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

, peer of France, prince of Leon, colonel general of the Swiss and Grisons, one of the greatest men France produced in his age, was born August 21, 1572, at the castle of Blein, in Bretany. He distinguishcd himself at the siege of Amiens when but sixteen, in presence of Henry IV. who had a sincere regard for him, and alter the death of that prince he hccame chief of the French protestants, to whom he rendered the most important services, both at the head of their armies, and in negociations. He fought with success in Holland, Germany, Italy, and France, and carried on three wars against Louis XIII. in favour of the protestants; the last, however, ended to the advantage of the catholics, in the capture of llochelle. But notwithstanding the consternation into which this event threw the duke’s party, he supported himself by those copious resources with which his prudence furnished him, refusing to surrender but on advantageous terms, and these were granted by the peace of 1629. The civil wars with the protestants being thus terminated, he regained the favour of Louis XIII. but not choosing to live at court, retired to Venice, and was chosen by that republic for their generalissimo, after the unfortunate battle of Valleggio, against the Imperialists, but the treaty of Querasque, concluded June '2[, 1631, rendered his plans useless. The king of France afterwards employed him as ambassador extraordinary to the Orisons, to assist them in reducing to obedience the Valteline, and counties of Bormio, and Chiavenes, which were supported in rebellion by the Spaniards and Imperialists. The Orisons immediately declared him their general, and their choice was confirmed by Louis XIII. who appointed him in 1632, ambassador extraordinary to the Helvetic body; but early in 1635, he received orders to return to Venice, and having staid there some months, was sent back to the Orisons, and seized the passages of the Valteline, took Bormio, Chiavenes, and Riva, and defeated the Germans and Spaniards. The Grisons having rebelled some time after because France delayed to withdraw its forces, he made a new treaty with them March 26, 1637, which did not please the court, and this circumstance obliged him to retire to Geneva, that he might avoid the resentment of cardinal Richelieu; but he left that city in January 1638, to join his friend the duke of Saxe Weimar, who was going to engage the Imperialists near Rhinfeld. The duke of Jiohan placed himself at the head of the Nassau regiment, broke through the enemies’ ranks, was woundcd, Feb. 28, 1638, and died of his wounds, April 13 following, aged fifty-nine. He was the author of many works, among which are, 1. “Memoirs,” the most complete edition of which is in 2 vols. 12mo, containing the transactions of trance from 16 10 to 1629. 2. “Les intérésts des Princes,” 12mo. 3. “Le parfait Capitaine, ou P Abregé des Guerres des Commentaires de Cesar,” 12mo. 4. “Memoires” and Letters, relative to the war of the Valtelines, 3 vols. 12mo; vol. I. contains the “Memoirs;” the two others, the “Pieces Justificatives,” the greatest part of which had never been printed before. From the preface we learn the following anecdote: This nobleman being at Venice, was informed that the grand signor would sell him this kingdom of Cyprus, and grant him the investureof it, on condition of his giving the Porte two hundred thousand crowns, and agreeing to pay an annual tribute of twenty thousand crowns. The duke being a protestant, intended to purchase this island, and settle the protestant families of France and Germany there. He negociated the affair skilfully with the Porte, by means of the patriarch Cyril, with whom he was much connected; but that patriarch’s death, and other unexpected incidents, prevented the execution of his design. The above anecdote originated in the memoirs of the duchess of Rohan, Margaret de Bethune, daughter of the great Sully, who married at Paris, Henry de Rohan, February 7, 1605. This lady, who was a protestant, rendered herself celebrated by her courage. She defended Castres against the marechal de Thémines, 1625, lived in strict conjugal harmony with the duke her husband, and died at Paris, Oct. 22, 1660. The French biographers tell us that all Henry de Rohan’s works are excellent, and extremely proper to form good soldiers: he writes like a great general and able politician, and his letters on the war of the mountains are very instructive. The duke trod in the steps of Sertorius, which he had learned from Plutarch, and the marechal de Catinat trod in those of the duke. To all these uncommon talents, the duke joined great sweetness of temper, the most affable and pleasing manners, and a degree of generosity seldom seen. He discovered neither pride, ambition, nor selfish views; and frequently said, that glory and zeal for the public welfare, never encamp where private interest is the commander. We have two good lives of this great man, one by Fauvelet du Toe, Paris, 1666, 12mo, the other by the Abbé Perau, Paris, 1767, 2 vols. 12mo. Some notice may be taken of Benjamin de Rohan, brother of the preceding, who supported the duke’s undertakings during the protestant war, after having learned the military art in Holland under prince Maurice of Nassau. He made himself master of Lower Poiton, 1622, and went into England soon after to solicit help for the Roohellers. In 1625, he took the isle of Rhe, and ravaged the whole coast from the mouth of the Garonne to that of the Loire, by the capture of several merchant ships. M. Rohan was driven from the isle of Rhe some time after, then from that of Oleron, and forced to retire into England, where he was active in procuring the succour sent to Rochelle; but that city being taken, notwithstanding these succours, he would not return to France, and died in England 1630, leaving no children.

, sister of the duke de Rohan, deserves also to be mentioned as a zealous supporter of the reformed religion during the civil wars, in which period she sustained with great courage the hardships of the siege of Rochelie, and, with her mother, refused to be comprehended in the capitulation, choosing rather to remain a prisoner of war. She was celebrated among her party for her piety and courage, and generally respected for her learning and capacity. She was also admired for her poetical talents; particularly for a poem written on the death of Henry IV. of France. She studied the Old Testament in the original language, and used in her devotions the Hebrew Psalms. She died unmarried, September 20, 1646, at Paris, in the sixty-second year of her age. The celebrated Anna Maria Schurman addressed some letters to this lady, which are in the collection of her works.

, wife of one of the republican ministers of France, who signed the order for the execution of the king, was born at Paris in 1754. She was the daughter of an engraver, and acquired some skill in music and painting, and a general taste for the fine arts. In 1780 she married Roland, and in 1787 visited Switzerland and England, and in these countries is said to have acquired that ardent attachment to the principles of liberty, which was in general so little understood by her countrymen. M. Roland having been appointed inspector of the manufactories at Lyons, was deputed to the constituent assembly, to obtain from it succours necessary for the payment of the debt of that town. Madame Roland at this period settled with her husband in the capital, and took delight in making her house the rendezvous of the Brissotine party, and among them acquired such superiority, that her biographers would have us believe that, for a time, she was the secret power that directed the whole government of France; perhaps one reason why it was so ill directed. Jn Marcji 1792, when the king endea r voured to allay the public discontents, by appointing 3, popular administration, Roland was chosen minister or the interior, and what kind of minister he was may be conjectured from a speech of Danton’s. When Roland resigned, and was urgently pressed by the assembly to resume his functions, Dan ton exclaimed, “if we give an invitation to Roland, we must give one to his wife too. I know all the virtues of the minister, but we want men who see otherwise than by their wives.” Indeed this lady, who had a remarkably good opinion of herself, informs us in her memoirs that she was in fact the minister without the name; and revised, or perhaps dictated, the letter which Roland addressed to the king on going out of office; “if he had written sermons,” said she, “I should have done the same.” On the 7th of December, 1792, having appeared at the bar of the national convention, to repel a denunciation made against her, she spoke with ease and eloquence, and was afterwards admitted to the honours of a sitting. She presented herself there again, when the decree was passed against her husband; but then, her eloquence having lost its charms, she was refused a hearing, and was herself sent to the Abbaye. From this prison she wrote to the assembly, and to the minister of the interior; her section also demanded her liberty, but it was in vain; and on the 24th of June, 1793, she was sent to the convent of St. Pelagic, which had been converted into a prison, where she passed her time in consoling her fellow prisoners, and composing an account of her own life, which has since been published. At length she was called before the revolutionary tribunal, and on Nov. 8, was condemned to death for having conspired against the unity and indivisibility of the republic. Her execution immediately followed. On passing the statue of liberty, in the Place de la Revolution, she bent her head towards it, exclaiming, “O Liberty, how many crimes are perpetrated in thy name.” She left one daughter, whose only provision was her mother’s writings, which are as follows: “Opuscules,” on moral topics, which treat of the soul, melancholy, morality, old age, friendship, love, retirement, &c. “Voyage en Angleterre et en Suisse;” and when in prison she composed what she entitled “Appel a Timpartiale Posterite”,“containing her own private memoirs, a strange mixture of modern philosophy and the current politics of the revolution, with rhapsodies of romance, and every thing that can shew the dangers of a <* little learning.” Although this work was written when. she was in hourly expectation of death, its principal characteristics are levity and vanity. She was unquestionably a woman of considerable abilities, and might have been, what we are told she was very ambitious of, a second Macauley, without exciting the envy of the amiable part of her sex; but she would be the head of a political party that was to guide the affairs of a distracted nation, and she fell a sacrifice to the confusion of principle in which she had assisted.

The following catalogue of Mr. Rolt’s publications, is subjoined to his proposals in 1769. But many of them were published without his name, and in weekly numbers. In folio, he published, 1. “A Dictionary of Trade and Commerce; dedicated, by permission, to George Lord Anson.” To this Johnson wrote the preface. 2. “Lives of the Reformers dedicated to the Princess Dowager of Wales” a decent compilation, but most valued for a fine set of mezzotinto heads. In quarto, 3. “Life of John earl of Craufurd; dedicated to his grace James duke of Hamilton.” In octavo, &c. 4. <f History of the General War from 1733 to 1748,“4 vols. 1st volume dedicated to admiral Vernon; 2d, to John earl Grenville; 3d, to his grace Charley duke of Marlborough; 4th to George Dunk, earl of Halifax. 5.” Universal Visitor, with several Songs.“(la this he joined with Christopher Smart, as is before-mentioned.) 6.” Account of capt. Northall’s Travels through Italy.“7.” Letters concerning the Antigallican privateer.“8.” Case of Clifford against the Dutch West India Company.“9.” Reply to the Anssver of the Dutch Civilians to Clifford’s Case.“10.” History of England,“4 vols. 11.” History of France,“vol. 12.” History of Egypt,“4 vols. 13.” History of Greece,“6 vols. 14.” Cambria; inscribed to Prince George“(his present majesty.) 15.” Eliza,“an English opera. 16.” Aljnena,“an English opera. 17.” A Monody on the Dqath oC Frederic Priace of Wales.“18.” An Elegiac Ode t* the memory of Edward Augustus, Duke of York.“19.” A Poem on the Death of sir Watkin Williams Wynne, bart.“20.” Shakspeare in Elysium to Mr. Garrick.“21.” The Ancient Rosciad," published in 1753.

, a brave naval officer, was born in Kent, 1650, of an ancient and honourable family. His father, sir William Rooke, knight, qualified him by a proper education for a liberal profession but was at last obliged to give way to his inclination to the navy. His first station was that of a volunteer, from which his merit raised him by regular steps to be vice-admiral, and one of the council to prince George of Denmark, lord high admiral. He had the command of several expeditions in the reigns of William and Anne, in which his conduct and courage were eminently displayed. The former appeared in his behaviour on the Irish station, when he was sent as commodore with a squadron to assist in the reduction of that kingdom; in his wise and prudent management when he preserved so great a part of the Smyrna fleet, which fortune had put into the hands of the French, who suffered themselves to be deprived of an immense booty by the superior skill of this admiral; but more particularly in the taking of Gibraltar, which was a project conceived and executed in less than a week, though it has since endured sieges of not only months but years, and more than once baffled the united forces of France and Spain. Of his courage he gave abundant testimonies, but especially in burning the French ships at La Hogue, and in the battle of Malaga, where he behaved with all the resolution of a British admiral; and, as he was first in command, was first also in danger; and all times must preserve the memory of his glorious action at Vigo.

His executor, conformably to his intentions, gave a complete and beautiful edition of his works at Paris, 1743, in 3 vols. 4to, and also in 4 vols. 12mo, They contain odes, epistles, epigrams, and comedies, in verse; and a collection of letters, in prose; and have procured him the Character of the best lyric poet of France. Voltaire, who is not supposed to have done justice to Rousseau, owns, however, that “his odes are beautiful, diversified, and abound with images; that, in his hymns, he equals the harmony and devotion observable in the spiritual songs of Racine; and that his epigrams are finished with greater care than those of Marot. He was not,” continues the critic, “so successful in operas, which require sensibility; nor in comedies, which cannot succeed without gaiety. la both these qualities he was deficient; and therefore failed in operas and comedies, as being foreign to his genius.”

It becomes necessary now to recur to some particulars of Rousseau’s more public and literary life, which was in many respects as censurable as his private. The commencement of his literary career was in 1750. The academy of Dijon had proposed the question, “Whether the revival of the arts and sciences has contributed to the refinement of manners.” Rousseau, it is said, at first inclined to the affirmative side of the question; but Diderot told him it was a kind of pons asinorum, and advised him to support the negative, and he would answer for his success. Nor was he disappointed, for this paradoxical discourse was allowed to be admirably written, and replete with the deepest reasoning, and was publicly crowned with the approbation of the academicians. Several answers appeared Against it, one of which was written by Stanislaus, king of Poland, who was, however, so much an admirer of Rousseau, that when the latter was ridiculed on the stage of Nancy, by Palissot, in his “Comedie des Philosophes,” the king, then duke of Lorraine, deprived Palissot of his place at the academy of Nancy. On this occasion Rousseau, with far more sense, interceded for him, and obtained his restoration. In 1752 Rousseau wrote a comedy entitled “Narcisse, ou PAmant de lui-meme.” He also composed a musical entertainment of “Le Devin du Village,” which was represented with the greatest success at Paris. His next piece was “Lettre sur la Musique Franchise,” which was to prove that the French had no such thing as vocal music, and that, from the defects in their language, they could not have it. This able work so excited the resentment of the French, that he is said to have been burnt in effigy. In 1754- he returned to Geneva, where he abjured the catholic faith, and was restored to the rights of citizenship. He now wrote his e< Discours sur les Causes de l'inegalite parmi les Hommes, et sur TOrigine des Societes.“This endeavour to prove that all mankind are equal has (in the opinion of a modern critic, by no means partial to Rousseau’s character) been much misunderstood by critics, and misrepresented by wits. Even by the author’s confession, it is rather ajeu d'esprit than a philosophical inquiry; for he owns that the natural state, such as he represents it, did probably never take place, and probably never will; and if it had taken place, he seems to think it impossible that mankind should ever have emerged from it without some very extraordinary alteration in the course of nature. He also says that this natural state is not the most advantageous for man; for that the most delightful sentiments of the human mind could not exert themselves till man had relinquished his brutal and solitary nature, and become a domestic animal. At this period, and previous to the establishment of property, he places the age most favourable to human happiness; which is precisely what the poets have done before him, in their descriptions of the golden age. After publishing this rhapsody, Rousseau did not remain long at Geneva, but returned to France, and lived some time at Paris, after which he retired to Montuiorency, and published, in 1758, his” Lettre“to M. D‘Alembert on the design of establishing a theatre at Geneva, which he proved could not be necessary in a place circumstanced as Geneva was. D’Alembert and Marmontel, however, replied, and Voltaire appears from this time to have begun his hatred for Rousseau, with whom he and the rest of the philosophers had hitherto cordially co-operated against the Christian religion. Rousseau wanted that uniform hatred to revealed religion which the others called consistency, and his fancy was apt to ramble bevond the limits they had set. In 1760 he published his 'celebrated novel entitled” Lettres de clt ux A mans,“c. bui generally known by the title of” Julie, ou la Nnuvelie Heloise.“This epistolary romance, of which the plofc is ill-managed, and the arrangement bad, like all other works of genius, has its beauties as well as its defects. Some of the letters are, indeed, admirable, both for style and sentiment, but none of the personages are reaily interesting. The character of St. Preux is weak, and often forced. Julia is an assemblage of tenderness and pity, of elevation af soul, and of coquetry, of natural parts and pedancry. Wolmar is a violent man, and almost beyond the limits of nature. In fine, when he wishes to change his style, and adopt that of the speaker, he does not long support it, and every attempt embarrasses the author and cools the reader. In this novel, however, Rousseau’s talent of rendering every thing problematical, appears very conspicuous, as, in his arguments in favour of, and against, duelling, which afford an apology for suicide, and a just condemnation of it; of his facility in palliating the crime of adultery, aud his strong reasons to make it abhorred; on the one hand, in declamations against social happiness, on the other in transports in favour of humanity; here in violent rhapsodies against philosophers; there by a rage for adopting their opinions; the existence of God is attacked by sophistry, and atheists confuted by the most irrefragable arguments; the Christian religion combated by the most specious objections, and celebrated by the most sublime eulogies. Yet in the preface to this work the author attempts to justify his consistency; he says public spectacles are necessary for great cities, and romances for a corrupted people.” I have,“he adds,” viewed the manners of my age, and have published these letters. Why did I not live at a time when I ought to have thrown them into the fire?“He affects also to say that they were not intended for an extensive circulation, and that they will suit but few readers. With regard to their effects on the female sex, he pretends to satisfy his conscience with saying” No chaste young woman ever reads romance^; and I have given this book a decisive title, that on opening it a reader may know what to expect. She who, notwithstanding, shall dare to read a single page, is undone; but let her not impute her ruin to me the mischief was done before.“Such is the impudence of this man, who had made his work as seductive as possible, and would have been greatly mortified if it had not produced its effect. Whoever, indeed, reads his” Confessions“will see that sensuality was, first and last, his predominant vice, and that moral corruption became early familiar to him. The only wonder is, that he should ever have been considered as a moral teacher, because, in order to introduce his depraved sophistry with more effect, he mixed with it some moral lessons. Yet there was a time when this was a favourite work even in our country, and it is to be feared, has been the pattern of many others, which, although written with less ability, have been encouraged in the same circles which once gave a fashion to Rousseau. His next attempt was to recommend republicanism in a work entitled” Du Contrat Social, ou Principes du Droit Politiqtie,“in which he bore his part, along with the Encyclopaedists, in exciting those awful delusions which produced the French revolution and all its disastrous consequences. It was, however, less cautious than some of his former productions, and was immediately prohibited in France and Switzerland; and hence his lasting enmity to all existing establishments, civil and religious, which brought on what he and his friends were pleased to consider as persecution. This appeared particularly in his” Emilie, ou de l'Education,“which was published in 1762. In this work, with many remarks that may be useful, there are others so mischievous and impious, that whenever it produces an effect, it must be of the worst kind. It was not, however, his dogmas on education only, which excited the public hostility to this work, so much as his insolent declamation against all which the world had agreed to hold sacred, mixed, as in his former novel, with an affected admiration of the morals of the gospel, and the character of its founder; and it is remarkable that, in this last condescension, he so much displeased his former colleagues, Voltaire, D'Alembert, &c. that they joined the public voice, although from different and concealed motives. In truth, they thought, like others, that there was too much of an insane inconsistency about Rousseau, and that no party could rank him among its supporters. In the mean time, as soon as published, the French parliament condemned this book, and entered into a criminal prosecution against the author, which forced him to a precipitate retreat. He directed his steps to his native country, but Geneva shut her gates against him, and both at Paris and Geneva, the” Emile“was burnt by the common hangman. At length he was for a time allowed to take shelter in Switzerland, where he published a letter to the archbishop of Paris, in answer to his tnandement for the burning of the” Emile;“and also his” JLettres de la Montagne,“in which occurs the following almost blasphemous paragraph:” How,“says he,” can I enter into a justification of this work? I, who think that I have effaced by it the faults of my whole life; I, who place the evils it has drawn upon me as a balance to those which I have committed; I who, filled with confidence, hope one day to say to the supreme Arbiter, ‘ Deign in thy clemency to judge a weak mortal:’ I have, it is true, done much ill upon earth, but I have published this writing.“In these letters too, he continued his hostility to revealed religion, in a manner that excited against him great indignation among the clergy of Neufchatel; and in September 1765, the populace attacked his house and his person, and with much difficulty he reached Strasburg in a very destitute condition, where he waited till the weather permitted, and then set out for Paris, and appeared in the habit of an Armenian. The celebrated Hume at this time resided in Paris, and being applied to in favour of Rousseau, undertook to find him an asylum in England, to which he accordingly conducted him in the beginning of the year 1766, and provided him with an agreeable situation. But Rousseau, whose vanity and perverse temper were ungovernable, and who thought he was not received in this country with the respect due to the first personage in Europe, which he conceived himself to be, took it in his head that Hume was in league with the French philosophers to injure his lame, and after abusing his benefactor in a letter, in the most gross manner, and even refusing a pension from the crown, left England in 1767, and went to France. At this period he published his” Dictionnaire de Musique.“Of this work Dr. Burney, after pointing out some defects, says, that” more good taste, intelligence, and extensive views are to be found in his original articles, not only than in any former musical dictionary, but in all the books on the subject of music which the literature of France can boast. And his ` Lettre sur la Musique Frangois,' may be safely pronounced the best piece of musical criticism that has ever been produced in any modern language. It must, however, be confessed, that his treatment of French music is very sarcastic, not to say contemptuous; but the music, the national character avantageux, and exclusive admiration of their own music, required strong Ian* guage. It had been proved long since, that they were not to be laughed out of their bad taste in any one of the fine arts: the national architecture, painting, and sculpture, were, in general, bad, and not what a traveller returning from Italy could bear to look at: though there have been now and then individual French artists of every kind, who have travelled and studied antiquity as well as the great masters of the Italian school; and it is now said, that at the Institute they are trying seriously to correct their errors, and to establish a classical taste throughout the empire."

, a learned Benedictine of the congregation de St. Maur, was born at Conches in Normandy in 16 58. He made profession, September 23, 1680, and distinguished himself in his order, by his genius and talents for the pulpit; but preferring the tranquillity of a private life, retired to Rheims, where he made a good French translation of St. Jerome’s “Letters,” which was reprinted, 1713, 3 vols. 8vo; and an elegant “Eulogy on Pere Mabillon.” He undertook also the Literary History of France, but had scarcely traced out his plan, and collected some materials on that subject, when he died at Argenteuil, October 5, 1717, aged fifty-nine. The plan was completed by father Rivet.

Like many other scholars of that day, he added political skill to his literary accomplishments, and held some offices of trust and importance. In 1480 he was chosen gonfalonier of justice and four years after, the republic appointed him ambassador to the state of Genoa, which was folloxved by three other embassies, one to Ferdinand king of Naples, and two to Charles VIII. king of France. During the revolutions which took place at Naples about the end of the fifteenth century, Ruccellai took a part, for which some Florentine historians censure him but whether his Conduct was patriotic or factious, is not very clear, although the former is most probable. He died in 1514, and was interred in the church of St. Maria Novella, the fagade of which, begun by his father, he finished with great magnificence.

, the third son of the preceding, and for whose sake indeed some account was thought necessary of his father, was born about 16H. Hi? was bred up in those principles of liberty for which his father had fought, but in his youth partook freely of the dissipations of the court of Charles II. until his marriage in 1667 reclaimed him, and he became afterwards a sedate and unblemished character, as to morals. He represented the county of Bedford in four parliaments, and was considered as one of the heads of the whig party. The first affair, however, in which he co-operated with this party, has thrown some obscurity on his character. When Charles II. exasperated against the court of France for withdrawing the pension he had been mean enough hitherto to receive, wished to join the continental confederacy against Louis XIV. the whigs, who dreaded the giving Charles an army that might as likely be employed against their own country as against France, raised an opposition to the measure; and this being acceptable to the French king, an intrigue commenced between some of the vvhigs and Barillon, the French ambassador, the consequence of which was their receiving bribes from him to thwart the measures of the court. Sir John Dalrymple has given a list of the members who thus accepted money from the enemy of their country; and although lord Russel is said positively to have refused to act so meanly, there seems little reason to doubt that he was concerned in the intrigue. The defence set up for him on this occasion amounts tolittle more than that in certain cases the means may be justified by the end.

, historiographer to the king, and one of the forty members of the French academy, was born 1605, at Paris, and was the son of Isaac Ryer, who died about 1631, and has left some “Pastoral Poems.” Peter Ryer gained some reputation by his translations, though they were not exact, his urgent engagements with the booksellers preventing him from reviewing and correcting them properly. He obtained the place of king’s secretary in 1616, but having married imprudently, sold it in 1633, was afterwards secretary to Caesar duke de Vendome, and had a brevet of historiographer of France, with a pension from the crown. He died November 6, 1658, at Paris, aged fifty-three, leaving French translations of numerous works. Du Ryer’s style is pure and smooth; he wrote with great ease, both in verse and prose, and could doubtless have furnished the publick with very excellent works, had not the necessity of providing for his family, deprived him of leisure to polish and bring them to perfection. He also wrote nineteen tragedies, among which “Alcyonee,” “Saul,” and “Scevole,” are still remembered.

, an eminent engraver, was born in London in the year 1732. His genius for the fine arts manifested itself at an early period of his life, and he was accordingly placed under Ravenet. At the expiration of his engagement he was patronized by his godfather sir Watkin Williams Wynne, and went to Paris, where, for five years, under the guidance of Boucher, who at that time led the fashion in art, he applied with great assiduity to the study of drawing, but did not neglect to improve himself also in the practical part of engraving. From the designs of this principal misleader of the taste of France, Ryland engraved several plates, of which the principal and probably the best engraving he ever performed, is rather a large work, of which the subject is “Jupiter and Leda.” In this he has displayed great power as an engraver in lines. The print has a fine transparent tone; he has tempered the flimsy touchiness of the French taste with a portion of Ravenet’s solidity; the soft firmness of flesh is ably characterized in the figure of Leda, and the delicacy of the swan, and various textures of the surrounding objects, are rendered with much feeling and judicious subserviency to the principal parts. Such other proofs did he give of his abilities, as to obtain an honorary gold medal, which entitled him to pursue his studies at the academy in Rome, which he afterwards did with great success. From Boucher, however, he acquired a false taste, which diverted his talents from the mark at which he was evidently and successfully aiming when he produced his “Jupiter and Leda;” and this error was heightened by the fashion of stippling which he learned in France, and introduced, with his own modifications, into England. Ryland employed stippling, so as rather to imitate such drawings as are stumped than such as are hatched with chalk, by which means he softened down all energy of style, and has left posterity to regret the voluntary emasculation of the powers he had manifested in his “Jupiter and Leda.”

He refused several engagements which were offered him from Russia, Portugal, and even France, but this last he at length accepted, in hopes of an establishment for life. A-ccordingly he went thither in 1781, but it is manifest in the operas that he composed for Paris, that he worked for singers of mean abilities; which, besides the airs being set to French words, prevented their circulation in the rest of Europe, which his other vocal productions in his own language had constantly done. At Paris, however, he was almost adored, but returned the following year to London, where he only augmented his debts and embarrassments; so that, in 1784, he took a final leave of this country, and settled at Paris, where he not only obtained a pension from the queen of France, but the theatrical pension, in consequence of three successful pieces. This graceful, elegant, and judicious composer died, at Paris, October 8, 1786.

Having by these productions established the reputation of being the best poet in his time, he laid down his pen, and assumed the character of the statesman, in which he also became very eminent. He found leisure, however, to make the tour of France and Italy; and was on some account or other in prison at Rome, when the news arrived of his father sir Richard Sackville’s death in 1566. Upon this, he obtained his release,‘ returned home, ente’red into the possession of a vast inheritance, and soon after was promoted to the peerage by the title of lord Buckhurst. He enjoyed this accession of honour and fortune too liberally for a while, but soon saw his error. Some attribute his being reclaimed to' the queen,- but others say, that the indignity of being kept in waiting by an alderman, of whom he had occasion to 1 borrow money, made so deep an impression oft him,“ibat he resolved from that moment to be an eeconomisi. By the queen he was received into particalar favour, and employed in many very important affairs- In 1587 he was sent ambassador to the United Provinces’,” upon 1 their complaints against the earl of Leicester 'j and y though he discharged that nice and hazardous trust with- great integrity, yet the favourite prevailed with his mistress to call him home, and confine him to his house for nine Or ten months; which command lord Buckhurst is said to have submitted to so obsequiously, than in all the time he never would endure, openly or secretly, by day or by night, to see either wife or child. His enemy, however, dying, her majesty’s favour returned to him more strongly than ever. He was made knight of the garter in 1590; and chancellor of Oxford in 1591, by the queen’s special interposition. In 1589 he was joined with the treasurer Burleigh in negotiating a peace with Spain; and, upon the death of Burleigh the same year, succeeded him in his office; by virtue of which he became in a manner prime minister, and as such exerted himself vigorously for the public good and her majesty’s safety.

, one of the promoters of the reformation, was born in 1534, at the castle of Chabot in the Maconais, and was descended of a noble and ancient family of the Forez. His father dying when he was very young, the care of his education devolved on his mother, who sent him to Paris, where he first was initiated in the principles of the Protestant religion. These he afterwards became better acquainted with at Thoulouse and Geneva, when introduced to Calvin and Beza. On the death of an uncle he was recalled home, and again sent to Paris, in consequence of a contest respecting the will of that uncle, who had left considerable property. While here, becoming more attached to the cause of the reformation, he was induced to study divinity, instead of law, for which he had been originally intended; and such was his progress and the promising appearance of his talents and zeal, that at the age of twenty, he was invited to preach to the congregation of the reformed at Paris. Their assembling, however, was attended with great danger; and, in 1557, when they met to celebrate the sacrament, about 150 were apprehended and thrown into prison, their pastors only escaping. The priests having circulated various scandalous reports of this meeting, which the judges found to be false, Sadeel was employed by his brethren in drawing up a vindication of them. Next year he was himself taken up, and imprisoned, but the king of Navarre, who had often been one of his hearers, immediately sent to the officers to release him, as being one of his own suite, and when they refused, went in person to the prison, complained of the affront, and released Sadeel. It nor, how^ ever, being thought safe for him to remain at this crisis in Paris, he retired for some time to Orleans, and when the danger seemed to be over, returned again, and drew up a Confession of Faith, first proposed in a synod of the reformed clergy of France, held at Paris, which was presented to the king by the famous admiral Coligni. The king dying soon after, and the queen and the family of Guise renewing with more fury than ever the persecution of the reformed, Sadeel was obliged again to leave the metropolis, which, however, he continued occasionally to visit when it could be done without danger.

, an eminent English statesman, was born in 1507, at Hackney, in Middlesex. He was the son of Henry Sadler, who, though a gentleman by birth, and possessed of a fair inheritance, seems to have been steward or surveyor to the proprietor of the manor of Gillney, near Great Hadham, in Essex. Ralph in early life gained a situation in the family of Thomas Cromwell, earl of Essex, and by him was introduced to the notice of Henry VIII. who took him into his service, but at what time is not very clear. He was employed in the great work of dissolving the religious houses, and had his full share of the spoil. In 1537, he commenced a long course of diplomatic services, byan embassy to Scotland, whose monarch was then absent in France. The objects of his mission were to greet the queen dowager, to strengthen the English interests in the councils of regency which then governed Scotland, and to discover the probable consequences of the intimate union of Scotland with France. Having collected such information as he could procure on these topics, he returned in the beginning of the following year, but went again to Scotland soon after, ostensibly to maintain a good correspondence between the two crowns, but really, as appears from his state-papers, to detach the king of Scotland from the councils of cardinal Beaton, who was at the head of the party most in the interest of France. He was instructed also to direct the king’s attention to the overgrown possessions of the church as a source of revenue, and to persuade him to imitate his uncle Henry VHIth’s conduct to the see of Rome, and to make common cause with England against France. In all this, however, he appears to have failed, or at least to have left Scotland without having materially succeeded in any part of his. mission.

Upon his arrival at Paris, he received an invitation from the Pretender, then at Barr, to engage in his service: which he at first absolutely refused, and thought it wiser to make the best application, that his present circumstances would admit, to prevent the progress of his prosecution in England. While this was in doubt, he retired into Dauphine“, where he continued till the beginning of July; and then, upon receiving unfavourable news from some of iiis party in England, he complied with a second invitation from the Pretender; and, taking the seals of the secretary’s office at Commercy, set out with them for Paris, and arrived thither the latter end of the same month, in order to procure from that court the necessary succours for his new master’s intended invasion of England. The vote for impeaching him of high treason had passed in the House of Commons the June preceding; and six articles were brought into the house, and read by Walpole, August 4, 1715, which were in substance as follows: 1.” That whereas he had assured the ministers of the States General, by order from her majesty in 1711, that she would make no peace but in concert with them; yet he sent Mr. Prior to France, that same year, with proposals for a treaty of peace with that monarch, without the consent of the allies.“2.” That he advised and promoted the making of a separate treaty or convention, with France, which was signed in September.“3.” That he disclosed to M. Mesnager, the French minister at London, this convention, which was the preliminary instruction to her majesty’s plenipotentiaries at Utrecht, in October.“4.” That her majesty’s final instructions to her said plenipotentiaries were disclosed by him to the abbot Gualtier, an emissary of France.“5.” That he disclosed to the French the manner how Tournay in Flanders might be gained by them.“6.” That he advised and promoted the yielding up of Spain and the West-Indies to the duke of Anjou, then an enemy to her majesty." These articles were sent up to the Lords in August; in consequence of which, he stood attainted of high-treason, September the 10th of the same year.

, in Latin Sammartbanus, is the name of a family in France, which produced many men of letters. The first, Gaucher de Sainte-Marthe, had a son Charles, born in 1512, who became physician to Francis II. and was remarkable for his eloquence. Queen Margaret of Navarre and the duchess of Vendome honoured him with their particular esteem; and when they died in 1550, he testified his grief by a funeral oration upon each, published the same year. That upon the queen was in Latin, the o.ther in French. There is also some Latin and French poetry of his in being. He died in 1555. Scevole, or Sclevola, the nephew of Charles, was born at Lou dun in 1536, and became very distinguished both in learning and business. He loved letters from his infancy, attained an intimate acquaintance with the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew tongues and became an orator, a lawyer, a poet, and an historian he is also represented as a good friend, zealous for his country, and of inviolable fidelity to his prince. He had, in the reigns of Henry III. and Henry IV. several considerable employments, which he filled with great reputation. In 1579, he was governor of Poitiers, and afterwards treasurer of France for this district. In 1593 and 1594, he exercised the office of intendant of the finances, in the army of Breta^ne, commanded by the duke de Montpensier: and, in the latter of these years, he reduced Poitiers to the subjection of Henry IV, Some time after, he conceived thoughts of retiring to his own country, and devoting the remainder of his life to contemplation: but was again made governor of Poitiers, in so honourable a manner that he could not decline it. Upon the expiration of this office, he went to Paris, and thence to Loudun, where he passed the rest of his days “in otio cum dignitate.” This town had been often protected from ruin in the civil wars merely by his credit, and therefore regarded hiui as its protector. He died there in 1623, universally regretted; and his funeral oration was pronounced by the famous Urban Graudier. He was the author of “La louange de la ville de Poitiers,” 1573; “Opera Poetica,” consisting of odes, elegies, epigrams, and sacred poems, in French and Luiin, 1575; “Gallorum doctrina illustrium elogia,” 1598:“hut ins chief work, and that which keeps his lame still alive in the republic of letters, is his work called” Paedotrophia, seu de puerorum eciucatione,“printed in 1584, and dedicated to Henry III. This poem^vent through ten editions in the author’s life time, and hath gone through, as many since. It was neatly printed at London in 1708, in 12mo, together with the” Calliurfdia“of Quillet. It is also printed with a complete edition of his and his son Abel’s works, under the title” Sammarthanorum patris et lilii opera Latina et Gallica, turn soluta oratione, turn versa scnpta,“Paris, 16:33, 4to. Scevole left several sons; of whom Abel, the eldest, born at Loudun in 1570, applied himself, like his father, to literature. He cultivated French and Latin poetry; the latter were printed with those of his father in the edition just mentioned, but are inferior to them. Lewis XIII. settled on him a pension, for the services he had -lone him, and made him a counsellor of state. In 1627, he was made librarian to the king at Fontainebleau; and had after that other commissions of importance. He died at Poitiers in 1652, where his” Opuscula Varia“were printed in 1645, 8vo. This Abe) had a son of his own name, born in 1630, and afterwards distinguished by his learning. He succeeded his father as librarian at Fontainebleau, and in that quality presented to Lewis XIV. in 1668,” Un Discours pour le r6tablissement de cette Bibliorheque." He died in 1706.

Scevole’s second and third sons, Scevole and Lewis, were born in 1571. They were twin-brothers, of the same temper, genius, and studies; with this difference only, that Scevole continued a layman, and married, wuile Lewis embraced the ecclesiastical state. They spent their lives together in perfect union, and were occupied in the same labours. They were both counsellors to the king, and historiographers of France. They were both interred at St. Severin in Paris, in the same grave though Scevole died in 1650, and Lewis did not die till 1656. They distinguished themselves by their knowledge, and in conjunction composed the “Galiia Christiana, seu series omnium Episc. &c. Francis,” of which there is an edition in 13 vols. folio, 17 15 1786, but three more volumes are yet necessary to complete it. Besides these, there were Denis, Peter Scevole, Abel Lewis, and Claude, de Sainte-Marthe, all men of learning, and who distinguished themselves by various publications; but their works are not of a nature to make a particular enumeration of them necessary here.

, a learned Jesuit of France, was born at Rouen in 1676. He taught polite literature with distinguished reputation at Caen, where he contracted an intimate friendship with Huet, bishop of Avranche. A taste for poetry is said to have been the principal bond of their union. He afterwards professed rhetoric at Paris; and was for some time charged with the education of the prince of Conti. He was librarian to the king when he died, September 2 I, 1733. He published separately various Latin poems, which are reckoned among the purest of modern times; and also published them in a collected form, “ Carnumim libri quatuor,” Paris, 1715, 12mo, and various theses and philological dissertations but is best known by his translation of the works of Horace with notes a work which has been very well received. The satires and epistles are ably translated; but the odes are rather weakened by a languid paraphrase than a version answerable to the original. His notes are learned, and many of them very useful for understanding his author; but there are also marks of a falsely delicate and fastidious taste, not uncommon among French critics. The best editions of his Horace are those of Paris, 1728, 2 vols. 4to, and 1756, 3 vols. 12mo.

In 1704 he published a translation of “Original Letters from William III. whilst Prince of Orange, to Charles II., Lord Arlington, and others, with an Account of the Prince’s Reception at Middleburgh, and his Speech on that occasion;” dedicating the book to lord Woodstock. He also wrote “A History of Henry V.” in the way of annals, in nine volumes, of which the first four have been lost, and the others still remain in manuscript amongst his papers. In 1714 he became a candidate for the place of historiographer to queen Anne, and received a very handsome offer of assistance from Matthew Prior, at that time ambassador to the court of France. His success, however, was prevented by the change of ministry which succeeded on the queen’s death. On the 28th of November, 1726, he was appointed usher of the high court of chancery, by sir Joseph Jekyll, the master of the rolls. He succeeded, in 1727, by the death of an elder brother, to a considerable landed property in Cumberland, the north riding of Yorkshire, and Durham. After this, though he continued chiefly to reside in London, he occasionally visited his country seat at Armathwaite castle, a mansion pleasantly situated on the banks of the Eden, about ten miles from Carlisle. He was married four times; for the last time to Elizabeth Hickes of London, when he had completed his 70th year. He died Dee. 25, 1741, at his house in Chancery-lane, in the 79th year of his age, and was buried in Red-Lion-Fields. He was a devout man, well read in divinity, attached to the forms of the church of England, and very regular in his attention to public and private worship. He was slightly acquainted with the Hebrew language, and conversant in the Greek, Latin, Spanish, Italian, and French. He made a choice collection of books in various languages, and left behind him several volumes of Mss. relating chiefly to history, and the court of chancery, and including a transcript of Thurloe’s State Papers. He kept a diary, in which he noted down, with minute attention, the slightest occurrences of his life. As he left no issue, his estates d^cended, on the death of his last wife, in 1753, to the family of Margaret, his eldest sister, married to Henry Milbourne, of Newcastle-upon-Tyne; whose great grandson, William Henry Milbourne, was high sheriff of Cumberland in 1794.

, brother of the preceding, was the seventh and youngest son of the archbishop of York, and was born at the archiepiscopal pala.ce of Bishopthorp in 1577. In 1588 he was sent to Oxford, and matriculated of St. Mary Hall. Wood is of opinion, that he afterwards removed to Corpus-Christi-coilege. How iang he resided in the university, or whether he took a degree, does not appear. In August 16 10, remarkable for the murder of king Henry IV“. of France, Mr. Sandys set out on his travels, and, in the course of. two years, made an extensive tour, having visited several parts of Europe, and many cities and countries of the East, as Constantinople, Greece, Egypt, and the Holy Land; after which, taking a view of the remote parts of Italy, he went to Rome and Venice, and, on his return, after properly digesting the observations he had made, published, in 1615, his well-known folio, the title of the 7th edition of which, in 1673, is,” Sandys* Travels, containing an history of the original and present state of the Turkish empire; their laws, government, policy, military force, courts of justice, and commerce. The Ma-^ hometan religion and ceremonies. A description of Constantinople, the grand signior’s seraglio, and his manner of living: also of Greece, with the religion and customs of the Grecians. Of Egypt; the antiquity, hieroglyphics, rites, customs, discipline, and religion, of the Egyptians, A voyage on the river Nilus. Of Armenia, Grand Cairo, Rhodes, the Pyramides, Colossus: the former flourishing and present state of Alexandria. A description of the Holy Land, of the Jews, and several sects of Christians Jiving there; of Jerusalem, Sepulchre of Christ, Temple of Solomon, and what else, either of antiquity orworth observation. Lastly, Italy described, and the islands adjoining; as Cyprus, Crete, Malta, Sicilia, the Eolian islands; of Rome, Venice, Naples, Syracusa, Mesena, jEtna, Scylla, and Charybdis; and other places of note. Illustrated with fifty maps and figures.“Most of the plates, especially those relating to Jerusalem and the Holy Land, are copied from the” Devotissimo Viaggio di Zualiardo, Roma,“1587, 4to. Of these travels there have been eight or ten editions published, and it still bears its reputation, his accounts having been verified by subsequent travellers. Mr. Markland has a copy of this work, edit. 1637, with a ms copy of verses by the author, which may be seen in the *' Censura Literaria,” but was first published at the end of his “Psalms,” 1640, 8vo.

The increasing celebrity of Sannazarius, as a scholar and poet, having attracted the notice of Ferdinand king of Naples, that monarch’s younger son, Frederick, who was greatly attached to poetry, invited him to court, and became his patron; he also grew into favour with Alphonsus, duke of Calabria, the next heir to the crown, and under him embraced a military life, and served in the Etruscan war. During his campaigns, Sannazarius continued to cultivate his poetical talent, and when in consequence of the series of misfortunes and deaths in the royal family, his patron Frederick came to the crown, he conceived the hope of very high honours, but obtained only a moderate annual pension, and a suburban villa, called Mergillina, to which, although at first he was chagrined, he became reconciled, and this villa' was afterwards the delight of his muse. In about four years, Frederick was dethroned by the combined powers of France and Spain, and now experienced the disinterested fidelity of our poet, who sold his possessions to assist the fallen monarch, attended him to France, and continued firmly attached to him as long as he lived.

, a celebrated French geographer, was born at Abbeville in Picardy, Dec. 20, 1600, Afte* he had finished his juvenile studies at the Jesuits’ college of Amiens, he betook himself to merchandise; but, sustaining considerable losses, quitted that calling, and applied himself to geography, a turn for which he had acquired under his father, who had published several maps. When only eighteen or nineteen, he drew a map of Ancient Gaul on four sheets, but did not publish it till 1627, lest, as we are told, it should, on account of his youth, be thought his father’s; or, which is rather more probable, lest it should not be sufficiently correct for publication. This, however, was so favourably received, as to encourage him to proceed with confidence and vigour, and in the course of his life he executed nearly three hundred large maps, ancient and modern, and caused an hundred methodical tables to be engraven concerning the divisions of the dominions of Christian princes. He also wrote several works to explain and illustrate his maps as> “Remarks upon the Ancient Gauls;” “Treatises of the four parts of the World;” “Two Tables of the Cities and Places, which occur in the maps of the Rhine and Italy;” “A Description of the Roman Empire, of France, Spain, Italy, Germany, and the British Isles, together with the ancient Itineraries:” all which are very necessary illustrations of the maps, which they are intended to accompany. He wrote also an account of the “Antiquities of Abbeville,” which engaged him in a contest with several learned men; with father Labbe, the Jesuit, in particular. He made also a “Sacred Geography,” divided into two tables; and a “Geographical Index of the Holy Land.” He was preparing other works, and had collected materials for an atlas of his own maps; but his incessant labours brought on an illness, of which, after languishing for near two years, he died at Paris, July 7, 1667, in the sixty-eighth year of his life, leaving two sons, William and Adrian, who were likewise geographers of considerable merit. Their father had received particular marks of esteem and kindness from the cardinals Richelieu and Mazarin; and was geographer and engineer to the king. His atlas was at last published at Paris, in 1693, 2 vols. folio.

, a French miscellaneous author, was born at Hermanville, in the neighbourhood of Caen, about 1604. It is said, in the “Segraisiana,” but we know not on what foundation, that he was the natural son of Mr. Fauconnier of Caen, a treasurer of France, by a woman of low rank, whom he afterwards married. Sarasin began his studies at Caen, and afterwards went to Paris, where he became eminent for wit and polite literature, though he was very defective in every thing that could be called learning. He then made the tour of Germany; and, upon his return to France, was appointed a kind of secretary to the prince of Conti. He was a man of a lively imagination and ready wit; and much caressed by those who thought themselves judges of that article. He was, however, so frequently invited on this account that he began to envy matter-of-fact men, from whom nothing of the kind is expected. He was also unfortunate in his marriage, his wife being a woman of a violent ungovernable temper. It is said that he persuaded the prince of Conti to marry the niece of cardinal Mazarin, and for this good office received a great sum; but this being discovered, the prince dismissed him from his service, with every mark of ignominy, as one who had sold himself to the cardinal. This treatment is supposed to have occasioned his death, which happened in 1654. Pelisson, passing through the town where Sarasin died, went to the grave of his old acquaintance, shed some tears, had a mass said over him, and founded an anniversary, though he himself was at that time a protestant.

In April 1607, the division between Rome and the republic was healed by the interposition of France; and Fulgentio relates, that the affair was transacted at Rome by cardinal Perron, according to the order of the king his master. But some English writers are of opinion, that this accommodation between the Venetians and the pope was owing to the misconduct of king James I., who, if he had heartily supported the Venetians, would certainly have disunited them from the see of Rome. Isaac Walton observes, that during the dispute it was reported abroad, “that the Venetians were all turned Protestants, which was believed by many: for it was observed, that the English ambassador (Wotton) was often in conference with the senate and his chaplain, Mr. Bedel, more often with father Paul, whom the people did not take to be his friend and also, for that the republic of Venice was known to give commission to Gregory Justiniano, then their ambassador in England, to make all these proceedings known to the king of England, and to crave a promise of his assistance, if need should require,” c. Burnet tells us, “That the breach between the pope and the republic was brought very wear a crisis, so that it was expected a total separation not only from the court, but the church of Rome, was like td follow upon it. It was set on by father Paul and the seven divines with much zeal, and was very prudently conducted by them. In order to the advancing of it, king James ordered his ambassador to offer all possible assistance to them, and to accuse the pope and the papacy as the chief authors of all the mischiefs of Christendom. Father Paul and the seven divines pressed Mr. Bedel to move the ambassador to present king James’s premonition to all Christian princes and states, then put in Latin, to the senate; and they were confident it would produce a great effect. But the ambassador could not be prevailed on to do it at that time; and pretended, that since St. James’s day was not far off, it would be more proper to do it on that day. Before St. James’s day came, the difference was made up, and that happy opportunity was lost; so that when he had his audience on that day in which he presented the book, all the answer he got was, that they thanked the king of England for his good will, but they were now reconciled to the pope; and that therefore they were resolved not to admit any change in their religion, according to their agreement with the court of Rome.” Welwood relates the same story, and imputes the miscarriage of that important affair to “the conceit of presenting king James’s book on St. James’s day.” But JDr. Hickes attempts to confute this account, by observing, that the pope and the Venetians were reconciled in 1607, and that the king’s premonition came not out till 1609, which indeed appears to be true; so that, if the premonition was really presented, it must have been only in manu* Script.

In the midst of his numerous excursions in the Alps, and even during the time of the troubled politics of Geneva in 1782, he found opportunities to make his hygrometrical experiments, the result of which he published in 1783, under the title of “Essays on Hygrometry.” We are indebted to him for the invention of the hygrometre, although Deluc had already invented his whalebone hygrometre, which occasioned a dispute between him and Saussure. In 1786, he gave up his professorship in favour of his disciple Pictet. The second volume of the Travels of Saussure was published in 1786 and contains a description of the Alps, which surround Mont-Blanc. Some years after the publication of this volume, Saussure was receivr 1 as a foreign associate in the academy cf scienes at Vans; t>ut our author not only honoured, but was desirous of serving his country. He founded the Society of Arts, to which Geneva is greatly indebted, and presided in this society to the very last, its prosperity being one of his principal objects. He also shewed his zeal to serve his country while he was member of the Council of Five Hundred, and of the National Assembly of France. It was from his assiduous labour in that Assembly that his health first began to fail; and in 1794 a paralytic stroke deprived him of the use of one side of his body. It was, however, after this accident that he drew up the two last volumes of his Travels, which appeared in 1796. They contain an account of his travels in the mountains of Piedmont, Switzerland, and in particular of his ascent to the summit of Mont Blanc.

In 1681 he was sent with M, Mariotte to Chantilli, to make some experiments upon the waters there, in which he gave great satisfaction. The frequent visits he made to this place inspired him with the design of writing a treatise on fortification; and, in order to join practice with theory, he went to the siege of Mons in 1691, where he continued all the while in the trenches. With the same view also he visited all the towns of FUnders; and on his return he became the mathematician in ordinary at the court, with a pension for life. In 1680 he had been chosen to teach mathematics to the pages of the Dauphiness. In 1686 he was "appointed mathematical professor in the Royal College. And in 1696 admitted a member of the Academy of Sciences, where he was in high esteem with the members of that society. He became also particularly acquainted with the prince of Conde, from whom he received many marks of favour and affection. In 1703, M. Vanban having been made marshal of France, he proposed Sauveur to the king as his successor in the office of examiner of the engineers; to which the king agreed, and honoured him with a pension, which our author enjoyed till his death, winch happened. July 9, 1716, in the sixty-fourth year of his age.

, seigneur de Breves, a learned Frenchman who had the merit of introducing oriental printing into his country about the beginning of the seventeenth century, was the French ambassador at Constantinople for twenty-two years. On his return, about 1611, Henry IV. sent him to Rome as ambassador in the pontificate of Paul V. where, in 1613, he appears to have established a printing-office; for in the title of a translation of Bellarmin’s conclusion, and a Psalter into Arabic, they are said tp come tx typographia Savariana. Savary is said to have cast the types, and employed on these two works, as correctors, Scialac and Sionita, two Maronites from mount Lebanon. In 1615, Savary returned to Paris, bringing with him Sionita and the printer Paulin, who, in the same year, printed in small quarto, in Turkish and French, the “Treaty of 1604, between Henry the Great, king of France, and the sultan Amurath,” &c. The following year appeared an Arabic Grammar, edited by Sionita and Hesronita. It appears that Savary had the liberality to lend his types to those who were desirous of printing works in the oriental languages. He died in 1627, when, we are told, the English and Dutch made offers for the purchase of his types, and the oriental manuscripts which he had collected in the Levant; but the king of France bought them, and soon after a new establishment appeared at Paris for oriental printing, all the credit of which was given to the cardinal Richelieu, while the name of Savary was not once mentioned. Sic vos non vobis, &c. These types are said to be still extant in the royal printing office. Savary published an account of his travels, from which we learn, that he projected certain conquests in the Levant, for the extension of the commerce of his country, and the propagation of Christianity. The number of oriental Mss. which he brought from the Levant amounted to ninety-seven.

We have already mentioned several noble instances of his munificence to the republic of letters: and his works exhibit equal zeal for the promotion of literature. In 1581, he published an English version of, 1. “Four Books of the Histories of Cornelius Tacitus, and the Life of Agricola; with notes upon them,” folio, dedicated to queen Elizabeth. The notes were esteemed so valuable as to be translated into Latin by Isaac Gruter, and published at Amsterdam, 1649, in 12mo, to which Gruter subjoined a treatise of our author, published ia 1598, under the title, 2. “A View of certain Military Matters, or commentaries concerning Roman Warfare;” which, soon after its first appearance, was translated into Latin by Marquardus Freherus, and printed at Heidelberg in 1601, but having become exceeding scarce, was reprinted by Gruter. In 1596, he published a collection of the best ancient writers of our English history, entitled, 3. “Rerum Anglicarum Scriptores post Bedain praecipui, ex vetustissimis codicibus nunc primum in lucem editi:” to which he added chronological tables at the end, from Julius Caesar to the coming in of William the Conqueror. This was reprinted at Francfort in 1601, which edition has a complete index to it. The collection contains William of Malmsbury’s history of the kings of England, and the lives of the English bishops; the histories of Henry of Huntingdon the annals of Roger de Hoveden the chronicle of Ethelvverd, and the history of Ingulphus with a dedication to queen Elizabeth, &c. Wharton, in the preface to his “Anglia Sacra,” objects only to Malmsbury’s history, which he says was printed from an incorrect ms. 4. He undertook and finished an edition, most beautifully printed, of “St. Chrysostom’s Works” in Greek, printed in 1613, 8 vols. folio. In the preface, he says, “that, having himself visited, about twelve years before, all the public and private libraries in Britain, and copied out thence whatever he thought useful to his design, he then sent some learned men into France, Germany, Italy, and the East; to transcribe such parts as he had not already, and to collate the others with the best manuscripts.” At the same time, he makes his acknowledgment to several great men for their assistance; as Thuanus, Velserus, Schottus, Isaac Casaubon, Fronto Duca3us, Janus Gruterus, Hoeschelius, &c. In the eighth volume are inserted sir Henry Savile’s own notes, with those of the learned John Bois, Thomas Allen, Andrew Downes, and other learned men. The whole charge of this edition, including the several sums paid to learned men, at home and abroad, employed in finding out, transcribing, and collating, the best manuscripts, is said to have amounted to no less than 8000l.; but, as soon as it was finished, the bishops and clergy of France employed, somewhat unfairly, as has been said, Fronton Due, or Fronto Ducaeus, who was a learned Jesuit, to reprint it at Paris, in 10 vols. folio, with a Latin translation, which lessened the price of sir Henry’s edition; yet we are told, that the thousand copies which he printed were all sold*. In 1618, he published a Latin work, written by Thomas Bradwarclin, abp. of Canterbury, against Pelagius, entitled, 5. “De Causa Dei contra Pelagium, et de virtute causarum;” to which he prefixed the life of Bradwardin. This book was printed from six Mss. carefully collated. 6. “Nazianzen’s Steliteutics,” 1610. Towards this, says Oldys, he was favoured with the ms epistles of Nazianzen out of the Bod* leian library, “which was a singular courtesy, and done because of his affection to the storing and preserving of the library,” as if any thing could have been refused to such a benefactor. 7. “Xenophon’s Institution of Cyrus,” Gr. 1613, 4to. In 1621, he published a collection of his own mathematical lectures. 8. <: Praelectiones Tredecim in principium Elementorum Euclidis Oxoniae habitae,“4to. 9.” Oratio coram Elizabetha Regina Oxonice hahita, anno 1592,“Oxon. 1658, 4to; published by Dr. Barlow from the original in the Bodleian library, and by Dr. Lamphire, in the second edition of *' Monarchia Britannica,” Oxford, 1681, 8vo. 10. He translated into Latin king James’s 46 Apology for the Oath of Allegiance.“Six letters of his, written to Hugo Blotius, and Sebastian Tenguagelius, keepers of the imperial library, were published in Lambecius’s” Bibliotheca,“vol. III.; four are printed among” Camdeni fcpistolae,“and others are in the Cotton and, Harleian Mss. He was also concerned in the new translation of the Bible, executed by command of James I. being one of the eight persons at Oxford who undertook to translate the four Gospels, Acts, and Revelations. He left behind him several Mss. some of which are now in the Bodleian library, such as 1.” Orations.“2.” Tract of the original of Monasteries.“3.” Tract concerning the Union of England and Scotland, written at the command of king James I.' 1 He wrote notes likewise upon the margin of many books in his library, particularly of Eusebius’s

, a celebrated commander, was born October 19, 1696, at Dresden, and was the natural son of Frederick Augustus If. king of Poland, and Aurora, countess of Konigsinarc. He gave evident proofs of his taste for military affairs from his childhood; was taught to read and write with the utmost difficulty; nor could he ever be prevailed upon to study a few ho irs in the morning, otherwise than by a promise that he should ride on horseback in the afternoon. He liked to have Frenchmen about him, for which reason their language was the only foreign one which he willingly learnt grammatically. He attended the elector in all his military expeditions; was at the siege of Lisle in 1708, when only twelve years old, and mounted the trenches several times both at the city and at the fortress, in sight of the king, his father, who admired his intrepidity. Nor did he discover less courage at the siege of Tournay, the year following, where he twice narrowly escaped death; and at the buttle of Malplaquet, far from being shocked by the dreadful carnage which attended the engagement, he declared in the evening, “that he was well pleased with the day.” In 1711, he followed the king of Poland to Stralsund, where he swam over the river, in sight of the enemy, with his pistol in his hand, during which time he saw, /vithout any seeming emotion, three officers and above twenty soldiers fall by his side. When he retired to Dresden, the king, who had been witness to his courage and abilities, raised a company of horse for him. Count Saxe spent the whole winter in teaching his regiment some new evolutions, which he had invented, and marched them against the Swedes the year following. This regiment suffered much st the battle of Gadelbusli, where he made them return three times to the attack. This campaign being ended, mad. de Konigsmarc married him to the young countess de Loben, a rich and amiable lady, whose name Avas Victoria, which name, count Saxe afterwards said, contributed as much to fix his choice on the countess, as her beauty and largtr fortune. This lady brought him a son, who died young, and the count having at length a disagreement with her, procured his marriage to be dissolved in 1721, but promised the countess never to marry again, and kept his word. She married a Saxon officer soon after, by whom she had three children, and they lived in harmony together. It was with, great reluctance that the countess had consented to her Carriage being dissolved, for she loved count Saxe; and the latter frequently repented afterwards of having taken such a step. He continued to signalize himself in the war against Sweden, was at the siege of Stralsund in December 1715, when Charles XII. was blocked up, and had the satisfaction of seeing him in the midst of his grenadiers“. The behaviour of this celebrated warrior inspired count Saxe with a high degree of veneration, which he ever retained for his memory. He served against the Turks in Hungary in 1717, and on his return to Poland in 1718, received the order of the white eagle from the king. In 1720, he visited France, and the duke of Orleans, then regent, gave him a brevet of marechal de camp. Count Saxe afterwards obtained leave from his Polish majesty to serve in France, where he purchased a German regiment in 1722, which afterwards bore his name. He changed the ancient exercise of this regiment for one of his own invention; and the chevalier Folard, on seeing this exercise, foretold immediately, in his Commentary on Polybius, torn. III. b. ii. chap. 14, that count Saxe would be a great general. During his residence in France, he learnt mathematics and the art of fortification with astonishing facility, till 1725, when prince Ferdinand, duke of Courland, falling dangerously ill in the month of December, he turned his thoughts to obtaining the sovereignty of Courland. With this view, he set out for Mittau, and arrived there, May 18, 1726. He was received with open arms by the states, and had several private interviews with the duchess dowager of Courland, who had resided there since her husband’s decease. This lady was Anne Iwanaw, second daughter of the czar I wan Alexiowitz, brother of Peter the Great. Count Saxe, having communicated his design to her, soon engaged her in his interests; and she acted with such indefatigable ardour, and conducted affairs so well, that he was unanimously elected duke of Courland, July 5, 1726. Thia choice being; opposed by Poland and Russia, the duchess supported count Saxe with all her interest, and even went to Riga and Petersburg, where she redoubled her solicitations in favour of the late election. There seems indeed to be no doubt, but that, if the count had returned her passion, he would not only have maintained his ground in Courland, but shared the throne of Russia, which this princess afterwards ascended; but, during his stay at Mittau, an affair of gallantry between him and one of her ladies broke off the marriage, and induced the duchess to abandon him. From that moment the count’s affairs took an unhappy turn, and he was forced to go back to Paris in 1729. The following remarkable circumstance occurred during the course of his enterprise: Having written from Ccmrlandto France for a supply of men and money, mademoiselle le Couvreur, a celebrated actress, who was at that time attached to him, pawned her jewels and plate, and sent him 40,000 livres. When count Saxe returned to Paris, he applied himself to obtain a complete knowledge of the mathematics, and acquired a taste for mechanics. He refused the command of the Polish army offered him by the king, his brother, in 1733, and distinguished himself on the Rhine under marechal Berwick, particularly at the lines of Etlingen, and the siege of Philipsburg, after which he was made lieutenant-general August 1, 1734. Hostilities having recommenced on the death of the emperor Charles VI. count Saxc took Prague by assault, Nov. 26, 1741, then Egra and Ellebogen, raised a regiment of Hullans, and brought back marechal de Broglio’s army upon the Rhine, where, he fixed various posts, and seized the trenches of Lanterburg. He was appointed marechal of France, March 26, 1744, and commanded the main bocly of the army in Flanders, where he so exactly observed the motions of the enemies, who were superior in, number, and made use of such excellent manoeuvres, that he reduced them to remain inactive, for they were afraid to undertake any thing. This campaign in Fianders did count Saxe great honour, and was considered as a chefd'ceuvre of the military art. He won the famous battle of Fonterioi, under the king’s command, May 11, 1745, where, though sick and weak, he gave his orders with such presence of mind, vigilance, courage, and judgment, as made him the admiration of the whole army. This victory was followed by the capture of Tournay, which the French be^ sieged; of Ghent, Bruges, Oudenarde, Ostend, Ath, &c. and at the time that the campaign was supposed to be finished, he took Brussels, February 28, 1746. Nor was the next campaign less honourable to count Saxe. He won the battle of Kauconx, Oct. I 1, the same year, 1746; and his majesty, to reward such a constant series of glorious services, dtrlurod him marechal general of his camps and armies, Jan. 12, 1747. Marechal Saxe carried troops into Zealand, gained the battle of Lanfeldt, July 2 following-, approved the siege of Bergen-op-Zoom, of which M. de Loewen made himself master, and took Maestrecht, May 7, 1748. In consequence of these victories a peace was concluded at Aix-la-Chapelle, Oct. 18, the same year. Marechai Saxe went afterwards to Chambord, which the king had given him, ordered his regiment of Hullans thither, and kept a stud of wild horses, more proper for light cavalry than those used by the French. He visited Berlin some time after, and was magnificently entertained by his Prussian majesty. On his return to Paris, he formed a plan for the establishment of a colony in the island of Tobago; but gave it up, when he found that England and Holland opposed it. Count Saxe died, after a nine days 7 illness, at Chambord, Nov. 30, 1750, in the fifty-fourth year of his age. He wrote a book on the art of war, called” Mes Reveries/ 1 of which a very splendid edition, with his life, was published in 1757, 2 vols. 4to. There is also an English translation of it. His “Life” was printed in 1752 > vols. 12mo, reprinted often.

Count Saxe was a man of ordinary stature, of a robust constitution, and extraordinary strength. To an aspect, noble, warlike, and mild, he joined many excellent qualities of disposition. Affable in his manners, and disposed to sympathize with the unfortunate, his generosity sometimes carried him beyond the limits of his fortune. He was remarkably careful of the lives of his men. One day a general officer was pointing out to him a post which would have been of great use “It will only cost you,” said he, “a dozen grenadiers:” “That would do very well,” replied the marshal, “were it only a dozen lieutenant-generals.” He had been educated and died in the Lutheran religion. “It is a pity (said the queen of France, when she heard of his death) that we cannot say a single De-profundis for a man who has made as sing so many Te Dennis” Religion had not much influence on his general conduct, but on his death-bed he is said to have reviewed his errors with remorse, and expressed much penitence.

, son of the preceding, and heir to his talents and temper, was born at Agen in 1540; and, at eleven years of age, was sent with two of his brothers to the college of Bordeaux, where he was taught Latin. Three years after, on the appearance of the plague, he was obliged to return home to his father, who then superintended his education. He required of him everyday a short exercise or theme upon some historical subject, and made him transcribe some poems, which he himself had composed. This last task is supposed to have inspired him with a taste for poetry, and so eager was he to show his proficiency, that he wrote a tragedy upon the story of Oedipus before he was seventeen. His father dying in 1558, he went to Paris the year following to study Greek, and attended the lectures of Turnebus for two months. But finding the usual course too dilatory, he resolved to study it by himself, and with the assistance of some knowledge of the conjugations, attempted to read Homer with a translation, in which he succeeded very soon, and at the same time formed to himself a kind of grammar, with which he was enabled to proceed to the other Greek poets, and next to the historians and orators, and by persevering in this course, he gained in the space of two years a perfect knowledge of the language. He afterwards turned his thoughts to the Hebrew, which he learned by himself in the same manner. All are agreed indeed, that he had an extraordinary capacity for learning languages, and is said to have been well skilled in no less than thirteen. He made the same progress in the sciences, and in every branch of literature; and he at length obtained the reputation of being the most learned man of his age, and his biographers have handed down to us little else than the progress of his studies and the chronology of his publications. In 1503 he was invited to the university of Leyden, to be honorary professor of Belles Lettres, on which occasion, if we may believe the “Menagiana,” Henry IV, of France treated him with great coldness and neglect. Scaliger had determined to accept the offer; and, waiting upon the king to acquaint him with his journey, and the occasion of it, “Well, Mr. Scaliger,” said his majesty, “the Dutch want to have you with them, and to allow you. a good stipend I am glad of it,” adding some other remarks of a grosser kind. Henry was no patron of learning or learned men: but some have supposed that he wished to mortify Scaliger, who had already shewn too much of his father’s vanity and arrogant spirit. He now went to Leyden, where he spent the remainder of his life; and died there of a dropsy, Jan. 21, 1609, without having ever been married. He was a man of perfect sobriety of manners, and whose whole time was well spent in study. He had as great parts as his father, and far greater learning, having been trained to it from his infancy, which his father had not. He had a profound veneration for his father, and unfortunately extended it to an imitation of his irritable temper, and disrespect for his learned contemporaries. But he was often a discerner and encourager of merit. While at Leyden he was so struck with the early appearance of talent in Grotius, that he undertook to direct his studies. Grotius repaid his care by the utmost respect, and Scaliger' s counsels were commands to him. The elder Scaliger lived and died in the church of Rome: but the son embraced the principles of Luther, and relates that his father also had intentions of doing so.

, a learned historian and antiquary, was born September 6, 1694-, at Sulzbourg, a town in the margraviate of Baden Dourlach; his father, holding an honourable office in the margrave’s court, died soon after in Alsace, leaving his son to the care of his mother. After tei: years studying at Dourlach and Basil, he kept a public exercise on some contested points of ancient history with applause, and finished his studies in eight years more at Strasbourg. In 1717, he there spoke a Latin panegyric on Ge^manicus, that favourite hero of Germany, which was printed by order of the city. In return for this favour he spoke a funeral oration on M. Barth, under whom he had studied; and another on Kuhn, the professor of eloquence and history there, whom he was soon after elected to succeed in 1720, at the age of twenty ­ix. The resort of students to him from the Northern nations was very great, and the princes of Germany sent their sons to study law under him. The professorship of history at Francfort on the Oder was offered to him; the czarina invited him to another at St. Petersburg, with the title of historiographer royal; Sweden offered him the same professorship at Upsal, formerly held by Scheffer and Boeder, his countrymen; and the university of Leyden named him successor to the learned Vitriarius. He preferred Strasbourg to all. Amidst the succession of lectures public and private, he found time to publish an innumerable quantity of historical and critical dissertations, too many to be here particularised. In 1725 he pronounced a congratulatory oration before king Stanislaus, in the name of the university, on the marriage of his daughter to the king of France; and, in 1726, another on the birth of the dauphin, besides an anniversary one on the king of France’s birthday, and others on his victories. In 1726 he quitted his professorship, and began his travels at the public expence. From Paris he went to Italy, stayed at Rome six months, re* ceived from the king of the Two Sicilies a copy of the “Antiquities of Herculaneum,” and from the duke of Parma the “Museum Florentinum.” He came to England at the beginning of the late king’s reign, and left it the day that Pere Courayer, driven out of Paris by theological disputes, arrived in London. He was now honoured with a canonry of St. Thomas, one of the most distinguished Lutheran chapters, and visited Paris a third time in 1728. Several dissertations by him are inserted in the “Memoirs of the academy of inscriptions and belles lettres;” one, ascribing the invention of moveable types to Guttenberg of Strasbourg, 1440, against Meerman,

In 1733, he narrowly escaped from a dangerous illness, He had long meditated one of those works, which alone, by their importance, extent, and difficulty, might immortalise a society, a “History of Alsace.” To collect materials for this, he travelled into the Low Countries and Germany in 1738, and into Switzerland 1744. At Prague he found that the fragment of St. Mark’s Gospel, so carefully kept there, is a continuation of that at Venice. The chancellor D'Aguesseau sent for him to Paris, 1746, with the same view. His plan was to write the History of Alsace, and to illustrate its geography and policy before and under the Romans, under the Franks, Germans, and its present governors; and, in 1751, he presented it to the king of France, who had before honoured him with the title of “Historiographer Royal and Counsellor,” and then gave him an appointment of 2000 livres, and a copy of the catalogue of the royal library. He availed himself of this opportunity to plead the privileges of the Protestant university of Strasbourg, and obtained a confirmation of them. His second volume appeared in 1761; and he had prepared, as four supplements, a collection of charters and records, an ecclesiastical history, a literary history, and a list of authors who had treated of Alsace: the publication of these he recommended to Mr. Koch, his assistant and successor in his chair. Between these two volumes he published his ^Vindiciae Celticse,“in which he examines the origin, revolution, and language of the Celts. The” History of Baden“was his last considerable work, a duty which he thought he owed his country. He completed this history in seven volumes in four years; the first appeared in 176 3, the last in 1766. Having by this history illustrated his country, he prevailed upon the marquis of Baden to build a room, in which all its ancient monuments were deposited in 1763. He engaged with the elector palatine to found the academy of Manheim. He pronounced the inaugural discourse, and furnished the electoral treasury with antiques. He opened the public meetings of this academy, which are held twice a year, by a discourse as honorary president. He proved in two of these discourses, that no electoral house, no court in Germany, had produced a greater number of learned princes than the electoral house. In 1766, he presented to the elector the first volume of the” Memoirs of a Rising Academy," and promised one every two years.

, a distinguished general, was descended of a noble family in Germany, and waa the son of count Schomberg, by his first wife, an English lady, daughter of the lord Dudley; which count was killed at the battle of Prague in Bohemia in 1620, together with several of his sons. The duke was born in 1608. He served first in the army of the United Provinces, and afterwards became the particular confident of William II. prince of Orange; in whose last violent actions he had so great a share, and particularly in the attempt upon Amsterdam, that, on the prince’s death in 1650, he retired into France. Here he gained so high a reputation, that, next to the prince of Conde, and Turenne, he was esteemed the best general in that kingdom; though, on account of his firm adherence to the Protestant religion, he was not for a considerable time raised to the dignity of a marshal. In Nov. 1659 he offered his service to Charles II. for his restoration to the throne of England; and, the year following, the court of France being greatly solicitous for the interest of Portugal against the Spaniards, he was sent to Lisbon; and in his way thither passed through England, in order to concert measures with king Charles for the suppoxt of Portugal. Among other discourse which he had with, that prince, he advised his majesty to set up for the head of the Protestant religion; which would give him a vast ascendant among the princes of Germany, make him umpire of all their affairs, procure him great credit with the protestants of France, and keep that crown in perpetual fear of him. He urged him likewise not to part with Dunkirk, the sale of which was then in agitation; since, considering the naval power of England, it could not be taken, and the possession of it would keep both France and Spain in a dependence upon his majesty.

In Portugal he performed such eminent services to that kingdom that he was created a grandee of it, by the title of count Mertola, with a pension of 5000l. to himself and his heirs. In 1673 he came over again into England, to command the army; but, the French interest being then very odious to the English, though he would at any other time of his life have been acceptable to them, he was at that crisis looked on as one sent over from France to bring our army under French discipline. Finding himself, therefore, obnoxious to the nation, and at the same time not loved by the court, as being found not fit for the designs of the latter, he soon returned to France. In June 1676, he was left by the king of France, upon his return to Parisy with the command of his army in Flanders; and soon after obliged the prince of Orange to raise the siege of Maestricht, and was made a marshal of France. But, when the prosecution against those of the reformed religion was begun in that kingdom, he desired leave to return into his own country; which was denied him, aud all the favour he could obtain was to go to Portugal. and, though he had preserved that nation from falling under the yoke of Castile, yet now, when he came thither for refuge, the inquisition represented that matter of giving harbour to an heretic so odiously to the king, that he was forced to send the marshal away. He went thence to England; and, passing through Holland, entered into a particular confidence with the prince of Orange; and, being invited by the elector of Brandenburgh to Berlin, was made governor of Prussia, and placed at the head of all the elector’s armies. He was treated likewise by the young elector with the same regard that his father had shewn him; and, in 1688, was sent by him to Cleves, to command the troops which were raised by the empire for the defence of Cologne.

, a learned German writer, and one of the most arrogant and contentious critics of his time, was born about 1576; and studied first at Amberg, then at Heidelberg, afterwards at Altdorf, at the charges of the elector palatine. Having made a considerable stay at Ingolstadt, he returned to Altdorff, where he began to publish some of his works. Ottavia Ferrari, a celebrated professor at Padua, says, that he “published books when he was but sixteen, which deserved to be admired by old men;” some, however, of his early productions do not deserve this encomium. He took a journey into Italy; and, after he had been some time at Verona, returned into Germany, whence he went again into Italy, and published at Ferrara a panegyric upon the king of Spain and pope Clement VIII. Iti 1599, he embraced the Roman catholic religion, but had an extraordinary antipathy to the Jesuits; against whom, Baillet tells us, he wrote about thirty treatises under fictitious names. Nor was he more lenient to the Protestants, and solicited the princes to extirpate them by the most bloody means, in a book which he published at Pavia in 1619, under the title of “Gasp. Scioppii Consiliarii Regii Classieum belli sa'cri, sive, Heldus Redivivus.” The following is the title of another, printed at Mentz in 1612, against Philip Mornay du Plessis; and which, as he tells us in the title-page, he sent to James I. of England, by way of new-year’s gift: “Alexipharmacum Regium felli clraconum et veneno aspidum sub Philippi Mornaei de Piessis nuper Papatus historia abdito appositum, et sereniss. Jacobo Magnae Britanniae Regi strenae Januariae loco muneri missum.” He had before attacked the king of England, by publishing in 1611, two books with these titles; “Ec­clesiasticus auctoritati Sereniss. D. Jacob), &c. oppositus,” and “Collyrium Regium Britanniae Regi graviter ex oculis laboranti muneri missum;” that is, “An Eye-salve for the use of his Britannic majesty.” In the first of these pieces he ventured to attack Henry IV. of France in a most violent manner which occasioned his book to be burnt at Paris. He gloried, however, in this disgrace and, according to his own account, had the farther honour of being hanged in effigy in a farce, which was acted before the king of England. He did not, however, always escape with impunity; for, in 1614, the servants of the English ambassador are said to have beaten him with great severity at Madrid. Of the wounds he received in this conflict, he, as usual, made his boasts, as he also did of having been the principal contriver of the Catholic league, which proved so ruinous to the Protestants in Germany. In his way through Venice in 1607, he had a conference with father Paul, whom he endeavoured by promises and threats to bring over to the pope’s party; which, perhaps, with other circumstances, occasioned his being imprisoned there three or four days. After he had spent many years in literary contests, he applied himself to the prophecies of holy scripture, and flattered himself that he had discovered the true key to them. He sent some of these prophetical discoveries to cardinal Mazarine, who paid no attention to them. It has been said that he had thoughts at last of going back to the communion of Protestants; but this, resting upon the single testimony of Hornius, has not been generally believed. He died in 1649.

, of Balwirie, a learned Scotch author of the fifteenth century, made the tour of France and Germany, and was received with some distinction at the court of the emperor Frederick II. Having travelled enough to gratify his curiosity, he returned to Scotland, and gave himself up to study and contemplation. He was skilled in languages; and, considering the age in which he lived, was no mean proficient in philosophy, mathematics, and medicine. He translated into Latin from the Arabic, the history of animals by the celebrated physician Avicenna. He published the whole works of Aristotle, with notes, and affected much to reason on the principles of that great philosopher. He wrote a book concerning “The Secrets of Nature,” and a tract on “The nature of the Sun and Moon,” in which he shews his belief in the philosopher’s stone. He likewise published what he called “Mensa Philosophica,” a treatise replete with astrology and chiromancy. He was much admired in his day, and was even suspected of magic, and had Roger Bacon and Cornelius Agrippa for his panegyrists.

, an eloquent French divine, was born in 1601, at Paris, and was the son of Peter Senault, secretary to the council of the League. He entered young into the congregation of the oratory, then newly established by cardinal de Berulle, and was one of the most celebrated preachers and best directors of his time. He preached with uncommon reputation during forty years, at Paris, and in the principal cities of France, and wrote several books on pious and moral subjects, which were much esteemed by pious catholics. He appears to have been a disinterested man, for he refused some considerable pensions, and two bishoprics, but was elected general of the oratory in 1662. He died August 3, 1672, at Paris, aged seventy-one. His principal works are, “A Paraphrase on the Book oflob,” 8vo; “L' Usage des Passions,” 12mo; “L'Homme Chretien,” 4to; “L'Homme criminel,” 4to “Le Monarque, on les Devoirs du Souverain,” 12mo; “Panegyrics on the Saints,” 3 vols. 8vo; and the Lives of several persons illustrious for their piety, &c. It was this father, says L'Avocat, who banished from the pulpit that empty parade of profane learning, and that false taste, by which it was degraded, and who introduced a strong, sublime, and majestic eloquence, suited to the solemnity of our mysteries, and to the truths of our holy religion.

He published several works in Latin and in French, relating to the history of France among the rest, in French “Memoires de la troisieme Guerre Civile, et derniers troubles de France sous Charles IX., &c.” “Inventaire general de l‘Histoire de France, illustre par la conference de i’Eglise et de i'Empire, &c.” “Recueil des choses memorables avenues en France sous Henri II. Francois II. Charles IX. et Henri III.” &c. These have been many times reprinted, with continuations and improvements; but it is objected that Serranus is not always impartial. Besides his theological works, he is perhaps best known for his “Latin version of Plato,” which was printed with Henry Stephens’s magnificent edition of that author’s works, 1578, 3 vols. fol. This translation, although more elegant, is not thought so faithful as that of Ficinus. Stephens had a very high opinion of Serranus, and printed in 1575, twenty-four of the Psalms, translated by Serranus into Greek verse, with two “Idyllia” from Daniel and Isaiah. Of this very rare volume, Francis Okely published anew edition at London in 1772, 12mo.

Somerset left three daughters, Anne, Margaret, and Jane, who were distinguished for their poetical talents. They composed a century of Latin distichs on the death of Margaret de Valois, queen of France, which were translated into the French, Greek, and Italian languages, and printed in Paris in 1551. Anne, the eldest of these ladies, married first the earl of Warwick, the son of the duke of Northumberland, already mentioned, and afterwards sir Edward Hunton. The other two died single. Jane was maid of honour to queen Elizabeth.

Mr. Sheridan’s wife, Frances, was born in Ireland about the year 1724, but descended from a good English family which had removed thither. Her maiden name was Chamberlaine, and she was grand-daughter of sir Oliver Cham* berlaine. The first literary performance by which she distinguished herself, was a little pamphlet at the time of the political dispute relative to the theatre, in which Mr. Sheridan had newly embarked his fortune. A work so well timed exciting the attention of Mr. Sheridan, he by an accident discovered his fair patroness, to whom he was soon afterwards married. She was a person of the most amiable character in every relation of life, with the most engaging manners. After lingering some years in a very weak state of health, she died at Blois, in the south of France, in the year 1767. Her “Sydney Bidclulph” has been ranked with the first productions of the novel class in ours, or in any other language. She also wrote a little romance, in one volume, called “Nourjahad,” in which there is a great deal of imagination, productive of an ad­Vol. XXVII. H H mirable moral. And she was the authoress of two comedies; “The Discovery,” and “The Dupe.”

, an eminent English admiral, was born near Clay, in Norfolk, about 1650, of parents in middling circumstances, and put apprentice to some mechanic trade, to which he applied himself for som.e time. He is said to have early discovered an inclination for the naval service, and at length went to sea, under the protection of sir Christopher Mynns, as a cabbin-boy, and applying himself very assiduously to the study of navigation, became an able seaman, and quickly arrived at preferment. In 1674, our merchants in the Mediterranean being very much distressed by the piratical state of Tripoly, a strong squadron was sent into those parts under the command of sir John Narborough, who arrived before Tripoly in the spring of the year, and found considerable preparations for defence. Being, according to the nature of his instructions, desirous to try negotiation rather than force, he thought proper to send Shovel, now a lieutenant, to demand satisfaction for what was past, and security for the time to come. Shovel went on shore, and delivered his message with great spirit; but the Dey, despising his youth, treated him with much disrespect, and sent him back with an indefinite answer. Shovel, on his return to the admiral, acquainted him with some remarks he had made on shore. Sir John sent him back with another message, and well furnished him with proper rules for conducting his inquiries and observations. The Dey’s behaviour was worse the second time, which Shovel made a pretence for delaying his departure that he might complete his observations. On his return he assured the admiral it was very practicable to burn the ships in the harbour, notwithstanding their lines and forts: accordingly, in the night of the 4th of March, Shovel, with all the boats in the fleet, filled with combustibles, went boldly into the harbour, and destroyed the vessels in it, after which he returned safe to the fleet, without the loss of a single man; and the Tripolines were so disconcerted at the boldness and success of the attack, as immediately to sue for peace. Of this affair sir John Narborough gave so honourable account in all his letters, that the next year Shovel had the command given him of the Sapphire, a fifth rate; whence he was not long after *e* moved into the James galley, a fourth rate, in which he continued till the death of Charles II. Although he was known to be unfriendly to the arbitrary measures of James II. yet that prince continued to employ him, and he was preferred to the Dover, in which situation he was when the Revolution took place, and heartily concurred in that event. In 1689, he was in the first battle, that of Bantry-bay, in the Edgar, a third-rate; and so distinguished himself by courage and conduct, that when king William came down to Portsmouth, he conferred on him the honour of knighthood. In 1690, he was employed in conveying king YVilr liam and his army into Ireland, who was so highly pleased with his diligence and dexterity, that he did him the honour to deliver him a commission of rear-admiral of the blue with his own hand. Just before the king set out for Holland, in 1692, he made him rear-admiral of the red, at the same time appointing him commander of the squadron that was to convoy him thither. On his return, Shovel joined admiral Russell with the grand fleet, and had a share in the glory of the victory at La Hogue. When it was thought proper that the fleet should be put under command of joint admirals in the succeeding year, he was one; and, as Campbell says, “if there had been nothing more than this joint commission, we might well enough account from thence for the misfortunes which happened in our affairs at sea, during the year 1693.” The joint admirals were of different parties; but as they were all good seamen, and probably meant well to their country, though they did not agree in the manner of serving it, it is most likely, “that, upon mature consideration of the posture things were then in, the order they had received from court, and the condition of the fleet, which was not either half manned or half victualled, the admirals might agree that a cautious execution of the instructions which they had received was a method as safe for the nation, and more so for themselves, than any other they could take.” On this occasion sir Cloudesley Shovel was at first an object of popular odium; but when the affair came to be strictly investigated in parliament, he gave so clear and satisfactory an account of the matter, that it satisfied the people that the commanders were not to blame; and that if there was treachery, it must have originated in persons in office at home. The character of sir Cloude&ley remaining unimpeached, we find him. again at sea, in 1694, under lord Berkley, in the expedition to Camaret-bay, in which he distinguished himself by his dextrous embarkation of the land forces, when they sailed on that unfortunate expedition; as also when, on their return to England, it was deemed necessary to send the fleet again upon the coast of France, to bombard Dieppe, and other places. In 1702 he was sent to bring the spoils of the Spanish and French fleets from Vigo, after the capture of that place by sir George Rooke. In 1703, he commanded the grand fleet up the Streights; where he protected our trade, and did all that was possible to be done for the relief of the protestants then in arms in the Cevenues; and countenanced such of the Italian powers as were inclined to favour the allies. In 1704 he was sent, with a powerful squadron, to join sir George liooke, who commanded a grand fleet in the Mediterranean, and had his share in the action off Malaga. Upon his return he was presented to the queen by prince George, as lord high admiral, and met with a very gracious reception; and was next year employed as commander in chief. In 1705, when k was thought necessary to send both a fleet and army to Spain, sir Cloudesley accepted the command of the fleet jointly with the earls of Peterborough and Monmouth, which sailed to Lisbon, thence to Catalonia, and arrived before Barcelona on the 12th of August and it was chiefly through his activity, in furnishing guns for the batteries, and men ta play them, and assisting with his advice, that the place was taken.

At the restoration, Sidney would not personally accept of the oblivion and indemnity generally granted to the whole nation; but continued abroad till 1677, when his father died. He then returned to England, and obtained from the king a particular pardon, upon repeated promises of constant and quiet obedience for the future. Burnet observes, “that he came back when the parliament was pressing the king into the war, the court of France having obtained leave for him to return; and that, upon his doing all he could to divert the people from that war, some took him for a pensioner of France: while he in the mean time declared, to those to whom he durst speak freely, that he knew it was a juggle; that our court was in an entire confidence with France; and had no other design in this show of a war but to raise an army, and keep it beyond sea till it was trained and modelled.” In 1683, he was accused of being concerned in the Rye-house plot; and, after lord Eussel had been examined, was next brought before the king and council. He said, that he would make the best defence he could, if they had any proof against him, but xvould not fortify their evidence by any thing he should say; so that the examination was very short. He was arraigned for high treason before the chief justice Jeffreys, Nov. 1683; and found guilty. After his conviction he sent to the marquis of Halifax, who was his nephew by marriage, a paper to be laid before the king, containing the main points of his defence upon which he appealed to the king, and desired he would review the whole matter but this had no other effect, except only to respite his execution for three weeks. When the warrant for his execution was brought, he told the sheriff, that he would not expostulate any thing upon his own account; for, the world was nothing to him: but he desired it mig^ht be considered, how guilty they were of his blood, who had not returned a fair jury, but one packed, and as directed by the king’s solicitor. He was beheaded on Tower-hill, where he delivered a written paper to the Sheriff, Dec. 7, 1683: but his attainder was reversed in the first year of William and Mary. “The execution of Sidney,” says Hume, “is regarded as one of the greatest blemishes of the reign of Charles II. The evidence against him, it must be confessed, was not legal: and the jury, who condemned him, were, for that reason, very blameable. But that after sentence parsed by a court of judicature, the king should interpose and pardon a man, who, though otherwise possessed of merit, was undoubtedly guilty, who had ever been a most indexible and most inveterate enemy to the royal family, and who lately had even abused the king’s clemency, might be an act of heroic generosity, but can never be regarded as a necessary and indispensable duty.” Burnet, who knew Sidney personally, gives the following character of him: “He was a man of most extraordinary courage; a steady man, even to obstinacy; sincere, but of a rough and boisterous temper, that could not bear contradiction. He seemed to be a Christian, but in a particular form of his own he thought it was to be like a divine philosophy in tue mind but he was against all public worship, and every thing that looked like a church. He was stiff to all republican principles; and such an enemy to every thing that looked like monarchy, that he set himself in a high opposition against Cromwell when he was made protector. He had studied the history of government in all its branches, beyond anv man I ever knew.”

On his rise to the papacy we shall be brief. In 991, Hugh Capet promoted him to the archbishopric of Rheiins; but this elevation was a source of disquiet to him, and after much contention, he was obliged to resign the see to Arnulf, the natural son of Lothaire, king of France, who had been formerly deposed from it. This was in 997, and at the same time Otho III. conferred upon him the archbishopric of Ravenna; and on the death of pope Gregory V, in 999, he was elected to the papal dignity, when he assumed the name of Silvester. The acts of his pontificate were but few, and not at all important. In 1000 he is said to have conferred on Stephen I., king of Hungary, the royal title, with the famous crown, the palladium of that kingdom, and to have constituted him perpetual legate of the holy see, with power to dispose of all ecclesiastical benefices. It was also in this century that the plan of the holy war was formed; and towards the conclusion of it, the signal was given by our learned pontiff, in the first year of his pontificate, in aa epistle, written in the name of the church of Jerusalem, to the church universal throughout the world, in which the European powers are solemnly exhorted to succour and deliver the Christians in Palestine. The pontiff’s exhortations, however, were only regarded by the inhabitants of Pisa.

, a late learned physician, and physician extraordinary to the king, was born March 17, 1750, at Sandwich, in Kent, where his father, who followed the profession of the law, was so respected, that, at the coronation of their present majesties, he was deputed by the cinque ports one of their barons to support the king’s canopy, according to ancient custom. His mother, whose maiden name was Foart, and whose family was likewise of Sandwich, died when he was an infant. He was educated at a seminary in France, where he not only improved himself in the learned languages, but acquired such a perfect knowledge of the French tongue, as to be able to write and speak it with the same facility as his own. He pursued his medical studies for nearly three years at Edinburgh, and afterwards went to Holland, and studied during a season at Leyden, where he was admitted to the degree of doctor of physic: he chose the measles for the subject of his inaugural discourse, which he inscribed to Cullen, and to Gaubius, both of whom hud shewn him particular regard. After taking his degree at Leyden, he visited and became acquainted with professor Camper in InesKuul, who had at that time one of the finest anatomical museums in Kurope. From thence he proceeded to Aix-lct-Chapelle and the Spa, and afterwards visited different parts of Germany; stopped for some time at the principal universities; and wherever he went cultivated the acquaintance of learned men, especially those of his own profession, in which he was ever anxious to impr >ve himself. At Berne, in Switzerland, he became known to the celebrated Haller, who afterwards ranked him among his friends and correspondents. He came to reside in London towards the close of 1778, being then in his 2Stii year, and was admitted a member of the College of Physicians, and was elected a fellow of the Royal Society 1779, and of the Society of Antiquaries 1791, as he had been before of different foreign academies at Nantz, Montpellier, and Madrid: he was afterwards admitted an honorary member of the Literary and Philosophical Society at Manchester, and of the Royal Society of Medicine at Paris, at which place he was elected one of the Associes Etrangers de l‘Ecole de Medicine; and in 1807, Correspondant de la Premiere Classe de I’Institut Imperial. Previous to 1778, he had written an elementary work on Anatomy, which was greatly enlarged and improved in its second edition, 1781: and he had communicated to the Royal Society the History of a curious case, which was afterwards published in their Transactions, “Phil. Trans.” vol. LXIV. He became also the sole editor of the London “Medical Journal;” a work which, after going through several volumes, was resumed under the title of “Medical Facts and Observations’.” these two works have ever been distinguished for their correctness, their judicious arrangement, and their candour. About this time he published an account of the Tape-worm, in which he made known the specific for this disease, purchased by the king of France. This account has been enlarged in a subsequent edition. — He likewise distinguished himself by a practical work on “Consumptions,” which, at the time, became the means of introducing him to considerable practice in pulmonary complaints. In 1780, he was elected physician to the Westminster General Dispensary; a situation he held for many years, and which afforded him ample scope for observation and experience in the knowledge of disease. These opportunities he did not neglect; and though, from his appointment soon after to St. Luke’s Hosr he was led to decline general practice, and to attach himself more particularly to the diseases of th mi-.;, continued to communicate to the publick such facts and remarks as he considered likely to promote the extension of any branch of professional science. With this view, he published some remarks on the treatment of Hydrocephalus internus (“Med. Comment, of Edinburgh, vol. V.”), and in the same work a case of Ulceration of the Œsophagus and Ossification of the Heart. He wrote also an account of a species of Hydrocephalus, which sometimes takes place in cases of Mania (London Med. Journal, vol. VI.) and an account of the Epidemic Catarrh of the year 1788, vol. IX. He had given an account also of the “Life of Dr. William Hunter,” with whom he was personally acquainted, a work abounding in interesting anecdote, and displaying an ingenuous and impartial review of the writings and discoveries of that illustrious anatomist. From the time of his being elected physician to St. Luke’s Hospital to the period of his death, he devoted himself, nearly exclusively, to the care and treatment of Insanity; and his skill in this melancholy department of human disease, became so generally acknowledged, that few, if any, could be considered his superiors. In the year 1803, it was deemed expedient to have recourse to Dr. Simmons, to alleviate the mournful malady of his sovereign, of whom he had the care for nearly six months, assisted by his son: the result was as favourable as the public could have wished; and on taking their leave, his majesty was pleased to confer a public testimony of his approbation, by appointing Dr. Simmons one of his physicians extraordinary, which took place in May 1804. — In the unfortunate relapse, which occurred in 1811, Dr. Simmons again attended; and, in conjunction with the other physicians, suggested those remedies and plans which seemed most likely to effect a cure. In February of that year he resigned the office of physician to St. Luke’s, in a very elegant letter, in which he assigned his age and state of health as the reasons for his resignation. The governors were so sensible of the value of his past services, and the respect due to him, as immediately to elect him a governor of the charity. They also proposed his being one of the committee; and, expressly on his account, created the office of Consulting Physician, in order to have the advantage of his opinion, not merely in the medical arrangement, but in the domestic ceconomy of the hospital. His last illness began on the evening of the 10th. of April, 1813, when he was seized with sickness, and a violent vomiting of bile, accompanied with a prostration of strength so sudden, and so severe, that on the second day of the attack he was barely able to stand; and a dissolution of the powers of life seeming to be rapidly coming on, he prepared for his departure with methodical accuracy, anticipated the event with great calmness, and, on the evening of the 23d of the same month, expired in the arms of his son. He was buried May 2, at Sandwich in Kent, and, according to the directions expressed in his will, his remains were deposited in a vault in the church-yard of St. Clement, next to those of his mother. In private life, Dr. Simmons was punctiliously correct in all his dealings; mild and unassuming in his manners, and of rather retired habits, passing Ins time chiefly in his study and in his professional avocations. He was one of the earliest proprietors of the Roy;d Institution and, in 1806, became an hereditary governor of the British Institution for the promotion of the Fine Arts. He has left one son, who is unmarried, and a widow, to deplore his loss.

Thus far we have heheld Sixtus acting in his civil capacity; and if we take a view of his conduct as a politician, in his transactions with foreign powers, we find him maintaining the same degree of firmness as in his treatment of his own subjects. Before he had been pope two months he quarrelled with Philip II. of Spain, Henry III. of France, and Henry king of Navarre. His intrigues in some measure may be said to have influenced, in his day, all the councils of Europe. Sixtus had caused the Vulgate Latin edition of the Bible to be published, which occasioned a good deal of clamour; but far less than his printing an Italian version of it, which excited the in lignation of all the Roman Catholic part of Christendom. Count Olivares, and some of the cardinals, ventured to expostulate with him freely upon it; and said, “It was a scandalous as well as a dangerous thing, and bordered very nearly upon heresy,” But he treated them with contempt, and only said, “We do it for the benefit of you that do not understand Latin.” Though this pope’s behaviour may not command universal applause, yet it is certain the Roman see was under very great obligations to him. His impartial, though rigorous, administration of justice, had a very happy effect; he strenuously defended the rights of the poor, the widow, and the orphan; he refused audience to nobody, ordering his masters of the ceremonies to introduce the poorest to him first; but was more particularly ready to hear any accusation against the magistrates: the same conduct he observed between the clergy and their superiors, always applying quick and effectual, though mostly severe, remedies. In short, he had wrought such a reformation, that the governor told him one day, the place of a judge was now become a perfect sinecure. At his accession to the papacy, he found the apostolic clia.-nber, or treasury, not only exhausted, but in debt: he lei't it, not only clear, but enriched itwith five millions of gold; he also augmented the revenue to double its former amount. To him the city of Rome was obliged for several of its greatest embellishments, particularly the Vatican library, began by Sixtus IV.; and to him its citizens were indebted for the introduction of trade into the ecclesiastical state. Though he was naturally an enemy to profusion, he was never sparing in expence to relieve such as were really necessitous; and, among many other noble charities, his appropriation of three thousand crowns a year, for the redemption of Christian slaves out of the hands of the infidels, will hardly be reckoned the least meritorious.

, an excellent German historian, was born in 1506, at Sleiden, a small town upon the confines of the duchy of Juliers, whence he derived his name. His origin, according to Varillas, was so obscure, that not knowing the name of his father, he adopted that of his birth-place; but this is the report of an enemy, as his father’s name was Philip, and his family not of the lower order. He went through his first studies in his own country, together with the learned John Sturmius, who was born in the same town with himself; and afterwards removed, first to Paris, and then to Orleans, where he studied the law for three years. He took the degree of licentiate in this faculty, but, having always an aversion to the bar, he continued his pursuits chiefly in polite literature. Uporf his return to Paris, he was recommended by his friend Sturmius, in 1535, to John Du Bellay, archbishop and cardinal; who conceived such an affection for him, that he settled on him a pension, and communicated to him affairs of the greatest importance; for Sleidan had a turn for business, as well as letters. He accompanied the ambassador of France to the diet of Haguenan, but returned to Paris, and remained there till it was not safe for him to stay any longer, as he was inclined to the sentiments of the reformers. In 1542 he retired to Strasburg, where he acquired the esteem and friendship of the most considerable persons, and especially of James Sturmius; by whose counsel he undertook, and by whose assistance he was enabled, to write the history of his own time. He was employed in some uegociations both to France and England; and, in one of these journeys, he met with a lady whom he married in 1546. About the same time the princes of the league of Smalcald honoured him with the title of their historiographer, and granted him a pension, and when he lost this by the dissolution of the league in 1547, the republic of Strasburgh gave him another. In 1551, he went, on the part of the republic, to the council of Trent; but, the troops of Maurice, elector of Saxony, obliging that council to break up, he returned to Strasburgh without having transacted any business. He was employed in other affairs of state, when the death of his wife, in 1555, plunged him into a deep melancholy, with such a total loss of memory, as that he did not know his own children. Some imputed this to poison; and others to natural causes. It ended, however, in his death, at Strasburg, Oct. 31, 1556, in the fiftieth year of his age.

After the publication of this work, Dr. Smith remained four years at Glasgow, discharging his official duties with increasing reputation. Towards the end of 1763 he received an invitation from Mr. Charles Townsend to accompany the duke of Buccieugh on his travels; and the liberal terms of the proposal, added to a strong desire of visiting the continent of Europe, induced him to resign his professorship at Glasgow. Early in the year 1764 he joined the duke of Buccieugh in London, and in March set out with him for the continent. Sir James Macdonald, afterwards so justly lamented by Dr. Smith and many other distinguished persons, as a young man of the highest accomplishments and virtues, met them at Dover. After a fevr days passed at Paris, they settled for eighteen months at Thou louse, and then took a tour through the south of France to Geneva, where they passed two months. About Christmas 1765 they returned to Paris, and there remained till the October following. By the recommendations of David Hume, with whom Dr. Smith had been united in. strict friendship from the year 1752, they were introduced to the society of the first wits in France, but who were also unhappily the most notorious deists. The biographer of Dr. A. Smith has told us, in the words of the duke of Buccleugh himself, that he and his noble pupil lived together in the most uninterrupted harmony during the thres years of their travels; and that their friendship continued to the end of Dr. Smith’s life, whose loss was then sincerely regretted by the survivor. The next ten years of Dr. A. Smith’s life were passed in a retirement which formed a striking contrast to his late migrations. With the exception of a few visits to Edinburgh and London, he passed the whole of this period with his mother at Kirkaldy, occupied habitually in intense study. His friend Hume, who considered a town as the true scene for a man of letters, in vain attempted to seduce him from his retirement; till at length, in the beginning of 1776, he accounted for his long retreat by the publication of his “Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations,” 2 vols. 4to. This book is well known as the most profound and perspicuous dissertation of its kind that the world has ever seen. About two years after the publication of this work the author was appointed one of the commissioners of the customs in Scotland. The greater part of these two years he passed in London, in a society too extensive and varied to allow him much time for study. In consequence of his new appointment, he returned in 1778 to Edinburgh, where he enjoyed the last twelve years of his life in affluence, and among the companions of his youth. “During the first years of his residence in Edinburgh,” says his biographer, “his studies seemed to be entirely suspended; and his passion for letters served only to amuse his leisure and to animate his conversation. The infirmities of age, of which he very early began to feel the approaches, reminded him at last, when it was too late, of what he yet owed to the public and to his own fame. The principal materials of the works which he had announced had long ago been collected, and little probably was wanting, but a few years of health and retirement, to bestow on them that systematical arrangement in which he delighted; and the ornaments of that flowing, and apparently artless style, which he had studiously cultivated, but which, after all his experience and composition, he adjusted with extreme difficulty to his own taste.” The death of his mother in 1784, who, to an extreme old age, had possessed her faculties unimpaired, with a considerable degree of health, and that of a cousin, who had assisted in superintending his household, in 1788, contributed to frustrate his projects. Though he bore his losses with firmness, his health and spirits gradually declined, and, in July 1790, he died of a chronic obstruction in his bowels, which had been lingering and painful. A few days before his death he gave orders to destroy all his manuscripts, with the exception of some detached essays, which he left to the care of his executors, and which have since been published in one volume 4to, in 1795.

One thing, however, is much to be regretted, in the life of Dr. A. Smith, of which his biographer has not thought fit to take the smallest notice; and that is his infidelity. “When his friend Hume died, he published the life which that celebrated sceptic had written of himself; with such remarks as proved, but too plainly, that his sentiments on the subject of religion were nearly the same with those of the deceased. This publication, which apparently was intended to strike a powerful blow against Christianity, and to give proportionable support to the cause of deism, produced an anonymous letter to Dr. A. Smith from the Clarendon press; which was afterwards known to have proceeded from the pen of Dr. Home In this celebrated letter, the argument is so clear, and the humour so easy and natural, that it produces an effect which no one but a determined infidel can resist or resent. Dr. A. Smith had assumed an air of great solemnity in his defence of his friend Hume; but the author of the letter treats them both with a jocularity which has wonderlui force. He alludes to certain anecdotes coneerning Hume, which are very inconsistent with the account given ii> his life for at the very period when he is reported to have been in the utmost tranquillity of spirits, none of his tiu n;is could venture to mention Dr. Beattie in his presence,” lest it shoul.l throw him into a fit of passion and sweariri“-” From whatever unfortunate cause this bias in Dr. Adam Smith’s mind arose, whether from his intimacy with Hume, from his too earnest desire to account for every thing metaphysically, or from a subsequent intercourse with the infidel wits and phdosophers of France, it is much to be regretted, as the only material stain upon a character of much excellence.

During his being abroad, the university created him M. A. by diploma, March 1, 16'j6, a very high mi.rk of respect; and he was also elected to a fellowship, Oct. 31, 1698, though not in orders, the want of which qualification had been sometimes dispensed with in the case of men of eminence, as in that of sir Joseph Williamson himself, and Tickel the poet. While abroad, he visited some foreign courts along with his patron, and was no inattentive observer of the political state of each, as appears by some memoirs he left in ms. concerning the treaty of Ryswick; and he had also a s’hare in the publication of “The Acts and Negotiations, with the particular articles at large of that peace.” Those circumstances, with the talents he displayed both in conversation and correspondence, procured him very flattering offers of political employment!, both from the earl of Manchester and sir Philip Meadows, the one ambassador at the court of France, the other envoy to that of Vienna. But, although he had fully enjoyed the opportunities he had abroad of adding to his knowledge of the world, his original destination to the church remained unaltered, and to accomplish it he returned to Oxford in 1700, where he was gladly received. He was then ordained by Dr. Talbot, bishop of Oxford, and was heard to say, that when he laid aside his lay habit, he did it with the greatest pleasure, as looking upon holy orders to be the highest honour that could be conferred upon him. It was not long before be entered into the more active service of the church, Dr. Halton, then provost of Queen’s college, and archdeacon of the diocese, having presented him to the donative of Iffley near Oxford, and at the same time appointed him divinity-lecturer in the college. The lectures he read in this last character were long remembered to his praise.

In the mean time, Mr. Smith acquired great reputation by his Greek lectures, which were frequented by a vast concourse of students, and by men then or afterwards of great eminence, such as Redman, Cox, Cecil, Haddon, Ascharn, &c. In 1536 he was appointed university orator; and in 1539 set out on his travels, prosecuting his studies for some time in the universities of France and Italy. At Padua he took the degree of doctor of laws, and some time after his return, in 1542, was admitted ad eundem at Cambridge, and appointed regius professor of civil law. He was also appointed chancellor to the bishop of Ely; and in both situations appears to have exerted himself to promote the cause of the reformed religion, as well as of learning. At a commencement about 1546, both his disputations aod determinations were such, that the learned Haddon, in a letter to Dr. Cox, says that, “had he been there, he would have heard another Socrates, and that Smith caught the forward disputants as it were in a net with his questions, and that he concluded the profound causes of philosophy with great gravity and deep knowledge.”

In 1551, sir Thomas was appointed one of the ambassadors to the court of France, to treat concerning a match for the king with the eldest daughter of the king of France; but the king’s life was now at a close, and on the accession of Mary, sir Thomas was deprived of all his places, and was charged not to depart the kingdom; yet enjoyed uncommon privileges. He was allowed a pension of 100l. per annum; he was highly favoured by Gardiner and Bonner on account of the opinion they had of his learning; and enjoyed a particular indulgence from the pope, which was occasioned by the following circumstance. In 1.555, William Smythwick of the diocese of Bath, esq. obtained an indulgence from Pius IV. by which he and any five of his friends, whom he should nominate, were to enjoy extraordinary dispensations. The indulgence exempted them from all ecclesiastical censures upon whatever occasion or cause inflicted; and “from all and singular their sins whereof they are contrite and confessed, although they were such for which the apostolic see were to be consulted.” Smythwick chose Smith, for one of his five friends specified in the bull, to be partaker of those privileges; and this undoubtedly was a great security to him in those perilous times. On the accession of queen Elizabeth, sir Thomas Smith was again received at court, and employed in affairs both of church and state. He was also sent on various embassies. In 1562 he was sent ambassador to France, where, in conjunction with sir Nicholas Throgmorton, he concluded a peace between England and France in the beginning of 156*, but was still continued ambassador in France. In March 1565 he finished his treatise of “the Commonwealth of England,” and in the beginning of the year following returned to England. In 1567 he was again sent ambassador to France to demand the restitution of Calais; and upon his return from thence in 1568, he solicited for the place of chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, but without success, it being given to sir Ralph Sadleir. In 1570 he was admitted into the privy council, and in 1572, he was again appointed secretary of state, and chancellor of the order of the garter.

The success of his “History” encouraged him to write a continuation of it from 1748 to 1764. The volume for 1765, his biographer seems not to have known, was written by Guthrie, during Smollett’s absence on the Continent. By the History and Continuation he is said to have cleared 2000l. He is also supposed to have written the accounts of France, Italy, and Germany, for the Universal History, when published in octavo volumes. A writer in the Gentleman’s Magazine states that he received fifteen hundred guineas for preparing a new edition of the same history, but this must be a mistake, as he was dead some years before that edition was undertaken.

, called L‘Abate Ciccio, from his mode of dressing like an abbot, an illustrious Italian painter, was descended of a good family, and born at Nocera de’ Pagani near Naples in 1657. His father Angelo, who had been a scholar of Massimo, and was a good painter and a man of learning, discerned an uncommon genius in his son; who is said to have spent whole nights in the studies of poetry and philosophy. He designed also so judiciously in chiaro obscure, tiiat his performances surprised all who saw them. Angelo intended him for the Jaw, and did not alter his purpose, though he was informed of his other extraordinary talents, till cardinal Orsini advised him. This cardinal, afterwards Benedict Xiji. at a visit happened to examine the youth in philosophy, and, although satisfied with his answers, observed, that he would do better, if he did not waste so much of his time in drawing; but when these drawings were produced, he was so surprised, that he told the father how unjust he would be both to his son and to the art, if he attempted to check a genius so manifestly displayed. Ou this, Solimene had full liberty given him to follow his inclination. Two years passed on, while he studied under his lather, after which, in 1674, he went to Naples, and put himself under the direction of Francesco di Maria. Thinking, however, that this artist laid too great a stress on design, he soon left him, and guided himself by the works of Lanfranc and Calabrese in composition and chiaro obscuro, while those of Pietro Cortona and Luca Jordano were his standards for colouring, and Guido and Carlo Maratti for drapery. By an accurate and well-managed study of these masters, he formed to himself an excellent style, and soon distinguished himself as a painter. Hearing that the Jesuits intended to paint the chapel of St. Anne in the church Jesu Nuovo, he sent them a sketch by an architecture painter; not daring to carry it himself, lest a prejudice against his youth might exclude him. His design was nevertheless accepted, and, while he was employed on this chapel, the best painters of Naples visited him, astonished to h'nd themselves surpassed by a mere boy. This was his first moment of distinction, and his reputation increased so fast, that great works were offered him from every quarter. His fame extending to other countries, the kings of France and Spain made him very advantageous proposals to engage him in their service, all which he declined. Philip V. arriving at Naples, commanded him to paint his portrait, and allowed him to sit in his presence: and the emperor Charles VI. knighted him on account of a picture he sent him. In 1701, he resided at Rome during the holy year: when the pope and cardinals took great notice of him. This painter is also known by his sonnets, which have been often printed in collections of poetry; and, at eighty years of age, he could repeat from memory the most beautiful passages of the poets, in the application of which he was very happy. He died in 1747, at almost ninety. He painted entirely after nature; being fearful, as he said, that too servile an attachment to the antique might damp the fire of his imagination. He was a man of a good temper, who neither criticised the works of others out of envy, nor was blind to his own defects. He told the Italian author of his life, that he had advanced many falsities in extolling the character of his works: which had procured him a great deal of money, but yet were very far short of perfection. The grand duke of Tuscany with difficulty prevailed on Solimene’s modesty to send him his picture, which he wanted to place in his gallery among other painters.

In 1653 he embraced the Popish religion; and, going to Paris in 1654, published, according to custom, a discourse upon the motives of his conversion, which he dedicated to cardinal Mazarine. He went afterwards to Rome, where he made himself known to Alexander VII, by a Latin letter addressed to that pope, in which he inveighed against the envious Protestants, as he called them. Upon his return from Rome, he came over to England; and afterwards published, in 1664, a relation of his voyage hither, which brought him into trouble and disgrace; for, having taken some unwarrantable liberties with the character of a nation with which France at that time thought it policy to be on good terms, he was stripped of his title of “Historiographer of France,” which had been given him by the king, and sent for some time into banishment. His book also was discountenanced and discredited, by a tract published against it in the city of Paris; while Sprat, afterwards bishop of Rochester, refuted its absurdities in “Observations on M. de Sorbiere’s Voyage into England,” 1665, 12mo. This work was reprinted with an English edition of Sorbiere’s voyage, and a life of him in 1709, 8vo. Voltaire has also been very severe upon this work: “I would not,” says he, “imitate the late Mr. Sorbiere, who, having stayed three months in England, without knowing any thing either of its manners or of its language, thought fit to print a relation, which proved but a dull scurrilous satire upon a nation he knew nothing of.”

, a man of uncommon abilities and learning, was the sun of a counsellor and secretary to Jane d' Albert, queen of Navarre; and born at Maulcon de Soule in the country of Biscay in i He made a considerable progress in literature; and, when not more than twenty, began a commentary upon Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey, winch was printed at Basil in 1583, fblie, with a dedication to the king of Navarre, afterwards Henry IV. of France. In this work, if there is not much noveky of critical discovery, there is more display of reading and learning than could have been expected in one so young. The same year, he printed an edition of Aristotle’s “Logic” at Basil, in Greek and Latin, with marginal notes. He abjured the reformed religion in 1593, and immediately published a declaration of his reasons, but does not appear to have enjoyed much comfort in his new communion. He left the court soon after his abjuration, and went to conceal himself in the mountains of Biscay; where he died March 18, 1595, and was buried at Bourdeaux. He is it-­presented as having spent this short life in much fatigue and misery.

In 1601, he attended Lodowick duke of Lenox as chaplain, in his embassy to the court of France, for confirm; the ancient amity between the two nations; and returned, in the ambassador’s retinue through England. In 1603, upon the accession of James to the throne of England, he was appointed, among other eminent persons, to attend his majesty into that kingdom; and, the same year, was advanced to the archbishopric of Glasgow, and made one of the privy council in Scotland. In 1610, he presided in the assembly at Glasgow and the same year, upon the king’s command, repaired to London about ecclesiastical affairs. He was so active in matters which concerned the recovery of the church of Scotland to episcopacy, that, during the course of his ministry, he is supposed to have made no less than fiftyjourneys to London, chiefly on thar. account. Having filled the see of Glasgow eleven years, he was translated in 1615 to that of St. Andrew’s; and thus

Upon the change of administration, a new parliament being called, he was proposed candidate for the City of Westminster, together with sir Henry Dutton-Colt, but being unsuccessful, was chosen again for Cockermouth. He continued prisoner in Spain till 1712, when his imperial majesty made an exchange for the duke of Escalone, formerly viceroy of Naples; and in July the general set out on his return home by the way of France, and on the 16th of August arrived in England. In parliament he now opposed vigorously the measures of the court, and particularly the Bill of Commerce between Great Britain and France. Upon the calling a new parliament in 1713, he lost his election at Cockermouth by a small majority, but was soon after chosen unanimously for Wendover in Bucks; and opposed the Schism-bill with great spirit. Upon the arrival of king George I. in England, he was received by his majesty with particular marks of favour; and on the 27th of September 1714, appointed one of the principal secretaries of state, and October the 1st sworn one of the privy- council. On the 20th of the same month, the day of his majesty’s coronation, he, with the lord Cobham, set out with a private commission to the emperor’s court; where having succeeded in his negotiations, he returned to England in the latter end of December. A new parliament being summoned to meet at Westminster on the 17th of March 1714-15, he was unanimously chosen for Cockermouth, as he was likewise for Aldborough in Yorkshire. In July 1716 he attended his majesty to Germany, and was principally concerned in the alliance concluded at that time with France and the States-general, by which the Pretender was removed beyond the Alps, and Dunkirk and Mardyke demolished. He returned with his majesty in 1716, and the following year was appointed first lord of the treasury, and chancellor of the exchequer. He was afterwards created a peer of Great Britain, by the title of baron Stanhope of Elvaston, in the county of Derby, and viscount Stanhope of Mahon in the island of Minorca. In March 1718, he was appointed principal secretary of state, in the room of the earl of Sunderland, who succeeded lord Stanhope in the Treasury: and soon after was created earl Stanhope. The Spanish power growing more formidable, an alliance was set on foot between his Britannic majesty, the emperor, and the king of France, for which purpose earl Stanhope set out in June for Paris, and thence to Madrid, but finding nothing could be done with that court, he returned to England in September. In December following, he introduced a bill into the House of Lords “for strengthening the protestant interest in these kingdoms,” in which he proposed a repeal of the occasional-conformity bill, and the schism bill, and it passed by a majority of eighteen.

Vol. XXVIII. A A of both parliaments of the late kingdoms of England and Scotland, and confirmed by the parliament of Great-Britain. With some seasonable remarks on the danger of a popish successor.“He explains in his” Apology for himself,“the occasion of his writing this piece. He happened one day to visit Mr. William Moore of the Inner-Temple; where the discourse turning upon politics, Moore took notice of the insinuations daily thrown out, of the danger the Protestant succession was in; and concluded with saying-, that he thought Steele, from the kind reception the world gave to what he published, might be more instrumental towards curing that evil, than any private man in England. After much solicitation, Moore observed, that the evil seemed only to flow from mere inattention to the real obligations under which we lie towards the house of Hanover: if, therefore, continued he, the laws to that purpose were reprinted, together with a warm preface, and a well-urged peroration, it is not to be imagined what good effects it would have. Steele was much struck with the thought and prevailing with Moore to put the law- part of it together, he executed the rest; yet did not venture to publish it, till it had been corrected by Addison, Hoadly, afterwards bishop of Winchester, and others. It was immediately attacked with great severity by Swift, in a pamphlet published in 1712, under the title of,” The Public Spirit of the Whigs set forth in their generous encouragement of the author of the Crisis:“but it was not till March 12, 1715, that it fell under the cognizance of the House of Commons. Then Mr. John Hungerford complained to the House of divers scandalous papers, published under the name of Mr. Steele; in which complaint he was seconded by Mr. Auditor Foley, cousin to the earl of Oxford, and Mr. Auditor Harley, the earl’s brother. Sir William Wyndham also added, that” some of Mr. Steele’s writings contained insolent, injurious reflections on the queen herself, and were dictated by the spirit of rebellion.“The next clay Mr. Auditor Harley specified some printed pamphlets published by Mr. Steele,” containing several paragraphs tending to sedition, highly reflecting upon her majesty, and arraigning her administration and government.“Some proceedings followed between this and the 18th, which was the day appointed for the hearing of Mr. Steele; and this being come, Mr. Auditor Folejr moved, that before they proceed farther, Mr. Steele should declare, whether he acknowledged the writings that bore his name? Steele declared, that he” did frankly and ingenuously own those papers to he part of his writings; that he wrote them in behalf of the house of Hanover, and owned them with the same unreservedness with which he abjured the Pretender.“Then Mr. Foley proposed, that Mr. Steele should withdraw; but it was carried, without dividing, that he should stay and make his defence. He desired, that he might be allowed to answer what was urged against him paragraph by paragraph; but his accusers insisted, and it was carried, that he should proceed to make his defence generally upon the charge against him. Steele proceeded accordingly, being assisted by his friend Addison, member for Malmsbury, who sat near him to prompt him upon occasion; and spoke for near three hours on the several heads extracted from his pamphlets. After he had withdrawn, Mr. Foley said, that,” without amusing the House with long speeches, it is evident the writings complained of were seditious and scandalous, injurious to her majesty’s government, the church and the universities;“and then called for the question. This occasioned a very warm debate, which lasted till eleven o'clock at night. The first who spoke for Steele, was Robert Walpole, esq. who was seconded by his brother Horatio Walpole, lord Finch, lord Lumley, and lord Hinchinbrook: it was resolved, however, by a majority of 245 against 152, that” a printed pamphlet, entitled l The Englishman, being the close of a paper so called,‘ and one other pamphlet, entitled * The Crisis,’ written by Richard Steele, esq. a member of this House, are scandalous and seditious libels, containing many expressions highly reflecting upon her majesty, and upon the nobility, gentry, clergy, and universities of this kingdom; maliciously insinuating, that the Protestant succession in the house of Hanover is in danger under her majesty’s administration; and tending to alienate the good affections of her majesty’s good subjects, and to create jealousies and divisions among them:“it was resolved likewise, that Mr. Steele,” for his offence in writing and publishing the said scandalous and seditious libels, be expelled this House.“He afterwards wrote” An Apology for himself and his writings, occasioned by his expulsion,“which he dedicated to Robert Walpole, esq. This is printed among his” Political Writings/' 1715, I2i“. He had no'v nothing to do till the death of the queen, but to indulge himself svith his pen; and accordingly, in 1714, he published a treatise, entitled” The Romish Ecclesiastical History of late years.“This is nothing more than a description of some monstrous and gross popish rites, designed to hurt the cause of the Pretender, which was supposed to be gaining ground in England: and there is an appendix subjoined, consisting of particulars very well calculated for this purpose. In No. I. of the appendix, we have a list of the colleges, monasteries, and convents of men and women of several orders in the Low Countries; with the revenues which they draw from England. No. II. contains an extract of the” Taxa Cameroe,“or” Cancellariat Apostolicse,“the fees of the pope’s chancery; a book, printed by the pope’s authority, and setting forth a list of the fees paid him for absolutions, dispensations, indulgencies, faculties, and exemptions. No. 111. is a bull of the pope in 1357, given to the then king of France; by which the princes of that nation received an hereditary right to cheat the rest of mankind. No. IV. is a translation of the speech of pope Sixtus V. as it was uttered in the consistory at Rome, Sept. 2, 1589; setting forth the execrable fact of James Clement, a Jacohine friar, upon the person of Henry III. of France, to be commendable, admirable, and meritorious. No. V. is a collection of some popish tracts and positions, destructive of society and all the ends of good government. The same year, 1714, he published two papers: the first of which, called” The Lover;“appeared Feb. 25; the second,” The Reader," April 22. In the sixth number for May 3, we have an account of his design to write the history of the duke of Marlborough, from the date of the duke’s commission of captain general and plenipotentiary, to the expiration of those commissions: the materials, as he tells us, were in his custody, but the work was never executed.

, a learned lawyer in queen Elizabeth’s reign, was born about 1541, and is said by Mr. Strype to have been a member of Corpus Christi college, Cambridge. He removed thence to Lincoln’s-inn for the study of the law, and contracted an acquaintance with the most learned and ingenious men of that society. He became a puritan in consequence, as some suppose, of his connection with the celebrated Thomas Cartu right, who had married his sister. About 1579, when the report of the queen’s intended marriage with the duke of Anjou, brother to the king of France, had created an extraordinary alarm, lest such a match should eventually be injurious to the Protestant establishment, Mr. Stubbs published a satirical work against it, entitled “The Discovery of a gaping gulph wherein England is like to be swallowed up by another French marriage,” &c. This highly incensed the queen, whose passions ha -I always much -way over her actions, and too much over htr ministers, and she immediately issued out a proclamation against it; and the autuor and printer, or bookseller, being discovered, they were soon apprehended, and sentence given against them, that their right hands should be cut off, according to an act of Philip and Mary, “against the authors and publishers of seditious writings.” When Stubbs came to receive his punishment, which was inflicted with great barbarity, with a butcher’s knife and mallet, he immediately took off his hat with his left hand, and cried “God save the queen!”

In the meantime, while this work was going on, Sturmius filled the office of professor of mathematics at Wolfenbuttel, and it was there he published his “Sciagraphia Templi Hierosolymitani,” in fol. In 1697 he obtained permission of the duke of Wolfenbuttel to travel, and went into the Netherlands and into France: the result of his observations, chiefly on subjects of architecture, he published in 1719, folio, with numerous plates, from his own designs. This work shows great skill in architecture, but, as his eulogist is disposed to allow, a taste somewhat fastidious, and a wish to estimate all merit in the art by certain preconceived opinions of his own. In 1702 he was appointed professor of mathematics in the university of Francfort on the Oder. The king of France having promised a reward to the inventor of a sixth order of architecture, Sturmius, among others, made an attempt, which he called the German order, and which he intended to hold a middle rank between the Ionic and the Corinthian. It is unnecessary to add that no attempt of this kind has succeeded.

, one of the best painters hi his time which the French nation had produced, was born at Paris in 1617, and studied the principles of his art under Simon Vouet, whom he infinitely surpassed; and although he was never out of France, carried the art to a very high degree of perfection. His style was formed upon antiquity, and after the best Italian masters. He invented with ease, and his execution was always worthy of his designs. His attitudes are simple and noble, and his ex r pression well adapted to the subject. His draperies are designed after the manner of Raphael’s last works. Although he knew little of the local colours, or the chiaro scuro, he was so much master of the other parts of painting, that there was a great likelihood of his throwing off Vuuet’s manner entirely, had he lived longer. Immediately aiter Vouet’s death, he perceived that his master had led him out of the way: and by considering the antiques that were in France, and the designs and prints of the best Italian masters, particularly Raphael, he contracted a more refined style and happier manner. Le Brun could not forbear being jealous of Le Sueur, who did not mean, however, to give any man pain; for he had great simplicity of manners, and much candour, and probity. He died at Paris April 30, 1655, at no more than thirty-eight years of age. The life of St. Bruno, in twenty pictures, originally preserved in the Chartreux, and which employed him for three years, have, as Mr. Fuseli informs us, been “lately consigned to the profane clutch of restoration in the attic of the Luxembourg, and are now little more than the faint traces of what they were when issuing from the hand of their master. They have suffered martyrdom more than once.It is well that the nature of the subject permitted little more than fresco in the colouring at first, and that the great merit of their execution consisted in that breadth of vehicle which monastic drapery demands, else we should have lost even the fragments that remain.‘ The old man in the fore-ground, the head of St. Bruno, and some of the disputants in the back-ground of the Predication; the bishop and the condemned defunct in the funeral; the apparition of St. Bruno himself in the camp; the female figure in the eleemosinary scene, and what has suffered least of all, the death of St. Bruno, contain the least disputable marks of the master’s primitive touch. The subject of the whole, abstractly considered, is the personification of sanctity, and it has been represented in the series with a purity which seems to place the artist’s heart on a level with that of his hero. The simplicity which tells that tale of resignation and innocence, despises all contrast of more varied composition, though not always with equal success, St. Bruno on his bed, visited by angels, building or viewing the plan for building his rocky retreat; the hunting-scene, and’ the apotheosis; might probably have admitted happier combinations. As, in the different re* touchings, the faces have suffered most, the expression must be estimated by those that escaped; and from what still remains, we may conclude that it was not inferior to the composition.”

, one of the most able and honest ministers that France ever had, was descended from an ancient and illustrious house, and born in 1559 at Rosni, descended from a younger branch of the ancient counts of Flanders. His father was the baron de Rosni. He was bred in the opinions and doctrine of the reformed religion, and continued to the end of his life constant in the profession of it, which seems to have fitted him for the important services to which Providence had designed him. The queen of Navarre, after the death of her husband Antony de Bourbon, returned to Beam, where she openly professed Calvinism. She sent for her son Henry from the court of France to Pau in 1556, and put him under a preceptor, who trained him up in the Protestant religion. She declared herself the protectress of the Protestants in 1566; and went to Rochelle, where she devoted her son to the defence of the Reformed religion. In that quality Henry, then prince of Beam, was declared chief of the party; and followed the army from that time to the peace, which was signed at St. Germains, August 11, 1570. He then returned to Beam, and made use of the quiet that was given him, to visit his estates and his government of Guyenne, after which he went and settled in Rochelle, with his mother.

The advantages granted to the Protestants by the peace of St. Germains, raised a suspicion in the breasts of their leaders, that the court of France was acting treacherously, and that in reality nothing else was intended by the peace, than to prepare for the most dismal tragedy that ever was acted and the truth was, that the queen dowager Catharine de Medicis, and her son Charles IX. being now convinced that the Protestants were too powerful to be subdued by force, were determined to extirpate them by stratagem. They, however, dissembled their intentions; and, during the whole year 1571, talked of nothing but faithfully observing the treaties of entering into a closer correspondence with the Protestants, and carefully preventing all occasions of rekindling the war. To remove all possible suspicion, the court of France proposed a marriage between Charles the IXth’s sister, and Henry prince of Beam; and feigned, at the same time, as if they would prepare a war against Spain, than which nothing could be more agreeable to Henry. These things, enforced with the appearance of great frankness and sincerity, entirely gained the queen of Navarre; who, though she continued irresolute for some months, yet yielded about the end of 1571, and prepared for the journey to Paris, as was proposed, in May 1572.

Sully’s father was one of those who doubted the sincerity of the court, and conceived such strong apprehensions, that when the report of the court of Navarre’s journey to Paris first reached him, he could not give credit to it. Firmly persuaded that the present calm won Id be of short continuance, he made haste to take advantage of it, and prepared to shut himself up with his effects in Rochelle, when every one else thought of leaving it. But the queen of Navarre having informed him of her design, and requested him to join her in her way to Vendome, he went, and took Sully, now in his twelfth year, along with him. He found a general security at Vendome, and an air of satisfaction on every face; to which, though he durst not object in public, yet he made remonstrances to some of the chiefs in private. These were considered as the effects of weakness and timidity; and therefore, not caring to seem wiser than persons of greater understandings, he seemed to incline to the general opinion. He went to Rosni, to put himself into a condition to appear at the magnificent court of France; but, before he went, presented his son to the prince of Beam, in the presence of the queen his mother, with great solemnity, and assurances of the most inviolable attachment. Sully did not return with his father to Rosni, but went to Paris in the queen of Navarre’s train. He applied himself closely to his studies, without neglecting to pay a proper court to the prince his master; and lived with a governor and a valet de chambre in a part of Paris where almost all the colleges stood, and continued there till the bloody catastrophe which happened soon after.

All the necessary measures having been taken, the ringing of the bells of St. Germain TAuxerrois for matins was the signal for beginning the slaughter. The admiral de Coiigni was first murdered by a domestic of the duke of Guise, the duke himself staying below in the court, and his body was thrown out of the window. (See Coligni.) The king, as Daniel relates, went to feast himself with the sight of it; and, when those that were with him took notice that it was somewhat offensive, is said to have used the reply of the Roman emperor Vitellius, “The body of a dead enemy always smells sweet.” All the domestics of the admiral were afterwards slain, and the slaughter was at the same time begun by the king’s emissaries in all parts of the city. Tavanes, a marshal of France, who had been page to Francis I. and was at that time one of the counsellors and confidants of Catharine de Medicis, ran through the streets of Paris, crying, “Let blood, let blood! bleeding is as good in the month of August, as in May!” Among the most distinguished of the Protestants that perished was Francis de la Rochefoucault; who having been at play part of the night with the king, and finding himself seized in bed by men in masques, thought they were the king and his courtiers, who came to divert themselves with him. During this carnage, Sully’s safety is thus accounted for by himself: “1 was in bed,” says he, “and awaked from sleep three hours after midnight by the sound of all the bells and the confused cries of the populace. My. governor, St. Julian, with my valet de chambre, went hastily out to know the cause; and I never afterwards heard more of these men, who, without doubt, were among the first that were sacrificed to the public fury. I continued alone in my chamber dressing myself, when in a few moments I saw my landlord enter, pale, and in the utmost consternation. He was of the reformed religion; and, having learned what the matter was, had consented to go to mass, to preserve his life, and his house from being pillaged. He came to persuade me to do the same, and to take me with him: I did not think proper to follow him, but resolved to try if I could gain the college of Burgundy, where I had studied; though the great distance between the house where I then was, and the college, made the attempt very dangerous. Having disguised myself in a scholar’s gown, I put a large prayer/-book under my arm, and went into the street. I was seized with horror inexpressible at the sight of the furious murderers; who, running from all parts, forced open the houses, and cried aloud, ‘ Kill! kill! massacre the Huguenots!’ The blood which I saw shed before my eyes, redoubled my terror. I fell into the midst of a body of guards; they stopped me, questioned me, and were beginning to use me ill, when, happily for me, the book that I carried was perceived, and served me for a passport. Twice after this 1 fell into the same danger, from which I extricated myself by the same good fortune. At last I arrived at the college of Burgundy, where a danger still greater than any I had yet met with awaited me. The porter having twice refused me entrance, I continued standing in the midst of the street, at the mercy of the furious murderers, whose numbers increased every moment, and who were evidently seeking for their prey; when it came into my mind to ask for La Faye, the principal of this college, a good man, by whom I was tenderly beloved. The porter, prevailed upon by some small pieces of money which I put into his hand, admitted me; and my friend carried me to his apartment, where two inhuman priests, whom I heard mention Sicilian vespers, wanted to force me from him, that they might cut me in pieces; saying, the order was, not to spare even infants at the breast. All the good man could do was to conduct me privately to a distant chamber, where he locked me up; and here I was confined three days, unceriain of my destiny, seeing no one but a servant of my friend, who came from time to time to bring me provision.”

At the end of three days, however, a prohibition against murdering and pillaging any more of the Protestants was published at Paris; and then Sully was suffered to quit his cell in the college of Btirgundy. He immediately saw two soldiers of the guard, agents to his father, entering the college, who gave his father a relation of what had happened to him; and, eight days after, he received a letter from him, advising him to continue in Paris, since the prince he served was not at liberty to leave it and adding, that he should follow the prince’s example in going to mass. Though the king of Navarre had saved his life by this submission, yet in other things he was treated very indifferently, and suffered a thousand capricious insults. He was obliged, against his will, to stay some years at the court of France; he knew very well how to dissemble his chagrin 5 and he often diverted it by gallantries, and the lady de Sauves, wife to one of the secretaries of state, became one of his chief mistresses. But still he did not neglect such political measures as seemed practicable, and he had a hand in those that were formed to take away the government from Catharine de Medicis, and to expel the Guises from court which that queen discovering, caused him and the duke of Alengon to be arrested, set guards upon them, and ordered them to be examined upon many heinous allegations. They were set at liberty by Henry III. for Charles IX. died, 1574, in the most exquisite torments and horrors, the massacre of St. Bartholomew’s -day having been always in his mind. Sully employed his leisure in the most advantageous manner he was able. He found it impracticable in a court to pursue the study of the learned languages, or of any thing called learning; but the king of Navarre ordered him to be taught mathematics and history, and all those exercises which give ease and gracefulness to the person; that method of educating youth, with a particular attention to the formation of the manners, being peculiar to Henry, who was himself educated in the same way.

In 1576, the king of Navarre made his escape from the court of France, while on a hunting-party near Senlis; from whence, his guards being dispersed, he instantly passed the Seine at Poissy, and went to Tours, where he no sooner arrived than he resumed the exercise of the Protestant religion. A war was now expected; and Catharine de Medicis began to tremble in her turn: and, indeed, from that time to 1S89, Henry’s life presents us only with a mixture of battles, negociations, and love-intrigues, which last made no inconsiderable part of his business. Sully- was one of those who attended him in his flight, and who continued to attend him to the end of his life, serving him in the different capacities of sofdier and statesman, as the various conditions of his affairs required. Henry’s wife whom Catharine had brought to him in 1578, was a great impediment to him yet by his management she was sometimes of use also. There were frequent ruptures between him and the court of France; but at last Henry III. confederated with him sincerely, and in good earnest, to resist the League, which was more furious than ever, after the death of the duke of Guise and the cardinal his brother. The reconciliation and confederacy of these two kings was concluded in April 1589: their interview was at Tours the 30th of that month, attended with great demonstration of mutual satisfaction. They joined their troops some time after to lay siege to Paris: they besieged it in person, and were upon the point of conquering that great city, when the king of France was assassinated by James Clement, a Dominican friar, the 1st of August, at the village of St. Cloud. “The league,” says Renault, “is perhaps the most extraordinary event in history; and Henry III. may be reckoned the weakest prince in not foreseeing, that he should render himself dependant on that party by becoming their chief. The Protestants had made war against him, as an enemy of their sect; and the leaguers murdered him on account of his uniting with the king of Navarre, the chief of the Huguenots.”

Henry III. upon his death-bed declared the king of Navarre his successor, who accordingly succeeded him, but not without very great difficulties. He was acknowledged king by most of the lords, whether catholic or protestant, who happened then to be at court; but the leaguers refused absolutely to acknowledge his title till he had renounced the protestant religion; 'and the city of Paris persisted in its revolt till the 22d of March, 1594. He embraced the catholic religion, as the only method of putting an end to the miseries of France, by the advice of Sully, whom he had long taken into the sincerest confidence; and the celebrated Du Perron, afterwards cardinal, was made the instrument of his conversion. He attempted also to convert Sully, but in vain: “My parents bred me,” said the minister, “in the opinions and doctrines of the reformed religion, and I have continued constant in the profession of it; neither threatenings, promises, variety of events, nor the change even of the king my protector, joined to his most tender solicitations, have ever been able to make me renounce it.”

Sully was now the first minister; and he performed all the offices of a great and good minister, while Henry performed the offices of a great and good king. He attended to every part of the government; prosecuted extortioners, and those who were guilty of embezzling the public money; and, in short, restored the kingdom, in a few years, from, a most desperate to a most flourishing condition; which, however, he could not have done, if the king had not resolutely supported him against favourite mistresses, the cabals of court, and the factions of state, which would otherwise have overwhelmed him. The king himself turned his whole application to every thing that might be useful, or even convenient, to his kingdom, without suffering things that happened out of it to pass unobserved, as soon as he had put an end to the civil wars of France, and had concluded a peace with Spain at Vervins, on the 2d of May, 1598. The state of the finances of France was at thu time in a wretched situation, as many of the provinces were entirely exhausted, and none of them in a condition of bearing any new imposition. The standing revenues brought into the king’s coffers no more than thirty millions, though an hundred and fifty millions were raised on the people: so great were the abuses of that government in raising money; and they were not less in the dispensation of it. The whole scheme of the administration was a scheme of fraud, and all who served cheated the public, from the highest offices down to the lowest; from the commissioners of the treasury, down to the under farmers and under treasurers. Sully beheld this state of things, when he came to have the sole superintendency of affairs, with horror; he was ready to despair but zeal for his master and for his country animated his endeavours, and he resolved to make the reformation of abuses, the reduction of expences, and a frugal management, the fund for the payment of national debts, and for all the great things he intended to do, without overcharging the people. This plan fully succeeded. The people were immediately eased, trade revived, the king’s coffers were filled, a maritime power was created, and every thing necessary was prepared to put the nation in a condition of executing great designs, whenever great conjunctures should offer themselves. “Such,” says Bolingbroke, “was the effect of twelve years of wise and honest administration: and this effect would have shewed itself in great enterprises against the house of Austria, more formidable in these days than the house of Bourbon has been in ours, if Henry IV. had not been stabbed by one of those assassins, into whose hands the interest of this house, and the frenzy of religion, had put the dagger more than once.”

After the death of his master, by which he was greatly afflicted, Sully retired from court; for, a new reign introducing new men and new measures, he was no longer regarded. The life he led in retreat was accompanied with decency, grandeur, and even majesty; yet it was, in some measure, embittered with domestic troubles, arising from the extravagance and ill conduct of his eldest son, the marquis of Rosni. He died Dec. 22, 1641, aged eighty-three, and his duchess caused a statue to be erected over his burying-place, with this inscription: “Here lies the body of the most high, most puissant, and most illustrious lord, Maximilian de Bethune, marquis of Rosni, who shared in, all the fortunes of king Henry the Great; among which was that memorable battle, which gave the crown to the victor; where, by his valour, he gained the white standard, and took several prisoners of distinction. He was by that great monarch, in reward of his many virtues and distinguished merit, honoured with the dignities of duke, peer, and marshal of France, with the governments of the Upper and Lower Poitou, with the office of grand master of the ordnance; in which, bearing the thunder of his Jupiter, he took the castle of Montmelian, till then believed impregnable, and many other fortresses of Savoy. He was likewise made superintendant of the finances, which office he discharged singly, with a wise and prudent occonomy; and continued his faithful services till that unfortunate day, when the Caesar of the French nation lost his life by the hand of a parricide. After the lamented death of that great king, he retired from public affairs, and passed the remainder of his life in ease apd tranquillity. He died at the castle of Villebon, Dec. 22, 1641, aged 82.” Though he lived to such an age, no life could be more frequently exposed to perils than that of Sully. One of these was of a very extraordinary kind, and deserves to be particularly mentioned. It was at the taking of a town in Cambray, in 1581, when, to defend the women from the brutality of the soldiers, the churches, with gu.irds about them, were given them for asylums; nevertheless, d very beautiful young girl suddenly threw herself into the arms of Sully, as he was walking in the streets, and, holding him fast, conjured him to guard her from some soldiers, who, she said, had concealed themselves as soon as they saw him. Sully endeavoured to calm her fears, and offered to conduct her to the next church; but she tpld him she had been there, and had asked for admittance, which they refused, because they knew she had the plague. Sully thrust her from him with the utmost indignation as well as horror, and expected every moment to be seized with the plague, which, however, did not happen.

The “Memoirs of Sully” have always been ranked among the best, and certainly are among the most interesting and authentic books of French history, replete with good sense and virtuous remark. They contain a particular account of whatever passed from the peace in 1570, to the death of Henry IV. in 1610; a period of time, which has supplied the most copious subjects to the historians of France. They are full of numerous and various events; wars, foreign and domestic; interests of state and religion; master-strokes of policy; unexpected discoveries; struggles of ambition; stratagems of policy; embassies and negociations. These memoirs take their value, perhaps their greatest value, from the innumerable recitals of a private kind, which scarcely belong to the province of history; for, at the same time that they treat of the reign, they describe the whole life of Henry the Great. They are not, however, either in the form or language in which they were left by Sully: the form has been digested and methodized, and the language has been corrected and polished. The best edition in French is that of Paris, in 3 vois. 4to, and also in 8 vols. 12mo. They have been translated into English by Mrs. Charlotte Lennox, and published both in 4to and 8vo.

The arcana of anatomy now exciting his curiosity, one of his first objects was to consider how the parts of the body, prepared by dissection, could be preserved in a state for anatomical demonstration; and in this he succeeded, as he had done before in his nicer contrivances to dissect and prepare the minutest insects. After this, he made a journey into France, where he spent some time at Saumur with Tanaquil Faber, and made a variety of observations upon insects. From Saumur he went to Paris, in 1664, where he lived in the same house with his friend Steno. He likewise contracted an intimacy with Thevenot, who strenuously recommended him to Conrad Van Beuningen, a senator and burgomaster of Amsterdam, and at that time that republic’s minister at the court of France: Beuningen obtained leave for Svvammerdam, at his return home, to dissect the bodies of such patients as should happen to die in the hospital of that city.

, a celebrated physician of France, was the son of Nicholas du Bois, a camblet-weaver, who had eleven sons and four daughters. He was born at Amiens in Picardy, in 1478, and went through a course of classical learning, under his elder brother Francis Sylvius; who was principal of the college of Tournay at Paris, and was a great promoter of letters in that age of barbarism. There he learned the Latin language, in much greater purity than it had been taught for a long time; and hence it was, that his writings are distinguished to such advantage by the elegance of the style. He became a very accomplished scholar in Latin and Greek, and had some little knowledge of the Hebrew; and applied himself also to mathematics and mechanics so successfully, as to invent machines, which deserved public notice. When the time was come for giving himself entirely up to physic, to which study his inclination had always led him, he traced it to its sources; and engaged so deeply in the reading of Hippocrates and Galen, that he scarcely did any thing but examine and translate those two authors. He discovered from thence the importance of anatomy, and applied himself to it so ardently, that he became as great a master as that age would permit. He studied pharmacy with no less care, and took several journeys to see, upon the spot, the medicines which different countries produce. Upon his return to Paris, he read lectures, and explained in two years a course of physic from Hippocrates and Galen; which so much extended his reputation, that scholars from all parts of Europe resorted to him. But being prohibited at last from teaching as not having taken his degree, he went to Montpellier in 1520 for that purpose, but not being willing to pay the expences of graduation, he returned to Paris, and by an agreement with the faculty, recommenced his lectures, although only a bachelor of physic. In 1535 he taught in the college of Treguier, while Fernelius taught in tbat of Cornouailles; but the latter had few scholars, while the former had about five hundred. The reason of this difference was, that Sylvius dissected bodies, and read lectures upon botany and the preparation of medicines, advantages which the scholars of Fernelius had not. The professorship of physic in the royal college becoming vacant in 1548, Sylvius was nominated to fill it; which he did, after hesitating about it two years. He continued in it till his death, which happened Jan. 13, 1555. He was never married, and shewed even an aversion to women. His personal character was particularly obnoxious. His behaviour was rude and barbarous. He had nothing social in his temper, or ever departed from a certain pompous stiffness; and it was observed that when he attempted to relax, he did it aukwardly. The only witticism related of him is, that “he had parted with three beasts, his cat, his mule, and his maid.” His avarice was extreme, and he lived in the most sordid manner: he allowed his servants nothing but dry bread, and had no fire all the winter. Two things served him as a remedy against cold; he played at foot-ball, and carried a great log upon his shoulders: and he said that the heat which he gained by this exercise was more beneficial to his health than that of a fire. He was most rigid in demanding his fees from his scholars, yet was puzzled often what to do with his money, for when, in 1616, his house in the rue de St. Jacques was pulled down, the workmen found many pieces of gold, which he had probably hid and knew not where to find. This avarice, which was his ruling passion, exposed him to the wit of his contemporaries. Buchanan has a distich on him, beginning “Sylvius hie situs est, gratis qui nil dedit unquam, &c.” and a dialogue was published under the title of “Sylvius ocreatus,” or “Sylvius booted,” of which it was thought that Henry Stephens was the author, by the assumed name of Ludovicus Arrivabenus Mantuanus. It is founded on the supposition that Sylvius, wishing to pass Acheron without paying anything, went in boots that he might ford it. This satire was answered by John Melet, one of his pupils, who adopted the name of Claudius Burgensis, and entitled his performance “Apologia in Lud. Arrivabenum pro D. J. Silvio.”

Although we cannot fix the exact time of his going to France, it appears that he attended Henry V. at the siege of Caen in 1417; and the following year, in conjunction with Richard Beauchamp, earl of Warwick, lord Talbot took the strong castle of Dumfront: and was afterwards present at the siege of Rouen, on all which occasions he was esteemed one of the bravest of those officers who had contributed to the conquest of France. About 1422 we find him again in England, employed in suppressing some riots, in the counties of Salop, Hereford, &c. but he returned again to the continent before the year 1427, at which time he regained possession of the city of Mans, which had been a considerable time in the hands of the English, but had in part been retaken by the French, who were now attacked with such impetuosity, that all their troops were either killed or taken prisoners. The unexpected recovery of this important place, the capital of the province of Maine, as it was entirely owing to lord Talbot, contributed not a little to encrease his military fame. He then made himself master of the town of Laval, and having joined the earl of Warwick in the siege of Pontorson, carried that place too, which had before been the grand obstacle in preventing the regent, the duke of Bedford, from carrying the war beyond the Loire. On its surrender, the earl of Warwkk appointed lord Talbot and lord Ross governors of it.

His next conquests were Harfleur, Tankerville, Crotoy, where he defeated the troops of the duke of Burgundy, who had deserted the English interest, Longueville in Normandy, Carles, and Manille, and performed feats of great bravery, when the French attempted to recover Pontoise. In truth, all the reputation which the English arms in France still retained appears to have been almost wholly owing to the abilities, courage, and activity of lord Talbot: and in consideration of so great merit, he was advanced to the dignity of earl of Shrewsbury, his patent of creation bearing date May 20, 1442. In the following year, he was constituted one of the ambassadors to treat of peace with Charles VII. king of France; and the year after, the king acknowledging himself indebted to him in the sum of 10, M6l. 4. and a farthing, in consideration of his great services, as well to king Henry V. (his father) as to himself, botli in France and Normandy, granted, that after the sum of twenty-one thousand pounds, in which he stood indebted unto Henry the cardinal bishop of Winchester, were paid, he should receive, yearly, four hundred marks out of the customs and duties issuing from tfje port of Kingston upon Hull. He was, the same year, again retained to serve the king in his wars of France, with one baron, two knights, fourscore and sixteen men at arms, and three hundred archers, the king having given him ten thousand pounds in hand.

In 1450, being again in the wars of France, where the good success of the English then more and more declined, he was at the surrender of Falaize, and quitted that; place on honourable terms. In 145 1 he was made general of the English fleet, then going out, having four thousand soldiers with him in that expedition; and the year following, 1452, lieutenant of the duchy of Aquitaine, having under him these captains of his men at arms and archers, viz. John Viscount Lisle (his eldest son by his second wife), sir Robert Hungerford, lord Molins, sir Roger Camoys, sir John Lisle, and the bastard of Somerset: and in consideration of his great charge in that high employment, had a grant of the thirds, and third of the thirds, which were reserved to the king upon his retainer therein. He then marched thither; took Bourdeaux, and put a garrison into it, which success caused several remote cities to submit to his authority. Hearing that the French had besieged Chastillon, he advanced thither, and gave them battle, on July 20; but the event of that day (though for a while it stood doubtful) at length proved fatal to the English; this renowned general being killed by a cannon ball, and his whole army routed.

He was first buried at Roan in France, together with his eldest son, and the inscription for him is thus translated “Here lyeth the right noble knt. John Talbot, earl of Shrewsbury, earl of Wexford, Waterford, and Valence, lord Talbot of Goderich and Orchenfield, lord Strange of Blackmere, lord Verdon of Alton, lord Cromwell of Wingfield, lord Lovetofte of Worsop, lord Furnival of Sheffield, lord Faulconbridge, knight of the noble orders of the garter, St. Michael, and the golden fleece, great marshal to Henry VI. of his realm of France, who died in the battle of Bourdeaux, 1453.”

, an admired general, and mareschal of France, was born Feb. 14, 1652, the son of Roger d'Hostun, marquis of la Beaume. Like other young nobles of France, he chose the army for his profession, and at the age of sixteen had the royal regiment of Cravates, in which command he signalized himself for ten years. In 1672 he attended Louis XIV. into Holland, obtained soon after the confidence of Turenne, and distinguished himself on several occasions. He was raised to the rank of lieutenant-general in 1693, and in 1697 was employed in an embassy to England. On the renewal of war, he commanded on the Rhine in 1702, and soon after was created mareschal of France. He distinguished himself in the ensuing year against the Imperialists, and gained a brilliant advantage, which, however, he rather disgraced by his pompous manner of announcing it. He was less fortunate in 1704, when being engaged against the English in the plains of Hochstedt, near Blenheim, he was defeated and brought a prisoner to England, where he remained for seven years. Soon after this battle, he said, in a kind of peevish compliment to the duke of Marlborough, “Your grace has defeated the finest troops in Europe” “You will except, 1 hope,” said the duke, “the troops who beat them.” His residence in England, say the French historians, was not without its use to France; as he very much assisted in detaching queen Anne from tha party of the allies, and causing the recall of the duke of Marlborough. He returned to Paris in 1712, and was created a duke. In 1726 he was named secretary of state, which honour he did not long retain, but died March 3, 1723, at the age of seventy-six. He was a man of good talents and character; his chief fault being that he was rather inclined to boasting.

, marquis de Louvois, by which title he is generally known, was born at Paris, January 18, 1641. He was the son of Mit-hel le Teilier, secretary of state, and afterwards chancellor of France, and keeper of the seals. The great credit and power of the father gave an early introduction to the son into the offices of slate, and he was onlv twenty- three when the reversion of the place of war-minister was assigned to him. His vigilance, activity, and application, immediately marked him as a man of superior talents for business; and two years afterwards, in 1666, he succeeded his father as secretary of state. In 1668 he was appointed post-mastergeneral, chancellor of the royal orders, and grand vicar of the orders of St. Lazarus and Mount Carmel; in all which places he fully justified the first conception of his talents. By his advice, and under his care, was built the royal hospital of invalids; and several academies were founded for the education of young men of good families in the military line. After the death of Colbert, in 1683, Louvois was appointed superintendant of buildings, arts, and manufactures. Amidst this variety of occupations, to which his genius proved itself fully equal, he shone most particularly in the direction of military affairs. He established magazines, and introduced a discipline which was felt with advantage in every department of the army. He several times acted in person as grand master of the ordnance, and in that branch of duty signalized his judgment and energy no less than in every other. The force of his genius, and the success of his most arduous undertakings, gained him an extreme ascendant over the mind of Louis XIV. but he abused his power, and treated his sovereign with a haughtiness which created disgust and hatred in all who saw it. One day, on returning from a council, where he had been very ill received by the king, he expired in his own apartment, the victim of ambition, grief, and vexation. This happened when he was no more than fifty-one, on the 16th of July, 1691.

In the mean time, in 1678, the king, finding that affairs were riot likely to come to any conclusion with France, sent for sir William Temple to the council, and told him, that he intended he should go to Holland, in order to form a treaty of alliance with the States; and that the purpose of it should be, like the triple league, to force both France and Spain to accept of the terms proposed. Temple was sorry to find this act of vigour qualified by such a regard to France, and by such an appearance of indifference and neutrality between the parties. He told the king, that the resolution agreed on, was to begin the war in conjunction with all the confederates, in case of no direct and immediate answer from France; that this measure would satisfy the prince, the allies, and the people of England; advantages which couid not be expected from such an alliance with Holland alone; that France would be disobliged, and Spain likewise; nor would the Dutch be satisfied with such a faint imitation of the triple league, a measure concerted when they were equally at league with both parties. For these reasons sir William Temple declined the employment; and Lawrence Hyde, second son of the chancellor Clarendon, was sent in his place; and although the measure was not palatable to the prince, the States concluded the treaty in the terms proposed by the king. Just afterwards we find the king a little out of humour with sir William Temple; and when the parliament would not pass the supplies without some security against the prevalence of the popish party, the king thought proper to reproach Temple with his popular notions, as he termed them; and asked him how he thought the House of Commons could be trusted in carrying on the war, should it be entered on, when in the very commencement they made such declarations? Sir William, however, was not daunted by this reproach; and when the king, thwarted by his parliament, began to lend an ear to the proposals of the king of France, who offered him great sums of money, if he would consent to France’s making an advantageous peace with the allies, sir William, though pressed by his majesty, refused to have any concern in so dishonourable a negociation. He informs us that the king said, there was one article proposed, which so incensed him, that as long as he lived, he should never forget it What it was, sir William does not mention; but dean Swift, who was the editor of his works, informs us, that the French, before they would agree to any payment, required as a preliminary, that king Charles should engage never to keep above 8000 regular troops in Great Britain!

king of Corsica, baron Niewhoff, grandee of Spain, baron of England, peer of France, baron of the holy empire, prince of the Papal throne for thus he styled himself; “a man whose claim to royalty,” says lord Orford, “was as indisputable, as the most ancient titles to any monarchy can pretend to be;” was born at Metz about 1696. The particulars of his eventful history are thus related. In March 1736, whilst the Corsican mal-contents were sitting in council, an English vessel from Tunis, with a passport from our consul there, arrived at a port then in the possession of the roal-contents. A stranger on board this vessel, who had the appearance of a person of distinction, no sooner went on shore, but was received with singular honours by the principal persons, who saluted him with the titles of excellency, and viceroy of Corsica. His attendants consisted of two officers, a secretary, a chaplain, a few domestics and Morocco slaves. He was conducted to the bishop’s palace; called Himself lord Theodore; whilst the chiefs knew more about him than they thought convenient to declare. From the vessel that brought him were debarked ten pieces of cannon, 4000 fire-locks, 3000 pair of shoes, a great quantity of provisions, and coin to the amount o 200,000 ducats. Two pieces of cannon were placed before his door, and he had 400 soldiers posted for his guard, He created officers, formed twenty-four companies of soldiers, distributed among the mal-contents the arms and shoes he had brought with him, conferred knighthood on one of the chiefs, appointed another his treasurer, and professed the Roman Catholic religion. Various conjectures were formed in different courts concerning him. The eldest son of the pretender, prince Ragotski, the duke de Ripperda, comte de Bonneval, were each in their turns supposed to be this stranger; all Europe was puzzled but the country of this stranger vas soon discovered he was, in fact, a Prussian, well known by the name of Theodore Antony, baron of Niewhoff.

, librarian to the king of France, and a celebrated writer of travels, was born at Paris in 1621, and had scarcely gone through his academical studies, when he discovered a strong passion for visiting foreign countries. At first he saw only part of Europe; but accumulated very particular informations and memoirs from those who had travelled over other parts of the globe, and out of those composed his “Voyages and Travels.” He laid down, among other things, some rules, together with the invention of an instrument, for the better finding out of the longitude, and the declination of the needle; which, some have thought, constitute the most valuable part of his works. Thevenot was likewise a great collector of scarce books in all sciences, especially in philosophy, mathematics, and history; and in this he may be said to have spent his whole life. When he iiad the care of the king’s library, though it is one of the best furnished in Europe, he found two thousand volumes wanting in it, which he had in his own. Besides printed books, he brought a great many manuscripts in French, English, Spanish, Italian, Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Syriac, Arabic, Turkish, and Persic. The marbles presented to him by Mr. Nointel, at his return from his embassy to Constantinople, upon which there are bas-reliefs and inscriptions of almost two thousand years old, may be reckoned among the curiosities of his library. He spent most of his time among his books, without aiming at any post of figure or profit; he had, however, two honourable employments; for he assisted at a conclave held after the death of pope Innocent X. and was the French king’s envoy at Genoa. He was attacked with a slow fever in 1692, and died October the same year at the age of seventy-one. According to the account given, he managed himself very improperly in this illness: for he diminished his v strength by abstinence, while he should have increased it with hearty food and strong wines, which was yet the more necessary Oh account of his great age. “7'hevenot’s Travels into the Levant, &c.” were published in English, in 1687, folio; they had been published in French, at Paris, 1663, folio. He wrote also “L'Art de nager,” the Art of Swimming, 12 mo, 1696.

, a writer of some note in the 16th century, was horn at Angflulesme, and entered the Franciscan order, and afterwards visited Italy, the Holy Land, Egypt, Greece, and Brasil. At his return to France in 1556, he quitted the cordelier’s habit, took that of an ecclesiastic, and was appointed almoner to queen Catherine de Medicis. He had the titles of historiographer of France, and cosmographer to the king, and received the profits of those offices. He died Nov. 23, 1590, aged eighty-tight, leaving “Cosmographie de Levant,” Lyons, 1554, 4to; “A History of illustrious Men/' 1671, 8 vols. 12mo, or 1684, 2 vols. fol. a work of very little merit; but the folio edition is esteemed of some price on account of the portraits. He wrote also” Singularity’s de la France Aniarctique," Paris, 1558, 4to, and several other books, from which the author appears to have been a great reader, but at the same time, to have possessed great credulity, and little judgment.

, a learned French divine, was born Aug. 28, 1619, at Aix in Provence, of a good and ancient family, and admitted at the age of fourteen into the congregation of the oratory, where he had been educated. After teaching ethics in his congregation, and philosophy, he was appointed professor of divinity at Saumur, and introduced in his school the method of treating theological subjects according to the scriptures, the fatheri, and councils. Being invited to Paris in 1654, he began to bold conferences of positive theology in the seminary of St. Magloire, according to the method he had adopted it Saumur, and continued them till 166S, at which time his superiors and several eminent prelates persuaded him to give the fruits of his labours to the public. He complied, and afterwards became so celebrated by his works, that pope Innocent XI. endeavoured to draw him to Koine, with an intention of giving him a cardinal’s hat, and making use of his talents; but the king of France replied that so learned a man was necessary in his dominions. The French clergy gave him a pension of Jooo livres, which the poor always shared with him. He was mild, modest, active, agreeable in his manners, and very assiduous in all his pursuits. He died December 25, 1695, aged seventyseven. His principal works are: 1. A large treatise on “Ecclesiastical Discipline,” reprinted 1725, 3 vols. fol. in French; of which he, made a Latin translation, reprinted also in 1706, 3 vols. fol. This work is highly praised by persons in the catholic community. 2. “Theological Dogmas,” 1680, 3 torn. fol. in Latin. 3. “Tracts on the Divine office, 8 vo; on the Feasts, 8vo; on the Fasts, 8 vo; on Truth and Falsehood, 8vo; on Alms, 8vo on Trade and on Usury, 8vo; 4.” Tr. dogmatique des Moyens dont on s’est servi dans tous les terns pour maintenir Tunite de i'Eglise,“1703, 3 vols. 4to. To these may be added,” Directions for studying and teaching philosophy in a Christian manner,“8vo the same” for the profane historians,“8vo; apian of the same kind for grammar or the languages with relation to the Holy Scriptures, 2 vols. 8vo;” A Universal Hebrew Glossary,“printed at the Louvre, 1697, fol.” Dissertations on the Councils,“in Latin, 1667, 1 vol. 4to;” Memoires sur la Grace," 1682, 4to, &c. His Life, written by father Bordes, is prefixed to his Hebrew Glossary.

On quitting England in the month of September 1783, he landed at Boulogne, along wiih the celebrated Gibbon, who describes him by three epithets which shew how quickly he had been able to appreciate him. He calls him “the soldier, philosopher, statesman, Thompson.” He afterwards arrived at Strasburg, where the prince Maximilian de Deux- Fonts, now elector of Bavaria, then mareschal du camp in the service of France, was in garrison. That prince, commanding the parade, discovered among the spectators an officer in a foreign uniform, mounted on a fine English horse, and accosted him; Thompson informed him that he had just been employed in the American war; the prince, pointing out to him several officers who surrounded him, ' These gentlemen,“said he,” served in the same war, but against you. They belonged to the royal regiment Deux-ponts, sent to America under the command of the count de Rochambeau."

, an illustrious historian of France, was son of a first president of the parliament of Paris, and born there the 9th of October, 1553. He was so exceedingly weak and infirm in his infancy, that there was no hope of rearing him for the first five years of his life; and to this it is owing, that abundantly more care was taken to preserve his body, than to cultivate his mind, although he then appeared to be a boy of uncommon talents; for he was not addicted to the amusements of childhood, but aimed at something higher, and would divert himself with drawing and painting, for which he had always a very good taste. When he was ten years old, he was put to books, and placed in the college of Bourgogne; but in less than a year he was attacked with a violent fever, and taken home. The physicians gave him over for many months; but he recovered, and applied again to books, though with great moderation; for hie constitution was not able to* undergo the least fatigue. He was afterwards placed under the care of private tutors \ and regard seems to have been had, in the choice of them, to the weakness of his nature, as well as to the improvement of his understanding; for they were physicians, and successively four of them. Then he studied under the famous Dionysius Lambinus, and Joannes Pellerinus, who was professor of the Greek language in the College-royal.

, a learned protestant divine of the French church, was born at Goldberg in Silesia, Feb*4, 1563. He came into France about 1590, and was naturalized by Henry IV. He at first distinguished himself as an opponent of the tenetsof Arminius, but afterwards changed his opinion, and enlisted on the side of the remonstrants. His principal controversy was with Peter Du Moulin, which was carried on with so much warmth, that those who were friends to the peace of the church, and admired both writers for their respective excellencies, interposed to reconcile them, or put a stop to the dispute. James I. of England, among others, wrote a letter in 1614 to the synod of Tonneins on this subject, which with the answer and proceedings of that assembly, may be seen in Quick’s “Synodicon,” vol. I. Tilenus had, before this, been appointed by the mareschal de Bouillon, to be professor at the college of Sedan, which de Bouillon had founded, but about 1619, or 1620, Tilenus was obliged to resign in consequence of persisting in his peculiar sentiments, and came to Paris, where he lived on his property. He afterwards had a personal controversy at a country house near Orleans, with John Cameron, divinity professor at Saumur, concerning the subject of grace and free will. This lasted five days, and an account of it was published, under the title of “Collatio inter Tilenum & Cameronem, &c.” (See Cameron). Some time after, Tilenus addressed a letter to the Scotch nation, disapproving of the presbyterian, and commending the episcopal form of the reformed church, as established in England. This pleased king James so much, who hated presbyterianism, that he invited the author to England, where he received him very graciously, and offered him a pension. Tilenus accepted the offer, and only begged leave to return to France to settle his affairs; but his character becoming by some means obnoxious in this country, he was discouraged from returning, and died at Paris, Aug. 1, 163S. His latter days were spent in defending the Arminian tenets against the reformed church of France, and he wrote several books, the titles of which may now be dispensed with, but may be found in our authorities.

, -viscount de Turenne, a celebrated French general, was born in September 1611, at Sedan, and was the second son of Henry de la Tour, duke de Bouillon, descended from one of the most illustrious French families. He very early discovered uncommon talents for the military art, and made his first campaign in Holland under Maurice, and Frederic Henry of Nassau, his uncles on the mother’s side. He went socm after into Lorrain with his regiment in 1634, and having contributed to the taking of la Mothe, was appointed major-general, though at that time very young. In 1636 he took Saverne, and the year following, the castles of Hirson and Sorle, and it was on this occasion, that he acted like Scipio, with respect to a very beautiful woman, whom he sent back to her husband. He was made marechal of France, in 1644, and had the misfortune to be defeated at the battle of Mariendal, 1645; but gained that of Nortlingen, three months after, restored the elector of Treves to his dominions, and the following year effected,. that famous junction of the French with the Swedish army commanded by general Wrangel, which compelled the duke of Bavaria to sue for peace. This duke having broken the treaty he made with France, the viscount de Turenue defeated him at Zumarshausen, and drove him entirely from his dominions in 1643. During the civil wars he joined the princes, and was defeated at the battle of Rhetel, in 1650; but his majesty, being soon reconciled to him, gave him the command of his army in 1652. His conduct was afterwards much admired at the battles of Jergeau, Gien, and the Fauxbourg St. Antoine, and in his retreat before the army of the princes at Villeneuve-Sainte-George. In 1654 he forced the Spaniards to raise the siege of Arras, and in 1655, took Condé, Saint Guillain, and several other places; won the famous battle of the Downs, and took Dunkirk and Oudenarde, with almost all the rest of Flanders; which obliged Spain to conclude the peace of the Pyrenees in 1660. These important services deservedly acquired him the office of marechal-general of the royal camps and armies. A fresh war breaking out with Spain, 1667, Turenne commanded under the king’s orders in Flanders, where he took so many places that the Spaniards were forced to propose peace the following year. In the same year he abjured the Protestant religion, probably from ambitious motives. In 1672 he commanded the French troops during the war against Holland, took forty towns in 22 days, drove the elector of Brandenburg quite to Berlin, won the battles of Sintsheim, Lademburg, Ensheim, MuU hausen and Turkeim, and compelled the Imperial army, consisting of 70,000 men, to re-pass the Rhine. This campaign acquired the viscount de Turenne immortal honour. He crossed the Rhine to attack general Montecuculli, and pursued him to Saspach, near the town of Acheren; but having ascended an eminence to observe the enemy’s camp, he was killed by a cannon-ball, July 27, 1675, at the age of sixty-four. All France lamented the loss of this great man, whose generosity and modesty, joined to his military virtues, and the noblest qualities of the hero, had made him admired throughout Europe. The king ordered a solemn service to be performed for him in the cathedral church at Paris, as for the first prince of the blood, and that his remains should be interred in the abbey of St. Denys, the burying-place of the royal personages of France, where the cardinal, his nephew, raised a superb mausoleum to his memory. He married Anne de Nompar de Caumont, daughter of the duke and marechal de la Force, but had no children by her. His life has been written by the abbe Raguenet, and M. de Ramsay. The viscount de Turenne, one of his ancestors, wrote a valuable treatise on “The Military Art.”

, a famous botanist of France, was born of a good family, at Aix in Provence, June 5, 1656. He had a taste for observing and collecting plants from his childhood; and, when he was at school, used frequently to play truant, though he was frequently punished for it, in order to traverse the fields in quest of new discoveries. The same passion continued when he was more grown up, and after he began to study philosophy and divinity; and, though all endeavours were used by his father, who designed him for the church, to cure him of it, his favourite study prevailed, and plants continued his object. In pursuit of them he was ready to traverse the globe, as he did a great part of it afterwards; but, for the present, was obliged to content himself with what the neighbourhood of Aix and the gardens of the curious afforded. Becoming his own master by the death, of his father in 1677, he quitted theology, which indeed he had never relished, and gave himself up entirely to physic, natural philosophy, and botany, at the instigation of an uncle, who was a very ingenious and reputable physician. In 1678, he ran over the mountains of Dauphine and Savoy, and thence enriched his collection with a great number of curious specimens. In 1679 he went to Montpelier, to study medicine and anatomy. In this town was a garden of plants, which had been established by Henry IV. but this did not satisfy his curiosity: he travelled over the country round about Montpelier, and brought back with him plants which were before unknown to the botanists of that place. His curiosity becoming more ardent, he formed a scheme of passing over into Spain, and set out for Barcelona in April 1681. He spent some time in the mountains of Catalonia, whither he was accompanied by the young physicians of the country, and the students in physic, to whom he pointed out and explained the various sorts of plants; but was often exposed to dangers, and was once stripped naked by the miquelets, a kind of banditti, who, however, so far took pity on him as to return him his waistcoat, in the lining of which, by good luck, he happened to have some silver tied up in a handkerchief. After other risks, he arrived safe at Montpelier in 1681, and continued his studies in medicine, and his operations in chymistry and anatomy. He was afterwards received doctor of physic at Orange, and thence went to Aix, where his passion for plants, which was as high as ever, did not suffer him to continue long. He now visited the Alps, and he brought back with him new treasures, which he had acquired with great fatigue and danger.

He now resumed the business of his profession, which his travels had interrupted, and was soon after made professor of physic in the college-royal. He had also the offices of his botanic professorship in the king’s garden, and the usual functions of the academy of sciences required of every member, to attend, together with the work of preparing an account of his travels, which was now to be expected from him. This being more than his constitution could bear, gradually impaired his health, but it was an unforeseen accident that cost him his life: as he was going to the academy his breast was violently pressed by the axle of a carriage, which brought on a spitting of blood, to which he did not pay a proper regard; and this ending in a dropsy of the breast, carried him off, after languishing some months, December 28, 1708. He was the greatest botanist of his time; and it was by his skill and care that the king of France’s gardens, almost quite neglected and abandoned before, were afterwards holden in honour, and thought worth the attention of all the virtuosi in Europe. Yet he was not so particularly attached to botany as to neglect every thing else; for he had made a most valuable collection of all kinds of natural curiosities, which he left by will to the king.

The Townley Museum was also rich in gems, terra cottas, sepulchral monuments; and, above all, in a series of Roman imperial, large brass, second only in extent and preservation to that of the late king of France, which alone had cost the collector above 3000l. The Greek medals were rather specimens than a collection; having been selected for a particular purpose, which will now be explained.

He is said to have given the estate of Blebo to a nephew, but we are unable to trace his descendants until we arrive at the sixteenth century, when we meet with Andrew Traill, the great grandfather of our author, who was a younger brother of the family of Blebo. Following the profession of a soldier, he rose to the rank of a colonel, and was for some time in the service of the city of Bruges, and other towns in Flanders, in the wars which they carried on in defence of their liberties, against Philip II. of Spain. When he left this service his arrears amounted to 2,700l. for which he received a bond secured upon the property of the States. He then served under the king of Navarre, afterwards Henry IV. of France, in the civil wars of that kingdom, and had occasion to do that prince considerable service in taking a town by stratagem. Upon his return to Britain he was made a gentleman of prince Henry’s privychamber. When he died is not known; but he had a son, James Traill, who endeavoured to recover the sum due to him by the cities of Flanders; and, upon a petition to king James, which was referred to sir Harry Martin, judge of the admiralty, he obtained a warrant to arrest a ship belonging to the city of Bruges, which was done accordingly. But the duke of Buckingham being gained by the adverse party, the ship was soon released; nor could he ever afterwards recover any part of the debt. This circumstance, together with the expence of the prosecution, obliged him to dispose of a small estate in the parish of Deninno, in the county of Fife.

, a French poet and dramatic writer, was born in the castle of Souliers, in the province of la Marche, in 1601. When attached to the household of the marquis de Verncuil, natural son of Henry IV. he fought a duel, in which his antagonist, one of the guards, was killed, and fled for some time to England. Returning to Poitou, he found friends who obtained his pardon from Louis XIII.; and Gaston of Orleans made him one of his gentlemen in ordinary. His life became then divided between poetry, gallantry, and gaming, and he experienced all the reverses and vicissitudes to which such a life is exposed, many of which he had alluded to in his “Page disgracie,” a romance published in 16-13, 4to. He wrote much for the stage, and was seldom unsuccessful. His tragedy of “Mariamne” still keeps his reputation alive, although it was fatal to the actor, Mondori, who performed the character of Herod, and died of violent exertion. Tristan was admitted into the French academy in 1649, but always lived poor. He died Sept. 7, 1655, in the fifty-fourth year of his age. His dramas and other poems were primed in '') vols. 4to. There were two others of this name: John Baptist Tristan L'Hermite Souliers, who was gentleman of his majesty’s bedchamber, and brother to the preceding. He was author of the genealogies of several families; “L'Histoire geneologique cle la Noblesse de Touraine,” 1669, fol.; “La Toscane Francoise,” 1661, 4to; “Les Corses Francoise,” 1662, 12mo; “Naples Francoise,” 1663, 4to, &c. containing the history of such persons in those countries as have been attached to France. There was also John Tristan, son of Charles Tristan, auditor of accounts at Paris. He attached himself to Gaston of France, duke of Orleans, was well skilled in antiquity and medals, and published a “Historical Commentary on the Lives of the Emperors,” 1644, 3 vols. fol. a work full of curious observations; but Angeloni and father Sirmond found several faults in it, which Tristan answered with great asperity. He was living in 1656.

In 1684, he was presented to the king by lord Rochester, and received the honour of knighthood; and was also made clerk of the deliveries of the ordnance stores, a place worth 300l. a year. In 1685, he was appointed envoy extraordinary at the court of France, against his inclination; but the king (James II.) insisted upon it, and gave him a pension of 200l. a year, in lieu of his place of clerk of the deliveries, which he could not hold with his appointment as envoy. His conduct in this office does him much credit. Being in France when the Protestants were persecuted in consequence of the revocation of the edict of Nantz, he remonstrated against it, and spoke his opinion with a freedom which was not very acceptable, either at the court where he was, or that from which he came; and when he found his remonstrances in vain, he took every method he could, by his privilege, to harbour many of the persecuted Protestants, and assisted them in recovering their effects, and conveying them to England. It was probably on this account that he was recalled in 1636, and, as his services were too valuable to be laid aside, the king appointed him ambassador extraordinary to the Ottoman Porte; and before he embarked, the Turkey-company presented him with a gold cup, value sixty pounds. He was continued in this embassy by William III. and remained there until 1691. He then returned from Constantinople, principally by land. In 1694 and 1695 he was advanced to be one of the lords of the treasury, a member of the privy-council, and principal secretary of state. He was also governor of the Turkeycompany: and had been several times member of parliament, and once represented the university of Oxford. His opportunities to acquire diplomatic knowledge, and to understand the intrigues of negotiation, induced him once to say to king William, “Do not, Sir, send embassies to Italy, but a fleet into the Mediterranean.”

, a gentleman of an ancient family in Yorkshire, deserves honourable mention in this work, although we can say little as to his biography, as the first inventor of the drill-plough, and the first Englishman, perhaps the first writer ancient or modern, who attempted with any tolerable degree of success to reduce agriculture to certain and uniform principles. After an education at one of our universities, and being admitted a barrister of the Temple, he made the tour of Europe, and, in every country through which he passed, was a diligent observer of the soil, culture, and vegetable productions. On his return to England he married, and settled in a paternal farm in Oxfordshire, where he pursued an infinite number of agricultural experiments, till by intense application, vexatious toil, and too frequently exposing himself to the vicissitudes of heat and cold in the open fields, he contracted a disorder in his breast, which, not being found curable in England, obliged him a second time to travel, and to seek a cure in the milder climates of France and Italy. Here he again attended more minutely to the culture of those countries; and, having little else to do, he employed himself, during three years residence abroad, to reduce his observations to writing, with a view of once more endeavouring to introduce them into practice, if ever he should be so happy as to recover his health, and be able to undergo the fatigues of a second attempt. From the climate of Montpelier, and the waters of that salutary spring, he found in a few months that relief which all the power of physic could not afford him at home; and he returned to appearance perfectly repaired in his constitution, but greatly embarrassed in his fortune. Part of his estate in Oxfordshire he had sold, and before his departure had settled his family on a farm of his own, called Prosperous Farm, near Hungerford in Berkshire, where he returned with a firm resolution to perfect his former undertaking, having, as he thought, devised means during his absence to obviate all difficulties, and to force his new husbandry into practice by the success of it, in spite of all the opposition that should be raised by the lower class of husbandmen against it. He revised and rectified all his old instruments, and contrived new ones proper for the different soils of his new farm; and he now went on pretty successfully, though not rapidly, nor much less expensively, in the prosecution of his new system. He demonstrated to all the world the good effects of his horsehoeing culture; and by raising crops of wheat without dunging for thirteen years together in the same field, equal in quantity, and superior in quality, to those of his neighbours in the ordinary course, he demonstrated the truth of his own doctrine, that labour and arrangement would snpply the place of dung and fallow, and would produce more corn at an equal or less expence. But though Mr. Tull was successful in demonstrating that this might be done, he was not so happy in doing it himself. His expences were enhanced various ways, but chiefly by the stupidity of workmen in constructing his instruments, and in the awkwardness and wickedness of his servants, who, because they did not or would not comprehend the use of them, seldom failed to break some essential part or other, in order to render them useless. These disadvantages were discernible only to Mr. Tull himself; the advantages attending the new husbandry were now visible to all the world; and it was now that Mr. Tull was prevailed upon, by the solicitations of the neighbouring gentlemen who were witnesses of its utility, to publish his theory, illustrated by a genuine account of the result of it in practice, which he engaged to do, and faithfully performed at no trivial expence.

On his return, apparently in 1519, he was rewarded by a succession of preferments, in this year by the prebend of Botevant, in the church of York; in May 1521 by another, that of Combe and Hornham, in the church of Sarum by the deanery of Salisbury; and in 1522 he wa promoted to the bishopric of London. In 1523 he was made keeper of the privy seal: and in 1525, he and sir Richard Wingfield went ambassadors into Spain, in order to confer with the emperor, after the king of France, Francis I was taken prisoner at the battle of Pavia.

In 1636 he gave a good edition of “Ammianus Marcellinus,” in 4to, corrected in a great number of places from the manuscripts, and illustrated with very ingenious and learned notes. A second edition, with more notes of Valesius, and those of Lindenbrog, came out at Paris, 1681, in folio, edited by his brother Adrian Valesius; and James Gronovius also published a third at Leyden, 1693, fol. and 4to. The critical talents and learning which Valesius had displayed in these publications, recommended him as the most proper person to superintend a work of greater importance, an edition of the ancient ecclesiastical historians. M. de Montchal, abp. of Tholouse, a learned man, whom the clergy of France had requested to give an edition of these historians, undertook the affair; and applied to Valesius to assist him privately. But Valesius was too jealous of his reputation, to let another person enjoy the fruits of his labours; and therefore absolutely refused his aid. The archbishop, either too much taken up with the business of his see, or despairing of success in what he had undertaken, soon after excused himself to the clergy; and at the same time advised them to apply to Valesius, as a man who was every way qualified for the task. To this Valesius had no objection, and his employers by way of encouragement settled a pension upon him. This was about 1650, and the Historians were published in Greek and Latin, with good notes, in the following order: “Eusebii Pamphili historia ecclesiastica, ejusdemque libri de vita Constantini, & panegyricus atque oratio Constantini ad sanctos,” Paris, 1659; “Socratis & Sozomeni historia ecclesiastica,” 166S; “Theodoreti et Evagrii historia ecclesiastica, item excerpta & historia ecclesiastica Philostorgii,” 1673. These were reprinted in 3 vols. folio, first at Amsterdam in 1699, and then at Cambridge in 1720; to which last edition some remarks, but very inconsiderable ones, scattered up and down in various authors, were collected and subjoined by the editor William Reading.

In 1660, Valesius was honoured with the title of historicgrapber of France; and had also a pension settled on him by the king, in consideration of his edition of Eusebius, which had appeared the year before. In 1662 he lost his left eye, so that now he was blind; and, notwithstanding all the skill of oculists, the most that could be done for him was, to enable him to see a little with the left eye, a new cataract, almost as soon as it was removed, forming itself again in the right. In 1663 he had an addition to his pension from the crown. He had hitherto lived among his books, but now, at the age of sixty, he surprized his friends by marrying a handsome young woman, by whom he had seven children. He died the seventh of May, 1676, having spent the two last years of life in all the miseries of one oppressed with infirmities. He was a man of great abilities and learning, and an admirable critic; but his disposition was far from being amiable. He was sparing in his praise, but so tenacious of the respect he thought due to him, as to resent the smallest attempt to criticise or find fault with what he wrote, and this irritable temper increased with his years.

, or Adrien de Valois, brother of Henry, and a very learned man also, was born at Paris in 1607, and educated in the college of Clermont there, under the Jesuits. He followed the example of his brother, and had the same counsellors in his studies, the fathers Sirmond and Petavius. History was his principal object; and he spent many years in searching into the most authentic records, manuscript as well as printed. His long perseverance in these pursuits enabled him to give the public an elaborate Latin work, entitled “Gesta Francorum, seu de rebis Francicis,” in 3 vols. folio; the first of which came out in 1646, the two others in 1658. This history begins with the year 254; and ends with 752. It is written with care and elegance, and may serve for an excellent commentary upon the ancient historians of France, who wrote rudely and barbarously: but some have considered it as a critical work filled with rude erudition, rather than a history. Colbert asked him one day concerning his Latin history of France, and pressed him to continue it; but he answered the minister, that he might as well take away his life, as put him upon a work so full of difficulties, and so much beyond what his age could bear; for he was then in years. He is the author of several other Latin works; as “Notitia Galliarum, ordine alphabetico digesta,” 1675, in folio; a work of great utility in explaining the state of ancient Gaul. He was the editor, as we have mentioned, of the second edition of “Ammianus Marcellinus;” to which, besides additional notes of his brother and Lindenbrog, he added notes and emendations of his own. He wrote also a Panegyric upon the king, and a life of his brother. There is also a “Valesiana.”

He wrote a great number of works, chiefly of the historical kind; and published, at different times and in distinct portions, a history of France, comprising a period of 176 years under nine different reigns, beginning with Lewis XL and ending with Henry III. He published also “Les Anecdotes de Florence, ou THistoire secrette de la Maison de Medicis, at the Hague,” 1685, in 12mo; and, -“Histoire des Revolutions arrives en Europe en matiere de Religion,” Paris, 1686, and often reprinted. Varillas had some advantages of style to recommend him as an historian; he had likewise a pleasing manner of relating and setting off facts; and his characters, though somewhat diffuse, are drawn with art, and for the most part appear curious and interesting. Add to this, that he abounds in anecdotes, and told Menage that, “of ten things which he knew, he had learned nine from conversation.” He was also profuse in his professions of sincerity, and was thought to have penetrated into the inmost recesses of the cabinet, and drawn forth a great deal of secret history from the numerous and important manuscripts which he pretends in his prefaces to have been from time to time communicated to him. All this procured him a vast reputation at first: his books were read with eagerness: and such was the call for them, that the booksellers generally sent forth two editions, in different forms, at the same time. The public, however, were at length undeceived, and came to be convinced that the historical anecdotes, which Varillas put off for authentic facts, were wholly of his own invention, notwithstanding his affected citations of titles, instructions, letters, memoirs, and relations, all of them imaginary. As his design was to please rather than instruct his readers, he omitted nothing which he thought might conduce to this. Thus he characterised persons he knew little of, as if he had lived in the greatest familiarity with them; and gave particular reasons for all the steps they took, as if he had been privy to their councils. He advanced facts with the utmost confidence, which were scarcely probable: the air of politics, which runs through all his writings, is romantic; and every event, according to him, proceeded from premeditation and design. Such is the opinion which his own countrymen soon learned to give of his “History of France,” and “Florentine Anecdotes;” but his “History of the Revolutions in matters of Religion which have happened in Europe,” utterly ruined his reputation abroad, and exposed him to the criticisms of able men in each country: of Burnet and Dr. King, in England, Brunsmann in Denmark, Puffendorf and Seckendorf in Germany, vtho copiously detected and exposed his falsehoods and misrepresentations concerning the state of religion in their respective countries, and totally destroyed the reputation of his works.

a Jesuit of France, eminently distinguished for his accomplishments in the belles-lettres, was born in 1605, at Paray, a small town in Charolois, in the diocese of Autun. He entered into the society of the Jesnits in 1621; and, after having finished the course of his studies, taught polite literature and rhetoric for seven years. Afterwards he was called to Paris, to explain the Holy Scriptures; which province he sustained for six and thirty years, all the while cultivating poetry and classical literature, in which he particularly excelled. He died at Paris in Dec. 1681. He understood the Latin tongue very exactly, and also spoke it with the greatest purity and elegance. He was a man of good talents, great acuteness, solid and accurate judgment, and profound learning; so that he had all the qualities necessary to make him, what he was generally allowed to be, a very good critic.

, marechal of France, commissioner-general of fortifications, and the greatest engineer which France has produced, was the son of Urban le Prestre, seigneur de Vauban, a descendant of an ancient and noble family of Nivernois. He was born May 1, 1633, and was in the army at the early age of seventeen, where his uncommon talents and genius for fortification soon became known, and were eminently displayed at the sieges of St. Menehould, 1652 and 1653, of Stenay 1654, and of several other places in the following years. He consequently rose to the highest military ranks by his merit and services: and was made governor of the citadel of Lisle in 1668, and commissioner-general of fortifications in 1678. He took Luxemburg in 1684, and, being appointed lieutenant-general in 1688, was present, the same year, at the siege and capture of Philipsburg, Manheim, and Frankendal, under the dauphin. This prince, as a reward for his services, gave him four pieces of cannon, which he was permitted to chuse from the arsenals of these three towns, and place in his castle at Bazoche; an honour afterwards granted to the famous marechal Saxe. M. de Vauban commanded on the coast of Flanders in 1689, and was made marechal of France, Jan. 14, 1703. His dignity was expensive to him, but the king would not permit him to serve as an inferior officer, though he offered it in a very handsome manner. He died at Paris, March 30, 1707, aged seventy-four. He was a man of high and independent spirit, of great humanity, and entirely devoted to the good of his country. As an engineer, he carried the art of fortifying, attacking, and defending towns, to a degree of perfection unknown before his time. He fortified above 300 ancient citadels, erected thirty- three new ones, and had the principal management and direction of fifty-three sieges, and was present at one hundred and forty engagements. But his countrymen tell us that it was unnecessary for him to exert his skill in defending a fort; for the enemies of France never attacked those in which he was stationed. His works are, a treatise entitled “La Dixme Roïale,” 1707, 4to and 12mo, which displays some patriotic principles, but the plan is considered as impracticable. A vast collection of Mss. in 12 vols. which he calls his “Oisivetés,” contain his ideas, reflections, and projects, for the advantage of France. The three following works are also attributed to him, but whether he wrote them, or whether they have been compiled from his Memoirs, and adapted to his ideas, is uncertain: “Maniere de fortifier,” 8vo and 12mo, printed also at Paris by Michalet, 8vo, under the title of “L'Ingéieur François.” M. Hebert, professor of mathematics, and the abbe“du Fay, have written notes on this treatise, which is esteemed, and is said to have been revised by the chevalier de Cambrai, and reprinted at Amsterdam, 1702 and 1727, 2 vols. 4to; 2.” Nouveau Traite de l'Attaque et de la Défense des Places, suivant le Systeme de M. de Vauban, par M. Desprez de Saint Savin,“1736, 8vo, much esteemed; 3.” Essais sur la Fortification, par M. de Vauban,“1740, 12mo. As to the” Political Testament" ascribed to him, it was written by Peter le Pesant, sieur de Boïs Guillebert, lieutenant-general of the bailiwic of Rouen, who died 1714. M. de Vauban’s second cousin, Anthony de Prestre, known by the name of Puy Vauban, was also a very eminent engineer. He died lieutenant-general of the king’s forces, and governor of Bethune, April 10, 1731, aged seventy-seven.

, a French historian, was born near Fismes, in Champagne, in 1711. He entered the Jesuits’ order, but quitted it at the end of eleven years, was tutor to M. Goguet, counsellor to the parliament, and having finished that gentleman’s education, devoted himself wholly to the study of French history. He died suddenly at Paris, September 4, 1759, aged about forty-eight, leaving a “History of France,” written in a simple and correct style, and with great candour. Six only, however, of the eight volumes were published by him; the seventh, which he had entirely finished, and the eighth, which was nearly completed at the time of his death, have been published since by M. Villaret, who continued the history to vol. XII. But the complete edition, with Garnier’s continuation, amounts to 15 vols. 4to, 1770 1789. M. Velli also left a French translation of Dr. Swift’s “History of John Bull.”

, one of the most prolific authors in the French series, deserves some notice as having been often mistaken for Claude Du Verdier, and even for Antony, who was dead long before this Gilbert was born. It is not known to what part of France he belonged. It appears that he was historiographer of France, and that after all his numerous publications, he was obliged in 1676 to apply for an asylum, for himself and his wife, in the hospital of Salpetriere, where he died in 1636. Bayle has a very superficial article on him. Joly allows him to have been the author of the historical works attributed to him, but doubts whether the romances under the name of Duverdier are not by another hand, and his reason is, that it is difficult to conceive a man’s continuing to write and publish for the long space of sixty years. This, however, is not absolutely decisive. Thirteen historical works are ascribed to Duverdier, all published in 12mo, in one, two, or more volumes each, consisting of histories of France, Turkey, Spain, England, Rome, and some lives. His romances amount to fourteen, but seem to be quite forgotten in his own country, and will not easily be revived in this by any list we can give. Some of them seem to be translations.

, count de Tressan, a lively French writer, was born at Mons, Nov. 4, 1705, of a noble family originally from Languedoc, one branch of which had been protestants, and fought on that side in the civil wars preceding the massacre. He came early in life to Paris, and attached himself to Voltaire and Fontenelle, who initiated him in the belles lettres, and in those principles which afterwards made him be ranked among the philosophers of France. He served afterwards in the French army, and attained the rank of lieutenant-general. In 1750 he was admitted a free associate of the French academy, and contributed a memoir on Electricity, a subject then not much known, and written with so much ability that it was supposed he might have acquired no small fame in pursuing scientific subjects. This, however, was not agreeable to his disposition. After the battle of Fontenoy, in 1741, in which he served as aide-de-camp to Louis XV. he went to the court of Stanislaus, king of Poland, at Luneville, where he recommended himself by the sprightliness of his temper, and by the freedom of his remarks, but at the same time made some enemies by his satirical and epigrammatic productions. On the death of Stanislaus, he retired from active life, and devoted his time to the composition of a variety of works, particularly romances. Some of which were however translations, and others abridgments. These fill 12 octavo volumes published in 1791. His translation of Ariosto seems to have done him most credit. A light, trifling spirit never deserted him, but still sported even in his grey-hairs, until death put a serious end to it, Oct. 31, 1782, in his seventy-seventh year. Almost up to this period he was abridging Amadis de Gaul, and writing tales of chivalry, after having begun his career with the grave and abstruse parts of science. While in this latter employment he was, in 1749, chosen a member of our Royal Society.

Having stayed a competent time, eagerly employed in the contemplation of the finest models of antiquity, he returned to France, and his first designs were views of some of the principal sea-ports on the coast. These being shewn to his late majesty of France, procured him the appointment of marine painter to the king, with a competent salary, and every assistance that he requested to go through his plan of giving a view of every sea' port in the kingdom. This he completed, and under royal and national patronage the views have been engraved and the prints, which are in general most exquisitely performed, have been disseminated through all Europe. Many of these engravings were by Balechon; one of them, well known to collectors by the name of “The Storm,” was much admired for the fluidity of the water, and the spirit of the figures. One hundred of the prints were consigned to an engraver in London, and part of them sold; but some persons objecting to the very clumsy style in which a long dedication, inscribed under the print, was written, Balechon said he would soon remedy that, and with his graver drew a number of black lines upon the copper, over the dedication, so as in a degree to obliterate the words, and sent 100 impressions to England. These our connoisseurs soon found to be “the second impression,” and eagerly bought up the first; but a print with the lines no man of taste would look at. This mortified the English printseller, who wrote to the French engraver, and complained that he could not sell the second set for half price. “Morbleu” cries the Frenchman, “How whimsical are these English Virtuosi! They must be satisfied, however.” To work he sets with his punch and hammer, and, repairing the letters, sends out the print, with the inscription apparently in its first state. A few of these were sold; but the imposition was soon discovered by the faintness of the impressions; and then those who did not possess the first impressions, were glad to have the plate in the second, rather than the third state; so that nearly all the third set lay upon the hands of the printseller. This produced a complaint; and the complaisant Frenchman, ever eager to satisfy his English customers, again punched out the lines, and brought the inscription to its second state.

, a very celebrated French mathematician, was born in 1540, at Fontenai, or Fontenai-le-­Comte, in Lower Poitou, a province of France. He was master of requests at Paris, where he died in 1603, in the sixty-third year of his age. Among other branches of learning in which he excelled, he was one of the most respectable mathematicians of the sixteenth century, or indeed of any age. His writings abound with marks of great originality and genius, as well as intense application. His application was such, that he has sometimes remained in his study for three days together, without eating or sleeping. His inventions and improvements in all parts of the mathematics were very considerable. He was in a manner the inventor and introducer of Specious Algebra, in which letters are used instead of numbers, as well as of many beautiful theorems in that science. He made also corir siderable improvements in geometry and trigonometry. His angular sections are a very ingenious and masterly performance: by these he was enabled to resolve the problem of Adrian Roman, proposed to all mathematicians, amounting to an equation of the 45th degree. Romanus was so struck with his sagacity, that he immediately quitted his residence of Wirtzbourg in Franconia, and came to France to visit him, and solicit his friendship. His “Apollonius Gallus,” being a restoration of Apollonius’s tract on Tangencies, and many other geometrical pieces to be found in his works, shew the finest taste and genius for true geometrical speculations. He gave some masterly tracts on Trigonometry, both plane and spherical, which may be found in the collection of his works, published at Leyden in 1646, by Schooten, besides another large and separate volume in folio, published in the author’s life-time at Paris 1579, containing extensive trigonometrical tables, with the construction aad use of the same, which are particularly described in the introduction to Dr. Hutton’s Logarithms, p. 4, &c. To this complete treatise on Trigonometry, plane and spherical, are subjoined several miscellaneous problems and observations, such as, the quadrature of the circle, the duplication of the cube, &c. Vieta having observed that there were many faults in the Gregorian Calendar, as it then existed, he composed a new form of it, to which he added perpetual canons, and an explication of it, with remarks and objections against Clavius, whom he accused of having deformed the true Lelian reformation, by not rightly understanding it. Besides those, it seems, a work greatly esteemed, and the loss of which cannot be sufficiently deplored, was his “Harmonicon Cceleste,” which, being communicated to father Mersenne, was, by some perfidious acquaintance of that honest-minded person, surreptitiously taken from him, and irrecoverably lost, or suppressed, to the great detriment of the learned world. There were also, it is said, other works of an astronomical kind, that have been buried in the ruins of time, Vieta was also a profound decypherer, an accomplishment that proved very useful to his country. As the different parts of the Spanish monarchy lay very distant from one another, when they had occasion to communicate any secret designs, they wrote them in cyphers and unknown characters, during the disorders of the league: the cypher was composed of more than five hundred different Characters, which yielded their hidden contents to the penetrating genius of Vieta alone. His skill so disconcerted the Spanish councils for two years, that they reported at Rome, and other parts of Europe, that the French king had only discovered their cyphers by means of magic.

, king’s physician, and historiographer of France, was born in 1530, of a good family, at Troyes, in Champagne. He became very celebrated by his practice, and died at Paris, 1596, aged sixty-six, after having abjured protestantism, in which he was brought up. His principal works are, 1. “Les Fastes des anciens Hébreux, Grecs, et Remains,” 4to. 2. “Bibliotheque Historiale,” 4 Vols. fol. 3. A collection of “Church History,” fol. but little valued. 4. An excellent treatise “On the state and origin of the ancient French,” fol. and 4to. 5. “Sommaire de l'Histoire des François,” fol. 6. “Traité de l'ancien etat de la petite Bretagne,” 4to, and other works on French history, which are said to be useful for consultation. His son, Nicholas Vignier, was minister at Blois at the beginning of the seventeenth century, but adopted the sentiments of the Catholic church after the year 1631, and left several controversial works.

In order to acquire a greater knowledge of the principles of architecture, Vignola went to Rome, and at first returned to painting fora maintenance; but not reaping much profit, abandoned that art a second time, and procured employment as a draughtsman from Melighini, of Ferrara, then architect to pope Paul III. and who had established a school of architecture at Rome. Yignola was afterwards employed to make drawings, for the use of this academy, of the ancient edifices of the city, from which he derived great advantage in his studies. While here, about 1537, or J 540, he met with Primaticcio, who was employed by Francis I. king of France, to purchase antiques (See Primaticcio); and Vignola was of so much service in making casts for him, that Primaticcio engaged him to go with him to France. There Vignola assisted that celebrated artist in all his works, and particularly in making the bronze casts which are at Fontainebleau. He also made various architectural designs for the king, who was prevented from having them executed, by the wars in which France was then involved. After a residence of about two years, he was invited to Bologna, to undertake the new church of St. Petronius, and his design was allowed the preference, and highly approved by Julio Romano, the celebrated painter, and Christopher Lombard, the architect. At Minerbio, near Bologna, he built a magnificent palace for count Isolani, and in Bologna the house of Achilles Bocchi. The portico of the exchange in that city is also of his designing, but it was not built until 1562, in the pontificate of Pius IV. His most useful work at Bologna was the canal of Navilio, which he constructed with great skill for the space of a league. But happening to be ill rewarded for this undertaking, he went to Placentia, where he gave a design for the duke of Parma’s palace, which was executed by his son Hyacinth, who was now able to assist him in his various works. He afterwards built several churches and chapels in various parts of Italy, which it is unnecessary to specify. These, it is supposed, he had finished before his return to Rome in 1550, where Vasari presented him to pope Julius III. who appointed him his architect. While at Rome, he was employed in various works, both of grandeur and utility, the last of which, and reckoned his finest work, was the magnificent palace or castle of Caprarola, so well described and illustrated by plates in his works.

, marshal of France, was born at Moulins in Bourbonnais in 1653. His father had served with ability and courage, both in the civil and military capacity, and the son very early shewed a zeal to excel in arms. He served first a& aid -de -camp to his cousin, the marshal de Belleforis, and signalized himself in several sieges and engagements, till 1702, when having defeated the prince of Baden at the battle of Friedlingen, he was appointed marechal of France, October 22, the same year. The following year he took the fortress of Kell, won a battle at Hochstet, 1703, and subdued the insurgents in the Cevennes, by negociating with their leader in a manner that did credit to his humanity; for ttiese services he was raised to the title of dukeofVillarsin 1706. His neM considerable action was forcing the lines at Stolhoffen, 1707, and obtaining more than eigtteed millions in contributions from the enemy. It was thought that he would have gained the battle of iMalplaquet, in 1709, had he not been dangerously wounded before the action finished. Such at least was his own opinion, towhich historians seem, not disposed to accede. But it is less doubtful that he afterwards acquired great glory from the stratagem by which he forced the entrenchments of Denain on the Schelde, July 24, 1712. This success was followed by the capture of Marchiennes, Douay, Bouchain, Landau, Friburg, &c. and by a peace concluded at Radstadt, between the emperor and France, May 6, 1714. Marechal de Villars, who had been plenipotentiary at the treaty of Radstadt, was made president of the council of war in 1715, and afterwards counsellor to the regency and minister of state. In 1733 he went into Italy as commander under the king of Sardinia, and his majesty declared him marshal general of his camps and armies; a title granted to no one, since the death of marechal de Turenne, who appears to have been the first person honoured with it. M. de Villars took Pisighitona, Milan, Novarra, and Tortona; but after having opened the following campaign, he fell sick and died at Turin, on his return to France, June 17, 1734, aged eighty-two, regretted as one of the greatest and most fortunate generals of France. He had been admitted into the French academy, June 23, 1714. M. the abbe Seguy spoke his funeral oration, which was printed in 1735. He was a man of undoubted courage, but he was vain and unaccommodating, and never beloved. “The Memoirs of M. de Villars” were published in Dutch, in 1734 36, 3 vols. 12mo; but the first volume only was written by himself. Another life was published by M. Anquetil in 1784, 4 vols. J2mo, which is said to contain more ample information and historical documents.

In this fatal conjuncture, and while the war with Spain was yet kept up, anew war was precipitately declared against France; for which no reasonable cause could ever be assigned. It has been said, that the king was hurried into this war, purely from a private motive of resentment in the duke of Buckingham, who, having bfeen in France to bring over the queen, had the confidence to make overtures of love to Anne of Austria, the consort of Lewis XIII.; and that his high spirit was so fired at the repulse he met with on this extraordinary occasion, as to be appeased with nothing less than a war between the two nations. Whatever was the cause, the fleet, which had been designed to have surprised Cadiz, was no sooner returned without success and with much damage, than it was repaired, and the army reinforced for the invasion of France. Here the duke was general himself, and made that unfortunate descent upon the Isle of Rhee, in which the flower of the army was lost. Having returned to England, and repaired the fleet and the army, he was about to sail to the relief of Rochelle, which was then closely besieged by the cardinal Richelieu; and to relieve which the duke was the more obliged, because at the Isle of Rhee he had received great supplies of victuals and some men from that town, the want of both which he laboured under at this time. He was at Portsmouth for this purpose, when he was assassinated by one Felton, on the 23d of August, 1628, in the thirty-sixth year of his age. The particulars of this assassination are well known, being related, at large by lord Clarendon, to whom we refer the reader; but we may subjoin another account, as being circumstantial and curious, and less known. This is given by sir Simonds D'Ewes, in a manuscript life of himself: “August the 23d, being Saturday, the duke having eaten his breakfast between eight and nine o‘clock in the morning, in one Mr. Mason-’ s house in Portsmouth, he was then hasting away to the king, who lay at Reswicke, about five miles distant, to have some speedy conference with him. Being come to the farthef part of the entry leading out of the parlour into the hall of the house, he had there some conference with sir Thomas Frier, a colonel; and stooping down in taking his leave of him, John Felton, gentleman, having watched his opportunity, thrust a long knife, with a white helfc, he had secretly ahout him, with great strength and violence, into his breast, under his left pap, cutting the diaphragm* and lungs, and piercing the very heart itself. The duke having received the stroke, and instantly clapping his right-hand on his sword-hilt, cried out ` God’s wounds! the villain hath killed me.‘ Some report his last words otherwise, little differing for substance from these; and it might have been wished, that his end had not been so sudden, nor his last words mixed with so impious an expression. He was attended by many noblemen and leaders, yet none could see to prevent the stroke. His duchess, and the countess of Anglesey (the wife of Christopher Villiers, earl of Anglesey, his younger brother), being in an upper room, and hearing a noise in the hall, into which they had carried the duke, ran presently into a gallery, that looked down into it $ and there beholding the duke’s blood gush out abundantly from his breast, nose, and mouth (with which his speech, after those his first words, had been immediately stopped), they brake into pitiful outcries, and raised great lamentation. He pulled out the knife himself; and being carried by his servants unto the table, tha,t stood in the same hall, having struggled with death near upon a quarter of an hour, at length he gave up the ghost, about ten o’clock, and lay a long time after he was dead upon the table.”

, a very learned Frenchman, member oi the Institute, and of all the academies and learned societies of Kurope, was born at Corbeille-sur- Seine, March 5, 1750. His family was originally of Spain, but had settled in France in the early part of the seventeenth century. His father, as well as others of his ancestors, had served in the army. He began his stiuiies at a very early age at the college of Lisieux, from which he removed to that of Du Plessis, and in both was distinguished by a decided taste for the ancient languages, especially the Greek, for the sake of which he again removed to the college of Des Grassis, that he might attend the Greek lectures of M. le Beau. Under his tuition he distanced all his fellow-students, and gained all the prizes destined to those who proved the superiority of their taste in Homer. He afterwards attended the lectures of Capperonier, Greek professor in the royal college of France,' which were adapted to a more advanced state of proficiency, and soon made such progress as to need no other instructor than his own study. And such was the extent of his application, that he had already, although scarcely fifteen years of age, perused almost all the writers of antiquity, poets, orators, historians, philosophers, and grammarians. Having thus exhausted the usual stores of printed works, he sought new treasures in manuscripts; and having foil' 1 i in the library of St. Germain-des-Pres, a collection of inedited Greek lexicons, among which was that of Homer by Apollonius, he formed the design of publishing this last, which accordingly appeared in 1773, preceded by ample prolegomena, and accompanied by notes and observations, the extensive and profound erudition of which appeared very extraordinary in a young man of only twenty-two. The academy of inscriptions and belles lettres, to which Villoison submitted his work before it was printed, had admitted him a member during the preceding year, after having obtained a dispensation on account of his age, without which he could not be elected. The reason assigned was extremely honourable to him: “that having anticipated the age of profound knowledge, it was just that he should enjoy its advantages earlier than other men; and that he should outstrip them in a career of honours, as he had in that of learning.”

He was not however fully satisfied with its success, and thought with reason that he might be more usefully employed in publishing some valuable work, not before given to the world. He had examined the libraries of France for this purpose ineffectually, and formed a project of going to Venice, to search the library of St. Mark, to which he knew that cardinal Bessarion had left his numerous manuscripts. He accordingly set out in 1781, under the patronage of the king, who appointed that the expenses of his journey and residence (to which no limits were fixed) should be defrayed by the government. His researches were not fruitless. In that depository, he soon discovered several inedited works of the rhetoricians and philosophers, and especially grammarians, which he deemed worthy of publication, either entire or in extracts; and these form the celebrated collection which was printed the same year, in 2 vols. 4to, under the title of “Anecdota Graeca e regia Parisiensi et e Veneta 8. Marci bibliotheca deprompta,” Venice. Of this some copies were taken off“in folio, and two on vellum. It was however unfortunate that publication followed so hastily on discovery, for Villoison soon found, but found too late, that a considerable proportion of the first volume of these” Anecdota“had already been given to the public. He made however a very important discovery in the library of Mark, of a ms. of Homer, which he judged to be of the 10th century, and consequently anterior by two centuries to the commentator Eustathius. This precious volume, which does not appear to have been before examined, contained the whole Iliad, enriched with the scholia of the most eminent grammarians of antiquity. The margins also were filled with various marks by which these grammarians distinguished the verses of Homer, which they judged to be supposititious, corrupted, or transposed, from those whose genuineness was universally recognized. He immediately prepared an edition of this valuable treasure, which was published in 1788, fol. accompanied by learned prolegomena, and was regarded as one of the most valuable presents made to the literary world during the last century, and every scholar hastened with his congratulations. But, says his biographer,” the satisfaction which this brilliant success must have given to M. de Villoison was not long unmixed. He could not see, without sentiments of pain, the spirit of system abusing his discoveries to attack the glory of the father of poetry: and perverting the critical marks affixed to a great number of verses in the Iliad, in support of the darling position, that parts of this poem, even entire books, were the work of ancient rhapsodists, and the first editors, &c. and the idea that he had unintentionally furnished the basis on which these conjectures were constructed, and the weapons by which their authors pretended to defend them, troubled him so much, that he almost repented of having published his work.“He had advanced but a little way in printing the Iliad, when he yielded to the invitation of the duke and duchess of Saxe-Weimar, who honoured him with their particular esteem, and quitting Venice, repaired to their capital. While here, he formed the collection of critical letters, printed at Zurich in 1783, under the title of” Epistolse Vinarienses, in quihus multa Graecorum scriptorum ioca emendantur ope librorum Ducalis bibliothecte,“4to. Having found in the library of St. Mark a very liberal translation of part of the Old Testament, made by a Jew in the ninth century, he laboured, during his stay at Weimar, to put it into a state fit for publication; and on his return to France in 1784, he remained some time at Strasburgh for the purpose of having it printed there under his own inspection. He soon after set out for Greece, in quest of other ancient Mss.; but after a tour of two years, found nothing of that description. He had made, however, many observations, and intended, with the aid of these, to have composed a history of ancient and modern Greece, For the same purpose he determined on a fresh perusal of all the Greek and Latin authors extant, and as Paris had now become the scene of the revolution, and all its enormities, he removed to Orleans, in the public library of which he executed his extensive plan of reading, and its fruits were fifteen large quarto volumes of extracts and observations, which were to contribute to his history of Greece. He also prepared during his retreat at Orleans, materials for a new edition of Montfaucon’s” Palasographia Graeca," all of which are now in the royal library.

After the last storms of the revolution, he returned to Paris with his treasures; and his property of other kinds having been lost in the general confusion, he endeavoured to supply his wants by a course of lectures on the Greek language, but either had few scholars, or was unable to level himself to their capacities. A professorship of modern Greek had just been founded, which was bestowed on him, but soon suppressed by Bonaparte, who, however, created for him a professorship of ancient and modern Greek in the college of France. On this he scarcely entered, when a malady, which at first he regarded as very slight, but the force of which was aggravated by degrees, put an end to his life, April 26, 1805.

, a Dominican of the thirteenth century, was reader to St. Louis, king of France, and tutor to his children. He compiled a summary of varions knowledge, called the “Speculum Majus,” containing matters of a natural, doctrinal, moral, and historical kind, which contains the opinions of authors that are not now extant, and on that account is an object of some curiosity. In other respects it serves only to shew the ignorance and superstition of the age. It was first printed at Strasburgh in 1476, and has often been reprinted, as low as the beginning of the seventeenth century. Vincent died in 1264, as some assert, but, according to Dupin, this is a matter of great doubt. He left some other works.

, a saint of the fifth century, was a native of France, and originally a soldier; but determining to forsake the world, retired to the monastery of Lerins in Provence, and became a priest. The time of his death is uncertain, but after that event he was canonized, He wrote a work to which he is supposed to have owed this honour, entitled “Commonitorium adversus Hsereticos,” in which he proposes to confute heretics by two authorities: first, that of the Holy Scriptures; and secondly, that of the church, and he advances many arguments that have at least the appearance of ingenuity. There have been many editions of this work abroad, and one at Cambridge, in 1687, 12mo. Mosheim calls it an excellent treatise, but his translator says he sees nothing in it but that blind veneration for ancient opinions, which is so fatal to the discovery and progress of truth, and an attempt to prove that nothing but the voice of tradition is to be consulted in fixing the sense of the holy scriptures.

After Lionardo had been labouring some years for the service of Milan, in quality of architect and engineer, he was requested by the duke to adorn it by his paintings; and be painted, among other things, his celebrated “Last Supper.”. Francis I. was so charmed with this, that, finding it impracticable to have it removed into France, he ordered a copy to be taken, which was placed at St. Germains; while the original, being painted in oil, and upon a wall not sufficiently secured from moisture, has been defaced long ago. The wars of Italy began how to interrupt him; and his friend and patron duke Lewis being defeated and carried prisoner to France, the academy was destroyed, the professors dispersed, and the arts effectually banished out of Milan. In 14^9, the year before duke Lewis’s defeat, Lionardo, be'ing at Milan, was desired, by the priucipals of the place, to contrive some new device for the entertainment of Lewis XII. of France, who was just then ready to make his entrance into that city. Lionardo consented; and accordingly made a very curious automaton of the figure of a lion, whose inside was so well furnished with machinery, that it marched out to meet the king; made a stand when it came before him; reared up its hinder legs; and, opening his breast, presented a scutcheon, with fleurs-de-lis quartered upon it.

Their tranquillity was at length disturbed by an edict of Charles IX. artfully procured by the Jesuits, which forbad the French churches from having any preachers who were not natives of France. Viret then, in 1563, retired to Orange, whence the pious Jeanne D'Albret, queen of Navarre, invited him to Beam. He preached also some time at Ortez, and died in that country in 1571, in the sixtieth year of his age. He had always been of a weakly constitution, and his health had been much injured by two attempts on his life by the enemies of the reformation, once when he was nearly poisoned at Geneva, and a second time when he received a stab from a knife, and was left for dead. He was a man of a meek and gentle disposition^ but of such winning eloquence, that many of his hearers conceived a kind of attachment to him, although they did not subscribe to his doctrines. Of the three great contemporaries in the church of Geneva, Calvin, Farel, and Viret, it was said that Calvin was admired for his profound erudition, Farel for his zeal and warmth, and Viret for his persuasive eloquence. Viret also, in his writings at least, had a happy talent in turning the superstitions he opposed into ridicule, and this he did with such effect that Dupin and other catholic biographers of later date cannot forgive him.

In 1664, he had the honour of a pension from LouisXIV. a prince to whom he was not subject, nor could be useful. In consequence, he resolved to finish his Divination upon Aristeus, with a view to dedicate it to that prince; but he was interrupted in this task again by public works, and some negotiations which his master entrusted to him. In 1666, he was honoured by the grand duke with the title of his first mathematician. He resolved three problems, which had been proposed to all the mathematicians of Europe, and dedicated the work to the memory of Mr. Chapelain, under the title of “Enodatio Problematum,” c. He proposed the problem of the quadrable arc, of which Leibnitz and l'Hospital gave solutions by the Calculus Differentialis. In 1669, he was chosen to fill, in the Royal Academy of Sciences, a place among the eight foreign associates. This new favour reanimated his zeal; and he published three books of his Divination upon Aristeus, at Florence in 1701, which he dedicated to the king of France. It is a thin folio, entitled “De Locis Solidis secunda Divinatio Geometrica,” &c. This was a second edition enlarged; the first having been printed at Florence in 1673. Viviani laid out the fortune which he had raised by the bounties of his prince, in building a magnificent house at Florence; in which he placed a bust of Galileo, with several inscriptions in honour of that great man; and died in 1703, at eighty-one years of age.

, the greatest literary character which France produced in the last century, was born at Paris, February 20, 1694. His father, Francis Arouet, was “ancien notaire du Chatelet,” and treasurer of the chamber of accounts; his mother, MaryMargaret Daumart. At the birth of this extraordinary man, who lived to the age of eighty-five years and some months, there was little probability of his being ‘reared, and for a considerable time he continued remarkably feeble. In his earliest years he displayed a ready wit and a sprightly imagination: and, as he said of himself, made verses before he was out of his cradle. He was educated under Father Por6, in the college of Louis the Great; and such was his proficiency, that many of his essays are now existing, which, though written when he was between twelve and fourteen, shew no marks of infancy. The famous Ninon de l’Enclos, to whom this ingenious boy was introduced, left him a legacy of 2000 livres to buy him a library. Having been sent to the equity-schools on his quitting college, he was so disgusted with the dryness of the law, that he devoted himself entirely to the Muses. He was admitted into the company of the abb< Chaulieu, the marquis de la Fare, the duke de Sully, the grand prior of Vendo;ne, marshal Villars, and the chevalier du Bouillon; and caught from them that easy taste and delicate humour which distinguished the court of Louis XIV. Voltaire had early imbibed a turn for satire; and, for some philippics against the government, was imprisoned almost a year in the Bastile. He had before this period produced the tragedy of “Oedipus,” which was represented in 1718 with great success; and the duke of Orleans, happening to see it performed, was so delighted, that he obtained his release from prison. The poet waiting on the duke to return thanks: “Be wise,” said the duke, “and I will take care of you.” “I am infinitely obliged,” replied the young man; “but I intreat your royal highness not to trouble yourself any farther about my lodging or board.” His father, whose ardent wish it was that the son should have been an advocate, was present at one of the representations of the new tragedy: he was affected, even to tears, embraced his son amidst the felicitations of the ladies of the court, and never more, from that time, expressed a wish that he should become a lawyer. About 1720, he went to Brussels with Madam de Rupelmonde. The celebrated Rousseau being then in that city, the two poets met, and soon conceived an unconquerable aversion for each other. Voltaire said one day to Rousseau, who was shewing him “An Ode to Posterity,” “This is a letter which will never reach the place of its address.” Another time, Voltaire, having read a satire which Rousseau thought very indifferent, was advised to suppress it, lest it should be imagined that he “had lost his abilities, and preserved only his virulence.” Such mutual reproaches soon inflamed two hearts already sufficiently estranged. Voltaire, on his return to Paris, produced, in 1722, his tragedy of “Mariamne,” without success. His “Artemira” had experienced the same fate in 1720, though it had charmed the discerning by the excellence of the poetry. These mortifications, joined to those which were occasioned by his principles of imprudence, his sentiments on religion, and the warmth of his temper, induced him to visit England, where he printed his “Henriade.” King George I. and particularly the princess of Wales (afterwards queen Caroline) distinguished him by their protection, and obtained for him a great number of subscriptions. This laid the foundation of a fortune, which was afterwards considerably increased by the sale of his writings, by the munificence of princes, by commerce, by a habit of regularity, and by an ceconomy bordering on avarice, which he did not shake off till near the end of his life. On his return to France, in 1728, he placed the money he carried with him from England into a lottery established by M. Desforts, comptroller-general of the finances; he engaged deeply, and was successful. The speculations of finance, however, did not check his attachment to the belles lettres, his darling passion. In 1730, he published “Brutus,” the most nervous of all his tragedies, which was more applauded by the judges of good writing than by the spectators. The first wits of the time, Fontenelle, La Motte, and others, advised him to give up the drama, as not being his proper forte. He answered them by publishing “Zara,” the most affecting, perhaps, of all his tragedies. His “Lettres Philosophiques,” abounding in bold expressions and indecent witticisms against religion, having been burnt by a decree of the parliament of Paris, and a warrant being issued for apprehending the author in 1733, Voltaire very prudently withdrew; and was sheltered by the marchioness du Chatelet, in her castle of Cirey, on the borders of Champagne and Lorraine, who entered with him on the study of the “System” of Leibnitz, and the “Principia” of Newton. A gallery was built, in which Voltaire formed a good collection of natural history, and made a great many experiments on light and electricity. He laboured in the mean time on his “Elements of the Newtonian Philosophy,” then totally unknown in France, and which the numerous admirers of Des Cartes were very little desirous should be known. In the midst of these philosophic pursuits, he produced the tragedy of “Alzira.” He was now in the meridian of his age and genius, as was evident from the tragedy of “Mahomet,” first acted in, 174-1 but it was represented to the “procureur general” as a performance offensive to religion and the author, by order of cardinal Fleury, withdrew it from the stage. “Merope,” played two years after, 1743, gave an idea of a species of tragedy, of which few models have existed. It was at the representation of this tragedy that the pit and boxes were clamorous for a sight of the author; yet it was severely criticised when it came from the press. He now became a favourite at court, through the interest of madam d'Etoile, afterwards marchioness of Pompadour. Being employed in preparing the festivities that were celebrated on the marriage of the dauphin, he attained additional honours by composing “The Princess of Navarre.” He was appointed a gentleman of the bed-chamber in ordinary, and historiographer of France. The latter office had, till his time, been almost a sinecure; but Voltaire, who had written, under the direction of the count d'Argenson, the “History of the War of 1741,” was employed by that minister in many important negociations from 1745 to 1747; the project of invading England in 1746 was attributed to him and he drew up the king ofFrance’s manifesto in favour of the pretender. He had frequently attempted to gain admittance into the academy of sciences, but could not obtain his wish till 1746 , when he was the first who broke through the absurd custom of filling an inaugural speech with the fulsome adulation of Richelieu; an example soon followed by other academicians. From, the satires occasioned by this innovation he felt so much uneasiness, that he was glad to retire with the marchioness du Chateletto Luneville, in the neighbourhood of king Stanislaus. The marchioness dying in 1749, Voltaire returned to Paris, where his stay was but short* Though he had many admirers, he was perpetually complaining of a cabal combined to filch from him that glory of which he was insatiable. “The jealousy and manoeuvres of a court,” he would say, “are the subject of conversation; there is more of them among the literati.” His friends and relations endeavoured in vain to relieve his anxiety, by lavishing commendations on him, and by exaggerating his success. He imagined he should find in a foreign country a greater degree of applause, tranquillity, and reward, and augment at the same time both his fortune and reputation, which were already very considerable. The king of Prussia, who had repeatedly invited him to his court, and who would have given any thing to have got him away from Silesia, attached him at last to his person by a pension of 22,000 livres, and the hope of farther favour . From the particular respect that was paid to him, his time was now spent in the most agreeable manner; his apartments were under those of the king, whom he was allowed to visit at stated hours, to read with him the best works of either ancient or modern authors, and to assist his majesty in the literary productions by which he relieved the cares of government. But this happiness was soon at an end; and Voltaire saw, to his mortification, when it was too late, that, where a man is sufficiently rich to be master of himself, neither his liberty, his family, nor his country, should be sacrificed for a pension. A dispute which our poet had with Manpertuis, the president of the academy at Berlin, was followed by disgrace . It has been said that the king of Prussia dismissed him with this reproof: “I do not drive you away, because I called you hither; I do not take away your pension, because I have given it to you; I only forbid you my presence.” Not a word of this is true; the fact is, that he sent to the king the key of his office as chamberlain, and the cross of the order of merit, with these verses:

, a man of great parts and learning, was the son of Gerard John Vossius, and born of his second wife at Leyden, in 1618. The particulars of his life will be comprised in a short compass: he had no master but his father in any thing; and his whole life was spent in studying. His merit having recommended him to the notice of Christina of Sweden, the queen submitted to correspond with him by letters, and employed him in some literary commissions. He even made several journeys into Sweden by her order, and had the honour of teaching her majesty the Greek language: but, being there in 1662 with M. Huet and Bochart, she refused to see him, because she had heard that he intended to write against Salmasius, for whom she had at that time a particular regard. In 1663, he received a handsome present of money from Lewis XIV. of France, and at the same time the following obliging letter from Mons. Colbert. “Sir, Though the king be not your sovereign, he is willing nevertheless to be your benefactor; and has commanded me to send you the bill of exchange, hereunto annexed, as a mark of his esteem, and as a pledge of his protection. Every one knows, that you worthily follow the example of the famous Vossius your father; and that, having received from him a name which hath rendered him illustrious by his writings, you will preserve the glory of it by yours. These things being known to his majesty, it is with pleasure that he makes this acknowledgment of your merit,” &c. After the death of his father, he was offered the history-professorship, but refused it; preferring a studious retirement to any honours. In 1670 he came over to England, and was that year created doctor of laws at Oxford; “after he had been,” says Wood, “with great humanity and friendship entertained by some of the chief heads of colleges, as his father had been before in 1629.” In 1673, Charles II. made him canon of Windsor, assigning him lodgings in the castle, where he died Feb. the 10th, 1638. He left behind him the best private library, as it was then supposed, in the world; which, to the shame and reproach of England, was suffered to be purchased and carried away by the university of Leyden.

The second production of Wace is the history of the irruptions into England and the northern provinces of France, written in verses of eight syllables. His third work is the famous Roman du Rou, composed in 1160, in verses of twelve syllables. Raoul, or Rollo, is the hero of this poem. His fourth piece is the romance of William Longsword, the son of Rollo, written in verses of twelve syllables. It is to be found in the royal library at Paris, at the end of the Roman du Rou; and his fifth work, or the romance of Richard I. duke of Normandy, composed in the same measure, may be seen in the same repository. His sixth work contains, in 12,000 lines, the history of the Norman dukes, from the time of duke Richard I. to the sixth year of Henry I. and was composed after 1170. A copy is in the British Museum, Bib. Reg. iv. c. xi. His seventh performance is an abridged chronicle of the history of the dukes of Normandy, beginning with Henry II. and going upwards to Rollo.

, an eminent English prelate, descended from an ancient family, was born in 1657, at Blandford, in Dorsetshire, where his father, of the same names, was a gentleman of considerable property. He was probably educated at first at home, whence his father carried him to Oxford, with a view to place him in Trinity college, but an accidental interview with Dr. Fell, dean of Christ Church, determined him in favour of that college, of which he was accordingly admitted a student in 1672. Having taken his degree of A. B. in 1676, and that of A. M. in 1679, he fixed his choice on divinity as a profession, rather against the intention of his father, who wished to provide for him in the clothing business. He then entered into holy orders, and in 1682 accompanied, in quality of chaplain, lord viscount Preston, also of Christ Church, who was appointed envoy extraordinary to the court of France.

The author of No. IV. of Mosheim’s Appendix deduces from the whole of this transaction, and particularly from the entire correspondence given in that Appendix, that Wake was invited to this correspondence by Dupin, the most moderate of all the Roman jcatholic divines; that he entered into it with a view to improve one of the most favourable opportunities that could be offered, of withdrawing the church of France from the jurisdiction of the pope; a circumstance which must have immediately weakened the power of the court of Rome, and, in its consequences, offered a fair prospect of a farther reformation in doctrine and worship, as the case happened in the church of England, when it happily threw off the papal yoke; that he did not give any of the doctors of the Sorbonne the smallest reason to hope that the church of England wpuld give up any one point of belief or practice to the church of France; but insisted, on the contrary, that the latter should make alterations and concessions, in order to be reconciled to the former; that he never specified the particular alterations which would be requisite to satisfy the rulers and doctors of the church of England; but only expressed a general desire of an union between the two churches, if that were possible, or at least of a mutual toleration: that he never flattered himself that this union could be perfectly accomplished, or that the doctors of the Gallican church, would be entirely brought over to the church of England; but thought that every advance made by them, and every concession, must have proved really advantageous to the. protestant cause.

Thus much it has been thought necessary to advance, in vindication of the character of Dr. Wake, which, after long enjoying the good opinion of mankind, was at last, with equal fury and falsehood, attacked by the author of the “Confessional,” who does not scruple to say, speaking of the archbishop, that “this pretended champion of the Protestant religion had set on foot a project for union with a Popish church, and that with concessions in favour of the grossest superstition and idolatry.” Nothing could be farther from Wake’s purpose, and nothing more at variance with the whole tenour of his public life or private sentiments; and, in truth, the whole of the above correspondence with the popish doctors was a matter of private sentiment, and neither party appears to have been authorized by, or to have consulted the church to which they respectively belonged. Had that been done, it is not quite clear that the plan, even as far as it has been divulged, would have been more acceptable in England than in France. The best part of it, the best object at which it aimed, was the separation of the church of France from the jurisdiction of the pope.

The next poem is supposed by Fenton to be the address “To the Queen” on her arrival but this is doubtful, and we have no date of any other poetical production before that which the murder of the duke of Buckingham occasioned. Neither of these pieces that seem to carry their own dates could have been the sudden effusion of fancy. In the verses on the prince’s escape, the prediction of his marriage with the princess of France must have been written after the event; in the other, the promises of the king’s kindness to the descendants of Buckingham, which could not be properly praised till it had appeared by its effects:, shew that time was taken fqr revision and improvement. It is not known that they were published till they appeared long afterwards with other poems.

Finding himself disinclined to enter so early into the business of parliament, he prevailed on his father to permit him to go abroad, and Mr. Gray consented to accompany him in his travels. They left England on the 29th of March, 1739, and took their route by the way of France to Italy, viewing whatever was remarkable in the several places they visited, and at some of them, particularly Florence, residing several months. About July 1741 the two friends came to a rupture, and parted at Reggio, each pursuing his journey homewards separately. Of this quarrel, the circumstances, as we have remarked in Mr. Gray’s article, are not clearly known; but Mr. Walpole enjoined Mr. Mason to charge him with the chief blarre, confessing, that more attention, complaisance, and deference, to a warm friendship, and superior judgment and prudence, might have prevented a rupture which gave much uneasiness to them both, and a lasting concern to the survivor. A reconciliation is said to have been effected between them by a lady who wished well to both parties; but the cordiality which had subsisted between them never wholly returned, as Mr. Walpole was entirely unnoticed by Mr. Gray in his last will. Mr. Walpole, however, was the first person to whom, in 1750, Mr. Gray communicated his celebrated “Elegy in a Country Church-yard,” and by him it was communicated to several persons of distinction. In 1758, also, Walpole employed Mr. Bentley to ornament an edition of his friend’s poems with beautiful designs and engravings, and printed it at his own press at Strawberry-hill.

, an eminent statesman in the reign of queen Elizabeth, of an ancient family in Norfolk, was the third and youngest son of William Walsingham of Scadbury, in the parish of Chislehurst, in Kent, by Joyce, daughter of Edmund Denny, of Cheshunt in Hertfordshire. He was born at Chislehurst in 1536. He spent some time at King’s-college in Cambridge, but, to complete his education, travelled into foreign countries, where he acquired various languages and great accomplishments. These soon recommended him to be agent to sir William Cecil, lord Burleigh; and under his direction he came to be employed in the most important affairs of state. His first engagement was as ambassador in France during the civil wars in that kingdom. In August 1570, he was sent a second time there in the same capacity, to treat of a marriage between queen Elizabeth and the duke of Alençon, with other matters; and continued until April 1573 at the court of France, where he acquitted himself with great capacity and fidelity, sparing neither pains nor money to promote the queen’s interest, who, however, did not support him with much liberality. It was even with great difficulty that he could procure such supplies as were necessary for the support of his dignified station. In a letter from him (Harleian Mss. No. 260), to the earl of Leicester, dated Paris, March 9, 1570, he earnestly solicits for some allowance on account of the great dearth in France; desiring lord Leicester to use his interest in his behalf, that he might not be so overburthened with the care how to live, as to be hindered from properly attending to the business for which he was sent thither. Five days after he wrote a letter to lord Burleigh, which gives a curious account of the distresses to which Elizabeth’s representative was reduced by her singular parsimony. “Your lordship knoweth necessity hath no law, and therefore I hope that my present request, grounded on necessity, will weigh accordingly. And surely if necessity forced me not hereto, I would forbear to do it for many respects. I do not doubt, after my lord of Buckhurst’s return, but you shall understand, as well by himself, as by others of his train, the extremity of dearth that presently reigneth here; which is such as her majesty’s allowance doth not, by 5l. in the week, defray my ordinary charges of household. And yet neither my diet is like to any of my predecessors, nor yet the number of my horses so many as they heretofore have kept. I assure your lordship, of 800l. I brought in my purse into this country, I have not left in money and provision much above 300/; far contrary to the account I made, who thought to have had always 500l. beforehand to have made my provisions, thinking by good husbandry somewhat to have relieved my disability otherwise,” &c. In another letter, dated June 22, 1572, he again solicits lord Burleigh for an augmentation of his allowance, alledging, that otherwise he should not be able to hold out: but notwithstanding this and other solicitations, there is much reason to believe that the queen kept him in considerable difficulties.

Walsingham had then an audience of the Scotch king, and after several other private conferences with him, set out again for England. But during his stay in Scotland he declined having any intercourse with the earl of Arran, < c for be esteemed the said earl,“says Melvit,” a scorner of religion, a sower of discord, and a despise* of true and honest men; and therefore he refused to speak with him, or enter into acquaintance; for he was of a contrary nature, religious, true, and a lover of all honest men.“Arran, in resentment, did every thing he could to affront Walsingham; but the latter, on his, return, made a very advantageous representation to Elizabeth, of the character and abilities of king James. Hume observes, that Elizabeth’s chief purpose in employing Walsingbam on an embassy” where so little business was to be transacted, was Ab Jearn, from a man of so much penetration and discernment, the real character of James. This young prince possessed very good parts, though not accompanied with that vigour and industry which his station required; and as he excelled in general discourse and conversation, Walsingham entertained a higher idea of his talents than he was afterwards found, when real business was transacted, to have fully merited.“Lloyd, who imputes universal genius to Walsingham, says, that he could ^ as well fit the humour of king James with passages out of Xenophon, Thucydides, Plutarch, or Tacitus, as he could that of Henry king of France with Rabelais’s conceits, or the Hollander with mechanic discourses.”

"P. IV. School of France, introduced after the restoration Waller, Dryden, Addison, Prior, and Pope, which has continued down to our own times.

In 1751, his patron the duke of Bolton invited him to be his companion on a tour to the south of France. For this, Mr. Wooll informs us, he had two motives, “the society of a man of learning and taste, and the accommodation of a Protestant clergyman, who, immediately on the death of his duchess, then in a confirmed dropsy, could marry him to the lady with whom he lived, and who was universally known and distinguished by the name of Polly Peachum.” Whichever of these motives predominated in the duke’s mind, it is much to be regretted that our author so far forgot what was due to his character and profession as to accept the offer. But if any circumstance, besides the consciousness of doing wrong, could embitter the remembrance of this solitary blemish in his public life, it was, that, after all, the only hopes which could justify his compliance were very ungraciously disappointed. For some reason or other, he was obliged to leave his patron, and come to England before the duchess died, and when that event took place, and he solicited permission to return to the duke, he had the mortification to learn that the ceremony had been performed by Mr. Devisme, chaplain to the embassy at Turin.

In 1655 he proceeded M. A. and was schoolmaster of Dedham near Colchester in Essex, and about the same time married. He was afterwards made master of the freeschool of Tunbridge in Kent, probably about 1660. While here he published his “Dictionarium Minus; a compendious Dictionary English-Latin, and Latin- English,” Lond. 1662, 4to. In 1671 he was elected superior beadle of law in the university of Oxford, and printer or architypographus to the same university. The same year he published “Cicero against Cataline, in four invective orations; containing the whole manner of discovering that notorious conspiracy,” Lond. 8vo. This was followed by “The History of France under the ministry of cardinal Mazarine, written in Latin by Benjamin Priolo,” Lond. 8vo. In 1678 he published at Oxford, “Considerations concerning free-schools as settled in JJngland,” 8vo; and in 1687, “Christopheri Wasii Senarius, sive de legibus et licentia veterum poetarum,” Oxon. 4to. He wrote also “Structurae Nonianse,” and appears to have been concerned in an edition of sir John Spelman’s life of king Alfred. Hearne says he translated it into Latin, and published it at Oxford in a thin folio, with a commentary by Obadiah Walker, master of University-college. He died Aug. 29, 1690, and appears to have been a man of great parts, and a very considerable sufferer for his loyalty. Hearne, at p. 20 of his discourse, prefixed to the eighth volume of Leland’s Itinerary, stiles him “that eminent philologer,” and makes honourable mention of a son of his of the same name, who was fellow of Corpus Christicollege, Oxford. He died, B. D. 1711, and was buried at Corpus, where 1 is an inscription to his memory.

Events occurred during his chief magistracy, which convulsed the whole political world, and which tried most severely his moderation and prudence. The French revolution took place. Both friends and enemies have agreed in stating that Washington, from the beginning of that revolution, had no great confidence in its beneficial operation. He must indeed have desired the abolition of despotism, but he is not to be called the enemy of liberty, if he dreaded the substitution of a more oppressive despotism. It is extremely probable that his wary and practical understanding, instructed by the experience of popular commotions, augured little good from the daring speculations of inexperienced visionaries. The progress of the revolution was not adapted to cure his distrust, and when, in 1793, France, then groaning under the most intolerable and hideous tyranny, became engaged in war with almost all the governments of the civilized world, it is said to have been a matter of deliberation with the president of the United States, whether the republican envoy, or the agent of the French princes should be received in America as the diplomatic representative of France. But whatever might be his private feelings of repugnance and horror, his public conduct was influenced only by his public duties. As a virtuous man he must have abhorred the system of crimes which was established in France. But as the first magistrate of the American commonwealth, he was bound only to consider how far the interest and safety of the people whom he governed, were affected by the conduct of France. He saw that it was wise and necessary for America to preserve a good understanding and a beneficial intercourse with that great country, in whatever manner she was governed, as long as she abstained from committing injury against the United States. Guided by this just and simple principle, uninfluenced by the abhorrence of crimes which he felt, he received Mr. Genet,the minister of the French republic, and was soon shocked by the outrages which that minister committed, or instigated, or countenanced against the American government. The conduct of Washington was a model of firm and dignified moderation. Insults were offered to his authority in official papers, in anonymous libels, by incendiary declaimers, and by tumultuous meetings. The law of nations was trampled under foot. His confidential ministers were seduced to betray him, and the deluded populace were so inflamed by the arts of their enemies that they broke out into insurrection. No vexation, however galling, could disturb the tranquillity of his mind, or make him deviate from the policy which his situation prescribed. With a more confirmed authority, and at the head of a longer established government, he might perhaps have thought greater vigour justifiable. But in his circumstances, he was sensible that the nerves of authority were not strong enough to bear being strained. Persuasion, always the most desirable instrument of government, was in his case the safest; yet he never overpassed the line which separates concession from meanness. He reached the utmost limits of moderation, without being betrayed into pusillanimity. He preserved external and internal peace by a system of mildness, without any of those virtual confessions of weakness, which so much dishonour and enfeeble supreme authority. During the whole of that arduous struggle, his personal character gave that strength to a new magistracy which in other countries arises from ancient habits of obedience and respect. The authority of his virtue was more efficacious for the preservation of America, than the legal powers of his office.

The government of America had none of those salutary prejudices to employ which in every other country were used with success to open the eyes of the people to the enormities of the French revolution. It had, on the contrary, to qontend with the prejudices of the people in the most moderate precautions against internal confusion, in the most measured and guarded resistance to the unparalleled insults and enormous encroachments of France. Without zealous support from the people, the American government was impotent. It required a considerable time, and it cost an arduous and dubious struggle, to direct the popular spirit against a sister republic, established among a people to whose aid the Americans ascribed the establishment of their independence. It is probable, indeed, that no policy could have produced this effect, unless it had been powerfully aided by the crimes of the French government, which have proved the strongest allies of all established governments; which have produced such a general disposition to submit to any known tyranny, rather than rush into all the unknown and undefinable evils of civil confusion, with the horrible train of new and monstrous tyrannies of which it is usually the forerunner. Of these circumstances Washington availed himself with uncommon address. He employed the horror excked by the atrocities of the French revolution for the most honest and praiseworthy purposes; to preserve the internal quiet of his country; to assert the dignity, and to maintain the rights, of the commonwealth which he governed, against foreign enemies. He avoided war without incurring the imputation of pusillanimity. He cherished the detestation of Americans for anarchy, without weakening the spirit of civil liberty, and he maintained, and even consolidated, the authority of government, without abridging the privileges of the. people.

, famous for his embassies and his writings, was a Hollander, and born in 1598; but it is not certain at what place, though some have mentioned Amsterdam. He left his country very young, and went and settled in France, where he applied himself diligently to political studies, and sought to advance himself by political services. Having made himself known to the elector of Brandenburg, this prince appointed him his resident at the court of France, about 1626 and he preserved this post two- and-thirty years, that is, till 1658. Then he fell into disgrace with cardinal Mazarin, who never had much esteem for him, and particularly disliked his attachment to the house of Conde. The cardinal accused him of having sent secret intelligence to Holland and other places; and he was ordered to leave the court and the kingdom: but, before he set out, he was seized and sent to the Bastille. M. le Teilier wrote at the same time tp the elector of Brandenburg, to justify the action; which he did by assuring him that his minister was an intelligencer in the pay of several princes. The year after, however (1659), he was set at liberty, and escorted by a guard to Calais; whence he passed over to England, and thence to Holland. There De Witt, the pensionary, received him affectionately, and protected him powerfully: he had indeed been the victim of De Witt, with whom he had carried on a secret correspondence, which was discovered by intercepted letters. He reconciled himself afterwards to France, and heartily espoused its interests; whether out of spite to the prince of Orange, or from some other motive; and the count d'Estrades reposed the utmost confidence in him. JFor the present, the duke of Brunswic-Liwienburg made him his resident at the Hague; and he was appointed, besides this, secretary-interpreter of the States General for foreign dispatches.

From Paris, where he sought an asylum, he certified to the speaker of the House of Commons, by the signatures of the physician of the king of France, and other gentlemen, his confinement to his room, and the impossibility, from his state of health, of his venturing to undertake the journey back to England. In the mean time, although the House of Commons had neglected his complaint of privilege, he derived his first considerable triumph from the verdict found for him in the court of common pleas. He had early brought his action against Robert Wood, esq. the under secretary of state, for the seizure of his papers, as the supposed author of the “North Briton.” It was tried before a special jury on the 6th of December, and 1000l. danlages were given. The charge to the jury, delivered by lord chief justice Pratt, concluded thus: “This warrant is unconstitutional, illegal, and absolutely void; it is a general warrant, directed to four messengers, to take up any persons, without naming or describing them with any certainty, and to apprehend them together with their papers. If it be good, a secretary of state can delegate and depute any of the messengers, or any even from the lowest of the people, to take examinations, to commit, or to release, and do every act which the highest judicial officers the law knows, can do or order. There is no order in our law-books that mentions these kinds of warrants, but several that in express words condemn them. Upon the maturest consideration, I am bold to say, that this warrant is illegal; but I am far from wishing a matter of this consequence to rest solely on my opinion; I am only one of twelve, whose opinions I am desirous should be taken in this matter, and I am very willing to allow myself to be the meanest of the twelve. There is also a still higher court, before which this matter may be canvassed, and whose determination is final; and here I cannot help observing the happiness of our constitution in adiiiitting these appeals, in consequence of which, material points are determined on the most mature consideration, and with the greatest solemnity. To this admirable delay or the law (for in this case the law’s delay may be styled admirable) I believe it is chiefly owing that we possess the best digested, and most excellent body of law which any nation on the face of the globe, whether ancient or modern, could ever boast. If these higher jurisdictions should declare my op-nion erroneous, I submit, as will become me, and kiss the rod; but I must say, I shall always consider it as a rod of iron for the chastisement of the people of Great Britain.”

During the alarm in 1780 he published a tract, entitled “A Plan of Association on Constitutional Principles” and in 1782, on occasion of the county meetings and associations, he gave to the public his “Letters on Political Liberty;” the most important perhaps of all his works-, it was extensively circulated both in England and France, having been translated into French by Brissot, and was the occasion of its author being invited to Paris, to assist in the formation of a constitution for that country. He continued about six months in Paris; and on the death of the king, and declaration of war against this country, took leave of his friends of the Girondist party, with an almost prophetic intimation of the fate that awaited them. He brought with him on his return a letter from the minister of war, addressed to lord Grenville, and intended to give Mr. Williams, who was fully and confidentially entrusted with the private sentiments and wishes of the persons then in actual possession of the government of France, an opportunity of conveying those sentiments and wishes to the British ministry. Mr. Williams delivered the letter into the hands of Mr. Aust, the under secretary of state, but never heard from lord Grenville on the subject. Some further curious circumstances relating to this transaction are detailed in a page or two, corrected by Mr. Williams himself, in Bisset’s “History of George III.”

Abbe Winkelman was a middle-sized man; he had a very low forehead, sharp nose, and little black hollow eyes, which gave him an aspect rather gloomy than otherwise. If he had any thing graceful in his physiognomy, it was, his mouth, yet his lips were too prominent; but, when he was animated, and in good humour, his features formed an ensemble that was pleasing. A fiery and impetuous disposition often threw him into extremes. - Naturally enthusiastic, he often indulged an extravagant imagination; but, as he possessed a strong and solid judgment, he knew how to give things a just and intrinsic value. In consequence of this turn of mind, as well as a neglected education, a cautious reserve was a quality he little knew. If hewas bold in his decisions as an author, he was still more so in his conversation, and has often made his friends tremble for his temerity. If ever man knew what friendship was, that man was Mr. Winkelman, who regularly practised all its duties, and for this reason he could boast of having friends among persons of every rank and condition. People of his turn of thinking and acting seldom or ever indulged suspicions: the abbe’s fault was a contrary extreme. The frankness of his temper led him to speak his sentiments on all occasions; but, being too much addicted to that species of study which he so assiduously cultivated, he was not always on his guard to repress the sallies of self-love. His picture was drawn half length, sitting, by a German lady born at Kosinitz, but carried when young into Italy by her father, who was a painter. She etched it in a 4to size, and another artist executed it in mezzotinto. This lady was Angelica Kauffman. The portrait is prefixed to the collection of his letters published at Amsterdam, 1781, 2 vols. 12ino. Among his correspondents were Mr. Heyne, Munchausen, baron Reidesel (whose travels into Sicily, translated into English by Dr. Forster, 1773, 8vo, are addressed to him, and inspired him with an ardent longing to go over that ground), count Bunau, C. Fuesli, Gesner, P. Usteri, Van Mechlen, the duke de Rochfoucault, lord (alias Mr. Wortley) Montague, Mr. Wiell; and there are added extracts from letters to M. Clerisseaux, while he was searching after antiquities in the South of France a list of the principal objects in Rome, 1766, &c. and an abstract of a letter of Fuesli to the German translators of Webb on the “Beauties of Painting.”

In 1614, Winwood was made secretary of state; in which office he continued till his death, which happened Oct. 27, 1617. He was interred in the parish church of St. Bartholomew the Less, London. Lloyd tells us, that “he was a gentleman well seen in most affairs, but most expert in. matters of trade and war.” But although others acknowledge his abilities and integrity, they add that he was nol; sufficiently polished as a courtier, as there was something harsh and supercilious in his demeanour. He left a son named Richard, afterwards of Ditton Park in Bucks, who dying without issue in 1688, his estate went to a son of Edward earl of Montague, who had married his sister. In 1725, were published at London, in 3 vols. folio, “Memorials of Affairs of State in the Reigns of queen Elizabeth and king James I. collected chiefly from the original papers of the right honourable sir Ralph Winwood, knight, some time one of the principal secretaries of state. Comprehending likewise the negotiations of sir Henry Neville, sir Charles Cornwallis, sir Dudley Carlton, sir Thomas Edmonds, Mr. Trumble, Mr. Cottington, and others, at the courts of France and Spain, and in Holland, Venice, &c. wherein the principal transactions of those times are faithfully related, and the policies and the intrigues of those courts at large discovered. The whole digested in an exact series of time. To which are added two tables, one of the letters, the other of the principal matters. By Edmund Sawyer, esq.” then one of the masters in chancery.

The last important service Wotton performed in the reign of queen Mary was in 1557, when he detected the rebellious plot of Thomas Stafford, the, consequence of which was Stafford’s defeat and execution, and a declaration of war against France. At the queen’s death he was acting as one of the commissioners to treat of a peace between England, Spain, and France, and in this station queen Elizabeth retained him (having also appointed him a privy-counsellor), and after much negociation peace was concluded at Chateaif-Camhresis April 2, 1559. He was afterwards commissioned with lord Howard and sir Nicholas Throgmorton to receive from the French king the confirmation of the treaty. This peace, however, was of short duration. The ambitious proceedings of the French court in 1559, and the success of their arms against the Scotch protestants, were sufficient to excite the vigilance of Elizabeth. Her indignation at the claim of Mary (queen of Scots) to the English crown, a claim which the French hoped to establish, and the declining affairs of the reformers who solicited her assistance, at length determined her to send a powerful force to Scotland. In the event of this quarrel the French were obliged to capitulate, and commissioners were appointed to treat of peace. Those on the part of England were dean Wotton and sir William Cecil; on that of France, Mouluc bishop of Valence, and the Sieur de Randan. The interests of the English and French courts were soon adjusted; but to a formal treaty with the Scots, the French ambassador considered it derogatory from the dignity of their sovereign to accede. The redress of their grievances was, however, granted in the name of Francis and Mary, and accepted by the Scots, as an act of royal indulgence. And whatever concessions they obtained, whether in respect to their personal safety, or their public demands, the French ambassadors agreed to insert in the treaty with Elizabeth; so that they were sanctioned, though not with the name, yet with all the security of the most solemn negociation. The treaty was signed at Edinburgh, July 6, 1560.

so, he was well served, and he would he were so." Sir Thomas acknowledged the possibility of his having uttered the first part of this sentence, and explained his meaning, viz. that between the emperor and the king of France, his master Henry would probably be left in the lurch.

, an English comic poet, eldest son of Daniel Wycherley, of Cleve, in Shropshire, esq. was born about 1640. At fifteen years. of age he was sent to France, in the western parts of which he resided, upon the banks of the Charante, where he was often admitted to the conversation of one of the most accomplished ladies of the court of France, madame de Montausier, celebrated by Voiture in his “Letters.” A little before the restoration of Charles II. he became a gentleman-commoner of Queen’s-college in Oxford, where he lived in the provost’s lodge, and was entered in the public library, under the title of “Philosophic Studiosus,” in July 1660. He left the university without being matriculated, or any degree conferred on him; having, according to Wood, been by Dr. Barlow, reconciled to the Protestant Religion, which he bad a little before deserted in his travels. He afterwards entered himself of the Middle Temple; but, making his first appearance in town in a reign when wit and gaiety were the favourite distinctions, he soon quitted the dry study of the law, and pursued things more agreeable to his own genius, as well as to the taste of the age. As nothing was likely to succeed better than dramatic performances, especially comedies, he applied himself to the writing of these and in about the space of ten years published four: “Love in a Wood, or St. James’s Park,” in 1672; “The Gentleman-Dancing-Master,” 1673; “Plain Dealer,” in 1678; and “Country-Wife,” in 1683. These were collected and printed together in 1712, 8vo.

Upon the publication of his first play, he became acquainted with several of the wits, both of the court and town; and likewise with the duchess of Cleveland, by whom, according to Mr. Dennis, and the secret history of those times, he was admitted to the last degree of intimacy. Villiers duke of Buckingham 4iad also the highest esteem for him; and, as master of the horse to the king, made him one of his equerries; and, as colonel of a regiment, captain- lieutenant of his own company, resigning to him, at the same time his own pay as captain, with many other advantages. King Charles likewise shewed him signal marks of favour; and once gave him a proof of esteem which perhaps, never any sovereign prince before had given to an author who was only a private gentleman. Wycherley happened to fall sick of a fever at his lodgings in Bowstreet, Covent*Garden, when the king did him the honour to visit him; and, finding his body extremely weakened, and his spirits miserably shattered, and his memory almost totally gone, he commanded him, as soon as he should be able to take a journey, to go to the south of France, believing that the air of Montpelier would contribute to restore him as much as any thing; and assured him, at the same time, that he would order him 500l. to defray the charges of the journey. Wycherley accordingly went into France, and, having spent the winter there, returned to England in the spring, entirely restored to his former vigour both of body and mind. The king, it is said, shortly after his arrival told him, that “he had a son, who he had resolved should be educated like the son of a king; and that he could not chuse a more proper man for his governor than Mr. Wycherley;” for which service 1500l. per annum should be settled upon him. But there seems no solid foundation for this report.

In 1737 he made a visit to his own country; and after his return, his eyes failing, he retired from business, about 1746, to South Lambeth, with a second wife, by whom he hacj three or four children. His first wife was a handsome woman, of whom he had been very fond; there is a print of him and her; he had a son by her, for whom he bought a place in the six clerks office, and a daughter, ic? lib died a little before he retired to Lambeth. After his quitting business, madanne Pompadour prevailed upon him to copy, in enamel, a picture of the king of France, which she sent over on purpose. He died in March 1767. Thus far from Walpole’s “Anecdotes.”What follows is from another authority. “When Zincke was in the greatest practice, he was in a very bad state of health; and being well respected by a number of the most celebrated physicians, had their assistance and advice. All of them pronounced that he was in a decline; but about the method of cure, they were not unanimous. Some prescribed one drug, and some another; and one of them recommended breast-milk. The drugs he swallowed; but the breast-milk he did not much relish the thought of. Finding himself grow rather worse than better; and being told that air and exercise were the best remedy for his complaint, he tasked himself to walk through the Park, and up Constitution-bill, every morning before breakfast. Tnis did Hot relieve him; but from habit rather than hope, he still continued his perambulations. One summer morning, a handsome young woman, very meanly clad, with a child about six weeks old in her arms, asked his charity. He gave her some pence, and asked her how she came into her present distressed situation. Her history was short she had been a servant she became partial to a footman in the same house, and married him they were both turned away the man had no other resource but to enlist he became a soldier; was sent abroad she had never heard from him since; had been delivered of the child now at her breast, for whose support and her own she should beg till her infant was a few months older, when she should try to get some more reputable employment. `Her frankness,' said Zincke, `pleased me; her face pleased me; her complexion pleased me; I gave her my direction she came to me I took her infant into my house I did bring myself to take her milk; it recovered me; I made inquiry after her husband, and found he was killed in the first engagement he was in, at the pillaging a village in Germany. I married her; and a better wife no man ever had/ With this woman he lived near twenty years. The soldier’s child he educated for the army, and promised to get him a commission when he was twenty-one; but the boy died at fourteen. By Zincke she had two children, each, of them were well provided for; and one of them was a very few years since alive, and well situated in a northern province.”

Hyde, Prideaux, and others, mention ancient books of Zoroaster, which are at this day extant among the Gheuri and other professors of the Zoroastriau superstition, and made use of in their sacred worship, copies from which have been brought over to England and France. A catalogue of these and other Persian Mss. lodged in the library of the king of France, was published by M. Anquetil du Perron, in his travels, and is copied in the Journal de Savans for July 1762. But these books, written partly in the Zendic or sacred, and partly in the vulgar Persian language, are, for the most part, a narrative of miracles and revelations, by which Zoroaster is said to have established his religion, or a collection of precepts for religious ceremonies. Some of them indeed treat of fundamental doctrines of theology, taught among the worshippers of fire: but it is probable, from the tenets contained in these books, many of which seem to have been borrowed from the Jews and Mahometans, from the entire silence of Greek authors who wrote after the time of Alexander concerning these books, and from other considerations, that they were writte-n at a later period, for the purpose of appeasing the resentment of their Mahometan persecutors.