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

, a poet and miscellaneous writer, is said to have descended from the Macgregors, a clan which became in the early part of the last century, under the conduct of one Robin Roy, so formidable for violence and robbery, that the name was annulled by a legal prohibition; and when they we,re all to denominate themselves anew, the father, as is supposed, of our author called himself Malloch. This father, James Malloch, kept a publichouse at Crieff, co. Perth, in Scotland, where David was born, probably about 170O. Of his early years we have but scanty and discordant memorials, some accounts placing him at first in a menial situation in the university of Edinburgh; others informing us that he was educated at the university of Aberdeen. The latter seems most probable, as he wrote and even printed some lines on the repairs of that university, in which he could not have been interested, had he not studied there for some time. That he afterwards went to Edinburgh is not improbable, and it is aU most certain that he had in some way distinguished himself at that university, for when the duke of Montrose applied to the professors for a tutor to educate his sons, they recommended Malloch; a mark of their high opinion of him; and the office was of importance enongh to have excited the wishes of many candidates, there being no surer step to future advancement.

Edmond Malone was born at his father’s house in Dublin, on the 4th of October, 1741. He was educated at the school of Dr. Ford, in Molesworth-street and went from thence, in 1756, to the university of Dublin,where he took the degree of batchelor of arts. Here his talents very early displayed themselves; and he was distinguished by a successful competition for academical honours with several young men, who atterwarda became the ornaments of the Irish senate and bar. It appears that at his outset he had laid down to himself those rules of study to which he ever afterwards steadily adhered. When sitting down to the perusal of any work, either ancient or modern, his attention was drawn to its chronology, the history and character of its author, the feelings and prejudices of the times in which he lived; and any other collateral information which might tend to illustrate his writings, or acquaint us with his probable views, and cast of thinking. In later years he was more particularly engrossed by the literature of his own country; but the knowledge he had acquired in his youth had been too assiduously collected, and too firmly fixed in his mind, not to retain possession of his memory, and preserve that purity and elegance of taste which is rarely to be met with but in those who have early derived it from the models of classical antiquity. He appears frequently at this period, in common with some of his accomplished contemporaries, to have amused himself with slight poetical compositions; and on the marriage of their present majesties contributed an ode to the collection of congratulatory verses which issued on that event from the university of Dublin. In 1763 he became a student in the Inner Temple; and in 1767 was called to the Irish bar, and, at his first appearance in the courts, he gave every promise of future eminence. But an independent fortune having soon after devolved upon him, he felt himself at liberty to retire from the bar, and devote his whole attention in future to literary pursuits, for which purpose he soon after settled in London, and resided there with very little intermission for the remainder of his life. Among the many eminent men with whom he became early acquainted, he was naturally drawn by the enthusiastic admiration which he felt for Shakspeare, and the attention which he had already paid to the elucidation of his works, into a particularly intimate intercourse with Mr. Steevens. The just views which he himself had formed led him to recognize in the system of criticism and illustration which that gentleman then adopted, the only means by which a correct exhibition of our great poet could be obtained. Mr. Steevens was gratified to find that one so well acquainted with the subject entertained that high estimation of his labours which Mr. Malone expressed; and very soon discovered the advantage he might derive from the communications of a mind so richly stored. Mr. Malone was ready and liberal in imparting his knowledge, which, on the other part, was most gratefully received.

Mr. Steevens having published a second edition of his Shakspeare, in 1778, Mr. Malone, in 1780, added two supplementary volumes, which contained some additional notes, Shakspeare’s poems, and seven plays which have been ascribed to him. There appears up to this time to have been no interruption to their friendship; but, on the contrary, Mr. Steevens, having formed a design of relinquishing all future editorial labours, most liberally made a present to Mr. Malone of his valuable collection of old plays, declaring that he himself was now become “a dowager commentator.” It is painful to think that this harmony should ever have been disturbed, or that any thing should have created any variance between two such men, who were so well qualified to co-operate for the benefit of the literary world. Mr. Matone, having continued his researches into all the topics which might serve to illustrate our great dramatist, discovered, that although much had been done, yet that much still remained for critical industry; and that a still more accurate collation of the early copies than had hitherto taken place was necessary towards a correct and faithful exhibition of the author’s text. His materials accumulated so fast, that he determined to appear before the world as an editor in form. From that moment he seems to have been regarded with jealousy by the elder commentator, who appears to have sought an opportunity for a rupture, which he soon afterwards found, or rather created. But it is necessary to go back for a moment, to point out another of Mr. Malone’s productions. There are few events in literary history more extraordinary in all its circumstances than the publication of the poems attributed to Rowley. Mr. Malone was firmly convinced that the whole was a fabrication by Chatterton; and, to support his opinion, published one of the earliest pamphlets which appeared in the course of this singular controversy. By exhibiting a series of specimens from early English writers, both prior and posterior to the period in which this supposed poet was represented to have lived, he proved that his style bore no resemblance to genuine antiquity; and by stripping Rowley of his antique garb, which was easily done by the substitution of modern synonymous words in the places of those obsolete expressions which are sprinkled throughout these compositions, and at the same time intermingling some archaeological phrases in the acknowledged productions of Chatterton, he clearly showed that they were all of the same character, and equally bore evident marks of modern versification, and a modern structure of language. He was followed by Mr. Warton and Mr. Tyrwhitt, in his second Appendix; and the controversy was soon at an end. While Mr. Malone was engaged in his Shakspeare, he received from Mr. Steevens a request of a most extraordinary nature. In a third edition of Johnson and Steevens’s Shakspeare, which had been published under the superintendance of Mr. Reed, in 1785, Mr. Malone had contributed some notes in which Mr. Steevens’s opinions were occasionally controverted. These he was now desired to retain in his new edition, exactly as they stood before, in order that Mr. S. might answer them. Mr. Malone replied, that he could make no such promise; that he must feel himself at liberty to correct his observations, where they were erroneous; to enlarge them, where they were defective; and even to expunge them altogether, where, upon further consideration, he was convinced they were wrong; in short, he was bound to present his work to the public as perfect as he could make it. But he added, that he was willing to transmit every note of that description in its last state to Mr. Steevens, before it went to press; that he might answer it if he pleased; and that Mr. Malone would even preclude himself from the privilege of replying. Mr. Steevens persisted in requiring that they should appear with all their imperfections on their head; and on this being refused, declared that all communication on the subject of Shakspeare was at an end between them. In 1790, Mr. Malone’s edition at last appeared and was sought after and read with the greatest avidity. It is unnecessary to point out its merits; the public opinion upon it iias been long pronounced. It cannot indeed be strictly said that it met with universal approbation. Mr. Ritson appeared against it in an angry and scurrilous pamphlet, replete with misrepresentations so gross, and so easy of detection, though calculated to mislead a careless reader, that Mr. Malone thought it worth his while to point them out in a letter which he published, addressed to his friend Dr. Farmer. Poor Ritson, however, has not been the only one who has attempted to persuade the world that they have been mistaken in Mr. Malone’s character as a critic. Mr. Home Tooke in particular, who, whatever were his talents as a grammarian, or his knowledge as an Anglo-Saxon, had by no means an extensive acquaintance with the literature of Shakspeare’s age, has mentioned Mr. Malone and Dr. Johnson with equal contempt, and immediately after proceeds to sneer at Mr. Tyrwhitt. It may readily be supposed that Mr. Malone would not feel very acutely the satire which associated him with such companions. But, to counterbalance these puny hostilities, his work gained the highest testimonies of applause from all who were best qualified to judge upon the subject, and from men whose approbation any one would be prpud to obtain. Dr. J. Warton, in a most friendly letter, which accompanied a curious volume of old English poetry which had belonged to his brother Thomas, and which he presented to Mr. Malone as the person for whom its former possessor felt the highest esteem and the most cordial regard, observes to him that his edition is by far, very far, the best that had ever appeared. Professor Person, who, as every one who knew him can testify, was by no means in the habit of bestowing hasty or thoughtless praise, declared to Mr. Malone’s biographer, that he considered the Essay on the three parts of Henry the Sixth as one of the most convincing pieces of criticism that he had ever read; nor was Mr. Burke less liberal in his praises.

In 1795 he was again called forth to display his zeal in defence of Shakspeare, against the contemptible fabrications with which the Irelands endeavoured to delude the public. Although this imposture, unlike the Rowleian poems, which were performances of extraordinary genius, exhibited about the same proportion of talent as it did of honesty, yet some persons of no small name were hastily led into a belief of its authenticity. Mr. Malone save through the falsehood of the whole from its commencement; and laid bare the fraud, in a pamphlet, which was written in the form of a letter to his friend lord Charlemont, a nobleman with whom he lived on the most intimate footing, and maintained a constant correspondence. It has been thought by some that the labour which he bestowed upon this performance was more than commensurate with the importance of the subject; and it is true that a slighter effort would have been sufficient to have overthrown this wretched fabrication; but we have reason to rejoice that Mr. Malone was led into a fuller discussion than was his intention at the outset; we owe to it a work which, for acuteness of reasoning, and the curious and interesting view which it presents of English literature, will retain its value long after the trash which it was designed to expose shall have been consigned to oblivion. Mr. Malone, in 1792, had the misfortune to lose his admirable friend sir Joshua Reynolds, and his executors, of whom Mr. Malone had the honour to be one, having determined in 1797 to give the world a complete collection of his works, he superintended the publication, and prefixed to it a very pleasing biographical sketch of their author. Although his attention was still principally directed to Shakspeare, and he was gradually accumulating a most valuable mass of materials for a new edition of that poet, he found time to do justice to another. He drew together, from various sources, the prose works of Dryden, which, as they had lain scattered about, and some of them appended to works which were little known, had never impressed the general reader with that opinion of their excellence which they deserved; and published them in 1800. The narrative which he prefixed is a most important accession to biography. By active inquiry, and industrious and acute research, he ascertained many particulars of his life and character that had been supposed to be irrecoverably lost, and detected the falsehood of many a traditionary tale that had been carelessly repeated by former writers. In 1808 he prepared for the press a few productions of his friend, the celebrated William Gerard Hamilton, with which he had been entrusted by his executors; and prefixed to this also a brief but elegant sketch of his life. In 1811 his country was deprived of Mr. Windham: Mr. Malone, who equally admired and loved him, drew up a short memorial of his amiable and illustrious friend, which originally appeared in the Gentleman’s Magazine; and was afterwards, in an enlarged and corrected state, printed in a small pamphlet, and privately distributed. But the kind biographer was too soon to want “the generous tear he paid.” A gradual decay appears to have undermined his constitution; and when he was just on the point of going to the press with his new edition of Shakspeare, he was interrupted by an illness, which proved fatal; and, to the irreparable loss of all who knew him, he died on the 25th of May, 1812, in the 70th year of his age. In hid last illness he was soothed by the tender and unremitting attentions of his brother, lord Sunderlin, and his youngest sister; the eldest, from her own weak state of health, was debarred from this melancholy consolation. He left no directions about his funeral; but his brother, who was anxious, with affectionate solicitude, to execute every wish he had formed, having inferred from something that dropt from him, that it was his desire to be buried among his ancestors in Ireland, his remains were conveyed to that country, and interred at the family seat of Baronston, in the county of Westmeath.

, an ingenious and learned French Jesuit, who has written Latin poetry, was born in the diocese of Clermont, in 1581. He was one of the most ambitious imitators of Virgil; and wrote in the same measure, the same number of books, and in the three different kinds to which that illustrious poet applied himself. Thus we have of Mambrun, “Eclogues,” “Georgics, or four books upon the culture of the soul and the understanding;” and an heroic poem in twelve books, entitled “Constantine, or idolatry overthrown. We cannot, however, say that he has imitated the genius and judgment of Virgil as well as he has his exterior form and ceconomy. He is, indeed, allowed to have had great talents for poetry, and was a good critic, as he has sufficiently shewn in a Latin Peripatetic dissertation upon an epic poem; so that it is not without some foundation that Menage has called him” a great poet, as well as a great critic.“His” Peripatetic dissertation“was published at Paris, 1652, 4to; his” ConstantiYie,“at Amsterdam, 1659, in 12mo; his” Eclogues and Georgics," at Fleche, 1661, in 12mo; in which year also he died, aged eighty.

, a schoolmaster of considerable learning, but chiefly known as the antagonist of the celebrated Ruddiman, was born about the beginning of the last century, at Whitewreatb, in the parish of Elgin, and county of Murray, and was educated, first at the parish school of Longbride, and afterwards at King’s college, Aberdeen, where he took his degree of master of arts in 1721. He was afterwards appointed schoolmaster of the parish school of Touch, in the county of Aberdeen; and at length, in 1742, master of the poor’s hospital, in the city of Aberdeen. While in this station, his zeal for the character of the very celebrated Scotch historian and poet, Buchanan, led him to join the party of Scotch scholars, politicians, and writers, who were dissatisfied with Ruddiman’s edition of Buchanan’s worfcs, published in 1715, 2 vols. folio, and Jie determined himself to give a new edition more agreeable to the views he entertained of Buchanan as a historian, which, he being a staunch presbyterian, were of course adverse to Ruddiman’s well known sentiments. In the mean time he thought it necessary to show the errors and defects of Ruddiman’s edition, and accordingly published a work, the title of which will give the reader some idea of its contents: “A censure and examination of Mr. Thomas Ruddiman’s philological notes on the works of the great Buchanan, more particularly on the history of Scotland; in which also, most of the chronological and geographical, and many of the historical and political notes, are taken into consideration. In a letter to a friend. Necessary for restoring the true readings, the graces and beauties, and for understanding the true meaning of a vast number of passages of Buchanan’s writings, which have been so foully corrupted, so miserably defaced, so grossly perverted and misunderstood: Containing many curious particulars of his life, and a vindication of his character from many gross calumnies,” Aberdeen, 1751. This work, which extends to 574 pages small octavo, forms a very elaborate examination of Ruddiman’s edition, not only as referring to classical points, but matters of history, and is distinguished throughout by an unjustifiable contempt for Ruddiman’s knowledge and talents. Blameable as this was, and as his style generally is, he evidently proves that he was no mean verbal critic, and that his researches into the history of Buchanan and his works had been very extensive. With a better temper he might have proved an antagonist more worthy of Rnddiman’s serious attention. The latter, however, replied in 1754, in a pamphlet entitled “Anticrisis, or a Discussion of the scurrilous and malicious libel published by one James Man of Aberdeen,” 8vo, which was followed by “Audi alteram partem; or a further vindication of Mr. Thomas Ruddiman’s edition of the great Buchanan’s works,” 1756, 8vo. Both these contain an able vindication of the author; but the latter is particularly valuable, on account of the critical remarks Ruddiman offers on Burman’s philological notes on Buchanan.

It reflects no small honour on him, that during these numerous occupations in the court and in the state, from 1749 to 1773, he wrote his masterly translation of the Georgics of his favourite Latin poet. The great success of his former essays on the Bucolics, inspired him with the design of some farther similar exertions of his powers; but he had no sooner written the first two books, than he was trusted with a charge utterly incompatible with his literary avocations, as it deprived him of any tolerable degree of leisure; being in 1779 appointed tutor to the infant hereditary prince, don Luigi, the late king of Etruria. He was not, however, suffered to remain long in this employment, being before the expiration of three years, appointed minister of state, to which he acceded with great reluctance, and at length his age being too much advanced to suffer him to continue, he solicited, and obtained from his sovereign permission to retire. His retreat was attended by the warmest mark of good-will from the court, by all the honours suitable to his station, and by an additional pension.

Although Manara never wrote any large work in prose, his letters to his friends and relatives were considered as a model of epistolary style. He must have kept up indeed a large correspondence with his poetical contemporaries of Italy, as it was his custom to shew his compositions previous to publication, to the most intelligent persons, and to listen with docility to their respective opinions. Canonici, Mazza, Pagnini, and many others were of the number. To the last mentioned poet, already celebrated as the translator of Theocritus and Anacreon, he was indebted for some valuable hints when about to publish his translation of the Georgics. The marquis Prosper Manara died Oct. 18, 1800. All his poetical works, with his life by Mr. Cerati, (from which the preceding account is abridged) were published in the following year, 1801, in 4 elegant little volumes, by the celebrated Bodoni.

, an Italian grammarian, poet, and orator, was born atVelitri, in 1452. He taught classical learning in different parts of Italy with considerable success. He published in 1492 a poem entitled “Silva vitse suae,” or an account of his own life, which Meuschenius reprinted, in 1735, in the first volume of his collection, entitled “Vitae summorum dignitate et eruditione virorum.” He was distinguished also by some other poems, as “de Floribus, de Figuris, de Poetica virtute.” 2. “Epigrams,” published at Venice in 1500, in 4to. 3. Notes upon some of the classic authors. He died some time after 1506; but the story of his having his hands cut off, and his tongue cut out, by order of the pope Alexander VI. for having made an insolent speech to him, and which was related by Flaccius Illyricus, appears to be without foundation.

, was a Latin poet, who lay buried in the German libraries, and never was heard of in the modern world, till Poggius published him from some old manuscripts found there about two centuries ago. He is mentioned by no ancient writer, and the moderns are so little able to fix the time when he lived, that while some place him as high as the age of Augustus, others bring him down to the reign of Theodosius the Great. Indeed, the only account to be had of him must be drawn from hi poem; and from this, his translator Creech thinks that he was born a Roman, and lived in Rome, when Rome was in her glory, as he says appears from several passages in the poem. In the beginning of it he invokes the emperor; who from the description must be Augustus Csesar. Creech likewise infers that he was of illustrious extraction, and a branch of that noble family the Manilii, who so often filled the consul’s chair, and supplied the greatest offices in the commonwealth. Some, indeed, have thought that he was a Tyrian slave, and that being made free, he took, ao cording to custom, the name of his patron. But this seems very improbable; and he almost, says Creech, expressly declares the contrary in the fortieth verse of his fourth book, where he shews a concern for the interest of the Roman commonwealth, as far back as the age of Hannibal:

He was then one of the ministers who waited upon the king after his arrival, to beg his majesty’s interposition for reconciling the differences in the church; and afterwards joined several of his brethren, in a conference with the episcopal clergy, at the lord chancellor’s house; preparatory to the declaration of his majesty, who was likewise present. Being satisfied with this declaration, Dr. Manton continued in his living of Covent-garden, and received episcopal institution from Dr. Sheldon, bishop of London, Jan. 16,1661, after having first subscribed the doctrinal articles only of the church of England, and taken the oaths of allegiance and supremacy, and of canonical obedience in all things lawful and honest. He also allowed that the common-prayer should be read in his church. Soon after he was offered the deanery of Rochester, which he might have held until 1662, and enriched himself by letting leases; but, either dissatisfied with the advances he bad already made towards conformity, or foreseeing that greater would soon be expected, he honourably refused to enrich himself by accepting a dignity, the very existence of which he and his brethren were prepared to oppose. In 1661 he was one of the commissioners at the Savoy conference, and continued preaching until St. Bartholomew’s day in 1662, when he was obliged to resign his living. After this he preached occasionally, either in private or public, as he found it convenient, particularly during the indulgence granted to the nonconformists from 1668 to 1670, but was imprisoned for continuing the practice when it became illegal. From this time his history is too generally involved with that of his brethren to admit of being separated. He preserved, amidst all vicissitudes, the friendship of the duke of Bedford, the duke of Richmond, lord Wharton, and many other persons of rank. To this they were probably induced by a congeniality of principle; but independent of this, Dr. Manton was a man of great learning and extensive reading, and his conversation as much recommended him to men of the world, as to those who admired his pious services. Waller, the poet, said “that he never discoursed with such a man as Dr. Manton in all his life.” He was also a person of extraordinary charity, and supplicated the assistance of his great friends more for the poor than for himself, being perfectly disinterested. Wood has misrepresented his character in all these respects. His constitution, although a man of great temperance, early gave way; and his complaints terminating in a lethargy, he died Oct. 18, 1677, in the fifty-seventh year of his age. He was buried in the chancel of the church at Stoke Newington, where his intimate friend Dr. Bates preached his funeral sermon, which includes a very copious character of him.

, an Italian poet of great temporary fame, was born at Mantua, whence he took his name, in 1448, and not in 1444, as Cardan and others have said; for Mantuan himself relates, in a short account of his own life, that he was born under the pontificate of Nicholas V. and Nicholas was only made pope in March 1447. He was of the illustrious family of the Spagnoli, being a natural son of Peter Spagnolo, as we learn from Paul Jovius, who was his countryman, and thirty-three years old when Mantuan died, and therefore must have known the fact. Mantuan too speaks frequently and highly, in his works, of his father Peter Spagnolo, to whom he ascribes the care of his education. In his youth, he applied himself ardently to books, and began early with Latin poetry, which he cultivated all his life; for it does not appear that he wrote any thing in Italian. He entered himself, we do not know exactly when, among the Carmelites, and came at length to be general of his order; which dignity, upon some disgust or other, he quitted in 1515, and devoted himself entirely to the pursuit of the belles-lettres. He did not enjoy his retirement long, for he died in March 1516, upwards of eighty years of age. The duke of Mantua, some years after, erected to his memory a marble statue crowned with laurel, and placed it next to that of Virgil; and even Erasmus went so far as to say that a time would come, when Baptist Mantuan would not be placed much below his illustrious countryman. In this opinion few critics will now join. If he had possessed the talents of Virgil, he had not his taste, and knew not how to regulate them. Yet allowance is to be made, when we consider that, in the age in which he lived, good taste had not yet emerged. Liiius Gyraldiis, in his “Dialogues upon the poets of his own times,” says, “that the verses which Mantuan wrote in his youth are very well; but that, his imagination afterwards growing colder, his latter productions have not the force or vigour of his earlier.” We may add, that Mantuan was more solicitous about the number than the goodness of his poems; yet, considering that he lived when letters were but just reviving, it must be owned, that he was a very extraordinary person. His poetical works were first printed, in a folio volume without a date, consisting of his eclogues, written chiefly in his youth seven pieces in honour of the virgins inscribed on the kalendar, beginning with the virgin Mary these he calls “Parthenissal.” “Parthenissa II.” &c. four books of Silvge, or poems on different subjects; elegies, epistles, and, in short, poems of every description. This was followed by an edition at Bologna, 1502, folio, and by another at Paris in 1513, with the commentaries of Murrho, Brant, and Ascensius, 3 vols. fol. but usually bound in ne. A more complete, but now more rare, edition of them was published at Antwerp, 1576, in four vols. 8vo, under this title, “J. Baptistae Mantuani, Carmelitae, theologi, philosophi, ppetae, & oratoris clarissimi, opera omnia, pluribus libris aucta & restituta.” The Commentaries of the Paris edition are omitted in this; but the editors have added, it does not appear on what account, the name of John, to Baptist Mantuan.

The character of Aldus as a printer is so well known to every scholar, and to such only it can be interesting, that it is unnecessary to enlarge upon it here. But he may be considered also as an original benefactor to the literature of the age. He published a Latin grammar of his own composition; and in 1515, after his death, was published by his friend Marcus Musurus, a Greek grammar, which Aldus had compiled with great research and industry. He wrote likewise a treatise “de metris Horatianis,” which is reprinted in Dr. Combe’s edition of that poet. He produced a Greek dictionary, printed by himself, in folio, 1497, and reprinted by Francis D' Asola in 1524. He was likewise the author of many of the Latin translations of the classics, wrote many letters, some of which have been published, and for some years after he settled at Venice, gave a course of lectures on the best Greek and Roman authors, which was attended by a great number of students. Aldus, however, has not escaped the censures of criticism. Urceus Codrus, the learned professor of Bologna, complained, that he suffered many errors to escape uncorrected, in his editions of the Greek authors; that he sold his copies too dear; and printed them with an useless and unsuitable width of margin. Later critics have not been sparing of remarks somewhat similar. Krnesti, in his notes on the Letters of Pliny, blames Aldus for excessive boldness of conjectural criticism. In the preface to his Tacitus, the same critic remarks, that Aldus rarely made on the second and subsequent editions of the works he printed, any alterations but such as consisted in neglected errors of the press. It is indeed true, that the editions of Greek works printed by Aldus, are not always so correct as his Latin and Italian editions. But their defects are owing to the disadvantages of Aldus’s situation, much rather than to negligence, or inability in himself, as a printer and a man of letters. He had not always a sufficient number of manuscripts to collate: and sometimes he could not have the benefit of the judgment of a sufficient number of the learned upon the difficulties which occurred to him. After beginning to print any particular work, he often had not leisure to pause for a sufficient length of time, over the difficulties occurring in the progress of the edition. He might, in some instances, also, print a manuscript which he did not approve, lest it should otherwise have been lost to posterity.

, was a poet of some celebrity for his time, which was that of Henry II. of England, whose chaplain he was about 1190. After the death of that monarch he held the same office under prince John, and lived familiarly with him. He was then made a canon of Salisbury, afterwards precentor of Lincoln, and in the eighth year of Richard I. archdeacon of Oxford. He wrote in Latin; and some of his verses, which are in a light and satirical style, are still extant. There is in the Bodleian a work of his under the assumed name of Valerius, entitled “Valerius ad llufinum de non ducenda uxore,” with a large gloss. He perhaps adopted this name because one Valerius had written a treatise on the same subject in St. Jerom’s works. Warton thinks it probable that he translated from Latin into French the popular romance of Saint Graal, at the instance of Henry II. He was also celebrated for his wit and facetiousness in conversation. When he heard a natural son of Henry II. swear by his father’s royalty, he told him to remember also his mothers honesty. He wrote a “Compendium Topographioe,” and “Epitome Cambriae;” and is thought to have written a “Descriptio Norfolciae,” which, says Mr. Gough, if we could find it, would be a valuable curiosity. Mapes was often confounded with a contemporary poet, Golias, of a similar genius; and some have supposed that Golias was a name assumed by Mapes. But according to Warton’s information, they were different persons.

, a nobleman celebrated for musical knowledge, was born July 24, 1680, at Venice, and was the descendant of one of the most illustrious families of that republic. He had cultivated music so seriously and successfully under the guidance of the celebrated Gasparini, that no contemporary professor was more reverenced for musical science, or half so much praised for his abilities as a composer, as Marcello; and besides his musical productions, consisting of psalms, operas, madrigals, songs, and cantatas, he was frequently his own poet, and sometimes assumed the character of lyric bard for other musicians. It is probable that Marcello had received some disgust in his early attempts at dramatic music; for, in 1720, he published a furious satire upon composers, singing-masters, and singers in general, under the title of “Teatro alia Moda,” or “An easy and certain Method of composing and performing Italian Operas in the modern manner.” But his great musical work, to which the late Mr. Avison’s encomiums aud Mr. Garth’s publication to English words, have given celebrity in our own country, was first printed at Venice, in 8 vols. folio, under the following title: “Estro poetico-arznonico, Parafrasi sopra i primi 50 Salmi, Poesia di Girciarno Ascanio Giustiniani, Musica di Benedetto Marcello, Patrizj Veneti, 1724 and 1725.” Dr. Burney, after a careful examination of this elaborate work, is of opinion, that though it has considerable merit, the author has been over-praised; as the subjects of many of his fugues and airs are not only common and old-fashioned at present, but were far from new at the time these psalms were composed. But, adds Dr. Burney, Marcello was a Venetian nobleman, as Venosa was a Neapolitan prince; both did honour to music by cultivating it; and both expected and received a greater return in fame than the legal interest of the art would allow. Marcello died at Brescia, June 25, 173<>, or, according to our principal authority, in 1741. He was author of a drama called “Arato in Sparta,” which was set by Ruggieri, and performed at Venice in 1704; and in 1710 he produced both the words and the music of an oratorio called “Giuditta.” He set the “Psyche” of Cassini about the same time; and in 1718 he published “Sonnets” of his own writing, without music.

, a physician, mathematician, and poet of Pisa, was born at Pontormo, between Pisa and Florence, March 17, 1633. His talents were early developed, and he became the pupil and intimate friend of the learned Borelli, whom he succeeded in 1679, as professor of mathematics at Pisa. He was a man above prejudices, free to declare his sentiments, preferring experiment to authority, and reason to Aristotle. He produced several excellent disciples, and died at Pontormo, Sept. 6, 1714, aged eighty-one. There are extant by him, 1. “Poems,” 1704, in 4to. 2. Several treatises on philosophical subjects, among which that on the resistance of fluids, is particularly valued, 1669, 4to. After his death appeared, 3. A translation of Lucretius, in Italian verse, much esteemed for its fidelity, ease, and harmony; yet, say* baretti, “the versification, in my opinion, is but indifferent.” It was not allowed to be published in Italy, but was published in London, 1717, in 4to, by Paulo Rolli, the translator of Milton into,blank verse. 4. His free translation of Anacreon is less esteemed; it was published at Venice in 1736. There is an edition of his poems, printed at Venice in 1755, 4to, to which his life is prefixed.

, a once celebrated Italian poet, was born at Naples in 1569; and made so great a progress in his juvenile studies, that he was thought qualified for that of the civil law at thirteen. His father, who was a lawyer, intended him for that profession, as the properest means of advancing him; but Marini had already contracted a taste for poetry, and was so far from relishing the science to which he was put, that he sold his law-books, in order to purchase books of polite literature. This so much irritated his father, that he turned him out of doors, and obliged him to seek for protectors and supporters abroad. Having acquired a reputation for poetry, he happily found in Inico de Guevara, duke of Bovino, a friend who conceived an affection for him, and supported him for three years in his house. The prince of Conca, grand admiral of the kingdom of Naples, next took him into his service, in quality of secretary; and in this situation he continued five or six years; but having assisted a friend in a very delicate intrigue, he was thrown into prison, and very hardly escaped with his life. Thence he retired to Rome, where, after some time spent in suspense and poverty, he became known to Melchior Crescendo, a prelate of great distinction, who patronized him, and provided him with every thing he wanted.

In 1601, he went to Venice, to print some poems which he dedicated to Crescentio; and after making the tour of that part of Italy, returned to Rome. His reputation increased greatly, so as to engage the attention of the cardinal Peter Aldobrandini, who made him his gentleman, and settled on him a considerable pension. After the election of pope Paul V. which was in 1605, he accompanied this cardinal to Ravenna, his archbishopric, and lived with him several years. He then attended him to Turin, at which court he ingratiated himself by a panegyric upon the duke Charles Emmanuel; for which this prince recompensed him with honours, and retained him, when his patron the cardinal left Piedmont. During his residence here he had a violent dispute, both poetical and personal, with Gasper Murtola, the duke’s secretary. Murtola was, or fancied himself, as good a poet as Marini, and was jealous of Marini’s high favour with the duke, and therefore took every opportunity to speak ill of him. Marini, by way of revenge, published a sharp sonnet upon him at Venice, in 1608, under the title of “II nuovo mondo;” to which Murtola opposed a satire, containing an abridged life of Marini. Marini answered in eighty-one sonnets, named the “Murtolelde:” to which Murtola replied in a “Marineide,” consisting of thirty sonnets. But the latter, perceiving that his poems were inferior in force as well as number to those of his adversary, resolved to put an end to the quarrel, by destroying him; and accordingly fired a pistol, the ball of which luckily missed him. Murtola was cast into prison, but saved from punishment at the intercession of Marini, who, nevertheless, soon found it expedient to quit his present station.

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

A little farther account, however, of this controversy, and its rise, may yet be interesting. In 1741, Mr. Tunstall, public orator of Cambridge, published his doubts on the authenticity of the letters between Cicero and Brutus (which Middleton, in his Life of Cicero, had considered as genuine), in a Latin dissertation. This Middleton called “a frivolous, captious, disingenuous piece of criticism,” answered it in English, and published the disputed epistles with a translation. On this, Tunstall, in 1744, published his “Observations on the Epistles, representing several evident marks of forgery in them, in answer to the late pretences of the Rev. Dr. Conyers Middleton.” Markland, the following year, published his arguments on the same side of the question, which called forth a pamphlet, written by Mr. Ross, afterwards bishop of Exeter, entitled “A Dissertation in which the defence of P. Sylla, ascribed to M. Tullius Cicero, is clearly proved to be spurious, after the manner of Mr. Markland; with some introductory Remarks on other writings of the Ancients, never before suspected.” It is written in a sarcastic style, but with a display of learning very inferior to that of the excellent scholar against whom it was directed, and in a disposition very dissimilar to the candour and fairness which accompanied the writings of Markland. It has lately been discovered that Gray, the celebrated poet, assisted Ross in his pamphlet, but at the same time does not seem to have entertained a very high opinion of Ross’s wit. In a manuscript note in the first leaf of his copy of Markland, he writes: “This book is answered in an ingenious way, but the irony is not quite transparent.” Gray’s copy of Markland is now in the possession of his late excellent biographer, the rev. John Mitford, to whom we are indebted for these particulars. Mr. Mitford adds, that the notes which Gray has written in this copy “display a familiar knowledge of the structure of the Latin language, and answer some of the objections of Markland,” who had not then learnt the caution, in verbal criticism and conjectural emendation, which he well knew how to value when an editor of Euripides.“The only other pamphlet which this controversy produced was entitled” A Dissertation in which the observations of a late pamphlet on the writings of the Ancients, after the manner of Mr. Markland, are clearly answered; those passages in Tully corrected, on which some of the objections are founded: with amendments of a few pieces of criticism in Mr. Markland’s Epistola Critica," Lond. 1746, 8vo. At length Gesner defended the genuineness of the orations in question, and they were reprinted by Ernest, and are still believed to be part of Cicero’s works.

Which rightly should possess a poet’s brain." In 1557 he translated Coluthus’s “Rape of Helen” into English rhyme. He also translated the elegies of Ovid, which book was ordered to be burnt at Stationers’-hall, 1599, by command of the archbishop of Canterbury and the bishop of London. Before 1598 appeared his translation of the “Loves of Hero and Leander,” the elegant prolusion of an unknown sophist of Alexandria, but commonly ascribed to the ancient Musseus. It was. left unfinished by Marlow’s death; but what was called a second part, which is nothing more than a continuation from the Italian, appeared by one Henry Petowe, in 1598. Another edition was published, with the first book of Lucan, translated also by Marlow, and in blank verse, in 160O. At length Chapman, the translator of Homer, completed, but with a striking inequality, Marlow’s unfinished version, and printed it at London in 1606, 4to. His plays were, 1. “Tamerlane the great Scythian emperor, two parts,” ascribed by Phillips erroneously to Newton. 2. “The rich Jew of Maltha.” 3. “The Tragical History of the Life and Death of Dr. John Faustus.” 4. “Lnst’s Dominion,” Lond. 1661, 8vo, from which was stolen the greater part of Aphra Behn’s “Abdelazer, or the More’s Revenge,” Lond. 1677. 5. “The Tragedy of King Edward II.” 6. “The Tragedy of Dido, queen of Carthage,” in the composition of which he was assisted by Thomas Nash, who published it in 1594.

His tragedies, says Warton, manifest traces of a just dramatic conception, but they abound with tedious and uninteresting scenes, or with such extravagancies as proceeded from a want of judgment, and those barbarous ideas of the times, over which it was the peculiar gift of Shakspeare’s genius alone to triumph and predominate. As a poet, there is one composition preserved in the collection called “England’s Helicon,” and often reprinted, which entitles him to the highest praise. It is that entitled “The Passionate Shepherd to his Love,” beginning “Come live with me, and be my love.” We can remember the revival of this beautiful pastoral about forty years ago, with some pleasing music, which made it the fashion of every theatre, concert, and private party. Sir Walter Raleigh wrote a reply to this piece.

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

Marot, according to an expression of the sieur de Vauprivas, was the poet of the princes, and the prince of poets, during his time in France. It is agreed on all hands, not only that the French poetry had never before appeared with the charms and beauties with which he adorned it, but that, even during the sixteenth century, there appeared nothing that could be compared with the happy turn, the native graces, and the wit, that was every-where scattered through his works, and which compose what is called the Marotic style. This has had many imitators, particularly La Fontaine and Rousseau. We find, by the judgments which have been collected upon Marot, that the French poets are obliged to him for the rondeau; and that to him they likewise owe, in same measure, the modern form of the sonnet and madrigal, and of some other of the smaller forms of poetry. His works, however, are highly censureable on the score of indecency. The wonder is, that, with such libertine propensities, he should employ his genius on a translation of the Psalms. Of these he first translated thirty, which he obtained a privilege to publish, about 1540, and dedicated them to Francis I. His translation was censured by the faculty of divinity at Paris, who carried matters so far as to make remonstrances and complaints to that monarch. The king, who had a great value for Marot on account of his genius, put them off with delays, testifying how acceptable this specimen was to him, and desiring to see the whole finished. However, after several remonstrances had been made to the king, the publication of them was prohibited; which, as usually happens in such cases, made them sell faster than the printers could work them off. After he had retired to Geneva, he translated twenty more Psalms, which in 1543 were printed there with the other thirty; together with a preface written by Calvin. Marot’s works have been collected and printed several times, and in various beautiful forms. Two of the best editions are those of the Hague, 1700, 2 vols. 12mo; and 1731, 4 vols. 4to.

, an English dramatic author, who lived in the time of James I. and wrote eight plays. Wood says, “that he was a student in Corpus-Christi college, Oxford; but where he was born, or from what family descended, is not known.” When he left Oxford, he was entered of the Middle Temple, of which society he was chosen lecturer in the 34th of Elizabeth; but much more of his personal history is not known. He lived in friendship with Ben Jonson, as appears by his addressing to him his “Malecontent,” a tragi-comedy, in 1604; yet we find him afterwards glancing with some severity at Jonson, on account of his “Catiline and Sejanus,” in his “Epistle” prefixed to “Sophonisba,” another tragedy. “Know,” says he, “that I have not laboured an this poem, to relate any thing as an historian, but to enlarge every thing as a poet. To transcribe authors, quote authorities, and to translate Latin prose orations into English blank verse, hath in this subject been the least aim of my studies.” Langbaine observes, and with good reason, “that none, who are acquainted with the works of Ben Jonson, can doubt that he is meant here, if they will compare the orations in Sallust with those in his Cataline.” Jonson appears to have quarrelled with him and Decker, and is supposed to have ridiculed both in his “Poetaster.”

, a Latin poet, and miscellaneous writer, was born at Paris, and entered early into the society of Jesuits, where he displayed and cultivated very excellent literary talents. When he was hardly twenty, he published some Latin poems which gained him credit. His religious opinionsbeing soon found too bold for the society to which he belonged, he was obliged to quit it; and having published in 1754, an “Analysis of Bayle,” in 4 vols. 12mo, he fell into still greater and perhaps more merited disgrace. His books were proscribed by the parliament of Paris, and himself shut up in the Bastile. This book contains a compilation of the most offensive matter contained in the volumes of Bayle, and has since been republished in Holland, with four additional volumes. Having, for a time, regained his liberty, he was proceeding in his modern history (a work of which he had already published some volumes), when he died suddenly in December 1763. Besides the analysis of Bayle, already mentioned, he published, I. The History of Mary Stuart,“1742, 3 vols. 12mo, a correct and elegant work, in which he was assisted by Fréron. 2.” Memoires de Melvill,“translated from the English, 1745, S^vols. 12mo. 3.” Abridged Dictionary of Painting and Architecture,“2 vols. 12mo. 4.” Le Rabelais moderne,“or the works of Rabelais made intelligible to readers in geaeral, 1752, 8 vols. 12mo. This is by no means executed in a manner either satisfactory to the reader, or creditable to the author. Some of the obscurities are removed or explained, but all that is offensive to decency is left. 5.” The Prince,“translated from father Paul, 1751. 6.” The Modern History, intended to serve as a continuation of Rollin’s Ancient History,“in 26 vols. 12mo. This is written with regularity, but little elegance. The abbe Marsy has since had a continuator in Richer, who has written with less order, but more profundity of research, especially respecting America and Russia. 7.” Pictura," in 12mo, 1756. This poem on painting, is considered as less learned in the art, and in that respect less instructive, than that of du Fresnoy; but he has shown himself a more pure and original Latin poet. There is also a poem in Latin by this author, on tragedy. The opinion of his countrymen is, that his fame rests principally on these Latin poems, and that there was nothing brilliant in his literary career afterwards.

, a Florentine poet, born about 1500, wrote verses serious and grotesque. The former were published in 8vo, at Florence, in 1548; the latter appear in the second volume of “Poesie Bernesche.” 'He was also a celebrated dramatic writer. He died in 1527, when he was no more than twenty-eight years old. His brother Vincent was also a poet, and left some “Rime,” or lyrics, which were much esteemed. He died in 1556, and his poems and letters appeared in 1607.

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

, an ancient Latin poet, and the model of epigrammatists, was born at Bilbilis, now called Bubiera, a town of the ancient Celtiberia in Spain, which is the kingdom of Arragon. He was born, as is supposed, in the reign of Claudius, and went to Rome when he was about twenty-one. He was sent thither with a view of prosecuting the law; but soon forsook that study, and applied himself to poetry. He excelled so much in the epigrammatic style, that he soon acquired reputation, and was courted by many of the first rank at Rome. Silius Italicus, Stella, and Pliny the younger, were his friends and patrons. Stertinius, a noble Roman, had so great an esteem for his compositions, that he placed > his statue in his library, while he was yet living; and the emperor Verus, who reigned with Antoninus the philosopher, used to call him his Virgil, which was as high an honour as could well be paid to him. We learn also from Pliny and Tacitus, as well as from several passages in his own writings, that he had honours and dignities bestowed upon him by some of the emperors. Domitian, whom it must be confessed he has flattered not a little, made him a Roman knight, and gave him likewise the “Jus trium liberorum,” the privileges of a citizen who had three children. He was also advanced to the tribunate. But though he was so particularly honoured, and had so many great and noble patrons, who admired him for his wit and poetry, it does not appear that he made his fortune among them. There is reason to think that, after the death of Domitian, his credit and interest declined at Rome; and if he had still remaining among the nobles some patrpns, such as Pliny, Cornelius Priscus, &c. yet the emperor Nerva took but little notice of him, and the emperor Trajan none at all. Tired of Rome, therefore, after he had lived in that city about four and thirty years, and grown, as himself tells us, grey-headed, he returned to his own country Bilbilis, where he took a wife, and had the happiness to live with her several years. He admired her much, as one who alone was sufficient to supply the want of every thing he enjoyed at Rome. She appears to have brought him a very large fortune; for, in one of his epigrams he extols the magnificence of the house and gardens he had received from her, and says, “that she had made him a little kind of monarch.” About three years after he had retired into Spain, he inscribed his twelfth book of Epigrams to Priscus, who had been his friend and benefactor; and is supposed to have died about the year 100. As an epigrammatist, Martial is eminently distinguished, and has been followed as a model by all succeeding wits. All his efforts, however, are not equally successful, and many of his epigrams are perhaps unjustly so called, being merely thoughts or sentiments without applicable point. He offends often by gross indelicacy, which was the vice of the times; but his style is in general excellent, and his frequent allusion to persons and customs render his works very interesting to classical antiquaries.

, a French poet of the fifteenth century, was procurator in parliament, and notary of the chatelet at Paris, where also he was born; and died in 1508, regarded as one of the most pleasing men and easy writers of his age. He wrote, 1. “Arrets l'Amour,” Love-causes, the thought of which was taken from the Troubadours of Provence, but handled with great skill and eloquence. The introduction and the close are in verse the rest in prose. 2. “Vigiles de larnort du Roi,” an historical poem on tKe death of Charles VII.; in which, in the form of the Romish office, entitled Vigils, he recites the misfortunes and the glorious acts of his hero; and displays his honest love of virtue and hatred of vice. 3. “L‘Amant rendu Cordelier de l’observance d' Amour;” a poem of 234 stanzas, reviling the extravagances produced by the passion of love. 4. “Devotes louanges a laVierge Marie,” in 8vo, an historical poem on the life of the virgin Mary a legend in bad verse, filled with the fables which were at that time believed.

, a learned popish writer, whose name is so much connected with some protestant writers of eminence as to deserve a brief notice here, was born at Maxfield, near Winchelsea, in Sussex, and was admitted one of the original scholars of St. John’s college, Oxford, in 1557, by sir Thomas White, the founder. In 1564 he proceeded M. A. and was afterwards taken into the family of Thomas, duke of Norfolk, as tutor to his children, and particularly to Philip, earl of Surrey. Such had been Martin’s reputation at college, that when the duke paid a visit to St. John’s, one of the society, in a Latin address to his grace, introduced his name with this panegyric: “Habes, illustrissime dux, Hebraeum nostrum, Grsecum nostrum, poetam nostrum, decus et gloriam nostrum,” implying that Martin was their best Hebrew and Greek scholar and poet, and an ornament to their college. Having embraced the Roman catholic religion, which he chose no longer to conceal, he went to the English college at Douay in 1570, where he was ordained priest in 1573, and licentiate in divinity in 1575. After a visit in the following year to Rome, he returned to Doway and taught Hebrew, and gave lectures on the Scriptures. When the college was removed to Rheims, he undertook to translate the Bible into English from the Vulgate, and Dodd is of opinion that what is called “The Rheims translation,” may be entirely ascribed to him. It was. not, however, published at one time. The New Testament appeared first atRheims and Antwerp, with Bristow’s notes, and the Old Testament several years afterwards, with the editor, Dr. Worthington’s notes. The New Testament, as we have noticed, under their respective articles, was answered by Fulk and Cartwright. Martin died Oct. 28, 1582, atRheims. He published some other works, a list of which may be seen, in Wood and Dodd, but is scarcely worth transcribing. Camden says that in 1584 a book of his appeared in which queen Elizabeth’s gentlewomen were exhorted to serve her as Judith had served Holofernes. The catholic "writers, however, deny this, and apparently with justice.

Nevertheless, our indefatigable botanist and scholar was not idle. The work on which his literary fame chiefly and firmly rests is his splendid quarto edition of Virgil’s Georgics, which appeared in 1741, dedicated to Dr. Mead. Here his abilities and his acquisitions had their full scope. The text was accompanied by an English translation, and ample notes in the same language. In these the editor was enabled, from his peculiar studies, to throw more light upon the natural history of his author, than any one before him had done, nor is it easy to improve upon his perfor<­mance. He was assisted in the astronomical part by his friend the celebrated Halley, to whose worth he has given a just and feeling tribute in the preface. In 1749 he published the Bucolics on the same plan, and intended to have gone through the whole of the Roman poet; but growing infirmities, and the loss of his wife, who died of a cancer in the breast this year, for a while damped his ardour. The labours of his profession, too, were becoming burthensome. He speedily indeed repaired his domestic loss, marrying, in July 1750, Mary-Anne, daughter of Claude Fonnereau, esq. of London, merchant. This lady bore him one son, and survived him. In the spring of 1752 he retired from practice, and took a farm in a most beautiful situation at Streatham, and, but for occasional attacks of the gout, enjoyed several years of learned leisure united with scientific experience, in attention to the business of his farm, and the care of his family. On the 30th of January, 1761, he resigned his professorship of botany in favour of his son the rev. Thomas Marty n, who was elected in his stead, and who has ever since filled that station with honour to himself and to his parent. In gratitude for this election, so consonant to his own wishes, Mr. Martyn, some time afterwards, gave his botanical library, of above 200 volumes, with his drawings, herbarium, and collections of seeds and materia mtdica, to the university, for which the thanks of that body were very handsomely returned him in 1765.

, one of those learned Greeks who retired into Italy after the Turks had taken Constantinople, where he was born. It is said that it was not his zeal for the Christian religion, but the fear of slavery, which made him abandon his country; but if, according to Tiraboschi, he was brought into Italy in his infancy, this insinuation may be spared. He studied Greek and Latin at Venice, and philosophy at Padua; but for a subsistence was obliged to embrace the profession of arms, and served in the troop of horse under Nicholas Rhalla, a Spartan general. Rejoined the two professions of letters and arms, and would be no less a poet than a soldier: and, as he suspected that it would not be thought any extraordinary thing in him to be able to write Greek verses, he applied himself diligently to the study of Latin poetry, and acquired a good deal of reputation by his success in it. His Latin poems consist of four books of epigrams, and as many of hymns, which were published at Florence in 1197, 4to. He bad begun a poem on the education of a prince, which he did not finish: as much of it, however, as was found among his papers was published along with his epigrams and hymns; and this whole collection has passed through several editions. He appears to have had a poetical mistress, whom he frequently courts under the name of Neraea; but he married Alexandra Scala, a Florentine lady of high accomplishments, and had Politian for his rival, which may account for the contempt with which Politian speaks of his poetry. The critics are divided about his poems, some praising them highly, while others, as the two Scaligers, find great fault with them. Erasmus says, in his “Ciceronianus,” that the poems of Marullus would have been tolerable, if they had savoured less of Paganism: “Marulli pauca legi, tolerabilia si minus haberent paganitatis.” He created himself many enemies by censuring too freely the ancient Latin authors, for which he was equally freely censured by Floridus Sabinns and Politian. The learned men of that time usually rose to fame by translation; but this he despised, either as too mean or too hazardous a task. Varillas, in his “Anecdotes of Florence,” asserts, that Lorenzo de Medici conjured Marullus, by letters still extant, to translate Plutarch’s moral works; but that Marullus had such an aversion to that kind of drudgery, which obliged him, as he said, to become a slave to the sentiments of another, that it was impossible for him to get to the end of the first page. He lost his life in 1499, or 1500, as he was attempting to pass the river Csecina, which runs by Volaterra, in Tuscany. Perceiving that his horse had plunged with his fore feet in such a manner that he could not disengage them again, he fell into a passion, and gave him the spur: but both his horse and himself fell; and, as his leg was engaged under the horse’s belly, there needed but little water to stifle him. Pierius Valerianus, who relates these circumstances, observes, that this poet blasphemed terribly just before his death, and immediately upon his fall discharged a thousand reproaches and curses against heaven. His impiety seems unquestionable; and it is imputed to this turn of mind, that he so much admired Lucretius. He gave a new edition of his poem, which is censured in “Joseph Scaliger’s notes upon Catullus:” and he endeavoured to imitate him. He used to say, that “the rest of the poets were only to be read, but that Virgil and Lucretius were to be got by heart.” Hody, however, has collected a great many honourable testimonies to his merit, from the writings of able and learned critics at or near his time, while be has been equally undervalued by more modern writers.

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

, a distinguished poet and divine of the last century, was the son of the vicar of St. Trinity-hall in the East Riding of Yorkshire, and was born in 1725. His education, previously to his going to the university, was probably superintended by his father, whose indulgence in permitting him to follow the bent of his youthful mind towards poetry and painting, he acknowledges in an epistolary address written in 1746. He went to Cambridge in 1742-3, and was entered of St. John’s college, where his tutor, Dr. Powell, encouraged him to publish his excellent monody to the memory of Pope, which appeared in 1747. He took his bachelor’s degree in 1745, and his master’s in 1749, but little else has been recorded of his academical progress, except that his attachment to the Muses continued during his residence at the university, of which he took leave in an ode complimentary to his college and his tutor.

In 1752, he published “Elfrida,” a dramatic poem, constructed on the model of the ancients, to which he was enthusiastically attached; and having once formed the opinion that dramas might be successfully written in this way, hq persisted in it to the last, contrary to argument and experience. In the present instance he attempted the plan with certain limitations. He professed that his intention was only to follow the ancient method as far as it is probable a Greek poet, were he alive, would now do, in order to adapt himself to the genius of our times, and the character of our tragedy. How far he has executed an intention, evidently suggested by a series of conjectures, will hardly now admit of a question. All critics are agreed that “Elfrida” is neither adapted to the genius of our times, nor to the character of our tragedy. The letters, however, which he published, may yet be perused as ingenious apologies for his judgment; and whatever the decision may be, there can be little difference of opinion respecting the merit of “Eifnda” as a poem. In 1772, Mr. Colman, at that time manager of Oo\ em-garden theatre, made such alterations as were supposed necessary to its appearance on the stage, and besides the decoration of splendid scenery, Dr. Arne contributed some characteristic iftusir-. The author, however, was so much offended at the alterations, as to have meditated a very angry address to Colman, who, on his part, threatened him with the introduction of a chorus of Grecian washerwomen in some future stage entertainment. Mr. Mason afterwards, in 1778 or 1779, made his own alterations and arrangements, and had it performed at the same theatre; but neither attempt was successful.

His father died in 1753, and in 1754- he went into orders; and through the interest of the earl of “Holdernesse, whose patronage he had obtained, he was preferred to be one of the king’s chaplains, and received about the same time the living of Aston. The reputation he had acquired by the odes of his” Elfrida,“encouraged him to publish, in 1756, four compositions of that class on <c Memory, Independency, Melancholy, and the Fate of Tyranny,” which were not received with favour or kindness. Both ridicule and legitimate criticism seem to have been employed on this occasion to expose the wanton profusion of glittering epithets, and the many instances of studied alliteration scattered over these odes. Colman and Lloyd, who were now beginning to look for satirical prey, published two excellent parodies Oh one of them, and on one of Gray’s. His praise of Andrew Marvell, and attack on bishop Parker, produced about the same time a dull letter of cet>sure, which probably gave him less uneasiness than the cool reception of his “Odes,” by those who then dispensed the laonours of literary fame. On the death of Gibber, he was proposed to succeed him as poet laureat; but, instead of an offer of this place, an apology was made to him by lord John Cavendish, that “being in orders, he was thought merely on that account, less eligible for the office than a layman.*' The notice of this circumstance in his life of W. Whitehead is followed by a declaration of his indifference.” A reason so politely put, I was glad to hear assigned; and if I had thought it a weak one, they who know me, will readily believe that I am the last man in the world who would have attempted to controvert it.“The probability, indeed^ is that Mr. Mason would not have thought himself honoured bv the situation, if compelled to fulfil its duties; for though by his mediation the office was tendered to Gray, it was” with permission to hold it as a mere sinecure."

In 1762, Mason published “Three Elegies,” which are elegant, tender, and correct beyond the productions of any of his contemporaries. These, with all his former pieces, except the “Isis” and the “Installation Ode,” were collected into one volume, and published in 1764, with a beautiful dedicatory sonnet to his patron the earl of Holdernesse. Why he omitted “Isis” from this collection is not very evident. We have, indeed, his own authority that he never would have published it, if a surreptitious copy had not found its way to the press; but, although he omitted it now, he reprinted it in the third volume of his poems, published in 1796, when his sentiments on political topics were more perfectly in unison with those held at Oxford. MV. Mant, in his life of Mr. T. Warton, informs us that several years after he had written this elegy, he was coming into Oxford on horseback; and as he passed over Magdalen Bridge (it was then evening), he turned to his friend, and expressed his satisfaction, that, as it was getting dusk, they should enter the place unnoticed. His friend did not seem aware of the advantage. “What!” rejoined the poet, “do you not remember my Lsis?” This may be reckoned an instance of the “harmless and comical vanity” which Gray attributed to him when at college. But a more singular omission occurs in this volume, in the “Ode to a Water Nymph:” this formerly concluded with a handsome compliment to lord Lyttelton, both as a poet and as a speaker in the senate, which was now removed, and a favourite description substituted. In the same year his majesty presented our author to the canonry and prebend of Driffield in the cathedral church of York, together with the precentorship of that church, vacant by the promotion of Dr. Newton to the bishopric of Bristol.

In 1772, he published the first book of his “English Garden,” a work in which Mr. Warton says “didactic poetry is brought to perfection, by the happy combination of judicious precepts with the most elegant ornaments of language and imagery.” This opinion is quoted, not only because it appears to be just, but because it proves that Mr. Warton entertained a very high opinion of Mason as a poet, although there did not exist so much cordiality of friendship as could have been wished between men who were certainly among the ornaments of literature in their day. The usual objections to didactic poetry are undoubtedly in force against this specimen; yet the “English Garden” was read with avidity and approbation. The subject was more familiar and interesting than those of former poems of instruction, and it afforded him more frequent opportunities to introduce rural imagery, and those descriptions which give scope to a poetical imagination. Yet the approbation of his friends did not flatter him into carelessness and precipitation. He appears to have been one of the few authors who are desirous to retain the fame they have acquired. The remaining books of the “English Garden” were published at periods sufficiently distant to admit all the niceties of polish and frequent correction. Book II. appeared in 1777, book III. in 1779, and book IV. in 1782.

During some of these intervals he executed a very important task, which devolved on him in consequence of the death of his friend Gray. This justly-celebrated poet gratified him by a visit at Aston in 1770, and after his return to Pembroke-hall, was seized with the gout in his stomach, which proved suddenly fatal. Mason hastened to Cambridge to pay the last duties of friendship, but arrived too late for the funeral, which had been conducted by Dr. Brown, master of Pembroke-hall, who was appointed jointexecutor. To Mason, Gray left the sum of 500l. with all his books, manuscripts, musical instruments, medals, &c. and Mason undertook to write his life, and to publish such of his manuscripts as might appear to be worthy of his high character in the literary world. In his biography he chose to deviate from the usual plan, by adopting one which seemed to present more advantages. Objections have been made to it, because the biographer seldom appears either as the narrator or the critic, but it must be allowed that the whole is rendered more interesting, and that the attention of the reader being constantly fixed on the principal character, he is enabled to form a more impartial opinion than if he had perused no evidence but the assertions of the biographer. The plan has since been followed in the cases of Johnson, Cowper, sir William Jones, Mrs. Carter, and Dr. Beattie and where lives of equal importance to literary curiosity are to be recorded, which cannot be often, it appears to be not only the most engaging species of minute biography, but also the most impartial.

In 1795, he published a judicious, comprehensive, and elegant “Essay, historical and critical, on English Church Music.” This work embraces so many subjects connected with the decorous administration of public worship as to deserve much more attention than has yet been bestowed upon it. His answer to Mr. Thomas Warton’s objections to metrical psalmody is not the least valuable part; and the spirit and intelligence which he displays on this subject do credit to him, both as a poet and a divine. His knowledge of music was very accurate, and he is said to have composed a Te Deum, a hymn, and other pieces for the choir of York. The improvement, if not the invention of the piano forte is also attributed to him in an elaborate article on that subject, inserted in Dr. Gleig’s supplement to the “Encyclopedia Britannica*.”

in the Cyclopædia, "was not only an accompaniment of a consummate orexcellent poet and able divine, but a ganist. As prec-n' or of the cathedral

As a poet, his name has been so frequently coupled with that of Gray, and their merits have been supposed to approach so nearly, that what has been said of the one will in some degree apply to the other. It is evident that they studied in the same school, and mutually cultivated those opinions which aim at restoring a purer species of poetry than was taught in the school of their predecessor Pope. Whether we consider Mason as a lyric, dramatic, or didactic writer, we find the same grandeur of outline, the same daring and inventive ambition which carries out of the common track of versification and sentiment into the higher regions of imagination. His attachment to the sister art, and his frequent contemplation of the more striking and sublime objects of nature, inclined him to the descriptive; and his landscapes have a warmth and colouring, often rich and harmonious, but perhaps too frequently marked with a glare of manner peculiar to the artist. His compositions, however, even on the same subject, have all the variety of a fertile invention. Although we have Evening, Morning, &c. often depicted, they are to be distinguished, and the preference we are inclined to give is regulated by the feeling which the varieties of natural appearances excite in different minds, and in the same mind at different times.

Mason’s correctness is almost proverbial, and his ambition undoubtedly was to be equally correct and elegant: yet his style must often lead the reader to question his judgment, and to wonder that he could not see what every one else saw. That a man with so many endowments as a scholar, a critic, and an admirer of the simplicity of the ancients, should have fallen so frequently into a style ornamented with a finical profuseness, would be sufficiently remarkable, if his decorations had readily presented themselves; but, when we see him so frequently pausing for an epithet that incumbers what it cannot illustrate, when we see him more attentive to novelty than strength of imagery, and above all, taxing his memory to produce repeated alliterations, we are forced to conclude that judgment is not always consistent, or that in some men it occasionally exists independent of true taste. With these exceptions, however, few indeed of the modern poets in our collections deserve a higher rank than Mason, as a lyric and descriptive poet, nor has he given any finished piece to the world from which examples of excellence may not be quoted.

, a very eminent dramatic writer, was born in 1584. His father was Arthur Massinger, a gentleman attached to the family of Henry second earl of Pembroke. He was born at Salisbury, and educated, probably, at Wilton, the seat of the earl of Pembroke. When he had reached his sixteenth year, he sustained an irreparable loss in the death of that worthy nobleman, who, from attachment to the father, would, not improbably, have extended his powerful patronage to the son. In May 1602 Massinger became a commoner of Aiban-Hall, Oxford, but left it soon without taking a degree. Various reasons have been assigned for this, as the earl of Pembroke’s withdrawing his support; or the same effect resulting from the death of the poet’s father; but his late excellent editor, Mr. Gifford, is probably right in attributing his removal to a change in his principles, to his becoming a Roman catholic. Whatever might be the cause, the period of his misfortunes commenced with his arrival in London, where he was driven by his necessities to dedicate himself to the service of the stage. We hear little, however, of him, from 1606, when he first visited the metropolis, until 1622, when his “Virgin Martyr,” the first of his printed works, was given to the stage. For this hiatus, his biographer accounts by his having assisted others, particularly Fletcher, and his having written some plays which have perished. He afterwards produced various plays in succession, of which eighteen only have descended to us. Massinger died March 17, 1640. He went to bed in good health, says Langbaine, and was found dead in his bed in the morning in his own house on the Bankside. He was buried in the church-yard of St. Saviour’s. It does not appear from the strictest search, that a stone, or inscription of any kind, marked the place where his dust was deposited: even the memorial of his mortality is given with a pathetic brevity, which accords but too well with the obscure and humble passages of his life: “March 20, 1639-40, buried Philip Massinger, a stranger!” So few particulars are known of his private history, that his life is little more than a detailed account of his various productions, for which we may refer the reader to Mr. Gifford’s edition. But, says this editor, though we are ignorant of every circumstance respecting- Massinger, unless that he lived, wrote, and died, we may yet form to ourselves some idea of his personal character from the incidental hints scattered through his works. In what light he was regarded may be collected from the recommendatory poems prefixed to his several plays, in which the language of his panegyrists, though warm, expresses an attachment apparently derived not so much from his talents as his virtues. All the writers of his life unite in representing him as a man of singular modesty, gentleness, candour, and affability; nor does it appear that he ever made, or found an enemy. He speaks indeed of opponents on the stage; but the contention of rival candidates for popular favour mast not be confounded with personal hostility. With all this, however, he appears to have maintained a constant struggle with adversity; since not only the stage, from which, perhaps, his natural reserve prevented him from deriving the usual advantages, but even the bounty of his particular friends, on which he chiefly relied, left him in a state of absolute dependence. Other writers for the stage, not superior to him in abilities, had their periods of good fortune, their bright as well as their stormy hours; but Massinger seems to have enjoyed no gleam of sunshine: his life was all one wintry day, and “shadows, clouds, and darkness” rested upon it.

His dedications, says Mr. Gifford, are principally characterised by gratitude and humility, without a single trait of that gross and servile adulation which distinguishes and disgraces the addresses of some of his contemporaries. That he did not conceal his misery, his editors appear inclined to reckon among his faults; he bore it, however, without impatience, and we only hear of it when it is’ relieved. Poverty made him no flatterer, and, what is still more rare, no maligner of the great: nor is one symptom of envy manifested in any part of his compositions. His principles of patriotism appear irreprehensible: the extravagant and slavish doctrines which are found in the dramas of his great contemporaries make no part of his creed, in which the warmest loyalty is skilfully combined with just and rational ideas of political freedom. But the great distinction of Massinger, is the uniform respect with which he treats religion and its ministers, in an age when it was found necessary to add regulation to regulation, to stop the growth of impiety on the stage. No priests are introduced by him, “to set on some quantity of barren spectators” to laugh at their licentious follies; the sacred name is not lightly invoked, nor daringly sported with; nor is Scripture profaned by buffoon allusions lavishly put into the mouths of fools and women. Compared with the other dramatic writers of his age, he appears more natural in his characters, and more poetical in his diction, than Jonson or Cartwnght, more elevated and nervous than Fletcher, the only writers who can be supposed to contest his pre-eminence. He ranks, therefore, in the opinion of the ablest recent critics, immediately under Shakspeare. It must be confessed, says Dr. Ferriar, in his “Essay on the Writings of Massinger,” that in comedy he falls considerably beneath Shakspeare; his wit is less brilliant, and his ridicule less delicate and various; but he affords a specimen of elegant comedy (“The Great Duke of Florence”), of which there is no archetype in his great predecessor. In tragedy Massinger is rather eloquent than pathetic: yet he is often as majestic, and generally more elegant, than his master; he is as powerful a ruler of the understanding, as Shakspeare is of the passions; with the disadvantage of succeeding that matchless poet, there is still much original beauty in his works; and the most extensive acquaintance with poetry will hardly diminish the pleasure of a reader and admirer of Massinger.

As the editions of Dell in 1761, and Davies in 1779, will probably be heard of no more, it is unnecessary to point out their many errors and imperfections. Massinger has at length found in Mr. Gifford an editor, who has completely revived his fame, in the closet at least, and whose well-known learning and taste, it has been justly said, are accompanied, on this occasion, with that genuine spirit of research, that acuteness and accuracy which happily detect and rectify many gross mistakes of former editors, and admirably explain the customs, manners, and language of the poet’s time. This, which is perhaps the most correct edition of any of our ancient poets, was published in 180.5, 4 vols. 8vo, and so completely answered the public expectation, that a second edition was called for in 1813.

, or perhaps Masters (Thomas), a poet and historian, was the son of the rev. William Master, rector of Cote near Cirencester in Gloucestershire. He was first educated at the grammar-school of Cirencester, and afterwards at Winchester-school, from which he entered New college, Oxford, as a probationer fellow in 1622, and was admitted perpetual fellow in 1624. He took his degrees in arts, that of M. A. in 1629, and being in orders, was in 1640 admitted to the reading of the sentences. At this time he was considered as a man of great learning, well-versed in the languages, and a good poet and preacher. There are no other circumstances recorded of his life, except his connection with lord Herbert of Cherbury, whom he assisted in some of his writings. He died of a putrid fever in 1643, and was buried in the outer chapel of New-college. Lord Herbert honoured his memory with a Latin epitaph, which is among his lordship’s poems, but was not inscribed on the place of his burial. His poems were in Latin and Greek: 1. “Mensa Lubrica,” Oxon. 1658, 4to, second edition. This is a poem in Lat. and English, describing the game of shovel-board. 2. “Movorfotpnta ei$ mv TsXfi<r7s alavgutriv,” a Greek poem on the passion of Christ, which was translated into Latin by Mr. Jacob of Merton-college, and into English by Cowley, and published at Oxford, 1658, 4to. His other Latin productions were, an oration delivered in New-college; “Iter Boreale,” “Carolus Redux,” “Ad regem Carolum,” &c. We have termed him a historian from his having given lord Herbert great assistance in his “Life of Henry VIII.” He also had a share in the Latin translation of his lordship’s book “De Veritate.” He had accumulated a great mass of historical information and authorities from the public records; Wood speaks of having four thick volumes in folio of these, “lying by him,” but does not mention whether his own property or borrowed. Dr. Fiddes, however, informs us, in the introduction to his “Life of Wolsey,' 7 that in his time Mr. Master’s” diligent and faithful collections“were in the library of Jesus-college, Oxford. He adds that” Lord Herbert appears to be indebted for good part of his history to those collections."

Although politics were his favourite pursuit in England, he affected the reputation of a man of universal genius, and certainly possessed many accomplishments. In his lighter hours he was a poet, a painter, and a man of gallantry. Lord Orford informs us that he made a portrait of the Infanta; and the famous character of Lucy Percy, countess of Carlisle, inserted by Fenton in his notes on Waller, was the production of his pen, and printed first in his volume of “Letters.” His excellent constitution required but few hours sleep, which he frequently took in a great chair, and rising by break of day, he used to dip his head in cold water. He was then fresh as the morning, and in spirits to write panegyrics upon lady Carlisle, or to pursue whatever else was started by his volatile genius. He was often, adds Granger, a spy upon such companies as he was admitted into upon the footing of an agreeable companion; and with the most vacant countenance would watch for intelligence to send to Rome. He affected much to whisper in public, and often pretended to disclose, when he was only attempting to obtain secret intelligence.

, a Spanish poet, was born at Oropesa in New Castile, in 1663. His poetical essays were published in 1682, in one volume, 4to. This fortunate commencement encouraged the young poet; but it gained himjnvoluntarily, as he was an ecclesiastic, the affections of a lady of great beauty and high rank. In order to retire from this temptation, he went to Rome, where he was received a member of the Arcadi; and Innocent XII. delighted with his talents, appointed him dean of Alicant. At that place he died,. Dec. 18, 1737, being then 74 years old. His letters and Latin poetry, published at Madrid in 1735, in 2 voh. 12mo, prove that he was gifted both with facility of writing and with imagination.

In order to make himself known, in 1750 he began to publish, in French, an account of the productions of the English press, printed at the Hague, under the name of the “Journal Britannique.” This humble, though useful labour, says Gibbon, “which had once been dignified by the genius of Bayle, and the learning of Le Clerc, was not disgraced by the taste, the knowledge, and the judgment of Maty; he exhibits a candid and pleasing view of the state of literature in England during a period of six years (Jan. 1750 December 1755); and, far different from his angry son, he handles the rod of criticism with the tenderness and reluctance of a parent. The author of the ‘ Journal Britannique’ sometimes aspires to the character of a poet and philosopher: his style is pure and elegant; and in his virtues, or even in his defects, he may be ranked as one of the last disciples of the school of Fontenelle.” This Journal, whatever its merits, answered the chief end he intended by it, and introduced him to the acquaintance of some of the most eminent literary characters in the country he had made his own; and it was to their active and uninterrupted friendship, that he owed the places he afterwards possessed. In 1758, he was chosen fellow, and, in 1765, on the resignation of Dr. Birch (who died a few months after, and made him his executor), secretary to the Royal Society. He had been appointed one of the under-librarians of the British Museum at its first institution in 1753, and became principal librarian at the death of Dr. Knight in 1772. Useful in all these posts, he promised to be eminently so in the last, when he was seized with a languishing disorder, which, in 1776, put an end to a life uniformly devoted to the pursuit of science, and the offices of humanity. His body being opened, the appearances which presented themselves were thought so singular as to be described before the Royal Society by Dr. Hunter, whose account is inserted in vol. LXVII. of the Philosophical Transactions.

, a French translator, and in some degree a poet, was born at Noyon, in 1619, and for a time followed the profession of an advocate but being disgusted with the lavi r went into the church, where he became an abbe, and canon of the cathedral of Rheims. In that city he died in 1708, at the age of ninety. His works consist chiefly of translations, which are written in a pure, but not an animated style. The principal of them are these: 1. “The Philippics of Demosthenes.” 2. “The Euthydemus, and the greater Hippias of Plato.” 3. Some Orations of Cicero. 4. “The Rationarium Temporum of father Petau,” 1683, 3 vols. 12mo. 5. “Sanderus’s History of the English Schism,” 1678, 2 vols. 12mo. 6. “The Lives of cardinal Pole and Campeggio.” 7. “The Homilies of St. Chrysostom, addressed to the people of Antioch.” Maucroix was intimately connected with Boileau, Racine, and particularly with La Fontaine; in conjunction with whom, he published in 1685, a collection of their miscellaneous works, in 2 vols. 12mo. In 1726 were published, “Les nouvelles Oeuvres de Maucroix,” among which are some poems, more remarkable for a certain natural style, than for brilliancy of imagination.

, born at Beaune in 1654, became auditor of the chamber of accounts at Paris, and member of the academy of inscriptions. He was beloved as a man, and esteemed as a scholar, and even as a poet ranks among those writers of mediocrity who occasionally produce some happy effusions. His poems are scattered in the “Mercure,” and various other collections. He published also a translation of Petau’s “Rationarium Temporum,” in 4 vols. 12 mo; and was author of many learned and acute dissertations in the Memoirs of the academy of belles lettres. He died in 1737, at the age of eighty-three.

, esq. an English poet and historian, was descended of an ancient, but somewhat declining family, in Sussex; and born at Mayfield in that county, as it is supposed, in 1594. His father purchased Mayfield in 1597, and was knighted at Whitehall, July 3, 1603. His son Thomas was instructed in classical literature in the neighbourhood, and Sept. 11, 1609, entered a fellow-commoner of Sidney college, in Cambridge, where, in 1612, he took a bachelor of arts degree, but never proceeded farther in academical advancement. He removed afterwards to London, and was admitted a member of Gray’s Inn, Aug. 6, 1615; but his genius leading him to pursue the belles-lettres, and especially the muses, he concerned himself very little with the law. In 1616 he succeeded to the estate of Mayfield, which he sold next year. He gained an acquaintance with several eminent courtiers and wits of those times, as sir Kenelm Digby, sir Richard Fanshaw, sir John Suckling, sir Ashton Cockaine, Thomas Carew, Endymion Porter, Ben Jonson, and others: and his reputation was such, that he obtained the countenance of Charles I. and his royal consort; at whose particular recommendation and desire he undertook and published several of his poetical works. In particular, while he resided at court, he wrote the five following plays 1 “The Heir, a comedy, acted in 1620,” and printed in 1633. 2. “Cleopatra, a tragedy,” acted in 1626, printed in 1639. 3. “Antigone, the Theban princess, a tragedy,” printed in 1631. 4. “Agrippina, empress of Rome, a tragedy,” printed in 1639. 5. “The Old Couple, a comedy,” 1651. The second and last of these are reprinted in Dodsley’s Collection. Two other plays have been ascribed to May, namely, “The old Wives Tale,” and “Orlando Furioso;” but Langbaine says he “never saw the first;” and for the latter he assures the reader, “it was. printed long before Mr. May was born, at least before he was able to guide a pen.”

Some of his works, we see, were written at the command of Charles I. and almost all of them were dedicated to his majesty, which seems to indicate rather a close connection between the king and the poet: yet May, on the,

His skill is in parody; and he was breaking out of the civil wars, joined himself very heartily to the parliament. Fuller gives a reason for this when he says that “some disgust at court was given to, or taken by him, as some would have it, because his bays were not gilded richly enough, and his verses rewarded by king Charles according to expectation.” Others, as Phillips and Winstanley, say more particularly, “that his desertion from the court was owing to his being disappointed of the place of queen’s poet, to which sir William Davenant, his competitor, was preferred before him;” and Clarendon seems to have suggested this opinion. Whatever was the cause, it is certain that he threw himself under the protection, and into the service of the parliament; and recommended himself so effectually to them, as to be appointed their secretary and historiographer. Agreeably to the duties of this last office, he published, in 1647, “The History of the Parliament of England, which began Nov. 3, 1640; with a short and necessary view of some precedent years,” folio. The first book of this history begins with short characters of queen Elizabeth and king James, passing through the former part of king Charles’s reign, to 1641; and the last ends with a narrative of the first battle of Newbury, in 1643. He afterwards made an abstract of this history, and a continuation of it to the death of king Charles I. in Latin, in 16^-9; and then an English translation of it, entitled “A Breviary of the History of the Parliament of England,” 1650, 8vo. Echard calls this history, “one of the genteelest and handsomest libels of those times.” Granger is of opinion that there is more candour in this history than the royalists were willing to allow him, but less elegance than might have been expected from the pen of so polite and classical a scholar. Warburton’s praise of this work is perhaps of more value. In a letter to Dr. Hurd he says, “May’s History of the Parliament is a just composition, according to the rules of history. It is written with much judgment, penetration, manliness, and spirit. And with a candour that will greatly increase your esteem, when you understand that he wrote by order of his masters the parliament. It breaks off (much to the loss of the history of that time) just when their armies were new modelled by the self-denying ordinance”

, a French poet, and one of the forty of the French academy, was the son of a counsellor of the parliament of Toulouse, and born in 1582. He was secretary to queen Margaret, and pleased the court of that princess by his wit and gaiety. Noailles, the ambassador to Rome, took him with him in 1634-; and pope Urban VIII. was very much pleased with him. Returning to France, he made his court to the great, but was too sanguine in the expectations he formed from them; which lead in general to disappointment. This was his case. He commended cardinal Richelieu, in order to obtain something; and abused him for giving him nothing. He had the same success at the court of Anne of Austria; and, after a variety of disappointments, he retired to his province, where he died in 1646. He wrote songs, odes, epigrams, some of them rather licentious, and a poem, entitled, “Philander,” &c. Malherbe says of him, and it has generally been allowed, that his verses were well turned, but wanted force.

, an English poet and divine, was born at Hatherlagh in Devonshire, in 1604. He received his education at Westminster-school; and was afterwards removed to Christ-church in Oxford, when he was about twenty. He took his bachelor and master of arts degrees in the regular way; and then, entering into holy orders, was presented by his college to the vicarages of Cassington, near Woodstock, and of Pyrton, near Watlington in Oxfordshire. He became, says W T ood, “a quaint preacher, and a noted poet;” and, in the latter capacity, distinguished himself by the production of two plays, entitled “The City Match,” a comedy; and “The Amorous War,” a tragi-comedy. When the rebellion broke out, and Charles I. was obliged to keep his court at Oxford, to avoid being exposed to the resentment of the populace in London, where tumults then prevailed, Dr. Mayne was one of those divines who were appointed to preach before his majesty. In 1646, he was created a doctor of divinity; and the year after, printed a sermon at Oxford, “Against false prophets,” upon Ezek. xxii. 26. which occasioned a dispute between him and the memorable antagonist of Chillingworth, Mr. Cheynell. Cheynell had attacked his sermon from the pulpit at St. Mary’s in Oxford; and several letters passed between them, which were published by Dr. Mayne the same year, in a piece entitled “A late printed sermon against false prophets vindicated by letter from the causeless aspersions of Mr. Francis Cheynell; by Jasper Mayne, D. D. the misunderstood author of it.” Mayne having said, in one of his letters to Cheynell, that “God, upon a true repentance, is not so fatally tied to the spindle of absolute reprobation, as not to keep his promise, and seal merciful pardons;” Cheynell animadverted upon him in the following terms: “Sir, Reprobatio est tremendum mysterium. How dare you jet upon such a subject, at the thought of which each Christian trembles? Can any man repent, that is given up to a reprobate mind and impenitent heart? And is not every man finally impenitent, save those few to whom God gives repentance freely, powerfully, effectually? See what it is for a man to come from Ben Jonson or Lucian, to treat immediately of the high and stupendous mysteries of religion. The Lord God pardon this wicked thought of your heart, that you may not perish in the bond of iniquity and gall of bitterness. Be pleased to study the ixth chapter to the Romans.” The same year Mayne published also another piece, entitled, “OXAOMAXIAj or, the people’s war examined according to the principles of scripture and reason, in two of the most plausible pretences of it. ID answer to a letter sent by a person of quality, who desired satisfaction.” In this piece he examines, first, how far the power of a king, who is truly a king, not one only in name, extends itself over subjects; secondly, whether any such power belongs to the king of England; and, thirdly, if there does, how far it is to be obeyed, and not resisted. The conclusion he draws is, that the parliamentary resistance to the king was rebellion. We cannot be surprized if a man of such principles was deprived of his studentship at Christ-church, in 1648, and soon after of both his livings. During the time of the usurpation, he was chaplain to the earl of Devonshire, and consequently became the companion of the celebrated Hobbes, who then attended his lordship; but, as Wood informs us, Mayne and he did not agree well together. At the restoration he not only recovered both his livings, but, for his services and attachment to the royal cause, was promoted to a canonry of Christ-church, and made archdeacon of Chichester, and chaplain in ordinary to his majesty, which preferments he held to the time of his death, Dec. 6, 1672. He was interred in the choir at Christ-church, where a monument was erected for him, at the charge of his executors, Dr. Robert South, and Dr. John Lamphire. By his will he left 500l. towards the re-building of St. Paul’s cathedral, and lOOl each to both of his livings. Though very orthodox in his opinions, and severe in his manners, he is said to have been a most facetious and pleasant companion, and a great joker. Of this last, Langbaine gives an instance which affords no very pleasing specimen of Mayne, either as a serious or a jocular man. Langbaine says that he had a servant, who had long lived with him; to whom he bequeathed a trunk, “with something in it,” as he said, “which would make him drink after his death.” The doctor dying, the servant immediately paid a visit to the trunk; but instead of a treasure, or at least a valuable legacy, which he expected, he found Only a red herring.

, esq. a political and miscellaneous writer, descended from an ancient family in Shropshire, was born at Ightfield in that county in 166S. He was instructed in grammar learning at Shrewsbury, and thence removed, at seventeen, to Christ-church, Oxford; where he was placed under the care of Smalridge, afterwards bishop of Bristol. He staid several years at Oxford, and then went into the country, where he prosecuted his studies in polite literature with great vigour; and afterwards, coming to London, applied himself to the law. During his residence in the country, he had contracted from an uncle, with whom he lived, an extreme aversion to the government of king William, which he displayed in a satire against king William and queen Mary, entitled “Tarquin and Tullia,” printed in the “State Poems,” vol. III. p. 319. He also wrote several pieces in favour of James the Second’s party but, upon being introduced to the acquaintance of the duke of Somerset, and the earls of Dorset and Burlington, he began to entertain very different notions in politics. He studied the law till he was five-and-twenty; and, upon the conclusion of the peace of Ryswick, went to Paris, where be became acquainted with Boileau. That poet invited him to his country-house, gave him a very handsome entertainment, and spoke much to him of the English poetry; but all by way of inquiry: for he affected to be as ignorant of the English Muse, as if the English were as barbarous as Laplanders. Thus a gentleman, a friend of Maynwaring’s, visiting him some time after, upon the death of Dryden, Boileau said that he was wonderfully pleased to see, by the public papers, that the English nation had paid such extraordinary honours to a poet in England, burying him at the public charge; and then asked the gentleman who that poet was, with as much indifference as if he had never heard of Dryden’s name.

, an Irish physician and poet, was born at Ormond, about the close of the sixteenth century, in the county of Tipperary, and educated at Oxford. Wood doubts this, because he could find no record of his matriculation or degrees; but in one of his writings he styles himself “lately a member of the university of Oxford,” and it is probable that he took his medical degrees there, as immediately on his leaving Oxford, he settled in his own country, and soon attained the highest eminence in his profession. He was living in 1620, but the time of his death is not specified in our authorities. He wrote a heroic poem, in Latin, on the earl of Ormond and Ossory, entitled “Ormonius, sive illust. herois et Domini D. Thomse Butler, &c. prosapia, &c.” printed at London in 1615, 8vo, % with an English version by William Roberts, Ulster king at arms. He wrote also some medical treatises, of which one only was published, on hereditary disorders, “Pathologia hereditaria generalis, &c.” Dublin, 1619, 12mo. It was afterwards reprinted with the works of his son Edmund Meara, London, 1665, and Amsterdam, 1666, 12mo. This son, a graduate of Oxford, practised both in Ireland and England, was a member of the college of physicians of London, and resided for some time at Bristol. He died about 1680, and had a short controversy with Dr. Lower, occasioned by Meara’s publishing an “Examen Diatribae Thomae Willisii, de Febribus,” London, 1665, 8vo. Lower answered it by a “Vindicatio Diatribae Willisii,” written with much controversial bitterness.

, a Greek epigrammatic poet, and the first collector of the epigrams that form the Greek Anthologia, was the son of Eucrates, and is generally considered as a native of Gadara in Syria, where he chiefly lived; but, according to Harles, was born rather at Atthis, an inconsiderable place, in the territory of Gadara. The time in which he lived has been a subject of controversy. Vavassor, in some degree, with the consent of Fabricius, and Reiske, in his Notitia Poetarum Anthologicorum, p. 131, contend, that he lived under Seleucus VI. the last king of Syria, who began to reign in olym. 170. 3. A. C. 96. This is confirmed by an old Greek scholiast, who says, ἤχμασεν ἐπὶ Σελεύχ τᾶ ἐσχάτα. “He flourished under Seleucus the last.” Saxius accordingly inserts his name at the year abovementioned. Some would carry him back to the 148th olympiad, A. C. 186, which, however, is not incompatible with the other account; and Schneider would bring him down to the age of Augustus, from a supposed imitation of an epigram of Strato, who lived then. But, as it may equally be supposed that Strato imitated him, this argument is of little validity. One of his epigrams in praise of Antipater Sidonius, seems to prove that he was contemporary with him (Epig. cxxiii*. ed. Brunck.) and another, in which he speaks of the fall of Corinth as a recent event, which happened in olym. 158. 4. may be thought to fix him also to that time. As he calls himself Kokuetw, or aged, in one of his compositions, there will be no inconsistency between these marks, and the account of the scholiast.

In his youth, Meleager lived chiefly at Gadara, and imitated the style and manner of Menippus, who had lived before him in the same city. He afterwards resided at Tyre; but in his old age, on account of the wars which then ravaged Syria, he changed his abode to the island of Cos, where he died. In the Anthologia are extant three epitaphs upon this poet, two of which, at least, are supposed to have been written by himself. Of one there can be no doubt from internal evidence, “N<roj spot,” &c.

There was a Cynic of Gadara, of the name of Meleager, whom some confound with this poet, and others distinguish; it seems very unlikely that this elegant writer was a Cynic. Meleager formed two collections of Greek verses, under the name of Anthologia - t one, it is melancholy to say, was entirely dedicated to that odious passion of the Greeks, which among us it is a shame even to mention. To this infamous collection was prefixed a poem, still extant, in which the youths whose beauty was celebrated, are described as flowers. A poet named Strato, increased this collection, and prefixed to it his own name: but Agathias and Planudes, to their honour, rejected this part altogether, and formed their collections from the second Anthologia of Meleager, which consisted of compositions entirely miscellaneous. On this the present collections of Greek epigrams are founded. The poems of Meleager in Brunck’s edition, amount to 129, the greater part of which are epigrams. They display great elegance of genius, and do as much honour to the collection, as most of those which it contains. Lord Chesterfield’s indiscriminate censure of the Greek epigrams, must be the result of mere ignorance, since many of them are of the highest elegance. He had seen, probably, a few of the worst, and knew nothing of the rest. Of the epigrams of Meleager, many are truly elegant, but those numbered, in Brunck’s Analecta, 50, 51, 52, 55, 57, 58, 61, 63, 109, 111, 112, and several others, have beauty enough to rescue the whole collection from the unjust censure of the witty, but not learned earl.

By the lowest account Menander wrote eighty plays; but some authorities more than double them, an improbable number to have been composed by a poet who died at the age of fifty, or very little after; whatever their number, it has been thought that morality, taste, and literature, scarcely ever suffered more irreparably than by the loss of them. A few fragments only remain, which, says Warton, ought “to be as highly prized by the curious, as was the Coan Venus, which Apelles left imperfect and unfinished.” Terence is supposed to have copied all his comedies from Menander, except the “Phormio” and “Hecyra;” and therefore from him we are enabled to form some idea of Menander’s manner. His general character we must still take from his contemporaries, or immediate successors; for all that we can deduce from his fragments will not raise him to the high rank to which he belongs* Some of these are excellent morals, and some of a more elevated cast, but the greater part are of a morose, gloomy, and acrimonious character.

We have many testimonies to the admiration in which he was held during his life-time. Pliny informs us that the kings of Egypt and Macedon gave a noble testimony to his fiierit, by sending ambassadors to invite him to their courts, and even fleets to convey him; but that Menander preferred the free enjoyment of his studies to the promised favours of the great. Yet the envy and corruption of his countrymen sometimes denied his merit the justice athome, which it found abroad; for he is said to have won but eight prices, though he wrote at least fourscore, if not, according to some accounts, above an hundred plays. Philemon, aeontemporary and much inferior dramatic poet, by the partiality the judges, often disappointed him of the prize; which made Menander once say to him, “Tell me fairly, Philemon, if you do not blush when the victory is decreed to you against me” The ancient critics have bestowed the highest praises on Menander, as the true pattern of every beauty and every grace of public speaking. Quintilian declares that a careful imitation of Menander only will enable a writer to comply with all the rules in his Institutions. It is in Menander, that he would have his orator search for copiousness of invention, an elegance of expression, and especially for that universal genius, which is able to accommodate itself to persons, things, and affections. Menander’s wonderful talent at expressing nature in every condition, and under every accident of life, gave occasion to that extraordinary question of Aristophanes the grammarian: “O Menander and Nature, which of you copied your pieces from the other’s work” And Ovid has made choice of the same excellency to support the immortality he has given him:

a celebrated seaman, traveller, and poet, the third son of Andrew Mennes, esq. of Sandwich in Kent, was born there March 1, 159S. He was educated at Corpus Christ! college, Oxford, where he distinguished himself by his literary acquirements; and afterwards became a great traveller, and well skilled in naval architecture. In the reign of James I. he had a place in the Navy-office, and by Charles i. was appointed its comptroller. In the subsequent troubles he took an active part, both military and naval, in favour of his royal master: and being a vice-admiral, in 1641 was knighted at Dover. In 1642, he commanded the Rainbow: but was afterwards displaced from his services at sea for his loyalty, and was implicated in the Kentish insurrection in favour of the king in 1648. After the Restoration he was made governor of Dover-castle, and chief comptroller of the navy, which he retained till his death. In 1661 he was appointed commander of the Henry, and received a commission to act as vice-admiral and commander in chief of his majesty’s fleet in the North Seas. He died Feb. 18, 1670-1, at the Navy-office in Seething-lane, London, with the character of an honest, stout, generous, and religious man, whose company had always been delightful to the ingenious and witty. He was buried in the church of St. Olave, Hart-street, where a monument and inscription were erected over his grave, and are there still. Wood says he was the author of a poem entitled “Epsom Wells,” and several other poems scattered in other men’s works. What can with most certainty be attributed to him are contained in a volume entitled “Musarum Deliciae, or the Muses Recreation,” second edit. 1656, 12mo. The celebrated scoffing ballad on sir John Suckling, “Sir John got him an ambling nag,” &c. was written by Mennes. The poems in this volume are the joint compositions of sir John Mennes and Dr. James Smith.

, an Italian poet, was born at Florence in 1646, of poor and humble parents. Notwithstanding the disadvantage of his circumstances, he began his studies under Miglioraccio, and pursued them with ardour; till, being noticed for his talents by Vincentio SaU viati, he, was removed from the difficulties of poverty, received into the house of that patron, and encouraged to indulge his genius in writing. In 1674, he inscribed a volume of poems to Cosmo III. of Medicis, but obtained Do great approbation from that depraved man. In 1679, he published a book, entitled “Construzione irregolare della linga Toscana;” on the irregular construction of the Tuscan language; and, in the following year, a volume of lyric poems, by way of illustrating his own precepts. His first patron seems now to have deserted him, or not to have afforded him sufficient support, for we find hirn at this period, after several disappointments, and particularly that of not obtaining a professorship at Pisa, venting his discontent in twelve satires. These, however, were not published in his life, but given to a friend, Paulo Falconeri. When they did appear, they went through several editions. In 1685, Menzini obtained the notice and patronage of Christina queen of Sweden, whom he celebrated in Latin as well as in Italian. Under her protection he lived at Rome, and enjoyed the best period of his life. It was at this period, in 1688, that he published his “Arte Poetiea,” which he dedicated to cardinal Azzolini. Being always more or less in want, owing to mismanagement, he contrived by these dedications to lay some of the chief nobility of his country under contribution: but he did not so succeed with cardinal Atestini, who received his dedication of “II Paradiso terrestre,” without granting him any remuneration. As he had a wonderful vein of ready eloquence, one of his resources was that of composing sermons for preachers who were not equally able to supply themselves. To this there is an allusion in one of the satires of his con<­temporary Sectanus.

We are told, by his biographer Fabroni, that being not a little in awe of the satirical talents of that writer, he had cultivated his kindness with no little anxiety; and thus, it may be supposed, obtained this compliment. He was now appointed by the pope, canon of St. Angelo in Piscina; and continued to publish several works, in Latin as well as in Italian as, “Orationes de morum, philosophise, humanarumque literarum studiis, et de Leonis X. P. M. laudtbus.” But his Latin compositions did not so well satisfy the learned as those he produced in his own language; and their criticisms led him to write and publish a tract, “De poesis innocentia, et de literatorum hominum invidia.” This, however, was prior to the present period, as it bears date in 1675. He published now a poetical version of the Lamentations of Jeremiah, in Italian, which was so much approved by pope Clement XI. that he ordered it to be distributed to the cardinals in passion-week. Menzini was admitted a member *of the society of Arcadi, under the name of Euganius, under which we have seen him mentioned by the satirist: and being also admitted of the academy Delia Crusca, he was very anxious to have his verses cited in their dictionary, as authority. In this he could not prevail, except after a time for his satires, in which he had revived some classical Italian expressions then growing obsolete. In 1731, however, long after his death, and in the fourth edition of that vocabulary, all his Italian works were admitted, as affording classical citations. Towards the end of life he became dropsical, and died at the age of fifty-eight, in 1704. He left the fortune of a poet, his works only, which he bequeathed to a friend and they were in 1730 1734, published collectively, in 4 vols. 8vo, the contents of which are recited by Fabroni. An edition of his “Art of Poetry” has lately been published by Mr. Mathias, perhaps the most accomplished Italian scholar and critic in this kingdom. His satires were published with Salvini’s notes, in 1759, 8vo, and with those of Rinaldo Maria Bracci, at Naples in 1763, 4to.

, an English divine and poet, whom bishop Lowth characterised as one of the best of men and most eminent of scholars, was the second son of John Merrick, M. D. He was born Jan. 8, 1720, and was educated at Reading school. After being opposed, (very unjustly according to his biographer) as a candidate for a scholarship at St. John’s, on sir Thomas White’s foundation, he was entered at Trinity-college, Oxford, April 14, 1736, and admitted a scholar June 6, 1737. He took the degree of B. A. in Dec. 1739, of M. A. in Nov. 1742, and was chosen a probationer fellow in May 1 744. The celebrated lord North, and the late lord Dartmouth, were his pupils at this college. He entered into holy orders, but never engaged in any parochial duty, being subject 10 acute pains in his head, frequent lassitude, and feverish complaints; but, from the few manuscript sermons which he left behind him, appears to have preached occasionally in 1747, 1748, and 1749. His life chiefly passed in study and literary correspondence, and much of his time and property were employed on acts of benevolence. Few men have been mentioned with higher praise by all who knew him*. He had an extraordinary faculty of exact memory; had great good nature, and a flow of genuine wit; his charity was extensive, and his piety most exemplary. He died after a short illness at Reading, where he had principally resided, Jan. 5, 1769; and was buried at Caversham church, near the remains of his father, mother, and brothers.

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

, an ingenious burlesque poet of Scotland, was born in the parish of Midmar in Aberdeenshire, about 1688. He received a liberal education at the Marischal college in Aberdeen, and, after finishing his studies, became one of the teachers in the high-school of New Aberdeen. Thence he removed into the family of Marshal, to be preceptor to the young earl of that name, and his brother, afterwards marshal Keith; and, in 1714, by the interest of the countess, was appointed professor of philosophy in the Marischal college. He did not long retain this situation, for, when the rebellion broke out in 1715, he followed the fortunes of his noble patrons, who made him governor of Dunotter castle. After the defeat at Sheriffmuir, he lurked among the mountains, till the act of indemnity was passed, with a few fugitive companions, for whose amusement and his own, he composed several of the burlesque poems, which he called “Mother Grim’s tales.” He appears to have remained steady to his principles, and consequently was not restored to his professorship but, while the countess of Marshal lived, resided chiefly in her family where his great pleasantry and liveliness made him always an acceptable guest. After her death, he must have been for some time without much provision, till he commenced an academy at Elgin, in conjunction with his brother Mr. Samuel Meston. He was, however, little formed for prudence and regularity, but much more given to conviviality; for which cause probably, among others, this academy at Elgin after a time began to decline. He then successively settled at Turiff, in Aberdeenshire, and* at Montrose, where he lost his brother and coadjutor. He made the same attempt at Perth, but soon after entered as preceptor into the family of a Mr. Oliphant, Here he continued till his health declined, when he removed to Peterhead for the benefit of the mineral waters. There he was chiefly supported by the bounty of the countess of Errol, under whose patronage he had formerly undertaken the academy at TuriflF. At length he removed to Aberdeen, where he was taken care of by some relations, till he died of a languishing distemper in the spring of 1745.

, the most illustrious poet of modern Italy, whose true name was Trapassi, was born at Rome Jan. 6, 1698, the second son of Felice Trapassi of Assisi. Felice, though a free citizen of Assisi, was very poor, and settled at Rome in a small way of business. His son was very early distinguished for an extraordinary talent at speaking extemporary verses; and, at ten years old, used to attract a little audience in the street by the melody of his voice, and the sweetness of his unpremeditated poetry. The celebrated Gravina, among others, accidentally heard him, and was so charmed with his talents, that, with the consent of his parents, he undertook to give him an education; and changed his name from Trapassi to Metastasio, a kind of Italianized Greek translation of the former name: and so much was he pleased with his disposition and talents, that he finally adopted him, and made him his heir.

From this time Metastasio united his family establishment with that of the Romanina and her husband, and lived the life of a poet, amidst harmony and poetry. Thus situated, he wrotewithin a short period, three more dramas; “Catone in Utica,” “Ezio,” and “Semiramide riconosciuta.” But it was now, in 1729, the thirty-second year of Metastasio’s life, that he was to change his country. A letter, dated Aug. 31, in that year, from prince Pio of Savoy, invited him to the court of the emperor, as coadjutor to signior Apostolo Zeno, in the office of imperial laureat. All matters of appointment being settled to his mind, he resolved, though with reluctance, to quit Italy, and his Italian connections, for this new country: and he actually arrived at Vienna in July 1730. From this time the life of Metastasio was uniform, even beyond what is usual to men of letters. He resided continually in one city, Vienna; and in one house, that of M. Martinetz: with the exception only of a visit in the autumn, which for a long time was annual, to the countess of Althan in Moravia, where he sought health from the bracing air of the mountains. To make the uniformity of his life more singular, he was naturally and habitually attached to an exact regularity, and passed one day precisely as he passed another, allotting particular hours for particular occupations. His usual routine was this, according to the report of Dr. Burney. “He studied from eight in the morning till noon; then he visited his friends, and those families and individuals from whom he had received civilities. He dined at two; and at five received his most familiar and intimate friends. At nine, in summer, he went out in his carnage, visited, and sometimes played at ombre; a game which he liked better than those of mere chance, as it afforded him exercise of mind in calculation. He returned home at ten o'clock, supped, and went to bed before eleven.” This monotonous mode of life has by some been ridiculed, and certainly would not be expected in a poet; but the varieties of human nature are endless, and in him the love of order had superseded the more common passion for change and variety. A very interesting part of the history of Metastasio, is his long and steady friendship with the celebrated Farinelli. From appearing first before the public about the same time, the one as a singer, the other as a poet, in 1723, they called each other Gemelli, or twins; and their attachment, which was of the most sincere and ardent kind, ended only with their lives, which were extended nearly to the same period. His other tuneful friend died early, namely, in the beginning of 1734, and, as a mark of her regard, left him heir to all her property, after the death of her husband, to the amount of 25,000 crowns; but Metastasio, with his usual sense of propriety, and with great generosity, relinquished the whole bequest, and restored it to the disposal of her husband.

“Whether Metastasio’s connection with the Romanina was purely Platonic,” says Dr. Burney, “or of a less seraphic kind, I shall not pretend to determine; but the husband residing in the same house with them, both at Naples and at Rome, and the friendly manner in which the poet always mentioned him in his letters to the wife, with, the open manner in which he expressed his affliction, in writing to him after her death, would, in England, be thought indications favourable to conjugal fidelity. But a chaste actress, and opei^, singer,” he adds, “is a still more uncommon phenomenon in Italy, than in Britain.” The ideas of that country are indeed totally different from those which we entertain on these subjects; and it is very probable, that the mutual attachment of Metastasio and his wife gave great pleasure to the husband Bulgarini, as an honour conferred upon his family.

, a historian of some note in Spain, when history was mere compilation, was a native of Seville, of a family of some rank, and liberally educated. His inclination being principally for historical studies, he was made chronographer, perhaps what we should call, historiographer to Charles V. He is also said to have been a poet. Antonio has collected from various authors, his contemporaries, opinions highly favourable to his learning and knowledge. The only fault imputable seems to be that of mixing Latin words too frequently with his Spanish. He died about 1552. His principal work, for which he is known in this country, is entitled “Silvade varia Leccion,” which with the additions of the Italian and French translators, was published at London under the title of the “Treasury of ancient and modern Times,” fol. The original was first printed at Seville, in black-letter, in 1542, fol. often reprinted, and translated into most European languages, with additions. His other writings were, a “History of the Caesars,” Seville, 1545, fol. likewise translated by W. T. and enlarged by Edward Grimeston, Lond. 1623. foL 2. “Colloquies o Dialogos,” or “Laus Asini,” in imitation of Lucian and Apuleius, Seville 1547, 8vo, often reprinted and translated into Italian. 3. “Parenesis de Isocrates.” He left some Mss. and an unfinished life of Charles V.

, an ingenious poet, was the son of the rev. Alexander Mickle or Meikle, who exchanging the profession of physic for that of divinity, was admitted, at an age more advanced than usual, into the ministry of the church of Scotland. From that country he removed to London, where he preached for some time in various dissenting meetings, particularly that of the celebrated Dr. Watts. He was also employed by the booksellers in correcting the translation of Bayle’s Dictionary, to which he is said to have contributed the greater part of the additional notes. In 1716 he returned to Scotland, on being presented to the living of Langholm in the county of Dumfries; and in 1727, he married Julia, daughter of Mr. Thomas Henderson, of Ploughlands near Edinburgh, and first cousin to the late sir William Johnstone, bart. of Westerhall. By this lady, who appears to have died before him, he had ten children.

Our poet, his fourth, or as some say, his third, son, was born Sunday Sept. 29, 1734, and educated at the grammar school of Langholm, where he acquired that early taste for works of genius which frequently ends, in spite of all obstacles, in a life devoted to literary pursuits. He even attempted, when at school, a few devotional pieces in rhyme, which, however, were not superior to the common run of puerile compositions. About his thirteenth year, he accidentally met with Spenser’s “Faerie Queene,” which fixed a lasting impression on his mind, and made him desirous of being enrolled among the imitators of that poet. To this he joined the reading of Homer and Virgil, during his education at the high school of Edinburgh, in which city his father obtained permission to reside in consideration of his advanced age and infirmities, and to enable him to give a proper education to his children.

About two years after the rev. Mr. Mickle came to reside in Edinburgh, upon the death of a brother-in-law, a brewer in the neighbourhood of that city, he embarked a great part of his fortune in the purchase of the brewery, and continued the business in the name of his eldest son. Our poet was then taken from school, employed as a clerk under his father, and upon coming of age in 1755, took upon him the whole charge and property of the business, on condition of granting his father a share of the profits during his life, and paying a certain sum to his brothers and sisters at, stated periods, after his father’s decease, which happened in 1758. Young Mickle is said to have entered into these engagements more from a sense of filial duty, and the peculiar situation of his family, than from any inclination to business. He had already contracted the habits of literary life; he had begun to feel the enthusiasm of a son of the Muses, and while he was storing his mind with the productions of former poets, and cultivating those branches of elegant literature not usually taught at schools at that time, he felt the employment too delightful to admit of much interruption from the concerns of trade. In 1761, he contributed, but without his name, two charming compositions, entitled “Knowledge, an Ode,” and a “Night Piece,” to a collection of poetry published by Donaldson, a bookseller of Edinburgh; and about the same time published some observations on that impious tract “The History of the Man after God’s own heart,” but whether separately, or in any literary journal, is not now known. He had also finished a dramatic poem of considerable length, entitled “The Death of Socrates,” and had begun a poem on “Providence,” when his studies were interrupted by the importunities of his creditors.

Among other schemes w hich he hoped might eventually succeed in relieving his embarrassments, he appears to have now had some intentions of going to Jamaica, but in what capacity, or with what prospects, he perhaps did not himself know. There was, however, no immediate plan soeabily practicable, by which he could expect at some distant period to satisfy his creditors, and the consciousness of this most painful of all obligations was felt by him in a manner which can be conceived only by minds of the nicest honour and most scrupulous integrity. While in this perplexity, he was cheered by a letter from lord Lyttelton, in which his lordship assured him that he thought his genius in poetry deserved to be cultivated, but would not advise the republication of his poem without considerable alterations. He declined the offer of a dedication, as a tiling likely to be of no use to the poet, “as nobody minded dedications;” but suggested that it might be of some use if he were to come and read the poem with his lordship, when they might discourse together upon what he thought its beauties and faults. In the mean time he exhorted Mickle to endeavour to acquire greater harmony of versification; and to take care that his diction did not loiter into prose ^ or become hard by new phrases, or words unauthorized by the usage of good authors. In answer to this condescending and friendly letter, Mickle informed his lordship of his real name, and inclosed the elegy of “Pollio” for his lordship’s advice. This was followed by another kind letter from lord Lyttelton, in which he gave his opinion, that the correction of a few lines would make it as perfect as any thing of that kind in our language, and promised to point out its faults when he had the pleasure of seeing the author. An interview accordingly took place in the month of February 1764, when his lordship, after receiving him with the utmost politeness and affability, begged him not to be discouraged at such difficulties as a young author must naturally expect, but to cultivate his very promising poetical powers; and, with his usual condescension, added, that he would become his schoolmaster. Other interviews followed this very flattering introduction, at which Mickle read with him the poem on “Providence,” and communicated his plan for treating more fully a subject of so much intricacy, intimating that he had found it necessary to discard the philosophy of Pope’s ethics. But, as in order to render his talents as soon productive as possible, he had now a wish to publish a volume of poems, he sent to his noble friend that on “Providence,” “Pollio,” and an “Elegy on Mary Queen of Scots.” This produced a long letter from his lordship, in which after much praise of the two former, he declined criticising any part of the elegy on Mary, because he wholly disapproved of the subject. He added, with justice, that poetry should not consecrate what history must condemn; and in the view his lordship had taken of the history of Mary, he thought her entitled to pity, but not to praise. In this opinion Mickle acquiesced, from convenience, if not from conviction, and again sent his lordship a copy of “Providence,” with further improvements, hoping probably that they might be the last; but he had the mortification to receive it back from the noble critic so much marked and blotted, that he began to despair of completing it to his satisfaction. He remitted, therefore, a new performance, the “Ode on May Day,” begging his lordship’s opimion “if it could be made proper to appear this spring (1765) along with the one already approved.”

On his arrival in England, in November 1780, he was appointed joint agent for the disposal of the valuable prizes taken during the Commodore’s cruize; and by the profits of this place, and his share of the prize-money, he was enabled to discharge his debts. This had long been the ardent wish of his heart, the object of all his pursuits, and an object which he at length accomplished with the strictest honour, and with a satisfaction to his own mind the most pure and delightful. Jn 1782 our poet published /'The Prophecy of Queen Emma," a ballad, with an ironical preface, containing an account of its pretended author and discovery, and hints for vindicating the authenticity of the poems of Ossian and Rowley. This irony, however, lost part of its effect by the author’s pretending that a poem, which is modern both in language and versification, was the production of a prior of Durham in the reign of William Rufus, although he endeavours to account for this with some degree of humour, and is not unsuccessful in imitating the mode of reasoning adopted by dean Milles and Mr. Bryant, in the case of Chatterton.

, a poetical writer of no very honourable reputation, was the son of a nonconformist minister, of both his names, a native of Loughborough in Leicestershire, who was ejected from the living of Wroxhal in Warwickshire. He died in 1667. Of his son, little seems to be known unless that he was educated at Pembroke hall, Cambridge, where he is said to have taken his master’s degree, but we do not find him in the list of graduates of either university. Mr. Malone thinks he was beneficed at Yarmouth, from whence he dates his correspondence about 1690. We are more certain that he was instituted to the living of St. Ethelburga within Bishopsgate, London, in 1704, and long before that, in 1688, was chosen lecturer of Shoreditch. Dryden, whom he was weak enough to think he rivalled, says in the preface to his “Fables,” that Milbourne was turned out of his benefice for writing libels on his parishioners. This must have been his Yarmouth benefice, if he had one, for he retained the rectory of St. Ethelburga, and the lectureship of Shoreditch, to his death, which happened April 15, 1720. As an author he was known by a “Poetical Translation of Psalms,” 1698, of a volume called “Notes on Dryden’s Virgil,” 1698 of “Tom of Bedlam’s Answer to Hoadly,” &c. He is frequently coupled with Blackmore, by Dryden, in his poems, and by Pope in “The Art of Criticism;” and is mentioned in “The Dunciad.” He published thirtyone single “Sermons,” between 1692 and 1720; a book against the Socinians, 1692, 12mo; and “A Vindication of the Church of England,” 1726, 2 vols. 8vo. A whimsical copy of Latin verses, by Luke Milbourne, B, A. is in the “Lacrymse Cantabrigienses, 1670,” on the death of Henrietta duchess of Orleans. Dr. Johnson, in the Life of Dryden, speaking of that poet’s translation of Virgil, says, “Milbourne, indeed, a clergyman, attacked it (Dryden’s Virgil), but his outrages seem to be the ebullitions of a mind agitated by stronger resentment than bad poetry can excite, and previously resolved not to be pleased. His criticism extends only to the preface, pasturals, and georgtcks; and, as he professes to give this antagonist an opportunity of reprisal, he has added his own version of the first and fourth pastorals, and the first georgic.” Malone conjectures that Melbourne’s enmity to Dryden originally arose from Dryden’s having taken his work out of his hands as he once projected a translation of Virgil, and published a version of the first Æneid. As he had Dryden and his friends, and Pope and his friends against him, we cannot expect a very favourable account either of his talents or morals. Once only we find him respectfully mentioned, by Dr. Walker, who thanks him for several valuable communications relative to the sequestered divines.

Dr. Miller’s professional knowledge was very extensive, particularly in the theory of music; and his publications have been much valued. Among these are “The Institutes of Music,” intended to teach the ground-work of the science; and “The Elements of Thorough Bass and Composition.” But the most popular of his works was the “Psalms of David,” set to music and arranged for every Sunday throughout the year. This, which was expressly intended for the use of churches and chapels, met with very great encouragement from all ranks of the clergy, and the subscription, before publication, amounted to near five thousand copies. It is now regularly used in a great proportion of places of public worship. Dr. Miller also was somewhat of a poet, and somewhat of an antiquary. His first attempt in the former character was entitled “The Tears of Yorkshire, on the death of the most noble the Marquis of Rockingham.” He informs us himself, that so much was the marquis beloved, “that 600 copies of this literary trifle were sold in the course of a few hours, on the day of his interment in York minster. As an antiquary he published, two years before his death,” The History and Antiquities of Doncaster," 4to, in which he was assisted by many learned friends in that neighbourhood; but even with their help it bears many marks of advanced years and infirmities.

, the most illustrious of English poets, was by birth a gentleman, descended from the proprietors of Milton, near Thame in Oxfordshire, one of whom forfeited his estate in the contests between the houses of York and Lancaster. His grand-father was under-ranger of the forest of Shotover in Oxfordshire, and being a zealous Roman catholic, disinherited his son, of the same name, for becoming a protestant. This son, when thus deprived of the family property, was a student at Christchurch, Oxford, but was now obliged to quit his studies, and going to London became a scrivener. That he retained his classical knowledge appears from his son addressing him in one of his most elaborate Latin poems; he was also a great proficient in music, a voluminous composer, and, in the opinion of Dr. Burney, “equal in science, if not genius, to the best musicians of his age.” He married a lady of the name of Custon, of a Welsh family. By her he had two sons, John the poet, Christopher, and Anne. Anne became the wife of Mr. Edward Phillips, a native of Shrewsbury, who was secondary to the crown office in chancery. Christopher, applying himself to the study of the law, became a bencher of the Inner Temple, was knighted at a very advanced period of life, and raised by James II. first to be a baron of the Exchequer, and afterwards one of the judges of the Common-pleas. During the rebellion he adhered to the royal cause, and effected his composition with the republicans by the interest of his brother. In his old age he retired from the fatigues of business, and closed, in the country, a life of study and devotion.

During these seven years of college residence, his genius appeared in various attempts not unworthy of the future author of “Comus” and “Paradise Lost.” He was a poet when he was only ten years old, and his translation of the 136th psalm evinces his progress in poetic expression at the early age of fifteen. He renounced his original purpose of entering the church, for which he assigns as a reason, “that coming to some maturity of years, he had perceived what tyranny had pervaded it, and that he who would take orders, must subscribe slave, and take an oath withal, which, unless h^ took with a conscience that could retch, he must either strain, perforce, or split his faith; I thought it better to prefer a blameless silence before the office of speaking, bought and begun with servitude and forswearing.” These expressions have been supposed to allude to the articles of the church; but, as far as we know of Milton’s theology, there was none of those articles to which he had any objection. It seems more reasonable therefore to conclude, that he considered subscription as involving an approbation of the form of church government, which, we know, was his abhorrence.

Though his controversial, and other engagements, had for some time suspended the exertion of his poetical talents, yet he did not suffer his character as a poet to sink into oblivion, and in 1645, he published his juvenile poems in Latin and English, including, for the first time, the “Allegro” and “Penseroso.” in 1646, Milton’s wife produced her first child, and in the following year, in which his father died, the family of the Powells returned to their own mansion, and his house was resigned once more to literature. In this house, in which his second daughter Mary was born, he did not continue long, but exchanged it for one of smaller cKmensions in High Holborn. He is not known to have published any thing afterwards till the king’s death, when finding that measure condemned by the Presbyterians, he wrote a treatise to justify it. Of all Milton’s political works this reflects least credit on his talents, or his principles. Even those who have been most disposed to vindicate him against all censure, and to represent him invulnerable both as a politician and a poet, seem to shrink from the task of defending him in this instance, and candidly tell us, that they meet with an insuperable difficulty in the very title of the book “TheTenure of Kings and Magistrates proving, that it is lawful, and hath been held so through all ages, for any who have the power, to call to account a tyrant or wicked king: and after due conviction, to depose and put him to death, if the ordinary magistrate have neglected or denied to do it.” Here, therefore, the right to punish kings belongs to any who have the power, and their having the power makes it lawful, a doctrine so monstrous as to be given up by his most zealous advocates, as “a fearful opening for mischief:” but it was, in truth, at that time, what Milton intended it to be, a justification, not of the people of England, for they had no hand in the king’s murder, but of the army under Ireton and Cromwell. That Milton was also at this time under the strong influence of party-spirit, appears from his attack on the Presbyterians in this work, the avowed ground of which is their inconsistency. When, however, we examine their inconsistency, as he has been pleased to state it, it amounts to only this, that they contributed in common with the Independents and other sectaries and parties, to dethrone the king; but r wished to stop short of his murder. Every species of opposition to what they considered as tyranny in the king, they could exert, but they thought it sufficient to deprive him of power, without depriving him of life.

To that multiplicity of attainments, and extent of comprehension, that entitle this great author to our veneration, may be added, says Johnson, a kind of humble dignity, which did not disdain the meanest services to literature. The epic poet, the controvertist, and politician, having already descended to accommodate children with a book of elements, now, in the last years of his life, composed a book of Logic, for the initiation of students in philosophy: and published, in 1672, “Artis Logica? plenior institutio ad Petri Kami methodum concinnata.” In the following year he ventured once more to meddle with the controversies of the times, and wrote “A Treatise of true Religion, &c. and the best means to prevent the Growth of Popery.” The latter was become the dread of the nation, and Milton was among the most zealous of its opponents. The principle of toleration which he lays down is, agreement in the sufficiency of the scriptures, which he denies to the Papists, because they appeal to another authority. In the same year Milton published a second edition of his youthful poems, with his “Tractate on Education,” in one volume, in which he included some pieces not comprehended in the edition of 1645. In 1674 he gave the world his familiar letters, and some college exercises, the former with the title of “Epistolarum Familiarum Liber unus,” and the latter with that, of “Prolusiones quaedam oratoriae in Collegio Christ! habitae.” He is also said, but upon doubtful authority, to have translated into English the declaration of the Poles, on their elevating John Sobieski to their elective throne. With more probability he has been reckoned the author of “A brief History of Muscovy,” which was published about eight years after his death. With this work terminated his literary labours; for the gout, which had for many years afflicted him, was now hastening his end. He sunk tranquilly under an exhaustion of the vital powers on the 8th of November, 1674, when he had nearly completed his sixty-sixth year. His remains were carried from his house in Bunhill-fields to the church of St. Giles, Cripplegate, with a numerous and splendid attendance, and deposited in the chancel near those of his father. No monument marked the tomb of this great man, but one was erected to his memory in Westminster Abbey, in 1737, at the expence of Mr. Benson, one of the auditors of the imprest. His bust has since been placed in the church where he was interred, by the late Samuel Whitbread, esq.

, an ancient Greek poet, was born either at Colophon, according to Strabo, or according to others at Smyrna, some time in the sixth century B. C. Strabo informs us that he was a musician, as well as a writer of elegies, which was his chief pursuit: and Nanno, the lady who passes for his mistress, is recorded to have got her livelihood by the same profession. There are but few fragments of his poems remaining, yet enough to shew him an accomplished master in his own style. His temper seems to have been as truly poetical as his writings, wholly bent on love and pleasure, and averse to the cares of common business. He appears to have valued life only as it could afford the means of pleasure. By some he is said to have been the inventor of the pentameter, but various specimens of that verse of older date are still extant. Mimnermus’s fragments are printed by Brunck, in his “Analecta,” and in the “Gnomici Poetae.”

, an ancient English poet, who flourished in the fourteenth century, but appears to have been unknown to Leland, Bale, Pits, and Tanner, was lately discovered by Tyrwhitt, and edited by Mr. Ritson in 1794, 8vo. The discovery was owing to a remarkable circumstance. Some former possessor of the manuscript in which his poems are contained had written his name, Richard Chawser, on one of the supernumerary leaves. The compiler of the Cotton catalogue, printed at Oxford in 1696, converted this signature into Geoffrey Chaucer, and therefore described the volume in these words, “Chaucer. Exemplar emendate scriptum.” Mr. Tyrwhitt, whilst he was preparing his edition of the Canterbury Tales, consulted this manuscript, and thus discovered the poems of Laurence Minot. The versification of this poet is uncommonly easy and harmonious for the period in which he lived, and an alliteration, as studied as that of Pierce Plowman, runs through all his varieties of metre. He has not the dull prolixity of many early authors; nor do we find in his remains those pictures of ancient times and manners, from whica early writers derive their greatest value. In the easy flow of his language he certainly equals Chaucer but here the merit of Laurence Minot ends, although Mr. Ritson endeavours to carry it much farther.

, was the son of a stone-cutter in North-Britain, and was born about 1684. Cibber tells us that he received an university education while he remained in that kingdom, but does not specify where. He quitted his own country, however, and repaired to London, with a view of improving his fortune. Here he got into favour with the earl of Stair and sir Robert Walpole; on the latter of whom he was for great part of his life almost entirely dependent. He received, indeed, so many obligations from that open-handed statesman, and, from a sense of gratitude which seems to have been strongly characteristic of his disposition, was so zealous in his interest, that he was distinguished by the title of “Sir Robert Walpole’s poet.” Notwithstanding this valuable patronage, his natural dissipation of temper, his fondness for pleasure, and eagerness in the gratification of every irregular appetite, threw him into perpetual distresses, and all those uneasy situations which are the inevitable consequences of extravagance. Nor does it appear that, after having experienced, more than once, the fatal effects of those dangerous follies, he thought of correcting his conduct at a time he had it in his power: for when, by the death of his wife’s uncle, several thousand pounds devolved to him, instead of discharging those debts which he had already contracted, he lavished the whole away, in the repetition of his former follies. As to the particulars of his history, there are not many on record, for his eminence in public character not rising to such an height as to make the transactions of his life important to strangers, and the follies of his private behaviour inducing those who were intimate with him, rather to conceal than publish his actions, there is a cloud of obscurity hanging over them, which is neither easy, nor indeed much worth while, to withdraw from them. His genius was of the third or fourth rate, yet he lived in good correspondence with most of the eminent wits of his time , particularly with Aaron Hill, who on a particular occasion finding himself unable to relieve him by pecuniary assistance, presented him with the profits and reputation also of a successful dramatic piece, in one act, entitled “The Fatal Extravagance.” It was acted and printed in Mitchell’s name; but he was ingenuous enough to undeceive the world with regard to its true author, and on every occasion acknowledged the obligations he lay under to Hill. The dramatic pieces, which appear under this gentleman’s name are, 1. “The Fatal Extravagance, a tragedy,” 1721, 8vo. 2. “The Fatal Extravagance, a tragedy, enlarged,” 1725, 12mo. 3. “The Highland Fair, ballad opera,” 1731, 8vo. The latter of these is really Mitchell’s, and is notwithout merit. This author died Feb. 6, 1738 and Gibber gives the following character of him “He seems to have been a poet of the third rate he has seldom reached the sublime his humour, in which he more succeeded, is not strong enough to last his versification holds a statd of mediocrity he possessed but little invention and if he was not a bad rhimester, he cannot be denominated a fine poet, for there are but few marks of genius in his writings.” His poems were printed 1729, in 2 vols. 8vo.

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

was permitted to have a long run. ridiculed; but Moliere, in the Tar‘­When Lows XIV. expressed to the tuftV,’ has attacked even the priests.“required the players also to bring their children to the rehearsals, that he might form his opinion of different passages from the natural expressions of their emotions. Moliere, who diverted himself on the theatre by laughing at the follies of mankind, could not guard against the effects of his own weakness. Seduced by a violent passion for the daughter of La Bejart, the actress, he married her, and was soon exposed to all the ridicule with which he had treated the husbands who were jealous of their wives. Happier in the society of his friends, he was beloved by his equals, and courted by the great. Marshal de Vivonne, the great Conde*, and even Lewis XIV. treated him with that familiarity which considers merit as on a level with birth. These flattering distinctions neither corrupted his understanding nor his heart. A poor man having returned him a piece of gold which he had given him by mistake,” In what a humble abode,“he exclaimed,” does Virtue dwell Here, my friend, take another.“When Baron informed him of one of his old theatrical companions whom extreme poverty prevented from appearing, Moliere sent for him, embraced him, and to words of consolation added a present of twenty pistoles and a rich theatrical dress.” When he was in the height of his reputation, Racine, who was just then come from Languedoc, and was scarcely known in Paris, went to see him, under pretence of consulting him about an ode which he had just finished. Moliere expressed such a favourable opinion of the ode, that Racine ventured to shew him his first tragedy, founded on the martyrdom of Theagenes and Chariclea, as he had read it in the Greek romance. Moliere, who had an honest consciousness of superiority, which exalted him above envy, was not sparing either of praise or of counsel. His liberality carried him still farther: he knew that Racine was not in easy circumstances, and therefore lent him a hundred louis-d'ors; thinking it a sufficient recompence to have the honour of producing a genius to the public, which, he foresaw, would one day be the glory of the stage. The French have very justly placed Moliere at the head of all their comic authors. There is, indeed, no author, in all the fruitful and distinguished age of Lewis XIV. who has attained a higher reputation, or who has more nearly reached the summit of perfection in his own art, according to the judgment of all the French critics. Voltaire boldly pronounces him to be the most eminent comic poet of any age or country nor, perhaps, is this the decision of mere partiality for, upon the whole, who deserves to be preferred to him When Louis XIV. insisted upon Boileau’s telling him who was the most original writer of his time, he answered, MoHere Moliere is always the satirist only of vice or folly. He has selected a great variety of ridiculous characters peculiar to the times in which he lived, and he has generally placed the ridicule justly. He possessed strong comic powers he is full of mirth and pleasantry and his pleasantry is always innocent. His comedies in verse, such as his “Misanthrope” and Tartuffe,“are a kind of dignified comedy, in which vice is exposed, in the style of elegant and polished satire. His verses have all the flow and freedom of conversation, yet he is said to have passed whole days’ in fixing upon a proper epithet or rhime. In his prose comedies, though there is abundance of ridicule, yet there is never any thing to offend a modest ear, or to throw contempt on sobriety and virtue. Together with those high qualities, Moliere has also some defects, which Voltaire, though his professed panegyrist, candidly admits. He is acknowledged not to be happy in the unravelling of his plots. Attentive more to the strong exhibition of characters, than to the conduct of the intrigue, his unravelling is frequently brought on with too little preparation, and in an improbable manner. In his verse comedies, he is sometimes not sufficiently interesting, and too full of long speeches; and in his risible pieces in prose, he is censured for being too farcical. Few writers, however, if any, ever possessed the spirit, or attained the true end of comedy, so perfectly, upon the whole, as Moliere. His” Tartuffe,“in the style of grave comedy, and his” Avare," in the gay, are accounted his two capital productions.

, an eminent Italian and Latin poet, was born of a noble family at Modena, in 1489; and, after being educated at Rome, where he made extraordinary proficiency in the Greek and Latin languages, and even in the Hebrew, he was recalled to Modena, where, in 1512, he married, and intended to settle. The fame, however, of Leo X's court, led him about four years after, back to Rome, where he formed an acquaintance with many eminent scholars; but appears to have paid more attention to the cultivation of his taste than his morals, as he formed a licentious connexion with a Roman lady, in consequence of which he received a wound from the hand of an unknown assassin, which had nearly cost him his life. Even when, on the death of Leo X. he left Rome, he did not return to his family, but went to Bologna, where he became enamoured of Camilla Gonzaga, a lady of rank and beauty, and a warm admirer of Italian poetry. His life after this appears to have been wholly divided between poetry and dissipation; and he died of the consequences of the latter, in 1544. His Italian and Latin poems were for many years published in detached forms until 1749, when Serassi produced an entire edition at Bergamo.

, a learned French poet, was born in Dijon, the capital of Burgundy, June 15, 1641, He was a man of parts and learning, had a decided taste for poetry; and, in 1671, had a fair opportunity of displaying his talents. The subject of the prize of poetry, founded by the members of the French academy at this time, was, “The Suppressing of Duelling by Lewis XIV.” As this was the first contest of the kind, the candidates were numerous and eager; but la Monnoye succeeded, and had the honour of being the first who won the prize Founded by the French academy; by which he gained a reputation that increased ever after. In 1673, he was a candidate for the new prize, the subject of which was, “The protection with which his Gallic majesty honoured the French academy;” but his poem came too late. He won the prize in 1675, on “The glory of arms and learning under Lewis XIV;” and that also of 1677, on “The Education of the Dauphin.” On this occasion, the highest compliment was made him by the abbe* Regnier; who said, that “it would be proper for the French academy to elect Mr. de la Monnoye upon the first vacancy, because, as he would thereby be disqualified from writing any more, such as should then be candidates would be encouraged to write.” It was indeed said, that he discontinued to write for these prizes at the solicitation of the academy; a circumstance which, if true, reflects higher honour on him than a thousand prizes. He wrote many other successful pieces, and was no less applauded in Latin poetry than in the French. Menage and Bayle have both bestowed the highest encomiums on his Latin poetry. His Greek and Italian poems are likewise much commended by the French critics.

He possessed a very elegant taste for the fine arts in general, and his collection, both of books and prints, was very extensive. He was uncommonly well versed in the early history of engraving; and the specimens he had collected of the works of the first engravers were very select and curious. From these, as well as from the communications of Dr. Monro, the late ingenious Mr. Strutt derived great assistance in the composition of his history of engravers. Though he never appeared as an author, except in the single instance mentioned above, he possessed a mind stored with the beauties of ancient as well as modern literature. Horace and Shakspeare were his favourite authors and his notes and remarks on the latter were considerable these he communicated to Mr. Steevens, previous to his publication of the works of our immortal poet anxious to contribute his mite to the elucidation of those passages which time has rendered obscure. His fondness for reading was great, and proved a considerable resource to him in the evening of life; and fortunately he was able to enjoy his books till within a very few days of his death.

, an English statesman and poet, was born April 16, 1661, at Horton in Northamptonshire. He was the son of Mr. George Montague, a younger son of the earl of Manchester. He was educated first in the country, and then removed to Westminster, where, in 1677, he was chosen a king’s scholar, and recommended himself to the celebrated master of the school, Busby, by his felicity in extemporary epigrams. He contracted a very intimate friendship with Mr. Stepney; and, in 1682, when Stepney was elected to Cambridge, the election of Montague not being to proceed till the year following, he was afraid lest by being placed at Oxford, he might be separated from his companion, and therefore solicited to be removed to Cambridge, without waiting for the advantages of another year. He was now in his twenty-first year, and his relation, Dr. Montague, was then master of Trinity college in which he was placed a fellow-commoner, and took him under his particular care. Here he commenced an acquaintance with, the great Newton, which continued through his life, and was at last attested by a legacy.

She had early distinguished herself as an author first by “Three Dialogues of the Dead,” published along with lord Lyttelton’s afterwards by her classical and elegant “Essay on the Genius and Writings of Shakspeare,” ia which she amply vindicated our great poet from the gross, illiberal, and ignorant abuse, thrown out against him by Voltaire. This is indeed a wonderful performance, as all, who will examine it impartially, must admit. It is a ridiculous supposition that she was assisted by her husband, whose talent lay in mathematical pursuits, which indeed absorbed the whole of his attention. Many years after she bad received the approbation of all persons of critical taste on this performance, it fell into the hands of Cowper the poet, who, on reading it, says to his correspondent, “I no longer wonder that Mrs. Montague stands at the head of all that is called learned, and that every critic veils his bonnet to her superior judgment:” “The learning, the good sense, the sound judgment, and the wit displayed in it, fully justify, not only my compliment, but all compliments that either have been already paid to her talents, or shall be paid hereafter.”

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

, a celebrated Castillian poet, was born at Monte-mayor, whence he took his name, probably in the early part of the sixteenth century, one authority says in 1520. It is thought he owed his reputation more to genius than study; in his early years he was in the army, and amidst the engagements of a military life, cultivated music and poetry. He appears to have afterwards obtained an employment, on account of his musical talents, in the suite of Philip II.; and was also patronized by queen Catherine, sister to the emperor Charles V. He died in the prime of life in 1562. His reputation now rests on his “Diana,” a pastoral romance, which has always been admired on the continent, and translated into various languages. The last edition of the original is that of Madrid, 1795, 8vo. Caspar Polo published a continuation, “La Diana enamoradacinco libros que prosequen los VII. de Jorge de Montemayor,” Madrid, 1778, 8vo, a work which, Brunet says, is more esteemed than that of Montemayor.

, an English poetical and miscellaneous writer, was the grandson of the rev. John Moore of Devonshire, one of the ejected non-conformists, who died Aug. 23, 1717, leaving two sons in the dissenting ministry. Of these, Thomas, the father of our poet, removed to Abingdon Hi Berkshire, where he died in 1721, and where Edward was born March 22,. 1711-12, and for some time brought up under the care of his uncle. He was afterwards placed at the school of East Orchard in Dorsetshire, where he probably received no higher education than would qualify him for trade. For some years he followed the business of a linen-draper, both in London and in Ireland, but with so little success that he became disgusted with his occupation, and, as he informs us in his preface, “more from necessity than inclination,” began to encounter the vicissitudes of a literary life. His first attempts were of the poetical kind, which still preserve his name among the minor poets of his country. In 174-4, he published his “Fables for the Female Sex,” which were so favourably received as tointroducehim into the society of some learned and some opulent contemporaries. The hon. Mr. Pelham was one of his early patrons; and, by his “Trial of Selim,” he gained the friendship of lord Lyttelton, who felt himself flattered by a compliment turned with much ingenuity, and decorated by wit and spirit. But as, for some time, Moore derived no substantial advantage from patronage, his chief dependance was on the stage, to which, within five years, he supplied three pieces of considerable, although unequal, merit. “The Foundling,” a comedy, which was first acted in 1748, was decried from a fancied resemblance to the “Conscious Lovers.” His “Gil Bias,” which appeared in 1751, met with a more severe fate, and, notwithstanding the sprightliness of the dialogue, not altogether unjustly. “The Gamester,” a tragedy, first acted Feb. 7, 1753, was our author’s most successful attempt, and is still a favourite. In this piece, however, he deviated from the custom of the modern stage, as Lilio had in his “George Barnwell,” by discarding blank verse; and perbaps nothing short of the power by which the catastrophe engages the feelings, could have reconciled the audience to this innovation. But hisobject was the misery of the life and death of a gamester, to which it would have been difficult to give a heroic colouring; and his language became what would be most impressive, that of truth and nature. Davies, in his Life of Garrick, seems inclined to share the reputation of the “Gamester” between Moore and Garrick. Moore acknowledges, in his preface, that he was indebted to that inimitable actor for “many popular passages,” and Davies believes that the scene between Lewson and Stukely, in the fourth act, was almost entirely his, because he expressed, during the time of action, uncommon pleasure at the applause given to it. Whatever may be in this conjecture, the play, after having been acted to crowded houses for eleven nights, was suddenly withdrawn. The report of the day attributed this to the intervention of the leading members of some gaming clubs. Davies thinks this a mere report “to give more consequence to those assemblies than they could really boast.” From a letter, in our possession, written by Moore to Dr. Warton, it appears that Garrick suffered so much from, the fatigue of acting the principal character as to require some repose. Yet this will not account for the total neglect, for some years afterwards, of a play, not only popular, but so obviously calculated to give the alarm to reclaimable gamesters, and perhaps bring the whole gang into discredit. The author mentions, in his letter to Dr. Warton, that he expected to clear about four hundred pounds by his tragedy, exclusive of the profits by the sale of the copy. It is asserted by Dr. Johnson, in his life of lord Lyttelton, that, in return for Moore’s elegant compliment, “The Trial of Selim,” his lordship paid him with “kind words, which, as is common, raised great hopes, that at last were disappointed.” It is possible, however, that these hopes were of another kind than it was in his lordship’s power to gratify*; and it is certain that he substituted a method of serving Moore, which was not only successful for a considerable time, but must have been agreeable to the feelings of a delicate and independent mind. Abouttheyears 175 1-2, periodical writing began to revive in its most pleasing form, but had hitherto been executed by men of learning only. Lord Lyttelton projected a paper, in concert with Dodsiey, which should unite the talents of certain men of rank, and receive such a tone and consequence from that circumstance, as mere scholars can seldom hope to command or attain. Such was the origin of the “World,” for every paper of which Dodsiey stipulated to pay Moore three guineas, whether the papers were written by him, or by the volunteer contributors. Lord Lyttelton, to render this bargain more productive to the editor, solicited and obtained the assistance of the earls of Chesterfield, Bath, and Corke, and of Messrs. Walpole, Cambridge, Jenyns, and other men of rank and taste, who gave their assistance, some with great regularity, and all so effectually as to render the “World” far more popular than any of its contemporaries.

Bower, to which our poet thought he to answer. Horace, however, kept hi

, was the son of Arthur More, esq. one of the lords-commissioners of trade in the reign of queen Anne; and his mother was the daughter of Mr. Smyth, who left this, his grandson, an handsome estate, upon which account he obtained an act of parliament to change his name from More to Smyth; and, besides this estate, at the death of his grandfather, he had his place of pay-master to the band of gentlemen-pensioners, with his younger brother Arthur More, esq. He was bred at Worcester college, Oxford; and, while he was there, wrote a comedy, called “The Rival Modes.” This play was condemned in the acting, but he printed it in 1727, with the following motto, which the commentator on the Dunciad, by way of irony, calls modest: “Hie csestus artemque repono.” Being of a gay disposition, he insinuated himself into the favour of the duke of Wharton; and being also, like him, destitute of prudence, he joined with that nobleman in writing a paper, called “The Inquisitor;” which breathed so much the spirit of Jacobitism, that the publisher thought proper to sacrifice his profit to his safety, and discontinue it. By using too much freedom with Pope, he occasioned that poet to stigmatize him in his Dunciad:

The cause of the quarrel between More and Pope was this In a letter published in the Daily Journal, March 18, 1728, written by the former, there are the following words: “Upon reading the third volume of Pope’s Miscellanies, I found five lines, which I thought excellent and, happening to praise them, a gentleman produced a modern comedy, * The Rival Modes,' where were the same verses to a tittle. These gentlemen are undoubtedly the first plagiaries, who pretend to make a reputation by stealing from a man’s works in his own life-time, and out of a public print.” But it appears, from the notes to the Dunciad, that More himself borrowed the lines from Pope; for, in a letter to Pope, dated Jan. 27, 1726, he observes, that “these verses, which he had before given him leave to insert in ‘ The Rival Modes,’ would be known for his, some copies being got abroad. He desires nevertheless, that, since the lines in his comedy have been read to several, Pope would not deprive it of them.” As proofs of this circumstance, are brought the testimonies of lord Bolingbroke, and the lady of Hugh Bethel, esq. to whom the verses were originally addressed, who knew them to be Pope’s long before “The Rival Modes” was written. This gentleman died in 1734, at Whister, near Isleworth in Middlesex, for which county he was a justice of peace. Notwithstanding his quarrel with Pope, he was certainly a man of parts and politeness, or the poet would never have introduced him, as he did, to the earl of Peterborough’s acquaintance; but his misfortune was, as the commentator on the Dunciad observes, too inordinate a passion to be thought a wit.

, a Welsh antiquary and poet, was born in the isle of Anglesey in the year 1702, and died in 1765 at Penhryn, in Cardiganshire. He surveyed the coast of Wales in 1737, by order of the admiralty-board; and his work was published in 1748. Some of his poetical pieces in the Welsh language have been printed, and he left above eighty volumes of manuscripts of antiquity, now deposited in the Welsh charity-school, GraysInn lane, London. It was his intention to have compiled a Welsh dictionary, as appears by his correspondence in the Gentleman’s Magazine. His brother Richard was also a poet and critic in his native language. He was clerk in the navy pay-office, and superintended the printing of two valuable editions of the Welsh Bible. He died in 1779. William Morris, another brother, was a great collector of Welsh manuscripts, and died comptroller of the customs at Holyhead in 1764.

Moschus and Bion, for they have usually been joined together, were two Grecian poets of antiquity, who flourished about 200 years B. C. and were contemporaries of Theocritus. The prodigious credit of Theocritus as a pastoral poet enabled him to engross not only the fame of his rivals, but their works too. In the time of the latter Grecians, all the ancient idyliiums were heaped together into one collection, and Theocritus’s name prefixed to the whole volume; but learned men having adjudged some of the pieces to their proper owners, the claims of Moschus and Bion have been admitted to a few little pieces, sufficient to make us inquisitive about their character and story. Yet all that can be known of them must be collected from their own small remains for Moschus, by composing his exquisite “Elegy on Bion,” has given the best memorials of Bion’s life, as well as the most perfect composition of its kind. We learn from it, that Bion was of Smyrna, that he was a pastoral poet, and that he unhappily perished by poison, and, as it should seem, not accidentally, but by the command of some great person. Moschus and Theocritus have by some critics been supposed the same person; but there are irrefragable testimonies against it. Moschus, in the “Elegy on Bion,” introduces Theocritus bewailing the same misfortune in another country and Servius says that Virgil chose to imitate Theocritus preferably to Moschus, and others who had written pastorals. Some will have it that Moschus, as well as Bion, lived later than Theocritus, upon the authority of Suidas, who affirms Moschus to have been the scholar of Aristarchus, in the reign of Ptolemy Philometor; while others suppose him to have been the scholar of Bion, and probably his successor in governing the poetic school. The latter supposition is collected from the elegy of Moschus, and does not seem improbable. The few but inimitable remains of these two poets are to be found in all editions of the “Poetas Minores,” and of separate editions there are some very valuable ones, particularly the rare and curious one of Mekerchus, printed at Bruges, 1565, 4to; and those of Schwebelius, Venice, 1746, 8vo; of Heskin, Oxford, 1748, 8vo, and of Gilbert Wake field, 1795, 8vo.

, an ingenious French writer, was born at Paris, Jan. 17, 1672. He was educated in a seminary of Jesuits, and afterwards entered on the study of the law, which he quitted for the stage, as in his opinion affording the more brilliant prospect. His first attempt, however, a comedy, miscarried, and he felt the disgrace so acutely as to throw himself into the celebrated monastery of La Trappe, where he fancied he could comply with its austerities; but after a few months he returned to the world, and produced some operas and pastorals, which had considerable success. His lyric efforts were particularly applauded, and he now published a volume of odes; but in these, says D'Alembert, “the images are scanty, the colouring feeble, and the harmony often neglected.” Dr. Warton had pronounced, long before, that these odes, although highly praised by Sanadon, and by Fontenelle, were fuller of delicate sentiment, and philosophical reflection, than of imagery, figures, and poetry. There are particular stanzas eminently good, but not one entire ode. So far the French and English critics seem to agree. We learn also, from D'Alembert, that La Motte’s odes were soon effaced by those of the celebrated Rousseau, who, with less wit, perhaps, than La Motte, had superior qualifications for the higher poetry. Yet, when these rivals became competitors for a seat in the academy in 1710, La Motte was preferred, from his having friends who loved him, while Rousseau, from his repulsive temper, did not possess one. La Motte succeeded Corneille in the academy, and, like him, was at this time nearly blind. He very ingeniously made use of this calamity, in his discourse at his reception, to interest his auditors. After having spoken of the merit of his predecessor, he proceeded “You have beheld him faithful to your duties till extreme old age, infirm as he was, and already deprived of sight. The mention of this circumstance makes rne feel the condition to which I am myself reduced. What age ravished from my predecessor, I have lost from my youth. I must, however, confess, that this privation of which I complain, will no longer serve me as an excuse for ignorance you, gentlemen, have restored me my sight you, by associating me with yourselves, have laid all books open to me; and, since I am able to hear you, I no longer envy the happiness of those who can read.” La Motte soon after became totally deprived of sight. He next ventured to appear on a theatre more worthy of a poet’s ambition, and produced the tragedy of the “Maccabees,” concealing his name. The critics found a great deal of merit in it while this concealment lasted and some went so far as to conceive it a posthumous work of Racine but when he discovered himself, they withdrew their praises, or changed them into censures; and the tragedy, being really of the mediocre kind, disappeared from the stage. It was followed by others, of which “Ines de Castro” obtained a permanent place on the stage, notwithstanding many attacks from wit, malice, and arrogance; all which he bore with good-humour. He was one day in a coffee-house, in the midst of a swarm of literary drones, who were abusing his work without knowing the author. He patiently heard them a long time in silence, and then called out to a friend who accompanied him, “Let us go and yawn at the fiftieth representation of this unfortunate piece.” At another time, when told of the numerous criticisms made on his tragedy, “It is true,” said he, “it has been much criticised, but with tears.”

He wrote also six comedies, of which the “Magnifique” still pleases by the ingenuity of its details, and the charms of its style. All his cornddies are written in prose: and when he produced his tragedy of “Œdipus,” after having first written it in verse, he turned it into prose, which gave occasion to the publication of his system of prose tragedies, so ingeniously supported, and so warmly refuted; the result of the controversy was, that all the menof let ers in France deckled in favour of verse. In 1714, he published his translation of Homer’s Iliad, in which he was still less successful then in his anti- poetical paradoxes. He presumed also to write against Homer, and was answered by madame Dacier; but by this, says D'Alembert, he offered Homer a less injury than by translating him into French verse. He had attacked the subject, the disposition-, and the entire plan of the Iliad, with much ingenuity, but he did not render sufficient justice to the sublime beauties of Homer, and still less was he able to transfer these beauties to his version. He substituted a bare skeleton to the monster he meant to combat; and as he had raised the public laughter against his adversaries, he exposed himself to their shafts by an unskilful travesty of the object of their worship. The powerful diversion he afforded them by this mistake lost him almost all his advantages; and the French Iliad consoled madam Dacier for the ridicule which had been thrown upon her by the answer of la Motte to her criticisms, which was undoubtedly a very witty and ingenious defence of a bad cause. Some years after, in 1719, he produced his “Fables,” which were praised for invention and moral, while it was allowed that they were in other respects not to be compared with those of La Fontaine. Besides these he wrote, at different times, many other species of poetry, eclogues, cantatas, psalms, hymns, &c. of which, as well as his other productions, D'Alembert says, “he wished to make verses, and felt that nature tiad not made him a poet he wished to compose odes, and felt that he had more good sense than warmth, more reason than enthusiasm; he wished to write tragedies, and saw himself at an immense distance from Corneille and Racine; he wished to produce fables, and felt that his genius, the character of which was artful refinement, would in vain aim at the charming simplicity of la Fontaine.” If, however, La Motte’s verses are not master-pieces of poetry, his prosewritings may be regarded as models of style. The talent of writing prose well is a merit that scarcely any French poet possessed before la Motte. His answer to madame Dacier, entitled “Reflections on Criticism,” and his prefaces to his works, are master-pieces of elegance. All his academical discourses, delivered on different occasions, were excellent; but the most applauded was his eulogy on Lewis XIV. pronounced at a public sitting after the death of that prince, which, of all the funeral orations made on him, is the only one which is not yet entirely forgotten.

, celebrated by ancient writers as a philosopher, astronomer, and poet, was, according to Plato and Diodorus Siculus, an Athenian, the son of Orpheus, and chief of the Eleusinian mysteries, instituted at Athens in honour of Ceres; or, according to others, he was only the disciple of Orpheus. He is allowed to have been one of the first poets who versified the oracles. He is placed in the Arundelian marbles, Epoch 15, 1426 B.C. at which time his hymns are there said to have been received in the celebration of the Eleusinian mysteries. Laertius tells us, that Musæus not only composed a theogony, but formed the first sphere but he was probably misled by the title of a poem said to have been written by Mnsaeus, “de Sphaera.” The doctrine which he taught was, that all things are produced fiom one, and shall be resolved into the same; an Orphic doctrine, which is the first principle of the system of emanation, and the foundation of all the ancient theogonies. He is celebrated by Virgil in the character of Hierophant, or priest of Ceres, among the most illustrious mortals who have merited a place in Elysium, and is made the conductor of Æneus to the recess, where he meets the shade of his fatber Anchises.

A hill near the citadel of Athens was called Musæum, according to Pausamas, from Musæus, who used to retire thither to meditate, and compose his religious hymns, and at which place he was afterwards buried. The works which went under his name, like those of Orpheus, were by many attributed to Onomacritus. Nothing remains of this poet now, nor were any of his writings exta-nt in the time of Pansanias, except a hymn to Ceres, which he made for theLycomedes. There is another Musæus, called the grammarian, author of a Greek poem on “The Loves of Hero and Leander.” He is supposed to have lived as late as the fourth century, since he is not referred to by any of the older scholiasts, and some of his verses appear borrowed from the Dionysiacs of Nonnius. Nothing is known of him personally, yet his work is in a pure and elegant style, with much delicacy of sentiment. It has been frequently reprinted, both in collections and separately, and has been translated into various languages.

, an Italian historian and poet, was born at Padua in 1261. When young he lost his father, and was left with a numerous family of brothers and sisters, whom he at first endeavoured to maintain by copying books for the scholars of the university. He was also permitted to attend the lectures there, and made very considerable progress in belles lettres and the law. Theiatterhe chose as the profession most likely to enable him to maintain his family, nor was he disappointed; and the very great ability he displayed at other times occasioned his being employed in political affairs. His talents in this respect were first called forth when Henry VII. made a descent on Italy; on which event he was five times se nt by the Paduans to that prince, who conceived a very high opinion of him. In his history we find the speeches he ma ie to Henry, and those he addressed to the senate of Padua. He also distinguished himself in the war which the Paduans carried on against Can Grande de la Scala, and when wounded and taken prisoner in 1314, Can Grande paid him the attention due to his merit, and restored him to liberty. The war raging more furiously, Mussato went first to Tuscany to negociate an alliance with the Tuscans and Paduans against Can Grande, but not succeeding, went next to Austria and Carint*hia, where he partially achieved his purpose, and at last, in 1324, had the honour of concluding a peace between Can Grande and his country.

, of Campania, an ancient Latin poet, was bred a soldier, but quitted the profession of arms, in order to apply himself with more leisure to poetry. Accordingly, he prosecuted that art with great diligence, and gave the first specimen of a heroic poem in Latin, in a description of the first Punic war, and the Iliad of Cyprus, mentioned by Cicero. He wrote also some tragedies, a few fragments of which are extant with Livius Andronicus, and somje comedies, the first of which appeared in the year 235 B.C., but this, it is said, when played at Rome, so highly incensed Metellus by the satirical strokes in it, that this nobleman, who wus then very powerful, procured him to be banished from the city. In this condition, he retired to Utica in Africa, where he died in the year 203 B. C. We have only some fragments of his works; unless his epitaph, which is said to have been composed by himself, may be ranked among them. Of these fragments there is an edition by Henry Stephens, Paris, 1569, 8vo.

When king William was upon the throne Nash was a member of the Middle Temple. It had been long customary for the inns of court to entertain our monarchs, upon their accession to the crown, or any remarkable occasion, with a revel and pageant. In the early periods of our history, poets were the conductors of these entertainments; plays were exhibited, and complimentary verses were then written but, by degrees, the pageant alone was continued^ sir John Davis being the last poet that wrote verses upon such an occasion, in the reign of James I. This ceremony, which has been at length totally discontinued, was last exhibited in honour of king William; and Nash was chosen to conduct the whole with proper decorum. He was then but a very young man; but at an early age he was thought proper to guide the amusements of his country, and be the arbiter elegantiarum of his time. In conducting this entertainment he had an opportunity of exhibiting all his abilities; and king William was so well satisfied with his performance, that he made him an offer of knighthood. This, however, he thought proper torefuse, which, in a person of his disposition, seems strange. “Please your majesty,” replied he, “if you intend to make me a knight, I wish it may be one of your poor knights of Windsor; and then I shall have a fortune, at least able to support my title.” Yet we do not find that the king took the hint of increasing his fortune; perhaps he could not; he had, at that time, numbers to oblige, and he never cared to give money without important services.

, a dramatic poet and satirist of queen Elizabeth’s reign, was born at the sea-port town of Leostoff, in Suffolk, probably about 1564, and was descended from a family whose residence was in Hertfordshire. He received his education at St. John’s college, Cambridge, where he took the degree of B. A. 1585. If we may judge from his pamphlet, entitled “Pierce Penniless,” which, though written with a considerable spirit, seems to breathe the sentiments of a man in the height of despair and rage against the world, it appears probable that he had met with many disappointments and much distress, which, from the character of his companion Robert Greene (see Greene), it is most likely arose from his own indiscretions; his “Pierce Penniless” might be no less a picture of himself, than the recantation pieces we have noticed in our account of Greene. It appears from a very scarce pamphlet, entitled “The Trimming of Tho. Nashe, gentleman, by the high tituled patron Don Richardo de Medico Campo, Barber Chirurgeon to Trinity college in Cambridge,” 1597, 4to, that Nash was, that year, in confinement on account of his having written a play, called, “The Isle of Dogs;” that while he was at Cambridge, he wrote part of a show, called “Terminus et noji Terminus,” for which the person, who was concerned with him in that composition, was expelled; that Nash left his college when he was seven years standing, and before he had taken his master’s degree, about 1587; and that after his arrival in London, he was often confined in different gaols.

a learned Italian scholar and poet, was born at Venice, of a patrician family, in 1483, and was instructed in Latin and Greek at Venice and Padua, under Sabellicus and Marcus Musurus. In the Latin language and composition he acquired great facility and taste, as appeared by his subsequent productions; and also cultivated Italian poetry, in his youth, with equal success. He appears to have embarked both in military and political life. He attended his friend Livanius, the Venetian general, in some of his expeditions and one of his most elegant Latin poems was a funeral elogy on that officer. His political talents recommended him t6 the office of Venetian ambassador at the court of Charles V. when the Italian States began to take the alarm at that monarch’s apparent projects of aggrandizement. He was afterwards deputed on a similar mission to Francis I.; but too great solicitude on this occasion is supposed to have been fatal to him. After travelling with great speed to France, he had scarce paid his respects to the monarch when he was seized with a fever, at Blois, and died in 1529, in his forty-sixth year.

, who flourished in the twelfth century, was probably born, and certainly educated at St. Alban’s abbey, of which period of his life he speaks with pleasing recollection in his poem “De Laude sapientiae Divinae.” He completed his education at Paris, and took the order of St. Augustine. He became the friend, associate, and correspondent of Peter of Blois, or Petrus Blesensis, and was afterwards abbot of Cirencester, in which office he died in 1217. He was much attached to the studious repose of the monastic life, yet he frequently travelled into Italy. His compositions are various, and, as Mr. Warton observes, crowd the department of Mss. in our public libraries. He has left numerous treatises of divinity, philosophy, and morality, and was also a poet, a philologist, and a grammarian. He wrote a tract on the mythology of the ancient poets, Esopian fables, and a system of 'grammar and rhetoric. Mr. Warton, who examined his elegiac poem “De vita motiastica,” says it contains some finished lines; but gives the highest praise to the poem already mentioned, “De divina sapientia.”

, a Latin poet, was born at Carthage, and flourished about the year 281, under the emperor Carus, and his sons Carinus and Numerian; the last of whom was so fond of poetry, that he contested the glory with Nemesianus, who had written a poem upon fishing and maritime affairs. We have still remaining a poem of our author, but in an imperfect state, called “Cynegeticon,” and four eclogues; they were published by Paulus Manutius in 1538; by Berthelet in 1613, and at Leyden, in 1653, with the notes of Janus Vlitias. Giraldi hath preserved a fragment of Nemesianus, which was communicated to him by Sannazarius; to whom we are obliged for all our poet’s works: for, having found them written in Gothic characters, he procured them to be put into the Roman, and then sent them to Paulus Manutius. Although this poem has acquired some reputation, it is greatly inferior to those of Oppian and Gratian upon the same subject; yet Nemesianus’s style is natural, and not without some degree of elegance. Such was the reputation of this poem in the eighth century, that it was read among the classics in the public schools, particularly in the time of Charlemagne, as appears from a letter of the celebrated Hincmar, bishop of Rheims, to his nephew, of Laon. There was another poet of the same name and century, who wrote a piece termed “Ixeutica,” published in the “Poetse Rei Venaticae,” but of far inferior merit.

It is remarkable, that in all his miseries and wretchedness, and even when most profligate and apparently thoughtless in his conduct on board of ship, he preserved an anxiety to learn, and at his leisure hours, acquired a considerable knowledge of the mathematics. In his later voyages, he endeavoured to revive his acquaintance with the Latin language. How scanty his means were, appears from his own account. “He had seen an imitation of one of Horace’s odes in a magazine, and wished to be able to read that poet, but had no other help than an old English translation, with Castalio’s Latin Bible. He had the DeU phin edition of Horace, and by comparing the odes with the interpretation, and tracing such words as he understood from place to place by the index, together with what assistance he could get from the Latin Bible, he thus, by dint of hard industry, made some progress. He not only understood the sense of many odes, and some of the epistles, but” I began,“he says,” 4o relish the beauties of the composition; acquired a spice of what Mr. Law calls classical enthusiasm; and, indeed, by this means, I had Horace more ad unguem, than some who are masters of the Latin tongue. For my helps were so few, that I generally had the passage fixed in my memory before I could fully understand its meaning." In a future voyage, which he commenced from Liverpool in August 1750^ as commander, he made still greater progress in Latin; providing himself with a dictionary, and adding to Horace, Juvenal, Livy, Caesar, &c. His conduct in all respects was now become regular. He allotted about eight hours for sleep and meals, eight hours for exercise and devotion, and eight hours to his books. In a Guinea trader, such a life perhaps has no parallel.

At Olney Mr. Newton became acquainted with two gentlemen whose friendship gave an important interest to his future life, the benevolent John Thornton, esq. and William Cowper, the celebrated poet. The farmer, conceiving a high idea of the integrity and usefulness of Mr. Newton in this parish, determined to allow him a certain sum (200l. a year) with which he wished him to keep open house for such as were worthy of entertainment, and to help the poor and needy. Mr. Newton reckoned that he had received of Mr. Thornton upwards of 3000l. in this way during his residence atOlney, a sum which, however great, will not surprize those who knew the extent of Mr. Thornton’s liberality. His intimacy with Cowper forms one of the most interesting periods of that poet’s life. To what is said in our account of Cowper (vol. X. p. 405, &c.) we have only to regret in this place that much information has been lost to the public by the suppression of Mr. Newton’s letters to his afflicted friend. These letters must have been in Cowper’s possession; but what became of them after his death has never been explained. Had they appeared, they probably would have established beyond all power of contradiction, that no part of Cowper’s deplorable melancholy was attributable to his connection with Mr. Newton, or with men of his principles. Mr. Newton was himself a man of remarkable cheerfulness of disposition, and had a particular talent in administering consolation to those whose uneasiness arose from religious affections, nor was he easily mistaken in separating real concern from affectation. It appears that Mr. Newton was once in possession of a life of Cowper, written by himself, at the calmest period of his life; some facts from this have been communicated to the public by his biographer, but more remains, which we have been told would have thrown additional light on Mr. Cowper’s remarkable history.

, a Latin poet, divine, schoolmaster, and physician of the sixteenth century, was the eldest son of Edward Newton, of Butley, near Presbury in Cheshire. He was educated at Macclesfield in the same county, under Brownswerd, a schoolmaster of considerable fame. Newton preserved so great a regard for him, as to erect a monument to his memory in Macclesfield church, lyith an inscription which concludes with these lines:

About this time he was induced by Mrs. Anne Deanes Devenish, an acquaintance whose friendship proved afterwards of great importance to him, to superintend an edition of Mr. Jlowe’s works, who had been her first husband. This edition was executed at the request of the Prince of Wales, who was very partial to that poet, and who honoured Mrs. Devenish with his friendship; and it was the means of JMr. Newton’s being made known to his royal highness. Nor was this the only obligation he owed to the good services of Mrs. Devenish, as she first introduced him ito the acquaintance of Mr. Pulteney, who, when lord Bath, appointed him his chaplain. Mr. Newton, in his life, gives a curious detail of that famous political revolution which occasionedthe resignation of sir Robert Walpole. This he appears to have written at the time, and it is no small proof of the authenticity of the facts, that Mr. Coxe, in his excellent Life of sir R. Walpole, seems disposed to admit it. It is indeed written with every internal mark of candour and honesty.

, a celebrated grammarian, poet, and physician, flourished in the 160th olympiad, about 140 B. C. in the reign of Attains; or, according to some, in the time of Ptolemy Philadelphia. Suidas tells us, that he was the son of Xenophon of Colophon, a town in Ionia and observes, that, according to others, he was a native of Ætolia but, if we may believe Nicander himself, he was born in the neighbourhood of the temple of Apollo, at Claros, a little town in Ionia, near Colophon yet the name of his father was Damphæus. He was called an Ætolian, only because he lived many years in that country, and wrote a history of it. A great number of writings are ascribed to him, of which we have remaining only two: one entitled “Theriaca;” describing, in verse, the accidents which attend wounds made by venomoug beasts, with the proper remedies; the other, “Alexipharmaca” in which he treats of poisons and their antiuotes, or counter-poisons these are both excellent poems. Demetrius Phalereus, Theon, Plutarch, and Diphilus of Laodicea, wrote commentaries upon the first; and we have still extant very learned Greek “Scholia” upon both, the author of which is not known; though Vossius imagines they were made by Diphilus just mentioned. He wrote also “Ophiaca,” upon serpents; “Hyacinthia,' 1 a collection of remedies, and a commentary upon the” Prognostics of Hippocrates“in verse. The Scholiast of Nicander cites the two first of these, and Suidas mentions two others. Athenseus also cites, in several places, some poetical works of our author upon agriculture, called his” Georgics,“which were known likewise to Curio. Besides these he composed five books of” Metamorphoses,“some verses of which are copied by Tzetzes, and the” Metamorphoses“of Antonius Liberalis were apparently taken from those of Nicander. He composed also several historical works, among which” The History of Colophon,“his birth-place, is cited by Athenaeus we are told likewise of his history of Ætolia, Bœotia, and Thebes, and of” A History and description of Europe in general.“He was undoubtedly an author of merit, and deserves those eulogiums which are given of him in some epigrams in the” Anthologia.“This Nicander has been confounded with Nicander the grammarian of Thyatira, by Stephanus Byzantius: and Vossius, in giving the titles of the books written by both these Nicanders, does not distinguish them very clearly. Merian, in his essay on the influence of the sciences on poetry (in the Memoirs of the royal academy of Berlin for 1776), mentions Nicander to show the antipathy that there is between the language of poetry and the subjects which he treated. He considers Nicander as a therapeutic bard, who versified for the apothecaries, a grinder of anecdotes, who sung of scorpions, toads, and spiders. The” Theriaca“and” Alexipharmaca“are inserted in the Corp. Poet. Greec. Of separate editions, the best is that of Aldus, 1522; of the” Theriaca,“that of Bandini, 1764, 8yo, and of the” Alexipharmaca," that of Schneider, 1792, 8vo.

, whom Mr. Headley considers as a poet of great elegance and imagination, and one of the ornaments of the reign of Elizabeth, was born in London, of genteel parents, in 1584. In 1602 he entered a student of Magdalen college, Oxford, whence, after a short time, he removed to Magdalen hall, and took the degree of B. A. in 1606. After remaining at the university some years, and being esteemed among the most ingenious men of his day, according to Wood, he quitted Oxford for London, where he “obtained an employment suitable to his faculty.” What this employment was, we are left to conjecture. The time of his death is also uncertain, but he appears to have been alive at least in 1616, and was then but young. The most material of his works are his additions to “The Mirror for Magistrates,” a book most popular in its time (see Higgins), containing a series of pieces by Sackville, Baldwyne, Ferrers, Churchyard, Phayer, Higgins, Drayton. It was ultimately completed, and its contents new arranged by Nichols, whose supplement to the edition of 1610 is entitled “A Winter Night’s Vision,” To this likewise is improperly subjoined “England’s Eliza; or the victorious and triumphant reigneof that virgin Empress, &c. Elizabeth, queen of England,” &c. His other writings are, “The Cuckow, a Poem,” London, 1607; “Monodia, or Waltham’s complaint upon the death of the most vertuous and noble lady, late deceased, the lady Honor Hay,” ibid. 1615; a play called “TheTwynnes Tragedye” is attributed to him in the Biog. Dram.; but we can, on better authority, add “London’s Artillery, briefly containing the noble practice of that worthie Society,” &c. &c. 1616, 4to; “The Three Sisters’ Tears, shed at the late solernne Funerals of the royal Henry, prince of Wales,” &c. 1613, 4to; and “The Furies, with Vertue’s encomium, &c. in two books of epigrammes, satirical and encomiastic,” 1614, 8vo. Ample specimens of his poetry are given in Headley’s “Beauties,” and the “Bibliographer.”

, a Greek poet, surnamed Panoplites, from the place of his birth, was born at Panopolis, in Egypt, in the fifth century. He is the author of two works of a very different character; one a miscellany of heathen mythology and learning, in heroic verse, entitled “Dionysiacorum libri xlviii.” which was printed by Falkenburgh, from a ms. in the library of John Sambucb, at Antwerp, in 1569, 4to, and afterwards translated into Latin by Eiihard Lubin, professor at Rostock, who reprinted it at Hanover in 1610, with the notes of various persons, 8vo. There is also an edition printed at Eton, 1610, 4to. This is one of the most irregular poems extant, both with regard to the style, sentiments, method, and constitution: nothing is natural, nothing approaching to the purity of Homer; nothing of the free, easy manner, and beautiful simplicity, of the ancients. In short, this piece is as much beneath, as his other work, his “Paraphrasis,” is above, censure. In his paraphrase in Greek verse, upon the Gospel of St. John, the diction is perspicuous, neat, elegant, and proper for the subject. Hence he is styled by Isaac Casaubon “poeta eruditissimus.” Heinsius, indeed, reproaches him with leaning to Arianism but he appears to hold the same sentiments concerning the Trinity with Gregory Nazianzen and St. John Chrysostom. The first edition of this piece is that of Aldus Manutius at Venice in 1501, 4to; it has since gone through several editions, the last of which, and the best, is that by Heinsius, Gr. and Lat. 1627, 8vo. His various readings, which are deemed important, have been selected by Mill, Bengelius, Wetstein, and Griesbach.

, an ingenious artist, was the son of Robert Norgate, D. D. master of Bene‘t college, Cambridge, and in his youth shewed a great inclination to heraldry and limning, in both of which he became very eminent, but his talent in illuminating the initial letters of patents, was chiefly admired. His judgment in paintings also was considered very great, for which reason he was employed by the earl of Arundel, that celebrated collector of antiquities, to purchase pictures for him in Italy. Returning by Marseilles, and by some accident being disappointed of the remittances he expected, and totally unknown there, he was observed by a French gentleman, who, after inquiring into his circumstances, furnished him with the means of returning to his own country on foot. He was afterwards one of the clerks of the signet to ’Charles I. and as such attended his majesty to the North in 1640. He was also made Windsor herald for his great skill in heraldry, in which office he died, at the heralds’ college, Dec. 23, 1650, and was buried at St. Bennet’s, Paul’s Wharf, leaving the character of an honest, amiable, and accomplished man. Lloyd tells us that he left manuscripts to several of his friends to be published, but his intention in that point has not been executed. His letters, giving an account of the expedition against the Scotch in 1639, are among Dr. Birch’s “Historical Letters,” 3 vols. ms. in the British Museum, Ayscough’s catalogue. As an illuminator, the evidence of his abilities is a curious patent discovered some years ago. The late earl of Stirling received from a relation an old box of neglected writings, among which he found the original commission of Charles J. appointing his lordship’s predecessor, Alexander earl of Stirling, the celebrated poet, commander in chief of Nova Scotia, with the confirmation of the grant of that province made by James I. In the initial letter are the portraits of the king sitting on the throne, delivering the patent to the earl, and round the border representations in miniature of the customs, huntings, fishings, and productions, of the country, all in the highest preservation, and so admirably executed, that it was believed of the pencil of Vanclyck. But Mr. Walpole ascribes it to Norgate, who was allowed the best illuminator of that age.

As to his character, he had a tincture of enthusiasm in his composition, which led him to imbibe the principles of the idealists in philosophy, and the mystics in theology; and the whole turn of his poetry shews that enthusiasm made him a poet. As an idealist, he opposed Locke, and adorned Malebranche’s opinion, of seeing all things in God, with all the advantages of style, and perspicuity of expression. A late writer who appears to have studied his works with almost the same enthusiasm that inspired them, says, that " in metaphysical acumen, in theological learning, and in purity of diction, Mr. Norris acknowledges no superior. Mr. Locke, the reputed discoverer of the true theory of the mind, does not rank higher in that peculiar branch of science than our penetrating divine; for if his reply to Locke’s Essay on Human Understanding be critically considered, it will be found to detect many fundamental errors in that celebrated treatise.

“As the pious and sincere Christian, as the fervent and zealous divine, Norris is above praise. The pure morality which breathes through his discourses, the seraphic fire which glows in his aspirations, may be too refined, may be too warm for the cool and rational taste of the present day; but the ardency of this divine heat is a strong proof of the natural sensibility of his heart, and of the. sincerity of his religious professions. Nor is the genius of Norris, as a poet, at all inferior to that of his contempqraries; specimens of genuine poetry, whose fire and sublimity are barely excelled by the Paradise Lost, are displayed in his Miscellanies.”

Warwickshire, and secondly of John Knight, esq. of Bellowes, or Belhouse, or Gosfield-hall, in Essex. Much of Pope’s correspondence with this lady is inserted in the supplementary volume of the last edition of that poet’s works. Earl Nugent died Oct. 13, 1788.

, one of the restorers of literature in Spain, flourished in the sixteenth century, and was born at Vailadolid, in Latin Pinciuniy whence he was sometimes called Pingianus. His father, of the illustrious family of Guzman, was superintendant of the finances, or treasurer to Ferdinand the catholic. As entitled by birth, he received, when of proper age, the honour of knighthood of St. Jago; but his earliest taste being decidedly for literature, he put himself under a regular course of instruction for that purpose, and having a particular desire to become acquainted with the Greek language, then little known in Spain, after some elementary instruction in grammar under Antonio Lebrixa, he went to Bologna, and applied with the greatest ardour to Greek and Latin under Jovian of Peloponesus, and Philip Beroaldus. Having learned what these celebrated masters were able to teach, he determined to improve himself by every means, and laid out large sums in the purchase of Greek books and Mss. with which he returned to Spain, and devoted the whole of his time and attention to the studies he had begun with so much success. He appears to have been first employed by cardinal Ximenes on his celebrated Polyglot, and executed the greater part of the Latin version. He then succeeded Demetrius Luca of Crete, as Greek professor in the university of Alcala, then founded by the cardinal; but some disputes which occurred in this university obliged him to seek a situation of more tranquillity. This he found at Salamanca, the most famous university of Spain, where he was appointed Greek professor, and also taught rhetoric, and lectured on Pliny’s natural history. Here he formed many distinguished scholars, acquired the esteem of the learned men of his time, and was for many years the great patron and teacher of classical studies. He assisted likewise in the correction and revision of some of the ancient authors. He died about the age of eighty, in 1553, according to Antonio, or 1552, according to Thuanus and others, bequeathing his valuable library to the university of Salamanca, and his other property to the poor. His private character appears to have been estimable; he kept a plain but hospitable table, at which he loved to see his friends and scholars, whom he delighted and edified by his conversation. Among his works are, 1. “Annotationes in Senecae Philosophi Opera,” Venice, 1536, which Lipsius calls a model of just criticism. 2. “Observationes in Pomponium Melam,” Salamanca, 1543, 8vo. 3. “Observationes in loca obscura et depravata Hist. Nat. C. Plinii, cum retractationibus quorundam locorum Geographiae Pomponii Melae, locisque aliis non paucis in diversis utriusque linguae authoribus castigatis et exposuis,” Antwerp,1547, fol. Antonio thinks there was a previous edition at Salamanca in 1544, as there certainly was a subsequent one at Francfort in 1596, fol. but Saxius calls the Antwerp edition an octavo. 3. “Glosa sobre las obras de Juan de Mena,” Saville, 1528, fol. and Toledo, 1547, fol. This^is a commentary in the Spanish language on the works of John de Mena, a poet of Cordova. 4. A collection of Spanish proverbs, beguti in his old age, and published under the title “Refranes, o Proverbios en Romance,” Salamanca, fol. 1555. Of this edition there is a copy in the British Museum with ms notes. It was reprinted at Madrid in 1619, 4to.

"People imagine, that it is only understanding Arabic, and then translating a book out of it, and there is an end of the story: but if ever learning revives among us, posterity will judge better. This work of mine (in another way) is almost of as different a nature from translating out of the Greek or Latin, as translating a Poet from one language to another is different from prose. One comfort I have, that the authors I arn concerned with are very good in their kind, and afford me plenty of materials, which will clear up a great many mistakes of modern travellers, who passing through the Eastern countries, without the necessary knowledge of the history and ancient customs of the Mahometans, pick up little pieces of tradition from the present inhabitants, and deliver them as obscurely as they receive them. One thing pleases me much, that we shall give a very particular account of Ali and Hosein, who are reckoned saints by the Persians, and whose names you must have met with both in Herbert and Tavernier; for the sake of whom there remains that implacable and irreconcileable hatred between the Turks and Persians to this very day, which you may look for in vain in all the English books that have hitherto appeared. It would be a great satisfaction to me, if the author I have were complete in all his volumes, that I might bring the history down five or six hundred years but, alas! of twelve that he wrote, we have but two at Oxford, which are large quartos, and from whence I take the chief of my materials.

While in this family he first gave a proof of his inclination rather than genius for poetry, by translating some of “Æsop’s Fables” into English verse and, being then one of the troop of guard belonging to his lord, he composed a humourous piece, entitled “The character of a Trooper.” As a poet, however, he ranks among the very lowest. About that time he was appointed deputy-master of the revels in Ireland; built a little theatre in Dublin, and was much encouraged; but, upon the breaking out of the rebellion in 1641, this scheme was interrupted, and he lost all his property. To add to his misfortune he was shiprecked in his passage from Ireland, and arrived in London in a most destitute condition. He had an enterprizing spirit, however, and was not easily discouraged. After a short stay in London he went on foot to Cambridge; where his great industry, and greater love of learning, being discovered, he was encouraged by several scholars in that university. By their assistance he became so complete a master of Latin, that he translated the “Works of Virgil,” and published them with his portrait in a large octavo volume, London, 1649-50; with a dedication to William marquis of Hertford, whom he calls his most noble patron. Wood observes that thereby he obtained a considerable sum of money in his pocket. Thus encouraged, he proceeded to print “Æsop’s Fables” in verse, in 1651 f. This was published in 4to; and, as Wood archly observes, procured him a degree among the minor poets, being recommended in some verses for the purpose, both by sir William Davenant and James Shirley.

A little before this time, she formed an illicit connection with Arthur May n waring, esq. who interested himself greatly in the figure she made upon the stage; and it was in some measure owing to the pains he took in improving her natural talents, that she became, as she soon did, the delight and chief ornament of it. After the death of this gentleman, which happened in Nov. 1712, she engaged in a like commerce with brigadier-gen. Charles Churchill, esq. She had one son by Maynwaring; and another by Churchill, who afterwards married the lady Anna Maria Walpole, natural daughter of the earl of Orford. About 1718, Savage, the poet, being reduced to extreme necessity, his very singular case so affected Mrs. Oldfield, that she settled on him a pension of 50L per annum, which was regularly paid as long as she lived. This, added to other generous actions, together with a distinguished taste in elegance of dress, conversation, and manners, have generally been spread as a veil over her failings; and such was her reputation, that upon her death, which happened Oct. 23, 1730, her corpse was carried from her house in Grosvenor-street to the Jerusalem Chamber, and after lying in state, was conveyed to Westminster abbey, the pall being supported by lord De la Warr, lord Hervey, the right hon* George Bubb Doddington, Charles Hedges, esq. Walter Carey, esq. and captain Elliot; her eldest son Arthur Maynwaring, esq. being chief mourner. She was interred towards the west end of the south aile, between the monumerits of Craggs and Congreve. At her own desire, she was elegantly dressed in her coffip, with a very fine Brussels laced head, a Holland shift, with a tucker and double ruffles of the same lace, a pair of new kid gloves, and her body wrapt up in a winding-sheet. On this account, Pope introduced her, in the character of Narcissa, in Epistle I. line 245,

, an English poet, was born Aug. 9, 1653, at Shipton, near Tedbury in Gloucestershire, where his father was a nonconformist minister, and had a congregation. He educated his son in grammar-learning, and afterwards sent him to Tedbury school, where he spent about two years. In June 1670, he was admitted of Edmund-hall, Oxford, where he was soon distinguished for a good Latinist, and made poetry and polite literature his chief study. In May 1674, he proceeded B. A. but soon after was called home, much against his inclination. He continued sometime with his father, still cultivating his muse: one of the first fruits of which was “A Pindaric Ode,” the next year, upon the death of his friend and constant companion, Mr. Charles Morvent. Shortly after this, he became usher to the free-school at Croydon in Surrey, yet found leisure to compose several copies of verses; some of which, being seen in ms. by the earls of Rochester and Dorset, sir Charles Sedley, and other wits of distinction, were so much admired, that they surprised him with an unexpected visit at Croydon. Mr. Shepherd (then master of the school) attributed the honour of this visit to himself; but they soon convinced him, that he was not the object of their curiosity. The visit, however, brought Oldham acquainted with other persons of wit and distinction, and probably by their means, he was, in 1678, removed from Croydon, and appointed tutor to the two grandsons of sir Edward Thurland, a judge, near Rygate in-' Surrey. He continued in this family till 1681; when, being out of employment, he passed some time in London among the wits, and was afterwards engaged as tutor to a son of sir William Hickes. This gentleman, living near London, was intimately acquainted with Dr. Richard Lower, an eminent physician there, and who encouraged Oldharn to study physic, in which he made some progress; but he had no relish for protracted study, and preferred the occasional exercise of his pen on temporaty subjects. f Having discharged his trust, in qualifying young Hickes for foreign travels, he declined, though earnestly pressed, to go abroad with him, and took leave of the family. With, a small sum of money which he had saved, he now hastened to London, where company seduced him into intemperance, yet in other respects he neither degraded nor disgraced his character. Before he had been long in the metropolis, he was found out by the noblemen who had visited him at Croydon, and who now brought him acquainted with Dryden, who highly esteemed him, conceived a very great opinion of his talents, and honoured his memory with some very pathetic and beautiful lines.

But what turned to his greater advantage was, his being made known to the earl of Kingston, who became his patron, and entertained him with great respect at his seat at Holme-Pierpoint; apparently in the view of making him his chaplain, if he would qualify himself for it by entering into orders. But he had the utmost aversion for that office, as appears from his “Satire,” addressed to a friend, who was about to leave the university, and come abroad into the world; in which he lets him know, that he was deterred from the thought of such an office by the servility too often expected from it. He remained, however, an inmate in the earPs house, till his death, which was occasioned by the small-pox, Dec. 9, 1683, in his 30th year. He was buried in the church of Holme-Pierpoint, the earl attending as chief mourner, who soon after erected a monument to his memory, with an inscription expressing his eloge in Latin, to this effect: “No poet was more inspired with the sacred furor, none more sublime in sentiments, none more happily bold in expression, than he.” In his person, he was tall of stature, very thin, long-visaged, with a high nose and prominent; his aspect unpromising, but satire was in his eye. His constitution was tender, and inclined to a consumption; and not a little injured by apJication to learned authors, in whom he was well versed. His genius lay chiefly to satire, where, however, he did not always keep within the bounds of decency.

, ridiculed in the Taller by the name of Mr. Omicron, “the Unborn Poet,” descended from an ancient family of the name, originally seated at Oldmixon, near Bridgewater, in Somersetshire, and was born in 1673. Where he was educated is not known. He appears to have been early a writer for the stage; his first production was “Amyntas,” a pastoral, and his second, in 1700, an opera, neither of much merit or success. He Soon, however, became a violent party-writer, and a severe and malevolent critic. In the former light he was a strong opponent of the Stuart family, whom he has, on every occasion, endeavoured to vilify without any regard to that impartiality which ought ever to be the essential characteristic of an historian. As a critic he was perpetually attacking, with evident tokens of envy and malevolence, his several contemporaries; particularly Addison, Eusden, and Pope. The last of these, however, whom he had attacked in different letters which he wrote in “The Flying Post,” and repeatedly reflected on in his “Prose essays on Criticism,” and in his “Art of Logic and Rhetoric,” written in imitation of Bouhours, has introduced him into his “Dunciad,” with some very distinguishing marks of eminence among the devotees of dulness. In the second book of that severe poem, where the dunces are contending for the prize of dulness, by diving in the mud of Fleet-ditch, he represents our author as mounting the sides of a lighter, in order to enable him to take a more efficacious plunge. Oldmixon’s malevolence of abuse entitled him to the above-mentioned honour; and, to the disgrace of the statesmen of that time, his zeal as a virulent party-writer procured him the place of collector of the customs at the port of Bridgewater, but he died at his house in Great Pulteney-street, aged sixty-nine, July 9, 1742. He left a daughter, who died in 1789, at Newiand in Gloucestershire, aged eighty-four. Another of his daughters sung at Hickford’s rooms in 1746. He lies buried in Ealing church.

, in Latin Opitius, reckoned the father of German poetry, was born at Bunzlau, in Silesia, 1597. His parents had but a moderate fortune; but his father, observing his genius, educated him carefully in grammar, in which he soon made great proficiency: and, after some time, went to Breslaw for farther improvement, and thence to Francfort upon the Oder. He spent a year in that university, and then removed to Heidelberg, where fce studied with remarkable assiduity: but the fame of the celebrated Bernegger drew him, after some time, to Strasbourg and Bernegger was so struck with the learning and wit of Opits, that he pronounced he would one day become the Virgil of Germany. At length be returned, by the way of Tubingen, to Heidelberg; but, the plague beginning to appear in the Palatinate, this, together with the troubles in Bohemia, disposed our. student to travel with a Danish gentleman into the Low Countries; and thence he went to Holstein, where he wrote his books of “Constancy.” As soon as the troubles of Bohemia were a little calmed, he returned to his own country and, that he might not live in obscurity, he frequented the cour$. Bethlem Gabor, prince of Transilvania, having founded a school at Weissenberg, Opits was recommended by Gaspar Conrade, a famous physician and poet at Breslaw, to that prince, who appointed him the school-master or professor; and there he read lectures upon Horace and Seneca. ; Puring his residence in Transilvania, he inquired into the original of the Daci, and the Roman antiquities there. He made also exact researches after the ancient Roman inscriptions, which he sometimes recovered, and sent them to Gruter, Grotius, and Bernegger. Some time after his return home, he was meditating a journey to France, when a burgrave, who was in the emperor’s service, made him his secretary, in which office he contrived to keep up a regular correspondence with Grotius, Heinsius, Salmasius, Rigaltius, and other learned men; and his employer having not only consented to, but furnished him with all the necessaries for his journey to France, he became intimate with Grotius, who then resided at Paris, and in this journey also he collected a good number of manuscripts and curious medals.

, a Greek poet and grammarian, who flourished about the year 200 under the emperor Caracalla, was a native of Anazarba in Cilicia. We have of this author five books of fishing, entitled “Halieutics;” which he presented to Caracalla, in the life-time of his father the emperor Severus: as also four books of hunting, presented likewise to Caracalla after the death of Severus. Caracalla was so much pleased with Oppian’s poems, that he gave a crown of gold for every line; whence, it is said, they got the title of Golden verses, although others have supposed they merited that appellation for their elegance. Some modern critics say, he was a particular favourite of the Muses; he excels in sentiments and similitudes, but is particularly distinguished by the great erudition which supports his verses. He composed other pieces, which are lost; for instance, “A Treatise upon Falconry.” He died in his own country, of the plague, at thirty years of age; and a statue was erected in honour of him by his feU low-citizens who also placed an epitaph upon his tomb, importing, that the gods took him out of the world, because he excelled all mortals. The best editions of his poems are those of Leyden in 1597, 8vo, with notes by Rittershusius; to which is prefixed an account of his life, and that of Schneider, 1776. His work upon “Fishing” was translated into English heroic verse by Jones and others, of St. John’s college, in Oxford, and printed there in 1722, 8vo, with his life prefixed.

, the most celebrated of all the Greeks in the fabulous ages, was distinguished as a teacher of religion and philosophy, and his name became as illustrious among the Greeks, as that of Zoroaster among the Persians, of Buddas among the Indians, or of Thoth, or Hermes, among the Egyptians. But it has happened to Orpheus, as to many other wise men of antiquity, that spurious writings have been ascribed to him, and modern tenets have been obtruded upon the world under the sanction of his name. It has even been questioned, whether Orpheus ever existed. Cicero asserts, on the authority of Aristotle, that there was no such person as the poet Orpheus. But no passage of tjiis kind is at present to be found in the works of Aristotle; and the opinion is contradicted by the general testimony of the ancients, who relate, that Orpheus was a native of Thrace, who flourished before the Trojan war, and passed the greater part of his life in Greece.

, or Ursatus, a celebrated antiquary, historian, grammarian, and poet, was born February 1, 1617, at Padua, of one of the most illustrious families in that city. He applied diligently to the study of antiquities and ancient inscriptions, which occasioned his taking several journies into different parts of Italy. When advanced in life, he was appointed to teach natural philosophy in the university of Padua, and acquitted himself with great success in that office. He died at Venice July 3, 1678. He was a member of the academy of the Ricovrati, and has left a great number of valuable works, some in Latin, others in Italian: the principal among the former are, “Sertum Philosophicum ex variis scientise naturaiis floribus consertum,” Padua, 1635, 4to. 2. “Monumenta Patavina,” Padua,“1652, folio. 3.” Commentarius de Dotis Romanorum,“Padua, 1672, folio, a useful work, and much esteemed. It has been inserted in torn. XI. of the” Thesaurus“of Groevius, and is printed separately, Paris, 1723, 12mo, and at the Hague, 1736. The following are his principal Italian works 4.” A Hist, of Padua, in two parts,“1678, folio. 5.” I Marmi eruditi,“1669, and 1719, 2 vols. 4to; a curious work, in two parts also. 6.” Chronologia di Reggimenti di Padoua;“revised, with notes, 1666, 4to. 7. Several” Lyric Poems,“1637, 12mo;” Comedies," andother poetical pieces, &c.

, an Italian grammarian and poet, was born in 1652, at Bologna, son of Mario Orsi, a patrician of that city. His house was a kind of academy, in which several literary men met regularly. He married twice, and died in 1733, aged eighty-one, leaving some ingenious sonnets, pastorals, and many poetical pieces, besides other works in Italian. Some of them may be found in Muratori’s and Crescembeni’s treatises on poetry. His “Thoughts” on Bouhour’s “Maniere de Penser,” were published at Modena, 1735, 2 vols. 4to.

, one of the first names in the English drama, was born at Trottin in Sussex, March 3, 1651— 2, the son of the rev. Humphrey Otway, rector of Woolbeding. From Winchester-school, where he was educated, he was entered, in 1669, a commoner of Christ-church, but left the university without a degree, whether for want of money, or from impatience of academical restraint, or mere eagerness to mingle with the world, is not known. The anonymous writer of his life in one of the editions of His works, reports that he removed from Oxford to St. John’s-college, Cambridge, the probability of which rests only on a copy of verses sent to him by Duke the poet, who was his intimate friend. At Cambridge, however, he could not have remained long, if ever he paid more than a visit to it, for he appeared in London in 1672 in the character of the king in Mrs. Behn’s “Forced Marriage,” and found himself unable to gain any reputation on the stage. If he ever went to Cambridge, it must have been after this period, for Duke himself was not entered of Trinity-college until 1675.

Dr. Johnson has endeavoured to account for his failure on the stage with more precision than perhaps was necessary, as the circumstance is far from being uncommon. This kind of inability, says that eminent critic, he shared with Shakspeare and Jonson, as he shared likewise some of their excellences. It seems reasonable to expect that a great dramatic poet should without difficulty become a great actor that he who can feel, could express that he who can excite passion, should exhibit with great readiness its external modes but since experience has fully proved, that of those powers, whatever be their affinity, one may be possessed in a great degree by him who has very little of the other; it must be allowed that they depend upon different faculties, or on different use of the same faculty that the actor must have a pliancy of mien, a flexibility of countenance, and a variety of tones, which the poet may be easily supposed to want; or that the attention of the poet and the player have been differently employed; the one has been considering thought, and the other action; one has watched the heart, and the other contemplated the face.

Pope’s account of Otway’s death was first related by Dr. Warton in the notes to his “Essay on Pope,” and in the. following words: “Otway had an intimate friend who was murdered (not robbed) in the street. One may guess at his sorrow, who has so feelingly described true affection in his * Venice Preserved.' He pursued the murderer on foot, who fled to France, as far as Dover, where he was seized with a fever, occasioned by the fatigue, which afterwards carried him to his grave in London.” The robber, we find, is by this account a murderer, and as Dr. Warton was alt ways more correct as to minor facts than Dr. Johnson, it is probable that he relates the story as he heard it, but it is to be traced to Spence, who was informed by Dennis, the critic, that “Otway had a friend, one Blakiston, who was shot; the murderer fled towards Dover, and Otway pursued him. In his return he drank water, when violently heated, and so got the fever which was the death of him.” And Dennis in the Preface to his “Observations on Pope’s translation of Homer,” 1717, 8vo, says, “Otway died in an alehouse,” which is not inconsistent with the preceding account, as he generally lived in one; but whether the story of the guinea and the loaf can be introduced with any probability to heighten the poet’s distress, we do not pretend to determine. It would not perhaps be very wrong to conjecture that both accounts might be true, but his contemporaries have left us no precise documents. Dr. Johnson has remarked that Otway appears by some of his verses to have been a zealous loyalist, and had what was in those times the common reward of loyalty, he lived and died neglected.

, a learned French ecclesiastic, of the seventeenth century, was a native of Chinon in Tourraine, and a canon of Tours, He enjoyed the reputation of an universal scholar; was a poet, mathematician, divine, a controversial writer, and even a musician, although in the latter character he appears to have escaped the very minute researches of Dr. Burney in his valuable history of that art. He had been music- master of the holy chapel at Paris for ten years, before he became a canon of Tours. He wrote a great many works, among which some of his controversial pieces against the protestants, his “History of Music from its origin to the present time,” and his dissertation on Vossius’s treatise “De poematum cantu et viribus rythmi,” remain in manuscript. Those which were published, are, 1. “Secret pour composer en musique par un art nouveau,” Paris, 1660. 2. “Studiosis sanctarum scripturarum Biblia Sacra in lectiones ad singulos dies, per legem, prophetas, et evangelium distributa, et 529 carminibus mnemonicis comprehensa,” ibid. 1668; of this a French edition was published in 1669. 3. “Motifs de reunion a l‘eglise catholique, presentes a ceux de la religion pretendue-reforme*e de France, avec un avertissement sur la reponse d’un ministre a Poffice du saint Sacrement,” ibid. 1668. 4. “Le motifs de la conversion du comte de Lorges Montgommery,” dedicated to Louis XIV. ibid. 1670. 5. “Defense de Tancienne tradition des eglises de France, sur la mission des premiers predicateurs evangeliques dans les Gaules, du temps des apotres ou de leurs disciples immediats, et de Pusage des ecrits des S. S. Severe-Sulpice, et Gregoire de Tours, et de Tabus qu‘on en faiten cette rnatiere et en d’autres pareilles,” ibid. 178. This was addressed to the clergy and people of To'irs by the author, who held the same sentiments as M.de Ma re a, respecting St. Denis. 6. “L‘Art de la science des Nombres, en Francois et en Latin, avec un preface de i’excellence de Farithmetique,” ibid. 1677. 7. “Architecture harmonique, ou application de la doctrine des proportions, de la musique a ^architecture, avec un addition a cet ecrit,” ibid. 1679, 4to. 8. “Calendarium novum, perpetuum, et irrevocable,” 1682; but this work he was induced to suppress by the advice of his friend M. Arnauld, who thought that his ideas in it were too crude to do credit to his character. His last publication was, 9. “Breviarium Turonense, renovatum, et in melius restitutum,” 1685. He died at Tours, July 19, 1694, and the following lines,

, a poet and orator, was born in the fourth century, at Drepanum in Aquitania, but, according to others, at Bourdeaux; or, according to Sidonius, at Agen. He discovered a remarkable taste for poetry from his youth; and Ausonius informs us, wrote love verses. Ausonius adds, that he was equal to Catullus, and surpassed all the Latin poets, except Virgil. Ausonius probably thought all this; for he certainly had a very high opinion of him, dedicated some of his own works to him, and paid the greatest deference to his judgment. Pacatus was sent to Rome in the year 388, to congratulate Theodosius the Great on his victory over the tyrant Maximus; and on this occasion he delivered a panegyric on the emperor in the senate house, for which he was rewarded, in the year 390, with theproconsulship of a province in Africa, and, in the year 393, with the office of superintendant of the imperial domain. We have no farther particulars of his life. None of his poems are extant, and the only proof of his talents to which we can appeal is his panegyric on Theodosius, the second part of which is the most interesting, and gives some curious historical facts. In style and manner he is thought to resemble Seneca or Pliny rather than Cicero. The best edition is that by Arntzenius, Amst. 1753, 4to.

, a Latin tragic poet, was a native of Brindisi, the ancient Brundusium, and nephew to Ennius. He flourished at Rome about 154 B. C. According to his last biographer, he was held in high esteem by C. Lelius, and particularly by Cicero, who affirmed him to be superior to Sophocles in his tragedy of “Niptra,” and classed“him in the first rank of tragic poets. They are said likewise to have looked upon every one as an enemy to Roman literature who had temerity enough to despise his tragedies, particularly his” Antiope.“We have nothing, however, of his works left except some fragments in Maittaire’s” Corpus Poetarum." Pacuvius was a painter also, as well as a poet; and Pliny speaks of one of his pictures which was placed in the temple of Hercules, and was admired by the connoisseurs of those times. He died at Tarentum, when beyond his ninetieth year. He wrote his own epitaph, which is preserved in Aulus Gellius. Annibale di Leo, who was also born at Brindisi, published in 1764 a dissertation on his life and writings, in order to do honour to his native place, which certainly would not have been less honoured if he had omitted to tell us that among the eminent men of Brindisi, was M. Lenius Strabo, the first inventor of bird-cages.

, seigneur de Bigot, a French poet, was born in May 1650, at Toulouse, of a noble family. He was a member of the academy of the Jeux Floraux, became chief magistrate of Toulouse in 1675, when scarcely twenty-five years of age and was made head of the consistory 1684, in which othce he acquitted himself with great integrity. He went to Rome two years after, and at length to Paris, in which city he chiefly resided from that time, and where M. de Vendome fixed him in his service in 1691, as one of his secretaries. He died October 23, 1721, at Paris, aged 71, leaving some “Comedies,” and a small collection of miscellaneous “Poems,” most of them addressed to M. de Vendome. M. Palaprat wrote for the stage with his friend Brueis, and their works have been collected in five small volumes 12mo, of which his is the least part. His style is gay and lively, but he discovers little genius or fancy, and he seems to have been indebted for his literary reputation to his private character, which was that of a man of great candour and simplicity.

He was the author of several works. In the piece on the immortality of the soul, 1. “De immortalitate animae, Jibri tres,” which is reckoned his master-piece, he establishes the doctrine of the soul’s immortality, against Lucretius; for which reason Daniel Pareus annexed it to his edition of that poet at Francfort, 1631, 8vo. Sadolet bestows high encomiums upon this poem^ in a letter to Palearius. It was printed by Gryphius in 1536, in 16mo; and is inserted in our author’s works. 2. “Epistolarum, libri 4,” “Orationum, lib, 3,” 1552. 3. “Actio in pontifices Romanes et eorum asseclas, ad imperatorem Rom. reges et principes Christianse reipublicae summos Oecumenici concilii praesides conscripta cum de consilio Tridentino habendo deliberaretur.” He drew up this piece with a design to get it presented by the emperor’s ambassadors to the council of Trent. It is a regular plan in defence of the protestants, and was published at Leipsic in 1606. 4. “Poemata;” these are some poems printed at Paris in 1576. His works came out under this title, “Aonii Palearii opera,” Amst. 1696, 8vo. In the preface is given, a circumstantial account of the author’s life. They were reprinted, Jenae, 1728, 8vo. There is also a piece extant, with the following title: “Dialogo intitulato il grammatico overo deile false Esercitationi, delle scuele (da Aonio Paleario),” Perugia, 1717. He also wrote a “Discourse upon the Passion of Christ,” in Italian, which is lost but the plan of it is in his “Orations,” p. 90, 91. In Schelhorn’s “Amcenitates,” Leipsic, 1737, is “Aonii Palearii ad Lutherum, Calvinum, aliosque de concilio Tridentino epistola;” a letter, in which he advises the Lutherans and Calvinists to unite, as the hest means of resisting the attack made by the council of Trent on both.

, an Italian poet, who flourished in the sixteenth century, was born at Stellada, in Ferrara, upon the bank of the Po. We are told by some, that his true name was Pietro Angelo Manzolli, of which “Marcello Palingenio” is the anaigram . He is chiefly known by his “Zodiacus Vitae,” a poem in twelve books, dedicated to Hercules II. of Este, duke of Ferrara. Some say he was physician to that prince, but this will admit of a doubt; at least it is certain he was not so when he wrote the dedication to his “Zodiac.” This poem, on which he had employed several years, brought him into trouble, as it contained many sarcastic attacks on monks and church-abuses and his name therefore appears in the “Index librorum prohibitorum,” as a Lutheran heretic of the Brst class, and as an impious author. It is thought, he carries too far the objections of libertines and scoffers at religion; otherwise his work is interspersed with judicious maxims, and some have considered it as a truly philosophical satire against immorality and prejudice. In the close of the dedication, he declares himself a good catholic, so far as to submit all his opinions to the censure of the church; and this declaration might perhaps have secured him against the inquisition, had the affair related only to some particular tenet; but it could not acquit him of that impiety, which Palingenius was, not without reason, suspected to teach. In his third book, for instance, he inculcates the doctrine of Epicurus without the least reserve. He published this book in 1536, and again at Basil, in1537 ; and seems not to have lived long after that date. Gyraldus, who wrote about 1543, relates, that, after his burial, his body was ordered to be dug up, in order to be burnt; which execution was prevented by the duchess of Ferrara, who, it is thought, had received him at her court among the Lutherans.

, a celebrated Italian architect, was born in 1518 at Vicenza in Lombardy. As soon as he had learned the principles of art from Trissino, the celebrated poet, who was his townsman, he went to Rome, and applying himself with great diligence to study the ancient monuments, he entered into the spirit of their architects, and formed his taste upon them. On his return he was employed to construct various edifices, and obtained great reputation throughout Italy, which abounds in monuments of his skill, particularly the palace Foscari, at Venice, and the Olympic theatre at Vicenza, where he died in 1580. He excelled likewise in the theory of his art, as appears by his publications, which are still in the highest reputation. His first was his treatise on architecture, “I quattro libri dell' Architettura,” Venice, 1570. This has been often reprinted, and our country has the merit of a very splendid edition, published at London in 1715, in English, Italian, and French, 2 or 3 vols. fol. This edition, published by Leoni, is enriched with the most valuable of the notes which Inigo Jones wrote on his copy of the original, now in the library of Worcester college, Oxford. A French edition of the London one was published by Nic. du Bois, at the Hague in 1726, 2 vols. fol.; and in 1740, one much enlarged in Italian and French, at Venice, 5 vols. fol. This has been more recently followed by Scamozzi’s fine edition in Italian and French, printed at Vicenza, 1776—83, 4 vols. fol. In 1730, our countryman, lord Burlington, printed an elegant work, entitled “Fabriche antiche designate da Andrea Palladio, e date in luce da Riccardo Conte de Burlington,” fol. This collection of Palladio' s designs is very scarce, as the noble editor printed only a limited number of copies for his friends. Palladio also composed a small work, entitled “Le Antichita di Roma,” not printed till after his death. He illustrated Caesar’s “Commentaries,” by annexing to Badelli’s translation of that work, a preface on the military system of the Romans, with copper-plates, designed, for the most part, by his two sons, Leonida and Orazio, who both died soon after. Palladio was modest in regard to his own merit, but he was the friend to all men of talents; his memory is highly honoured by the votaries of the fine arts; and the simplicity and purity of his taste have given, him the appellation of the Raphael of architects.

Besides his “Chronicle,” Matthew, or Matteo, Palmieri wrote in Latin the life of Nicolas Acciajuoli, grandseneschal of the kingdom of Naples, which is printed in the thirteenth volume of Muratori’s “Script. Rer. Ital.;” a work on the taking of Pisa by the Florentines, “De captivitate Pisarum,” printed in Muratori’s nineteenth volume, and, in Italian, “Libro della vita civile,” written in the form of dialogues, and printed at Florence in 1529, 8vo. It was translated into French by Claude des Hosiers, Paris, 1557, 5vo. Palmieri was also a poet. He composed in the terza rima, in imitation of Dante, a philosophical, or rather a theological, poem, which had great celebrity in his day: its title was “Citta di Vita,” and was divided into three books, and an hundred chapters. But having advanced, among other singular opinions, that human souls were formerly those angels who remained neuter during the rebellion in heaven against their Creator, and were sent to the world below as a punishment, the Inquisition, after his death, ordered his poem to be burnt, although it had never been published, but read in manuscript. Some assert, that he was burnt along with his poem but Apostolo Zeno has proved that he died peaceably in 1475, and was honoured with a public funeral, by order of the state of Florence, that Rinuccini pronounced his funeral oration, and that, during the ceremony, his poem was laid on his breast, as his highest honour.

, a French poet, was born at Couville near Chartres in 1691, where he remained a Jong time in obscurity, upon some small employment. At length, the comedian Le Grand, having seen some of his pieces, went to find him out, and encouraged him; and Marmontel called him the Fontaine of the place. Panard had many qualities of Fontaine; the same disinterestedness, probity, sweetness, and simplicity of manners. He knew, as well as any man, how to sharpen the point of an epigram; yet always levelled it at the vice, not the person. He had a philosophic temper, and lived contented with a little. He died at Paris June 13, 1764. His works, under the title of “Theatre & Oeuvres diverse*,” have been printed, 1763, in 4 vols. 12mo. They consist of comedies, comic operas, songs, and all the various kinds of smaller poetry.

, son of the preceding, one of the most laborious grammarians that Germany ever produced, was born at Hembach, May 24, 1576. He began his studies at Neustadt, continued them at Heidelberg, and afterwards visited some of the foreign universities, at the expence of the elector Palatine, where he was always courteously received, not only on account of his own merit, but his father’s high reputation. Among others, he received great civilities from Isaac Casaubon at Paris. In 1612, he was made rector of the college of Neustadt, which post he held till the place was taken by the Spaniards in 1622, when he was ordered by those new masters to leave the country immediately, at which time his library was also plundered by the soldiers. He published several books on- grammatical subjects, and was remarkably fond of Plautus. This drew him into a dispute with John Gruter, professor at Heidelberg, in 1620, which was carried to such a height, that neither the desolation which ruined both their universities and their libraries, and reduced their persons to the greatest extremities, nor even their banishment, proved sufficient to restrain their animosity, or incline them to the forbearance of mutual sufferers. Philip also undertook the cause of his late father against Owen, mentioned in the last article, whom he answered in a piece entitled “Anti-Owenus,” &c. He was principal of several colleges, as he was of that at Hanau in 1645. The dedication of his father’s exegetical works shews him to be living in 1647, and Saxius conjectures that he died the following year. The same writer informs us that his first publication was “Castigationes in brevem et maledicam admonitionem Joannis Magiri Jesuitae predicantis apud Nemetes Spirantes,” Heidelberg, 1608, 8vo. This refers to a controversy which his father had with Magirus, the Jesuit. He wrote also some commentaries upon the “Holy Scriptures,” and other theological works. He published “Plautus,” in 1609, with notes; also a “Lexicon Plautinum,” in 1614; st Analecta Plautina,“in 1617; a treatise” De imitatione Tereiuiana, ubi Plautum imitatus est,“1617; a second edition of” Plautus,“in 1619, and of the” Analecta Plautina,“in 1620, and again in 1623. H also published a third edition of his” Plautus“in 1641. The” Prolegomena“which it contains of that poet’s life, the character of his versification, and the nature of his comedy, have been prefixed entire to the Delphin edition. He published his answer to Gruter in 1620, with this title,” Provocatio ad senatum criticum pro Plauto et electis Plautinis“and more of this angry controversy may be seen in the long preface prefixed to his” Analecta Plautina.“He also published” Calligraphia Romana, sive Thesaurus phrasium linguae Latinos,“in 1620; and” Electa Symmachiana, Lexicon Symmachianum, Calligraphia Synimachiana,“in 1617, 8vo: to which we may add his father’s life,” Narratio de curriculo vitce et obitu D. Parei," 1633, 8vo.

, an English historian, was a Benedictine monk of the congregation of Clugny, in the monastery of St. Alban’s, the habit of which order he took in 1217. He was an universal scholar; understood, and had a good taste both in painting and architecture. He was also a mathematician, a poet, an orator, a divine, an historian, and a man of distinguished probity. Such rare accomplishments and qualities as these, did not fail to place him very high in the esteem of his contemporaries; and he was frequently employed in reforming some monasteries, visiting others, and establishing the monastic discipline in all. He reproved vice without distinction of persons, and did not even spare the English court itself; at the same time he shewed a hearty affection for his country in maintaining its privileges against the encroachments of the pope. Of this we have a clear, though unwilling, evidence in Baronius, who observes, that this author remonstrated with too sharp and bitter a spirit against the court of Rome; and that, except in this particular only, his history was an incomparable work. He died at St. Alban’s in 1259. His principal work, entitled “Historia Major,” consists of two parts: The first, from the creation of the world to William the Conqueror; the second, from that king’s reign to 1250. He carried on this history afterwards to the year of his death in 1259. Rishanger, a monk of the monastery of St. Alban’s, continued it to 1272 or 1273, the year of the death of Henry III. It was first printed at London in 1571, and reprinted 1640, 1684, fol. besides several foreign editions. There are various ms copies in our public libraries, particularly one which he presented to Henry III. and which is now in the British Museum. From Jiis Mss. have also been published “Vitas duorum Offarum, Merciae regum, S, Albani fundatorum” <c Gesta viginti duo abbatum S. Albani“”Additamenta chronicorum ad historian) majorern,“all which accompany the editions of his” Historia Major“printed in 1640 -and 1684. Among his unpublished Mss. are an epitome of his” Historia Major," and a history from Adam to the conquest, principally from Matthew of Westminster. This is in the library of Bene't college, Cambridge. The titles of some other works, but of doubtful authority, may be seen in Bale and Pits.

Parker (Henry) Lord Morley, a nobleman of literary taste in the reign of Henry VIII. was the son and heir of sir William Parker, knight, by Alice, sister and heir of Henry Lovel, and daughter of William Lovel, a younger son of William lord Lovel of Tichmersh, by Alianore, daughter and heir of Robert Morley, lord Morley, who died 21 Henry Vlth. He was educated at Oxford, but at what college, or at what time, does not appear. After leaving the university, he retired to his estate in Northamptonshire, and in the 21st year of the reign of Henry VIII. was summoned to parliament by the title of lord Morley. He was one of the barons, who, in the year following, signed the memorable declaration to pope Clement Vji. threatening him with the loss of his supremacy in England, unless he consented to the king’s divorce, but he still remained a bigoted adherent to the popish religion. In the 25th of the same reign, having a dispute for precedence with lord Dacre of Gillesland, his pretensions were confirmed by parliament. Anthony Wood says, that “his younger years were adorned with all kind of superficial learning, especially with dramatic poetry, and his elder with that which was divine.” Wood adds, that he was living, “an ancient man, and in esteem among the nobility, in the latter end of Henry VIII.” But from his epitaph, which is inserted in Collins’s Peerage, it appears that he died in Nov. 1556, aged eighty. His great grandson, Edward lord Morley, who married Elizabeth, sole daughter and heir of William Stanley, lord Montegle, had issue Mary, who by her husband Thomas Habington, of Henlip in Worcestershire, was mother of William Habington the poet, and was supposed to have been the person who wrote to her brother William, lord Morley and Montegle, the famous letter of warning respecting the gun-powder plot.

, an eminent prelate of the sixteenth century, was born at Guild ford, in Surrey, in 1511, and was the son of Mr. George Parkhurst of that place. He was educated there in the grammar school adjoining to Magdalen college gate, under Thomas Robertson, a very famous teacher. He was elected fellow of Merton college in 1529, and three years after, proceeding in arts, entered into holy orders. Anthony Wood says that he was at this time better esteemed for poetry and oratory than divinity. Yet we find him recorded in the life of Jewell, as the tutor of that excellent prelate, who entered of Merton college in 1535, and as “prudently instilling, together with his other learning, those excellent principles into this young gentleman, which afterwards made him the darling and wonder of his age.” Among other useful employments, we find him collating Coverdale and Tindal’s translations of the Bible along with his pupil, of whom he conceived a very high opinion, and on one occasion exclaimed “Surely Paul’s Cross will one day ring of this boy,” a prophecy which was remarkably fulfilled in Jewell’s celebrated sermon there in 1560. Parkhurst, it is true, was a poet and an orator, but he had very early examined the controversy that was about to end in the reformation, and imbibed the spirit of the latter. In 1548, according to a ms note of Baker, he was presented by Thomas lord Seymour to the rich benefice of Bishop’s Cleve in Gloucestershire, which he held three years in commendam, and where he did much good by his hospitality and charity; but the author of Jewell’s life says that he held this living in 1544, and when in that year Jewell commenced master of arts, he bore the charges of it. Nor, says Jewell’s biographer, “was this the only instance wherein he (Jewell) did partake of this good man’s bounty, for he was wont twice or thrice in a year to invite him to his house, and not dismiss him without presents, money, and other things that were necessary for the carrying on his studies. And one time above the rest, coming into his chamber in the morning, when he was to go back to the university, he seized upon his and his companions purses, saying, What mo'ney, I wonder, have these miserable, and beggardly Oxfordians? And finding them pityfully lean and empty, stuffed them with money, till they became both fat and weighty.”

, a French author and poet, whose works are now scarce, as well as obsolete, was originally a merchant at Dieppe, where he was born in 1494, and became famous by means of his voyages, and his taste for the sciences. He died in the island of Sumatra, A. D. 1530, being then only thirty-six. The collection of his verses in 4to, printed in 1536, is entitled “Description nouvelle des Dignites de ce Monde, et de la Dignite de l'homme,” composee en rithme Franchise et en maniere d‘exhortation, par Jean Parmentier: avec plusieur chants Royaulx, et une Moralite a l’Honneur de la Vierge, mise par personaiges; plus la deploration sur la mort dudit Parmentier et son frere, composee par Pierre Crignon.“This book is very rare. Crignon, who published it, was Parmentier' s particular friend, and thus speaks of him” From the year 1522, he had applied to the practice of cosmography, on the great fluctuations of the sea he became very profound in astrology he composed several maps, spherical and plain, which have been used with success in navigation. He was a man worthy to be known by all the learned; and capable, if he had lived, of doing honour to his country by great enterprises. He was the first pilot who conducted vessels to the Brasils, and the first Frenchman who discovered the Indies, as far as the island Samothra or Sumatra, named Taprobane by the ancients. He reckoned also upon going to the Moluccas; and he has told me several times, that when he should return to France, his intention was to seek a passage to the North, and to make discoveries from thence to the South.“Another work by him is entitled” Moralites tres-excellens en Thonneur de la benoiste Vierge Marie; mise en rime Franchise et en personnaiges, par Jehan Parmentier,“Paris, 1531,4to, black letter. This also is extremely scarce, but is reprinted in the” Description nouvelle," &C.

, a very pleasing English poet, was descended from an ancient family, settled for some centuries at Congleton, in Cheshire. His father, of the same name, wns attached to the republican party in the reign of Charles I.; and on the restoration found it convenient to go over to Ireland, carrying with him a large personal fortune, with which he purchased estates in that kingdom. These, with the lands he had in Cheshire, descended to the poet, who was horn in 1679, in Dublin. In this city he was educated, and entered of Trinity-college, Dublin, at the age of thirteen. He became M. A. in 1700, and in the same year was ordained deacon, although under the canonical age, by a dispensation from the primate. Three years after he was admitted into priest’s orders, and in 1705, Dr. Ashe, bishop of Clogher, conferred upon him the archdeaconry of Clogher. About the same time, he married miss Anne Minchin, an amiable lady, by whom he had two sons, who died young, and a daughter who long survived him.

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

He was highly esteemed by Ronsard, Belleau, and Baif; and was much admired as a Latin poet; he was indeed chiefly partial to the Latin authors, and formed a dictionary of that language, which some say was incorporated in an improved edition of Calepin. His chief works are, 1. “Chant d'allegresse pour Pentree de Charles IX. en sa ville de Troyes,” Troyes, 1564, 8vo. 2. “Complaintesur la mort d'Adrien Turnebe,” Paris, 1565, 8vo. 3, “Sonnets sur le tombeau du Seigneur de la Chatre, 1569, 8vo. 4.” Hymne de la paix, Paris, 1563, 8vo. 5. “Recueil des poesies, Francoises et Latines,” Paris, 1606, 8vo. 6. “c Orationes et proefationes.” 7. “Conjecturarum liber.” 8. “De literarum inter se cognatione et permutatione.” 9. “Commentarii in Catullum, Tibullum, et Propertium.” 10. “Kalenclae Januariae.” 11.“Oratio de Csecitate.” 12. “Notae in Petronii Arbitri satyricon.” 13. “Encomium Asini.” Besides which, Groevius tells us that he had met with academical questions by Passerat in manuscript upon some of Cicero’s orations, out of which he took what was for his purpose in illustrating that author; and Pithou said that Passerat knew nothing else but Cicero.

, a painter and a poet, of no great merit in either line, died at Rome in 1679, at the age of about seventy. The work which is most likely to preserve his name is his “Lives of the Painters, Sculptors, and Architects, who nourished at Rome in his own time.” This book is full of curious and interesting anecdotes, and was published in Italian at Rome in 1772. Fuseli speaks of him as celebrated for his impartiality and acumen in this work. Though no great painter, he was a disciple of the famous Dominichino; and though his sonnets were bad, one of them is said very materially to have promoted his fortune.

, a French minor poet, was born at Caen in 1585, and being the son of a lawyer, was designed by his father for the same profession. This destination, which seldom suits a poetical imagination, was accordingly rejected by Patrix, who addicted himself entirely to poetry. About the age of forty, he attached himself to the court of Gaston, duke of Orleans, 'to whom, and to his widow, Margaret ofLorraine, he faithfully devoted his services. A Norman accent, and a certain affectation of rustic simplicity, did not prevent him from being in high favour at that little court: his wit, liveliness, and social talent, making amends for such imperfections. Towards the latter end of life, he became strongly touched with sentiments of religion, and suppressed, as far as he could, the licentious poems which he had written in his youth. He lived to the great age of eighty-eight, and died at Paris in 1672. At eighty, he had a violent illness, and when he recovered from it, his friends advised him to leave his bed; “Alas!” said he, “at my time of life, it is hardly worth while to take the trouble of dressing myself again.” He proved however mistaken, as to the shortness of his subsequent life. Of his works there are extant, 1. A collection of verses entitled “La miv-ricorde de Dieu sur un pecheur pénitent,” Blois, 1660, 4to. These were written in his age, yet possess some fire. 2. “Plaints des Consonnes qui n‘ont pas Thonneur d’entrer dans le noiu de Neufgermain,” preserved in the works of Voiture 3. Miscellaneous poems, in the collection of Barbin. The greater part of them are feeble, with the exception of a few original passages. The poem most known was made a few days before his death. It is called the Dream; and, though it is of a serious cast, a translation of it, oddly enough, possesses a place in all our English jest bokks, beginning, “I dreamt that buried in my fellow-clay,” &c. It asserts a moral and religious axiom, which is undeniable, that death levels all conditions. The original is little known; it is this:

, an unfortunate poet, was born at Peasmarsh, in the county of Sussex, in 1706, and was the son of a farmer at that place, who rented a considerable estate of the earl of Thanet. He discovered excellent parts, with a strong propensity to learning and his father, not being in circumstances to give him a proper education, applied to his noble landlord, who took him under his protection, and placed him at Appleby school in Westmoreland. Here he became acquainted with Mr. Noble, a clergyman of great learning and fine taste, who promoted his studies and directed his taste. Upon his leaving Appleby, he went to Sidney college in Cambridge, where he pursued the plan Mr. Noble had given him, and went through the classics, as well as all our English poets, with great advantage. Of these last, Spenser’s “Fairy Queen” and Brown’s “( Britannia’s Pastorals” are said to have given him the greatest delight. He had, however, unfortunately contracted a habit of desultory reading, and had no relish for academical studies. His temper could not brook restraint; and his tutor, he thought, treated him with great rigour. A quarrel ensued; and, to avoid the scandal of expulsion, with which he was threatened, he took his name out of the college book, and went to London. Even now his friends would have forgiven him, and procured his readmission; but the pleasures of the town, the desire of being known, and his romantic expectations of meeting with 0u,e generous patron to reward his merit, rendered him deaf to all advice. He led a pleasurable life, frequented Button’s, and became acquainted with some of the most eminent wits of the time. As he had no fortune, nor any means of subsistence, but what arose from the subscriptions for the poems he proposed to publish; and, as he wanted even common prudence to manage this precarious income, he was soon involved in the deepest distress and most deplorable wretchedness. In a poem, entitled “Effigies Authons,” addressed to lord Burlington, he describes himself as destitute of friends, of money; a prey to hunger; and passing his nights on a bench in St. James’s park. In a private letter to a gentleman, he thus expressed himself: “Spare my blushes; I have not enjoyed the common necessaries of life these two days, and can hardly hold to subscribe myself,” &c. Curll, the bookseller, finding some of his compositions well received, And going through several impression>, took him into his house; and, as Pope affirms in one of his letters, starved him to death. But this does not appear to be strictly true; and his death is more justly attributed to the small-pox, which carried him off in 1727, in his 21st year. His biographer says, that he had a surprising genius, and had raised hopes in all that knew him, that he would become one of the most eminent poets of the age; but surh of his poems as we find in the collection published in 2 vols. 8vo, in 1728, would not in our days be thought calculated to Support such high expectations.

, sieur of Villeneuve, a French poet, born at Nantes in 1636, was for a considerable time comptroller-general of the imposts in Dauphine* and Provence; yet he mingled the flowers of poetry with the thorns of that occupation, and became celebrated at court by a miscellaneous publication of prose and verse, entitled “Amities, Amours, et Amourettes,” published in 1685. This publication gained him particularly the favour of the ladies; and the duke of Savoy honoured him with the title of chevalier of St. Maurice, and he was made a member of the academy of Aries. The latter part of his life was embittered by a law-suit, which obliged him to pay for the dishonesty of one of his associates in office. He died April 30, 1690, at the age of fifty-four. His remaining works are, 1. “Zelotide,” a novel of gallantry, which was admired in the country, but despised at Paris. 2. A collection of poetry, containing eclogues, sonnets, stanzas, &c. published at Paris in 1672, in 2 vols. 12mo, under the title of “Nouvelles Oeuvres.” These contain rather the fancies of a minor wit, than the efforts of real genius.

, a French wit, the son of a surgeon of Toulouse, where he was born in 1638, wrote several Latin poems, which were reckoned good, but applied himself chiefly to the poetry of his native country. Having been three times honoured with the laurel at the academy of the Floral games, he wrote a tragedy called Gela, which was acted, in 1687, with applause, in consequence of which he published it, with a dedication to the first prince of the blood. He wrote also “Le sacrifice d' Abraham;” and ^ Joseph vendu par ses Freres,“two singular subjects for tragedies; but received with favour. He produced besides a tragedy called” La Mort de Neron,“concerning which an anecdote is related, which nearly coincides with one which is current here, as having happened to our dramatic poet Fletcher. He wrote usually at public-houses, and one day left behind him a paper, containing his plan for that tragedy; in which, after various marks and abbreviations, he had written at large,” Ici le roi sera tu6“Here the king is to be killed. The tavern-keeper, conceiving that he had found the seeds of a plot, gave information to the magistrate. The poet was accordingly taken up; but on seeing his paper, which he had missed, in the hands of the person who had seized him, exclaimed eagerly,” Ah! there it is; the very scene which I had planned for the death of Nero." With this clue, his innocence was easily made out, and he was discharged. Pechantre died at Paris in 1709, being then seventy-one; he had exercised the profession of physic for some time, till he quitted it for the more arduous task of cultivating the drama.

, an English poet, who flourished in the reign of queen Elizabeth, was a native of Devonshire. was first educated at Broadgate’s Hall, but was some. time afterwards made a student of Christ Church college, Oxford, about 1573, where, after going through all the several forms of logic and philosophy, and taking all the necessary steps, he was admitted to his master of arts degree in 1579. After this it appears that he removed to London, became the city poet, and had the ordering of the pageants. He lived on the Bank-side, over against Black-friars, and maintained the estimation in his poetical capacity which he had acquired at the university, which seems to have been of no inconsiderable rank. He was a good pastoral poet; and Wood informs us that his plays were not only often acted with great applause in his life-time, but did also endure reading, with due commendation, many years after his death. He speaks of him, however, as a more voluminous writer in that way than he appears to have been, mentioning his dramatic pieces by the distinction of tragedies and comedies, and has given us a list of those which he says he had seen; but in this he must have made some mistake, as he has divided the several incidents in one of them, namely, his “Edward I.” in such manner as to make the “Life of Llewellin,” and the “Sinking of Queen Eleanor,” two detached and separate pieces of themselves; theerror of which will be seen in the perusal of the whole title of this play. He moreover tells us, that the lastmentioned piece, together with a ballad on the same subject, was, in his time, usually sold by the common balladmongers. The real titles of the plays written by this author, of which five only are known, are, 1. “The Arraignment of Paris,” 1584, 4to. 2, “Edward the First, 1593,” 4to. 3. “King David and Fair Bethsabe,” 1599, 4to. 4. “The Turkish Mahomet and Hyren the Fair Greek.” 5. “The Old Wives Tale,” a comedy, 1595, 4to.,

, an English poet, was the son of the rev. Mr. Pen rose, rector of Newbury in Berkshire, a man of high character and abilities, descended from an ancient Cornish family, who died in 1769. He was born in 1743, and being intended for the church, pursued his studies at Christ-church, Oxford, until the summer of 1762, when his eager turn for the naval and military profession overpowering his attachment to his real interest, he left his college, and embarked in the unfortunate expedition against Nova Colonia, in South America, under the command of captain Macnainara. The issue was fatal; the Clive, the largest vessel, was burnt, and although the Ambuscade escaped (on board of which Mr. Penrose, acting as lieutenant of marines, was wounded), yet the hardships which he afterwards sustained in a prize sloop, in which he was stationed, utterly ruined his constitution.

During his retreat, Perrault employed his leisure io the composition of several works, among which were his “Poem on the age of Lewis the Great,” and his “Parallel between the Ancients and Moderns.” The long and bitter war these pieces excited between Boileau and the author, is well known. The chief fault of Perrauit was his censuring the ancients in bad verses, which gave Boileau the advantage. Had the two adversaries combated in prose, the match would have been more equal. In the collection of Boileau’s works, may be seen a letter addressed to him by Perrault, in the height of this warfare, against which this great poet’s prose, somewhat inclined to harshness and ponderosity, is scarcely able to sustain itself, notwithstanding all the author’s talents for sarcasm and irony. Perrault’s letter, though filled with reproaches, for the worst part well merited by his antagonist, is a model of decorum and delicacy. With respect to the ground of the dispute, the two adversaries, as usual in these quarrels, are aitrrhafely right and wrong. Perrault, too little conversant m the Greek language, too exclusively sensible of the defects of Homer, shows too little feeliirg of the superior beau ties of this great bard, and is not enough indulgent to his errors in favour of his genius. Boileau, perpetually on his knees before his idol, defends him sometimes unhapplx, and always with a rudeness almost equal to that with which the heroes of the Iliad abuse each other. It is, indeed, asserted that the enmity of Boileau against the author of the “Poem on^Louis le Grand,” had a secret cause, more potent than his devotion for the ancients; which was, that the writer, when justly celebrating the great Corneille, had affected to avoid all mention of the author of “Phaedra” and“” Iphigenia." There is some reason to believe that Boileau was- not better satisfied with the silence observed with respect to himself in this poem, which had not disdained to notice Godeaux and Tristan. But the satirist’s self-love in the displeasure he professed, prudently concealed itself behind his friendship for Racine, and perhaps was thus concealed even from himself. If on this occasion he displayed an excess of feeling, his adversary had been guilty of great injustice. To deprive the age of Lewis the Fourteenth of Boileau and Racine, is to deprive the age of Augustus, of Horace and Virgil.

, or Duperier, a French poet, was born' at Aix in Provence. He first devoted himself to Latin versification, in which he succeeded greatly; and he boasted of having formed the celebrated Santeuil. They quarrelled afterwards from poetic jealousy, and made Menage the arbitrator of their differences; who, however, decided in favour of Perrier, and did not scruple to call him “The prince of Lyric poets.” They afterwards became reconciled, and there are in Perrier’s works several translations of pieces from Santeuil. Perrier afterwards applied himself to French poetry, in which he was not so successful, though he took Malherbe for his model. His obtrusive vanity, which led him to repeat his verses to all who came near him, made him at last insupportable. Finding Boileau one day at church, he insisted upon repeating to him an ode during the elevation of the host, and desired his opinion, whether or no it was in the manner of Malherbe. Pope’s lines, “No place so sacred from such fops is barr'd,” &c. are literally a translation of Boileau’s on Perrier, “Gardez-vous d'imiter ce rimeur furieux,” &c. Indifferent, however, as his French poetry was, he obtained the academy-prize two years together, namely, in 1681 and 1682. He died March 28, 1692. His Latin poems are to he found in various collections, but have never been published in a separate volume, although they amply deserve that distinction.

He recovered, however, from any loss of character which this affair might occasion, by abjuring the religion in which he had been educated. It is rather singular that he is said to have acquired a distaste of the prorestant religion by studying the “Suinma” of St. Thomas Aquinas, and the writings of St. Austin; but having by this or by some other means, reconciled his mind to the change of his religion, he displayed all the zeal of a new convert by labouring earnestly in the conversion of others, even before he had embraced the ecclesiastical function. By these arts, and his uncommon abilities, he acquired great influ*­ence, and was appointed to pronounce the funeral oration of Mary queen of Scots, in 1587; as he had done also that of the poet Ronsard, in 1586. He wrote, some time after, by order of the king, “A comparison of moral and theological virtues;” and two “Discourses,” one upon the soul, the other upon self-knowledge, which he pronounced before that prince. After the murder of Henry III. he retired to the house of cardinal de Bourbon, aud laboured more vigorously than ever in the conversion of the reformed. Among his converts was Henry Spondanus, afterwards bishop of Pamiez; as this prelate acknowledges, in his dedication to cardinal du Perron of his “Abridgment of Baronius’s Annals.” But his success with Henry IV. is supposed to redound most to the credit of his powers of persuasion. He went to wait on that prince with cardinal de Bourbon, at the siege of Rouen; and followed him at Nantes, where -he held a famous dispute with four protestant ministers. The king, afterwards resolving to have a conference about religion with the principal prelates of the kingdom, sent for Du Perron to assist in it; but, as he was yet only a layman, he nominated him to the bishopric of Evreux, that he might be capable of sitting in it. He came with the other prelates to St. Denis, and is said to have contributed more than any ether person to the change in Henry’s sentiments.

The best editions of this poet are that of London, 1647, 8vo, with Casaubon’s “Commentary” and that of Wedderburn, Amst. 1664, 12mo; but he is generally printed along with Juvenal; and has had the same editors. We have several English metrical translations: the first by Dryden; the second, and a very valuable one, by a Dr. Brewster, in 17ol, 8vo; and, more recently, an ejegant and spirited version by Mr. Drummond.

, member of the academies of Nancy, of Amiens, of Kouen, and Angers, was born at Paris on the 9th of July, 1712, of a reputable family. In his early youth his progress in his studies was rapid. His assiduous application, 'his lively genius, and mild demeanour, conciliated the esteem of his master, and gained the friendship of his juvenile companions. His taste for poetry was apparent at a very earl) period; but the designs of his parents for the advancement of his fortune would not permit him to resign himself entirely to his favourite pursuits, and he sacrificed in some degree his propensity to their wishes. He was placed tinder M. Holland, an advocate, and constantly attended to the regular discharge of business. His leisure hours were devoted to the Muse; and J.e gave up that time to poetry, which by many, at his age, is sacrificed to pleasure. In 1738 his “Ecole du Temps,” a comedy in verse, was represented with applause on the Italian theatre. Encouraged by this success, and with the approbation of M. Rolland, he produced, in the following year, at the French theatre, his “Esope au Parnasse,” a comedy in verse. The reputation of the young poet, and his character for probity, recommended him to M. Lailemand of Bety, a farmer-general, who was at that time forming a system of finance, and who felicitated himself in procuring such an assistant, and in attaching him to his interest. The occupations incident to this new department were probably the causes which prevented Pesselier from producing any other pieces for the stage. Poetry was, however, still the amusement of the time that could be spared from business. In 1748, he published his fables, and among his dramatic works appears a comedy, “La Mascarade du Parnasse,” in verse, and in one act, which was never performed.

It was while at Avignon, that he contracted that passion which has so deeply engaged the attention of his biographers, and has given an air of romance, or of poetic fiction, to a considerable portion of his life. It appears that on the morning of Good Friday in 1327, he saw for the first time the young and beautiful Laura; undoubtedly a most important incident to Petrarch, for although his works give evidence of his abilities as a politician, theologian, and philosopher, yet it is to those beautiful verses alone, in which he has celebrated the accomplishments, and bewailed the fate of Laura, that he has been indebted for his permanent reputation. But his biographers differ widely from each other in their representations of the nature of Petrarch’s love for Laura. His late acute and ingenious apologist, lord Wooclhouselee, deduces from the works of the poet himself, that this passion, so remarkable both for its fervency and duration, was an honourable and virtuous flame, and that Petrarch aspired to the happiness of being united to Laura in marriage. “We have,” says his lordship, “unquestionable grounds for believing, from the evidence of his own writings, that the heart of Laura was not insensible to his passion; and although the term of his probation was tedious and severe, he cherished a hope, approaching to confidence, that he was at last to attain the of his wishes. Such are the ideas that we are led to entertain from the writings of the poet himself, of the nature and object of his passion; and such has been the uniform and continued belief of the world with regard to it, from his own days to the present.”

Notwithstanding this argument, which we think conclusive against the abbe“Sade, all the difficulties which attend this part of Petrarch’s history are by no means removed. Many are still inclined to doubt whether Laura was a real character. Gibbon calls Petrarch’s love” a metaphysical passion for a nymph so shadowy, that her existence has been questioned." Some say that his mistress’s name was Lauretta, and that the poet made it Laura, because, thus altered, it supplied him with numberless allusions to the laurel, and to the story of Apollo and Daphne; but what appears to have perplexed most of his biographers and critics, is their supposition that Laura was a married lady. This obliges them to suppose farther, that Petrarch’s love was disinterested, and correspondent to a certain purity of character which they have been pleased to give him, in contradiction to the fact of his licentious commerce with women, by whom he had at least two children, at the times when he is suffering most for the absence of his Laura.

The taste for poetry and elegant composition, for which the public mind had been prepared by the writings of Dante, ascended to a pitch of enthusiastic admiration, when these works of Petrarch appeared. Literary fame, in those days, must have depended on the opinion of a very few competent judges; for, as printing was not then known, the circulation of a new work, by manuscript copies, must have been very slow, and extremely limited. While enjoying this reputation, however, he received a letter from the Maecenas of the age, Robert king of Naples. And this honour was followed by one still greater; the revival, in his favour, of the ancient custom of crowning eminent poets at Rome. Petrarch appears to have indulged the hope of attaining this honour, and not on slight grounds; for, in August 1340, he unexpectedly received a letter from the Roman senate, inviting him to come and take the laurel in that city, and on the same day he received a similar invitation from Paris. Having determined to accept the invitation from Rome, he thought it necessary first to repair to the court of king Robert at Naples (in March 1341), and undergo a public examination as to his learning and talents. Having gone through a ceremony, which, as far as voluntary, was ostentatious, he went to Rome where, on Easter-day, in the midst of the plaudits of the Roman people, the ceremony was performed in the capitol by his friend count d'Anguillara. Twelve patrician youths were arrayed in scarlet; six representatives of the most illustrious families, in green robes, with garlands of flowers, accompanied the procession: in the midst of the princes and nobles, Anguillara assumed his throne, and at the voice of a herald Petrarch arose. After discoursing on a text of Virgil, and thrice repeating his vows for the prosperity of Rome, he knelt before the throne, and received from the senator a laurel crown, with the declaration, “This is the reward of merit.” The people shouted “Long life to the capitol and the poet.” A sonnet in praise of Rome was accepted as the effusion of genius and gratitude; and after the whole procession had visited the Vatican, the wreath was suspended before the shrine of St. Peter. In the act of diploma, which was presented to Petrarch, the title and prerogatives of poet-laureat are revived in the capitol, after the lapse of 1300 years; and he received the perpetual privilege of wearing, at his choice, a crown of laurel, ivy, or myrtle, of assuming the poetic habit, and of teaching, disputing, interpreting, and composing, in all places whatsoever, and on all subjects of literature. The grant was ratified by the authority of the senate and people, and the character of citizen was the recompence of his affection for the Roman name.

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

, an ancient Latin author, who wrote five books of “Fables” in Iambic verse, was a Thracian and was born, as there is reason to suppose, some years before Julius Caesar made himself master of the Roman empire. His parentage is uncertain; though some have imagined his liberal education to be an argument that it was not mean. Perhaps he might have been made captive by Octavius, the father of the emperor Augustus; for we read, that while Octavius was prcetor in Macedonia, he gave the Thracians a very great overthrow. This fell out the same year that Q. Cicero was proconsul of Asia, and Csesar sole consul at Rome. As this opinion would carry his age pretty high, Phsedrus outliving the 18th year of Tiberius, pome have therefore rejected it, though with little reason; since many proofs may be collected, from his Fables, that he lived to be very old. How he came into the service of Augustus is unknown: but his being called “Augustus’s freedman,” in the title of his book, shews that he had been that emperor’s slave. It should seem as if he had arrived early in life at Rome for he quotes a line from “Ennius,” which, he says, he remembers to have read when he was a boy and it is not probable that he should have read it before he left Thrace. He received his freedom from Augustus, and no doubt such a competency, as enabled him to enjoy that valuable gift. He expresses a great regard for that prince’s memory, which he had indeed the more reason to do, since misfortunes overtook him after his decease. Under Tiberius, he was unjustly persecuted by Sejanus, to which he has frequently alluded in his “Fables;” and particularly in the preface to his third book. We know not the cause of this persecution, but it was not for his wealth: he represents himself, in the very same place, as a man who had never cared to hoard up riches; and mentions this as one of the reasons which should facilitate his promotion to the rank of a poet. He seems to have written all his Fables after the death of Augustus; the third book he certainly wrote after that of Sejanus, who perished in the eighteenth year of Tiberius; for, in the dedication of that book to his patron Eutychus, he has mentioned the favourite with a resentment which would never have been pardoned had he been living. How long Phsedrus survived him, is uncertain; but, supposing him to have lived a little longer, he must have been above seventy at his death; for so many years there are from Caesar’s first dictatorship to the eighteenth of Tiberius. Chronologers place him between 41 and 54 A. C.

, a Welsh physician and poet, a native of Pembrokeshire, and the first English translator of Virgil, was educated at Oxford, whence he removed to LincolnVinn, to undertake the study of the law. So far was he in earnest, for a time, in this pursuit, that he published two books on subjects of law; one on the nature of writs, and the other, what is now called a book of precedents. Why he quitted law for physic is unknown, but he became a bachelor and a doctor in the latter faculty, both in 1559, and his medical works were collected at London in 1560. They consist chiefly of compilations and translations from the French. Among his poetical works is “The Regimen of Life,” translated from the French, London, 1544, 8vo. The story of “Owen Glendower,” in the “Mirror for Magistrates;” and his translation of the first nine books, and part of the tenth, of Virgil’s uEneid. There is a commendatory poem by him prefixed to Philip Betham’s “Military Precepts.” Warton mentions also an entry in the stationers’ books for printing “serten verses of Cupydo by Mr. Fayre,” and that he had seen a ballad called “Gadshill” by Faire, both which names were probably intended for that of Phaer. His translation of the first seven books of Virgil was printed in 1558, by John Kyngston, and dedicated to queen Mary. The two next books, with part of the tenth, were translated afterwards by him, and published after his death by William Wightman, in 1562. He has curiously enough marked at the end of each book the time when it was finished, and the time which it cost him in translating; which amounts, at separate intervals between the year 1555 and 1560, to 202 days, without reckoning the fragment of the tenth book. It appears, that during the whole of this period he resided very much at his patrimonial territory in Kilgerran forest, in South Wales. The fifth book is said, at the end, to have been finished on the 4th of May, 1557, “post periculum ejns Karmerdini,” which, whether it relates to some particular event in his life, or means that he made a trial upon it at Caermarthen, is a little uncertain; probably the former. Wightman says that he published all he could find among his papers; but conjectures, nevertheless, that he had proceeded rather further, from the two lines which he translated the very day before his death, and sent to Wightman. They are these,

, a celebrated Greek comic poet, contemporary with Plato and Aristophanes, flourished about 420 B.C. He followed the style of the ancient comedy, which, instead of feigned and imaginary persons, introduced living characters on the stage, who were known to the spectators by their names and distinguishing marks, and turned them into ridicule; but Pherecrates is said to have been very moderate in his use of this licence. Twenty one comedies are attributed to this poet, of which we have only some fragments remaining, collected by Hertelius and Grotius. It appears from these fragments, some of which are given by Cumberland, or rather Bentley, in “The Observer,” that Pherecrates wrote very pure Greek, and excelled in that nice and delicate raillery distinguished by the name of Attic urbanity. He invented a kind of verses, called, from his name, Pherecratian; consisting of the three last feet of an hexameter, the first of these three feet being always a spondee. This verse of Horace, for example, “Quamvis Pontica Pinus,” is a Pherecratian verse. M. Burette, in torn. XV. of the academy of inscriptions, has examined a fragment of this poet concerning music, which may be found in Plutarch.

, an Athenian comic poet, contemporary with Menander, whose rival he was, and though inferior, was frequently successful against him by means of intrigue or the partiality of friends, was, by the account of Suidas, a Syracusan by birth; but Strabo says that he was born at Solae, in Cilicia. He was some years older than Menander, and in the opinion of Quintilian fairly next to him in merit, though unfit to be preferred to him. Apuleius speaks still more favourably, saying only that he was fortasse impar; and adds, that there are to be found in his dramas “many witty strokes, plots ingeniously disposed, discoveries strikingly brought to light, characters well adapted to their parts, sentiments that accord with human life, jests that do not degrade the sock, and gravity that does not intrench upon the buskin.” Philemon, who flourished 274 B.C. lived to the extraordinary age of 101 years, and composed ninety comedies. Menander, indeed, composed more, and in less time, but even this was extraordinary. His longevity was the result of great temperance, and a placid frame of mind. Frugal, to a degree that subjected him to the charge of avarice, he never weakened his faculties or constitution by excess: and he summed up all his wishes in one rational and moderate petition to heaven, which throws a most favourable light upon his character: “I pray for health in the first place; in the next, for success in my undertakings; thirdly, for a cheerful heart; and lastly, to be out of debt to all mankind.” A petition which seems to have been granted in all its parts. As he lived in constant serenity oi mind, so he died without pain of body; for, having called together a number of his friends to the reading of a play which he had newly finished, and sitting, as was the custom in that serene climate, under the open canopy of heaven, an unforeseen fall of ruin broke up the company, just when the old man had g'>t into the third act, in the very wannest interests of his fahle. His hearers, disappointed by this unlucky check to their entertainment, interceded with him for the remainder on the day following, to which he readily assented; and a great company being then assembled, whom the fame of the rehearsal had brought together, they sat a considerable time in expectation of the poet, till wearied out with waiting, and unable to account for his want of punctuality, some of his intimates were dispatched in quest of him, who, having entered his house, and made their way to his chamber, found the old man dead on his couch, in his usual meditating posture, his features placid and composed, and with every symptom that indicated a death without pain or struggle. The fragments of Philemon are in general of a sentimental tender cast; and though they enforce sound and strict morality, yet no one instance occurs of that gloomy misanthropy, that harsh and dogmatizing spirit, which too often marks the maxims of his more illustrious rival. They were collected and published by Grotius, together with those of Menander; the greater part having been preserved by Stobtcns. Several of them, as well as the fragments of the other Greek comic poets, have been translated by Mr. Cumberland in his “Observer,” to which we refer our readers for further information.

, an English poet, was descended from an ancient family in Leicestershire, and educated at St. John’s-college, in Cambridge, where he took his degrees of A.B. in 1696, and A.M. in 1700, at which time he obtained a fellowship. ' While at college also he is supposed to have written his “Pastorals,” which involved him so seriously with the wits and critics of the age. When he quitted the university, and repaired to the metropolis, he became, as Jacob expresses himself, “one of the wits at Button’s; n and there contracted an acquaintance with the gentlemen of the belles lettres, who frequented it. Sir Richard Steele was his particular friend, and inserted in his Tatler, N. 12, a little poem of his, called” A Winter Piece,“dated from Copenhagen, the 9th of May, 1709, and addressed to the earl of Dorset. Sir Richard thus mentions it with honour:” This is as fine a piece as we ever had from any of the schools of the most learned painters. Such images as these give us a new pleasure in our sight, and fix upon our minds traces of reflection, which accompany us wherever the like objects occur.“Pope, too, who had a confirmed aversion to Philips, while he affected to despise his other works, always excepted this out of the number, and mentioned it as the production of a man” who could write very nobly."

, one of the nephews of Milton, Was the son of Edward Phillips, who came from Shrewsbury, and rose to be secondary in the Crown-office, by Anne, sister of the celebrated poet, and was born in the Strand, near Charing-cross, in August 1630, and received his earliest education under his uncle. In 1648 he became a student of Magdalen-hall, Oxford, where he continued till 1651. The time of his death is not ascertained. He published two small works, entitled “Tractatulus de carmine Dramatico Poetarum, praesertim in choris Tragicis, et veteris Comediae,” and “Compendiosa enumeratio Poetarum (saltern quorum fama maxime enituit) qui atempore Dantis Aligerii usque ad hanc aetatem claruerunt; nempe Italorum, Germanorum, Anglorum, &c.” These were added to the seventeenth edition of Job. Buchlerus’s book, entitled “Sacrarum profanarumque phrasium poeticarum Thesaurus,” &c. Lond. 1669, 8vo. But he is better known by his “Theatrum Poetarum, or a compleat collection of the Poets, especially the most eminent of all ages, the Ancients distinguish't from the Moderns in their several alphabets. With some observations- and reflections upon many of them, particularly those of our own nation. Together with a prefatory discourse of the Poets and Poetry in general,” Lond. 1675. Into this work there is, says Warton, good reason to suppose that Milton threw many additions and corrections. It contains criticisms far above the taste of that period, and such as were not common after the national taste had been just corrupted by the false and capricious refinements of the court of Charles II. The preface, however, discovers more manifest traces of Milton’s hand than the book itself.

, an Lnglish poet, was son of Dr. Stephen Philips, archdeacon of Salop; and born at Barnpton in Oxfordshire, Dec. 30, 1676. After some domestic education, he was sent to Winchester, where, as we are told by Dr. Sewel, his biographer, he was soon distinguished by the superiority of his exercises; and, what is less easily to be credited, so much endeared himself to his schoolfellows, by his civility and good-nature, that they, without murmur or ill-will, saw him indulged by the master with particular immunities. It is related, that, when he was at school, he seldom mingled in play with the other boys, but retired to his chamber; where his sovereign pleasure was to sit, hour after hour, while his hair was combed by somebody, whose service he found means to procure.

His eldest son, Thomas Philipott, or Philpot, M. A. was educated at Clare-hall, and published the “Villare Cantianum,” London, 1659, folio; a book which is written in an affected style, yet is a very valuable performance, as an early history of property, and continues to be highly and justly prized. Though the son takes the credit, there can be little doubt but that much of it was written by the father. The, son, however, was a man of good abilities, a tolerable poet, and well versed in divinity and antiquities. He published a whimsical, mystical, heraldic book, entitled “A brief Historical Discourse of the original and growth of Heraldry, demonstrating upon what rational foundations that noble and heroic science is established,” London, 1672, 8vo, dedicated to John earl of Bridgewater. There are some verses of his prefixed to the “Monasticon Favershamiensis,” 1671, 12mo; also an appendix to it by him of the descent of king Stephen. The book was written by his friend Thomas Southouse, of Gray’s Inn, esq. His*' Poems,“Lond. 1646, vo, is a volume of rare occurrence. The elder Ptiilipot is supposed to have been the author of” The Citie’s great concern in this case, or question of Honour and Arms, whether Apprenticeship extinguisheth Gentry? discoursed; with a clear refutation of the pernicious error that it doth,“1674, 12mo. Another production of John Philipot was,” A perfect Collection or Catalogue of all Knights Bachelours made by king James,“&c. 1660, 8vo. Mr. Lysons gives an extract from the parish register of Greenwich, which has been supposed to relate to him:” Mr. Thomas Philipott, buried September 30, 1682;“adding,” that besides the above works, he wrote on the origin and growth of the Spanish Monarchy, and a Life of jsop," and remarking, that Anthony Wood attributes to him some theological works; but Mr. Lysons thinks it is more probable that they were the production of his contemporary, Thomas Philipott, D. D. rector of Turveston and Akeley, Bucks. Wood places his death in 1684-.

During this early period he distinguished himself likewise as a poet, by his compositions both in the Latin and Italian languages, almost all which, however, as they were disapproved either by the nicety of his maturer judgment, or by the purity of his religious and moral feelings, at a later period, he was induced to destroy. Many also of his letters, which are still extant, were written whilst he was yet very young; and from them proofs might be selected, tending greatly to support the high juvenile reputation of their author. We have, indeed, few other documents to illustrate his literary career; and the little we know of his progress, during the seven years that he spent in visiting the universities, must be taken from them, as Mr. Gressvvell has done with great judgment. Among the academies where he passed the greater part of the above period, were those of Ferrara, Padua, Florence, and Perugia; and among the eminent scholars, with whom he entered into friendship and correspondence, were Guarinus, Marsilius Ficinus, Politian, and Nic. Leonicenus. When not engaged in any literary excursion, he spent his time at Fratta, a rural retreat in the neighbourhood of Mirandula. In 1482, he informs Leanicenns that he had erected this villa, and had written a poem in its, praise. With the commencement of 1484, the literary career of Picus became more distinct and conspicuous: he was now approaching the age of manhood; and went to Florence to perfect himself in the Greek. Within a few months after his arrival here, he composed his well-known panegyrical criticism on the Italian poems of Lorenzo de Medici. It is drawn up in the form of a letter, and addressed to Lorenzo himself. With many remarks in the true spirit of criticism, there is, perhaps, rather too much of a courtly partiality to the productions of Lorenzo. While at Florence, we find Picus employed in investigating the manuscripts of ancient authors, both in Greek and Latin, of the value of which he was already enabled to form a just estimate. Indeed the mere discovery of them was a service of high importance at that time, when the invention of printing was forming a new oera in literature. He had now added to his correspondents Jerome Donatus, Hermolaus Barbarus, Philip Beroaldus, and Alexander Cortesius, the latter of whom seems to carry his admiration of Picus to the very borders of gross and extravagant flattery; which, however, a little moderated, was a distinguishing feature in the literary correspondence of that age.

Considered as a writer, she holds some rank in dramatic history, as the author of “The Turkish Court, or London Apprentice,” a comedy acted at Dublin in 1748, but never printed. The first act of her tragedy, “The Roman Father,” was no bad specimen of her talents in that way. Her “Memoirs” are written with great sprightliness and wit, and describe the different humours of mankind very naturally, but they must, as to facts, be read with the caution necessary in the Apologies of the Bellamys and Baddelys of our own days. She had a son, John Carteret Pilkington, who also became an adventurer, and somewhat of a poet. He published a volume of his “Memoirs,” 1760, 4to, and died in 1763.

, usually styled the prince of Lyric poets, was a contemporary of Æschylus, and born somewhat above forty years before the expedition of Xerxes, against the Greeks, and more than 500 B. C. His birth-place was Thebes, the capital of Bceotia; a country, the air of which was esteemed gross, and the stupidity of its inhabitants proverbial. We find the poet, in his sixth Olympic, confessing the disadvantage of his climate, yet resolving to exempt himself from the general censure. His parents are supposed to have been of low condition, so that he was more indebted for his attainments to his genius than to any advantages of education. We hrtve, however, few particulars of his life, amidst the numerous panegyrics to be found in ancient writers. He was highly courted and respected by most of the princes and states of Greece, and even allowed a share with the gods in their gifts and offerings, by the command of the oracle itself. For the priestess at Delphi ordered the people to give a part of thrir (irstfruits, which they brought thither, as a present to Pindar: and he had an iron stool set on purpose for him in that temple, on which he used to sit and sing verses in honour of Apollo. His countrymen, the Thebans, were irritated at his commending their enemies, the men of Athens; and fined him, for this affront to the state. Out of spleen too, they determined a poetical prize against him, in favour of a woman, the ingenious and beautiful Corinna. In the mean time, the Athenians made him a present of double the value of his fine; and erected a noble statue in honour of him. His greatest patron was Hiero king of Syracuse, whom he has celebrated in his poems, and it is supposed he left Thebes to attend the court of that prince. He is thought to have passed his whole time in the ease and tranquillity commonly allowed to men of his profession, without intermeddling in affairs of state: for we find him, in his “Isthmics,” defending this way of life. His death is said to have been an answer to his wishes: for, having prayed the gods to send him the greatest happiness of which a mortal is capable, he expired immediately after in the public theatre, in his fifty-fifth year. His relations were highly respected after his decease, and such was the veneration for his memory, that the Lacedemonians, at the taking of Thebes, saved his house; a mark of respect which was afterwards repeated by Alexander the Great. The ruins of this house were to be seen in the time of Pausanias, who lived under the reign of Antoninus the philosopher.

The best editions of this poet are, that of Henry Stephens, 1560, 2 vols. 8vo; that of Erasmus Schmidts, in 1616, 4to; and that of Oxford, by West and Welsted, in 1697, folio. From which there was a neat and correct edition, with a Latin version, printed at London by Bowyer in 1755, small 8vo. Of late years, the edition of Heyne, 1773, 8vo, but particularly that of 1798, 3 vols. 8vo, have been in high and just estimation. Two volumes of a more complete edition, with notes on the text, and on the Scholia, were published by the celebrated Beck, in 8vo, at Leipsic, in 1792 and 1795. The remainder is much wanted. We have an excellent translation of this poet bt the amiable Gilbert West, esq.

, a French dramatic poet, was born at Dijon in 1689, where he lived till he was past thirty, in all the dissipation of a young man of pleasure. At length, having given great offence to his countrymen by an ode which he produced, he removed to Paris; where, as his relations could not give him much assistance, he supported himself by his talent of writing an admirable hand. He was first secretary to M. Bellisle, and afterwards to a financier, who little suspected that he had such a genius in his house. By degrees he became known, from producing several small pieces, full of originality, at a little theatre in Paris; till the comedy called “Metromanie,” esteemed one of the best produced in the last century, raised his fame to the highest point. His very singular talent for conversation, in which he was always lively, and inexhaustible in wit, contributed to enhance his popularity; and as his company was more courted for a time than that of Voltaire, who had less good humour, he was inclined to fancy himself superior to that writer. Many traits of his wit are related, which convey, at the same time, the notion that he estimated himself very highly. At the first representation of Voltaire’s Semiramis, which was ill received, the author asked him in the theatre what he thought of it “I think,” said he, “that you would be very glad that I had written it.” The actors wishing him to alter one of his pieces, affronted him by using the word “corrections,” instead of alterations. They pleaded that Voltaire always listened to their wishes in that respect. “What then?” replied Piron, “Voltaire works cabinet-work, I cast in bronze.” The satirical turn of Piron kept him from a seat in the academy. “I never could make nine-and thirty people,” said he, “think as I do, still less could 1 ever think with them.” He sought, however, a species of revenge, in the epitaph which he wrote for himself:

, an English poet, was born in 1699 at Blandford, the son of a physician much esteemed. He was, in 1714, received as a scholar into Winchester college, where he was distinguished by exercises of uncommon elegance; and, at his removal to New college in 1719, presented to the electors, as the product of his private and voluntary studies, a complete version of Lucan’s poem, which he did not then know to have been translated by Rowe. This is an instance of early diligence which well deserves to be recorded. The suppression of such a work, recommended by such uncommon circumstances, is to be regretted. It is indeed culpable, to load libraries with superfluous books; but incitements to early excellence are never superfluous, and from this example the danger is not great of many imitations. When he had resided at his college three years, he was presented to the rectory of Pimpern in Dorsetshire, 1722, by his relation, Mr. Pitt of Stratfeildsea in Hampshire; and, resigning his fellowship, continued at Oxford two years longer, till he became M. A. 1724. He probably about this time translated “Vida’s Art of Poetry,” which Tristram’s elegant edition had then made popular. In this translation he distinguished himself, both by the general elegance of his style, and by the skilful adaptation of his numbers to the images expressed; a beauty which Vida has with great ardour enforced and exemplified. He then retired to his living, a place very pleasing by its situation, and therefore likely to excite the imagination of a poet; where he parsed the rest of his life, reverenced for his virtue, and beloved for the softness of his temper, and the easiness of his manners. Before strangers he had something of the scholar’s timidity and diffidence; but, when he became familiar, he was in a very high degree cheerful and entertaining. His general benevolence procured general respect; and he passed a life placid and honourable, neither too great for the kindness of the low, nor too low for the notice of the great. At what time he composed his “Miscellany,” published in 1727, it is not easy nor necessary to know: those poems which have dates appear to have been very early productions. The success of his “Vida” animated him to a higher undertaking; and in his thirtieth year he published a version of the first book of the Jfeneid. This being commended by his friends, he some time afterwards added three or four more; with an advertisement in which he represents himself as translating with great indifference, and with a progress of which himself was hardly conscious. At last, without any further contention with his modesty, or any awe of the name of Dryden, he gave a complete English “Æneid,” which we advise our readers to peruse with that of Dryden. It will be pleasing to have an opportunity of comparing the two best translations that perhaps were ever produced by one nation of the same author. Pitt, engaging as a rival with Dryden, naturally observed his failures and avoided them; and, as he Wrote after Pope’s Iliad, he had an example of an exact, equable, and splendid versification. With these advantages, seconded by great diligence, he might successfully labour particular passages, and escape many errors. If the two versions are compared, perhaps the result will be, that Dryden leads the reader forward by his general vigour and sprightliness, and Pitt often stops him to contemplate the excellence of a single couplet; that Dryden’s faults are forgotten in the hurry of delight, and that Pitt’s beauties are neglected in the languor of a cold and listless perusal; that Pitt pleases the critics, and Dryden the people; that Pitt is quoted, and Dryden read. He did not long enjoy the reputation which this great work deservedly conferred; for he died April 15, 174S, and lies buried under a stone at Blandford, with an inscription, which celebrates his candour, and primitive si nplicity of manners; and says that he lived innocent, and died beloved; an encomium neither slight nor common, though modestly expressed.

, a comic writer of ancient Rome, was born at Sarsina, a small town in Umbria, a province of Italy; his proper name was Marcus Accius he is supposed to have acquired the surname of Plautus, from having broad and ill-formed feet. His parentage seems to have been mean; and some have thought him the son of a slave. Few circumstances of his life are known; Cicero has told us in general that he was some years younger than Naevius or Ennius, and that he died the first year of the elder Cato’s censorship, when Claudius Pulcher and Lucius Portius Licinius were consuls. This was about the year of Rome 569, when Terence was about nine years old, and 184 years B. C. A. Gellius says, that Plautus was distinguished at the same time for his poetry uptm the theatre, that Cato was for his eloquence in the forum and observes elsewhere, from Varro, that he was so well paid for his plays, as to think of doubling his stock by trading in which, however, he was so unfortunate, that he lost all he had got by the Muses, and for his subsistence was reduced, in the time of a general famine, to work at the mill. How long he continued in this distress, is uncertain; but Varro adds, that the poet’s wit was his best support, and that he composed three plays during this daily drudgery.

In the same year this diligent editor also published, in two separate books, small 8vo, “Court Ayres, by Dr. Charles Colman, William Lawes, John Jenkins, Simpson, Child, Cook, Rogers,” &c. These being published at a time when there was properly no court, were probably tunes which had been used in the masques performed at Whitehall during the life of Charles I. In 1671 he published the first edition of his “Psalms and Hymns in solemn Musick, in foure Parts, on the common Tunes to Psalms in Metre used in Parish churches. Also six Hymns for one Voice to the Organ,” folio. The several editions of this work, published in various forms, at a small price, rendered its sale very general, and psalm-singing in parts, a favourite amusement in almost every village in the kingdom. He died about 1693, and Tate, then poet-laureat, wrote an elegy upon him.

, an English poet, was son of Mr. Pomfret, rector of Luton in Bedfordshire, and formerly of Trinity college, Cambridge. He was born about 1667. He was educated at a grammar-school in the country, and thence sent to Queen’s college, Cambridge, where he took his bachelor’s degree in 1684, and that of master in 1698. He then went into orders, and was presented to the living of Malden in Bedfordshire. About 1703, he came up to London for institution to a larger and very considerable living but was stopped some time by Compton, then bishop of London, on account of these four lines of his poem entitled “The Choice:”

A volume of his poems was published by himself in 1699, with a very modest and sensible preface. Two pieces of his were published after his death by a friend under the name of Philalethes one called “Reason,” and written in 1700, when the disputes about the Trinity ran high; the other, “Dies Novissima,” or, “The Last Epiphany,” a Pindaric ode. His versification is sometimes not unmusical; but there is not the force in his writings which is 'necessary to constitute a poet. A dissenting teacher of his name, and who published some rhimes upon spiritual subjects, occasioned fanaticism to be imputed to him; but from this his friend Philalethes has justly cleared him. Pomfret had a very strong mixture of devotion in him, but no fanaticism.

, an Italian poet and a man of letters, was born of a noble family at Verona in 1731. He became an early proficient in classical literature, particularly the Greek, of which he was enthusiastically fond, and attained an excellent style. At this period the marquis Maffei and other eminent literary characters were resident at Verpna, in whose society the talents of Pompei received the most advantageous cultivation. He was first known as an author by “Canzoni Pastorali,” in two vols. 8vo. Able critics spoke in the highest terms of these pieces, on account of their sweetness and elegance it was thought by some good judges that they were never surpassed by any productions of the kind. He next translated some of the Idylls of Theocritus and Moschus, in which he exhibited a very happy selection of Italian words, corresponding with the Greek. The next object of his attention was dramatic poetry, in the higher departments of which the Italians were at that time very deficient, and he published in 1763 and 1770, his tragedies of “Hypermestra” and “Callirhoe,” which were represented with great success in several cities of the Venetian state. He now employed several years on a translation of “Plutarch’s Lives,” which appeared in 1774 in four vols. 4to. This work gave him considerable reputation as a prose writer and scholar, and it ranks among the very best classical versions in the Italian language. In 1778 he published two volumes of “Nuove Canzoni Pastorali” he also published poetical versions of the “Hero and Leander of Musjeus” of the “Hymns of Callimachus;” “A hundred Greek Epigrams” and the “Epistles of Ovid.” He was a member of some of the academies, and he served his native city in the capacities of secretary to the tribunal of public safety, and to the academy of painting. He died at Verona in 1790, at the age of fifty-nine, and his memory was honoured by various public testimonies, and by the erection of his bust in one of the squares of the city. He was highly respected and esteemed, as well for his morals as for his literary talents, and his fame was not limited to the confines of Italy. An edition of his works was published after his death in six vols. 8vo.

, marquis of, a French nobleman, still more distinguished by his talents in poetry than by his rank, was born at Montauban in 1709. He was educated for the magistracy, and became advocategeneral, and first president of the court of aids at Montauban. His inclination for poetry, however, could not be repressed, and at the age of twenty-five he produced his tragedy of “Dido,” in which he approved himself not only one of the most successful imitators of Racine, but an able and elegant poet. After this success at Paris, he returned to his duties at Montauban, which he fulfilled in the most upright manner; but having suffered a short exile, on account of some step which displeased the court, he became digusted with the office of a magistrate. As he had now also increased his fortune by an advantageous marriage, he determined to remove to Paris, where at first he was received as his virtues and his talents deserved. His sincere attachment to Christianity brought upon him a persecution from the philosophists, which, after a time, drove him back to the country. Voltaire and his associates had nowinundated France with their deistical tracts the materialism of Helvetius in his book de TEsprit, had just been brought forward in the most triumphant manner the enemies of Christianity had filled the Encyclopedic with the poison of their opinions, and had by their intrigues formed a powerful party in the French academy, when the marquis of Pompignan was admitted as an academician, in 1760. He had the courage, at his admission, to pronounce a discourse, the object of which was to prove that the man of virtue and religion is the only true philosopher. From this moment he was the object of perpetual persecution. Voltaire and his associates were indefatigable in pouring out satires against him: his religion was called hypocrisy, and his public declaration in its favour an attempt to gain the patronage of certain leading men. These accusations, as unjust as they were illiberal, mingled with every species of sarcastic wit, had the effect of digusting the worthy marquis with Paris. He retired to his estate of Pompignan, where he passed the remainder of his<laysin the practice of a true philosophy, accompanied by sincere piety and died of an apoplexy in 1784, at the age of seventy-five, most deeply regretted by his neighbours and dependents. The shameful treatment of this excellent man, by the sect which then reigned in the academy, is a strong illustration of that conspiracy against religion, so ably detailed by M. Barruel, in the first volume of his Memoirs of Jacobinism. When once he had declared himself a zealous Christian no merit was allowed him, nor any effort spared to overwhelm him with disgrace and mortification. His compositions nevertheless were, and are, esteemed by impartial judges. His “Sacred Odes,” notwithstanding the sarcasm of Voltaire, “sacred they are, for no one touches them,” abound in poetical spirit, and lyric beauties though it is confessed also that they have their inequalities. His “Discourses imitated from the books of Solomon,” contain important moral truths, delivered with elegance, and frequently with energy. His imitation of the Georgics of Virgil, though inferior to that of the abbe De Lille (whose versification is the richest and most energetic of modern French writers), has yet considerable merit and his “Voyage de Languedoc,” though not equal, in easy and lively negligence to that of Chapelle, is superior in elegance, correctness, and variety. He wrote also some operas which were not acted and a comedy in verse, in one act, called “Les Adieux de Mars,” which was represented with success at the Italian comic theatre in Paris. The marquis of Pompignan was distinguished also as a writer in prose. His “Eulogium on the Duke of Burgundy,” is written with an affecting simplicity. His “Dissertations,” his “Letter to the younger Racine,” and his “Academical Discourses,” all prove a sound judgment, a correct taste, and a genius improved by careful study of the classic models. He produced also a “Translation of some dialogues of Lucian,” and some “Tragedies of Æschylus,” which are very generally esteemed. He was allowed to be a man of vast literature, and almost universal knowledge in the fine arts. Yet such a man was to be ill-treated, and crushed if possible, because he had the virtue to declare himself a partizan of religion. Even his enemies, and the most inflexible of them, Voltaire, were unable to deny the merit of some of his poetical compositions. The following stanza in particular, in “An- Ode on the Death of Rousseau,” obtained a triumph for him in defiance of prejudice. The intention seems to be to illustrate the vanity of those who speak against religion:

He wrote the “History of the Wars of Ferdinand I. and John of Anjou,” and several works in prose, which were collected and published at Venice by D'Asola, in 1513, 1518, in 3 vols. 8vo. His poetical works were published by Aldus, in 1505, in 8vo, and again in 1513, 1518, in 2 vols. Many have considered him as the most accomplished poet and scholar of his age; but, like too many scholars, he was infected with the licentiousness which then prevailed.

In 1700, when he had attained his twelfth year, he retired with his father to Binfield near Oakingham and for some time was under the care of another priest named Dean, but with so little advantage, that the youth determined to study on a plan of his own, reading all such books as he could procure, but with a decided preference, even at this early age, to poetical works. It does not appear that any of the learned professions were pointed out to him, or that his father attempted in any way to direct his studies. “He was,” says Dr. Warton, “invariably and solely a poet, from the beginning of his life to the end.” Of the poets which he read, Dryden soon became his favourite and model; and we are told that he entreated a friend to carry him to Button’s coffee-house which Dryden. frequented, that he might gratify himself with the hare sight of a man whom he so much admired, and of whom he continued to speak well throughout life.

In 1727, Swift, who had long corresponded withhiai, coming to England, joined with Pope in publishing in 4 vols. 8vo, their miscellanies in prose and verse. To these Pope wrote a preface, complaining, among other instances, of the ill usage he had received front booksellers, and of the liberty one of them (Curll) had taken in this same year to publish his juvenile letters, purchased from a Mrs. Thomas, a mistress of his correspondent Mr. Cromwell. Pope had been intimate with this lady in his young days, but was now so seriously hurt at the publication of his letters, although he knew that she did it from distress, that he took a severe revenge in a poem called “Corinna,” and in the “Dunciad,” which appeared in the following year. The object of this celebrated satire was to crush all his adversaries in a mass, by one strong and decisive blow. His own account of this attempt is very minutely related by Pope himself, in a dedication which he wrote to Lord Middlesex, under the name of Savage the poet, who assisted Pope in finding out many particulars of these adversaries. If we may credit this narrative, Pope contemplated his victory over Dunces with great exultation and such, says Dr. Johnson, was his delight in the tumult he had raised, that for a while his natural sensibility was suspended, and he read reproaches and invectives without emotion, considering them only as the necessary effects of that pain which he rejoiced in having given. He would not however have long indulged this reflection, if all the persons he classed among the Dunces had possessed the spirit which animated some of them. Ducket demanded and obtained satisfaction for a scandalous imputation on his moral character and Aaron Hill expostulated with Pope in a manner so much superior to all mean solicitation, that Pope “was reduced to sneak and shuffle, sometimes to deny, and sometimes to apologize: he first endeavours to wound, and is then afraid to own that he meant a blow.” There are likewise some names introduced in this poem with disrespect which could receive no injury from such an attack. His placing the learned Bentley among dunces, could have occurred to Pope only in the moment of his maddest revenge Bentiey had spoken truth of the translation of the Iliad he said it was “a fine poem, but not Homer.” This, which has ever since been the opinion of the learned world, was not to be refuted by the contemptuous lines in which Bentley is mentioned in the “Dunciad.” On the other hand, the real Dunces, who are the majority in this poem, were beneath the notice of a man who now enjoyed higher fame than any poetical contemporary, and greater popularity, and greater favour with men of rank. But it appears’ to have been Pope’s opinion that insignificance should be no protection, that even neutrality should not be safe, and that whoever did not worship the deity he had set up, should be punished. Accordingly we find in this poem contemptuous allusions to persons who had given no open provocation, and were nowise concerned in the author’s literary contests. The “Dunciad” indeed seems intended as a general receptacle for all his resentments, just or unjust; and we find that in subsequent editions he altered, arranged, or added to his stock, as he found, or thought he found new occasion; and the hero of the “Dunciad,” who was at first Theobald, became at last Gibber.

Returning to his more original publications, Pope nowissued those two dialogues which were named, from the year in which they appeared, “Seventeen hundred and thirty eight,” and are among the bitterest of satires. Ever/ species of sarcasm and mode of style are here alternately employed ridicule, reasoning, irony, mirth, seriousness, lamentation, laughter, familiar imagery, and high poetical painting. Although many persons in power were highly provoked, he does not appear to have been very directly menaced with a prosecution; but Paul Whitehead, who about this time wrote his “Manners,” and his publisher Dodsley, were called to an account, which was supposed to have been intended rather to intimidate Pope, than to punish Wintehead> and Pope appears to have taken the hint; for he discontinued a Third Dialogue, which he had begun, and never afterwards attempted to join the patriot with the poet. He had been led into this by his connection with the prince of Wales and the opposition, but he could not have long been of service to them. Had they come into office, he must have been either silent, or offensive, for he was both a Jacobite and a papist. Dr. Johnson says very justly that he was entangled in the opposition now, and had forgot the prudence with which he passed, in his earlier years, uninjured and unoffending, through much more violent conflicts of faction.

We have already copied an expression of Dr. Warton’s, that Pope was invariably and solely a poet from the beginning of his life to the end and we may add from the same elegant critic, that his whole life, and every hour of it, in sickness and in health, was devoted with unremitting diligence, to cultivate that one art in which he had determined to excel, and in which he did excel. It is not our intention, however, to expatiate on his merits as a poet. What has been advanced by Dr. Johnson and Dr. Warton must supersede all other efforts; but we may be permitted to regret that he added so little to the dignity of the literary character, and that his passions were vulgar and vulgarly expressed. Never had the genus irritabile a more faithful representative. With abundant professions of philosophy, benevolence, and friendship, he thought no display of petty revenge, and no discharge of acrimony, beneath him and was continually endeavouring to promote his interest by quackish stratagems and idle artifices, often so poorly disguised as to expose him to immediate contempt; and all this at a time when he was confessedly at the head of the poetical list, and when his wealth was so great that he was mean enough to upbraid his adversaries for their want of it. “It would be hard,” says Johnson, “to find a man so well entitled to notice by his wit, that ever delighted so much in talking of his money. In his letters and in his poems, his gardens and his grotto, his quincunx and his vines, or some hints of his opulence, are always to be found. The great topic of his ridicule is poverty; the crimes with which he reproaches his antagonists are their debts, their habitation in the Mint, and their want of a dinner.”

Although Mr. Potter had announced his “Euripides” as in a state of preparation for the press, he first published, in 1777, his translation of “Æschylus,” in a quarto volume, indisputably the best translation of any Greek poet that had appeared in the English language. In the same year appeared his “Notes on the Tragedies of Æschylus,” about eighty pages in quarto. These were dedicated to Mrs. Montague, at whose request they were written, and were printed and distributed at her expence gratis to the purchasers of the tragedies. A second edition appeared in 1779, in two volumes octavo, corrected in many places, and with the notes inserted in their respective places. In 1781, he published the first volume of his translation of “Euripides,” in quarto and, the following year, thesecond and, in 1788, that of “Sophocles,” in the same size. These last-mentioned versions are, on the whole, inferior to his first production, yet they are each of them excellent performances, and thought even superior to those of Mr. Wodhull and Dr. Franklin, Besides these very laborious works, Mr. Potter published, in 1783, in quarto, “An Enquiry into some passages of Dr. Johnson’s Lives of the Poets” in which we are sorry to observe a degree of petulance unworthy of liberal criticism and, in 1785, in quarto, “A Translation of the Oracle concerning Babylon, and the Song of Exultation, from Isaiah, chap, xiii. and xiv.” and “A Sermon on the Thanksgiving for the Peace, 1802.”