited “fertility of invention, and extraordinary specimens of genius.” Her mother was a beauty, with all the vanity that unhappily attaches to beauty, and fearing that her daughter’s understanding might become a more attractive object than the personal charms on which she valued herself, she took no pleasure in the progress which Hester seemed to make, and if she did not obstruct, employed at least no extraordinary pains in promoting her education. This mother, however, died when her daughter was yet young, and a circumstance which otherwise might have been of serious consequence, seemed to strengthen the inclination miss Mulso had shewn to cultivate her mind. She studied the French and Italian languages, and made some progress in the Latin. She read the best authors, especially those who treat of morals and philosophy. To these she added a critical perusal of the Holy Scriptures, but history, we are told, made no part of her studies until the latter part of her life. Her acquaintance with Richardson, whose novels were the favourites of her sex, introduced her to Mr. Chapone, a young gentleman then practising law in the Temple. Their attachment was mutual, but not hasty, or imprudent. She obtained her father’s consent, and a social intimacy continued tor a considerable period, before it ended in marriage. In the mean time, miss Mulso became acquainted with the celebrated miss Carter; a correspondence took place between them, which increased their mutual esteem, and a friendship was thus cemented, which lasted during a course of more than fifty years.

, an eminent French astronomer, was born at Mauriac, a town in Upper Auvergne, on the 23d of May, 1728, of John Chappe, lord of the barony of Auteroche, and Magdalen de la Farge, daughter of Peter de la Farge, lord of larPierre. From his birth he enjoyed the valuable advantage of not being under the necessity of struggling, like many men of genius, with adversity and penury. The distinguished rank which his parents held in their province, added to their wealth and opulence, enabled them to bestow upon their son an excellent education, the foundation of which was laid at Mauriac, where he began his studies. Having made considerable progress here, he went afterwards to finish them at the college de Louis le Grand. M. Chappe, from his earliest infancy, shewed a surprising turn for drawing and the mathematics. Descartes was scarcely eight years of age when he was styled a philosopher, and Chappe at that age might have been called a mathematician. An irresistible impulse, and singular disposition, as if innate, led him to draw plans and make calculations; but these pursuits, quite forojgn to the studies in which he was then engaged, occupied no part of that time which was allotted for them. He applied to the former only at those moments which the regulations. of the college suffered him to call his own.

Had it not been for the care of a very respectable French academician, the fruits of this observation would have been entirely lost to the learned. The abbé Chappe having at his death committed his papers to the care of M. Pauli, they were afterwards arranged and published by M. Cassini, the son, who at an age when others only afford hopes of their future celebrity, had acquired the highest reputation; and if any thing could console the public for the loss occasioned by the abbé being prevented from putting the last hand to his work, it certainly was the seeing it appear under the auspices of so able an editor.

, a skilful apothecary, born at Usez, in Upper Languedoc, in 1618, followed ins profession at Orange, from whence he went and settled at Paris. Having obtained a considerable share of reputation by his treatise on the virtues and properties of treacle, he was chosen to deliver a course of chemistry at the royal garden of plants at Paris, in which he acquitted himself with general applause during nine years. His “Pharmacopeia,” 1673, of which an improved edition by Monnier was published in 1753, 2 vols. 4to, was the fruit of his lectures and his studies, and has been translated into all the languages of Europe, and even into the Chinese, for the accommodation of the emperor. The edicts against the Calvinists obliged him to quit his country in 1680. He went over to England, from thence to Holland, and afterwards into Spain with the ambassador, who brought him to the assistance of his master Charles II. Languishing in sickness from his birth. Every good Spaniard was at that time convinced that the vipers for twelve leagues round Toledo were innoxious, ever since they were deprived of their venom by the fiat of a famous archbishop. The French doctor endeavoured to combat this error, and the physicians of the court, envious of the merit of C haras, failed not to take umbrage at this impiety; they complained of him to the inquisition, from whence he was not dismissed till he had abjured the protestant faith. Charas was then seventy -two years old. He returned to Paris, and was admitted a member of the royal academy, and there he continued until his death, Jan. 17, 1698.

After Chardin’s return to Paris, he remained there only fifteen months, the king of Persia having made him his agent in 1666, and commissioned him to purchase several trinkets of value. Chardin accordingly left Paris Aug. 17, 1671, and set sail in November from Leghorn in a vessel bound for Smyrna, again visited Persia, and did not return to Europe until 1677. He now determined to settle in England, and came to London in April 1681, and on the 24th of that month was knighted by Charles II. The same day he married a young lady of Rouen, the daughter of a protestant refugee in London. Next year he was chosen a fellow of the royal society. After this, Charles II. sent him to Holland; and in 1683, we find him there as agent for the English East India Company. In 1686 he published the first part of his Voyages, (the other not appearing until 1711), under the title of “Journal duVoyage de Chardin en Perse, et aux Inde? Orientates, par la Mer Noire et par la Colchide,” folio. This was immediately translated into English under his inspection, and published the same year. The dedication to James II. is singular for a high complimentary strain, arising from his gratitude to Charles and James for their patronage of him, and, what he was more unfortunate in attempting, a prophecy of the duration of James’s reign. After this he carried on a considerable trade in jewels, but continued his studies of the oriental languages and antiquities. The continuation of his Travels was published along with the first part much enlarged at Amsterdam in 3 vols. 4to, and 10 vols. 8vo, with plates on which he employed the skill of M. Grelot, being himself no draftsman. There was also a new edition at Amsterdam in 1735, 4 vols. 4to. He died, according to Musgrave’s “Adversaria,” on Dec. 26, and not Jan. 5, 1713, as the French biographers report, and the register of C his wick proves that he was buried there December 29. There is no memorial of him at Chiswick, but there is a monument to his memory in Westminster Abbey, with only this inscription, “Sir John Chardin. Nomen sibi fecit enndo.” He lived in his latter days at a house in Turnham-green, which at his death was sold to Thomas Lutwyche, esq. His Travels have been translated into English, or at least large extracts in Harris’s and other collections of voyages, and into German, and Flemish; and as they contain authentic and valuable information with regard to the religion, manners, products, and commerce, &c. of the countries he visited, they obtained an extensive circulation. Among other curious particulars, he records several medical facts; and particularly an account of his own case, when he was attacked with a dangerous fever at Gombron, and cured by the country physicians, who employed the repeated affusion of cold water. This fact has suggested an useful hint to modern practitioners.

In the preface to his Voyages, he promised other works, as “A Geography of Persia;” “A Compendious History of that Empire, taken from Persian Authors;” and “Observations on Passages of the Holy Scripture, explained by the manners and customs of the East,” but the two former never appeared, and the latter was discovered by a public advertisement In 1770, sir John’s descendants advertised a reward of twenty guineas for this manuscript, which they call “A Commentary or Explanation of the Old Testament, from the manners and customs of the East, written in French by sir J. Chardin,” and which, they add, about twenty years before, i. e. 1750, was seen by a gentleman in the possession of Dr. Oldfield. It was describecTto have been a thin quarto volume, in a very small hand. But when Mr. Harmer compiled his “Observations on divers passages of Scripture, &c.” illustrated by books of travels, he recovered this treasure by means of sir William Jlusgrave, bart. in whose possession it was, not a single quarto volume, but six small ms volumes, the principal part of which Mr. Harmer incorporated in his valuable work.

, of Aphrodisium, secretary to a rhetorician named Athenagoras, lived at the end of the fourth century, if these are not fictitious names, which there is great reason to think. A Greek romance, in his style, was some years ago found, entitled “The Loves of Chsereas and Callirhoe,” an edition of which was published by M. d‘Orville, professor of history at Amsterdam, 1750, 4to, with a Latin translation and notes. A French translation appeared at Paris, 1763, 2 vols. 8vo, and M. Fallet published a new one, 1775, 8vo. Gesner, Fabricius, and M. Huet, had spoken of this romance as being only known by name. It is a very amusing composition, and the notes of D’Orville contain a treasure of critical learning. They were adopted afterwards by "Reiske in his edition of Leipsic, 1783, 8vo, and the novel was translated into English, 1763, 2 vols. 12mo, with a preface giving all the account that is known of the author.

, a learned and industrious French Jesuit, was born at St. Quintin in 1684, and died in 1761, aged 78. His fame rests chiefly on the histories of his travels, which were extensive, and his accounts, although diffuse, are in general reckoned very godd authority. They consist of: 1. “Histoire et description gene*rale du Japon,” 1738, 2 vols. 4to; and 1754, 6 vols. 12mo. 2. “Histoire de PIsle de St. Dominique,” 1720, 2 vols. 4to. 3. “Histoire generale de la Nouvelle France,” 1744, 3 vols. 4to, and 6 vols. 12mo. 4. “Histoire générale du Paraguay,” 1756, 6 vols. 12mo, and 3 vols. 4to. From these were translated into English, the “Journal of a Voyage to North America,” 1760, 2 vols. 8vo, abridged afterwards under the title of “Letters to the duchess of Lesdiguieres, giving an account of a voyage to Canada,” &c. 1763, 8vo; and “The History of Paraguay,” 1769, 2 vols. 8vo. Charlevoix also published in 1724, “Vie de Mere Marie de l'Incarnation,” 12mo; and he was for twenty-four years employed on the “Journal de Trevoux,” which he enriched with many valuable articles.

, dean of the French academy, was born at Paris, Feb. 1620. His early discovery of great acuteness made his friends design him for the bar: but his taste led him to prefer the repose and stillness of the closet, and he became more delighted with languages and antiquity, than with the study of the law. He was made a member of the French academy in 1651, and had the advantage of the best conversation for his improvement. When Colbert became minister of state, he projected the setting up a French East-India company; and to recommend the design more effectually, he thought it proper that a discourse should be published upon this subject. Accordingly he ordered Charpentier to draw one up, and was so pleased with his performance, published in 1664, that he kept him in his family, with a design to place him in another academy which was then founding, and which was afterwards known by the name of “Inscriptions and Medals.” The learned languages, in which Charpentier was a considerable master, his great knowledge of antiquity, and his exact and critical judgment, made him very serviceable in carrying on the business of this newacademy; and it is agreed on all hands, that no person of that learned society contributed more than himself towards that noble series of medals, which were struck of the most considerable events that happened in the reign of Lewis XIV. but his adulation of the king exceeded that of all his contemporaries.

, a native of Bayeux, one of the first French writers who aspired to elegance, flourished about 1430. He was secretary to the kings Charles VI. and VII. and employed in several embassies. His compositions in prose excelled those that were poetical, and he spoke as well as he wrote, so that he was esteemed the father of French eloquence. The following curious anecdote relating to him is recorded: Margaret of Scotland, first wife to the dauphin, afterwards Lewis XI. as she passed through the Louvre, observed Alain asleep, and went and kissed him. When her attendants expressed their surprize that she should thus distinguish a man remarkable for his ugliness, she replied, “I do not kiss the man, but the mouth that has uttered so many charming things.” His works were published by the elder Du Chesne, in 1617, 4to; the first part consisting of his works in prose, viz. the “Curial;” a “Treatise on Hope;” the “Luadrilogus Invectif,” against Edward III.; and others, partly spurious; and the second part containing his poems, which are for the most part obscure and tedious. Alain Chartier died at Avignon in 1449. We find much difference in the biographers of Chartier, some ascribing to him the “Chroniques de St. Denys,” Paris, 1493, 3 vols. fol. and others to his brother John; and the “History of Charles VII.” likewise attributed to him, is given by Du Chesne to Berri, first herald to Charles VII. and by Moreri to Gilles de Bouvier.

, canon of the cathedral church of Paris, his native place, where he was born in 1639, possessed a very superior degree of knowledge in the liturgies, rites, and ceremonies of the church; and had for that purpose travelled over Italy, France, and Germany; studying every where the particular customs of each separate church. He died 1712, aged seventy-three, leaving a “Universal Martyrology,” Paris, 1709, 4to, and the “Life of St. Chaumont,” 1697, 12mo. He also published the “Hagiographicai Dictionary,” which was inserted by Menage in his etymologies of the French tongue, with great praise of the author, as one whose merit was not duly estimated by the age he lived in.

, a Flemish gentleman, who was educated at the court of the dukes of Burgundy, and esteemed as one of those by whom the French language was at that time best understood. John Molinet was his pupil. He died 1475, leaving in French verse, an account of all the extraordinary things which happened in his time, 1531, 4to; and at the end of the Legend of Fairfeu, 1723, 8vo; “Le Chevalier delibere, ou la Mort du Due de Bourgogne devant Nanci,” 1489, 4to. Some attribute this work to Oliver de la Marche. “Hist, du Chevalier Jaques de Lalain,” Antwerp, 1634, 4to; “Les Epitaphes d‘Hector et d’Achille,” 1525, 8vo.

, a marshal in the French army, and a member of the French academy, and of many other literary societies, was born in 1734, of a distinguished family. His military talents raised him to the rank of brigadier-general, and he is said to have served in that capacity with great reputation in America. Of his military, however, we know less than of his literary career, which he pursued amidst all his public employments. He had early in life a strong passion for poetry and music. Many of his comedies, written for private theatres, and heard with transport, might have been equally successful on the public stages, had he had courage sufficient to make the experiment. He was an officer in the French guards in 1765, when he published his ingenious “Essay on the Union of Poetry and Music.” This essay was the consequence of a voyage into Italy, where he seems to have adopted an exclusive taste for the dramatic music of that country, as Rousseau had done before. He even adopts some of Rousseau’s ideas upon music; but in general he thinks for himself, both deeply and originally. By his reflections on the musical drama, he not only offended the musicians of France, but the lyric poets of every country; not scrupling to assert that in an opera, music, which ought to be the principal consideration, had been too long a slave to syllables; for since the cultivation of the melo-drama, it was found that music had its own language, its tropes, metaphors, colouring, movements, passions, and expression of sentiment. This little tract, for it was but a pamphlet of 90 or 100 pages, 12mo, gave birth to a long controversy in France, in which the author was supported by the abbe Arnaud, M. D'Alembert, the abb Morellet, and M. Marmontel. His chief antagonist was the author of a “Treatise on the Melo-Drama,” who, loving poetry better than music, wished to reduce the opera to a mere recitative or musical declamation. During the subsequent feuds between the Gluckists and Piccinists, the opponents of the marquis de Chastellux enlisted with the former, and his friends with the latter of these sects.

, in Latin Castellanus, a very learned French prelate, is said by some to have been of obscure birth, but his biographer Galland makes him of an ancient family, and the son of a brave knight. Yet this is doubtful, if what he said to king Francis I. be more than a witticism. The king once asked him if he was a gentleman; to which Chatel answered “that there were three in the ark, but he did not really know from which of them he descended.” He was, however, born at Arc, in Burgundy, and in the eleventh year of his age, before which his parents died, he was sent to Dijon, for education, where he made an astonishing progress, and before he had been there six years, was appointed a teacher, in which capacity he soon distinguished himself, and on one occasion made a public display of more than grammatical talents. His master, Peter Turreau, was accused of being an astrologer, and Chatel pleaded his cause so ably that he was acquitted. He afterwards travelled, in order to cultivate the acquaintance of the learned men of his time, and particularly of Erasmus, whom he met at Basil, and who conceived such a high opinion of his learning, as to recommend him to Frobenius, to be corrector of the Greek and Latin authors, printed at his celebrated press. While here he had also an opportunity of correcting some of Erasmus’s works; but they left Basil together, when the popish religion was established there. Erasmus retired to Fribourg, and Chatel returned to France, where he accepted the offer made him by some persons of distinction, to be tutor to certain young men who were to study law at Bourges, under the celebrated Alciat. As they were not yet prepared to depart, he read public lectures on the Greek text of St. Paul’s epistle to the Romans; and unfortunately for his reputation, was entrapped into an intrigue with a young woman, a circumstance on which Bayle expatiates with his usual delight ~in what is indelicate. ChatePs scholars, however, being at length ready, he accompanied them to Bourges, and studied law, filling up his leisure hours with topics of polite literature. His diligence was unremitting, as he slept scarcely three hours in the night, and the moment he waked ran with eagerness to his books. This method of study he preserved, even afterwards, when appointed reader to the king.

Having an inclination to visit Italy, the bishop of Auxerre, who was going there in a diplomatic character, took him with him, but at Rome he found little enjoyment except in contemplating the remains of antiquity. The corruption of morals at the court of Rome appeared so atrocious in his eyes, that for many years afterwards he could not speak on the subject without indignation, and appears indeed to have conceived as bad an opinion of the court of Rome as any of the reformers, and expressed himself with as much severity. From Rome he went to Venice, and was induced to accept the office of teaching polite literature in the island of Cyprus, with a pension of two hundred crowns, and there he read lectures for two years with great success. He afterwards went into Egypt, Jerusalem, and Constantinople, and on his return home, the French ambassador at the Porte gave him letters of strong recommendation to Francis I. who appointed him his reader; and entertained him with the utmost familiarity. Chatel availed himself of this favour to procure advantages to learning and learned men; but although his sentiments were so far liberal as to admit that the church wanted reforming, he supported the catholic religion, and even assisted the inquisitors and informers. He was also averse to capital punishments for heresy, and involved himself in danger by pleading for some pretended heretics, who, it was reported, were to be put to death. He likewise appeased the king’s wrath against the Waldenses before the slaughter of Cabrioles and Merindol, and once delivered Dolet out of prison. His zeal for maintaining the rights of the Gallican church against the pretensions of the court of Rome, rendered him odious there, and the doctors of the Sorbonne were not less displeased with him for the protection he granted in 1545, to Robert Stephens, the celebrated printer. These were favourable symptoms of liberality, at least, if not of an inclination to befriend the cause of the reformation, and soften the rigours of persecution. But Chatel wanted firmness, and withdrawing his protection from Stephens, the latter was forced to retire into another country. Chatel was perhaps influenced by the favours heaped upon him by Francis T. who made him bishop of Tulle in 1539, and afterwards bishop of Macron. He is said never to have appeared to more advantage as a divine and a man of eloquence than when he prepared Francis I. for death, and delivered his funeral oration. Yet in this oration, by hinting that the soul of Francis had immediately gone to heaven, he alarmed the doctors of the Sorbonne, who complained that he was heretic enough to oppose the doctrine of purgatory. A more valid objection, perhaps, might have been his high praise of Francis I. whose character was not that of perfect purity.

, a gentleman descended froman ancient family in Bretany, one of the members of the French, academy, advocate-general to the parliament of Rennes, afterwards master of the requests, and counseller of state, was born in 1593. The court entrusted him with several important commissions; but, upon his refusing to be among the judges at the trial of the marechal de Marillac, he was sent to prison, but set at liberty some time after. It is said, that, being one day with M. de St. Preuil, who was soliciting the due de Montmorenci’s pardon, the king said to him, “I believe M. du Chatelet would willingly part with an arm to save M. de Montmorenci.” To which he replied, “I would, sire, that I could lose them both, for they can do you no service, and save one who has gained many battles for you, and would gain many more.” After his release from prison above noticed, he went to the king’s chapel; but that prince affecting to look another way that he might not meet the eyes of a person to whom he had lately done such a flagrant injury, Du Chatelet whispered one of the noblemen, “Be so good, my lord, as to tell the king, that I freely forgive him, and beg the honour of one look.” This made the king smile, and Du Chatelet was forgiven. It was after the same release, that, when the cardinal de Richelieu (most of whose state papers were the products of Lis pen) made some excuses for his detention, he answered, “I make a great difference betwixt any ill your eminency does of yourself, and any which you permit to be done nor shall you find me the less devoted to your service.” Du Chatelet died April 6, 1636, leaving several works in prose and verse, the principal of which are, 1. “Histoire de Bertrand du Gueschin, connetable de France,” 1666, fol. and 1693, 4to. 2. “Observations sur la vie et la condamnation du mareschal de Marillac,” Paris, 1633, 4to. 3. “Plusieurs de pieces pour servir a l'Histoire,” 1635, fol. and some satires and poems which are not in much estimation.

, an English poet of singular genius and character, was born Nov. 20, 1752. His father was originally a writing usher to a school in Bristol, afterwards v a singing man in the cathedral, and lastly, master of the free-school in Pyle-street in the same city. He died about three months before this son was born. It is not quite unimportant to add that our poet was descended from a long line of ancestors who held the office of sexton of St. Mary Reclcliffe; since it was in the muniment room of this church that the materials were found from which he constructed that system of imposture which has rendered his name celebrated, and his history interesting. At five years of age he was sent to the school in Pyle-street, then superintended by a Mr. Love; but here he improved so little that his mother took him back. While under her care his childish attention is said to have been engaged by the illuminated capitals of an old musical manuscript in French, which circumstance encouraged her to initiate him in the alphabet, and she afterwards taught him to read from an old black-letter Testament or Bible. That a person of her rank in life should be able to read the blackletter is somewhat extraordinary, but the fact rests upon her authority, and has been considered as an introduction to that fondness for antiquities for which he was afterwards distinguished.

, styled the Father of English poetry, is one of whose birth and family nothing has been decided. It has been contended on the one hand, that he was of noble origin; on the other, that he descended from persons in trade. Even the meaning of his name in French, Chaucier, a shoemaker, has been brought in evidence of a low origin, while the mention of the name Chaucer, in several records, from the time of William the conqueror to that of Edward I. has been thought sufficient to prove the contrary. Leland says he was nobili loco natus but Speght, one of his early biographers, informs us, that, “in the opinion of some heralds, he descended not of any great house, which they gather by his arms;” and Mr. Tyrwhitt is inclined to believe the heralds rather than Leland. Speght, however, goes farther, and makes his father a vintner, who died in 1348, and left his property to the church of St. Mary Aldermary, where he was buried. This is confirmed by Stowe, who says, “Richard Chawcer, vintner, gave to that church his tenement and tavern, with the appurtenance, in the Royal-­streete the corner of Kerion-lane, and was there buried, 1348.” But neither Stowe nor Speght afford any proof that this Richard Chawcer was the father of our poet.

One effect of this connection was the marriage of our poet, by which he became eventually related to his illustrious patron. John of Gaunt’s duchess, Blanche, entertained in her service one Catherine Rouet, daughter of sir Payne, or Pagan Rouet, a native of Hainault, and Guion king at arms for that country. This lady was afterwards married to sir Hugh Swinford, a knight of Lincoln, who died soon after his marriage, and on his decease, his lady returned to the duke’s family, and was appointed governess of his children. While in this capacity, she yielded to the duke’s solicitations, and became his mistress. She had a sister, Philippa, who is stated to have been a great favourite with the duke and duchess, and by them, as a mark of their high esteem, recommended to Chaucer for a wife. He accordingly married her about 1360, when he was in his thirty-second year, and this step appears to have increased his interest with his patron, who took every opportunity to promote him at court. Besides the instances already given, we are told that he was made shield-­bearer to the king, a title at that time of great honour, the shield-bearer being always next the king’s person, and generally, upon signal victories, rewarded with military honours. But here again his biographers have mistaken the meaning of the courtly titles of those days. In the 46 Edward III. 1372, the king appointed him envoy, with two others, to Genoa, by the title of scutifer noster, “our squier.” Scutifer and armiger, according to Mr. Tyrwhitt, are synonymous terms with the French escuier; but Chaucer’s biographers thinking the title of squier too vulgar, changed it to shield-bearer, as if Chaucer had the special office of carrying the king’s shield. With respect to the nature of this embassy to Genoa, biography and history are alike silent, and from that silence, the editor of the Canterbury tales is inclined to doubt whether it ever took place, or whether he had that opportunity of visiting Petrarch, an event which his biographers refer to the same period.

About a year after this, the king granted to him the wardship of sir Edmund Staplegate’s heir, for which he received 104l. and in the next year some forfeited wool to the value of 71l. 4s. 6d. These, and his other pecuniary advantages, are said to have raised his income to a thousand pounds per annum, a prodigious sum at that time, but quite incredible. Whatever his income was, however, he informs us in the “Testament of Love,” it enabled him to live with dignity and hospitality. In the last year of king Edward III. 1377, he was sent to France, with sir Guichard Dangle, and Richard Stau or Sturry, to treat of a marriage between the prince of Wales, Richard, and a daughter of the French king. Such is Froissart’s account; but the English historians, Hollingshed and Barnes, inform us, that the principal object of this mission was to complain of some infringement of the truce concluded with the French, and that although they were not very successful in that remonstrance, it produced some overtures towards the said marriage, and this ended in a new treaty.

Although Chaucer has been generally hailed as the founder of English poetry and literature, the extent of the obligations which English poetry and literature owe to him has not been decidedly ascertained. The improvement he introduced in language and versification has been called in question, not only by modern but by ancient critics. The chief faults attributed to him, are the mixture of French in all his works, and his ignorance of the laws of versification. With respect to the mixture of French words and phrases in Chaucer’s writings, it must be observed that the French language was prevalent in this country several centuries before his time. Even previously to the conquest, the Normans had made it a fashion to speak French in the English court, and from thence it would naturally be adopted by the people; but after the conquest this became the case in a much greater proportion. It was a matter of policy in the conqueror to introduce his own language, and it would soon become a matter of interest in the people to acquire it. We uniformly find that where new settlers appear, even without the superiority of conquerors, the aborigines find it convenient to learn their language. The history of king William’s conquest and policy shows that his language must soon extend over a kingdom which he had parcelled out among his chiefs as the reward of their valour and attachment. One step which he took must above all others have contributed to naturalize the French language. He supplied all vacancies in the ecclesiastical establishment with Norman clergy; and if, with all this influence, the French language did not universally prevail, it must at least have interfered in a very considerable degree with the use of the native tongue. At schools, French and Latin were taught together in the reign of Edward III. and it was usual to make the scholars construe their Latin lessons into French, a practice which must have greatly retarded the progress of the native tongue towards refinement. Some check, indeed, appears to have been given to this in the reign of the same sovereign; but the proceedings in parliament and the statutes continued to be promulgated in French for a far longer period.

These circumstances have been advanced to prove that Chaucer ought not to be blamed for introducing words and phrases with which his countrymen were familiar long before his time, and which they probably considered as elegancies. If Chaucer was taught at school, as other youths were, it is plain that he must have learned French while he was learning his mother tongue, and was taught to give a preference to the former by making it the vehicle of translation.

The language, therefore, in use in Chaucer’s days, among the upper classes, and by all that would be thought learned, was a Norman-Saxon dialect, introduced by the influx and influence of a court of foreigners, and spread wherever that influence extended. Journeys to France were also common, for the purposes of improvement in such accomplishments as were then fashionable, and this kind of intercourse, which is always in favour of the country visited, would perhaps tend to introduce a still greater proportion of French phraseology. But still the foundation was laid at home, in the prevailing modes of education. With respect to the progress of this mixture, and the effects of the accessions which in the course of nearly three centuries, the English language received from Normandy, the reader is referred to Mr. Tyrwhitt’s very elaborate “Essay on the Language and Versification of Chaucer,” prefixed to his edition of the” Canterbury Tales.” It appears, upon the whole, that the language of our ancestors was complete in all its parts, and had served them for the purposes of discourse, and even of composition in various kinds, long before they had any intimate acquaintance with their French neighbours.” They had therefore “no call from necessity, and consequently no sufficient inducement, to alter its original and radical constitutions, or even its customary forms.” And accordingly, notwithstanding the prevalence of the French from the causes already assigned, it is proved by Mr. Tyrwhitt that “in all the essential parts of speech, the characteristical features of the Saxon idiom were always preserved; and the crowds of French words which from time to time were imported, were themselves made subject, either immediately, or by degrees, to the laws of that same idiom.”

The Saxons had a species of writing which they called poetry, but it did not consist of regular verses, nor was it embellished by rhime. The Normans, it is generally thought, were the first who introduced rhime or metre, copied from the Latin rythmical verses, a bastard species, which belongs to the declining period of the Latin language. To deduce the history of versification from the earliest periods is impossible, for want of specimens. Two very trifling ones only are extant before the time of Henry II. namely, a few lines in the Saxon Chronicle upon the death of William the Conqueror, and a short canticle, which, according to Matthew Paris, the blessed virgin was pleased to dictate to Godric, an hermit near Durham. In the time of Henry II. Layamon, a priest, translated chiefly from the French of Wace, a fabulous history of the Britons, entitled Le Brut, which Wace himself, about 1155, had translated from the Latin of Geffry of Monmouth. In this there are a number of short verses, of unequal lengths, but exhibiting something like rhime. But so common was it to write whatever was written, in French or Latin, that another century must be passed over before we come to another specimen of English poetry, if we except the Ormulum, and a moral piece upon old age, &c. noticed by Mr. Tyrwhitt, and which he conjectures to have been written earlier than the reign of Henry III.

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

A selection of Chaufepie’s “Sermons” was published after his death by his nephew and colleague in the church at Amsterdam, Samuel de Chaufepié. But the work which gives him the best title to a place here, is his “Nouveau Dictionaire Historique et Critique pour servir de Supplement, ou de Continuation au Dictionaire de M. Pierre Bayle,” Amsterdam, 1750—1756, 4 vols. fol. The editors of the French Dict. Historique, of 1804, messieurs Chaudon and Delandine, speak of this as an ill-digested work, and say that the author, in continuing Bayle, has imitated him neither in his good nor his bad qualities, and that he does not interest his readers like the philosopher of Rotterdam, his style being inferior and incorrect. They allow, however, that he respects religion, although he declaims sometimes against the Roman Catholics; and they give due praise to his researches respecting the literature of France, England, and Holland. That he declaims against the Roman catholics sometimes, is an objection very natural to the editors of the French dictionary, but frequent recourse to Chaufepie’s work convinces us that he speaks with impartiality, and engages as little as possible with points of controversy. The work was originally intended as a supplement to Bayle, but various circumstances stated by the author in his preface, prevented the booksellers from prosecuting this plan, and it may rather be considered as a new work, founded partly on Bayle, and partly on the English “General Dictionary,” 10 vols. fol. The new articles from the pen of Chaufepié are in general accurate, and this work ought to be better known in this country, because, owing to the author’s religious principles, less use has been made of it abroad than it deserves. The English articles, although this circumstance is not perhaps of much importance here, are more full than in any other work published on the Continent, and the additions the author has made not only to them, but to Bayle’s series, afford a very favourable idea of the labour and research he must have employed. He appears to have been first applied to by the booksellers of Amsterdam in 1739, and to have spent several years in preparing it for the press. With respect to the charge that it is less interesting to readers than Bayle, we can only remark that in proportion as any biographer follows Bayle, he will render his work a tissue of interrupting impertinencies and crude sentiments.

years, when he was visited by the gout, the pains of which he contrived to alleviate, by conversations with his friends and the muses, and prolonged his life to a very advanced age, dying in 1726, in his 81st year. He was extremely desirous of becoming a member of -the academy of fine arts; and, on seeing another preferred to him, he took his revenge by satirical attacks on the management of the institution. It was the perfect consonance of his life with his poems, that gave them the natural air for which they have ever been so greatly admired. The philosophy of the graces, that animates his works, was also the rule of his life. But few of his poems were published during his lifetime, and those occasionally and detached; the trouble of collecting them he left to his friends after his death. The first editions were very imperfect, till Camusac and St. Marc took the pains to publish them in a completer collection, 1750, 2 vols. 12mo. They consist of epistles in verse, and letters in prose intermingled with verses. Both are characterised by an easy gaiety, agreeable pictures, lively strokes, genuine wit, pleasing fictions, Epicurean morality, or “sagesse commode,” as Saint Marc used to call it, and a style varied as the subject requires. They are not, however, without flat, incorrect, and puerile passages. His versification is flowing and harmonious, but frequently faulty and contrary to the rules of speech, and sometimes designedly negligent, in imitation of the simple style of Marot. Some find great harmony in the continual recurrence of the same rhymes, in which he followed Chapelle, and is praised by Dubos; and Camusac thinks that such verses are eminently adapted to music. Saint Marc, on the other hand, and the younger Racine, complain of their monotony, and conceive that the beauty of them consists solely in the conquest of greater difficulties, and that the French language is not so poor in sonorous phraseology as to stand in need of such a practice. Though the letters of Chaulieu were all actually written, and mostly directed to Bouillon, yet they are frequently interspersed with ingenious fictions. Excepting that to the chevalier Bouillon, the most remarkable letter is that addressed to M. la Fare, as the poet, with great frankness, gives us in it his own portrait. Chaulieu’s odes are not of the higher species.

, a painter, engraver, and designer of great talents and industry, was born at Paris in 1613) and died there in 1676. His first performances were some engravings from the pictures of Laurence de la Hire, who was his master; but the liveliness of his imagination not comporting with the tardiness of the graving tool, he began to delineate his own thoughts in aquafortis. If his works have not the delicacy and mellowness that distinguish the engravings of some other artists, yet he threw into them all the fire, all the force and sentiment of which his art is susceptible. He worked with surprising facility. His children used to read to him after supper the passages of history he intended to draw. He instantly seized the most striking part of the subject, traced the design of it on the plate of copper with the point of his graver; and, before he went to bed, fitted it for being corroded by the aquafortis the next day, while he employed himself in engraving or drawing something else. He supplied not only painters and sculptors with designs, but also carvers and goldsmiths, jewellers and embroiderers, and even joiners and smiths. Besides 4000 pieces engraved by his hand, and 1400 executed from his designs, he painted several small pictures, which were much admired, and many of them were purchased by Le Brun. The multitude of works on which he was employed brought their authors to his house, and their frequent meetings and conversations there terminated in the establishment of the French academy. He was admitted into the royal academy of painting and sculpture in 1663, and obtained a pension farengraving the plates of the Carousal. His small plates, Mr. Strutt says, are executed in a style much resembling that of Le Clerc, founded upon that of Callot. In his large prints he approaches near to that coarse, dark style, which was adopted by his tutor, La Hire. Among the sets of prints executed from his own compositions, are those for the “Bible History” the “History of Greece” the “Metamorphosis of Benserade” the “Jerusalem of Tasso” the “Fables of La Fontaine” “Alaric,” or “Rome conquered” and several romances. Among the prints engraved from other masters are, “Christ with the Disciples at Emmaus,” from Titian a “Concert,” from Dominichino; the “Life of St. Bruno,” from Le Sueur; “Apollo and Daphne,” from N. Poussin; “A Virgin and Child, with St. John and little Angels,” finely etched, and finished with much taste; and “Meleager presenting the Head of the Boar to Atalanta.” With all his talents and fame, Perrault assures us that he was a man of great modesty.

, a French mathetician and engineer, was born at Lyons July 24, 1657, and educated there in the college of Jesuits, from whence he removed to Paris in 1675. He first made an acquaintance with du Hamel, secretary to the academy of sciences; who, observing his genius to lie strongly towards astronomy, presented him to Cassini. Cassini took him with him to the observatory, and employed him under him, where he made a very rapid progress in the science. In 1683, the academy carried on the great work of the meridian to the north and south, begun in 1670, and Cassini having the southern quarter assigned him, took in the assistance of Chazelles. In 1684, the duke of Montemart engaged Chazelles to teach him mathematics, and the year after procured him the preferment of hydrography-professor for the gallies of Marseilles, where he set up a school for young pilots designed to serve on board the gailies. In 1686, the gallies made four little campaigns, or rather four courses, for exercise, during which Chazelles always went on board, kept his school on the sea, and shewed the practice of what he taught. He likewise made a great many geometrical and astronomical observations, which enabled him to draw a new map of the coast of Provence. In 1687 and 1688 he made two other sea campaigns, and drew a great many plans of ports, roads, towns, and forts, which were so much prized as to be lodged with the ministers of state. At the beginning of the war which ended with the peace of Ryswick, Chazelles and some marine officers fancied the gailies might be so contrived as to live upon the ocean, and might serve to tow the men of war when the wind failed, or proved contrary; and also help to secure the coast of France upon the ocean. He was sent to the western coasts in July 1689 to prove this scheme; and in 1690 fifteen gailies, new-built, set sail from Rochefort, cruised as far as Torbay in England, and proved serviceable at the descent upon Tinmouth. Here he performed the functions of an engineer, and shewed the courage of a soldier. The general officers he served under declared that when they sent him to take a view of any post of the enemy, they could rely entirely upon his intelligence. The gallies, after their expedition, came to the mouth of the Seine into the basons of Havre de Grace and Honfleur; but could not winter because it was necessary to empty these basons several times, to prevent the stagnation and stench of the water. He proposed to carry them to Rohan; and though all the pilots were against him, objecting insuperable difficulties, he succeeded in the undertaking* While he was at Rohan he digested into order the observations which he had made on the coasts, and drew distinct maps, with a portulan to them, viz. a large description of every haven, of the depth, the tides, the dangers and advantages discovered, &c. which were inserted in the “Neptune Francois,” published in 1692, in which year he was engineer at the descent at Oneille. In 1693 M. de Pontchartrain, then secretary of state for the marine, and afterwards chancellor of France, resolved to get the “Neptune François” carried on to a second volume, which was also to include the Mediterranean. Chazelles desired that he might have a year’s voyage in this sea, for making astronomical observations; and, the request being granted, he passed by Greece, Egypt, and the other parts of Turkey, with his quadrant and telescope in his hand. When he was in Egypt he measured the pyramids, and found that the four sides of the largest lay precisely against the four quarters of the world. Now as it is highly probable that this exact position to east, west, north, and south, was designed 3000 years ago by those that raised this vast structure, it follows, that, during so long an interval, there lias been no alteration in the situation of the heavens; or, that the poles of the earth and the meridians have all along continued the same. He likewise made a report of his voyage in the Levant, and gave the academy all the satisfaction they wanted concerning the position of Alexandria: upon which he was made a member of the academy in 1695. Chazelles died Jan. 16, 1710, of a malignant fever. He was a very extraordinary and useful man; and, besides his great genius and attainments, was also remarkable for his moral and religious endowments.

, a celebrated French preacher, was born at Paris Jan. 3, 1652, and entered the society of Jesuits in 1667, where he made a considerable figure, and afterwards taught classical literature and rhetoric at Orleans but his talents being peculiarly calculated for the pulpit, he became one of the most popular preachers of his time in the churches of Paris. It became the fashion to say that Bourdaioue was the Corneille, and Cheminais the Racine of preachers; but his fame was eclipsed by the superior merit of Massillon. When on account of his health he was obliged to desist from his public services, he went every Sunday, as long as he was able, to the country to instruct and exhort the poor. He died in the flower of his age Sept. 15, 1689. Bretonneau, another preacher of note, published his “Sermons” in 1690, 2 vols. 12mo, which were often reprinted, and Bretonneau added a third volume, but the fourth and fifth, which appeared in 1729, were neither written by Cheminais, nor edited by Bretonneau. The only other production of Cheminais was his “Sentimens de Piete,” 1691, 12mo, but it is said he had a turn for poetry, and wrote some verses of the lighter kind.

, grandson of the preceding Chemnitz, the reformer, was bora at Stettin May 9, 1605, and after completing his education, served in the army, first in Holland, and afterwards in Sweden, where his merit raised him from the rank of captain to that of counsellor of state, and historiographer of Sweden. Queen Christina also granted him letters of nobility, with the estate of Holstaedt in that country, where he died in 1678. He wrote, in six books, an account of the war carried on by the Swedes in Germany, which was published in 2 vols. folio, the first at Stettin in 1648, and the second at Holme in 1653; the whole in the German language: the second volume is most highly esteemed, owing to the assistance the author received from count Oxenstiern. The abbe Lenglet mentions a Latin edition, at least of the first volume, entitled “Beilum Germanicum ab ejus ortu anno 1612, ad mortem Gustavi Adolphi anno 1632.” Chemnitz is also said to be the author of “De ratione Status Imperii Romano- Germanici,” which was published at Stettin in 1640, under the assumed name of Hyppolitus a Lapide. Its object is to impugn the claims of the house of Austria, and it was answered by an anonymous writer, Franefort, 1657, by Bruggeman, at Jena, 1667, and by Henry Boeder, at Strasbtirgh, in 1674. It was afterwards translated into French by Bourgeois de Chastelet, under the title of “Des Interets des princes d'Allemagne,” Friestad, 1712, 2 vols. 12mo, and by Samuel Formey, as late as 1762, under the title of “Les vrais interets de l'Allemagne,” Hague, with notes and applications to the then state of German politics.

, the brother of Elizabeth Cheron, was born at Paris in 1660; and having been taught the rudiments of the art in his own country, he travelled to Italy, where his sister supplied him with a competency, to enable him to prosecute his studies for eighteen years. During his continuance in Italy, he made the works of Raphael and Julio Romano the principal object of his studies, by which his future compositions had always a certain air of the antique, though he had no great portion of grace, and his figures were frequently too muscular. Two of his pictures are in the church of Notre Dame, at Paris; the one, of Herodias holding the charger with the head of St. John the Baptist; the other, of Agabus foretelling the persecution of St. Paul. On account of his religion, being a Calvinist, he was compelled to quit his native country, and settled in London, the happy retreat of all distressed artists; and there he found many patrons among the nobility and gentry, particularly the duke of Montague, for whom he painted the Council of the Gods, the Judgment of Paris, and he was also employed at Burleigh and Chatsworth; but finding himself eclipsed by Baptist, Rousseau, and La Fosse, he commenced painting small historical pieces. His most profitable employment, however, was designing for painters and engraver ^ and his drawings were by some preferred to his paintings. He etched several of his own designs, and in particular, a series of twenty-two small prints for the life of David, with which Giffart, a bookseller at Pans, ornamented a French edition of the Psalms published in 1713. Strutt notices also two engravings which he executed from his own designs, of great taste, “The Death of Ananias and Sapphira,' and” St. Paul baptising the Eunuch." His private character was excellent. He died in 1713, of an apoplexy, at his lodgings in the Piazza, CovenNgarden, and was buried in the porch of St. Paul’s church in that parish. He had some time before sold his drawings from Raphael, and his academy figures, to the earl of Derby, for a large sum of money.

, an eminent surgeon and anatomist, and a celebrated writer, was born Oct. 19, 1688, at Burrow-on-the-Hill, near Somerby in Leicestershire. After having received a classical education, and been instructed in the rudiments of his profession at Leicester, he was placed about 1703, under the immediate tuition of the celebrated anatomist Cowper, and resided in his house, and at the same time studied surgery under Mr. Feme, the head surgeon of St. Thomas’s hospital. Such was the proficiency he made under these able masters, that he himself began, at the age of twenty-two, to read lectures in anatomy, a syllabus of which, in 4to, was first printed in 1711. Lectures of this kind were then, somewhat new in this country, having been introduced, not many years before, by M. Bussiere, a French refugee, and a surgeon of high note in the reign of queen Anne. Till then, the popular prejudices had run so high against the practice of dissection, that the civil power found it difficult to accommodate the lecturers with proper subjects; and pupils were obliged to attend the universities, or other public seminaries, where, likewise, the procuring of bodies was no easy task. It is an extraordinary proof of Mr. Cheselden’s early reputation, that he had the honour of being chosen a member of the royal society in 1711, when he could be little more than twenty- three years of age but he soon justified their choice, by a variety of curious and useful communications. Nor were his contributions limited to the royal society, but are to be found in the memoirs of the royal academy of surgeons at Paris, and in other valuable repositories. In 1713 Mr. Cheselden published in 8vo, his “Anatomy of the Human Body,” reprinted in 1722, 1726, 1732; in folio in 1734, and in 8vo, 1740, and an eleventh edition aslate as 1778. During the course of twenty years, in which Mr. Cheselden carried on his anatomical lectures, he was continually rising in reputation and practice, and upon Mr. Feme’s retiring from business, he was elected head surgeon of St. Thomas’s hospital. At two other hospitals, St. George’s, and the Westminster Infirmary, he was chosen consulting surgeon; and at length had the honour of being appointed principal surgeon to queen Caroline, by whom he was highly esteemed; and was indeed generally regarded as the first man in his profession.

In the latter end of the same year, he was seized with a paralytic stroke, from which in appearance he soon perfectly recovered. The flattering prospect, however, of his continuanc6 in life, soon vanished; for, on the 1 Oth of April, 1752, he was suddenly carried off by a fit of an apoplexy, at Bath, in the sixty -fourth year of his age. He married Deborah Knight, a citizen’s daughter, and, if we mistake not, sister of the famous Robert Knight, cashier to the South-sea company in 1720. By this lady Mr. Cheselden had only one daughter, Wilhelmina Deborah, who was married to Charles Cotes, M. D. of Woodcote, in Shropshire, and member of parliament for Tamworth, in Staffordshire. Dr. Cotes died without issue, on the 2 1st of March, 1748; and Mrs. Cotes, who survived him, died some years since at Greenhithe, in the parish of Swanscombe, in the county of Kent. Mrs. Cheselden died in 1764. Mr. Cheselden’s reputation was great in anatomy, but we apprehend that it was still greater, and more justly founded, in surgery. The eminent surgeon Mr. Sharp, in a dedication to our author, celebrates him as the ornament of his profession; acknowledges his own skill in surgery to have been chiefly derived from him; and represents, that posterity will be ever indebted for the signal services he has done to this branch of the medical art. In surgery he was undoubtedly a great improver, having introduced simplicity into the practice of it, and laid aside the operose and hurtful French instruments which had been formerly in use. Guided by consummate skill, perfectly master of his hand, fruitful in resources, he was prepared for all events, and performed every operation with remarkable dexterity and coolness. Being fully competent to each possible case, he was successful in all. He was at the same time eminently distinguished by his tenderness to his patients. Whenever he entered the hospital on his morning visits, the reflection of what he was unavoidably to perform, impressed him with uneasy sensations; and it is even said that he was generally sick with anxiety before he began an operation, though during the performance of it he was, as hath already been observed, remarkably cool and self-collected. Our author’s eulogist relates a striking contrast between him and a French surgeon of eminence. The latter gentleman, having had his feelings rendered callous by a course of surgical practice, was astonished at the sensibility shewn by Mr. Cheselden previously to his operations, and considered it as a great mark of weakness in his behaviour. Yet the same gentleman, being persuaded to accompany Mr. Cheselden to the fencing-school, who frequently amused himself with it as a spectator, could not bear the sight, and was taken ill. The adventure was the subject of conversation at court, and both were equally praised for goodness of heart; but the principle of humanity appears to have been stronger in Mr. Cheselden, because the feeling of it was not weakened by his long practice.

, an eminent historian, and justly considered as the father of French history, was bornin the Isle of Bouchard; in Torrairie, May 1584. He was the youngest of the four sons of Tanneguy Du Chesne, lord of Sausoniere. His name has been Latinized in different forms. He has at different times called himself Quema3us, Quercetanus, Duchenius; and by others he has been called Querceus, a Quercu, Chesneus, and Chesnius. In his historical works he assumed no other title than that of geographer to the king, except in his history of the house of Bethune, printed in 1639, where he calls himself historiographer to the king. His family produced many men of talents in the army and at the bar. He was first educated at Loudun, and after a course of grammar and rhetoric, came to Parisj where he studied philosophy, in the college of Boncours, under Julius Caesar Boulanger, an eminent philosopher, and one of the best historians of that period.

In 1617 he undertook an edition of the “Histoire de la Maison de Luxembourg,” written in 1574, by Nicholas Viguier, and continued it to the year 1557. He was also editor this year of the works of Alain Chartier, and of Alcuinus, and at the same time projected two great works the one, “A Geographical Description of France,” which was to extend to many volumes. This work, of which he published a specimen, was begun to be printed in Hoiland, but was not continued; the other was that on which his fame chiefly rests, his collection of French historians, under the title “Historia Francorum Scriptores cocetanei ab ipsius gentis origine ad nostra usque tempora.” In the preface to his collection of the historians of Normandy, he gives some account of the plan, which may be seen in the life of Bouquet, in this Dictionary, (vol. VI.) Peter Pithou and Marquard Freher had given him the idea of it, and he undertook it by order of Louis XIII. who encouraged him, by a pension of 2400 livres, which he enjoyed till his death, with the title of royal geographer and historiographer in ordinary. As a preparation for this work, he published in 1618, his “Bibliotheque des Auteurs qui ont ecrit Histoire et Topographic de la France,” 8vo, which is now superseded by the more extensive work of Le Long. It appears that in forming his collections for the French historians, he was assisted by Peiresc, who examined the church and monastic libraries for him.

In 1619, he published his “Histoire des Rois, Dues, et Comtes de Burgogne,” a new edition of the “Letters of Stephen Pasqnier,” and his “Historic Normannorum Scriptores antiqui,” which forms the first volume of his collection of French historians. The following year appeared his “Histoire genealogique de la Maison de Chastillou-sur-Marue, &c.” As his intended publication of the geographical history of France was interrupted in Holland, he published an abridgment of it at Paris, under the title of “Antiqnitez et Recherches desvilles, chateaux, et places remarkables de la France selon Pordre et les ressorfc ties parlemens,” which passed through several editions, as already noticed; that of 1647 was edited and improved by his son. In 1621 was printed his “Histoire genealogique de la Maison de Montmorency,” folio, which Le Long thinks a capital work of the kind; it was followed in 1626 by a similar history of the house of De Vergy. In 1629 he published a second volume of the history of Burgundy, under the title of “Histoire genealogique des Dues de Bonrgogne,” and in 1631, two other genealogical histories of the houses of Guines, Ardres, Dreux, &c. The accuracy of these family histories has been very generally acknowledged, but it is unnecessary to specify the dates of each publication.

With respect to his collection of French historians, he published the first two volumes in 1636, fol. after having two years before issued a prospectus of the whole, and the third and fourth volumes were in the press, when on May 30, 1640, he was crushed to death by a cart, as he was going to his country-house at Verrieres. He was at this time in full health, and bade fair for long life and usefulness. The two volumes, then in the press, were completed by his son, and published in 1641, to which he added a fifth volume in 1649, without any assistance from government, as the pension granted to his father, and continued to hirn on his death, was taken from him about three years after that event. Some particulars of the continuation of the work to the present time may be seen in our life of Bouquet. In Du Chesne’s “Historic Norluannorum,” is the “Emmae Anglorum reginse encomium,” of which an edition, with William of Poictier’s history of William the Conqueror, and other historical documents, was published, or rather printed for private distribution, in 1783, 4to, by the learned Francis Maseres, esq. F. 11. S. cursitor-baron of the court of exchequer.

Extensive as Du Chesne’s published labours were, they give but a faint idea of his immense industry in collecting historical materials, and of the works which might have been expected from him. He had intended to confine his collection of French historians to 24 folio volumes; but according to Le Long, forty would not be sufficient to contain the manuscripts worthy of publication, and which were discovered after his death; and he had himself written with his own hand above an hundred folio volumes of extracts, transcripts, observations, genealogies, &c. most of which were deposited, for the use of his successors, in the king’s library. Du Fresuoy speaks with less respect of Da Chesne’s labours than they deserve. In collecting so many original authorities, and producing so many transcripts from valuable and perishing Mss. he has surely proved himself a great benefactor to general history; and it is much to his honour that he always was ready to communicate his discoveries to persons engaged in the same study, but who did not always acknowledge their obligations.

, called also Quercetanus, lord of La Violette, and physician to the French king, was born at Armagnac, about the middle of the sixteenth century. After having passed a considerable time in Germany, and being admitted to the degree of M. D. at Basle, 1573, he practised his art in Paris, and was made physician to Henry IV. He had made great progress in the study of chemistry, to which he was particularly devoted. The success that attended his practice in this science, excited the spleen of the rest of the physicians, and especially that of Guy Patin, who was continually venting sarcasms and satires against him, but experience has since shewn that Du Chesne was better acquainted with the properties of antimony than Patin and his colleagues. This learned chemist, who is called Du Quesne by Moreri, died at Paris, at a very advanced age, in 1609. He wrote in French verse, “The Folly of the World,” 1583, 4to. 2. “The great Mirror of the World,” 1593, 8vo. He also composed several books of chemistry, which had great reputation once, although they are now forgotten. Haller has given the titles of them, and analyses of the principal of their contents. The most celebrated among them, which passed through the greatest number of editions, is his “Pharmacopoeia Dogmaticorum restituta, pretiosis, selectisque Hermeticorum Floribus illustrata,” Giesse Hess. 1607. This is said to have been recommended by Boerhaave to his pupils.

, aprotestant divine, was born at Montchamps near Vire in Normandy, in 1507. He learned Hebrew under Vatablus at Paris, and having gone to England, became of the household of the princess, afterwards queen Elizabeth, whom he taught French. He then went to Germany, where he married the daughter of Tremellius, and this alliance procured him the assistance of Tremellius in his Hebrew studies, in which he made very distinguished progress, and became one of the first Hebrew scholars and critics of his age. In 1559 he was invited to Strasburgh, and thence went to Geneva, where he taught Hebrew, and published an improved edition of Pagninus’s Dictionary of that language. His love, however, for his native country induced him to return to Caen, which the civil wars soon obliged him to leave, and take refuge in England: he again returned on the peace, but the massacre of St. Bartholomew’s day obliged him to escape to the island of Guernsey, where he died in 1572. He translated from the Syriac into Latin the “Targum Hierosolymitanum;” and two years after his death, his “Rudimenta Hebraicse linguae,” a very accurate work, was published at Wittemberg, 4to. He had designed to publish an edition of the Bible in four languages, but did not live, to accomplish it.

On the accession of Henry V. he was again consulted and employed in many political measures, and appears to have completely acquired the confidence of the new sovereign, who sent him a third time into France on the subject of peace. The English were at this time in possession of some of the territories of that country, a circumstance which rendered every treaty of peace insecure, and created perpetual jealousies and efforts towards emancipation on the part of the French.

, counsellor of state, and first physician to the French king, was born at Montpellier in 1672. Having obtained his doctor’s degree, though no more than twenty years old, he was sent to stop the progress of the plague then raging at Marseilles, by the duke of Orleans, regent of the kingdom. The boldness and confidence with which he entered that city, where every one seemed only waiting for death, had a striking effect on their fears. He encouraged the inhabitants, and quieted their alarms by his presence; and his success was beyond expectation. His services were rewarded by marks of honour and a pension from the king. In 1731 he was called to court to be physician to the royal children, by the interest of Chirac, whose daughter he had married; and after whose death he was made first physician to the king, counsellor of state, and superintendent of the mineral waters of the kingdom. He died at Versailles in 1752, aged near 80. The most curious of his works is that wherein he maintains that the plague is not contagious, entitled “Observations et reflexions touchant la nature, les evenements, et le traitement de la Peste de Marseilles,” Paris, 1721, 12mo. He published also a valuable collection of facts relative to the plague, under the title of “Traitedes causes, &c. de la Peste,” Paris, 1744, 4to.

, a physician and politician, was born at Besanon, a town of Franche Comte, in 1588. He was descended from a family distinguished by literary merit, as well as by the services it had done its country. He was educated at Besanc/ni, and then travelled through several parts of Europe, where he became acquainted with all the men of letters, and in every place made his way into the cabinets of the curious. At his return he applied himself to the practice of physic; but being sent by the town of Besan^on, where he had been consul, on an embassy to Elizabeth Clara Eugenia, archduchess of the Low Countries, that princess was so pleased with him, that she prevailed with him to continue with her in quality of physician in ordinary. Afterwards he became physician to Philip IV. of Spain, who honoured him very highly, and treated him with great kindness. Chifflet imagined, that these bounties and honours obliged him to take up arms against all who were at variance with his master; and accordingly wrote his book entitled “Vindiciae Hispanicse,” against the French. He wrote several pieces in Latin, which were both ingenious and learned, and were collected and published at Antwerp, 1659, fol.

, an excellent Greek and Latin scholar and mathematician, was born in 1610 at Slow in the Wold, in Gloucestershire, and became one of the clerks of Magdalen college, Oxford; and in 1632, one of the petty canons or chaplains of Christ church. Being ejected from this by the parliamentary visitors in 1648, he came to London in great necessity, and took lodgings in the house of Thomas Est, a musician and music printer, in Aldersgate street. There being a large room in this house, Chilmead made use of it for a weekly music meeting, from the profits of which he derived a slender subsistence, and probably improved it by being employed as translator. He died in 1653, having for some years received relief from Edward Bysshe, esq. garter king at arms, and sir Henry Hoibrook, the translator of Procopius. He was interred in the church of St. Botolph without Aldersgate. Among his works, our musical historians notice his tract “De musica antiqua Graeca,” printed in 1672, at the end of the Oxford edition of Aratus: he also wrote annotations on three odes of Dionysius, in the same volume, with the ancient Greek musical characters, which Chilmead rendered in the notes of Guide’s scale. His other works are, 1 “Versio Latina et Annotationes in Joan. Malalae Chronographiam,” Oxf. 1691, 8vo. 2. A translation, from the French of Ferrand, of “A Treatise on Love, or Erotic Melancholy,” 1640, 8vo. 3. Gaffarel’s “Unheard-of Curiosities.” 4. Campanella’s “Discourse touching the Spanish monarchy,” which not selling, Prynne prefixed an epistle and a new title, “Thomas Campanella’s advice to the king of Spain, for obtaining the universal monarchy of the world,” Lond. 1659, 4to. 5. Hues’ “Treatise of the Globes,” ibid. 1639 and 1659; and 6. Modena’s “History of the Rites, Customs, &c. of the Jews,” ibid. 1650. He also compiled the “Catalogus Mss. Grsecorum in Bibl. Bodl.” 1636, a manuscript for the use of the Bodleian, and the most complete of its time.

, an eminent French physician, was born 1650, at Conques in ^anguedoc. M. Chicoineau entrusted him with the education of his two sons, and perSuaded him to study physic. Chirac became a member of the faculty at Montpellier, and in five years time taught physic there, which he afterwards practised, taking M. Barbeyrac for his model, who then held the first rank at Montpellier. In 1692 he was appointed physician to the army of Roussillon; the year following a dysentery became epidemical among the troops, and ipecacoanha proving unsuccessful, Chirac gave miHt mixed with lye, made of vine branches, which cured almost all the sick. Some years after he returned to his situation of professor and physician at Montpellier, and was engaged in two disputes, which were the subjects of much conversation; one with M. Vieussens, an eminent physician at Montpellier, on the discovery of the acid of the blood; the other with M. Sorazzi, an Italian physician, on the structure of the hair. He attended the duko of Orleans into Italy 1706, whom he cured of q. wound in the arm, by putting it into the water of Balaruc, which was sent for on purpose. In 1707, he accompanied the s^me prince into Spain, and was appointed his first physician 1713; admitted a free associate of the academy of sciences the following year, and succeeded M. Fagon as superintendant of the king’s garden, 1718. In 1728 he received letters of nobility from his majesty; and in 1730, the place of first physician, vacant by the death of M. Dodart, was conferred upon him. He died March 11, 1732, aged 52. He left 30,000 livres to the university of Montpellier for the purpose of founding two anatomical professorships. M. Chirac was skilful in surgery, and sometimes performed operations himself. He gained great honour during the epidemical disorder which prevailed at Ilochefort, and was called the Siam sickness. When there was danger of an inflammation on the brain in the small-pox, he advised bleeding in the foot. His Dissertations and Consultations, are printed with those of Silva, 3 vols. 12mo.

, a learned divine and antiquary, was born at Ey worth, in Bedfordshire, and was the son of Paul Chishull, formerly bible clerk of Queen’s college, Cambridge, and master of arts, as a member of Pembroke college, Oxford. His son being intended for the church, was sent to Oxford, became a scholar of Corpus Christi college, and received the degree of master of arts in February 1693; and he was chosen, likewise, a fellow of his college. Previously to his commencing master of arts, he had published in 1692, a Latin poem, inquarto, on occasion of the famous battle of La Hogue, entitled, “Gulielmo Tertio terra manque principi invictissimo in Gallos pugna navali nuperrime devictos, ' carmen heroic urn,” Oxon. When queen Mary died, on the 28th of December 1694, Mr. Chishull was one of the Oxford gentlemen who exerted their poetical talents in deploring that melancholy event, and his tribute of loyalty is preserved in the third volume of the Musse Anglicans, but is rather a school exercise, than a production of genius. In 1698, having obtained a grant of the traveller’s place, from the society of Corpus Christi college, he sailed from England on the 12th of September, and arrived on the 19th of November following at Smyrna. Before he set out on his voyage, he preached a sermon to the Levant company, which was published, and probably procured him to be appointed chaplain to the English factory at Smyrna, in. which station he continued till the 12th of February, 1701-2. On the 16th of June, 1705, he was admitted to the degree of bachelor in divinity. In the next year he engaged in a controversy, which at that time excited considerable attention, by publishing “A charge of Heresy maintained against Mr. Dodwell’s late Epistolary Discourse concerning the Mortality of the Soul,” London, 8vo. This was one of the principal books written in answer to Dodwell on that subject. In 1707, Chishull exerted his endeavours in opposing the absurdities and enthusiasm of the French prophets, and their followers, in a sermon, on the 23d of November, at Serjeant’s-inn chapel, in Chancery-lane, which was published in the beginning of 1708, and was entitled, “The great Danger and Mistake of all new uninspired Prophecies relating to the End of the World,” with an appendix of historical collections applicable to subject. On the 1st of September, in the same year, he was presented to the vicarage of Walthamstow, in Essex; and in 1711, he had the honour of being appointed one of the chaplains in ordinary to the queen. About the same time, he published a visitation and a few other occasional sermons, preached on public occasions, all which were favourably received. But he, soon became more distinguished for his researches in ancient literature and history.

, dean of the cathedral at Bayeux, and one of the members of the French academy, was born April 16, 1644, at Paris. He was sent to the king of Siam, with the chevalier de Chaumont in 1685, and ordained priest in the Indies by the apostolical vicar. He died October 2, 1724, at Paris, aged 81. Although his life in our authorities is very prolix, he seems entitled to very little notice or respect. His youth was very irregular. Disguised as a woman, under the name of comtesse des Barres, he abandoned himself to the libertinism which such a disguise encouraged; but we are told that he did not act thus at the time of writing his ecclesiastical history; though such a report might probably arise from his having been so accustomed from his youth to dress in woman’s clothes, to please Monsieur, brother of Louis XIV. who liked such amusements, that he wore petticoats at his house as long as he lived, equally a disgrace to himself and his patron. The principal of his works are, 1. “Quatre Dialogues sur l‘Immortalite de I’Ame,” &c which he wrote with M. Dangeau, 12mo. 2. “Relation du Voyage de Siam,” 12mo. 3. “Histoires de Piett- et de Morale,” 2 vols. 12mo. 4. “Hist. Ecclesiastique,” 11 vols. in 4to, and in 12mo. 5. “La Vie de David, avec une Interpretation des Pseaumes,” 4to. 6. “The Lives of Solomon 3 of St. Louis, 4to 'of Philip de Valois, and of king John, 4to of Charles V. 4to; of Charles VI. 4to and of Mad. de Miramion, 12mo his Memoirs, 12mo. These are all superficial works, and have found readers only from their being written in that free and natural style which amuses the attention. What he wrote on the French history has been printed in 4 vols. 12mo. His life was published at Geneva, 1748, 8vo, supposed to be written by the abbe tT Olivet, who has inserted in it the History of la comtesse des Barres, 1736, small 12mo, written by t)ie abbe” Choisi himself.

, a French physician, was the son of Noel Chomel, an agriculturist, and the author of the “DictionTiaire œconomique,” of which we have an English translation by Bradley, 1725, 2 vols. folio. He was born at Paris towards the end of the seventeenth century, and studied medicine at Montpellier, where he took his degree of doctor, in 1708. Returning to his native city, he was appointed physician and counsellor to the king. The following year he published “Universal Medicince Theoricse pars prima, seu Physiologia, ad usum scholae accommodata,” Montpellier, 1709, 12mo; and in 1734, “Traite des Eaux Minerales, Baines et Douches de Vichi,” 1734, 12mo, and various subsequent editions. To that of the year 1738 the author added a preliminary discourse on mineral waters in general, with accounts of the principal medicinal waters found in France. His elder brother, Peter John Baptiste, studied medicine at Paris, and was admitted to the degree of doctor there in 1697. Applying himself more particularly to the study of botany, while making his collection, he sent his observations to the royal academy of sciences, who elected him one of their members. He was also chosen, in November 1738, dean of the faculty of medicine, and the following year was reelected, but died in June 1740. Besides his “Memoirs” sent to the academy of sciences, and his “Defence of Tournefort,” published in the Journal des Savans, he published “Abrege de L'Histoire des Pi antes usuelles,” Paris, 1712, 12mo. This was in 1715 increased to two, and in 1730, to three volumes in 12mo, and is esteemed an useful manual. His son, John Baptiste Lewis, was educated also at Paris, and took his degree of doctor in medicine in 1732. He was several years physician in ordinary to the king, and in November 1754 was chosen dean of the faculty. He died in 1765. He published in 1745, 1. “An account of the disease then epidemic among cattle,” and boasts of great success in the cure, which was effected, he says, by using setons, imbued with white hellebore. 2. “Dissertation historique sur la Mai de Gorge Gangreneaux, qui a regne parmi les enfans, en 1748:” the malignant sore throat, first treated of in this country by Dr. Fothergill, about ten years later than this period. 3. “Essai historique sur la Medicine en France,” 1762, 12mo. He also wrote, “Vie de M. Morin,” and “Eloge historique de M. Louis Duret,” 1765.

, a gentleman of Lyons, of the sixteenth century, bailiff of the mountains of Dauphiny, travelled over Italy to improve himself in the knowledge of antiquity; and is principally known by a scarce and excellent treatise of the “Religion and Castrametation of the ancient Romans,” folio, Lyons, 1556, 1569, 4to, and 1580, 4to. This singular work of antiquities is remarkable, especially for its second part, which treats of the manner of pitching and fortifying the camps used by the Romans, of their discipline and their military exercises. It has been translated into Latin, Italian, and Spanish: the Latin, Amst. 1685, 4to, the Italian, Lyons, 1559, folio; both editions are scarce, but less so than the French original, though not so well executed. He has the honour of being one of the earliest French antiquaries, but his countrymen have preserved no memorials of his personal history. The last edition of the French Dict. Hist, attributes to him two other treatises, “Promptuaire des Medailles,” and “Traite des Bains des Grecs et des Remains,” but we suspect this last is included in the larger work above mentioned.

, or as he was called Quintus Septimus Florens Christianus, a French poet, was born at Orleans Jan. 26, 1541. He was called Quintus, because he was his father’s fifth child, and Septimus, because he was born in the seventh month of his mother’s pregnancy. He was well skilled in languages and in the belles lettres; and was tutor to Henry IV. whom he educated in the reformed religion; but he himself returned to the Roman catholic church before his death, which happened in 1596. He was author of some satires against Ronsard, under the name of “La Baronnie,” 1564, 8vo; poems, printed separately in 8vo, and some translations; the principal of which is that of Oppian, 4to. He had a part in the Satyrae Menipeae. Notwithstanding his disposition to satire, he preserved the attachment of his friends, and the general esteem of the public. William his father, physician -to Francis I. and Henry II. translated some medical works into French.

Having studied medicine for some time, under Dr. Simmons, he spent two winters, attending the medical classes at Edinburgh, and afterwards travelled, in search of general knowledge, to almost every considerable town in the kingdom, where his letters of recommendation, his insatiable thirst for information, and above all, his pleasing manners, and interesting juvenile figure, procured him admission to all who were distinguished for science, and by many of the most eminent literary characters he was welcomed and encouraged as a young man of extraordinary talents. He then went to the continent for further improvement; and while he was at Paris, some advantageous offers from a mercantile house in London, induced him to resume his original pursuit, and to become a partner in that house. This journey to Paris, however, produced another effect, not quite so favourable to his future happiness. Becoming acquainted with many of the literati of France, and among them, with many of the founders of the French revolution, he espoused their principles, was an enthusiast in their cause, and seemed to devote more attention, more stretch of mind, to the study and support of the revolutionary measures adopted in that country, than was consistent with the sober pursuits of commerce. This enthusiasm, in which it must be confessed he was at that time not singular, produced in 1790, “A Sketch of the New Constitution of France,” in two folio sheets; and in 1791, he enlisted himself among the answerers of Mr. Burke’s celebrated “Reflections,” in “Letters on the Revolution of France, and the new Constitution established by the National Assembly,” a large 8vo volume, which was to have been followed by a second; but the destruction of that constitution, the anarchy which followed, and the disappointment of his, and the hopes of all the friends of liberty, probably prevented his prosecuting the subject. In 1792, having dissolved partnership with the mercantile-house above alluded to, he became a partner in the carpet-manufactory of Messrs. Moore and Co. in Finsbury- square but in 1796, some necessary arrangements of trade induced him to take a voyage to Surinam, where he died in the prime of life in October of that year.

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

After the dissolution of the parliament in 1678, sir Winston was dismissed from the post of clerk of the green cloth, much against his master’s will, who restored him again, and continued him in it during the rest of his reign. He enjoyed the same degree of favour from court, during the short reign of James II.; and having lived to see his eldest son raised to the peerage, he departed this life, March 26, 1688. Besides three sons, and as many daughters, who died in their infancy, sir Winston had several sons and daughters, who lived to grow up. The eldest of his sons was John Churchill, afterwards duke of Marlborough, of whom we shall speak largely in the next article. Arabella, the eldest of his children, born in March 1648,. was maid of honour to the duchess of York, and mistress to the duke, afterwards James II. by whom she had two sons and two daughters. The eldest, James Fitz-James, was created by his father duke of Berwick: he was also knight of the garter and of the golden fleece, marshal of France, and grandee of Spain of the first class. He was reputed one of the greatest officers in his time; and when generalissimo of the armies of France, fell by a cannon-shot at the siege of Phillipsburg in 1734. Henry Fitz-James, grand prior of France, lieutenant-general and admiral of the French gal lies, Was born in 1673, and died in 1702. Henrietta, born in 1670, married sir Henry Waldgrave of Cheuton, and died 1730. The youngest daughter was a nun but afterwards married colonel Godfrey, by whom she had two daughters.

, duke of Marlborough, and prince of the holy Roman empire, was eldest son of sir Winston Churchill, and born at Ashe in Devonshire on Midsummerday in 1650. A clergyman in the neighbourhood instructed him in the first principles of literature, and he was for some time educated at St. Paul’s school but his father, having other views than what a learned education afforded, carried him to court in the twelfth year of his age, where he was particularly favoured by James duke of York. He had a pair of colours given him in the guards, during the first Dutch war, about 1666; and afterwards obtained leave to go over to Tangier, then in our hands, and besieged by the Moors, where he resided for some time, and cultivated the science of arms. Upon his return to England, he attended constantly at court, and was greatly respected by both the king and the duke. In 1672, the duke of Monmouth commanding a body of English auxiliaries in the service of France, Churchill attended him, and was soon after made a captain of grenadiers in his grace’s own regiment. He had a share in all the actions of that famous campaign against the Dutch; and at the siege of Nimeguen, distinguished himself so much, that he was particularly taken notice of by the celebrated marshal Turenne, who bestowed on him the name of the handsome Englishman. He appeared also to so much advantage at the reduction of Maestricht, that the French king thanked him for his behaviour at the head of the line, and assured him that he would acquaint his sovereign with it, which the duke of Monmouth also confirmed, telling the king his father how much he had been indebted to the bravery of captain Churchill.

He was on the point of returning to Holland, when, Feb. S, 1703, his only son, the marquis of Blandford, died at Cambridge, at the age of 18, and was interred in the magnificent chapel of King’s college. This very afflicting accident did not however long retard him; but he passed over to Holland, and arrived at the Hague March 6. The nature of our work will not suffer us to relate all the military acts in which the duke of Marlborough was engaged: it is sufficient to say, that, numerous as they were, they were all successful. The French had a great army this year in Flanders, in the Netherlands, and in that part of Germany which the elector of Cologn had put into their hands; and prodigious preparations were made under the most experienced commanders: but the vigilance and activity of the duke baffled them all. When the campaign was over, his grace went to Dusseldorp to meet the late emperor, then styled Charles III. king of Spain, who made him a present of a rich sword from his side, with very high compliments; and then returning to the Hague, after a very short stay, came over to England. He arrived Oct. 13, 1703; and soon after king Charles, whom he had accompanied to the Hague, came likewise over to England, and arrived at Spithead on Dec. 26; upon which the dukes, of Somerset and Marlborough were immediately sent down to receive and conduct him to Windsor. In January the States desired leave of the queen for the duke to come to the Hague; which being granted, he embarked on the 15th, and passed over to Rotterdam. He went immediately to the Hague, where he communicated to the pensionary his sense of the necessity there was of attempting something the next campaign for the relief of the emperor; whose affairs at this time were in the utmost distress, having the Bavarians on one side, and the Hungarian malcontents on the other, making incursions to the very gates of Vienna, while his whole force scarce enabled him to maintain a defensive war. This scheme being, approved of, and the plan of it adjusted, the duke returned to England in the middle of February.

When measures were properly settled at home, April 6, 1704, he embarked for Holland; where, staying about a month to adjust the necessary steps, he began his march towards the heart of Germany; and after a conference held with prince Eugene of Savoy, and Lewis of Baden, he arrived before the strong entrenchments of the enemy at Schellenburg, very unexpectedly, on June 21; whom, after an obstinate and bloody dispute, he entirely routed. It was on this occasion that the emperor wrote the duke a letter with his own hand, acknowledging his great services, and offering him the title of a prince of the empire, which he modestly declined, till the queen afterwards commanded him to accept of it. He prosecuted this success, and the battle of Hochstet was fought by him and prince Eugene, on August 2; when the French and Bavarians were the greatest part of them killed and taken, and their commander, marshal Tallard, made a prisoner. After this glorious action, by which the empire was saved, and the whole electorate of Bavaria conquered, the duke continued his pursuit till he forced the French to repass the Rhine. Then prince Lewis of Baden laid siege to Landau, while the duke and prince Eugene covered it; but it was not taken before the 12th of November. He made a tour also to Berlin; and by a short negotiation, suspended the disputes between the king of Prussia and the Dutch, by which he gained the good will of both parties. When the campaign was over, he returned to Holland, and, Dec. 14, arrived in England. He brought over with him marshal Tallard, and 26 other officers of distinction, 121 standards, and 179 colours, which by her majesty’s order were put up in Westminster-hall. He was received by the queen with the highest marks of esteem, and had the solemn thanks of both houses of parliament. Besides this, the commons addressed her majesty to perpetuate the memory of this victory, which she did, by granting Woodstock, with the hundred of Wotton, to him and his heirs for ever. This was confirmed by an act of parliament, which passed on the 14th of March following, with this remarkable clause, that they should be held by tendering to the queen, her heirs and successors, on August 2, every year for ever, at the castle of Windsor, a standard with three fleurs de lys painted thereon. Jan. 6, the duke was magnificently entertained by the city; and Feb. 8, the commons addressed the queen, to testify their thanks for the wise treaty which the duke had concluded with the court of Berlin, by which a large body of Prussian troops were sent to the assistance of the duke of Savoy.

These points adjusted, the duke made haste to return to his charge, it being thought especially necessary he should acquaint the foreign ministers at the Hague, that the queen of Great Britain would hearken to no proposals for a peace, but what would firmly secure the general tranquillity of Europe. The campaign of the year 1707 proved the most barren he ever made, which was chiefly owing to a failure on the part of the allies, who began to be remiss in supporting the common cause. Nor did things go on more to his mind at home; for upon his return to England, after the campaign was over, he found that the fire, which he suspected the year before, had broke out in his absence; that the queen had a female favourite, who was in a fair way of supplanting the duchess; and that she listened to the insinuations of a statesman who was no friend to him. He is said to have borne all this with firmness and patience, though he easily saw whither it tended; and went to Holland as usual, early in the spring of 1708, arriving at the Hague March 19. The ensuing campaign was carried on by the duke, in conjunction with prince Eugene, with such prodigious success, that the French king thought fit, in the beginning of 1709, to set on foot a negotiation for peace. The house of commons this year gave an uncommon testimony of their respect for the duke of Marlborough; for, besides addressing the queen, they, January 22, 1709, unanimously voted him thanks, and ordered them to be transmitted to him abroad by the speaker. He returned to England Feb. 25, and on his first appearance in the house of lords, received the thanks of that august assembly. His stay was so very short, that we need not dwell upon what passed in the winter. It is sufficient to say, that they who feared the dangerous effects of those artful proposals France had been making for the conclusion of a general' peace, were also of opinion, that nobody was so capable of setting their danger, in a true light in Holland as his grace of Marlborough. This induced the queen to send Mm thither, at the end of March, with the character of her plenipotentiary, which contributed not a little to the enemy’s disappointment, by defeating all their projects. Marshal Villars commanded the French army in the campaign of 1709; and Lewis XIV. expressed no small hopes of him, in saying a little before the opening of it, that “Villars was never beat.” However the siege of Tournay, and the battle of Malplaquet, convinced the monarch that Villars was not invincible. Upon the news of the glorious victory gained Aug. 1, 1709, the city of London renewed their congratulatory addresses to the queen; and her majesty in council, Oct. 3, ordered a proclamation for a general thanksgiving. The duke of Marlborough came t6 St. James’s Nov. 10, and soon after received the thanks of both houses: and the queen, as if desirous of any occasion to shew her kindness to him, appointed him lord lieutenant and custos rotulorum of the county of Oxford. But amidst these honours, preferments, and favours, he was really chagrined to the last degree. He perceived that the French intrigues began to prevail both in England and Holland: the affair of Dr. Sacheverell had thrown the nation into a ferment: and the queen was not only estranged from the duchess of Marlborough, but had taken such a dislike to her that she seldom appeared at court.

In the beginning of 1710 the French set on foot a new negotiation for a peace, which was commonly called the treaty of Gertruydenburg. The States upon this having shewn an inclination to enter into conferences with the French plenipotentiaries, the house of commons immediately framed an address to the queen, that she would be pleased to send the duke of Marlborough over to the Hague. Accordingly, towards the latter end of February he went to the Hague, where he met with prince Eugene, and soon after set out with him for the army, which was assembled in the neighbourhood of Tournay. This campaign was very successful, many towns being taken and fortresses reduced: notwithstanding which, when the duke came over to England, as he did about the middle of December, he found his interest declining, and his services undervalued. The negotiations for peace were carried on during a great part of the summer, but ended at last in nothing. In the midst of the summer, the queen began the great change in her ministry, by removing the earl of Sunderland from being secretary of state; and on Aug. 8, the lord treasurer Godolphin was likewise removed. Upon the meeting of parliament no notice was taken in the addresses of the duke of Marlborough’s success: an attempt indeed was made to procure him the thanks of the house of peers, but it was eagerly opposed by the duke of Argyle. His grace was kindly received by the queen, who seemed desirous to have him live upon good terms with her new ministry; but this was thought impracticable, and it was every day expected that he would lay down his commission. He did not do this; but he carried the golden key, the ensign of the duchess of Marl borough’s office, January 19, 1711, to the queen, and resigned all her employments with great duty and submission. With the same firmness and composure he consulted the necessary measures for the next campaign, with those whom he knew to be no friends of his; and treated all parties with candour and respect. There is no doubt that the duke felt some inward disquiet, though he shewed no outward concern, at least for himself: but when the earl of Galway was very indecently treated in the house of lords, the duke of Marlborough could not help saying, “it was somewhat strange, that generals, who had acted according to the best of their understandings, and had lost their limbs in their service, should be examined like offenders about insignificant things.” An exterior civility, in court language styled a good understanding, being established between the duke and the new ministry, the duke went over to the Hague, to prepare for the next campaign, which at the same time he knew would be his last. He exerted himself in an uncommon manner, and was attended with the same success as usual. There was in this campaign a continued trial of skill between the duke of Marlborough and marshal Villars; and brave and judicious as the latter was, he was obliged at length to submit to the former. The duke embarked for England when the campaign was over, and came to London Nov. 8; and happening to land the very night of queen Elizabeth’s inauguration, when great rejoicings were intended by the populace, he continued very prudently at Greenwich, and the next day waited on the queen at Hampton-court, who received him graciously. He was visited by the ministers, and visited them; but he did not go to council, because a negotiation of peace was then on the carpet, upon a basis which he did by no means approve. He acquainted her majesty in the audience he had at his arrival, that as he could not concur in the measures of those who directed her councils, so he would not distract them by a fruitless opposition. Yet finding himself attacked in the house of lords, and loaded with the imputation 5 of having protracted the war, he vindicated his conduct and character with great dignity and spirit; and in a most pathetic speech appealed to the queen his mistress, who was there incognito, for the falsehood of thut imputation; declaring, that he was as much for peace as any man, provided it was such a peace as might be expected from a war undertaken on such just motives, and carried on with uninterrupted success. This had a great effect on that august assembly, and perhaps made some impression on the queen; but at the same time it gave such an edge to the resentment of his enemies, who were then in power, that they resolved at all adventures to remove him. Those who were thus resolved to divest him of his commission, found themselves under a necessity to engage the queen to take it from him. This necessity arose chiefly from prince Eugene’s being expected to come over with a commission from the emperor; and to give some kind of colour to it, an inquiry was promoted in the house of commons, to fix a very high imputation upon the duke, as if he had put very large sums of public money into his own pocket. When a question to this purpose had been carried, the queen, by a letter, conceived in very obscure terms, acquainted him with her having no farther occasion for his service, and dismissed him from all his employments.

, a voluminous poet of the sixteenth century, w,as born in Shrewsbury about the year 1520. Wood, who has given a long account of him, says he was of a genteel family, and well educated; and that at the age of seventeen, his father gave him a sum of money, and sent him to court, where he lived in gaiety while his finances lasted. He does not seem, however, to have gained any thing by his attendance at court, except his introduction to the celebrated earl of Surrey, with whom he lived some time as domestic, and by whose encouragement he produced some of his poems. He certainly had no public employment either now or in queen Elizabeth’s reign, although some have denominated him poet laureat, merely, as Mr. Malone thinks, “because he had addressed many of the noblemen of Elizabeth’s court for near forty years, and is called by one of his contemporaries, the old court poet.” He appears, however, to have continued with the earl of Surrey, until this virtuous and amiable nobleman was sacrificed to the tyrannical caprice of Henry VIII. Churchyard now became a soldier, and made several campaigns on the continent, in Ireland, and in Scotland. Tanner is inclined to think that he served the emperor in Flanders against the French in the reign of Henry VIII.; but the differences of dates between his biographers are not now so reconcileable as to enable us to decide upon this part of his history. Wood next informs us that he spent some time at Oxford, and was afterwards patronized by the earl of Leicester. He then became enamoured of a rich widow; but his passion not meeting with success, he once more returned to the profession of arms, engaged in foreign service, in which he suffered great hardships, and met with many adventures of the romantic kind; and in the course of them appears to have been always a favourite among the ladies. At one time, in Flanders, he was taken prisoner, but escaped by the “endeavours of a lady of considerable quality;” and at another time, when condemned to death as a spy, he was reprieved and sent away by the “endeavours of a noble dame.” On his return he published a great variety of poems on all subjects; but there is reason to think that by these he gained more applause than profit, as it is very certain that he lived and died poor. The time of his death, until lately was not ascertained; Winstanley and Cibber place that event in 1570, Fuller in 1602, and Oldys in 1604, which last is correct. Mr. George Chalmers, in. his “Apology for the believers in the Shakspeare Mss.” gives us an extract from the parish register, proving that he was buried April 4, of that year, in St. Margaret’s church, Westminster, near the grave of Skelton. Mr. D'Israeli, who has introduced him in his “Calamities of Authors,” very aptly characterises him as “one of those unfortunate men, who have written poetry all their days, and lived a long life, to complete the misfortune.” His works are minutely enumerated by Ritson in his “Bibliographia Poetica,” and some well- selected specimens have lately appeared in the Censura Literaria. The best of his poems, in point of genius, is his “Legende of Jane Shore,” and the most popular, his “Worthiness of Wales,” 1580, 8vo, of which an edition was published in 1776. It may be added, as it has escaped his biographers, that he is mentioned by Strype, in his life of Grind*!, as “an excellent soldier, and a man of honest principles,” who in 1569 gave the secretary of state notice of an intended rising at Bath (where Churchyard then was) among the Roman catholics.

Cimarosa, unfortunately for his fame and fortune, manifested a partiality for the French during their possession of Naples, which occasioned his disgrace at the court of his patron and natural sovereign, and he narrowly escaped the fate of convicted rebels and traitors. He was, however, allowed to die in his bed in 1801, in the fiftieth year of his age, extremely regretted by the lovers "of music, as an original and exquisite composer, and an amiable man.

, nephew to Nicolas Cirillo, a Neapolitan physician of considerable eminence, was born at Naples in 1730, and liberally educated. His principal study was medicine, as a profession but his inclination led him more particularly to natural history and at the age of thirty he was appointed botanical professor at Naples. In 1761, he published his “Introductio ad Botanicam,” which in the then state of botany was considered as a useful book. In the mean time, his knowledge of the English language made him be consulted by all visitors from that nation, and among others by lady Walpole, who engaged him to accompany her to England, as her travelling physician; and here he attended Dr. Hunter’s, and probably other medical lectures. On his return he published his “Nosologiae methodicse rudimenta,” 1780; and in 1784 another work, “De essentialibus nonnullarum plantarum characteribus,” which was followed by other botanical treatises, learned, but badly written, his Latin and Italian style being both ungrammatical and uncouth. His most splendid work was an account of the “Papyrus,” printed by Bodoni in 1796, and this was his last. He soon caught the delusion of French liberty; and when the French army entered Naples, he not only joined them, but was appointed a functionary, for which treasoiij on the restoration of the lawful government, he was executed in 1799.

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

, a celebrated French mathematician and academician, was born at Paris, May 13, 1713, and died May 17, 1765. His father, a teacher of the mathematics at Paris, who was his sole instructor, taught him even the letters of the alphabet on the figures of Euclid’s Elements, by which he was able to read and write at four years of age, and by a similar stratagem calculations were rendered familiar to him. At nine years of age he put into his hands Guisnee’s “Application of Algebra to Geometry” at ten he studied l'Hopital’s “Conic Sections;” and between twelve and thirteen, he read a memoir to the academy of sciences, concerning four new geometrical curves of his own invention. About the same time he laid the first foundation of his work upon curves that have a double curvature, which he finished in 1729, at sixteen years of age. He was named adjoint-mechanician to the academy in 1731, at the age of eighteen, associate in 1733, and pensioner in 1738. During his connection with the academy, he sent a great multitude of learned and ingenious communications to their Memoirs, from 1727, almost every year, to 1762, and wrote several other works, which he published separately, as, 1. “On Curves of a Double Curvature,” in 1730, 4to. 2. “Elements of Geometry,” 1741, 8vo. 3. “Theory of the Figure of the Earth,” 1743, 8vo. 4. “Elements of Algebra,” 1746, 8vo. 5. “Tables of the Moon,” 1754, 8vo.

In 1715 and 1716 he had a dispute with the celebrated Leibnitz, relating to the principles of natural philosophy and religion: and a collection of the papers which passed between them was published in 1717; and remarks upon a book entitled “A philosophical enquiry concerning Human Liberty,” by Anthony Collins, 8vo. The letters from Cambridge, which Clarke answers in this volume, were written by Richard Bulkeley, esq. author of a poem in 12 books,entitled “The Last Day,” who died in 1718, at about twenty-four years of age. All the pieces contained in this volume were translated into French, and published by Des Maizeaux in the first volume of “Recueil de diverses pieces sur la philosophic, la religion naturelle, Phistoire, les mathematiques, &c. par Messrs. Leibnitz, Clarke, Newton, et autres auteurs celebres,” printed at Amsterdam in 1720, 2 vols. 12 mo. This book of the doctor’s is inscribed to her late majesty queen Caroline, then princess of Wales, who was. pleased to have the controversy pass through her hands, and was the witness and judge of every step of it. It related chiefly to the important and difficult subjects of liberty and necessity. Whiston says, “I confess, I look upon these letters of Dr. Clarke as among the most useful of his performances in natural philosophy.” He has also preserved an anecdote relating to this controversy^; which is, that sir Isaac Newton once pleasantly told Clarke, that “he had broke Leibnitz’s heart with his reply to him.”

, son to the preceding, was born at Btixted, March 16, 1730, and was educated at St. John’s college, Cambridge, where he took his degree of B. A,. 1752, and after being elected a fellow, proceeded M. A. 1755. In 1758 he was presented to the rectory of Pepperharrow, in Surrey. He was, like his father, a man of genius and an excellent scholar. His taste and wit gave peculiar charms to his conversation, in which he particularly excelled. His first publication, we believe, was a copy of Greek hexameters on the death of Frederic prince of Wales, in the “Luctus Academias Cantabrigiensis,” 1751. Jn 1755, he published “A Letter to a Friend in Italy, and verses on reading Montfaucon.” In concert with Mr. Itowyer, he projected the improvement of a Latin dictionary, by reducing that of Faber from its present radical to a regular form. One single sheet of this work was completed, when the design dropped for want of due encouragement. In 1759, he published a thanksgiving sermon, for the victory over the French fleet; and the following year, went as chaplain to the embassy at Madrid, and during a residence there of two years, collected the materials of a very curious work which he published on his return, entitled “Letters concerning the Spanish nation, written at Madrid during the years 1760 and 1761,” 1763, 4to. In this year also, he married Anne, daughter of Thomas Grenfield, esq. and soon afterwards attended general James Johnstone to Minorca (of which island that officer had been appointed lieutenant-governor), as secretary and chaplain. In 1767 he published “A defence of the conduct of the lieutenantgovernor, in reply to a printed libel.” On his return from Minorca, about 1768, he was inducted to the vicarages of Willingdon and Arlington, in Sussex, through the interest of his father, by whose resignation also he succeeded to the rectory of Buxted, on which he principally resided, devoting his whole life to literature. In 1769 he resigned Pepperharrow, from a dislike, very honourable to him, of the character of a pluralist. In 1778, he printed proposals for an edition in folio of the “Greek Testament,” with a selection of notes from the most eminent critics and commentators, but sufficient encouragement was not given. The copy, however, is in the possession of his son the rev. James Stanier Clarke, with another that was interleaved and filled with notes by his grandfather Mr. William Clarke. He died November 1786, and was buried at Buxted. He left three sons, and a daughter married to capt. Parkinson of the royal navy. Of his sons, the youngest, capt. George Clarke of the royal navy, a brave and skilful officer, was unfortunately drowned by the upsetting 1 of a pleasure-boat in the Thames, Oct. 1, 1805. It would be unnecessary to add how much the literary honours of this family are likely to be perpetuated by his other sons, the rev. James Stanier Clarke, LL. B. and F. K. S. the biographer of Nelson, and the rev. Edward Daniel Clarke, LL. D. a gentleman of consummate abilities in the antiquities of literature, and author of two volumes of “Travels” just published, which have interested the public in no common degree.

, an eminent French protestant clergyman, was born at Sauvetat in the province of Angenois, in 1619, and studied grammar and philosophy under his father Francis Claude, also a minister, ~and a man of great piety, and afterwards went through a course of divinity at Montauban, where he was ordained in 1645. He was made minister of the church of la Treyne, where he officiated a year, and then became minister of a church of St. Afric in Rovergne and eight years after, pastor of that of Nismes. As the protestants had an university in the city of Nismes, Claude had an opportunity of displaying one of his chief talents, that of happily explaining a theological subject; and he used to read private lectures to such as were candidates for the ministry. He had undertaken to refute the piece called “The Method,” which was written by cardinal Richelieu against the protestants; but hearing that Martel, an eminent professor of divinity, had a synodical commission for that purpose, he laid aside that design. Havfng opposed, in the synod of the Lower Languedoc, a person whom the court had won over to attempt a re-union between the Roman catholics and protestants, he was forbid, by a decree of council, the functions of a minister in Languedoc, after he had exercised them eight years at Nismes. He went to Paris to get this resolution taken off; and, after staying there six months to no purpose, he went to Montauban, preached the day after his arrival, and accepted an offer from the people of that church.

Claude, as we have observed, was elected minister of the church of Montauban, about 1662; but four years after he was forbid by the court to exercise his functions there, which obliged him to go a second time to Paris, where he continued near nine months, without being able to remove the obstacles of his return to Montauban. During this interval, he was invited to the church of Bourdeaux; but the congregation of Charenton, being unwilling to lose a person of Claude’s abilities, gave him also an invitation in 1666. From that time to the revocation of the edict of Nantz, he did very great service to the cause of the French protestants by his excellent works, and by the minute attention he paid to the affairs which the deputies of provinces communicated to him. No man was ever better qualified to head either a consistory or a synod, or to manage a personal dispute. He discovered this latter talent in the last conference, which Mad. de Duras desired to hear. This lady would not forsake her religion till she had heard Claude and the bishop of Meaux dispute in her presence; and they accordingly disputed at the countess de Roie’s, her sister’s, the 1st of March, 1678. Each disputa'nt wrote the relation of his conference, and ascribed the victory to himself. These relations were at first only handed about in ms. but at last the bishop of Meaux published his in 1682, and that of Claude followed soon after. Claude was distinguished from the rest of the ministers, by the manner in which the court ordered him to leave the kingdom. He, like them, had a fortnight allowed him to leave it: but the Romish clergy found means to shorten even that time. For, Oct. 22, 1685, the day on which the revocation of the edict of Nantz was registered at Paris, Claude at ten in the morning was ordered to leave France in twenty-four hours. He obeyed with the utmost submission; and set out, attended by one of the king’s footmen, who was ordered to conduct him to the frontiers of France; and who, though he executed his orders faithfully, yet treated him with civility. He travelled in the Brussels coach; and his fame flying before him, procured him much kind and hospitable attention during his journey. He passed through Cambray, where he lay; and was there presented with some refreshments by the Jesuits. Even their rector paid him a visit, which Claude returned; and the difference of religion did not interrupt this interchange of civilities.

, or, as some add, Claudius Clemens, bishop of Turin in the ninth century, and one of the earliest reformers of popish superstitions, was a native of Spain, and in his youth a disciple of Felix bishop of Urgel, whom he accompanied into France, Italy, and Germany, but whose errors he afterwards renounced, and obtained access to the court of Lewis le Debonnaire, emperor and king of France. Lewis admitted him among his almoners and chaplains, and having preached before the court, a thing very rare in those days, he was much admired as an expounder of the Scriptures, of which Fleury assures us he had great knowledge. On this account Lewis, who perceived the ignorance of a great part of Italy, and was willing to provide the churches of Piedmont with one who might stem the growing torrent of image worship, promoted Claudius to the see of Turin, about the year 817, in which he fully answered his expectations, and both in his preaching and writings successfully combated the prevailing superstitions. His commentaries on several parts of the Old and New Testaments are still extant in manuscript, in various French libraries; but his “Commentary on the Galatians,” Paris, 1542, is the only part of his works which has been printed, except his “prefaces” to the book of Leviticus and to the Epistle to the Ephesians, which father Mabillon published; an abridged “Chronicle” which father Labbe attributes to him; and a letter addressed to the emperor Charlemagne on the two eclipses of the year 8 10, which is in the tenth vol. of D'Acheri’s collection. In his commentary on the Galatians, he every where asserts the equality of all the apostles with St. Peter, and owns Jesus Christ as the proper head of the church. He inveighs against the doctrine of human merits, and against raising traditions to a height of credibility equal to that of the divine word. He maintains salvation by faith alone, admits the fallibility of the church, exposes the futility of praying for the dead, and of the idolatrous practices then supported by the Roman see. These tenets involved him in a controversy with a recluse named Dungal, and with Jonas, bishop of Orleans; and created many more dangerous enemies, from whom, however, he appears to have been protected by the French court, and died in peace in the year 339.

Soon after Dr. Clayton’s marriage, he went with his lady to England, and while at London, a person in distressed circumstances applied to him for assistance, with the testimony of Dr. Samuel Clarke for a recommendation, upon which, instead of the usual donation on such occasions, he gave to the necessitous man the sum of three hundred pounds, which was the whole that he wanted to make him easy in the world. This circumstance introduced him to Dr. Clarke, and the result of their acquaintance was, Dr. Clayton’s embracing the Arian principles, to which he adhered during the remainder of his life. Dr. Clarke having carried to queen Caroline an account of Dr. Clayton’s remarkable beneficence, it made a powerful impression on her majesty’s mind in favour of his character; which impression was strongly enforced by her bed-chamber woman, Mrs. Clayton, afterwards lady Sundon. Such a powerful interest procured an immediate recommendation to lord Carteret, then chief governor of Ireland, for the very first bishopric tbat should become vacant, and accordingly, he was advanced to that of Killala, January 1729-30. In this situation he continued till November 1735, when he was translated to the see of Cork, and in 1745 to that of Clogher. Excepting a letter written to the royal society upon a subject of no great consequence, his first publication was an “Introduction to the History of the Jews,” which was afterwards translated into French, and printed at Leyden. His next work was “The Chronology of the Hebrew Bible vindicated: the facts compared with other ancient histories, and the difficulties explained, from the flood to the death of Moses; together with some conjectures in relation to Egypt during that period of time; also two maps, in which are attempted to be settled the journeyings of the children of Israel,” 1747, 4to, and containing a variety of observations which deserve the attention of the learned reader. In 1749 he published a “Dissertation on Prophecy,” in which he endeavoured to shew, from a joint comparison of the Prophecies of Daniel, and the Revelation of St. John, that the final end of the dispersion of the Jews will be coincident with the ruin of the popedom, and take place about 2000. This was followed by an “Impartial Enquiry into the time of the coming of the Messiah,” in two letters to an eminent Jew, printed first separately, and then together, in 1751. In the same year (1751), appeared the “Essay on Spirit,” a performance which excited very general attention, and was productive of a fruitful controversy. Its object was to recommend the Arian doctrine of the inferiority of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and to prepare the way for suitable alterations in the Liturgy. His biographer, who is at the same time his warm panegyrist, allows that in this performance he has indulged too freely in imagination and conjecture; and that he might have confined the question with greater advantage to the direct and simple standard of Scripture. The work, after all, was not Dr. Clayton’s, but one of his adoption, the real authoi being a young clergyman in his diocese, who shewed the manuscript to his lordship, but had not the courage to print it in his own name. The bishop, with what is called a romantic generosity, conveyed it to the press, and managed the affair in such a manner, that the treatise was universally ascribed to him in all the attacks to which it was exposed, and the sentiments certainly were his. One effect of this conduct was, his being prevented from rising higher in the church. In 1752, he was recommended by the duke of Dorset, then viceroy of Ireland, to the vacant archbishopric of Tuam, but this was refused, solely on account of his being regarded as the writer of the Essay.

, a learned physician, was born of reputable parents, at Granton, in the parish of Crammond, near Edinburgh, on the 13th of December 1716. His father died in 1719, and left a widow and five children. George, who was the youngest son, received the rudiments of his education in the grammar-school of Crammond, and in 1728 was sent to Edinburgh to be further instructed in the Latin, Greek, and French; where, to a singular proficiency in these languages, he added a considerable stock of mathematical knowledge. In the beginning of 1731 he resolved to study physic and surgery, and had the happiness of being placed under the tuition of the late Dr. Alexander Monro, and under his roof. In one of his letters his pupil appeared to dwell with peculiar pleasure upon this circumstance; observing, that “his amiable manners and unremitting activity in promoting the public welfare, endeared him to all his acquaintance, but more particularly to those who lived under his roof, and had daily opportunities of admiring the sweetness of his conversation, and the invariable benignity of his disposition.” For five years he continued to profit by the instruction and example of his excellent master, visiting patients in company with him, and assisting at the dissections in the anatomical theatre; at the same time he attended in their turn the lectures in botany, materia medica, chemistry, and the theory and practice of medicine; and by extraordinary diligence he attracted the notice of all his preceptors. On Dr. Fothergill’s arrival from England at this university in 1733, Dr. Cleghorn was introduced to his acquaintance, and soon became his inseparable companion. These twin pupils then studied together the same branches of science under the same masters, with equal ardour and success; they frequently met to compare the notes they had collected from the professors, and to communicate their respective observations. Their moments of relaxation, if that time can be called relaxation which is devoted to social studies, were spent in a select society of fellowstudents, of which Fothergill, Russel, and Cuming, were associates; a society since incorporated under the name of The Royal Medical Society of Edinburgh.

, an eminent German bibliographer, was a French preacher at Hanover, a man profoundly acquainted with the history of literature, and the author of a well-known collection of bibliography, entitled “Bibliotheque curieuse, historique, et critique, ou Catalogue raisonne de livres difficiles a trouver,” 9 vols. 4to, Gottingen, &c. 1750 1760, at which last date^this useful work was interrupted by his death, and has never been completed. It is in alphabetical order, and extends no farther than the letter H. Its only fault is that the author marks many books as rare, which are very common. He published also “Specimen Bibliothecae Hispano-Maiansianae, sive idea novi catalog! critici operum scriptorum Hispanorum, quse kabet in sua bibliotheca Gregorius Maiansius,” Hanover, 1753, 4to.

, a learned French historian,- and a Benedictine of the congregation of St. Maure, was born at Beze in Burgundy, April 7, 1714, After his first studies at the college of Dijon, he embraced the monastic life in the abbey of Vendome, where he studied so hard as to injure his health. Being afterwards ordered to Paris by his superiors, he devoted himself principally to history, to which his attention was drawn by that vast collection of French historical documents, of which we have already spoken so largely in the lives of Bouquet and Andrew du Chesne, and which was continued by Haudiquier, Housseau, Precieux, and Poirier. Clement became now their successor in this great work, and in conjunction with father B rial, published in 1770 the twelfth volume, and in 1786 the thirteenth, enriched by two hundred articles of great value and curiosity. Clement wrote also, 1. “Nouveaux eclaircissemens sur l'origine de Pentateuque des Samaritains,” a work begun by Poncet, and completed with a preface, &c. by Clement. 2. “A Catalogue of the Mss. in the library of the Jesuits at St. Germain-des-Pres. 3.” L'art de verifier les dates,“1780 1792, 3 vols. folio. This work, which is accounted in France a master-piece of learning, was begun by the Benedictins Antine, Clemencet, and Durand, whose labours, however, are far inferior to those of Clement, who employed thirty years of his life upon it, almost without any intermission. The only objection is to the chronological table, or index, which is said to be somewhat inaccurate. Clement was a free associate of the academy of inscriptions, but his studies were interrupted by the revolution, which obliged him to quit one convent after another, and at last seek an asylum with a nephew. The remainder of his days were employed in a work to introduce the former, under the title of” L'art de verifier les dates avant J. C." In this he had made considerable progress, when he was carried oft by a stroke of apoplexy, March 29, 1793.

, brother to the preceding, a celebrated writer, and universal scholar, was born at Geneva, March 19, 1657. He was sent to a grammar-school at eight years of age; where he soon discovered an insatiable inclination to books, and such a genius for poetry, that he flattered himself, if he had duly cultivated it, he would probably have gained no small reputation. But the more serious studies, to which he applied himself, made him entirely neglect poetry, and he never wrote verses but on particular occasions. Thus, in 1689, having translated into French two sermons of bishop Burnet, preached before king William, on account, he says, of the friendship which subsisted between himself and that prelate, he subjoined to the one a small poem in heroic, and to the other an epigram in elegiac verse, upon England restored to liberty.

In 1682, Le Clerc, intending to visit England, travelled through Paris, and arrived at London in May, chiefly with a view to learn the English language; which, with the help of a master, he soon effected. He preached several times in the French churches at London, and visited several bishops and men of learning; but the air of the town not agreeing with his lungs, he returned to Holland, after less than a year’s stay, in company with the celebrated historian Gregorio Leti, who formerly lived at Geneva, and was then retiring to Holland. He visited Limborch at Amsterdam, from whom he learned the condition of the remonstrants in the United Provinces, but did not yet join them, although he discovered his real sentiments to Limborch, with whom he entered into a strict friendship, which lasted till the death of that great man. He had not been long in Holland before his friends and relations entreated him to return to Geneva, but not being able when there to dissemble his opinions, which wexe contrary to those established by law, he thought it prudent to return to Holland at the latter end of 1683. The year after he preached sometimes in French in the church of the remonstrants, but was soon obliged to leave off preaching; for what reason is not known, but his friends have thought proper to impute it to the jealousy of the Walloon ministers, who finding their audiences very thin when Le Clerc preached, prevailed upon the magistrates to forbid his preaching any more. In 1634, when the remonstrants held a synod at Rotterdam, he preached once more before them; and was then admitted professor of philosophy, the Hebrew tongue, and polite literature in their school at Amsterdam. The remainder of his life offers nothing to us but the history of his works, and of the controversies in which he was engaged; which were numerous, and displayed undoubted talents.

In the same year, we find him better employed in writing his “Bibliotheque universelle et historique,” a literary journal of great utility. The first eight and part of the ninth volume he wrote in conjunction with de la Crose the tenth is Le Clerc’s, and the 11th La Grose’s; the rest to the 19th Le CHerc’s, and the remainder to the 25th, which is the last, were written by Mr. Bernard. While employed on this work, Le Clerc published various others. In the years 1687 89, he published French translations of bishop Burners “Reflections upon Varillas’s History,” &c. and of some of his sermons and in 1690 the last book of Stanley’s “Lives of the Philosophers,” translated into Latin, with notes. The same year he revised and corrected the sixth edition of Moreri’s Dictionary; and wrote a French letter to Jurieu, vindicating the character of Episcopius, whom Jurieu had classed among Socinians. Besides these labours, he continued to read regular lectures, as professor of philosophy and the belles-lettres, at Amsterdam; and in 1691, published his “Logic, Ontology, and Pneumatology,” which, in order to complete the course, were followed in 1695, by his “Natural Philosophy.” These were all written in Latin, and were reprinted, in a fourth edition, Amst. 1710, 4 vols. 8vo, to which was subjoined also in Latin, his life, written by himself, 1711, which makes a fifth volume, and in 1712 was translated into English, and published at London. In 1693 he published the first volume of his “Commentary on the Bible,” a work he had long projected, and for which he had been long collecting materials. He published the remainder, at different times, until 1731, when the Commentary on the Prophets appeared, but it was still left incomplete, owing to that decay of his faculties which interrupted all his labours in the latter part of his life.

In 1701, another controversy produced his “Questiones Hieronymianae,” an attack on the character of that father, as to his skill in the Greek and Hebrew languages, and on Martinay, who some time before had published an edition of Jerom’s works. In 1701 he published a very indifferent edition of Hesiod, and the following year, under the name of Theodore Gorallus, he edited “P. Cornelii Severi Etna,” which involved him in a philosophical dispute with Burman, who had no respect for his verbal accuracy. In 1703, under another assumed name, Johannes Phereponus, he added to the Amsterdam edition of St. Augustine’s works, some animadversions on that father, which were answered by Dr. Jenkin, master of St. John’s college, Cambridge, in a work printed in 1707. In 1703, his French translation of the “New Testament” occasioned him to be ranked among Socinians, and some steps were taken, although in vain, to have it suppressed. The same year, he returned to his more useful employment, by beginning his “Bibliotheque choisee,” as a supplement to his “Bibliotheque Universelle.” This was continued to the year 1714, and consists of 28 vols. 12mo. It was immediately followed by his “Bibliotheque ancienne et moderne,” which extended to 29 vols. These 83 little volumes contain a great mass of very valuable materials, of critical disquisitions and bibliographical notices and memoirs, and well deserve a place in the library of every literary man. The public are indebted to them for the documents from which Dr. Jortin principally composed his life of Erasmus.

Mr. Pennant characterizes lady Anne Clifford as the most eminent person of her age for intellectual accomplishments, for spirit, magnificence, and deeds of benevolence; and he has given a particular description of two portraits of her, in the side-leaves of a family picture. Both the paintings are full lengths; one representing her at the age of thirteen, and the other in her middle age, in the state of widowhood. The books, in the first of these pictures, inform us of the fashionable course of reading among people of rank in her days. There are among them Eusebius, St. Augustine, sir Philip Sidney’s Arcadia, Godfrey of Boulogne, the French Academy, Camden, Ortelius, and Agrippa on the Vanity of Occult Sciences. Above are the heads of Mr. SamuelDaniel, her tutor, and Mrs. Anne Taylor, her governess and this memorial of the instructors of her youth, is a most grateful acknowledgment of the benefits she received from them. The books in the second picture consist wholly of the Bible, Charron on. Wisdom, and pious treatises, excepting one of Distillations and excellent Medicines; from which may be collected what were the chief objects of the countess’s studies, in the retirement of her later days.

When in 1746 Madras was surrendered to the French, under. the command of their admiral M. de la Bourdonnais, the officers both civil and military, who had served under the East India company, became prisoners on parole. M. Dupleix, however, who was chief commander of the military forces in India, not having been present at the surrender, refused to ratify the treaty, unless they would take another parole under the new governor. The English, in consequence of this new stipulation, thought themselves released from their engagements with Bourdonnais, and at liberty not only to make their escape, but to take up arms, if they should find an opportunity. Mr. Clive, accordingly, disguised as a Moor, in the dress of the country, escaped with a few others to St. David’s, a fortress which is situated to the south of Madras, at about the distance of 21 miles.

When the season for military operations was over, the troops remained at St. David’s, and before the return of spring they received news of a cessation of hostilities between Great Britain and France. Still, however, the sense of ancient rivalship. the reciprocal aggravation of recent injuries, an opposition of interests, a mutual confidence in strength, seemed to animate both nations to a renewal of the war. The dominions of the rajah of Tanjore had at that time been claimed by his brother, with a declaration that he, though deposed by his subjects, was their rightful sovereign; and that the reigning rajah was an usurper. The English of St. David’s, convinced by these allegations, determined to espouse the cause of the deposed rajah. They resolved to begin their attack upon a fort of the rajah’s, called Devi Cdtah. On their advance, rinding the approaches difficult, and the ramparts covered with innumerable forces, they were at first deterred from their enterprize. Clive, however, insisted that the attempt, though dangerous, was not hazardous. He thought the town might easily b$ taken by storm; recommending only to advance the cannons in the night, as by them the gates might be effectually destroyed. Captain Cope, the commander, refused to listen to the advice, as too desperate; till, after having exhausted his ammunition by a fruitless cannonade, he was compelled to retreat to Fort St. David’s. The disgrace of this discomfiture; its pernicious influence upon their trade 5 and the exultation of their common enemy the French, induced the English once more to attempt the reduction of Devi Cotah. The command of this expedition was entrusted to major Lawrence, an officer at that time but little known, but who was afterwards distinguished for his abilities in the service. As a breach was made in the walls, Clive, who then possessed only the rank of a lieutenant, solicited the command of the forlorn hope. Lawrence, willing to preserve him from so dangerous a station, told him the service did not then fall in his turn. Clive replied, that knowing it did not, he came rather to ask it as a favour, than to demand it as a right; but that on such an occasion he hoped the request of a volunteer would not be rejected. Major Lawrence consented; and Clive, in consequence of his appointment to the command of thirty-four British soldiers and seven hundred Sepoys, was ordered to storm the breach. Accord, ingly they led the way; but in passing a rivulet between the camp and the fort, four of the English fell by the fire of the enemy. The Sepoys were alarmed, and halted as soon as they had passed the stream but the English persevered, and, advancing closely upon the breach, presented their musquets, when a party of horse, which had been concealed in the tower, rushed upon their rear, and killed twenty-six. Clive, by stepping aside, escaped a stroke which had been aimed at him by oqe of the horse as they passed him. He ran towards the rivulet, and, having passed, had the good fortune to join the Sepoys. Of the whole fouj>and- thirty, himself and three others were all that were left alive. Major Lawrence, seeing the disaster, commanded all the Europeans to advance. Clive still marched in the first division. The horse renewed their attack, but were repulsed with such slaughter that the garrison, dismayed at the sight, gave way as the English approached the breach, and, flying through the opposite gate, abandoned the town to the victors. Alarmed at the success of the English, the rajah sent them overtures of peace; to which, on condition that a settlement should be made on his rival, and the fort of Devi Cutah, with the adjoining district, be ceded to the company, the English readily agreed.

The cessation of hostilities between the English and the French had given to the latter an opportunity of executing the important projects they had formed; which brought the affairs of the company into such a state as to induce Clive to resume the military character; in which he performed most signal acts of prowess, and encountered a variety of uncommon difficulties and dangers, too numerous to be particularised in our limited work, but which the reader will find amply detailed in the history of the times, and in his lite in the Biographia Britannica.

, an ingenious professor of the veterinary art, was born at Norwich, Aug. 12, 1725. His father was a blacksmith, in humble life, and could only afford to allow his son a short time for instruction, in the elements of reading, writing, and arithmetic. He was taken from school before he had made much progress in his education; and when he was seventeen years old, he was obliged, by the death of his father, to carry on the business for the benefit of his mother and her family, which consisted of four children. About the year 1750, he was first noticed by Dr. Kirwan Wright, an eminent physician, and a man of learning, who encouraged him to direct his mind to the investigation and treatment of the diseases of horses. To this pursuit he devoted his attention with great zeal and success. Through the same friend he was induced to acquire a knowledge of the Latin and French languages, in. order to make himself acquainted with the best authors on farriery and medicine, but particularly Vegetius and La Fosse. His Latin teacher was a Mr. Pagan, under whose tuition he made a rapid progress: and in French he instructed himself without the help of any master. He was much assisted in his Latin studies by acting as an amanuensis, and sometimes read in^ Latin books, to Dr. Wright, who had the misfortune to be deprived of his sight. During this time he was a hard worker as well as a hard student. He used to work at the forge, the regular hours, from sixo'clock in the morning until eight at night, and then frequently got ready the nails requisite for his men the next day. To his labours as a blacksmith, a veterinary practitioner, a student of Latin and French, he added others, as a student of mathematics. He became a member of a society established in Norwich, among men of original minds and small incomes, for improvement in mathematics and experimental philosophy, under the direction of Mr. Peter Bilby. Here ho associated with John Fransham, with Mr. Arderon, F. 11. S. a friend and correspondent of Baker, whose inquiries with the microscope excited general interestat that time, and with other working and thinking men. Mr. Clover had a greater quickness of apprehension, and excelled Fransham in mathematics; but the latter had made a greater proficiency in the classics, and was therefore qualified to become his master. After his return from his eccentric excursion to Newcastle, Mr. Clover employed Fransham occasionally to ride the horses home after they were shod, and whilst the iron was heating, they used both to be employed in Latin exer^ses and mathematical problems, worked upon a slate hung against the forge. Thus the tutor assisted in all the labours of his pupil, and, ' after correcting an exercise, or discussing the properties of a circle, he earned his frugal meal by conducting home the horses which his pupil had shod. Natural philosophy, natural history, and botany, engaged much of this little Bilbean society’s attention. Mr. Clover demonstrated at several of their meetings the origin and progress of the bots found in the stomach and intestines of horses, so early as 1753. He discovered the manner in which the larvae of these insects f&strus equij are conveyed from the coat of the horse, where they are deposited by the fly, into the animal’s stomach; and he illustrated, by many experiments, the whole progress of their transformation, which has been since so well described by Mr. B. Clarke, in the Linnean Transactions for 1796. In 1765, Mr. Clover’s reputation had increased so much that he relinquished working at the forge, and devoted himself wholly to the veterinary art. In this he was assisted by the most eminent medical practitioners of those days, particularly Mr. Gooch, who has inserted in the second volume of his surgical cases, a letter from Mr. Clover, giving a description and a drawing of an ingenious machine invented by him for the cure of ruptured tendons and fractured legs in horses. For many years Mr. Clover was severely afflicted with giddiness and pain in his head, which obliged him to decline business in 178!. He continued, however, to interest himself in every improvement that was made, and always took delight in recounting the results of his extensive experience. One of his greatest amusements was to talk with those who studied physic and surgery; and he continued to read the new medical publications, and to deliver short private lectures on the theory and practice of the healing art, with a lively interest, until the very day of his death. It is to be regretted that he never could be prevailed upon to extend the usefulness of his knowledge and experience in the diseases of animals, by any publication of his observations; but he felt a diffidence and fastidiousness in writing that could never be overcome, though his readiness to communicate information was universally acknowledged. The latter end of his life was cheered by the amusement of gardening, in which he excelled. He marked the gradual decay of his bodily organs with perfect tranquillity and composure, and watched his declining pulse when he expired Feb. 19, 1811, in the eighty-sixth year of his age. With an understanding vigorous and acute, and n. power of discrimination and discernment peculiar to himself, Mr. Clover possessed the external advantage of a strong muscular frame of body, which was tall and well proportioned.

, an eminent French lawyer, was born at Paris June 10, 1687, and admitted a counsellor in 1706, in the grand council, where he acquired such reputation, that at the age of thirty, he was looked upon as one of the ablest canonists, and he now determined, with the advice of his friends and clients, to plead in the parliament. He was heard there with universal applause, and, from that time till his death, there was scarce any affair of importance at the palace but the public crowded to hear him, and returned convinced that M. Cochin possessed all the extraordinary talents which characterise a great orator. He was consulted from every part of the kingdom, and never ceased to serve the public by his assiduous and unremitted labours. He died at Paris, after several attacks of an apoplexy, February 24, 1747, aged 60. His works were published at Paris, 1751, and the following year, 6 vols. 4to, with his life. These, however, have not preserved his reputation undiminished; and M. la Cretelle, in along article on them in the French Mercure for April 1782, concludes with asserting that Cochin was an advocate of great merit, but a genius of the second order. This sen*­tence, however, seems in some measure to proceed from an opinion that no man can be a genius who does not introduce novelties in his profession. France has unfortunately abounded of late years in such geniuses.

, a famous French engraver, was born in 1688, and received into the royal academy of Paris in 1731. His works are full of spirit, correctness, and harmony. The principal are from the paintings of the invalids, which employed him full ten years. He painted also Rebecca, St. Basil; the Origin of Fire, from Le Moine, Jacob and Laban, from Restout, The village Wedding, after Watteau, and the prints for the Lutrin, besides many upon the occasion of the dauphin’s marriage, and the general collection of the gallery of Versailles. He died in 1754.

, son of the preceding artist, was born at Paris in 1715, and, assisted by the instructions of his father, and his mother Louise Madeleine Hortemels, became an engraver of considerable celebrity. In 1749, he travelled to Italy with the marquis de Marigny, and after his return, was in 1752 made a member of the royal academy of Paris, and, in the sequel, appointed secretary and historian to that society. In addition to these honours, he was made a knight of the order of St. Michael, and keeper of the king’s drawings. Of his works, then extremely numerous, Mr. Jombert published a catalogue in 1770. He died April 29, 1790, after having published some works connected with his profession, as, 1. “Lettres sur les Peintures d'Herculaneum,” 1751, 12mo. 2. “Dissertation sur l'effet de la lumiere et des ombres, relativement a la peinture,” 1757, 12mo. 3. “Voyage d‘ltalie, ou Recueil d’ observations sur les ouvrages d‘architecture, de peinture, et de sculpture, que l’on voit dans les principales villes d'ltalie,” Lausanne, 1773, 3 vols. 8vo. 4. “Les Mysotechniques aux enfers,” 1763, 12mo. 5. “Lettres sur les Vies de Slodz et de Deshays,” 1765, 12mo. 6. “Projet d'une salle de spectacle,” 1765, 12mo. Cochin gave the design for the monument of the mareschal D'Harcourt, executed by Pigal, which is now in the French museum.

, a lady much distinguished by her literary accomplishments, was born in London, August 16, 1679, the daughter of captain David Trotter, who was a native of Scotland, and a commander in the royal navy, in the reign of king Charles the Second. Her mother was Mrs. Sarah Ballenden, nearly related to the noble lord of that name, and to the illustrious families of Maitland, duke of Lauderdale, and Drumrnond, earl of Perth. She had the misfortune to lose her father when very young; an event which also reduced her mother to narrow circumstances. In her childhood, she surprised a company of her relations and friends with some extemporary verses, on an incident which had happened in the street, and which excited her attention. By her own application and diligence, without any instructor, she learned to write, and also made herself mistress of the French language; but had some assistance in the study of the Latin grammar and logic; and of the latter she drew up an abstract for her own use. She was educated in the protestant religion, but having an early intimacy with several Roman catholic families of distinction, she was led, when very young, to embrace the Romish communion, and continued in it for some years.

In 1693, when she was only fourteen years of age, she wrote some verses, and sent them to Mr. Bevil Higgons, tf on his sickness and recovery from the small-pox,“and was only in her seventeenth year when she produced a tragedy, entitled” Agnes de Castro,“which was acted with applause at the Theatre-Royal in 1695, and printed the following year in 4to, without her name. The play is founded upon a French novel of the same title, printed at Paris in 1688. In 1697, she addressed some verses to Mr. Congreve on his” Mourning Bride“which gave rise to an acquaintance between her and that celebrated writer. In 1698, her tragedy, entitled” Fatal Friendship,“was performed at the new theatre in Lincoln’s-inn-fields, and printed the same year in 4to, with a dedication to the princess Anne of Denmark. This play was considered as the most perfect of her dramatic performances and it was praised by Hughes and Farquhar. On the death of Mr. Dry den, in 1701, our poetess joined with several other ladies, in paying a just tribute to his memory in verse. Their performances were published together in that year, under the title of” The Nine Muses; or, Poems written l>y so many Ladies, upon the death of the late famous John Dryden, esq.“The same year she also brought upon the stage a comedy, called” Love at a Loss; or, most votes carry it,“acted at the Theatre-Royal, and published in quarto; but on account of her absence from London while it was in the press, it was so incorrectly printed, that she would gladly have suppressed the edition; and many years after she revised it, with a view to a second performance, which never took place. Soon after, before the close of the year 1701, she produced another tragedy, called” The Unhappy Penitent,“which was performed at the Theatre-Royal in Drury-lane, also printed in 4to. In the midst of this attention to poetry and dramatic writing, she spent much of her time in metaphysical studies. She was a great admirer of Mr. Locke’s” Essay on Human Understanding;" and drew up a defence of that work, against some remarks written by Dr. Thomas Burnet, master of the Charter-house. This was published in May 1702, without a name, lest the public should be prejudiced against a metaphysical treatise written by a woman. She also professed herself to be desirous of concealing her name, from an unwillingness tobe known to Mr. Locke, under the character of his defender. But her name was not long concealed; and Mr. Locke desired his cousin, Mr. King, afterwards lord chancellor, to pay her a visit, and make her a present of books; and upon her owning her performance, he wrote her a letter of acknowledgment. She also received a letter of thanks for this piece from Mrs. Burnet, the last wife of the celebrated prelate of that name. It appears, that at the latter end of 1701, she was some time at Salisbury, on a visit to her relations in that city.

, a brave soldier and a distinguished benefactor to All Souls college, Oxford, was born at Barbadoes in 1668, and had part of his education in that island. He afterwards came over to England, and was admitted a gentleman-commoner of Christ-church in Oxford, 1685; where having taken a degree in arts, he was elected a probationer fellow of All Souls college in 1639. He became perfect, it is said, not only in logic, history, and the ancient and modern languages, but likewise in poetry, physic, and divinity. Thus qualified, he went into the army, but without quitting his fellowship; and being a well-bred and accomplished gentleman, as well as a scholar, he soon recommended himself to the favour of king William. He was made captain in the first regiment of foot guards, and seems to have'been instrumental in driving the French out of the island of St. Christopher’s, which they had seized at the breaking out of the war between France and England: but it is more certain that he was at the siege of Namur in 1695. Upon the conclusion of the peace of Ryswick, he was made captaingeneral and governor in chief of the Leeward Caribhee Islands, in which office he met with some trouble: for in 1701 several articles were exhibited against him to the house of commons in England, but he was honourably acquitted from all imputations. In 1703 he was at the attack upon Guadaloupe, belonging to the French, in which he shewed great bravery, though that enterprise happened to be unsuccessful. Some time after, he resigned his government of the Leeward islands, and led a studious and retired life. For a few years before his death, he chiefly applied himself to church history and metaphysics; and his eulogist tells us, that “if he excelled in any thing, it was in metaphysical learning, of which he was perhaps the greatest master in the world.” He died in Barbadoes, April 7, 1701, and was buried there the day following; but his body was afterwards brought over to England, and interred, June 19, 1716, in All Souls chapel, Oxford. Two Latin orations to his memory were spoken there by two fellows of that college; one by Digby Cotes, M. A. the university orator, at his interment; the other the next day by Edward Young, LL. B. at the laying the foundation stone of his library. Over his grave a black marble stone was soon after laid, with no other inscription on it but Codrington.

, called likewise P. Van Aelst, from the place of his nativity, a town in Flanders, was, if we may judge from the writers who have spoken of him, or from the admirable prints remaining from his designs, one of the greatest painters which either Germany or Flanders produced in his age. After he had been some time instructed in the school of Bernard of Brussels, he went to Rome to complete his studies, and soon proved himself an excellent designer, and a bold and spirited painter, as well in fresco as in oil. At his return to his own country he married, but his wife soon dying, he once more travelled, and at the solicitations of a merchant, a friend of his, accompanied him to Constantinople in 1531. Having stayed some time with the Turks, and drawn some most animated representations of their customs and ceremonies, which he afterwards cut in wood, he once more arrived in the place of his nativity, and took a second wife. Towards the latter part of his life he wrote some excellent treatises upon geometry, architecture, and perspective. His pictures of history, as well as his portraits, were much esteemed. He was made painter to the emperor Charles V. and died at Antwerp in 1550. After his death, the prints which he had made of Turkish costume were published by his widow. This admirable work consists of seven large pieces, which, when joined together, form a frieze, divided into compartments by Cariatides on a tablet in the first block is written in old French “Les moeurs et fachom de faire de Turcz, avecq les regions y appertenantes, ont est au vif contrefaicetze par Pierre Cceck d‘Alost, luy estant en Turque, Tan de Jesu Christ MDXXXIII. lequel aussy de sa main propre a pourtraict ces figures duysantes a Pimpression dy’celles;” and on the last is this inscription: “Marie ver hulst, vefue du diet Pierre d'Alost, tres passe en Tan MDL. a faict imprimer les diet figures, soubz grace et privilege dTimperialle majeste en Tan MCCCCCLIII.” These prints are very rare.

, an eminent French merchant, was the richest subject in Europe in the fifteenth century. He enjoyed an office of trust in the court of Charles VII. of France, and his industry was of more service to that country, than the boasted bravery of a Dunois or a Maid of Orleans. He had established the greatest trade that had ever been carried on by any private subject in Europe; and since his time Cosmo de Medicis is the only person that equalled him. He had 300 factors in Italy and the Levant. He lent 200,000 crowns of gold to his master, Charles VII. without which he never could have recovered Normandy; and therefore nothing can be a greater stain to the annals of this reign, than the persecution of so useful a man. After he had represented his prince in foreign states, he was accused of having poisoned the beautiful Agnes Sorel, Charles’s mistress; but this was without foundation, and the real motive of his persecution is not known. He was by the king’s order sent to prison, and the parliament tried him: all that they could prove against him was, that he had caused a Christian slave to be restored to his Turkish master, whom this slave had robbed and betrayed; and that he had sold arms to the sultan of Egypt. For these two facts, one of which was lawful, and the other meritorious, his estate was confiscated, and he was condemned to the amende honorable, and to pay a fine of 100,000 crowns. He found more virtue in his clerks than in the courtiers who ruined him: the former contributed to relieve him under his misfortunes, and one of them particularly, who had married his niece, facilitated his escape out of his confinement and out of France. He went to Rome, where Calixtus III. filled the papal chair, who gave him the command of part of a fleet which he had equipped against the Turks. He died on his arrival at the Isle of Chio, in 1456; therefore Mr. de Voltaire is mistaken in saying, in his “Essay on Universal History,” that “he removed to Cyprus, where he continued to carry on his trade; but never had the courage to return to his ungrateful country, though strongly invited.” Charles VII. afterwards restored some part of Coeur’s property to his children.

, the Vauban of the Dutch, was born in 1632, or, according to Saxius, in 1641. His genius for the art of war, and for constructing fortifications, displayed itself early in life. Being engineer and lieutenant-general in the service of the States-general, he fortified and defended the greater part of their places. It was a curious spectacle, says the president Heinault, to see in 1692, at the siege of Namur, the fort Cohorn besieged by Vauban, and defended by Cohorn himself. He did not surrender till after he had received a wound judged to be mortal, but which, however, did not prove to be so. In 1703 the elector of Cologne, Joseph Clement, having espoused the part of France, and received a French garrison into Bonn, Cohorn kept up such a strong and terrible fire upon the place, that the commandant surrendered it three days afterwards. This great man died at the Hague in 1704, leaving the Hollanders several places fortified by his industry and skill, Bergen-op-zoom, which he called his master-piece, but which, it ought to be mentioned, he left unfinished, was taken in 1747 by the marshal de Loewendahl, notwithstanding its fine fortifications, which caused it to be regarded as impregnable. We have a treatise by Cohorn, in Dutch, on the new method of fortifying places.

, a French historian, was born at Troyes, the 4th of November, 1611, and entered very early into the congregation of the oratory, where he was received by the cardinal de Berulle. Father Bourgoin, one of the cardinal’s successors in the generalship, considered him for a long time as a useless being, because he applied himself to the study of history. The prejudice of Bourgoin was so strong in that respect, that when he wanted, according to Richard Simon, to denote a blockhead, he said, he is an historian. Notwithstanding this, when Servien, plenipotentiary at Munster, asked him for a father of the oratory as chaplain to the embassy, he gave him Le Cointe, who attended him, assisted him in making preliminaries of peace, and furnished the memorials necessary to the treaty. Colbert obtained for him the grant of a pension of 1000 livres in 1659; and three years after, another of 500. It was then that he began to publish at Paris his grand work, entitled “Annales ecclesiastici Francorum,” in 8 volumes, folio, from the year 235 to 835. It is a compilation without the graces of style, but of immense labour, and full of curious particulars. His chronology frequently differs from that of other historians; but whenever he departs from them, he usually gives his reasons for it. The first volume appeared in 1665, and the last in 1679. Father Le Cointe died at Paris, the 18th of January, 1681, at the age of seventy.

We have besides of his, 1. A treatise of Bail and Mainprize, 1637, 4to. 2. Reading on the state of Fines, 27 Edw. I. French, 1662, 4to. 3. Complete Copyholder, 1640, 4to. There was added in another edition of this book in 1650, 4to, Calthorpe’s reading between a lord of a manor and a copyholder his tenant, &c. And in the editions in 12mo, 1668 and 1673, there is a supplement; but a more complete specification of the various editions may be found in Bridgman’s “Legal Bibliography.”

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

, an eminent antiquary and benefactor to the history and antiquities of England, was the son of William Cole, a gentleman of landed property, at Baberham in Cambridgeshire, by his third wife, Catharine, daughter of Theophilus Tuer, of Cambridge, merchant, but at the time she married Mr. Cole, the widow of Charles Apthorp . He was born at Little Abington, a village near Baberham, Aug. 3, 1714, and received the early part of “his education under the Rev. Mr. Butts at Saffron-Walden, and at other small schools. From these he was removed to Eton, where he was placed under Dr. Cooke, afterwards provost, but to whom he seems to have contracted an implacable aversion. After remaining five years on the foundation at this seminary, he was admitted a pensioner of Cla/e hall, Cambridge, Jan. 25, 1733; and irt April 1734, was admitted to one of Freeman’s scholarships, although not exactly qualified according to that benefactor’s intention: but in 1735, on the death of his father, from whom he inherited a handsome estate, he entered himself a fellow-commoner of Clare Hall, and next year removed to King’s college, where he had a younger brother, then a fellow, and was accommodated with better apartments. This last circumstance, and the society of his old companions of Eton, appear to have been his principal motives for changing his college. In April 1736, he travelled for a short time in French Flanders with his halfbrother, the late Dr. Stephen Apthorp, and in October of the same year he took the degree of B. A. In 1737, in consequence of bad health, he went to Lisbon, where he remained six months, and returned to college May 1738. The following year he was put into the commission of the peace for the county of Cambridge, in which capacity he acted for many years. In 1740 his friend lord Montfort, then lord lieutenant of the county, appointed him one of his deputy lieutenants and in the same year he proceeded M. A. In 1743, his health beting again impaired, he took another trip through Flanders for five or six weeks, visiting St. Omer’s, Lisle, Tournay, &c. and other principal places, of which he has given an account in his ms collections. In Dec. 1744 he was ordained deacon in the collegiate church of Westminster, by Dr. Wilcocks, bishop of Rochester, and was in consequence for some time curate to Dr. Abraham Oakes, rector of Wethersfield in Suffolk. In 1745, after being admitted to priest’s orders, he was made chaplain to Thomas earl of Kinnoul, in which office he was continued by the succeeding earl, George. He was elected a fellow of the Society of Antiquaries in 1747; and appears to have resided at Haddenham in the Isle of Ely in 1749, when he was collated by bishop Sherlock to the rectory of Hornsey in Middlesex, which he retained only a very short time. Speaking of that prelate, he says,” He gave me the rectory of Hornsey, yet his manner was such that I soon resigned it again to him. I have not been educated in episcopal trammels, and liked a more liberal behaviour; yet he was a great man, and I believe an honest man." The fact, however, was, as Mr. Cole elsewhere informs us, that he was inducted Nov. 25; but finding the house in so ruinous a condition as to require rebuilding, and in a situation so near the metropolis, which was always his aversion, and understanding that the bishop insisted on his residing, he resigned within a month. This the bishop refused t accept, because Mr. Cole had made himself liable to dilapidations and other expences by accepting of it. Cole continued therefore as rector until Jan. 9, 1751, when he resigned it into the hands of the bishop in favour of Mr. Territ. During this time he had never resided, but employed a curate, the rev. Matthew Mapletoft. In 1753 he quitted the university on being presented by his early friend and patron, Browne Willis, esq. to the rectory of Bletchley, in Buckinghamshire, which he resigned March 20, 1767, in favour of his patron’s grandson, the rev. Thomas Willis, and this very honourably, and merely because he knew it was his patron’s intention to have bestowed it on his grandson had he lived to effect an exchange.

, the second of the name, of an ancient family, admiral of France, was born the 16th of February 1516, at Chatillon-sur-Loing. He bore arms from his very infancy. He signalized himself under Francis I. at the battle of Cerisoles, and under Henry II. who made him colonel-general of the French infantry, and afterwards admiral of France, in 1552; favours which he obtained by the brilliant actions he performed at the battle of Renti, by his zeal for military discipline, by his victories over the Spaniards, and especially by the defence of St. Quintin. The admiral threw himself into that place, and exhibited prodigies of valour; but the town being forced, he was made prisoner of war. After the death of Henry II. he put himself at the head of the protestants against the Guises, and formed so powerful a party as to threaten ruin to the Romish religion in France. We are told by a contemporary historian, that the court had not a more formidable enemy, next to Conde, who had joined with him. The latter was more ambitious, more enterprising, more active. Coligni was of a sedater temper, more cautious, and fitter to be the leader of a party; as unfortunate, indeed, in war as Conde, but often repairing by his ability what had seemed irreparable; more dangerous after a defeat, than his enemies after a victory; and moreover adorned with as many virtues as such tempestuous times and the spirit of party would allow. He seemed to set no value on his life. Being wounded, and his friends lamenting around him, he said to them with incredible constancy, “The business we follow should make us as familiar with death as with life.” The first pitcht battle that happened between the protestants and the catholics, was that of Dreux, in 1562. The admiral fought bravely, lost it, but saved the army. The duke of Guise having been murdered by treachery, a short time afterwards, at the siege of Orleans, he was accused of having connived at this base assassination; but he cleared himself of the charge by oath. The civil wars ceased for some time, but only to recommence with greater fury in 1567. Coligni and Conde fought the battle of St. Denys against the constable of Montmorenci. This indecisive day was followed by that of Jarnac, in 1569, fatal to the protestants. Concle having been killed in a shocking manner, Coligni had to sustain the whole weight of the party, and alone supported that unhappy cause, and was again defeated at the affair of Men Icon tour, in Poitou, without suffering his courage to be shaken for a moment. An advantageous peace seemed shortly after to terminate these bloody conflicts, in 1571. Coligni appeared at court, where he was loaded with caresses, in common with all the rest of his party. Charles IX. ordered him to be paid a hundred thousand francs as a reparation of the losses he had sustained, and restored to him his place in the council. On all hands, however, he was exhorted to distrust these perfidious caresses. A captain of the protestants, who was retiring into the country, came to take leave of him: Coligni asked him the reason of so sudden a retreat: “It is,” said the soldier, “because they shew us too many kindnesses here: I had rather escape with the fools, than perish with such as are over-wise.” A horrid conspiracy soon broke out. One Friday the admiral coming to the Louvre, was fired at by a musquet from a window, and dangerously wounded in the right hand and in the left arm, by Maurevert, who had been employed by the duke de Guise, who had proposed the scheme to Charles IX. The king of Navarre and the prince of Cond6 complained of this villainous act. Charles IX. trained to the arts of dissimulation by his mother, pretended to be extremely afflicted at the event, ordered strict inquiry to be made after the author of it, and called Coligni by the tender name of father. This was at the very time when he was meditating the approaching massacre of the protestants. The carnage began, as is well known, the 24th of August, St. Bartholomew’s day, 1572. The duke de Guise, under a strong escort, marched to the house of the admiral. A crew of assassins, headed by one Besme, a domestic of the house of Guise, entered sword in hand, and found him sitting in an elbow-chair. “Young man,” said he to their leader in a calm and tranquil manner, “thou shouldst have respected my gray hairs but, do what thou wilt thou canst only shorten my life by a few days.” This miscreant, after having stabbed him in several places, threw him out at the window into the court-yard of the house, where the duke of Guise stood waiting. Coligni fell at the feet of his base and implacable enemy, and said, according to some writers, as he was just expiring “If at least I had died by the hand of a gentleman, and not by that of a turnspit!” Besme, having trampled on the corpse, said to his companions: “A good beginning! let us go and continue our work!” His body was exposed for three days to the fury of the populace, and then hung up by the feet on the gallows of Montfaucon. Montmorenci, his cousin, had it taken down, in order to bury it secretly in the chapel of the chateau de Chantilli. An Italian, having cut off the head of the admiral, carried it to Catherine de Medicis; and this princess caused it to be embalmed, and sent it to Rome. Coligni was in the habit of keeping a journal, which, after his death, was put into the hands of Charles IX. In this was remarked a piece of advice which he gave that prince, to take care of what he did in assigning the appanage, lest by so doing he left them too great an authority. Catherine caused this article to be read before the duke of Alei^on, whpm she knew to be afflicted at the death of the admiral: “There is your good friend!” said she, “observe the advice he gives the king!” “I cannot say,” returned the duke, “whether he was very fond of me; but 1 know that such advice could have been given only by a man of strict fidelity to his majesty, and zealous for the good of his country.” Charles IX. thought this journal worth being printed; but the marshal de Retz prevailed on him to throw it into the fire. We shall conclude this article with the parallel drawn by the abbe“de Mably of the admiral de Coligni, and of Francois de Lorraine, due de Guise.” Coligni was the greatest general of his time; as courageous as the duke of Guise, but less impetuous, because he had always been less successful. He was fitter for forming grand projects, and more prudent in the particulars of their executioj. Guise, by a more brilliant courage, which astonished his enemies, reduced conjunctures to the province of his genius, and thus rendered himself in some sort master of them. Coligni obeyed them, but like a commander superior to them. In the same circumstances ordinary men would have observed only courage in the conduct of the one, and only prudence in that of the other, though both of them had these two qualities, but variously subordinated. Guise, more successful, had fewer opportunities for displaying the resources of his genius: his dexterous ambition, and, like that of Pompey, apparently founded on the very interests of the princes it was endeavouring to ruin, while it pretended to serve them, was supported on the authority of his name till it had acquired strength enough to stand by itself. Coligni, less criminal, though he appeared to be more so, openly, like Caesar, declared war upon his prince and the whole kingdom of France. Guise had the art of conquering, and of profiting by the victory. Coligni lost four battles, and was always the terror of his victors, whom he seemed to have vanquished. It is not easy to say what the former would have been in the disasters that befell Coligni; but we may boldly conjecture that the latter would have appeared still greater, if fortune had favoured him as much. He was seen carried in a litter, and we may add in the very jaws of death, to order and conduct the longest and most difficult marches, traversing France in the midst of his enemies, rendering by his counsels the youthful courage of the prince of Navarre more formidable, and training him to those great qualities which were to make him a good king, generous, popular, and capable of managing the affairs of Europe, after having made him a hero, sagacious, terrible, and clement in the conduct of war. The good understanding he kept up between the French and the Germans of his army, whom the interests of religion alone were ineffectual to unite; the prudence with which he contrived to draw succours from England, where all was not quiet; his art in giving a spur to the tardiness of the princes of Germany, who, not having so much genius as himself, were more apt to despair of saving the protestantsof France, and deferred to send auxiliaries, who were no longer hastened in their march by the expectation of plunder in a country already ravaged; are master-pieces of his policy. Coligni was an honest man. Guise wore the mask of a greater number of virtues; but all were infected by his ambition. He had all the qualities that win the heart of the multitude. Coligni, more collected in himself, was more esteemed by his enemies, and respected by his own people. He was a lover of order and of his country. Ambition might bear him up, but it never first set him in motion. Hearty alike in the cause of protestantism and of his country, he was never able, by too great austerity, to make his doctrine tally with the duties of a subject. With the qualities of a hero, he was endowed with a gentle soul. Had he been less of the great man, he would have been a fanatic; he was an apostle and a zealot. His life was first published in 1575, 8vo, and translated and published in English in 1576, by Arthur Golding. There is also a life by Courtilz, 1686, 12mo, and one in the “Hommes Illustres de France.”

, countess de la Suze, a French poetess, whose works have been printed with those of Pellison and others in 1695, and 1725 in 2 volumes 12mo, was the daughter of Gaspar de Coligni, the third of that name, marshal of France, and colonel-general of infantry. She was very early married, in 1643, when she could not be more than seventeen, to Thomas Hamilton, earl of Haddington, according to Moreri, but we find no mention of this in the Scotch peerage. After his death she espoused the count de la Suze, of an illustrious house in Champaigne. But this second match proved unfortunate, owing to the furious jealousy of the count her husband, whose severities towards her made her abjure protestantism, and profess the catholic faith, which occasioned queen Christina of Sweden to say, “that she had changed her religion, that she might not see her husband, neither in this world nor the next.” Their antipathy became so great that the countess at last disannulled the marriage; and to induce the count to accede to it, she offered 25,000 crowns, which he accepted. She then gave herself up to the study of poetry, and became much admired by the geniuses of her time, who made her the subject of their eulogiums. Her fort lay in the elegiac strain, and those works of hers which have come down to us have at least a delicate turn of sentiment. Her other poems are songs, madrigals, and odes. The wits of her time gave her the majesty of Juno with Minerva’s wit and Venus’s beauty in some verses, attributed to Bouhours: but her character in other respects appears not to have been of the most correct kind. She died at Paris, March 10, 1673.

, a voluminous French divine, was a native of Ternay in Vendomois, doctor of divinity, and priest of the mission of St. Lazare. He was born Sept. 6, 1693, and died at Paris Oct. 6, 1770, at the seminary des Bons Enfans, where he resided. M. Collet published “A System of Moral Theology,” Is torn, which make 17 vols. 8vo, in Latin, because torn. 1, and torn. 13, are divided each into two, 1744 et seqq. An abridgment of this work, 5 vols. 12mo a scholastic work in 2 vols. “Tr. des Dispenses,” 3 vols. “Tr. des Saints Mysteres,” 3 vols.; “Tr. des Indulgences, et du Jubile,” 2 vols. 12moj and some books of devotion, which are very superficial; “Sermons,” 2 vols. 12mo, an abridgment of Pontas, 2 vols. 4to, &c.

, one of the members of the French academy, was born at Paris in 1598, and died in the same city February 10, 1659, aged sixty-one, leaving scarcely enough to bury him. Cardinal Richelieu appointed him one of the five authors whom he selected to write for the theatre. Colletet alone composed “Cyminde,” and had a part in the two comedies, the “Blindman of Smyrna,” and the “Tuilleries.” Reading the monologue in this latter piece to the cardinal, he was so struck with six bad lines in it, that he made him a present of 6uO livres; saying at the same time, that this was only for the six verses, which he found so beautiful, that the king was not rich enough to recompense him for the rest. However, to shew his right as a patron, and at the same time his judgment as a connoisseur, he insisted on the alteration of one word for another. Colletet refused to comply with his criticism; and, not content with defending his verse to the cardinal’s face, on returning home he wrote to him on the subject. The cardinal had just read his letter, when some courtiers came to compliment him on the success of the king’s arms, adding, that nothing could withstand his eminence!—“You are much mistaken,” answered he smiling; “for even at Paris I meet with persons who withstand me.” They asked who these insolent persons could be? “It is Colletet,” replied he; “for, after having contended with me yesterday about a word, he will not yet submit, as you may see here by this long letter he has been writing to me.” This obstinacy, however, did not so far irritate the minister as to deprive the poet of his patronage. Colletet had also other benefactors. Harlay, archbishop of Paris, gave him a handsome reward for his hymn on the immaculate conception; by sending him an Apollo of solid silver. Colletet took for his second wife, Claudine his maid servant; and, in order to justify his choice, published occasionally pieces of poetry in her name; but, this little artifice being presently discovered, both the supposititious Sappho, and the inspirer of her lays, became the objects of continual satire. This marriage, in addition to two subsequent ones, to the losses he suffered in the civil wars, and to his turn for dissipation, reduced him to the extreme of poverty. His works appeared in 1653, in 12mo.

In 17 13, Collier, as is confidently related, was consecrated a bishop by Dr. George Hickes, who had himself been consecrated suffragan of Thetford by the deprived bishops of Norwich, Ely, and Peterborough, Feb. 23, 1694. As he grew in years, his health became impaired by frequent attacks of the stone, to which his sedentary life probably contributed: so that he published nothing more but a volume of “Practical Discourses” in 1725, and an additional sermon “upon God not the origin of Evil,” in 1726. Besides what has been mentioned, he wrote some prefaces to other men’s works; and published also an advertisement against bishop Burnet’s “History of his own Times:”' this was printed on a slip of paper, and dispersed in all the coffee-houses in 1724, and is to be seen in the “Evening-post, No. 2254.” He died of the stone, April 26, 1726, aged seventy-six; an.d was interred three days after in the church-yard of St. Pancras near London. Hs was a very ingenious, learned, moral, and religious man* and though stiff in his opinions, is aid to have had nothing stiff or pedantic in his behaviour, but a great deal of life, spirit, and innocent freedom. It ought never to be forgot, that Collier was a man of strict principle, and great sincerity, for to that he sacrificed all the most flattering prospects that could have been presented to him, and died at an advanced age in the profession and belief in which he had lived. He will long be remembered as the reformer of the stage, an attempt which he made, and in which he was successful, single-handed, against a confederacy of dramatic talents the most brilliant that ever appeared on the British stage. His reputation as a man of letters was not confined to his own country: for the learned father Courbeville, who translated into French “The Hero of Balthazar Gratian,” in his preface to that work, speaks in high terms of his “Miscellaneous Essays;” which, he says, set him upon a level with Montaigne, St. Evremond, La Bruyere, &c. The same person translated into French his “Short View of the English Stage;” where he speaks of him again in strong expressions of admiration and esteem.

At length the opportunity offered. The plan that was laid to Jure them out succeeded. Admiral Louis having been detached with four sail of the line to attend a convoy to a certain distance up the Mediterranean, and the rest of the fleet so disposed as to lead the enemy to believe it to be not so strong as it was, admiral Villeneuve was tempted to venture out -with 33 ships under his command (18 French and 15 Spanish), in the hope of doing something to retrieve the honour of rheir flag. On the 19th of October lord Nelson received the joyful intelligence from the ships that were left to watch their motions, that the combined fleet had put to sea, and as they sailed with light westerly winds, his lordship concluding their destination to be the Mediterranean, made all sail for the Straits with the fleet under his command, consisting of 27 ships, three of which were sixty-fours. Here he learnt from capt. Blackwood that they had not yet passed the Straits, and on the 21st, at day-light, had the satisfaction to discover them six or seven miles to the eastward, and immediately made the signal for the fleet to bear up in two columns. It fell to the lot of vice-admiral Collingwoocl, in the Royal Sovereign, to lead his column into action, and first to break through the enemy’s line, which he did in a manner that commanded the admiration of both fleets, and drew from lord Nelson the enthusiastic expression, “Look at that noble fellow! Observe the style in which he carries his ship into action!” while the vice-admiral, with equal justice to the spirit and valour of his friend, was enjoying the proud honour of his situation, and saying to those about him, “What would Nelson give to be in our situation!”

Of this memorable engagement, which will occur again in our life of Nelson, we shall only notice in this place, that it began at twelve o'clock: at a quarter past one, lord Nelson received the fatal wound; and at three, P. M. many of the ships, having struck their colours, gave way. The British fleet was left with nineteen ships of the enemy, ass the trophies of their victory; two of them first rates, with three flag officers, of which the commander in chief (Villeneuve) was one. On the death of lord Nelson, the command of his conquering fleet, and the completion of the victory, devolved upon vice-admiral Collingwood, who, as he had so often done in the early part of his life, now for the last time succeeded him, in an arduous moment, and most difficult service. Succeeding high gales of wind endangered the fleet, and particularly threatened the destruction of the captured ships; but by the extraordinary exertions that were made for their preservation, four 74 gunships (three of them Spanish and one French) were saved and sent into Gibraltar. Of the remainder, nine were wrecked, three burnt, and three sunk. Two others were taken, but got into Cadiz in the gale. Four others which had got off to the southward were afterwards taken by the squadron under sir Richard Strachan. So that out of the thirty-three ships, of which the combined fleet consisted, there were only ten left, and many of these in such a shattered state, as to be little likely to be further serviceable.

Lord Collingwood was also confirmed in the command of the Mediterranean fleet, to which he succeeded by seniority, and in the opinion of lord Hood wanted only an opportunity to prove himself another Nelson. The bad state of his health had required his return home, but he remained on his station in hopes that the French fleet would come out from Toulon. His last active service was the direction of the preparations which ended in the destruction of two French ships of the line on their own coast He had not seen any of his relatives for a considerable period before his death, yet he appears to have been sensible that his illness would prove fatal. He even ordered a quantity of lead on board at Minorca, for the purpose of making a coffin for his conveyance to England. He died off Minorca, March 7, 1810, onboard the Ville de Paris. His death is supposed to have been occasioned by a large stone in the passage to the bladder; and for some time before his death he was incapable of taking any sustenance. His body having been brought to England was interred. May 11, in St. Paul’s cathedral, with great funeral solemnity. Lord Collingwood was a man of amiable temper and manners, dignified as an officer and commander, yet without any pride; and social among his friends even to a degree of playfulness. His mind was impressed by a strong sense of religion, which he reverenced and enjoined to those under him. He had no enemies but those of his country, and while he cherished all the Old English prejudices against those, he displayed, in the most trying moments, a spirit of humanity which gained their affections. Of this an instance occurred after the great battle of Trafalgar which must not be passed over superficially. In clearing the captured ships of the prisoners, he found so many wounded men, that, as he says in his dispatches, “to alleviate. human misery as much as was in his power,” he seat to the marquis de Solano, governor-general of Andalusia, to offer him the wounded to the care of their country, on receipts being given; a proposal which was received with the greatest thankfulness, not only by the governor, but by the whole country, which resounded with expressions of gratitude. Two French frigates were sent out to receive them, with a proper officer to give receipts, bringing with them all the English who bad been wrecked in several of the ships, and an offer from the marquis de Solano of the use of their hospitals for our wounded, pledging the honour of Spain for their being carefully attended.

While this book was circulating in England, and all parties were exerting their zeal, either by writing or preaching against it, the author is said to have received great civilities abroad. From Holland he went to Flanders, and intended to have visited Paris; but the death of a near relation obliged him to return to London, where he arrived Oct. 18, 1713, greatly disappointed in not having seen France, Italy, &c. In 1715 he retired into the county of Essex, and acted as a justice of the peace and deputy-lieutenant for the same county, as he had done before in the county of Middlesex and liberty of Westminster. The same year he published “A philosophical inquiry concerning Human Liberty: r ' which was reprinted with some corrections in 1717. Dr. Samuel Clarke wrote remarks upon this inquiry, which are subjoined to the colJection of papers between him and Leibnitz; but Collins did not publish any reply on this subject, because, as we are told, though he did not think the doctor had the advantage orer him in the dispute, yet, as he had represented his opinions as dangerous in their consequences, and improper to be insisted on, Collins affected to say that, after such an insinuation, he could not proceed in the dispute upon equal terms: The inquiry was translated into French by the rev. Mr. D. and printed in the first volume of Des Maizeaux’s” Recueilde diverses pieces sur la philosophic, la religion naturelle, &c. par M. Leibnitz, Clarke, Newton, &c." published at Amsterdam 1720, 2 vols. 12mo. In 1718 he was chosen treasurer for the county of Essex, to the great joy, it is said, of several tradesmen and others, who had large sums of money due to them from the said county; but could not get it paid them, it having been embezzled or spent by their former treasurer. We are told that he supported the poorest of them with his own private cash, and promised interest to others till it could be raised to pay them: and that in 1722 all the debts were by his integrity, care, and management discharged.

About this time Dr. Johnson fell into his company, who tells us, that “the appearance of Collins was decent and manly; his knowledge considerable, his views extensive, his conversation elegant, and his disposition cheerful. By degrees,” adds the doctor, “I gained his confidence; and one day was admitted to him when he was immured by a bailiff, that was prowling in the street. On this occasion recourse was had to the booksellers, who, on the credit of a translation of ‘ Aristotle’s Poetics,’ which” he engaged to write with a large commentary, advanced as much money as enabled him to escape into the country. He shewed me the guineas safe in his hand. Soon afterwards his uncle, Mr. Martin, a lieutenant-colonel, left him about 2000l. a sum which Collins could scarcely think exhaustible, and which he did not live to exhaust. The guineas were then repaid; and the translation neglected. But man is not born for happiness: Collins, who, while he studied to live, felt no evil but poverty, no sooner lived to study, than his life was assailed by more dreadful calamities, disease and insanity.“Dr. Johnson’s character of him, while it was distinctly impressed upon that excellent writer’s memory, is here at large inserted:” Mr. Collins was a man of extensive literature, and of vigorous faculties. He was acquainted, not only with the learned tongues, but with the Italian, French, and Spanish languages. He had employed his mind chiefly upon works of fiction, and subjects of fancy; and by indulging some peculiar habits of thought, was eminently delighted with those flights of imagination which pass the bounds of nature, and to which the mind is reconciled only by a passive acquiescence in popular traditions. He loved fairies, genii, giants, and monsters; he delighted to rove through the meanders of enchantment, to gaze on the magnificence of golden palaces, to repose by the water-falls of Elysian gardens. This was, however, the character rather of his inclination than his genius; the grandeur of wildness, and the novelty of extravagance, were always desired by him, but were not always attained. Yet as diligence is never wholly lost; if his efforts sometimes caused harshness and obscurity, they likewise produced in happier moments sublimity and splendour. This idea which he had formed of excellence, led him to Oriental fictions and allegorical imagery; and, perhaps, while he was intent upon description, he did not sufficiently cultivate sentiment. His poems are the productions of a mind not deficient in fire, nor unfurnished with knowledge either of books or life, but somewhat obstructed in its progress by deviation in quest of mistaken beauties. His morals were pure, and his opinions pious: in a long continuance of poverty, and long habits of dissipation, it cannot be expected that any character should be exactly uniform. There is a degree of want by which the freedom of agency is almost destroyed; and long association with fortuitous companions will at last relax the strictness of truth, and abate the fervour of sincerity. That this man, wise and virtuous as he was, passed always linen tangled through the snares of life, it would be prejudice and temerity to affirm; but it may be said that at least he preserved the source of action unpolluted, that his principles were never shaken, that his distinctions of right and wrong were never confounded, and that his faults had nothing of malignity or design, but proceeded from some unexpected pressure, or casual temptation. The latter part of his life cannot be remembered but with pity and sadness. He languished some years under that depression of mind which enchains the faculties without destroying them, and leaves reason the knowledge of right without the power of pursuing it. These clouds which he perceived gathering on his intellects, he endeavoured to disperse by travel, and passed into France; but found himself constrained to yield to his malady, and returned. He was for some time confined in a house of lunatics, and afterwards retired to the care of his sister in Chichester , where death, in 1756, came to his relief. After his return from France, the writer of this character paid him a visit at Islington, where he was waiting for his- sister, whom he had directed to meet him there was then nothing of disorder discernible in his mind by any but himself; but he had withdrawn from study, and travelled with no other book than an English Testament, such as children carry to the school: when his friend took it into his hand out of curiosity, to see what companion a man of letters had chosen: ‘ I have but one book,’ says Collins, ‘ but that is the best.’ Such was the fate of Collins, with whom I once delighted to converse, and whom I yet remember with tenderness. He was visited at Chichester in his last illness by his learned friends Dr. Warton and his brother; to whom he spoke with disapprobation of his t Oriental Eclogues,‘ as not sufficiently expressive of Asiatic manners, and called them his ’ Irish Eclogues.‘ He shewed them, at the same time, an ode inscribed to Mr. John Hume, ’ On the Superstitions of the Highlands;' which they thought superior to his other works, but which no search has yet found. His disorder was not alienation of mind, but general laxity and feebleness, a deficiency rather of his vital than intellectual powers. What he spoke wanted neither judgment nor spirit; but a few minutes exhausted him, so that he was forced to rest upon the couch, till a short cessation restored his powers, and he was again able to talk with his former vigour. The approaches of this dreadful malady he began to feel soon after his uncle’s death; and with the usual weakness of men so diseased, eagerly snatched that temporary relief with which the table and the bottle flatter and seduce. But his health continually declined, and he grew more and more burthensome to himself. “To what I have formerly said of his writings may bft added, that his diction was often harsh, unskilfully laboured, and injudiciously selected. He alVected the obsolete when it was not worthy of revival; and he puts his words out of the common order, seeming to think, with some later candidates for fame, that not to write prose is certainly to write poetry. His lines commonly are of slow motion, clogged and impeded with clusters of consonants. As men are often esteemed who cannot be loved, so the poetry of Collins may sometimes extort praise when it gives little pleasure .”

The successor of lord Bath, general Pulteney, died in 1767; and Mr. Colman found himself also remembered in his will by a second annuity, which confirmed the independency of his fortune. He seems, however, to have taken the first opportunity to engage in active life; as, about the year 1768, Mr. Beard, being incapable of bearing any longer the fatigues of a theatrical life, and wishing to retire from the management of Covent-garden theatre, disposed of his property in that house to Messrs. Colman, Harris, Powell, and Rutherford. These gentlemen carried on the management conjointly; but, in a short time, Mr. Colman appearing to aspire to a greater authority than the other patentees, excepting Mr. Powell, were disposed to grant, Mr. Colman, after a severe literary contest, which was published, sold his share, and retired. Soon after, Mr. Foote, then proprietor of the Haymarket theatre, having beeu induced to withdraw from the stage, disposed of his theatre to Mr. Colman for a handsome annuity, which he did not long enjoy. On his death, Mr. Colman obtained th*e license; and, from that period, conducted the theatre with great judgment and assiduity, occasionally supplying many dramas from his own fancy, as well as many pleasant translations from the French.

, a famous Jesuit, born at St. Symphorien, two leagues from Lyons, in 1641, acquired great reputation among his order by his extraordinary talents in the pulpit. He was preacher for two years at the court of James II. of England, who listened to his sermons with great pleasure, and, as it is said by the Romanists, with edification; hut, falling under the suspicion, though not convicted, of being concerned in a conspiracy, he was banished England, and betook himself to Parai, in the Charolois, where he died, Feb. 15, 1682. In conjunction with Marie Alacoque, he recommended the celebration of the solemnity of the heart of Jesus, and composed an office for the occasion. The first inventor of this rite, however, was Thomas Goodwin, president of Magdalen college, Oxford, an Arminian, who excited great notice in England, in the middle of the seventeenth century, by his ascetical and theological writings. His book entitled “Cor Christi in ccelis erga peccatores in terris,” printed in 1649, comprises the whole system of this devotion and was intended to promote the spread of it in England. La Colombiere, who was sent to London as confessor and preacher to the duchess of York, afterwards queen, found there a numerous sect, who, after Goodwin’s example, paid adoration to the fleshly heart of Jesus, as the symbolical image of divine love. He was astonished at the novelty of so ravishing a devotion, which had so long escaped the fertile invention of his fraternity; and carried it in triumph back with him to France, where, under the influence of heavenly visions and miracles, it struck deep root, and was extensively propagated. Among other agents a nun of the name of Marie Alacoque, who, in her heavenly visions, pretended to have conversed familiarly with Christ, was employed by the Jesuits to aid the deception, and in one of her visions, asserted that she had received orders from heaven to acquaint father la Colombiere, that he should institute a yearly festival to the heart of Jesus, propagate this devotion with all his might, and announce to such as should dedicate themselves to it, the assurance of their predestination to eternal life. The Jesuits immediately and zealously complied with the celestial mandate. There appeared at once in all quarters of the world, and in all languages, an innumerable swarm of publications, manuals, copper-plates, and medals, with hearts decorated with crowns of thorns, with lambent flames, transpiercing swords, or other symbolical impresses. They distributed scapularies to be worn day and night upon the breast, and tickets to be swallowed for driving out fevers. In all Spain there was not a nun who had not a present from the Jesuits of a heart cut out of red cloth, to be worn next the skin. In every catholic city and town, in all parts of the world, fraternities were erected, passionmasses and nine-day devotions were instituted, to the honour of the heart of Jesus; and panegyrical sermons delivered, exhorting the faithful to augment their zeal. The proselytes must vow, before the holy sacrament of the altar, an eternal fidelity to the heart of Jesus; and every soul was made responsible for the increase and growth of this new devotion; nay, the display of a burning zeal for making proselytes was regarded as the peculiar characteristic of the true worshipper of the heart. This devotion was represented in their sermons and writings, as a necessary means to the enjoyment of a blissful hereafter: it was no wonder, then, that the partisans of this devotion were in a short time as numerous in all catholic Christendom as the sands of the sea. The bishops approved and confirmed the brotherhoods, and consecrated churches, altars, and chapels, erected to the promotion of this enthusiasm. Kings and queens preferred petitions to the papal throne, that a proper office might be appointed in the breviary and choir, and a peculiar mass for the solemnization of the anniversary; and even at Rome fraternities arose and flourished that devoted themselves to the worship of the heart of Jesus. In recommendation of it the Jesuits were not wanting either in prophecies or miracles; among the foremost of whom was la Colombiere, who had an excellent taste in his compositions, and a noble delivery in the pulpit. His masterly eloquence displays itself amidst the extreme simplicity ofhis style, as we are told by the abbe Trublet, speaking of his sermons, published at Lyons 1757, in 6 volumes 12mo. He had an impetuous and lively imagination, and the warmth of his heart appears through all his discourses: it is the unction of pere Che'minaisr, only more ardent and glowing. All his sermons breathe the most gentle, and at the same time the most fervent piety: he has been equalled by few in the art of affecting his hearers, and no enthusiast ever fell less into the familiar. The celebrated Patru, his friend, speaks of him as the best skilled of his time in the refinements and niceties of the French language. There are likewise by him, “Moral Reflections,” and “Spiritual Letters.”

, or Colomesius, a learned French protestant, was born at Rochelle in 1638, where his father was a physician, and where he was probably educated. His application to various reading must evidently have been very extensive, and although he has no decided claims to originality, his works ranked in his own day, and some of them may still, as ably illustrating the history of learning and learned men. He faithfully treasured what he found in old, scarce, and almost unknown authors, and knew how to render the reproduction of learned curiosities both agreeable and useful. His great intimacy and high regard for Vossius, induced him to visit England, where Vossius was then canon of Windsor, and by his interest or recommendation he was appointed librarian at Lambeth, with a competent salary. This, however, he lost at the revolution, when his patron, archbishop Bancroft, was deprived for not taking the oaths to the new government. After this it is said that he fell into poverty, and died in Jan. 1692; and was buried in St. Martin’s church-yard. His principal works are, 1. “Gallia Orientalis,” reprinted at Hamburgh, 1709, in 4to, under the care of the learned Jabricius; and containing an account of such French as were learned in the Oriental languages. 2. “Hispania & Italia Orientalis,” giving an account of the Spanish and Italian Oriental scholars. 3. “Bibliotheque Choisie;” reprinted at Paris, 1731, with notes of M. de la Monnoye, 12mo. This was published at Hamburgh, 4to, by Christ. Wolf, an useful work, and of great erudition. 4. “Theologorum Presbyterianorum Icon,” in which he shews his attachment to episcopacy; and for which he was attacked by Jurieu (who had not half his candour and impartiality) in a book entitled “De P esprit d'Arnauld.” 5. “Des opuscules critiques & historiques,” collected and published in 1709, by Fabricius. 6. “Melanges Historiques,” &c. 7. “La vie du pere Sirmond,” &c. His “Colomesiana,” make a volume of the collection of Anas.

, a Venetian dominican, who died May 17, 1520, in his eightieth year, is chiefly known by a scarce book, entitled “Poliphili Hypnerotomachia,” Venice, 1499, fol. There is an edition of 1545, but none of 1467; the copies which pass for that edition, are of one or the other above mentioned editions; and the mistake has arisen from the last leaf, which contained the elate of the impressions, heing taken out, and the last but one left; on which is the date of the time when the work was written. It is a romance filled with mythological learning, of very little value but for its scarcity and whimsical composition, and has been translated into French by John Martin, Paris, 1561, fol

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

, a Greek poet, was a native of Lycopolis, a city of Thebais, in Upper Egypt, of whose parentage or education nothing is recorded; but we learn from Suidas that he lived in the reign of Anastasius, who succeeded Zeno in the government of the Eastern empire, about the year 491. He wrote Caledonics, Persies, and Encomia; but none of his works now remain, except the “Rape of Helen,” and that in a mutilated state. It is not, however, destitute of imagery, and is adorned by a variety of striking and expressive epithets, although we may infer from it, that the true poetic spirit had then ceased to flourish. The first edition of this work is that by Aldus, 8vo, without a date, along with Quintus Calaber; and the last, if we mistake not, was by Harles, 1776, 8vo, but the best is said to be that of Lanness, Gr. & Lat. 1747, 8vo. The Italians and French have good translations in their respective languages, and there are three in English; the first by sir Edward Sherborne in 1701, valuable chiefly for his learned notes; the second partly by Fawkes, and partly by a nameless coadjutor, in 1780; and the third, inferior to that of Fawkes, by an anonymous writer, was published in 1786.

, a celebrated grammarian and protestant divine, was born in Moravia in 1592. Having studied in several places, and particularly at Herborn, he returned to his own country in 1614, and was made rector of a college there. He was ordained minister in 1616, and two years after became pastor of the church of Fulnec: at which time he was appointed master of a school lately erected. He then appears to have projected the introduction of a new method for teaching the languages. He published some essays for this purpose in 1616, and had prepared other pieces on that subject, which were destroyed in 1621, when the Spaniards plundered his library, after having taken the city. The ministers of Bohemia, and Moravia being outlawed by an edict in 1624, and the persecution increasing the year after, Comenius fled to Lesna, a city of Poland, and taught Latin. There he published in 1631, his book entitled “Janua linguarum reserata,” or, “the gate of languages unlocked” of which he gives us an account which is universally allowed to be true “I never could have imagined,” says he, “that this little book, calculated only for children, should have met with universal applause from the learned. This has been justified by the letters I have received from a great number of learned men of different countries, in which they highly congratulate me on this new invention; as well as by the versions which have been emulously made of it into several modern tongues. For it has not only been translated into twelve European languages, namely, Latin, Greek, Bohemian, Polish, German, Swedish, Dutch, English, French, Spanish, Italian, Hungarian; but likewise into the Asiatic languages, as, Arabic, Turkish, Persian, and even the Mogul, which is spoken all over the East Indies.” It was afterwards reprinted under the title of “Orbis sensualium pictus,” and is still, according to baron Born, used in the schools of Bohemia, Comenius being particularly skilled in the language of that country.

, or Commines, Lat. Cominæus (Philip de), an excellent French historian, was born of a noble family in Flanders, 1446. He was a man of great abilities, which, added to his illustrious birth, soon recommended him to the notice of Charles the Bold, duke of Burgundy, with whom he lived in intimacy for about eight years. He was afterwards 'invited to the court of France by Louis XI. and became a man of consequence, not only from the countenance which was given him by the monarch, but from other great connections also, which he formed by marrying into a noble family. Louis made him his chamberlain, and seneschal or chief magistrate of the province of Poictou. He also employed him in several negotiations, which he executed in a satisfactory manner, and enjoyed the high favour of his prince. But after the death of Louis, when his successor Charles VIII. came to the throne, the envy of his adversaries prevailed so far, that he was imprisoned at Loches, in the county of Berry, and treated with great severity; but by the application of his wife, he was removed at length to Paris. After some time he was convened before the parliament, in which he pleaded his own cause with such effect, that, after a speech of two hours, he was discharged. In this harangue he insisted much upon what he had done both for the king and kingdom, and the favour and bounty of his master Louis XI. He remonstrated to them, that he had done nothing either through avarice or ambition; and that if his designs had been only to have enriched himself, he had as fair an opportunity of doing it as any man of his condition in France. He died in a house of his own called Argenton, Oct. 17, 1509; and his body, being carried to Paris, was interred in the church belonging to the Augustines, in a chapel which he had built for himself. In his prosperity he had the following saying frequently in his mouth: “He that will not work, let him not eat:” in his adversity he used to say, “I committed myself to the sea, and am overwhelmed in a storm.”

He was a man of great parts, but not learned. He spoke several modern languages well, the German, French, and Spanish especially; but he knew nothing of the ancient, which he used to lament. His “Memoirs of his own times,” commence from 1464, and include a period of thirty-four years; in which are commemorated the most remarkable actions of the two last dukes of Burgundy, and of Louis XL and Charles VIII. kings of France; as likewise the most important contemporary transactions in EngJand, Flanders, Germany, Italy, and Spain. The great penetration and judgment which Comines has shewn in, these memoirs, the extensive knowlege of men and things, the wonderful skill in unfolding counsels and tracing actions to their first springs, and the variety of excellent precepts, political and philosophical, with which the whole is wrought up, have long preserved the credit of this work. Catherine de Medicis used to say, that Comines had made as many heretics in politics as Luther had in religion. He has one qualification not yet mentioned, which ought particularly to recommend him to our favour; and that is, the great impartiality he shews to the English. Whenever he has occasion to mention our nation, it is with much respect; and though, indeed, he thinks us deficient in political knowledge, when compared with his own countrymen, he gives us the character of being a generous, boldspirited people; highly commends our constitution, and never conceals the grandeur and magnificence of the English nation. Dryden, in his life of Plutarch, has made the historian some return for his civilities in the following elogium: “Next to Thucydides,” says that poet, “in this kind may be accounted Polybius among the Grecians; Livy, though not free from superstition, nor Tacitus from, ill-nature, amongst the Romans; amongst the modern Italians, Guicciardini and d'Avila, if not partial: but above all men, in my opinion, the plain, sincere, unaffected, and most instructive Philip deComines amongst the French, though he only gives his history the humble name of Commentaries. I am sorry I cannot find in our own nation, though it has produced some commendable historians, any proper to be ranked with these.” There are a very great number of editions of these “Memoirs” in French, enumerated by Le Long: the best, in the opinion of his countrymen, is that of the abbe Lenglet du Fresnoy, Paris, 1747, 4 vols. 4to, under the title of London. It was translated into English in 1596, as noticed by Ames and Herbert, who have, however, confounded him with Philip de Mornay. The last English translation was that of Uvedale, 1712, 2 vols. 8vo.

, a celebrated French printer, native of Douav, settled first at Geneva, afterwards at Heidelberg, where he died in 1598. He was a very learned scholar, as appears by all the editions of the Greek and Latin fathers which he corrected, and to which he added notes that are much esteemed. He printed since 1560, in Switzerland, S. Chrysostomus in Nov. Testarnentum, 1596, 4 vols. fol. This edition, with that of the Old Testament printed at Paris, makes this work complete, and the best edition. He took up his residence at Heidelberg for the convenience of consulting the Mss. in the Palatine library. He printed many other books; those without his name are known by his mark, which represents Truth sitting in a chair. His edition of Apollodorus is well known in classical libraries, but unfortunately he did not live to finish it, which was accomplished in 1599 by his assistant Bonutius.

, a French monk, a native of Paris, is known as the author or editor of different works which met with a favourable reception. Among others he published “The remarkable Travels of Peter della Valle, . Si Roman gentleman, translated from the Italian,” 4 vols. 4to; “A new and interesting History of the kingdoms of Tonquin and Laos,” 4to, translated from the Italian of father Manni, in 1666. In the year preceding this, he published the third volume of father Lewis Coulon’s “History of the Jews.” He died at Paris in 1689.

King Charles now caused him to be sworn one of his privy council; and committed to his care the educating of his two nieces, the princesses Mary and Anne, which important trust he. discharged to the nation’s satisfaction. They were both confirmed by him upon January 23> 1676; and it is somewhat remarkable that they were both likewise married by him: the eldest, Mary, with William prince of Orange, November 4, 1677; the youngest, Anne, with George prince of Denmark, July 28, 1683. The attachment of these two princesses to the protestant religion was owing, in a great measure, to their tutor Compton; which afterwards, when popery came to prevail at the court of England, was imputed to him as an unpardonable crime. In the mean time he indulged the hopeless project of bringing dissenters to a sense of the necessity of an union among protestants; to promote which, he held several conferences with his own clergy, the substance of which he published in July 16SO. He further hoped, that dissenters might be the more easily reconciled to the church, if the judgment of foreign divines should be produced against their needless separation: and for that purpose he wrote to M. le Moyne, professor ef divinity at Leyden, to M. de PAngle, one of the preachers of the protestant church at Charenton near Paris, and to M. Claude, another eminent French divine. Their answers are published at the end of bishop Stillingfleet’s “Unreasonableness of Separation,” 1681, 4to; all concurring in the vindication of the church of England from any errors in its doctrine, or unlawful impositions in its discipline, and therefore in condemning a separation from it as needless and uncharitable. But popery was what the bishop most strenuously opposed; and while it was gaining ground at the latter end of Charles the lid’s reign, under the influence of the duke of York, there was no method he left untried to stop its progress. This zeal was remembered and resented on the accession of James II.; when, to his honour, he was marked out as the first sacrifice to popish fury, being immediately dismissed from the council-table; and on December 16, 1685, from being dean of the royal chapel. Means were also devised to entrap him into some measure which might affect his office as bishop of London, nor could this be difficult in the case of a man so firm and conscientious. The following is a striking instance of the intentions of the court to overturn the national church. Dr. John Sharp, rector of St, Giles’s in the Fields, afterwards archbishop of York, having in some of his sermons vindicated the doctrine of the church of England against popery; the king sent a letter, dated June 14, 1686, to bishop Compton, “requiring and commanding him forthwith to suspend Dr. Sharp from further preaching in any parish church or chapel within his diocese, until he had given the king satisfaction.” In order to understand how Sharp had offended the king, it must be remembered, that king James had caused the directions concerning preachers, published in 1662, to be now reprinted; and reinforced them by a letter directed to the archbishops of Canterbury and York, given at Whitehall, March 5, 1686, to prohibit the preaching upon controversial points; that was, in effect, to forbid the preaching against popery, which Sharp had done. The bishop refusing to suspend Dr. Sharp, because, as he truly alleged, he could not do it according to law, was cited to appear, August y, before the new ecclesiastical commission: when he was charged with not having observed his majesty’s command in the case of Sharp, whom he was ordered to suspend. The bishop, after expressing some surprise, humbly begged a copy of the commission, and a copy of his charge; but was answered by chancellor Jefferies, “That he should neither have a copy of, nor see, the commission neither would they give him a copy of the charge.” His lordship then desired time to advise with counsel; and time was given him to the 16th, and afterwards to the 3 1st of August. Then his lordship offered his plea to their jurisdiction: which being overruled, he protested to his right in that or any other plea that might be made for his advantage; and observed, “that as a bishop he had a right, by the most authentic and universal ecclesiastical laws, to be tried before his metropolitan, precedently to any other court whatsoever.” But the ecclesiastical commissioners would not upon any account suffer their jurisdiction to be called in question; and therefore, in spite of all that his lordship or his counsel could allege, he was suspended on Sept. 6 following, for his disobedience, from the function and execution of his episcopal office, and from all episcopal and other ecclesiastical jurisdiction, during his majesty’s pleasure; and the bishops of Durham, Rochester, and Peterborough, were appointed commissioners to exercise ecclesiastical jurisdiction within, the diocese of London. But the court did not think fit to meddle with his revenues. For the lawyers had settled that benefices were of the nature of freeholds; therefore, if the sentence had gone to the temporalities, the bishop would have had the matter tried over again in the king’s bench, where he was likely to find justice.

Among the many excellent features of his character given by Dr. Gooch, his munificence stands conspicuous. “He disposed of money to every one who could make out (and it was very easy to make that out to him) that he was a proper object of charity. He answered literally the apostle’s character, poor enough himself, yet making many rich. He had divers ancient people, men and women^ whom he supported by constant annual pensions; and several chiklren at school, at his own cost and charge, besides those educated from children, and brought up to the universities, to the sea, or to trades, &c. The poor of his parish were always attending his gate for their dole, and for the remains of his constant hospitable table, which was always furnished, and free to those whom respect or business drew to him. His hall was frequented in the morning with petitioners of all sorts. More particularly, he spared no cost nor pains to serve the church and clergy. He bought many advowsons out of lay-hands. He gave great sums for the rebuilding of churches, and greater still for the buying in impropriations, and settling them on the poor vicars. There was no poor honest clergyman, or his widow, in want, but had his benevolence when applied for: not any in the reformed churches abroad, to whom he was not a liberal patron, steward, and perpetual solicitor for. The French refugees drank deep of his bounty for many years; so did the Irish in their day of affliction and likewise the Scotch episcopal party,” when ejected from their livings at the revolution. It may truly 'be said, that by his death the church lost an excellent bishop; the kingdom a consistent and able statesman; the protestant religion, at home and abroad, an ornament and refuge; and the whole Christian world, an eminent example of virtue and piety.

His works are: 1. “A translation from the Italian, of the Life of Donna Olympia Maldachini, who governed the church during the time of Innocent X. which was from the year 1644- to 1655,” London, 1667. 2. “A translation i'roni the French, of the Jesuits’ intrigues; with the private instructions of that society to their emissaries,” 1669. 3. “A treatise of the Holy Communion,” 1677. 4. “A Letter to the Clergy of the diocese of London, concerning Baptism, the Lord’s Supper, Catechising, dated April 25, 1679.” 5. “A second letter concerning the Half- communion, Prayers in an unknown tongue, Prayers to Saints, July 6, 1680.” 6. “A third letter, on Confirmation, and Visitation of the Sick, 1682.” 7. “A fourth letter, upon the 54th Canon,” April 6, 1683. 8. “A fifth letter, upon the 118th Canon, March 19, 1684.” 9. “A sixth letter, upon the 13th Canon, April Is, 1685.” They were all reprinted together in 1686, 12mo, under the title of “Episcopalia, or Letters of the right reverend father in God, Henry lord hishop of London, to the Clergy of his Diocese.” There is also, 10. “A Letter of his to a Clergyman in his Diocese, concerning Nonresistance:” written soon after the revolution, and inserted in the Memoirs of the life of Mr. John Kettlewell.

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

, of the French academy and that of Berlin, abbe of Mureaux, preceptor of the infant don Ferdinand duke of Parma, was born at Grenoble about the year 1715, and died of a putrid fever at his estate of Flux near Baugenci, the 2dof August 1780. Strong sense, sound judgment, a clear and profound knowledge of metaphysics, a well chosen and extensive reading, a sedate character, manners grave without austerity, a style rather sententious, a greater facility in writing than in speaking, more philosophy than sensibility and imagination; form, according to the opinion of his countrymen, the principal features in the portrait of the abbe de Condillac. A collection in 3 vols. 12mo, under the title of his Works, contains his essay on the origin of human sciences, his treatise of sensations, his treatise of systems; all performances replete with striking and novel ideas, advanced with boldness, and in which the modern philosophic style seems perfectly natural to the author. His “Course of Study,” 1776, 16 vols. 12mo, composed for the instruction of his illustrious pupil, is esteemed the best of his works. He also wrote “Commerce and Government considered in their mutual relations,” 12mo, a book which has been decried by anti-qeconomists, and it is allowed by his admirers that it might have been as well if the author had not laid down, certain systems on the commerce of grain; that he had given his principles an air less profound and abstracted, and that on those matters that are of moment to all men, he had written for the perusal of all men. It is observed in some of the abbe Condillac’s works, that he had a high opinion of his own merit, and thought it his duty not to conceal it. He has also been more justly censured for having, in his treatise of “Sensations,” established principles from which the materialists have drawn pernicious conclusions and that in his course of study, he has, like an incompetent judge, condemned several flights of Boileau, by submitting poetry, which in its very nature is free, irregular, and bold, to the rules of geometry. His works we may suppose are still in favour in France, as a complete edition was printed in 1798, in 25 vols. 8vo.

, an eminent French philosopher and mathematician, was born at Ribemont in Pirardy, three leagues from Saint-Quintin and De la Fere, September 17, 1743, of a very ancient family. At the age of fifteen he was sent to study philosophy at the college of Navarre, under Giraud de Keroudon, who has since distinguished himself by several scientific works, and was an able teacher of mathematics. During the first year of his residence there, young Condorcet exhibited but little relish for the metaphysical questions relative to the nature of ideas, of sensations, and of memory, but in the course of the following year, mathematics and natural philosophy decided his future vocation; and although he had more than one hundred and twenty fellow-students, he acquired a greater portion of fame than any of them. At Easter he supported a public thesis, at which Clairaut, D'Alembert, and Fontaine, the first geometricians of France, assisted; and his conduct on this occasion obtained their approbation. After his course of philosophy was finished, he returned to his family, but still continued to cultjrate geometry; and his attachment to it carried him back to Paris in 1762, where he lived with his old professor, in order to have more frequent opportunities of indulging his ruling passion. He at the same time attended the chemical lectures of Macquer and Beaume, and soon distinguished himself among the geometricians.

He was received into the French academy on the 8th of March, 1769, and in the course of the same year he published a memoir on the nature of infinite series, on the extent of solutions afforded by this mode, and on a new method of approximation for the differential equations of all the orders. In the volumes of 1770, and the following years, he presented the fruits of his researches on the equations with partial and finite differences; and in 1772 he published “L‘Essai d’une methode pour distinguer les Equations differentielles possibles en termes finis de celies qui ne le sont pas,” an essay on a method to distinguish possible differential equations in finite terms, from those which are not so. The mode of calculation here presented, although an admirable instrument, is still very far distant from that degree of perfection to which it may be brought. In the midst of these studies, he published an anonymous pamphlet, entitled “A Letter to a Theologian,” in which he replied with keen satire to the attacks madfc by the author of “The Three Centuries of Literature,” against the philosophic sect. “But (subjoins the prudent La Lande) he pushed the matter somewhat too far, for, even, supposing his system demonstrated, it would be advantageous to confine those truths within the circle of the iniliated, because they are dangerous, in respect to the greater part of mankind, who are unable to replace, by means of principles, that which they are bereaved of in the shape of fear, consolation, and hope.” Condorcet was now in fact leagued with the atheists; and La Lande, who wished well to the same sect, here censures not his principles, but only regrets his rashness. In 1773 he was appointed secretary to the academy of sciences, when he composed eulogies upon several deceased members who had been neglected by Fontenelle; and in 1782 he was received into the French academy, on which occasion he delivered a discourse concerning the influence of philosophy. In the following year he succeeded D'Alembert as secretary to that academy, and pronounced an able eulogy to the memory of his deceased friend, whose literary and scientific merits are set forth with great ability. The death of Euler afforded Condorcet another opportunity of displaying his own talents by appreciating those of the departed mathematician. The lives of Turgot and Voltaire, and the eulogy pronounced upon the death of the celebrated Franklin, were decided testimonies to the abilities of Condorcet as a biographical writer. Turgot had occupied much of his time and attention with moral and political sciences, and was particularly anxious that the certainty of which different species of knowledge are susceptible, might be demonstrated by the assistance of calculation, hoping that the human species would necessarily make a progress towards happiness and perfection, in the same manner as it had done towards the attainment of truth. To second these views of Turgot, Condorcet undertook a work replete with geometrical knowledge. He examined the probability of an assembly’s rendering a true decision, and he explained the limits to which our knowledge of future events, regulated by the laws of nature, considered as the most certain and uniform, might extend. If we do not possess a real, yet he thought, we ha\ 7 e at least a mean probability, that the law indicated by events, is the same constant law, and that it will be perpetually observed. He considered a forty-five thousandth part as the value of the risk, in the case when the consideration of a new law comes in question and it appears from his calculation, that an assembly consisting of 6 1 votes, in which it is required that there should be a plurality of nine, will fulfil this condition, provided there is a probability of each vote being equal to four-fifths, that is, that each member voting shall be deceived only once in five times. He applied these calculations to the creation of tribunals, to the forms of elections, and to the decisions of numerous assemblies; inconveniences attendant on which were exhibited by him. This work, says his eulogist, furnished a grand, and at the same time, an agreeable proof of the utility of analysis in important matters to which it had never before been applied, and to which we may venture to assert it never will be applied while human reason is allowed any share in human transactions. There are many of these paradoxes in geometry, which, we are told, it is impossible to resolve without being possessed of metaphysical attainments, and a degree of sagacity not always possessed by the greatest geometricians; but where such attainments and sagacity are to be found, even Condorcet himself has not exemplified. In his “Euler’s Letters,” published in 1787-89, he started the idea of a dictionary, in which objects are to be discovered by their qualities or properties, instead of being searched for under their respective names; he also intimated a scheme for constructing tables by which ten milHards of objects might be classed together, by means of only ten different modifications.

The political labours of Condorcet entirely occupied the last years of his existence. Among them were, his work, “Sur les assemblies provinciales,” and his “Reflexions sur le commerce des bk-s,” two of the most harmless. In 1788, Roucher undertook to give a new translation of an excellent English work by Smith, entitled “The Wealth of Nations,” with notes by Condorcet, who, however, had but little concern with it, and on this and other occasions he was not unwilling to sell his name to the booksellers to give a reputation to works with which he had no concern. Chapelier and Peissonel announced a periodical collection, entitled “Bibliotheque de I'liomme Public, &c.” (The statesman’s library, or the analysis of the best political works.) This indeed was one way of enabling the deputies of the assembly to learn what it was important for them, to become acquainted with; it was supposed that the name of Condorcet might be useful on this occasion also, and it was accordingly made use of. The work itself contained one of his compositions which had been transmitted to the academy at Berlin. The subject discussed was, “Est il permis de tromper le peuple r” (Ought the people to be deceived?) This question, we presume, must have always been decided in the affirmative by such politicians as Condorcet, since what amounts to the same effect) almost all his writings tended to pave the way for a revolution in which the people were completely deceived. He was afterwards a member of the popular clubs at Paris, particularly that of the jacobins, celebrated for democratic violence, where he was a frequent but by no means a powerful speaker. He was chosen a representative for the metropolis, when the constituent assembly was dissolved, and joined himself to the Brissotine party, which finally fell the just victims to that revolutionary spirit which they had excited. Condorcet at this period was the person selected to draw up a plan for public instruction, which he comprehended in two memoirs, and which it is acknowledged were too abstract for general use. He was the author of a Manifesto addressed from the French people to the powers of Europe, on the approach of war; and of a letter to Louis XVI. as president of the assembly, which was dictated in terms destitute of that respect and consideration to which the first magistrate of a great people has, as such, a just claim. He even attempted to justify the insults offered to the sovereign by the lowest, the most illiterate, and most brutal part of a delirious populace. On the trial of the king, his conduct was equivocal and unmanly; he had declared that he ought not to be arraigned, yet he had i^t courage to defend h\s opinion, or justify those sentiments which he had deliberately formed in the closet.

, secretary of the French king’s council, was born at Paris 1603. The French Academy, to which he was perpetual secretary, considers him as its father and founder. It was in his house that this illustrious society took its birth in 1629, and continued to assemble till 1634; and he contributed much to render these meetings agreeable by his taste, his affability, and politeness. He therefore deservedly still enjoys a degree of celebrity in the republic of letters, though he does not rank among eminent scholars, being unacquainted with Greek, and knowing but little of Latin. He published some pieces cf no great merit; as, 1. “Letters to Felibien,” Paris, 1681, 12mo. 2. “A treatise on oratorical action,” Paris, 1657, 12mo, reprinted in 1686, under the name of Michel le Faucheur. 3. “Extracts from Martial,” 2 vols. 12mo, and a few other trifles. He died Sept. 23, 1675, at the age of 72. Conrart managed his estate without avarice and without prodigality. He was generous, obliging, and constant in his friendships. He was in habits of intimacy with the principal people in the several departments of the government, who consulted him in the most important afiairs; and, as he had a complete knowledge of the world, they found great resources in his judgment. He kept inviolably the secret of others, as well as his own. Being brought up a protestant, he continued firm to his profession. It is said that he revised the writings of the famous Claude, before they went to press. Conrart was related to Godeau, afterwards bishop of Vence, who, whenever he came to town, lodged at his house: several men of letters came there also, for the sake of conversing with the abbe: and this was the first origin of the academy.

, an eminent French architect, was born March 11, 1698, at Ivri sur Seine. He studied drawing under the celebrated Watteau, and having occasion afterwards to go into the office of M. Dulin, an architect, he made so great a progress in that art, as to be admitted a member of the academy at the age of twenty-eight. M. Contant had more business than any other architect of his time, if we may judge from the great number of buildings in which he was employed. Among these we may enumerate, the houses of M. Crozat de Tugny, and of M. Crozat de Thiers; the stables of Bissey, where he first tried those brick arches, which even to connoisseurs appear so bold and astonishing the church of Panthemont the royal palace the amphitheatre at St. Cloud; the church of Conde in Flanders La Gouvernance at Lisle the church de la Madelene, which he could not finish. He had a paralytic stroke on the right side, three years before his death; but during his illness, and unable to move his hand, he planned the church of St. Waast at Arras. This beautiful edifice has been as much admired as the church of St. Madelene. This celebrated artist died at Paris, October 1, 1777, aged 79. He left a folio volume of his system of architecture engraved.

, an English officer and statesman, the second son of Francis, first lord Conway, was born in 1720, and appeared first in public life in 1741 as one of the knights for the county of Antrim, in the parliament of Ireland; and in the same year was elected for Higham Ferrers, to sit in the ninth parliament of Great Britain. He was afterwards chosen for various other places from 1754 to 1780, when he represented St. Edmund’s Bury. In 1741 he was constituted captain-lieutenant in the “first regiment of foot-guards, with the rank of lieutenant-colonel; and in April 1746, being then aid-de-camp to the duke of Cumberland, he got the command of the xorty-eighth regiment of foot, and the twenty-ninth in July 1749. He was constituted colonel of the thirteenth regiment of dragoons in December 1751, which he resigned upon being appointed colonel of the first, or royal regiment of dragoons, Septembers, 1759. In January 1756 he was advanced to the rank of major-general; in March 1759, to that of lieutenant-general; in May 1772, to that of general; and in October 12, 1793, to that of field marshal. He served with reputation in his several military capacities, and commanded the British forces in Germany, under prince Ferdinand of Brunswick, in 1761, during the absence of the marquis of Granby. He was one of the grooms of the bed-chamber to George II. and likewise to his present majesty till April 1764, when, at the end of the session of parliament, he resigned that office and his military commands, or, more properly speaking, was dismissed for voting against the ministry in the question of general warrants. His name, however, was continued in the list of the privy counsellors in Ireland; and William, the fourth duke of Devonshire, to whom he had been secretary when the duke was viceroy in Ireland, bequeathed him at his death, in 1764, a legacy of 5000l. on account of his conduct in parliament. On the accession of the Rockingham administration in 1765, he was sworn of the privy council, and appointed joint- secretary of state with the duke of Grafton, which office he resigned in January 1768. In February following, he was appointed colonel of the fourth regiment of dragoons; in October 1774, colonel of the royal regiment of horse-guards; and in October 1772, governor of the island of Jersey. On March 30, 1782, he was appointed commander in chief of his majesty’s forces, which he resigned in December 1783. He died at his seat at Park-place, near Henley upon Thames, July 9, 1795. General Conway was an ingenious man, of considerable abilities, but better calculated to be admired in the private and social circle, than to shine as a great public character. In politics, although we believe conscientious, he was timid and wavering. He had a turn for literature, and some talent for poetry, and, if we mistake not, published, but without his name, one or two political pamphlets. In his old age he aspired to the character of a dramatic writer, producing in 1789, a play, partly from the French, entitled” False Appearances," which was not, however, very successful. His most intimate friend appears to have been the late lord Orford, better known as Horace Walpole, who was his cousin, and addressed to him a considerable part of those letters which form the fifth volume of his lordship’s works. This correspondence commenced in 1 7-1-0, when Walpole was twenty-three years old, and Mr. Couway twenty. They had gone abroad together with the celebrated poet Gray in 1739, had spent three months together at Rheims, and afterwards separated at Geneva. Lord Orford’s letters, although evidently prepared for the press, evince at least a cordial and inviolable friendship for his correspondent, of which also he gave another proof in 3 letter published in defence of general Couway when dismissed from his offices; and a testimony of affection yet more decided, in bequeathing his fine villa of Strawberry Hill to Mrs. Darner, general Con way’s daughter, for her life.

Lady Russel translated out of French into English a tract entitled, “A way of reconciliation of a good and learned man, touching the true nature and substance of the body and blood of Christ in the Sacrament.” This work was printed in 1605, and is dedicated to her only daughter, Anne Herbert, wife to Henry lord Herbert, son and heir to Edward earl of Worcester.

The death of lady Killegrevv was lamented in various epitaphs. Her sister, lady Russel, wrote one, partly in Greek and partly in Latin verse. Three others, in Latin verse, were written by Robert Mason Format), minister of the reformed French church in London, by Andrew Melvin, and by William Chark. Such of our readers as are curious to see these productions, may find them in Ballard. It is generally understood that sir Anthony Cooke had only four daughters; but there is some reason to believe that he had, at least, one more. Camden, Fuller, Lloyd, Bohun, and Strype, concur in mentioning a fifth daughter, whose name, they say, is lost. Nevertheless, they all observe that she was married to sir Ralph Rowlet but this seems doubtful.

, earl of Shaftesbury, the celebrated author of the Characteristics, was born Feb. 26, 1671, at Exeter-house in London. His father was Anthony earl of Shaftesbury; his mother lady Dorothy Manners, daughter of John earl of Rutland. He was born in the house of his grandfather Anthony first earl of Shaftesbury, and chancellor of England, of whom we have spoken in the preceding article; who was fond of him from his birth, and undertook the care of his education. He pursued almost the same method in teaching him the learned languages, as Montaigne’s father did in teaching his son Latin: that is, he placed a person about him, who was so thoroughly versed in the Greek and Latin tongues, as to speak either of them with the greatest fluency. This person was a female, a Mrs. Birch, the daughter of a schoolmaster in Oxfordshire or Berkshire; and a woman who could execute so extraordinary a task, deserves to have her name recorded with honour among the learned ladies of England. By this means lord Shaftesbury made so great a progress, that he could read both these languages with ease when but eleven years old. At that age he was sent by his grandfather to a private school; and in 1683 was removed to Winchester school, but such was the influence of party-spirit at the time, that he was insulted for his grandfather’s sake, by his companions, which made his situation so disagreeable, that he begged his father to consent to his going abroad. Accordingly he began his travels in 1686, and spent a considerable time in Italy, where he acquired great knowledge in the polite arts. This knowledge is very visible through all his writings; that of the art of painting is more particularly so, from the treatise he composed upon “The Judgement of Hercules.” He made it his endeavour, while he was abroad, to improve himself as much as possible in every accomplishment; for which reason he did not greatly affect the company of other English gentlemen upon their travels; and he was remarkable for speaking French so readily, and with so good an accent, that in France he was often taken for a native.

In the beginning of the year after, viz. 1703, he made a second journey to Holland, and returned to England in the end of the year following. The French prophets soon after having by their enthusiastic extravagances created much disturbance throughout the nation, among the different opinions as to the methods of suppressing them, some advised a prosecution. But lord Shaftesbury, who abhorred any step which looked like persecution, apprehended that such measures tended rather to inflame than to cure the disease: and this occasioned his “Letter concerning Enthusiasm,” which he published in 1708, and sent it to lord Somers, to whom he addressed it, though without the mention either of his own or lord Somers’s name. Jan. 1709, he published his “Moralists, a philosophical rhapsody:” and, in May following, his “Sensus communis, or an essay upon the freedom of wit and humour.” The same year he married Mrs. Jane Ewer, youngest daughter of Thomas Ewer, esq. of Lee in Hertfordshire; to whom he was related, and by whom he had an only son, Anthony the fourth earl of Shaftesbury. From his correspondence, it does not appear that he had any very extraordinary attachment to this lady, or that the match added much to his happiness, which some have attributed to a disappointment in a previous attachment. In 1710, his “Soliloquy, or advice to an author,” was printed. In 1711, finding his health still declining, he was advised to leave England, and seek assistance from a warmer climate. He set out therefore for Italy in July 1711, and lived above a year after his arrival; dying at Naples, Feb. 4, 1713.

Dr. Kippis, who knew him personally, informs us that he was a gentleman of polite address and accomplishments, and if the general tenour of his works may be credited, he possessed an amiable and affectionate heart. His chief foible was vanity, but this is more discoverable in his writings than it probably was in his life. There are few of the minor poets who have higher claims to originality. The “Epistles to Aristippus/' his songs, and the” Father’s Advice to his Son,“although of unequal merit, contain many passages that are truly poetical. His veneration for some of the French poets, particularly Gresset, induced him to attempt a mode of versification in the Epistles, to which the English ear cannot easily become familiar, and which is not to be justified from any defect in the manliness or copiousness of the English language. Yet this study of the French writers, of no use in other respects, has rendered his translation of the” Ver Vert" almost a perfect copy of the original, and far superior to the coarse version since published by the late Dr. Geddes.

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

, a descendant of the preceding family, was the son of Chidley Coote, esq. by Jane, sister of George lord Carbery. He was born in 1726, and, having at an early period devoted himself to arms, if we are not misinformed, served in his majesty’s troops during the rebellion in 1745. In the beginning of the year 1754 the regiment under colonel Aldercon, to which sir Eyre Coote belonged, embarked from Ireland to the East Indies. In January 1757, sir Eyre, then a captain, was ordered by admiral Watson to take possession of Calcutta, surrendered by the nabob, of which he was appointed governor, but of which he was almost immediately dispossessed by colonel Clive, who claimed to be the superior officer. He was afterwards employed in the reduction of Houghley and of Chandenagore. At the battle of Plassey, in June, he signalized himself so much, as to be entitled to a considerable share of the honour of that important victory. In July, being then a major, he was detached with a party in pursuit of monsieur Law, who had collected together the dispersed French; which expedition, though it did not sue-, ceed as to its principal object, the capture of Mr. Law, was yet attended with advantages both to the company and the country at large. In the same year, general Lally threatening the siege of Trichinopoly, major Coote, then become a colonel, drew together what forces he could, and invested Wandewash, which he took the 30th of November, in three days. Knowing the advantage of this place, general Lally attempted to retake it, which brought on an engagement the 22d of July 1760, in which the French troops were entirely routed, and, with their general, fled in despair to Pondicherry.

The siege of this place commenced on the 26th of November, and was carried on with unremitted diligence until the middle of January 1761, when the English forces took possession of this important town; the garrison, consisting of 1400 European soldiers, became prisoners of war; and a. vast quantity of military forces, and great riches, were given up at discretion to the victors. This was the final blow to the French power in India. On the colonel’s return to England, the next year, he was presented by the court of directors with a diamond-hilted sword, which cost 700l. as a testimony of gratitude for the important services he had done. At the close of 1769, or very early in 1770, he was appointed commander in chief of the East India Company’s forces in India. He reached Madras in 1770, but left that place again in October to proceed to Bussorah, from whence he prosecuted his journey to Europe overland. The reason of his quitting Fort St. George was supposed to have been owing to a dispute with the governor there. On the 31st of August 1771 he was invested witH the order of the Bath; and in March 1773 he became colonel of the 37th regiment of foot, which being stationed in Scotland, he resided at Fort George there as governor. On the death of general Clavering in the East Indies, sir Eyre Coote was appointed a member of the supreme council at Bengal, and commander of the British troops. In 1780, Hyder Ally having invaded the Carnatic, general Coote was sent with money and a reinforcement of troops from Bengal to the coast of Coromandel, where he assumed the command of the army.

, in Latin Corasitjs, was born at Toulouse, or rather at Realmont, 1513. He taught law at Anger, Orleans, Paris, Padua, Ferrara, and Toulouse, with universal applause, and was afterwards counsellor to the parliament of Toulouse, and chancellor of Navarre; but, turning protestant, was driven from Toulouse, 1562, and, with difficulty, restored by the patronage of chancellor de l'Hospital, his friend. This return, however, proved unfortunate; for he was murdered in that city, 1573, after the massacre of St. Bartholomew was known there. He left only a daughter. Coras wrote some excellent works in Latin and French, the principal of which were printed, 1556 and 1558, 2 vols. fol. His “Miscellaneorum Juris Civilis libri tres,” is particularly valued. His life was written by a descendant, James Coras, also a protestant, and published in 1673, 4to.

, an English prelate, but better known and perhaps more respected as a poet, was the son of Vincent Corbet, and was born at Ewell in Surrey, in 1582. His father, who attained the age of eighty, appears to have been a man of excellent character, and is celebrated in one of his son’s poems with filial ardour. For some reason he assumed the name of Pointer, or, perhaps, relinquished that for Corbet, which seems more probable: his usual residence was at Whitton in the county of Middlesex, where he was noted for his skill in horticulture, and amassed considerable property in houses and land, which he bequeathed to his son at his death in 1619. Our poet was educated at Westminster school, and in Lenu term, 1597-8, entered in Broadgate hall (afterwards Pembroke college), and the year following was admitted a student of Christ Church, Oxford, where he soon became noted among men of wit and vivacity. In 1605 he took his master’s degree, and entered into holy orders. In 3612 he pronounced a funeral oration in St. Mary’s church, Oxford, on the death of Henry, prince of Wales; and the following year, another on the interment of that eminent benefactor to learning, sir Thomas Bodley. In 1618 he took a journey to France, from which he wrote the epistle to sir Thomas Aylesbury. His “Journey to Fiance,” one of his most humorous poems, is remarkable for giving some traits of the French character that are visible in the present day. King James, who showed no weakness in the choice of his literary favourites, made him one of his chaplains in ordinary, and in 1627 advanced him to the dignity of dean, of Christ Church. At this time he was doctor in divinity, vicar of Cassington near Woodstock, in Oxfordshire, and prebendary of Bedminster Secunda in the church of Sarum.

, a French historian, was born at Paris, of a noble family, originally of Auvergne, and having studied law, was admitted to the bar, which he quitted for the philosophy of Descartes. Bossuet, who was no less an admirer of that philosopher, procured him the appointment of reader to the dauphin, which office he filled with success and zeal, and died the 8th of October 1684, member of the French academy, at an advanced age. We are indebted to his pen for, 1. “The general History of France during the two first races of its kings,” 1685, 2 vols. fol. a work which the French critics- do not appreciate so justly as it deserves. 2. Divers tracts in metaphysics, history, politics, and moral philosophy, reprinted in 1704, 4to, under the title of “CEuvres de feu M. de Cordemoi.” They contain useful investigations, judicious thoughts, and sensible reflections on the method of writing history. He had adopted in philosophy, as we before observed, the sentiments of Descartes, but without servility; he even sometimes differs from them. In the latter part of his life, he was assisted in his literary labours by his son Lewis, who was born in 1651, and who became successively a licentiate of Sorbonne, and an abbot in the diocese of Clermont. He was a voluminous writer, chiefly on theological subjects; and was considered among the catholics as an able advocate of their cause against the attacks of the defenders of protestantism. He was, however, of considerable service to his father in the latter part-of his “General History of France;” and, it is believed, wrote the whole of that part which extends from about the conclusion of the reign of Lewis V. to the end of the work. By order of Lewis XIV. he continued that history from the time of Hugh Capet until the year 1660, which he did not live to finish. He died at the age of seventy-one, in the year 1722.

, in Latin Corderius, lived in the sixteenth century, and was an eminent teacher. He understood the Latin tongue critically, was a man of virtue, and performed his functions with the utmost diligence, mixing moral with literary instruction. He spent his long life in teaching children at Paris, Nevers, Bordeaux, Geneva, Neufchastel, Lausanne, and lastly again at Geneva, where he died September the 8th, 1564, at the age of eighty-five, having continued his labours until three or four days before his death. He studied divinity for some time at Paris in the college of Navarre, about the year 1528, after he had taught a form in the same college but he left off that study in order to apply himself to his former functions of a grammarian. He had taught at Nevers in 1534, 1535, and 1536. Calvin, who had been his scholar at Paris in the college de la Marche, dedicated his Commentary on the 1st Epistle to the Thessalonians to him. It is not exactly known of what province Mathurin Cordier was; some say he was born in Normandy; others pretend he was born in the earldom of Perche. He published several books for the use of schools, among which were, 1. “Epistres Chrestiennes,” Lyons, 1557, 16to. 2. “Sentences extraictes de la Saincte Escriture pour Tinstruction des Enfans,” Latin and French, 1551. 3. “Cantiques spirituels en nombre 26,” 1560. 4. “Le Miroir de la Jeunesse, pour la former a bonnes mceurs, et civilite de la vie,” Paris, 16to. 5. “L‘ Interpretation et construction en Francois des distiques Latins, qu’on attribue a Caton,” Lyons, 8vo, and since, perhaps, above an hundred times. His “Colloquia” have long been used in schools, and have been printed, says Bayle, a thousand times.

, born in 1460, of an illustrious family of Milan, was selected by duke Lewis Sforza, surnamed Maurus, for composing the history of his country; but the French having got possession of the Milanese, and the duke his patron being taken prisoner, he died of grief in 1500. The best edition of his history, “Storia di Milano,” is that of Milan in 1503, in folio. It is finely printed, scarce, and much more valued than those since published, which have been disfigured by mutilations. Some estimation, however, is attached to those of Venice, 1554, 1565, 4to and that of Paris, 1646, 4to. Although he writes in a harsh and incorrect style, he is accurate in ascertaining dates, and minute in relating those circumstances that interest the attention. His nephew Charles Corio employed himself on the same object, and wrote in Italian, a “Portrait of the city of Milan,” in which are collected the monuments, ancient and modern, of that unfortunate city.

, one of the most celebrated French poets, and called by his countrymen the Shakspeare of France, was born at Roan, June 6, 1606, of considerable parents, his father having been ennobled for his services by Louis XIII. He was brought up to the bar, which he attended some little time; but having no turn for business, he soon deserted it. At this time he had given the public no specimen of his talents for poetry, nor appears to have been conscious of possessing any such: and they tell us, that it was purely a trifling affair of gallantry, which gave occasion to his first comedy, called “Melite.” The drama was then extremely low among the French; their tragedy fiat and languid, their comedy more barbarous than the lowest of the vulgar would now tolerate. Corneille was astonished to find himself the author of a piece entirely new, and at the prodigious success with which his “Melite” was acted. The French theatre seemed to be raised, and to flourish at once; and though deserted in a manner before, was now filled on a sudden with a new company of actors. After so happy an essay, he continued to produce several other pieces of the same kind; all of them, indeed, inferior to what he afterwards wrote, but much superior to any thing which the French had hitherto seen. His “Medea” came forth next, a tragedy, borrowed in part from Seneca, which succeeded, as indeed it deserved, bul indifferently; but in 1637 he presented the “Cid,” another tragedy, in which he shewed the world how high his genius was capable of rising, and seems to confirm Du Bos’s assertion, that the age of thirty, or a few years more or less, is that at which poets and painters arrive at as high a pitch of perfection as their geniuses will permit. All Europe has seen the Cid: it has been translated into almost all languages: but the reputation which he acquired by this play, drew all the wits of his time into a confederacy against it. Some treated it contemptuously, others wrote against it. Cardinal de Richelieu himself is said to have been one of this cabal; for, not content with passing for a great minister of state, he affected to pass for a wit and a critic; and, therefore, though he had settled a pension upon the poet, could not abstain from secret attempts against his play . It was supposed to be under his influence that the French Academy drew up that critique upon it, entitled, “Sentiments of the French academy upon the tragi-comedy of Cid:” in which, however, while they censured some parts, they did not scruple to praise it very highly in others. Corneille now endeavoured to support the vast reputation he had gained, by many admirable performances in succession, which, as Bayle observes, “carried the French theatre to its highest pitch of glory, and assuredly much higher than the ancient one at Athens;” yet still, at this time, he had to contend with the bad taste of the most fashionable wits. When he read his “Polyeucte,” one of his best tragedies, before a company of these, where Voiture presided, it was very coldly received; and Voiture afterwards told him, it was the opinion of his friends that the piece would not succeed. In 1647 he was chosen a member of the French academy; and was what they call dean of that society at the time of his death, which happened in 1684, in his 79th year.

He was, it is said, a man of a devout and melancholy cast; and upon a disgust he had conceived to the theatre, from the cold reception of his “Pertharite,” betook himself to the translation of “The Imitation of Jesus Christ,” by Kempis; which he performed very elegantly. He returned, however, to the drama, although not with his wonted vigour. He spoke little in company, even upon subjects which he perfectly understood. He was a very worthy and honest man; not very dexterous in making his court to the great, which was perhaps the chief reason why he never drew any considerable advantage from his productions, besides the reputation which always attended them. Racine, in a speech made to the French academy in the beginning- of 1685, does great justice to our author’s talents. After representing the miserable state in which the French theatre then was, that it was without order, decency, sense, taste, he passes to the sudden reformation effected by Corneille: “a man who possessed at once all those extraordinary talents which form a great poet; art, force, judgment, and wit. Nor can any one sufficiently admire the greatness of his sentiments, the skill he shews in the economy of his subjects, his masterly way of moving the passions, the dignity, and at the same time the vast variety of his characters.” This encomium must have the more weight, as it comes from the only man in the world who has been considered as his great rival. Yet we are told, that when Racine read his tragedy of “Alexander” to Corneille, the latter gave him many commendations, but advised him to apply his genius, as not being adapted to the drama, to some other speuies of poetry. Corneille, says Dr. Warton, one would hope, was incapable of a mean jealousy; and if he gave this advice, thought it really proper to be given. The French have ever been fond of opposing Corneille to Shakspeare ' 9 but the want of comic powers in Corneille, for his comedies are truly contemptible, must ever obstruct the comparison. His genius was unquestionably very rich, but seems more turned towards the epic than the tragic muse; and in. general he is magnificent and splendid, rather than tender and touching. He is, says Blair, an opinion in which all English critics agree, the most declamatory of all the French tragedians. He united the copiousness of Dryden with the fire of Lucan; and he resembles them also in their faults: in their extravagance and impetuosity. As to the opinions of the best modern French critics, on the merits of Corneille, we may refer to an admirable “Eloge,” published by Da Ponte, in London, 1808, and to Suard’s “Melange de Litterature,” 1808. But Fontenelle’s comparison between Corneille and Racine, as less accessible to many readers, may be added here with advantage. Corneille, says Fontenelle, had no excellent author before his eyes, whom he could follow; Racine had Corneille. Corneille found the French stage in a barbarous state, and advanced it to great perfection: Racine has not supported it in the perfection in which he found it. The characters of Corneille are true, though they are not common: the characters of Racine are not true, but only in proportion as they are common. Sometimes the characters of Corneille are, in some respects, false and unnatural, because they are noble and singular; those of Racine are often, in some respects, low, on account of their being natural and ordinary. He that has a noble heart, would chuse to resemble the heroes of Corneille; he that has a little heart, is pleased to find his own resemblance in the heroes of Racine. We carry, from hearing the pieces of the one, a desire to be virtuous; and we carry the pleasure of finding men like ourselves, in foibles and weaknesses, from the pieces of the other. The tender and graceful of Racine is sometimes to be found in Corneille: the grand and sublime of Corneille is never to be found in Racine. Racine has painted only the French and the present age, even when he designed to paint another age and other nations: we see in Corneille all those ages, and all those nations, that he intended to paint. The number of the pieces of Corneille is much greater than that of Racine: CorneiHe, notwithstanding, has made fewer tautologies and repetitions than Racine has made. ID the passages where the versification of CorneiHe is good, it is more bold, more noble, and, at the same time, as pure and as finished as that of Racine: but it is not preserved in this degree of beauty: and that of Racine is always equally supported. Authors, inferior to Racine, have written successfully after him, in his own way: no author, not even Racine himself, dared to attempt, after CorneiHe, that kind of writing which was peculiar to him. Voltaire, the best editor of Corneille’s works, seems in some measure to coincide with Fontenelle. “CorneiHe,” says he, “alone formed himself; but Louis XIV. Colbert, Sophocles, and Euripides, all of them contributed to form Racine.” When we arrive, however, at Racine, it will be necessary to estimate his merit, without the bias which comparative criticism generally produces.

, brother to the preceding, a French poet also, but inferior to Peter CorneiHe, was born in 1625. He was a member of the French academy, and of the academy of inscriptions. He discovered, when he was young, a strong inclination and genius for poetry; and afterwards was the author of many dramatic pieces, some of which were well received by the public, and acted with great success. He died at Andeli, 1709, aged 84. His dramatic works, with those of his brother, were published at Paris, 1.738, in 11 vols. 12mo. Besides dramatic, Thomas Corneille was the author of some other works: as, 1. A translation of Ovid’s Metamorphoses and some of his Epistles. 2. Remarks upon Vaugelas. 3. fe A dictionary of arts,“in 2 vols. folio. 4.” An universal geographical and historical dictionary," in 3 vols. folio. In the last work, that part of the geography which concerns Normandy is said to be excellent. As to his dramatic talents, they were far from being contemptible, and a few of his pieces still keep their place on the stage; but it was his misfortune to be a Corneille, and brother of one emphatically called the Great Corneille.

, the son of Ant. Corranus, LL.D. was born at Seville, in Spain, in 1527, and educated for the Roman Catholic church; but being afterwards desirous of embracing the reformed religion, became to England in 1570, and being admitted into the English church, became a frequent preacher. In 1571 he was made reader of divinity in the Temple, by the interest of Dr. Edwin Sandys, bishop of London, and continued in that office about three years. In the beginning of March 1575, he was recommended to the university of Oxford for a doctor’s degree, by their chancellor, the earl of Leicester; but doubts being raised as to the soundness of his principles on certain contested points, his degree was refused until he should give full satisfaction, which he probably did, although the matter is not upon record. At Oxford he became reader of divinity to the students in Gloucester, St. Mary’s, and Hart-hail, and resided as a student of Christchurch, holding at the same time the prebend of Harleston in St. Paul’s. He died at London in March 1591, and was buried either at St. Andrew’s, Hoiborn, or St. Andrew Wardrobe. His works are, 1. “An Epistle to the pastors of the Flemish church at Antwerp,” originally written in Latin, Lond. 1570, 8vo. 2. “Tabulae Divinorum operum, de humani generis creatione,” 1574, 8vo; and afterwards published in English. 3. “Dialogus Theologicus,” an explanation of St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans, collected from his lectures, 1574, 8vo; also translated, 1579. 4. “Supplication to the king of Spain,” respecting the protestants in the Low Countries, 1577, 8vo, published in Latin, French, and English. 5. “Notsc in concionem Solomonis” i. e. Ecclesiastes, 1579 and 1581, 8vo and again, by Scultetus, in 1618. 6. “Sermons on Ecclesiastes,” abridged by Thomas Pitt, Oxon. 1585, 8vo, probably an abridgement of the preceding. 7. “A Spanish grammar, with certain rules for teaching both the Spanish and French tongues,” translated into English by Thorius. Lond. 1590, 4to.

Here, by the king’s order, he officiated as chaplain to such of the queen’s household as were protestants; and with them, and other exiles daily resorting thither, he formed a congregation, which was held first in a private house, and afterwards at the English ambassador’s chapel. Not long after, he had lodgings assigned him in the Louvre, with a small pension, on account of his relation to queen Henrietta. During his residence in this place, he continued firm in the protestant religion; reclaimed some who had gone over to popery, and confirmed others who were wavering about going; had disputes and controversies with Jesuits and Romish priests, and about the same time employed himself in writing several learned pieces against them. One accident befel him abroad, which he often spoke of as the most sensible affliction in his whole life; and that was, his only son’s turning papist. This son was educated in grammar learning in a Jesuit’s school, as were! many others of our youths during the civil war; and occasion was thence taken of inveigling him into popery. He was prevailed upon, not only to embrace popery, but also to take religious orders in the church of Rome: and though his father used all the ways imaginable, and even the authority of the French king, which by interest he had procured, to regain him out of their power, and from their persuasion, yet all proved ineffectual. Upon this he disinherited him, allowing him only an annuity of 100l. He pretended indeed to turn protestant again, but relapsed before his father’s decease.

, was a native of Uzez, who fled to England on account of religion in the time of queen Anne, and after residing many years in London, where he was employed in literary pursuits, returned to Paris some time before his death, which happened in 1746. His principal works were: l. Translations into French of Locke’s Essay on human understanding, Amsterdam, 1736, 4to, and Trevoux, 4 vols. 12mo; of Newton’s Optics, 4to, and of the Reasonableness of Christianity, by Locke, 2 vols. 8vo. 2. An edition of Montaigne’s Essays, 3 vols. 4to, and 10 vols. 12mo, with remarks and annotations. 3. An edition of Fontaine’s Fables, 12mo, with cursory notes at the bottom of the pages. He ventured to add a fable of his own, which served to prove that it was far more easy to comment on Fontaine than to imitate him. 4. The defence of la Bruyere, against the Carthusian d'Argonne, who assumed the name of Vigneul Marville: which is prefixed to OzelPs English translation of Bruyere’s works, 1713, 2 vols. 8vo, 5. The life of the Grand Conde, 4to and 12mo. Coste, as an editor, was often tediously minute, and, as an original author, not above mediocrity; but he bestowed great attention on whatever he did. He was an excellent corrector of the press, thoroughly versed in his own language, well acquainted with the foreign tongues, and had a general knowledge of the sciences. In this country he must have been highly respected, as, although he died in France, a monument was erected to his memory in the old church of Paddington, in which parish he probably resided. This monument is now in a light vault under the present church

, B. D. of Sorbonne, and king’s Greek professor, was born at Nismes, in Languedoc, in 1627. He made an extraordinary proficiency in the languages under his father, when very young: for being, at twelve years only, brought into the hall of the general assembly of the French clergy held at Mante in 1641, he construed the New Testament in Greek, and the Old in Hebrew, at the first opening of the book. He unfolded, at the same time, several difficulties proposed in regard to the peculiar construction of the Hebrew language; and explained also the text from the customs practised among the Jews. After this, he demonstrated certain mathematical propositions, in explaining Euclid’s definitions. This made him looked upon as a prodigy of genius; and his reputation rose as he advanced in life. In 1643 he took the degree of M. A.; B. D. in 1647; and was elected a fellow of the Sorbonne in 1.649. In 1651 he lost his father, who died at Paris, whither he had come to reside with his children in 1638; and he lamented him much, as a parent who had taken the greatest pains in his education. This appears from a letter of Cotelerius to his father, in which he says, “I must necessarily be obedient in every respect to you, to whom, besides innumerable benefits and favours, I owe not only my life, but also the means of living well and happily, those seeds of virtue and learning which you have been careful to plant in me from my infancy. Now, if Alexander of Macedon could own himself so much indebted to his father Philip for begetting him, and so much more to Aristotle for forming and educating him, what ought not I to acknowledge myself indebted to you, who have been both a Philip and an Aristotle to me?”

, a member of the French academy, so ill-treated by Boileau in his satires, and by Moliere in his comedy of the “Femmes Savantes,” under the name of Trissotiu, was born at Paris, and has at least as good a title to a place in this work, as some of Virgil’s military heroes in the Æneid, who are celebrated purely for being knocked on the head. It is said, that he drew upon him the indignation of Boileau and Moliere: of the former, because he counselled him in a harsh and splenetic manner, to devote his talents to a kind of poetry different from satire; of the latter, because he had endeavoured to hurt him with the duke de Montausier, by insinuating that Moliere designed him in the person of the Misanthrope. Cotin, however, was a man of learning, understood the learned languages, particularly the Greek, Hebrew, and Syriac, was respected in the best companies, where merit only could procure admittance, and preached sixteen Lents, in the principal pulpits of Paris. He died in that city in 1682, leaving several works tolerably well written the principal are, K “Theoclee, on la vraie Philosophie des principes du monde.” 2. “Traite de l'Ame immortelle.” 3. “Oraison funeb. pour Abel Servien.” 4. “Reflexions sur la conduite du roi Louis XIV. quand il prit le soin des affaires par lui-meme.” 5. “Salomon, ou la Politique Royale.” 6. “Poesies Chretiennes,” 1668, 12mo. 7. “CEuvres galantes,” 1665, 2 vols. 12uio, &c. The sonnet to Urania in the “Femmes Savantes” of Molitjre, was really written by abbe Cbtin: he composed it for Madame de Nemours, and was reading it to that lady when Menage entered, who disparaging the sonnet, the two scholars abused each other, nearly in the same terms as Trissotin and Vadius in Moliere.

, an advocate in the parliament of Paris, and a native of Aix or of Avignon, who died at the beginning of the eighteenth century, gained a reputation in the literary world by several works. The principal are: 1. “The voyages of Peter Texeira, or the history of the kings of Persia down to 1609,” translated from the Spanish into French, 1681, 2 vols. 12mo. 2. “The Life of St. Francis de Sales,” 1689, 4to. 3. “The Life of Christopher Columbus,” translated into French, 1681, 2 vols. 12mo. 4. “The Life of the Duchess of Montmorenci,” 2 vols. 8vo. 5. “Arlequiniana, or bon-mots,” &c. collected from the conversations of Harlequin, 1694. 6. “The book without a name,” 1711, 2 vols. 12rno, and, as his countrymen say, worthy of its title. 7. “Dissertation on the works of St. Evremont,” 1704, 12rno, under the name of Dumont. “I find many things in this work, justly censured,” says St. Evremont; “I cannot deny that the author writes well; but his zeal for religion and morals surpasses all things else. 1 should gain less in changing iny style for his, than my conscience for his. Favour surpasses severity in the judgment, and I feel more gratitude for the former than resentment against the latter.” This certainly discovers modesty, which, if sincere, should atone for many faults in St. Evremont.

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

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

, a French lady of considerable talents, whose maiden name was Ristau, was born in 1772, the daughter of a merchant at Bourdeaux, according to whose wish she was married, at eighteen, to M. Cottin, a rich banker at Paris, who was also a relation. Her husband left her a beautiful widow at the age of twenty-two. She resided for some time with a lady to whom she was warmly attached, who was also a widow, and she devoted much of her attention to the education of that lady’s two daughters; but it does not appear that madame de Cottin herself ever was a mother. Much of her time seems likewise to have been occupied in writing those novels which have established her fame in that branch in her own country. She died at Paris, August 25, 1807. Her principal novels are, 1. “Claire d'Albe,” 1798. 2. “Malvina,” 1800, 4 vols. 12mo. 3. “Amelia Mansfield,” 1802, 4 vols. 12mo. 4. “Mathilcle,” 6 vols. 12mo. 5. “Elizabeth, ou les Exiles cle Siberia,” 1806, 2 vols. 12mo. Some of these have been translated into English, and published here. Madame Cottin is of the high sentimental cast, with all that warmth of imagination which distinguishes the more elegant French novelists; but the moral tendency of her writings seems rather doubtful.

, an English poet, was the son of Charles Cotton, esq. of Beresford in Staffordshire, a man of considerable fortune and high accomplishments. His son, who inherited many of these characteristics, was born on the 28th of April, 1630, and educated at the university of Cambridge, where he had for his tutor Mr. Ralph Rawson, whom he celebrates in the translation of an ode of Joannes Secundus. At the university, he is said to have studied the Greek and Roman classics with distinguished success, and to have become a perfect master of the French and Italian languages. It does not appear, however, that he took any degree, or studied with a view to any learned profession; but after his residence at Cambridge, travelled into France and other parts of the continent. On his return, he resided during the greater part of his life at the family seat at Beresford. In 1656, when he was in his twenty-sixth year, he married Isabella, daughter of sir Thomas Hutchinson, knt. of Owthorp in the county of Nottingham, a distant relation, and took her home to his father’s house, as he had no other establishment. In 1658 he succeeded to the family estate encumbered by some imprudencies of his deceased father, from which it does not appear that he was ever able to relieve it.

From this time, almost all we have of his life is comprized in a list of his various publications, which were chiefly translations from the French, or imitations of the writers of that nation. In 1664, he published Mons. de Vaix’s “Moral Philosophy of the Stoics,” in compliance, sir John Hawkins thinks, with the will of his father, who was accustomed to give him themes and authors for the exercise of his judgment and learning. In 1665, he translated the Horace of Corneille for the amusement of his sister, who, in 1670, consented that it should be printed. In this attempt he suffered little by being preceded by sir William Lower, and followed by Mrs. Catherine Phillips. In 1670 he published a translation of the Life of the duke D'Espernon and about the same time, his affairs being much embarrassed, he obtained a captain’s commission in the army, and went over to Ireland. Some adventures he met with on this occasion gave rise to his first burlesque poem, entitled “A Voyage to Ireland,” in three cantos. Of his more serious progress in the army, or when, or why he left it, we have no account.

In 1674, he published the translation of the “Fair One of Tunis,” a French novel; and of the “Commentaries of Blaise de Montluc,” marshal of France; and in 1675, “The Planter’s Manual,” being instructions for cultivating all sorts of fruit-trees. In 1678 appeared his most celebrated burlesque performance, entitled “Scarronides, or Virgil Travestie a mock poem, on the First and Fourth Books of Virgil’s Æneis, in English burlesque.” To this was afterwards added, “Burlesque upon Burlesque, or the Scoffer scoffed; being some of Lucian’s Dialogues newly put into English fustian.” In 1681, he published “The Wonders of the Peak,” an original poem, which, however, proved that he had not much talent for the descriptive branch of poetry. His next employment was a translation of Montaigne’s Essays, which was highly praised by the marquis of Halifax, and has often been reprinted, as conveying the spirit and sense of the original with great felicity. His style at least approaches very closely to the antiquated gossip of that “old prater.” Besides these he wrote “An elegie upon the Lord Hastings,” signed with his name, in the “Lachrymae Musarum,” published on that nobleman’s death, London, 1649, 8vo; and in 1660, he published a folio of about forty leaves, entitled “A Panegyrick to the King’s most excellent majesty.'” This last is in the British Museum. His father has also a copy of verses in the “Lachrymae Musarum,” on the death of lord Hastings, published by Richard Brome.

As the famous dispute between M. Arnauld, of the Sorbonne, and M. Claude, minister at Charenton, concerning the faith of the Greek church in the article of the real presence, was then in its full height, which much interested learned men of all denominations in Europe, and particularly the English clergy, Dr. Cove! was desired, by some of the principal persons of the university of Cambridge, particularly the doctors (afterwards bishops) Gunning, Pearson, and Sancroft, to inquire into this matter at Constantinople. When he arrived there, the controversy was handled with great warmth by the Roman Catholic party, at the head of which was the marquis de Nointel, ambassador from the king of France at the Porte, a man of great learning; but Dr. Covel’s disputes with him were conducted rather in an amicable manner, Nointel being a man of a liberal mind. Dr. Covel remained here, as we have already noticed, for the space of seven years, daring which he had an opportunity of informing himself well of the ancient and present state of the Greek church; and having collected several observations and notices relating thereto, digested them afterwards into a curious and useful book, entitled “Some account of the present Greek church, with reflections on their present doctrine and discipline, particularly in the Eucharist,” &c. Cambridge, 1722, folio. In the preface he informs us, that Arnauld, not content to say that the church in all ages believed transubstantiation, did also positively affirm, that all the eastern churches do at this very day believe it, in the same sense as it was defined by the council of Trent. Claude, in answer to him, brought most authentic proofs of the contrary; upon which Arnauld set all the missionaries of the East at work to procure testimonies for him: these, by bribes and other indirect means, they obtained in such numbers, that there was soon after a large quarto in French, printed at Paris, full of the names of patriarchs, bishops, and doctors of those churches, who all approved the Roman doctrine. But Claude, having had most certain information, by means of a French gentleman at Colchis, that some of those testimonies were mere fictions, and others quite different from what they were represented, sent some queries into the East, and desired the English clergymen residing there to inquire of the Greeks, and other eastern Christians of the best note, who had no connections with the Romanists, “Whether transubstantiation, or the real and natural change of the whole substance of the bread into the same numerical substance as the body of Christ, which is in heaven, be an article of faith amongst them, and the contrary be accounted heretical and impious?” Dr. Covel, having instituted this inquiry, published the result in the volume above mentioned.

, youngest son of the preceding, was born in 1626, and in 1642 became a gentlemancommoner of Queen’s college in Oxford; and after he had continued there some time, he travelled on the continent, and at his return, adhering to Charles II. was made secretary to the duke of York, also secretary to the admiralty; and elected a burgess for the town of Great Yarmouth in Norfolk, in the parliament which met at Westminster, May 8, 1661; and also to that which was summoned in 1678. In 1663 he was created doctor of the civil law at the university of Oxford. He was sworn of the privy-council, and received the honour of knighthood June 26, 1665, and was made one of the commissioners of the treasury on May 24, 1667 being, as bishop Burnet relates, “a man of great notions and eminent virtues the best speaker in the house of commons, and capable of bearing the chief ministry, as it was once thought he was very near it, and deserved it more than all the rest did.” Yet, as he was too honest to engage in the designs of that reign, and quarrellt d with the duke of Buckingham, a challenge passed between them upon which he was forbid the court, and retired to Minster- Lovel, near Whitney, in Oxfordshire, where he gave himself up to a religious and private course of life, without accepting of any employment, though he was afterwards offered more than once the best posts in the court. He died June 23, 1686, unmarried, at Somerhill, near Tunbridge-wells, in Kent (where he had went for the benefit of the waters, being afflicted with the gout in the stomach) and was buried at Penshurst, in the same county, under a monument erected to his memory. By his last will he gave 2000l. for the relief of the French protestants then lately come into England, and banished their country for the sake of their religion; and 3000l. for the redemption of captives from Algiers.

, a French Jesuit, who died at Paris Aug. 4, 1774, at an advanced age, connected himself with the Jansenists, and particularly with the learned abbé Boursier. His sentiments on the bull Unifrenitus occasioned his being imprisoned for some weeks at Vincennes in 1755, and for more than a year in the Bastille in 1758-9. He wrote some works in defence of his opinions, and some political tracts; but his most celebrated publication was his “History of the Jesuits,” 1761, 4 vols, 12mo, to which he added 2 vols. of a supplement in 1764. This work cost him so much literary research, as to have injured his sight; but it is more remarkable, that, notwithstanding he owed his advancement to the Jesuits, and was the friend of many members of that society, he was a decided enemy to the society itself; and when their dissolution was concerted, in 1762, this work is said to have furnished many arguments in favour of the measure. His character was that of a laborious, active, useful, and disinterested ecclesiastic.

, a French historian, was born at Poitou in 1605, entered the society of the Jesuits in 1620, and quitted them in 1640, after having taught classical learning in their schools for some time. He afterwards devoted his time to historical and geographical pursuits, and published: 1. “Traite historique des rivieres de France,” Paris, 1644, 2 vols. 8vo. 2. An enlarged edition of “Tresor de l'Histoire de France de Gilles Corrozet,” 1645, 8vo. 3. “Histoire universelle du royatime de la Chine,” translated from the Italian of Alvares Semedo, 1645, 4to. 4. An enlarged edition of “Introducteur en la Cosmographie,” supposed to have been written by M. de Renti, 1645. 5. A translation of Turselin’s “Universal History,” continued to 1647, 1647, 2 vol. 8vo. 6. An enlarged edition of “Voyages de Vincent de Blanc,” 1648 and 1658, 4to. 7. A translation of Platina’s “Lives of the Popes,” with a continuation to Innocent X. 1651, 4to. 8. An original “Histoire des Vies des Papes,” 1656, 12mo, often reprinted, with additions and alterations by other hands. 9. “Harmonic des Evangelistes stir la Passion de notre Seigneur, avec des eclaircissemens,” 1645, 12mo. 10. “Lexicon Homericum,” 1643, 8vo. 11. “Histoire de Juifs,” 3 vojs. 12mo, two only of which were Coulon’s, the third being completed by his friend father Comte. Coulon died in 1664, and this history of the Jews was published the year after.

, a Jesuit, born at Malines, went to China in quality of missionary in 1659, and returned in 1680. Being embarked in the intention of making a second voyage, he died on his passage in 1693. He composed some works in the Chinese language, and many in Latin; of which are: 1. “Confucius Sinarum philosophus; sive Scientia Sinica Latine exposita,” Paris, 1687, folio. This curious and uncommon work is a compendium of the theology and the ancient history of the Chinese. He extols the morality of that people as excellent, and carries up their annals to a very remote period. 2. “Historia Candidue Hiu, Christianas Sinensis,” translated into French at Paris 1688. 3. “The catalogue (in Latin, Paris, 1688) of the Jesuits that have gone as missionaries to China.”

He was well received in England: the marquis of Blandford made him a present of fifty pounds, and he obtained a pension of one hundred pounds a year from the court. In 1729 he published, at Amsterdam, in two vols. 12mo, “Relation Historique et Apologetique des sentimens et de la conduite du P. le Courayer, chanoine regulier de Ste. Genevieve: avec les preuves justificatives des faits avancez dans l'ouvrage.” In this work he entered into a farther justification of his sentiments and of his conduct, and shewed the necessity that he was under of quitting France, from the virulence and power of his enemies. In 1733 he was at Oxford, and was present in the theatre at the public act that year, and made a speech there upon the occasion, which was afterwards printed both in Latin and English. In 1726 he published at London, in two vols. folio, a translation, in French, of “Father Paul’s History of the Council of Trent;” with notes critical, historical, and theological. He dedicated this work to queen Caroline, and speaks of it as having been undertaken by her command; and he expresses, in the strongest terms, his gratitude to her majesty for her patronage, and for the liberality which she liad manifested towards him. A list of subscribers is prefixed, in which are found the names of the prince of Wales, the duke of Cumberland, the prince and princess of Orange, the princesses Amelia and Caroline, the archbishop of Canterbury, the lord Chancellor, lord Hardwicke, then chief Justice of the King’s Bench, sir Robert Walpole, and many of the nobility, andother persons of distinction. By the sale of this work he is said to have gained fifteen hundred pounds, and the queen also raised his pension to two hundred pounds per annum. He gave sixteen hundred pounds to lord Feversham, for an annuity of one hundred pounds per annum, which he enjoyed forty years. By these means he came into very easy circumstances, which were rendered still more so by the reception which his agreeable and instructive conversation procured him, among persons of rank and fortune, with many of whom it was his custom to live for several months at a time. He wrote some other works in French, besides those that have been mentioned; and, in particular, he translated into that language Sleidan’s “History of the Reformation.” His exile from his own country was probably no diminution of his happiness upon the whole; for he appears to have passed his time in England very agreeably, and he lived to an uncommon age. Even in his latter years, he was distinguished for the cheerfulness of his temper and the sprightliness of his conversation. He died in Downingstreet, Westminster, after two days illness, on the 17th of October, 1776, at the age of ninety-five. Agreeably to his own desire, he was buried m the cloister of Westminsterabbey, by Dr. Bell, chaplain to the princess Amelia. In his will, which was dated Feb. 3, 1774,* he declared, “That he died a member of the Catholic church, but without approving of many of the opinions and superstitions which have been introduced into the Romish church, and taught in their schools and seminaries, and which they have insisted on as articles of faith, though to him they appeared to be not only not founded in truth, but also to be highly improbable.” It is said, that soon after he came to England, he went to a priest of the Romish church for confession, and acquainted him who he was. The priest would not venture to take his confession, because he was excommunicated, but advised him to consult his superior of Genevieve. Whether he made any such application, or what was the result, we are not informed bat it is certain that, when in London, he made it his practice to go to mass; and when in the country, at Ealing, he constantly attended the service of the parish-church, declaring, at all times, that he had great satisfaction in the prayers of the church of England. In discoursing on religious subjects he was reserved and cautious, avoiding controversy as much as possible. He left 500l. to the parish of St. Martin; and gave, in his life-time, his books to the library there, founded by archbishop Tenison. He bequeathed 200l. to the parish of St. Margaret, Westminster, and a handsome sum of money to the poor of Vernon, in Normandy; and, after many legacies to his friends in England, the remainder to two nephews of his name at Vernon. During his lifetime, he was occasionally generous to some of his relations in France, and in England was very liberal to the poor. He had two sisters, who were nuns; and a brother at Paris, in the profession of the law, to whom he gave a handsome gold snuff-box, which had been presented to him by queen Caroline.

To what has been already said respecting Dr. Courayer’s works, it may not be improper here to add, that he wrote “Traite de Poem Epique” that his French translation of father Paul’s “History of the Council of Trent,” was printed at London in 1736, in 2 vols. folio; and at Amsterdam, the same year, in 2 vols. 4to; and that his translation of Sleidan’s History of the Reformation, to which he added copious notes, was printed in 3 vols. 4to, in 1767.

One other circumstance respecting Courayer’s history remains to be noticed. From the fourth volume of bishop Atterbury’s Epistolary Correspondence, we learn that the bishop was exposed to some trouble on account of Courayer' s escape from France, which he was supposed to have facilitated. The French king and cardinal Fleury sent him a message on the subject by the lieutenant de police. “I did not mince the matter to the magistrate,” says the bishop, “nor am I at all ashamed of what has happened, or concerned for it. I owned my friendship for Pere Courayer told them frankly a great deal more than they knew of that matter, as <far as I was concerned and thought there was no reason to wonder at, or blame my conduct. I convinced them of that point, and I believe there is an end of it. I shewed the lieutenant the picture of Pere Courayer hanging up in my room; told him I had visited him in his retreat at Hanment, while he was in disgrace there; and that he came to take his leave of me the night before he left Paris; and that in all this I thought I had done nothing that misbecame me.” The lieutenant, who behaved with great politeness, was perfectly satisfied with our prelate’s explanation but this was not the case with the cardinal, who was persuaded that father Courayer’s escape was entirely owing to Atterbury, and displayed much resentment on that account. The picture of Courayer, in the bishop’s possession, was left by him to the university of Oxford.

, the son of a tailor at Menin, was one of many who experienced the oppression of Olivarez duke of Alva, who, being appointed by Philip II. governor of the seventeen provinces, endeavoured, with execrable policy, to establish over all the Netherlands an irreligious and horrible court of judicature, on the model of the Spanish inquisition. By consequence, in 1567, great numbers of industrious, thriving, and worthy people were imprisoned by the rigorous orders of this petty tyrant, and treated with great injustice and cruelty. Courten had the good fortune to escape from prison; and in the year following, 1568, arrived safe in London, with his wife Margaret Casiere, a daughter named Margaret, her husband, son of a mercantile broker at Antwerp of the name of Boudean, and as much property as they could hastily collect under such disadvantages. Soon after their arrival, they took a house in Abchurch-lane, where they lived together, following for some time the business of making what were commonly called French hoods, much worn in those days and long after, which they vended in wholesale to the shopkeepers who sold them in retail. Encouraged by great success in this employment, they soon removed to a larger house in Pudding-lane or Love-lane, in the parish of St. Mary Hill, where they entered on a partnership trade, in silks, fine linens, and such articles as they had dealt in before when in Flanders. Michael Boudean, the daughter Margaret’s husband, died first, leaving behind him, unfortunately for the family, a son and only child, named Peter, after an uncle certainly not much older than himself. The widow married John Money, a merchant in London, who instantly became an inmate with the family, which was moreover increased by the parents themselves, with two sons, William, born in 1572, and Peter, born in 1581. The young men, being instructed in reading, writing, and arithmetic, were early initiated in business, and soon after sent abroad as factors for the family: William to Haerlem, Peter to Cologne, and Peter Boudean the grandchild to Middleburg. At what time William Courten and Margaret Casiere died is at present uncertain most probably their deaths happened about the end of queen Elizabeth’s, or in the beginning of king James’s reign; but it seems certain, that they left their descendants not only in easy, but even in affluent circumstances. At the following aera of this little history it does not appear clearly, whether the old people were actually dead, or had only declined all farther active, responsible concern in business: but, in 1606, William and Peter Courtens entered into partnership with John Money, their sister Margaret’s second husband, to trade in silks and fine linen. Two parts, or the moiety of the joint stock, belonged to William Courten, and to each of the others, Peter Courten and John Money, a fourth share. As for Peter Boudean, the son of Margaret Courten by her first husband, he seems to have been employed to negotiate for the partnership at Middleburg on some stipulated or discretionary salary; for it does not appear that he had any certain or determinate share in the trade, which was carried on prosperously till 1631, with a return, it is said, one year with another, of 150,000l. During the course of this copartnership, there is nothing upon record unfavourable to the character of John Money. The characters too of William and Peter Courtens appear unexceptionable, fair, and illustrious. They prospered, it seems, remarkably in all their undertakings, for twenty years and more; in the course of which time they were both dignified with the honours of knighthood.

1643, became insolvent, and quitted this kingdom, to which it does not appear that he ever returned. When he died at Florence, in 1655, the subject of this article was about thirteen years of age; and it is most likely that his mother did not survive her husband above four or five years: for as no mention is made of lady Katharine in 1660, when Mr. Carew obtained letters of administration to the estates of the Courten family, it is probable she was then dead. In a petition to parliament, a rough draught of which is in the British Museum, there is a like ground for the same supposition, no mention being made of his mother; for it is only said there, that he the petitioner, and his only sister, had been left for many years destitute of a livelihood. It is not said at what time this gentleman’s father sold the great bulk of sir William Courten’s lands. Even the wrecks of a fortune, once so ample, must have been very considerable, and more than sufficient for the proper education and decent maintenance of William Courten and his sister. She could very well live in those days on no more income, as appears, than 30l. per annum. That this moderate annual sum was her principal support, we are led to believe from a slight attention to two papers still in being. If he and his sister had even been more reduced in point of income than we can well suppose, they still had infallible resources in the number, rank, and riches of their relations. Their grandfather the earl of Bridgewater, two uncles, with eleven aunts on the side of their mother, and three aunts on their father’s side, were people of fortune and distinction; many of them married into honourable and wealthy families, and all of them apparently in affluent or easy circumstances. It may therefore be reasonably concluded that William Courten was well educated, though the fact were not ascertained by other testimony. Having previously received a good education in this country, forwarded probably with peculiar care, and earlier certainly than is now usual, William Courten began his travels; or was sent, while yet a minor, to prosecute his studies abroad. The genius of a naturalist, which he discovered, it seems, from his infancy, led him to cultivate it at Montpellier, distinguished then, as Upsal since, for its botanical garden, its peculiar attention to natural history, and the abilities and celebrity of masters in various branches of this science. Here he met, as might be probably expected, with students of a congenial taste, and persons then and afterwards eminent in various walks of literature, with several of whom he appears to have lived in great familiarity, and to have cultivated long correspondence. Tournefort, the celebrated French botanist, was of this number. William Courten, who was the senior by several years, had no doubt made a very considerable proficiency in botany before his acquaintance with this illustrious foreigner commenced; but it must have been much improved by the intimacy that appears to have subsisted between them. It was at Montpellier probably, but many years after his primary settlement there, that William Courten contracted his first acquaintance with sir Hans Sloane, a zealous naturalist, who spared no pains or expence in the acquisition and promotion of knowledge in natural history, and who was yet more honourably distinguished by his skill in his own profession, his general patronage of scholars, his public spirit, and extensive phiJanthropy. Sir Hans Sloane unquestionably spent a considerable time at Montpellier, probably to improve his knowledge and to establish his health; and here too it is said he got his degree of M. D. But at what place and at what time soever their acquaintance began, being forwarded'by a similarity of studies, in which William Courten had undoubtedly the pre-eminence, it ripened into a friendship that continued without interruption to the end of his life.

, sieur de Sandras, was born at Paris in 1644. After having been captain in the regiment of Champagne, he went over to Holland in 1683, ivhere he wrote several works, published under different names, and with opposite views. Among these are, I. “The conduct of France since the peace of Nimeguen,” 1683, i'2mo, a work in which he censures the conduct of his countrymen. 2. “An answer to the foregoing,” in which he produces the arguments on the other side of the question. 3. “The new interests of the Princes.” 4. “The Life of Coligni,” 1686, 12mo, in which he affects to speak as belonging to the reformed religion, although he was always a Roman catholic. 5. “Memoirs of Rochfort,” 12mo. 6. “History of the Dutch War from the year 1672 to 1677; a work which obliged him for some time to quit the territories of the republic. 7.” Political Testament of Colbert,“12mo. The French clergy were highly incensed against him, for relating in it an expression of Colbert, that” the bishops of France were so much devoted to the will of the king, that if he should think fit to substitute the koran instead of the gospel, they would readily subscribe to it.“8.” Le grand Alcandre frustre,“or the last efforts of love and virtue. 9.” The Memoirs“of John Baptist cle la Fontaine; those of Artagnan, 3 vols. 12mo; those of Montbrun, 12mo; those of the marchioness Dufresne, 12mo; those of Bordeaux, 4 vols. 12mo; those of Saint- Hilaire, 4 vols. 12mo. 10.” Annals of Paris and of the Court, for the years 1697 and 1698.“11.” The Life of the Vicomte Turenne,“12mo, published under the name of Dubuisson. On his return to France in 1702, he was shut up in the Bastille, where he was kept in a dungeon for nine years, or, as Moreri says, only three years. Having obtained his liberty, he married a bookseller’s widow, and died at Paris the 6th of May, 1712, at the age of 68. He is also the author of, 12. Memoirs of Tyrconnel, composed from the verbal accounts of that nobleman, a close prisoner, like him, in the bastille. 13.” Historical and political Mercury,“&c. He, besides, left manuscripts sufficient in quantity to make 40 volumes in 12 mo.” The Memoirs of Vortlac," 2 vols. I 2mo, are unjustly attributed to him but enough was avowed to give us but an unfavourable opinion of his judgment or consistency.

, chevalier de Saint-Louis, and veteran pensionary of the academy of sciences, born at Dijon in 1715, died the 4th of October, 1785, at the age of 70. He signalized himself both as a military and a literary man. Being wounded in the campaign of Bavaria, in the act of saving marshal Saxe from the most imminent danger, he devoted himself to the cultivation of mathematics and natural philosophy, and communicated to the French academy several valuable memoirs on those sciences. His separate publications were, 1. “A treatise of Optics,” 1752, 4to. The author here gives the theory of light on the Newtonian system, with new solutions of the principal problems in dioptrics and catoptrics. This book is of use as a commentary on Newton’s Optics. 2. “Memoirs of an Epizootia which raged in Burgundy.” 3. “The Art of Forges and Furnaces;” this he wrote in partnership with M. Bouchu, which was afterwards incorporated in the Cyclopaedia. The marquis de Courtivron, says his eulogist, was a true philosopher. As he had properly appreciated life, he resigned it without disquietude, and perhaps without regret. The only sentiment to be perceived through the serenity and silence of his last moments, was that of gratitude for the tenderness that was shewn him, and a constant attention to spare the sensibility of his family and friends.

, an excellent French geometrician, a member of the old academy of sciences, and more recently of the conservative senate, and the national institute of France, was horn at Paris, Jan. 28, 1739, and was early distinguished for literary industry, and habits of study and reflection, which were confined at last to the pursuit of mathematical knowledge and natural philosophy. In 1766 he was appointed professor of the latter in the college of France, as coadjutor of Le Monnier, which situation he filled for thirty-two years with great reputation. 3u 1769 he was appointed professor of mathematics in the military school in 1772 he was admitted into the academy of sciences as adjoint-geometer, and in 1777 he published the first edition of his lessons on the “Calcul differentiel, et Calcul integral,” 2 vols. 12mo, reprinted in 1796 and 1797, in 2 vols. 4to, a work which manifests the depth and precision of his geometrical knowledge. In 1787 he published his “Introduction a l‘etude de l’Astronomie physique,” 8v; and in 1798, “Elemens d'Algebre,” 8vo. There are also various essays by him in the Memoirs of the Academy of Sciences. In 1791 he was appointed municipal officer of the commune of Paris, and his office being to provide the metropolis with provisions at that distracted period, he must have executed its duties with no common prudence and skill to have given satisfaction. In 1796 he resumed his professor’s chair in the college of France, and in 1799 was chosen a member of the conservative senate. His conduct in political life we are unacquainted with. He died at Paris December 30, 1808.

, an eminent French artist, and the earliest historical painter France produced, was born at Souci near Sens, in 1530, and studied the fine arts so strenuously in his youth, that he became profoundly learned, especially in the mathematics. Painting on glass being very much in vogue in those days, he applied himself more to that than to the drawing of pictures. Several fine performances of his are to be seen in the churches of the neighbourhood of Sens, and some in Paris; particularly in St. Gervase’s church, where, on the windows of the choir, he painted the martyrdom of St. Laurence, the history of the Samaritan woman, and that of the paralytic. There are several of his pictures in the city of Sens; as also some portraits. But the chief of his works, and that which is most esteemed, is his picture of the Last Judgment, in the sacristy of the Minims at Bois de Vincennes, which was graved by Peter de Tode, a Fleming, a good designer. This picture shews the fruitfulness of Cousin’s genius, by the numbers of the figures that enter into the composition; yet is somewhat wanting in elegance of design.

Cousin married the daughter of the lieutenant-general of Sens, and carried her to Paris, where he lived the rest of his days. His learning acquired him the name of the Great. He was well received at court, and in favour with four kings successively; namely, Henry II. Francis II. Charles IX. and Henry III. He worked also in sculpture, and made admiral Chabot’s tomb, which is in the chapel of Orleans, belonging to the Celestines in Paris. The last French account of him fixes his death in 1589. Of his literary works, we have seen only the following: 1. “Livre de Perspective,” Par. 1560, folio. 2. “Livre de Pourtraiture,” ib. 1618, 4to, and 1671, both which are in the British Museum.

, president of the Mint, one of the forty members of the French academy, was born Aug. 12, 1627, at Paris. He was intended for the ecclesiastical profession, and admitted bachelor of the Sorbonne; but, quitting that situation afterwards, was received advocate, married, and attended the bar till 1657, when he was appointed president of the Mint. He assisted in the “Journal des Savans” from 1687 to 1702. President Cousin was well acquainted with ecclesiastical antiquity, and learned Hebrew at the age of 70, that he might spend his last years in reading the Scripture in the original. He died. February 26, 1707, at Paris, aged 80. He founded six scholarships at the college of Laon, and left his library to the abbey of St. Victor, with 20,000 livres; the interest to be employed in augmenting that library. His works are, “The Roman History of Xiphilin,” &c. 4to, or 2 vols. 12mo, a French translation of the “Ecclesiastical Histories of Eusebius, Socrates, Sozomenus, and Theodoret,” 4 vols. 4to, or 6 vols. 12 mo: there are often hut five, because the History of Constantine has been taken out, and added to that of Constantinople. A translation of the authors of the “Byzantine History,” 1672—1674, in 8 vols. 4to, or 11 12mo and some other works. These translations are written in very good French.

, sculptor in ordinary to the French king, was born at Lyons in 1658, and died at Paris the 1st of May, 1733, aged 75, member of the royal academy of painting and sculpture. He went to Italy as pensionary of the king. It was there he produced his fine statue of the emperor Commodus, represented under the character of Hercules, forming one of the ornaments of the gardens of Versailles. On his return to France, he decorated Paris, Versailles, and Marly, with several pieces of exquisite workmanship. The groupe at the back of the high-altar of Notre Dame de Paris is by him, as well as the two groupes ut Marly, representing two horses tamed by grooms. A fop, who gave himself airs as a great connoisseur, thought fit to say to the artist, while he was employed on this his last grand work: “But this bridle, methinks, should be tighter.” “What pity, sir,” replied Coustou, “you did not come in a moment sooner! you would have seen the bridle just as you would have it; but these horses are so tender-mouthed, that it could not continue so for the twinkling of an eye.” In all his productions he displays an eleyated genius; with a judicious and delicate taste, a fine selection, a chaste design, natural, pathetic and noble attitudes; and his draperies are rich, elegant, and mellow. His brother William was director of the royal academy of painting and sculpture, and died at Paris the 22d of February, 1746, at the age of 69. Although he had not much less merit in the number and perfection of his works, he was not always esteemed so highly as he deserved.

From this period, his life affords little of the narrative kind, until 1773, when, in the language of his biographer, “he sunk into such severe paroxysms of religious despondency, that he required an attendant of the most gentle, vigilant, and inflexible spirit. Such an attendant he found in that faithful guardian (Mrs. Unwin), whom he had professed to love as a mother, and who watched over him, during this long fit of depressive malady, extended through several years, with that perfect mixture of tenderness and fortitude, which constitutes the inestimable influence of maternal protection. I wish to pass rapidly over this calamitous period, and shall only observe, that nothing could surpass the sufferings of the patient, or excel the care of the nurse. That meritorious care received from heaven the most delightful of all rewards, in seeing the pure and powerful mind, to whose restoration it has contributed so much, not only gradually restored to the common enjoyments of life, but successively endowed with new and marvellous funds of diversified talents and courageous application.” His recovery was slow; and he knew enough of his malady, to abstain from literary employment' while his mind was in any degree unsettled. The first amusement which engaged his humane affections was the laming of three hares, a circumstance that would have scarcely deserved notice unless among the memoranda of natural history, if he had not given to it an extraordinary interest in every heart, by the animated account he wrote of this singular family. In the mean time his friends, Mrs. Unwin and Mr. Newton, redoubled their efforts to promote his happiness, and to reconcile him to the world, in which he had yet a very important part to act; but as, in 1780, Mr. Newton was obliged to leave Olney, and accept of the living of St. Mary Woolnoth, London, he contrived to introduce Cowper to the friendship of the rev. Mr. Bull, of Newport Pagnell. This gentleman, who had many excellent qualities to recommend him as a fit successor to Mr. Newton, soon acquired the unreserved confidence of our author . It was at Mr. Bull’s request that he translated several spiritual songs from the French of Madame de la Mothe Guion , which have since been published separately. His recovery from this second illness may be dated from the summer of 1778, after which he began to meditate those greater exertions upon which his fame rests.

, a learned English bishop, was born at Whaddon in Buckinghamshire, of mean parentage, in the year 1499. He had probably his first education in the small priory of Snelshall, in the parish of Whaddon; but being afterwards sent to Eton-school, he was elected into a scholarship at King’s college in Cambridge, of which he became fellow in the year 1519. Having the same year taken his bachelor of arts degree, and being eminent for his piety and learning, he was invited to Oxford by cardinal Wolsey, to fill up his new foundation. He was accordingly preferred to be one of the junior canons of Cardinal college; and on the 7th of December, 1525, was incorporated bachelor of arts at Oxford, as he stood at Cambridge. Soon after, having performed his exercises, he took the degree of M. A. July 2, 1526, and at this time was reputed one of the greatest scholars of his age; and even his poetical compositions were in great esteem. His piety and virtue were not inferior to his learning, and commanded the respect of all impartial persons. But shewing himself averse to many of the popish superstitions, and declaring freely for some of Luther’s opinions, he incurred the displeasure of his superiors, who stripped him of his preferment, and threw him into prison on suspicion of heresy. When he was released from his confinement, he left Oxford; and, some time after, was chosen master of Eton-school, which flourished under his care. In 1537, he commenced doctor in divinity at Cambridge, and December 4, 1540, was made archdeacon of Ely; as he was also appointed in 1541, the first prebendary in the first stall of the same cathedral, upon its being new founded by king Henry VIII. September 10, 1541. He was likewise, June 3, 1542, presented by the same king to the prebend of Sutton with Buckingham in the church of Lincoln, and installed the llth of that month, but this he surrendered up in 1547. In the year 1543, he supplicated the university of Oxford, that he might take place among the doctors of divinity there, which was unusual, because he was not then incorporated in that degree, but this took place in June 1545. When a design was formed, of converting the collegiate church of Southwell into a bishopric, Dr. Cox was nominated bishop of it. On the 8th of January, 1543-4, he was made the second dean of the new-erected cathedral of Osney near Oxford; and in 1546, when that see was translated to Christ church, he was also made dean there. These promotions he obtained by the interest of archbishop Cranmer and bishop Goodrich, to the last of whom he had been chaplain; and, by their recommendation, he was chosen tutor to the young prince Edward, whom he instructed with great care in the true principles of religion, and formed his tender mind to an early sense of his duty, both as a Christian and a king. On that prince’s accession to the throne, he became a great favourite at court, and was made a privy-counsellor, and the king’s almoner. The 2 1st of May, 1547, he was elected chancellor of the university of Oxford; installed July 16, 1548, canon of Windsor; and the next year made dean of Westminster. About the same time he was appointed one of the commissioners to visit the university of Oxford, in which he and his brother commissioners destroyed some of the most valuable treasures in the libraries, from a notion that they encouraged popery and conjuration *. In 1550, he was ordered to go down into Sussex, and endeavour by his learned and affecting sermons, to quiet the minds of the people, who had been disturbed by the factious preaching of Day bishop of Chichester, a violent papist: and when the noble design of reforming the canon law was in agitation, he was appointed one of the commissioners. Both in this and the former reign, when an act passed for giving all chantries, colleges, &c. to the king, through Dr. Cox’s powerful intercession, the colleges in both universities were excepted out of that act. In November 1552, be resigned the office of chancellor of Oxford and soon after queen Mary’s accession to the crown, he was stripped of his preferments and on the 15th of August, 1553, committed to the Marshalsea. He was indeed soon discharged from this confinement; but foreseeing the inhuman persecution likely to ensue, he resolved to quit the realm, and withdraw to some place where he might enjoy the free exercise of his religion, according to the form established in the reign of king Edward. With this view he went first to Strasburgh in Germany, where he heard with great concern of some English exiles at Francfort having thrown aside the English Liturgy, and set up a form of their own, framed after the French and Geneva models. On the 13th of March 1555, he came to Francfort in order to oppose this innovation, and to have the Common- Prayer-Book settled among the English congregation there, which he had the satisfaction to accomplish. Then he returned to Strasburgh for the sake of conversing with Peter Martyr, with whom he had contracted an intimate friendship at Oxford, and whom he loved and honoured for his great learning and moderation. After the death of queen Mary he returned to England; and was one of those divines who were appointed to revise the Liturgy. When a disputation was to be held at Westminster between eight papists and eight of the reformed clergy, he was the chief champion on the protestants’ side. He preached often before queen Elizabeth in Lent; and, in his sermon at the opening of her first parliament, exhorted them in most affecting terms to restore religion to its primitive purity, and banish all the popish innovations and corruptions. These excellent discourses, and the great zeal he had shewn in support of the English liturgy at Francfort, so effectually recommended him to the queen’s esteem, that in June 1559, she nominated him to the bishopric of Norwich; but altering her mind, preferred him to the see of Ely in July 1559, in the room of Dr. Thirlby, who was deprived. Before his consecration (Dec. 19) he joined with Dr. Parker, elect archbishop of Canterbury, and the bishops elect of London, Chichester, and Hereford, in a petition to the queen, against an act lately passed for the alienating and exchanging the lands and revenues of the bishops; and sent her several arguments from scripture and reason against the lawfulness of it; observing withal, the many evils and inconveniencies both to church and state that would thence arise. In 1559 we find him again appointed one of the visitors of the university of Oxford, but this visitation was conducted so moderately as to obtain a letter of thanks to queen Elizabeth for the services of the commissioners. He enjoyed the episcopal dignity about twenty-one years and seven months, and was justly considered one of the chief pillars and ornaments of the church of England, having powerfully co-operated with archbishop Parker, and his successor Grindal, in restoring our church in the same beauty and good order it had enjoyed in king Edward’s reign. He indeed gave some offence to the queen by his zealous opposition to her retaining the crucifix and lights on the altar of the Chapel Royal, and his strenuous defence of the lawfulness of the marriage of the clergy, to which the queen was always an enemy. He was a liberal patron to all learned men whom he found well affected to the church; and shewed a singular esteem for Dr. Whitgift, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury, made him his chaplain, and gave him the rectory of Teversham in Cambridgeshire, and a prebend of Ely. He did his utmost to get a body of ecclesiastical laws established by authority of parliament; but through the opposition of some of the chief courtiers, this design miscarried a third time. As he had, in his exile at Francfort, been the chief champion against the innovations of the puritans, he still continued, with some vigour and resolution, to oppose their attempts against the discipline and ceremonies of the established church. At first he tried to reclaim them by gentle means; but finding that they grew more audacious, and reviled both church and bishops in scurrilous libels, he wrote to archbishop Parker, to go on vigorously in reclaiming or punishing them, and not be disheartened at the frowns of those court-favourites who protected them; assuring him that he might expect the blessing of God on his pious labours to free the church from their dangerous attempts, and to establish uniformity. When the privycouncil interposed in favour of the puritans, and endeavoured to screen them from punishment, he wrote a bold letter to the lord- treasurer Burieigh in which he warmly expostulated with the council for meddling with the affairs of the church, which, as he said, ought to be left to the determination of the bishops; admonished them to keep within their own sphere; and told them he would appeal to the queen if they continued to interpose in matters not belonging to them. He is blamed by some for giving up several manors and other estates belonging to his see, while others thought he deserved commendation for his firmness in resolving to part with no more, and for being proof against the strongest solicitations and most violent attacks which he had to encounter, even from those who were most in favour at court, and who were backed by royal command and authority. In the years 1574- and 1575, sir Christopher Hatton, a noted favourite of the queen, endeavoured to wrest Ely-house in Holborn from him; and in order to preserve it to his see he was forced to have a long and chargeable suit in chancery, which was not determined in 1579. The lord North also attempted, in 1575, to oblige him to part with the manor of Somersham, in Huntingdonshire, one of the best belonging to his bishopric; and with Downham park; which he refusing to yield, that lord endeavoured to irritate the queen against him, and to have him deprived. For that purpose, North, and some others of the courtiers, examined and ransacked his whole conduct since his first coming to his see, and drew tip a large body of articles against him addressed to the privy-council. But the bishop, in his replies, so fully vindicated himself, that the queen was forced to acknowledge his innocence, though the lord North boasted he had found five prsemunires against him. Vexed, however, with the implacable malice of the lord North, and other his adversaries, he desired, in 1577, leave to resign his bishopric, which the queen refused. North, though disappointed in his former attempt, yet not discouraged, brought three actions against the poor old bishop for selling of wood, on which the bishop offered again, in 1579, to resign, provided he had a yearly pension of two hundred pounds out of his see, and Donnington (the least of five country houses belonging to Ely bishopric) for his residence during life. The lord- treasurer Burieigh, at the bishop’s earnest desire, obtained leave of the queen for him to resign; and in February 1579-80, upon the bishop’s repeated desires, forms of resignation were actually drawn up. But the court could not find any divine of note who would take that bishopric on their terms, of surrendering* up the best manors belonging to it. The first offer of it was made to Freak, bisbop of Norwich; and, on his refusal, it was proffered to several others; but the conditions still appeared so ignominious that they all rejected it; by which means bishop Cox enjoyed it till his death, which happened on the 22d of July 1581, in the eighty-second year of his arge. By his will he left several legacies, amounting in all to the sum of 945l.; and died worth, in good debts, 2,322l. He had several children. His body was interred in Ely cathedral, near bishop Goodrich’s monument, under a marble stone, with an inscription, now nearly effaced. His character is said to have been that of a man of a sound judgment and clear apprehension, and skilled in all polite and useful learning. He wanted no advantages of education, and improved them with such diligence and industry, that he soon became an excellent proficient both in divine and human literature. The holy scriptures were his chief study; and he was perfectly well versed in the original language of the New Testament. He was extremely zealous for the true interest of the reformed church, and a constant and vigorous defender of it against alj, the open, assaults of all its enemies. He is accused by some of having been a worldly and covetou’s person; and is said to have made a great havock and spoil of his woods and parks, feeding his family with powdered venison to save expences. Several complaints and long accusations were exhibited against him and his wife, in 1579, to queen Elizabeth upon these accounts, but the bishop fully vindicated himself, and shewed that all these complaints were malicious calumnies. It is likewise said, that he appears to have been of a vindictive spirit, by reason of his prosecution of, and severity to, the deprived catholics in his custody; and especially by his complaints against Dr. Feckenham, the last abbot of Westminster. But the bishop alleges in his own excuse, that these complaints were well founded; and that his endeavours to convert him were by order of the court. It must be remembered of this bishop, that he was the first who brought a wife to live in a college; and that he procured a new body of statutes for St, John’s college in Cambridge, of which, as bishop of Ely, he was, visitor.

, who was born at Baumeles-Nones in Franche-Comtt;, and died at Paris July 18, 1782, in an advanced age, was for some time a Jesuit. Having quitted that society, he repaired to the capital about 1751, and sought a livelihood by his pen. He began his career by certain fugitive pieces, of which some, as the “Discovery of the Philosopher’s stone,” in imitation of Swift, and the “Miraculous year,” had the most success. These trifles were collected under the very suitable title of “Bagatelles morales.” Some of the pieces in this collection are written, with ease, delicacy, and sprightliness; but irony being the favourite figure with the author, the style of it is too monotonous, and the witticisms sometimes too far fetched. There was visible in the writings of the abbe Coyer, as well as in his conversation, a perpetual effort at being agreeable, which he was unable to sustain to any length. Besides some temporary pieces, the abbé Coyer also wrote, 1. “The History of John Sobieski,” 1761, 3 vols. 12mo; a very interesting work. 2. “Travels in Italy and Holland,” 1775, 2 vols. 12mo. The abbe Coyer ran over these countries, oiot so much in the character of a deep observer, as of a light Frenchman, who takes a superficial glance, and then hastily sets down some remarks analogous to the fluctuation of his mind, of his inclinations and his character. The book is far inferior both to the observations of M. Grosley and the travels of M. de la Lande. 3. “New observations on England,” 1779, 12mo, which is little else that an abridgment of Grosley’s London. 4. “Noblesse Commenjante,” 2 vols. 8vo, and a little romance entitled “Chinki, histoire Cochin-Chinoise,” which made more noise in France than his “Bagatelles,” and are said to have contributed to two important changes in France, the granting of letters of noblesse to eminent merchants, and the abolition of wardenships. 5. “Plan d'education publique,” 1770, 12 mo. The abbe Coyer also translated Biackstone’s Commentaries on the Criminal Law of England. He had long fruitlessly endeavoured to obtain admittance into the French academy, and had adopted many of the sentiments of the modern philosophers, who do not appear, however, to have had a profound respect for him. He was always telling Voltaire that he intended to come and spend three months with him, until the poet, frightened at his threat, wrote to him, “Mons. Abbe, do you know the difference which I find between you and Don Quixote It is, that he took inns for castles, and you take castles for inns.”

, an ingenious French sculptor, born at Lyons, in 1640, died chancellor and regent of the academy of painting and sculpture in 1720. Versailles boasts his best works, except the figure of that great minister, M. Colbert, on his tomb, in the church of S. Eustache; the two groupes of Renown, and Mercury, in the Thuilleries; and the player on the flute, in the same garden. The Neptune and Amphytrite, at Marly, with many very fine busts, are the chief works of this artist, who was endowed with a most fruitful imagination, and an admirable execution.

, a Russian by birth, was a landscape painter in London, but chiefly practised as a drawing-master. He taught in a way that was new and peculiar, and which appears to have been adopted from the hint given by Leonardo da Vinci, who recommends selecting the ideas of landscape from the stains of an old plaster wall, and his method of composing his drawings may be considered as an improvement upon the advice of Da Vinci. His process was to dash out, upon several pieces of paper, a number of accidental large blots and loose flourishes, from which he selected forms, and sometimes produced very grand ideas; but they were in general too indefinite in their execution, and unpleasing in their colour. He published a small tract upon this method of composing landscapes, in which he has demonstrated his process. He also published some other works, the most considerable of which was a folio, entitled “The Principles of Beauty relative to the Human Head,” 1778, French and English, a very ingenious, but somewhat fanciful work, illustrated with engravings by Bartolozzi, showing the gradations of character, from the outline of a feature, 'to the outline of the face, and to each face is applied an head dress in the style of the antique. He also published “The various species of Composition in Nature, in sixteen subjects, on four plates,” with observations and instructions and “The shape, skeleton, and foliage of thirty-two species of Trees,” 1771, reprinted 1736; but, in Mr. Edwards’s opinion, not very creditable to the artist. As a drawingmaster, he had very considerable reputation and employment. He attended for some years at Eton school, and among other pupils of high rank, had the honour of giving some lessons to his royal highness the prince of Wales, He died at his house in Leicester-street, Leicester-square, April, 1786, leaving a son John Cozens, who greatly excelled him as a landscape painter: rejecting his lather’s method of fortuitous blots and dashes, he followed the arrangements of nature, which he saw with an enchanted eye, and drew with an enchanted hand. He owes his fame to those tinted drawings, of which, Mr. Fuseli says, the method has been imitated with more success than the sentiment which inspired them. A collection of his drawings, amounting to ninety-four, the property of Mr. Beckford, were sold by Christie in 1805, and produced 510l. He visited Italy twice, where he appears to have drawn most of these In 1794, he was seized with a mental derangement which continued to his death in 1799.

, a learned protestant divine, was born at Retz in the new march of Brandenburgh, Jan. 20, 1568, where his father was pastor of the church, and for some time superintended his education. In 1531 he was sent to Lansberg, where he was educated in Greek and Latin by J. M. Capito, and afterwards pursued his studies at other seminaries, particularly Rostock, where he applied to philosophy and mathematics under Dr. Duncan Liddel, a learned native of Scotland, and Gotschovius. Under the presidentship of Dr. Liddel he defended a thesis on the organon of Aristotle with great applause, and lectured on the ethics to some of his fellow-students. About this time, 1590, the son of the prime minister of Denmark, Rosenkranz, being at Rostock for his education, Cramer was appointed his tutor, and afterwards accompanied him to Denmark, and to the university of Whtemberg; here he was appointed professor of logic, and superintendant of the scholars who were exhibitioners. From hence, being invited to Stettin, he was made first dean, and professor, and assessor of the consistory. In 1597 he was appointed pastor at Marienkirk, and inspector of the college. In 1598 he received the degree of doctor of divinity at Wittemberg, where Moreri, blunderingly, makes him die in the following year: on the contrary, after refusing many preferments, he remained here until Oct. 5, 1637, on which day he died, in his sixty-ninth year. His works, both in Latin and German, are very numerous. Freher has given a complete list, in which we find several treatises on Aristotle, “Emblematum Sacrorum Decades X.” with plates, and Latin, German, Italian and French verses,“8vo. ”Isagoge ad libros Propheticos et Apostolicos,“8vo;” Arbor hsereticse consanguinitatis," a history of heresies, divided into four classes, 4to; and various controversial works in favour of the Lutheran opinions.

, an eminent mathematician, was born at Geneva, in 1704, and became a pupil of John Bernouilli, and a professor of mathematics at the age of nineteen. He was known all over Europe, and was of the academies of London, Berlin, Montpellier, Lyons, and Bologna. He died in 1752, worn out with study, at the baths of Languedoc, whither he had repaired for the recovery of his health. He made a most important and interesting collection of the works of James and John Bernouilli, which was published 1743, under his inspection, in 6 vols. 4to, and he had before bestowed no less pains on an edition of Christopher Wolf’s “Elementa universae matheseos,” Genev. 1732 1741, 5 vols. 4to. The only work he published of his own was an excellent “Introduction to the Theory of Curve lines,” 1750, 4to. L'Avocat says he was an universal genius, a living Encyclopedia, and a man of pious and exemplary conduct. His family appears to have been numerous and literary. There wap another Gabriel Cramer, probably his father, who was born at Geneva, 1641, rose to be senior of the faculty of medicine, died in 1724, and left a son, John Isaac, who took the degree of doctor in 1696, succeeded to his practice, and published an “Epitome of Anatomy,” and a “Dissertation on Diseases of the Liver,” left by his father. Also, “Thesaurus secretorum curiosorum, in quo curiosa, ad omnes corporis humani, turn internes turn externos, morbos curandos, &c. continentur,” 1709, 4to, He again was succeeded by his son, John Andrew Cramer, who rendered himself famed by his skill in mineralogy and chemistry; and published at Leyden, in 1739, 2 vols. 8vo, “Elementa Artis Docirnasticae.” It was reprinted in 1744, and again translated into French, in 1755. He wrote also a treatise on the management of forests and timber, and gave public lectures on Assaying, both in Holland and England. He died Dec. 6, 1777. Tn his person he was excessiyely slovenly, in his temper irritable, and when disputes occurred, not very delicate in his language.

Notwithstanding his repeated successes, he was unable in the most brilliant season of his reputation, to obtain a seat in the French academy, perhaps, for one reason, because he had written a severe satire against them. After, however, he had been long forgotten, he was elected into the academy, Sept. 27, 1731, and obtained favours from the court. He was also urged to finish the tragedy of “Cataline *,” which he had begun thirty years before, and which, from some passages he had read to his friends, was spoken of as a dramatic wonder. This piece had but a transient success, however, and even for this it was indebted to the interest inspired in the public by the advanced a;e of the author, and especially to the numerous and powerful cabal, whose object was to sacrifice his rival Voltaire f, who was now making an eminent figure in the drama. Crebillon himself was so little flattered by the

2400 French livres. When Crebillon to his memory in the church of St. Gerwent to thank his patroness, she re- vais, where his remains are interred. indiscreet ardour of his friends, that he opposed, as much as he was able, all the means they wished to employ for his success. One of them having asked him for tickets for the first representation of “Cataline,” “You well know,” he replied, “that I would not have a single person in the pit who should think himself ohliged to applaud me.” * c Such applause,“returned his friend,” it is so far from my intention to procure, that, you may he assured, the persons to whom I shall give your tickets, will he the fir>t to hiss the piece, if it deserves to be hissed.“” In that case,“said Crebillon,” you shall have them."

, son of the preceding, was born at Paris February 12, 1707, and died there April 12, 1777, at the age of 70. It is said that his father being one day asked, in a large company, which of his works he thought the best? “I don't know,” answered he, “which is my best production; but this (pointing to his son, who was present) is certainly my worst.” “It is,” replied the son, with vivacity, “because no Carthusian had a hand in it:” alluding to the report, that the best passages in his father’s tragedies had been written by a Carthusian friar, who was his friend. His father had gained his fame as a manly and nervous writer; the son was remarkable for the ease, elegance, and caustic malignity of his conversation and writings, and might be surnamed the Petronius of France, as his father had been characterised by that of the Æschylus. The abbe Boudot, who lived on familiar terms with him, said to him one day in reply to some of his jokes: “Hold thy tongue! Thy father was a great man; but as for thee, thou art only a great boy.” “Crebiilon the father,” says M. d'Alembert, “paints in the blackest colours the crimes and wickedness of man. The son draws, with a delicate and just pencil, the refinements, the shades, and even the graces of our vices; that seducing levity which renders the French what is called amiable, but which does not signify worthy of being beloved; that restless activity, which makes them feel ennui even in the midst of pleasure; that perversity of principles, disguised, and as it were softened, by the mask of received forms; in short, our manners, at once frivolous and corrupt, wherein the excess of depravity combines with the excess of ridiculousness.” This parallel is more just than the opinion of L'Advocat, who says that the romances of Crebiilon are extremely interesting, because all the sentiments are drawn from a sensible heart, but it is plain that this “sensible heart” is full of affectation, and that the author describes more than he feels. However this may be, Crebiilon never had any other post than that of censor-royal. He is said to have lived with his father as with a friend and a brother; and his marriage with an English woman, whom Crebiilon the father did not approve, only produced a transient misunderstanding. The principal works of the son are: 1. Letters from the marchioness to the count of ***, 1732, 2 vols. 12rno. 2. Tanzai and Neadarne“, 1734, 2 vols. 12mo. This romance, abounding in satirical allusions and often unintelligible, and which caused the author to be put into the bastille, was more applauded than it deserved. 3.” Les egarements du coeur & de Tesprit,“1736, three parts, 12mo. 4.” The Sopha,“a moral tale, 1745, 1749, 2 vols. 12mo, grossly immoral, as most of his works are. For this he Was banished from Paris for some time. 5.” Lettres Atheniennes,“177I,4vols. 12mo. 6.” Ah! que?i conte“1764, 8 parts, 12mo. 7.” Les Heureux Orphelins,“1754, 2 vols. 12mo. 8.” La Nuit & le Moment,“1755, 12mo. 9.” Le hasard du coin du feu,“1763, 12mo. 10.” Lettres de la duchesse de ***,' &c. 1768, 2 vols. 12mo. 11. “Lettres de la marquise de Pompadour,” 12mo, an epistolary romance, written in an easy and bold style; but relates few particulars of the lady whose name it bears. The whole of his works have been collected in 7 vols. 12mo, 1779.

, a French historian, was born at Pads in 1693. His father was a journeyman printer. He studied under the celebrated Rollin, and became professor of rhetoric in the college de Beauvais. After Rollin’s death, he undertook the continuation of his Roman history, and published various works, in which, as in the education of his pupils, he preserved a sacred regard for the interests of religion, virtue, and literature. He died at Paris, Dec. I, 1765, after publishing, 1. an edition of “Livy,” with notes, 6 vols. 4to, which, says Gibbon, contains a sensible life of the historian, a judicious selection of the best remarks on his work, and displays as much intelligence as taste on the part of the editor. Ernesti is not less in favour of this edition, which has been reprinted in 8vo and 12mo. 2. Continuation of “llollin’s Roman History,” already noticed. 3. “Histoire des Empereurs Remains jusqu' a Constantin,” Paris, 1756, 6 vols. 4to, which was soon after translated into English, and published in 8vo. 4. “Histoire de l'universite” de Paris,“7 vols. 12mo; a very useful work, for which his countrymen think he was better qualified than to write the Roman history. 5.” Observations sur V Esprit des Lois,“12mo, some remarks on Montesquieu’s celebrated work, from which Crevier derived little reputation. 6.” Rhetorique Fransoise," 1765, 2 vols. 12mo, which was well received, and was reprinted at Liege, in 1787. Crevier, like most voluminous writers, is careless in his style, but generally correct and precise in his narrative.

, was a Scotch gentleman, who lived in the sixteenth century, and has furnished a sort of biographical romance. His endowments both of body and mind were esteemed so great, that he obtained the appellation of “The admirable Crichton,” and by that title he has continued to be distinguished down to the present day. The accounts given of his abilities and attainments are indeed so wonderful, that they seem scarcely to be credible; and many persons have been disposed to consider them as almost entirely fabulous, though they have been delivered with the. utmost confidence, and without any degree of hesitation, by various writers. The time of Crichton’s birth is said, by the generality of authors, to have been in 1551; but according to lord Buchan, it appears from several circumstances, that he was born in the month of August, 1560. His father was Robert Crichton of Elliock in the county of Perth, and lord advocate of Scotland in queen Mary’s reign, from 1561 to 1573; part of which time he held that office in conjunction with Spens of Condie. The mother of James Crichton was Elizabeth Stuart, the only daughter of sir James Stuart of Beath, who was a descendant of Robert duke of Albany, the third son of king Robert II. by Elizabeth Muir, or More, as she is commonly called. It is hence evident, that when the admirable Crichton boasted, as he did abroad, that he was sprung from Scottish kings, he said nothing but what was agreeable to truth. Nevertheless, Thomas Dempster, who sufficiently amplifies his praises in other respects, passes a severe censure upon him on this account; which is the more remarkable, as Dempster lived so near the time, and was well acquainted with the genealogies of the great families of Scotland. James Crichton is said to have received his grammatical education at Perth, and to have studied philosophy in the university of St. Andrew. His tutor in that university was Mr. John Rutherford, a professor at that time famous for his learning, and who distinguished himself by writing four books on Aristotle’s Logic, and a commentary on his Poetics. But nothing, according to Mackenzie, can give us a higher idea of Rutherford’s worth and merit, than his being master of that wonder and prodigy of his age, the great and admirable Crichton. However, it is not to this professor alone that the honour is ascribed of having formed so extraordinary a character. There are others who may put in their claim to a share in the same glory; for Aldus Manutius, who calls Crichton first cousin to the king, says that he was educated, along with his majesty, under Buchanan, Hepburn, and Robertson, as well as Rutherford. Indeed, whatever might be the natural force of his genius, jnany masters must have been necessary, in order to his acquiring such a variety of attainments as he is represented to have possessed. For it is related, that he had scarcely reached the twentieth year of his age, when he had run through the whole circle of the sciences, and could speak and write to perfection in ten different languages. Nor was this all; for he had likewise improved himself to the highest degree in riding, dancing, and singing, and in playing upon all sorts of instruments. Crichton, being thus accomplished, went abroad upon his travels, and is said to have gone to Paris; of his transactions at which place the following account is given. He caused six placards to be fixed on the gates of the schools, halls, and colleges belonging to the university, and on the pillars and posts before the houses of the most renowned men for literature in the city, inviting all those who were well versed in any art or science to dispute with him in the college of Navarre, that day six weeks, by nine o'clock in the morning, where he would attend them, and be ready to answer to whatever should be proposed to him in any art or science, and in any of these twelve languages, Hebrew, Syrlac, Arabic, Greek, Latin, Spanish, French, Italian, English, Dutch, Flemish, and Sclavonian; and this either in verse or prose, at the discretion of the disputant. During this whole time, instead of closely applying to his studies, he regarded nothing but hunting, hawking, tilting, vaulting, riding of a well-managed horse, tossing the pike, handling the musquet, and other military feats; or else he employed himself in domestic games, such as balls, concerts of music, vocal and instrumental; cards, dice, tennis, and other diversions of youth. This conduct so provoked the students of the university, that, beneath the placard that was fixed on the Navarre gate, they caused the following words to be written: “If you would meet with this monster of perfection, to search for him either in the tavern or t)ie brothel is the readiest way to find him.” Nevertheless, when the day appointed arrived, Crichton appeared in the college of Navarre, and acquitted himself beyond expression in the disputation, which lasted from nine in the morning till six at night. At length, the president, after extolling him highly for the many rare and excellent endowments which God and nature had bestowed upon him, rose from his chair; and, accompanied by four of the most eminent professors of the university, gave him a diamond ring and a purse full of gold, as a testimony of their approbation and favour. The whole ended with the repeated acclamations and huzzas of the spectators; and henceforward our young disputant was called “The admirable Crichton.” It is added, that he was so little fatigued with the dispute, that he went the very next day to the Louvre, where he had a match'at tilting, an exercise then in great vogue; and, in presence of some princes of the court of France, and a great many ladies, carried away the ring fifteen times successively, and broke as many lances on the Saracen, whatever that might be; probably a sort of mark.

, a learned protestant clergyman in France, in the seventeenth century, was born at Usez, and being educated to the church, was appointed pastor, first of Beziers, and afterwards of Usez. His life appears to have been spent in the exercise of his duties as a clergyman, and in writing on the controversies of the times, in which he was enabled to take a distinguished part, being a man of extensive learning, a critic, and an able Oriental scholar. He died Aug. 31, 1659. He wrote many controversial pieces in French, particularly a defence of the Geneva confession of Faith, 1645, 8vo, and “Augustin suppose,” &c. proving that the four books on the creed in St. Augustine’s works are not the production of that author; but his Latin works gained him greater reputation, particularly his “Specimen Conjecturarum in qusedam Origenis, Ireneei, et Tertulliani Loca,” 1632; and “Observationes Sacræ et Historicæ in Nov. Test.” chiefly against Heinsius, 1644.

, was born in the province of Maine in 1552. He was sieur or lord of the manor of Croix du Maine, and of Vieille Cour, four leagues from Mans. From his youth he. had a passionate inclination for learning and books, and collected so large a library at the university in Greek and Latin authors, and most European languages, that, as he says himself, the catalogue of them would make a volume. He began to make this collection in his seventeenth year; and in his thirty-second, viz. in 1584, he published his “French Library,” being a general account of all authdfs that wrote in that language, fol. Of this we shall take particular notice under the article Verdier. In 1519 he addressed a discourse to viscount de Pauliny, and speaks of a great many works which he had written, none of which, however, are known, except a small 4to, *' Dessems ou projets, &c. pour dresser une bibliotheque parfaite," Paris, 1583, and a long Latin epitaph on the poet Monin, who was assassinated at Paris in 1586, a fate which befell himself at Tours in 1592.

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

, protector of the commonwealth of England, and one of the most remarkable characters in English history, was descended, both by his father and mother, from families of great antiquity. He was the son of Mr. Robert Cromwell, who was the second son of sir Henry Cromwell of Hinchinbrooke, in the county of Huntingdon, knt. whose great grandfather is conjectured to have been Walter Cromwell, the blacksmith at Putney, spoken of in the preceding article; and his grandmother sister to Thomas Cromwell, earl of Essex. Yet we are told that when Goodman, bishop of Gloucester, who turned papist, and was very desirous of making his court to the protector, dedicated a book to him, and presented a printed paper to him, by which he pretended to claim kindred with him, as being himself someway allied to Thomas earl of Essex, the protector with some warmth told him, “that lord was not related to his family in any degree.” For this story, however, told by Fuller, there seems little foundation . Robert Cromwell, father of the protector, was settled at Huntingdon, and had four sons (including the protector) and seven daughters. Though by the interest of his brother sir Oliver, he was put into the commission of the peace for Huntingdonshire, he had but a slender fortune; most of his support arising from a brewhouse in Huntingdon, chiefly managed by his wife. She was Elizabeth, daughter of a Stewart, of Rothseyth in Fifeshire, and sister of sir Robert Stewart, of the isle of Ely, knt. who has been reported, and not without some foundation of truth, to have been descended from the royal house of Stuart; as appears from a pedigree of her family still in being. Out of the profits of this trade, and her own jointure of 60l. per annum, Mrs. Cromwell provided fortunes for her daughters, sufficient to marry them into good families. The eldest, or second surviving, was the wife of Mr. John Desborough, afterwards one of the protector’s major-generals; another married, first, Roger Whetstone, esq. and afterwards colonel John Jones, who was executed for being one of the king’s judges; the third espoused colonel Valentine Walton, who died in exile; the fourth, Robina, married first Dr. Peter French, and then Dr. John Wilkins, a man eminent in the republic of letters, and after the restoration bishop of Chester. It may be also added, that an aunt of the protector’s married Francis Barrington, esq. from whom descended the Barringtons of Essex; another aunt, John Hampden, esq. of Buckinghamshire, by whom she was mother of the famous John Hampden, who lost his life in Chalgrave field; a third was the wife of Mr. Whaley, and the mother of colonel Whaley, in whose custody the king was while he remained at Hampton-court; the fourth aunt married Mr. Dunch.

In these circumstances one might wonder, how he should form a design, at a time when elections were considered as things of the utmost consequence, of getting himself chosen, more especially for the town of Cambridge, where he was so far from having any interest, that he was not so much as known; and, if he had been known, would never have been elected. But the whole of that affair was owinor to an accidental intrigue, in which himself had at first no hand. One reason why he quitted Huntingdon was, a dispute he had with Mr. Bernard, upon his becoming recorder, about precedency; a point in which he was very nice. After he came to Ely, he resorted entirely to nonconformist meetings, where he quickly distinguished himself by his gifts, as they were styled in those days, of preaching, praying, and expounding. At one of these meetings he met with Richard Tims, a tradesman of Cambridge, who rode every Sunday to Ely for the sake of pure doctrine; and captivated his heart entirely. This man, hearing that a parliament was to be called, and being himself one of the common-council, took it into his head, that there could not be a fitter man to be their burgess than Mr. Cromwell; and with this notion he went to Wildbore, a draper in the town, and a relation of Cromwell’s, who agreed with him exactly as to the fitness of the person, but told him the thing was impossible, as he was not a freeman. Tims, not satisfied with that, addressed himself next to Evett, a tallow-chandler, who was also a puritan. He relished the thought; but, for the same reason, pronounced the design impracticable. However, Tims had hardly left his house, before Evett sent for him back, and whispered, that the mayor had a freedom to bestow, and that one Kitchingman, an attorney, who had married his wife’s sister, and was of their party, had a great influence over him. He advised him therefore to move Kitchingman in it, who was to use his interest with the mayor, stating that Mr. Cromwell was a gentleman of fortune, and had a mind to come and live in the town, which was then in a poor condition; but with a strict charge to hide the true design, alderman French, who was then the mayor, being a declared royalist. When they came to make this application to him, French said he was sorry, but that in reality they came too late, for he had promised his freedom to the king’s fisherman. Kitchingman easily removed this objection, by undertaking that the town should confer a freedom upon the person he mentioned; and accordingly at the next court-day, the mayor declared his intention to bestow his freedom on a very worthy gentleman of the isle of Ely, one Mr. Cromwell; who, being apprized of his friend’s industry, came to town over night, and took up his lodgings at Almond’s, a grocer. Thither the mace was sent for him, and he came into court dressed in scarlet, richly laced with gold; where, having provided plenty of claret and sweetmeats, they were so well circulated among the corporation, that they unanimously declared Mr. Mayor’s freeman to be a civil worthy gentleman. When the election came on, the mayor discovered his mistake; but it was then too late, for the party among the burgesses was strong enough to choose him, which they accordingly did at the next election the ensuing year.

The opening of 1655 proved but cloudy: the dissolution of the parliament created much discontent in the kingdom; so that Cromwell found himself beset with conspiracies on all sides, and by all parties; but he had the good luck to discover them before they could be executed. Upon Feb. 13, he went to Guildhall; and declared, that the republicans and cavaliers had formed designs against his person. Of the former, major John Wildman, who had been an intimate friend of his, was seized while penning a paper, entitled “A declaration of the people of England against the tyrant Oliver Cromwell;” and other violent men of that party he imprisoned, but was afraid of doing more. As to the royalists, he suffered them to go on a little; for, by the help of one Manning, who was his spy in the court of Charles II. he was so well acquainted with their projects, as to put them upon measures which turned to his own account. And this is a true solution of that insurrection which broke out at Salisbury, where the king was proclaimed, and Cromwell’s judges seized; which act of open force left no doubt with the public, that there were designs against the protector. For this insurrection several persons suffered death; and hence the protector, who had hitherto shewn an inclination to govern as a lawful prince if he could, seemed to lay aside his disposition, and no longer to make any difficulty of supporting his authority in any manner and by any means; In the spring of this year was carried into execution that famous expedition, by which the protector hoped to make himself master of the Spanish West Indies; where, though his forces did not succeed in their main design, yet they made themselves masters of Jamaica, which island has remained ever since part of the British dominions. The alliance which had been so long in treaty with the crown of France, was signed Nov. 24, 1655, and proclaimed the 28th; by which it was stipulated, that Cromwell should send over a body of English troops, to act in conjunction with the French agaiust the Spaniards in the Low Countries; and that, on the other hand, the French king should oblige the royal family to quit his dominions. The new king of Sweden sent over an ambassador to compliment the protector. He was most graciously received; but the intended visit of queen Christina, who had just resigned the crown, he judged proper to avoid. The glorious successes of admiral Blake in the Mediterranean, and the great sums he recovered from several powers for depredations committed by their subjects on the English merchants, did much honour to the protector’s government; and to conclude the transactions of this year, it must be allowed, that how much soever Ire might be disliked at home, his reputation at this time was very great abroad.

Odious as Cromwell’s reign had been, many marks of public approbation were bestowed upon his memory. The poems of Waller, Sprat, and Dryden, though the authors lived to change their sentiments, give a very high idea of him, but allowance must be made for poetical evidence. In his life-time his actions had been celebrated by the learned abroad, as well as by his own secretary Milton at home; and with these panegyrics he seems not to have been displeased. We have indeed various characters of him from persons of various sentiments; yet in most of these there seems to be a mixture of flattery or prejudice. His panegyrists knew not where to stop their praises; and his enemies were as extravagant in their censures. Lord Hollis, in his “Memoirs,” will hardly allow him any great or good qualities; and one principal design of Ludiow’s Memoirs is to represent him as the vilest oi men. Cowley seems to have excelled all others, as well in respect to the matter as the manner of representing him in the different lights of praise and censure; so that his performance may justly be esteemed the most perfect of any, as it is beyond comparison the most beautiful. It is said, that cardinal Mazarine styled him a fortunate madman: but father Orleans, who relates this, dislikes that character, and would substitute in its place that of a judicious villain. Clarendon calls him a brave, wicked man: and Burnet is of opinion, that “his life and his arts were exhausted together; and that, if he had lived longer, he would scarce have been able to preserve his power.” But this only proves, that the bishop did not discern what resources he had. “how blameworthy soever the protector might have been in the acquisition of his high office, or how wickedly soever he acquired it, certain it is, he rivalled the greatest of the English monarchs in glory, and made himself courted and dreaded by the nations around him. The peace he gave the Dutch was honourable to himself and the nation; and whether he acted prudently or not in breaking with Spain, and allying himself with France, the inequality between the two crowns was far from being as visible then as it has since appeared, and Cromwell always had it in his power to throw himself into the opposite scale if necessary; and he distinguished himself by his interposition in behalf of the persecuted subjects of the French crown. His own government was, however, far from being free from blame. His edict against the episcopal clergy was very cruel, as it deprived them in a good measure of their maintenance, and liberty of worshiping God in a way that appeared best to their own understandings. The cavaliers had hard measure from him, as they were almost without exception subjected to heavy taxes and other inconveniences, on account of the rashness and imprudence of some of their party. Nor must we forget his institution of major-generals, who, in a variety of instances, lorded over an oppressed country; nor his sometimes making use of packed juries, and displacing judges for refusing to follow his directions, establishing high-commission courts, and so frequently violating the privileges of parliament.” Concessions like these make part of the character of Oliver Cromwell, as drawn by Mr. Harris, a professed advocate: but when he attempts to vindicate his illegal and tyrannical actions, on the ground of his being disappointed of regal power, and that had he accepted the kingship, which was offered by his parliament, a firmer settlement and a milder administration might have taken place, there seems little reason to doubt but the support even of that rank, considering the dangerous and uncertain terms on which he must have held it, would have urged him to the same violent and unwarrantable measures. Such biographers as Harris are generally employed in striking a balance between good and bad deeds; but it is not a few of the former that can redeem the character of Cromwell, who has been more justly said to be the strangest compound of villainy and virtue, baseness and magnanimity, absurdity and good sense, that we find upon record in the annals of mankind.

For his conduct towards foreign courts, it is certain that he carried his authority very far; and perhaps the English honour never stood higher. The queen of Sweden paid great respect to him, who, to express his regard for her on the other side, hung her picture in his bed-chamber. He treated very haughtily the kings of Denmark and Portugal; and obliged the ambassador of the latter to come and sign the peace at Whitehall, the very morning his brother was executed on Tower-hill. He refused the title of cousin from the French king, expecting that of brother; and so artfully played the Spaniard with him at a critical conjuncture, that the two crowns contended for his friendship with an earnestness which made them both ridiculous. Their advances were so extraordinary, and their acts of submission so singular, that the Dutch struck a medal, with the bust of Cromwell and his titles on one side, with Britannia on the other, and Cromwell laying his head in her lap with his breeches down and his posteriors bare, the Spanish ambassador stooping to kiss them, while the French ambassador holds him by the arm, with these words inscribed, “Retire toi, l'honneur appartient au roi mon maitre:” that is, “Keep back; that honour belongs to the king my master.”