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

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.

Having concluded his laborious work, Mr. Malone paid a visit to his friends in Ireland; but soon after returned to his usual occupations in London. Amidst his own numerous and pressing avocations he was not inattentive to the calls of friendship. In 1791 appeared Mr. Boswell’s Life of Dr. Johnson, a work in which Mr. Malone felt at all times a very lively interest, and gave every assistance to its author during its progress which it was in his power to bestow. His acquaintance with this gentleman commenced in 1785, when, happening accidentally at Mr. Baldwin’s printing-house to be shewn a sheet of the Tour to the Hebrides, which contained Johnson’s character, he was so much struck with the spirit and fidelity of the portrait, that he requested to be introduced to its writer. From this period a friendship took place between them, which ripened into the strictest and most cordial intimacy, and lasted without interruption as long as Mr. Boswell lived. After his death, in 1795, Mr. Malone continued to show every mark of affectionate attention towards his family; and in every successive edition of Johnson’s Life took the most unwearied pains to render it as much as possible correct and perfect. He illustrated it with many notes of his own, and procured many valuable communications from his friends, among whom its readers will readily distinguish Mr. Bindley. Any account of Mr. Malone would be imperfect which omitted to mention his long intimacy with that gentleman, who is not so remarkable as the possessor of one of the most valuable libraries in this country, as he is for the accurate and extensive information which enables him to use it, and the benevolent politeness with which he is always willing to impart his knowledge to others. There was no one whom Mr. Malone more cordially loved.

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.

Mr. Malone, in his person, was rather under the middle size. The urbanity of his temper, and the kindness of his disposition, were depictured in his mild and placid countenance. His manners were peculiarly engaging. Accustomed from his earliest years to the society of those who were distinguished for their rank or talent, he was at all times and in all companies easy, unembarrassed, and unassuming. It was impossible to meet him, even in the most casual intercourse, without recognizing the genuine and unaffected politeness of the gentleman born and bred His conversation was in a high degree entertaining and instructive; his knowledge was various and accurate, and his mode of displaying it void of all vanity or pretension. Though he had little relish for noisy convivial merriment, his habits were social, and his cheerfulness uniform and unclouded. As a scholar, he was liberally communicative. Attached, from principle and conviction, to the constitution of his country in church and state, which his intimate acquaintance with its history taught him how to value, he was a loyal subject, a sincere Christian, and a true son of the Church of England. His heart was warm, and his benevolence active. His charity was prompt, but judicious and discriminating; not carried away by every idle or fictitious tale of distress, but anxious to ascertain the nature and source of real calamity, and indefatigable in his efforts to relieve it. His purse and his time were at all times ready to remove the sufferings, and promote the welfare of others, and as a friend he was warm and steady in his attachments.

, an eminent French chemist and physician, was born at Caen in 1701, and was the son of a counsellor, who sent him, when of a proper age, to study law at Paris. Young Malouin, however, as soon as he arrived there, without ever informing his father, began the study of medicine, and pursued it with such success as well as secrecy, that on his return home in 1730, his father, whom he had always satisfied in every respect as to moral conduct, expenses, &c. and who expected to see him return as a licentiate in law, was astonished to find him a doctor of medicine, but was obliged at the same time to yield to a choice which indicated so much zeal and decision. Nor was this a new profession in the family, his uncle and grandfather having both been physicians. After remaining at home about three years, he went again, to Paris, and assisted Geoffroi in his chemical lectures, and would probably have succeeded him had he been on the spot when he died; but it was not until 1767 that he was appointed in the room of Astruc, who was the immediate successor of Geoffroi. At Paris, where he got iiitd practice, it lay much among literary men, whom he found generally very incredulous in the virtues of medicine. Malouin, who was a perfect enthusiast in his art, had many contests with them on this account. When a certain great philosopher had been cured by taking Malouin’s prescriptions for a considerable time, and came to acknowledge the obligation, Malouin embraced him and exclaimed, “you deserve to be sick.” (Vous etes digne d'etre maladej. He could not, however, bear those who, after being cured, indulged their pleasantries at the expehce of the faculty, and he broke off his acquaintance with an eminent writer* who had been his patient, on this account. On another occasion, when one of these wits with whom he had had a warm dispute about his favourite art, and had quarrelled, fell ill, Malouin sought him out, and his first address was, “I know you are ill, and that your case has been improperly treated; I am now come to visit you, although I hate you; but I will cure you, and after that never see your face more,” and he kept his word in all these points. This was, however, in him pure enthusiasm, without any mixture of quackery. His liberal conduct and talents were universally acknowledged, and he filled with great reputation the honourable offices of professor of medicine in the college of Paris, and physician in ordinary to the queen. He was also a member of the academy of sciences, and of our royal society. His love of medicine did not hinder him from paying equal attention to preventatives, and he was distinguished for a habit of strict temperance, which preserved his health and spirits to the advanced age of seventy-seven, without any of its infirmities. His death was at last occasioned by a stroke of apoplexy, which happened Dec. 31, 1777. He left a legacy to the faculty on condition of their assembling once a year, and giving an account of their labours and discoveries. His principal works were, 1. “Traite” de Chimie,“1734, 12mo. 2.” Chimie medicinale,“1755, 2 vols. 12mo, a work iti a very elegant style, and including maiiy valuable observations. He wrote also several articles in the dictionary” Des arts et metiers,“published by the academy of sciences* and the chemical part of the” Encyclopedic."

, an Italian physician and anatomist, was born March 10, 1628, at Crevalcuore, near Bologna, in Italy, where he was taught Latin and studied philosophy. In 1649, losing his parents, and being obliged to choose his own method of life, he determined to apply himself to physic. The university of Bologna was then supplied with very learned professors in that science, particularly Bartholomew Massari, and Andrew Mariano, under whose instructions Malpighi in a short time made great progress in physic and anatomy. After he had finished the usual course, he was admitted doctor of physic, April 6, 1653, In 1655 Massari died, a loss which Malpighi severely felt, as independent of his esteem for him as a master, he had become more nearly related to him by marrying his sister. In 1656, the senate of Bologna gave him a professorship, which he did not long hold; for the same year the grand duke of Tuscany invited him to Pisa, to be professor of physic there. Here he contracted a strict friendship with Borelli, whom he subsequently owned for his master in philosophy, and to whom he ascribed all the discoveries which he afterwards made. They dissected animals together, and it was in this employment that he found the heart to consist of spiral fibres; a discovery, which has been ascribed to Borelli in his posthumous works. The air of Pisa not agreeing with Malpighi, be continued there but three years: and, in 1659, returned to Bologna, to resume his former posts, notwithstanding the advantageous offers which were made him to stay at Pisa. In 1662 he was sent for to Messina, in order to succeed Peter Castello, first professor of physic, who was just dead. It. was with reluctance that he went thither, though the stipend was great; and although he was prevailed on at last by his friend Borelli, to accept it, yet in 1666 he returned to Bologna. In 1669 he was elected a member of the royal society of London, with which he ever after kept a correspondence by letters, and communicated his discoveries in anatomy. Cardinal Pignatelli, who had known him while he was legate at Bologna, being chosen pope in 1691, under the name of Innocent XII. immediately sent for him to Rome, and appointed him his physician. In 1694 he was admitted into the academy of the Arcadians at Rome. July the 25th, of the same year, he had a fit, which struck half his body with a paralysis; and, November the 29th following, he had another, of which he died the same day, in his 67th year. His remains were embalmed, and conveyed to Bologna, where they were interred with great funeral honours in the chureh of St. Gregory, and a statue was erected to his memory. Malpighi is described as a man of a serious and melancholy temperament, which is confirmed by his portrait in the meeting-room of the royal society at Somerset-house. He was indefatigable in the pursuit of knowledge, on the sure ground of experience and observation, ever candid in his acknowledgments to those who had given him any information, and devoid of all ostentation or pretension on the score of his own merits. He ranks very high among the philosophers of the physiological age in which he lived, when nature began to be studied instead of books, and the dreams of the schools. Hence arose the discoveries of the circulation of the blood, the absorbent system of the animal body, and the true theory of generation. To such improvements the investigations of Malpighi, relative to the anatomy and transformation of insects, particularly the silk-worm, and the developement of the chick in the egg, lent no small aid. From these inquiries he was led to the anatomy and physiology of plants, in which he is altogether an original, as well as a very profound, observer. His line of study was the same as that of Grew, but these philosophers laboured independent of each other, and their frequent coincidence evinces the accuracy of both.

The first work which he published in 1661, and which was afterwards frequently reprinted, comprised his microscopical observations relative to the intimate structure of the lungs, and was entitled “Observationes Anatomicse de l*ulmonibus,” fol. He published separate tracts concerning the brain, the tongue, the external organ of touch, the omentum, throat, and the adipose ducts, between the years 1661 and 1665; and subsequently, other tracts, respecting the structure of the viscera, the kidneys, spleen, liver, membranes of the brain, &c.

In 1669, when he became a fellow of our royal society, his essay “de formatione pulli in ovo” was first printed, in London, in quarto, as well as his remarks on the “Bombyx” or silk-worm, and “De Glandulis conglobads,” forming his three “Dissertationes Epistolicae.” His “Anatome Piantarum,” addressed to the royal society, accompanied by observations on the incubation of the egg, was published by that learned body in folio, with wurny plates, in 1675 and 1679. His works were republished at London in 1686, making two folio volumes and more correctly at Amsterdam, in 1687, 4to, and a posthumous volume appeared Jiere, accompanied with an account of his life, in 1697, of which a re-impression was given at Venice, and another at Leyden, the ensuing year. Some other dissertations are to be found in the “Bibliotheca Anatomica,” published by Le Clerc and Manget at Geneva in 1685; especially “De Cornuum Vegetgtione,” “DeUtero et Viviparorum Avis;” and “Epistolae quaedam circa illam de ovo dissertationem.” His only medical work, “Consultationum Medicinalium Centuria prima,” was edited by Gaspari, in 1713, 4to, Patau. He is not, indeed, distinguished as a practitioner, but he deserves praise for pointing out the mischiefs of blood-letting, in the malignant epidemics prevalent in Italy in his time. An edition of the whole of his works was printed at Venice, in 1733, in folio, by Gavinelli.

, a distinguished mathematician, philosopher, and military engineer, was born at Paris July 23, 1775. His first education was principally directe'd to classical and polite literature, and at seventeen years of age he composed a tragedy in five acts, called “The Death of Cato.” These pursuits, however, did not prevent him from a study apparently not very compatible, that of the mathematics; for at the above age he passed an examination which gained him admittance into the school of engineers. After having distinguished himself there by his genius for analysis, he was about to leave it in quality of officer of military engineers, but was rejected on political grounds, and as this repulse deprived him of all hope of promotion there, he repaired to the army in the north, where he was incorporated in the 15th battalion of Paris, and was employed as a common soldier in the fortifications of Dunkirk. The officer of engineers, who superintended those works, perceiving that Malus was deserving of a better station, represented his merits to the government, and he was recalled and sent to the Polytechnic school, where he was soon appointed to the analytic course in the absence of M. Monge. Being now re-established in his former rank at the date of his first nomination, he succeeded almost immediately to that of captain, and was employed at the school at Metz as professor of mathematics.

It was at this period (1797), that his military career commenced, and in the army of the Sambre and Meuse he was present at the passage of the Rhine. The same year he formed an attachment to the lady who afterwards became his wife. She was the daughter of the chancellor of the university of Giessen; but honour and duty prevented him from then realising his wishes. He was obliged to embark for Egypt, and assisted at the battles of Chebreis, and of the Pyramids. He was chosen member of the Institute of Cairo, but his life was too active and busy to allow him to indulge his taste for the sciences. One only occasion presented itself, of which he knew how to take advantage. In a reconnoitre on which he was ordered along with M. Lefevre, engineer of bridges and causeways, he had the satisfaction to discover a branch of the Nile, hitherto unknown to travellers, and to draw a description and map of a country where no Frenchman had penetrated since the crusades; and the memoir which he wrote on this subject forms part of the first volume of “La Decade Egyptienne.” But it was as a military engineer that he principally distinguished himself during this memorable expedition, particularly during the dangers of all kinds which attended him in Syria, and at the siege of El-Hariscb, and Jaffa, where he filled the office of engineer. After the capture of this town, he received orders to repair the fortifications, and to establish military hospitals. Here he was attacked by the plague, of which he had the good fortune to cure himself without any foreign assistance. Scarcely recovered, he hastened to Damietta on business, and from thence marched against the Turks who had landed at Lisbech; and was present at the battle of Heliopolis and Coraim, and at the siege of Cairo. After other movements, which will be found in the history of that expedition, he embarked at Aboukir, and arrived in France in Oct. 1801.

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

Malus was a member of the legion of honour, and under director of the fortifications at Antwerp in 1804; underdirector of the barracks in the department of the Seine, in 1809; member of the committee of fortifications, and major of engineers, in 1810. In 1811 he was second in command, director of the studies of the Polytechnic school, in which he performed for several years, to the satisfaction of the directors and pupils, the arduous duties of examiner. These various occupations did not prevent him from continuing the ingenious experiments on which his fame was to be chiefly founded, and which procured him the Copley niedal from our royal society.

The activity of Malus was equal to so many different pursuits. Though he carried in his habit the seeds of that severe illness which was so soon to terminate his life, scarcely a week elapsed without his submitting to the Institute new fruits of his researches and his name being attached to the phenomenon of polarised light, which he discovered, all future discoveries of this kind must recall the remembrance of the philosopher who first opened this new road, and who, if he had lived, would have probably completed the theory of light. He died February 24th, 1812, in the thirty-seventh year of his age, a loss which cannot be sufficiently deplored, as his learning, his genius, and indefatigable industry, afforded every hope that length of years would have added to his discoveries, and extended the boundaries of science. His discovery of the polarisation of light by oblique reflection is perhaps the most important that optics has received since the discovery of the achromatic telescope.

, a learned Dominican, born in 1566, at Xativa, taught philosophy and divinity with great reputation in his order. Baronius, hearing of his abilities, persuaded his general to send for him to Rome, that he might have the benefit of his advice. Malvenda accordingly gave Baronius great assistance, and was employed, at the same time, to correct all the ecclesiastical books of his order, which he did with much accuracy. He died May 7, 1628, at Valencia in Spain, aged sixty-three. His most esteemed works are, a treatise “De Anti-Christo,” the best edition of which is that of Valencia, 1621, folio “A new Version of the Hebrew Text of the Bible, with Notes,” Lyons, 1650, 5 vols. folio; “Annales Ordinis Praedicatorum,” Naples, 1627, folio.

, commonly called the marquis Malvezzi, an Italian writer of eminence, was born of a noble family at Bologna, in 1599. After having finished his classical and philosophical studies, he applied to the law, and became a doctor in that faculty in 1616, although not quite seventeen years of age. After this he cultivated other sciences, and spent some time and pains upon physic, mathematics, and divinity. He even did not neglect astrology; in favour of which he always entertained high prejudices, although he affected outwardly to despise it. Music and painting were also among the arts in which he exercised himself for his amusement. He afterwards became a soldier, and served under the duke Feria, governor of the Milanese. Philip the Fourth of Spain employed him in several affairs, and admitted him into his council of war. Letters, however, occupied a good part of his time, and he was member of the academy of the Gelati at Bologna. He was the author of several works in Spanish and Italian: among the latter were, “Discourses upon the first book of Tacitus’s Annals,” which he composed at the age of twenty-three, and dedicated to Ferdinand II. great duke of Tuscany. There is a great shew of learning in it; too much, indeed, for there are many quotations from the fathers and scripture, which have but little to do with Tacitus and modern politics. There are also in it certain logical distinctions, and subtile reasonings, which savour of pedantry, and had better become a professor of philosophy, than a writer upon government and stateaffairs. He died at Bologna, Aug. 11, 1654. His discourses upon Tacitus were translated and published in English, by sir R. Baker, Lond. 1642, folio. His “Davide perseguitato” was translated by Robert Ashley, 1647, in 12mo; his “Romulus and Tarquin,” by lord H. Gary, 1638, 12mo; and his “Successi della monarchia di Spagna” by Robert Gentilis, 1647, 12mo.

, 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.

Mr. Man died in 1761. In private life his character was highly respected, and his manners were amiable. He was a very useful superintendent of the poor’s hospital, to which he left more than half the little property he had accumulated. He had made collections for an edition of Arthur Johnston’s poems, which were in the hands of the late professor Thomas Gordon of Aberdeen, and had been encouraged by many clergymen to undertake the history of the church of Scotland, for which task he was well qualified by his learning and diligence. The only undertaking, however, which he lived to accomplish, although not t6 publish, was his edition of Buchanan’s History, published in 1762, 8vo. Whatever may be the defects in this edition, we do not mention it as any honour to Buchanan’s countrymen, that it is the last which has appeared.

, a statesman and elegant writer, was born at Borgo Taro, a small town of the dukedom of Parma, on the 14th April, 1714. He was the eldest son of Marcel marquis of Ozzano, of an ancient family amongst the Parmesan nobility, and of a lady named Pellegrini, of birth equally illustrious. As soon as he arrived at an age competent for a learned education, he was placed in the college of Parma, where he went through all his studies with assiduity and success; and in the earliest period of his youth displayed that peculiar fondness for the belles lettres and fine arts, which afterwards constituted his predominant and almost exclusive passion. On quitting college, he repaired to his native place, where his father, with a view of giving him some knowledge of domestic economy, associated him in the management of his large estate, and thus gave him for some time rather more occupation than was compatible with his literary pursuits. After his father’s death he married a lady of noble birth, of the name of Antini; and soon added to his other occupations that of superintending the education of his children. In this way he spent many years, on his manor of Borgo Taro, and occasionally gave specimens of his talents in painting and poetry. His performances in the former art were not numerous or highly distinguished, and were only intended as presents to his friends; but in poetry he reached the highest degree of merit, and seemed to have well availed himself of those favourable circumstances which the spirit of the age had introduced. The abbe" Frugoni was then one of the most conspicuous leaders of the new poetical band; and having fixed his residence at Parma, he naturally became, in that small metropolis, the head of a school, in which, by exploding the frequent antitheses, the inflation of style, the wantonness of conceits, and the gigantic strains of imagination, he introduced an easy, regular, descriptive, sentimental, and elegant poesy, and what was more remarkable, gave to blank verse a strength and harmony till then unknown. Mr. Manara, although a professed admirer of Frugoni and his disciples, did not choose to be of their number as far as regarded their enthusiasm, imagery, rapidity of thoughts, and luxury of versification. He was conscious that his own poetical fire was like his temper, endowed with gentleness and sensibility; and with this spirit wrote those elegant eclogues, which soon proved rivals to the pastoral songs of the celebrated Pompei; and in the opinion of the best judges, united the flowing style of Virgil with the graces of Anacreon. His sonnets, too, though not numerous, might be put in competition with those of Petrarch.

During his retreat also, he wrote his very excellent translation of the Bucolics of Virgil, which was thought to display taste, elocution, harmony, and such an happy substitution of the Italian for the Latin graces, as to give it the double appearance of a faithful translation and an original composition. It rapidly went through several editions, and raised the name of the author to the first rank among his contemporaries in the art of poetry.

In 1749, and the thirty-fifth year of his age, Manara was called to town by his sovereign, and the place to which he was appointed, the first he had filled at court, was admirably adapted to his temper. No sooner had the highspirited Infant Don Philip become the pacific possessor of that principality, than he thought of reviving the languid progress of scientific and literary pursuits; and instituted that famous academy of arts, which, except those of Rome and Bologna, was soon accounted the best in Italy. He himself was appointed academician and counsellor, invested with a vote; and he greatly distinguished himself, as might be expected, in the sessions of the society, and in the annual speeches on the solemn distribution of its premiums. The first minister of state, marquis of Felin, a man of great discernment and sagacity, was not long in perceiving that Manara, by his uncommon abilities, was entitled to higher honours and employments at court. Accordingly, in 1760 he appointed him a chamberlain of the royal house, and soon after, superintendant of the newly-projected high road, through that lofty branch of the Apennines which connects the Ligurian with the Parmesan dominions; and from that time he was gradually promoted to more conspicuous and important places. He succeeded the abbe" de Condillac in the education of the young Infant (his late royal highness) Ferdinand, and acquitted himself of this task to the complete satisfaction of his friends and countrymen. The amiable prince himself was so duly sensible of his services in this respect that he rewarded him with an extraordinary pension for life^ and with the eminent dignity of first chamberlain of his royal family.

From 1767 to 1781 his farther advancements were so rapid, that we can only slightly glance at them. The celebrated Theatin Paciaudi being directed to new model the university of Parma, he established it on the same plan as that of Turin 1 he invested a committee of secular clergymen with the power of directing all moral and religious concerns in it, and another committee of lay noblemen, under the name of magistracy of reform, with that of superintending all its temporal and economical transactions. Manara was appointed one of these magistrates, with the additional prerogative of being the exclusive director of that branch of the establishment which was called the royal college of noblemen, and in this double capacity he answered the most sanguine expectations. In 1771 he was appointed counsellor of state to his royal highness, and in 1773 was sent ambassador to the court of Turin, for the purpose of felicitating his late Sardinian majesty on his accession to the crown.

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.

Soon after his retreat from the ministry, though he had already reached the sixty-ninth year of his age, he thought of bestowing his now uninterrupted leisure on the translation of the other two books of the Georgics, a performance for which, owing to his past occupations, no hopes perhaps were entertained by the public. This task he actually performed with so much care, attention, and zeal, that these last two books were decidedly better translated than the two former; a truth of which the respectable writer himself was so convinced, that he carefully revised, and almost totally altered the preceding part of his work. This uncommon zeal, however, was attended by a fatal consequence; for being determined to copy, as he did, the whole manuscript with his own hand, he fell into a giddiness which prevented him from any literary labour during the last days of his life, and scarcely left him the power of perusing historical books and periodical works for the sake of amusement.

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.

, a Roman catholic writer, was the son of lieutenant-colonel Manby, and after being educated at the university of Dublin, became chaplain to Dr. Michael Boyle, archbishop of -Dublin, and at length dean of Derry. During the reign of James II. in 1686, being disappointed of a bishopric, which he had hopes of obtaining by means of the lord primate, he attempted to rise by popish interest, and publicly embraced that religion, in vindication of which he wrote several books. But the revolution preventing the accomplishment of his wishes, he removed to France, and thence to England, and died at London in 1697. He wrote “A Letter to a Nonconformist minister,” Lond. 1677, 4to. 2. “A brief and practical Discourse on Abstinence in Lent,” Dublin, 1682, 4to. 3. “Of Confession to a lawful Priest,” &c. Lond. 1686, 4to. 4. “The Considerations which obliged Peter Manby, Dean of Derry, to embrace the Catholic religion. Dedicated to the Lord Primate of Ireland,” Dublin, 1687. This was ably answered by Mr. William King, afterwards archbishop of Dublin, and by Dr. Clagett in England. Manby replied to Mr. King, in “A reformed Catechism in two Dialogues,” the first only of which appeared in 1687, and was answered by King.

, 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.

, a celebrated English traveller, was born at St. Alban’s, in the beginning of the fourteenth century, of a family whose ancestor is said to have come into England with William the Conqueror. Leland, who calls this knight Magdovillanus, affirms that he was a proficient in theology, natural philosophy, and physic, before he left England, in 1322, to visit foreign countries. He returned, after having been long reputed dead, at the end of thirty-four years, when very few people knew him; and went afterwards to Liege, where it seems he passed under the name of Joannes de Barbam, and where he died, according to Vossius, who has recorded the inscription on his tomb, Nov. 17, 1372. His design seems to have been to commit to writing whatever he had read, or heard, or knew, concerning the places which he saw, or has mentioned in his book. Agreeably to this plan, he has described monsters from Pliny, copied miracles from legends, and related, without quotation, stories from authors who are now ranked among writers of romances and apocryphal history, so that many or most of the falsehoods in. his work properly belong to antecedent relators, but who were certainly considered as creditable authors at the time he wrote.

Sir John Mandevile visited Tartary about half a century after Marco Polo, who was there in 1272. In this interval a true or fabulous account of that country, collected by a cordelier, one Oderic D'Udin, who set out in 1318, and returned in 1330, was published in Italian, by Guillaume de Salanga, in the second volume of Ramusio, and in Latin and English by Hakluyt. It is suspected that sir John made too much use of this traveller’s papers; and it is certain that the compilers of. the “Histoire Generale des Voyages” did not think our English knight’s book so original, or so worthy of credit, as to give any account of it in their excellent collection. Sir John indeed honestly acknowledges that his book was made partly of hearsay, and -'partly of his own knowledge; and he prefaces his most improbable relations with some such words as these, thei seyne, or men seyn^ but I have not sene it. His book, however, was submitted to the examination of the pope’s council, and it was published after that examination, with the approbation of the pope, as Leland thinks, of Urban V. Leland also affirms that sir John Mandevile had the reputation of being a conscientious man, and that he had religiously declined an honourable alliance to the Soldan-of Egypt, whose daughter he might have espoused, if he would have abjured Christianity. It is likewise very certain that many things in his book, which were looked upptv as fabulous for a long time, have been since verified beyond all doubt. We give up his men of fifty feet high r but his hens that bore wool are at this day very well known, under the name of Japan and silky fowls, &c. Upon the whole, there does not appear to be any very g.ood reason why sir John Mandevile should not be believed in any thing that he relates on his own observation. He was, as may be easily credited, an extraordinary linguist, and wrote his book in Latin, from which he translated it into French, and from French into English, and into Italian; and Vossius says that he knows it to be in Belgic and German. The English edition has the title of “The Voiyage and Travaile of Sir John Maundevile, knight, which treateth of the way to Hierusalem, and marvayles of lude,” &c. Lond. 1568, 4to, reprinted in 1684, same form, and again in 1727, 8vo. All these are in the British Museum, together with copies of the French, Spanish, Latin, and Italian. Of the last there are two editions, printed at Venice in 1537 and 1567, both in 8vo. The original English ms, is in the Cotton library. The English editions are the most valuable to us, as written in the very language used by our countrymen three hundred years ago^ at a time when the orthography of the English language was so little fixed, that it seems to have been the fashionable affectation of writers, to shew their wit and scholarship by spelling the same words in the greatest variety of ways imaginable. The reader will be amused by Addison’s pretended discovery of sir John Mandevile’s Mss. and the pleasant fiction of “the freezing and thawing of several short speeches which sir John made in the territories of Nova Zembla.” This occurs in the Tatler, No. 254, the note upon which has principally furnished us with the above account.

, an author of temporary celebrity in the last century for his writings, was born about 1670, in Holland, where he studied physic, and took the degree of doctor in that faculty. He afterwards came over into England, and wrote several books, not without ingenuity, but some of them were justly considered as likely to produce a bad effect upon society. In 1709 he published his “Virgin Unmasked, or A dialogue between an old maiden aunt and her niece, upon love, marriage,” &c. a piece not very likely to increase virtue and innocence among his female readers. In 1711 came out his “Treatise of the hypocondriac and hysteric passions, vulgarly called the hyppo in men, and the vapours in women.” This work, which is divided into three dialogues, may be read with amusement at least, and contains some shrewd remarks on the art of physic and the modern practice of physicians and apothecaries, among whom he probably did not enjoy much reputation. In 1714 he published a poem entitled “The grumbling hive, or knaves turned honest;” on which he afterwards wrote remarks, and enlarged the whole into his celebrated publication, which was printed at London in 1723, under the title of “The Fable of the Bees, or private vices made public benefits with an Essay on charity and charity-schools, and a search into the nature of society.” In the preface to this book he observes, that since the first publication of his poem he had met with several, who, either wilfully or ignorantly mistaking the design, affirmed that the scope of it was a satire upon virtue and morality, and the whole written for the encouragement of vice. This made him resolve, whenever it should be reprinted, some way or other to inform the reader of the real intent with which that little poem was written. In this, however, he was so unfortunate, that the book was presented by the grand jury of Middlesex in July the same year, and severely animadverted upon in “A Letter to the Right Honourable Lord C.” printed in the London Journal of July the 27tb, 1723. The author wrote a vindication of his book from the imputations cast upon it in that Letter, and in the presentment of the grand jury, which he published in the “London Journal” of August the 10th, 1723. It was attacked, however, by various writers, to whom Mandeville made no reply until 1728, when he published, in another 8vo volume, a second part of “The Fable of the Bees,” in order to illustrate the scheme and design of the first. In 1720, he published “Free thoughts on Religion,” builfc upon the system called rational; an arrogant epithet, which generally excludes from the province of reason a belief in the truths of revelation. In 1732 he published “An inquiry into the origin of honour, and usefulness of Christianity in war;” a work which abounds in paradoxical opinions.

Mandeville died Jan. 21, 1733, in his sixty-third year. He is said to have been patronized by the first earl of Macclesfield, at whose table he was a frequent guest, and had an unlimited licence to indulge his wit as well as his appetite. He lived in obscure lodgings, in London, and never had much practice as a physician. Besides the writings already enumerated, which came spontaneously from his pen, we are told by sir John Hawkins that he sometimes employed his talents for hire, and in particular wrote letters in the “London Journal” in favour of spirituous liquors, for which he was paid by the distillers. Sir John adds, that “he was said to be coarse and overbearing in his manners, where he durst be so, yet a great flatterer of some vulgar Dutch merchants, who allowed him a pension.”' The principles indeed, inculcated in some of his works, although there are many ingenious and many just remarks in them, forbid us to entertain any very high opinion of his morals; and among all his faults, we do not hear that he ever acted the hypocrite, or was ashamed of what he had written.

The “Fable of the Bees,” as we have observed, was attacked by several writers; particularly by Dr. Fiddes, in the preface to his “General treatise of morality formed upon the principles of natural religion only,” printed in 1724; by Mr. John Dennis, in a piece entitled “Vice and luxury public mischiefs,” in 1724; by Mr. William Law, in a book entitled “Remarks upon the Fable of the Bees,” in 1724; by Mr. Bluet, in his “Enquiry, whether the general practice of virtue tends to the wealth or poverty, benefit or disadvantage, of a people? In which the pleas offered by the author of The Fable of the Bees, for the usefulness of vice and roguery, are considered; with some thoughts concerning a toleration of public stews,” in 1725; by Mr. Hutcheson, author of the “Inquiry into the original of our ideas of beauty and virtue, in several papers published at Dublin, and reprinted in the first volume of Hibernicus’s Letters;” and lastly, by Mr. Archibald Campbell, in his “Astoria,” first published by Alexander Innis, D. D. in his own name, but claimed afterwards by the true author. Mandeville’s notions were likewise animadverted upon by Berkeley, bishop of Cloyne in Ireland, in his “Alciphron, or the Minute Philosopher,” printed in 1732; in answer to which Mandeville published, the same year, “A Letter to Dion, occasioned by his book called Alciphron.” In this year also a pamphlet appeared, entitled “Some remarks on the Minute Philosopher, in a letter from a country clergyman to his friend in London;” the anonymous author of which, supposed to have been John lord Harvey, interferes in the controversy between Mandeville and Berkeley with an apparent impartiality. It would be very unnecessary now, however, to enter minutely into the merits of a work no longer read. The prevailing error in the “Fable of the Bees” appears to us to be, that the author did not sufficiently distinguish between what existed, and what ought to be; that while he could uicontestibly prove “private vices” to be in some degree “public benefits,” that is, useful to the grandeur and financial prosperity of a state, he did not distinguish between vices properly so called, and superfluities, or articles of luxury, which are the accompaniments, and the usetul accompaniments too, of certain ranks of life. As to his tracing good actions to bad motives, and the general disposition he has to dwell on the unfavourable side of appearances in human nature and conduct, no apology can be offered, and none can be wanted for the contempt into which his writings have fallen.

, Man!, or Manicileus, the founder of a remarkable sect of heretics, flourished towards the conclusion of the third century, and began about the year 267 to propagate his doctrines, which he had taken from the books of one Scythianus. Scythianus was an Arabian, educated upon the borders of Palestine, and extremely well skilled in all the learning of the Greeks. Afterwards he went to Alexandria, where he studied philosophy, and acquainted himself also with the learning of the Egyptians. Here he espoused the opinion of Empedocles, concerning two co-eternal principles, one good and the other bad; the former of which he called God and light, the latter matter and darkness; to which he joined many dogmas of the Pythagorean school. These he formed into a system, comprised in four books; one of which was called “Evangelium,” another “Capita,” a third “Mysteria,” and a fourth “Thesauri.” After this he went to Jerusalem, ivhere he disputed with the Jews, and taught openly his opinions. Upon the death of Scythianus, his books and effects devolved by will to Terebinthus his disciple, who, however, soon quitted Palestine, and fled into Persia, where, to avoid the persecutions to which his doctrines exposed him, he took up his abode with a certain rich widow. Here he died, by a sudden and violent death, as it is commonly related. When, according to his usual way, he had ascended to the top of the house, in order to invoke the demons of the air, which custom the Manichees afterwards practised in their ceremonies, he was in a moment struck with a blow from heaven, which threw him headlong down and fractured his skull. St. Epiphanius says, that Scythianus had also met with the same fate before him. Here, however, it was that Manes became acquainted with the writings of Scythianus; for, having a handsome person and a ready wit, this widow, who had bought him, adopted him for her son, and took care to have him instructed by the magi in the discipline and philosophy of the Persians, in which he made so considerable a progress that he acquired the reputation of a very subtile and learned philosopher. When this lady died, the writings of Terebinthus, to whom she had been heir, or rather of Scythianus, from whom Terebinthus had received them, fell of course into the hands of Manes.

Manes now began to think of founding his system. He made what use he could of the writings of Scythianus; he selected from the heathen philosophy whatever was for his purpose, and he wrought it all up together with some institutes of Christianity; which made Socrates call his heresy a motley mixture of Christianity and Paganism. Although Manes wrote a great many pieces himself, we have nothing remaining, except a few fragments preserved in the writings of Epiphanius. Manes became famous all over Persia, engaged the attention of the court, and as he pretended to the gift of working miracles, he was called by king Sapor to cure his son, who was dangerously ill. This he undertook at the hazard of his life, and the undertaking in the end proved fatal to him. This bold impostor was no sooner called than he dismissed all the physicians who were about the young prince; and promised the king that he would recover him presently by the help of a few medicines, accompanied with his prayers: but the child dying in his arms, the king, enraged to the last degree, caused him to be thrown into prison; whence by the force of bribes he made his escape, and fled into Mesopotamia. There he was taken again by persons sent in quest of him, and carried to Sapor, who caused him to be flead alive, and after that his body to be given to the dogs, and his skin to be stuffed with chaff, and hung before the city gates, where, Epiphanius tells us, it was remaining to his time. His death is supposed to have happened about the year 278.

Manicheism, as we have seen, is a. great deal older than Manes. The Gnostics, the Cordonians, the Marcionites, and several other sectaries, who introduced this doctrine into Christianity before Manes occasioned any contest about it, were by no means its inventors, but found it in the books of the heathen philosophers. In truth, the Manicheau doctrine was a system of philosophy rather than of religion. They made use of amulets, in imitation of the Basilidians; and are said to have made profession of astronomy and astrology. They denied that Jesus Christ, who was only God, assumed a true human body, and maintained it was only imaginary; and, therefore, they denied his incarnation, death, &c. They pretended that the law of Moses did not come from God, or the good principle, but from the evil one; and that for this reason it was abrogated. They rejected almost all the sacred books, in which Christians look for the sublime truths of their holy religion. They affirmed that the Old Testament was not the work of God, but of the prince of darkness, who was substituted by the Jews in the place of the true God. They abstained entirely from eating the flesh of any animal; following herein the doctrine of the ancient Pythagoreans: they also condemned marriage. The rest of their errors may be seen in St. Epiplianius and St. Augustin; which last, having been of their sect, may be presumed to have been thoroughly acquainted with them.

Though the Manichees professed to receive the books of the New Testament, yet, in effect, they only took so much of them as suited with their own opinions. They first formed to themselves a certain idea or scheme of Christianity, and to this adjusted the writings of the apostles; pretending that whatever was inconsistent with this, had been foisted into the New Testament by later writers, who were half Jews. On the other hand, they made fables and apocryphal books pass for apostolical writings; and even are suspected to have forged several others, the better to maintain their errors. St. Epiphanius gives a catalogue of several pieces published by Manes, and adds extracts out of some of them. These are the Mysteries, Chapters, Gospel, and Treasury.

The rule of life and manners which Manes prescribed to his followers, was most extravagantly rigorous and severe. However, he divided his disciples into two classes; one of which comprehended the perfect Christians, under the name of the elect; and the other, the imperfect and feeble, under the title of auditors or hearers. The elect were obliged to a rigorous and entire abstinence from flesh, eggs, milk, fash, wine, all intoxicating drink, wedlock, and all amorous gratifications; and to live in a state of the severest penury, nourishing their emaciated bodies with bread, herbs, pulse, and melons, and depriving themselves of all the comforts that arise from the moderate indulgence of natural passions, and also from a variety of innocent and agreeable pursuits. The auditors were allowed to possess houses, lands, and wealth, to feed on flesh, to enter into the bonds of conjugal tenderness; but this liberty was granted them with many limitations, and under the strictest conditions of moderation and temperance. The general assembly of the Manieheans was headed by a president, who represented Jesus Christ. There was joined to him twelve rulers or masters, who were designed to represent the twelve apostles, and these were followed by seventytwo bishops, the images of the seventy-two disciples of our Lord. These bishops had presbyters or deacons under them, and all the members of these religious orders were chosen out of the class of the elect. Their worship was simple and plain; and consisted of prayers, reading the scriptures, and hearing public discourses, at which both the auditors and elect were allowed to be present. They also observed the Christian appointments of baptism of infants and the eucharist, communicating frequently in both kinds. They kept the Lord’s day, observing it as a fast and they likewise kept Easter and Pentecost.

, an ancient Egyptian historian, who pretends to take all his accounts from the sacred inscriptions on the pillars of Hermes Trismegistus, to whom the Egyptians ascribed the first invention of their learning, and all excellent arts, and from whom they derived their history. Manethos, as Eusebius tells us, translated the whole Egyptian history into Greek, beginning from their gods, and continuing his history down to near the time of Darius Codomannus, whom Alexander conquered; for in Eusebius’s <k Chronica,“mention is made of Manethos’s history, ending in the sixteenth year of Artaxerxes Ochus, which, says Vossius, was in the second year of the third olympiad. Manethos, called from his country Sebennyta, was highpriest of Heliopolis in the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus, at whose request he wrote his history, and digested it into three tomes; the first containing the eleven dynasties of the gods and heroes, the second eight dynasties, the third twelve, and altogether, according to his fabulous computation, the sum oft 53, 53 5 years. These dynasties are yet preserved, being first epitomized by Julius Africanus, from him transcribed by Eusebius, and inserted in his” Chronica;“from Eusebius by Georgius Syncellus, out of whom they are produced by Joseph Scaliger, and may be seen both in his Eusebius and his” Canones Isagogici.“Manethos, as appears by Eusebius, vouches this as the principal testimony of the credibility of his history, that he took his relations” from some pillars in the land of Seriad, on which they were inscribed in the sacred dialect by the first Mercury Thoth, and after the flood were translated out of the sacred dialect into the Greek tongue in hieroglyphic characters, and are laid up in books among the reveries of the Egyptian temples by Agathodsemon, the second Mercury, the father of Tat.“” Certainly,“says bishop Stillingfleet, in his” Origines Sacroe,“” this fabulous author could not in fewer words have more manifested his own impostures, or blasted his own credit, than he hath done in these."

, a very learned scholar, was born at Florence, June 5, 1396, of an illustrious family that had fallen into decay. After a course of philosophical, theological and mathematical studies, he became, in the Greek language, the pupil of Camaldoli, who then taught that language at Florence, and not of Chrysoloras, as Vossius, and Hody, if we mis-take not, have reported. Manetti then lectured on philosophy in that city to a numerous auditory. He was afterwards employed by the state in various negociatious; and became successively governor of Pescia, Pistoria, and Scarperia, and commissary of the army along with Bernardetto de Medicis. He filled also several offices in the government of Florence, and rendered his own country many important services. When at Rome in 1452, at the coronation of the emperor Frederick, pope Nicholas V. bestowed on him the honour of knighthood. His talents and services, however, excited the envy of some of the families of Florence, and even the favour he acquired with the princes at whose courts he had been employed as ambassador, was considered as a crime; and a heavy fine being imposed on him, he found it necessary to leave his country, and take refuge in Rome, where pope Nicholas V. made him one of his secretaries, with a handsome salary, besides the perquisites of his place. He remained in the same office under the succeeding popes Calixtus III. and Pius II. which last made him librarian of the Vatican. Manetti at length left Rome to reside with Alphonsus, king of Naples, who had a great esteem for him, and gave him an annuity of 900 golden crowns. He did not, however, enjoy this situation long, dying Oct. 26, 1459, in his sixty-third year. He was an excellent scholar in Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, which at that time was little known in Italy, and employed twenty-two years on those languages. He kept three domestics, two of whom were Greeks, and the third a Syrian, who knew Hebrew, and whom he ordered always to speak to him in their respective languages. He was the author of a great many works, most of which remain in manuscript in the Laurentian Library. Those published were, 1. “De dignitate et excellentia hominis,” Basle, 1532, 8vo. 2. “Vita Petrarchae.” This life of Petrarch is inserted in Tommasini’s “Petrarcha redivivus.” 3. “Oratio ad regem Alphonsum in nuptiis filii sui.” This, which was spoken in 1445, was printed by Marquard Freher, in 1611, 4to, along with three other orations, addressed to Alphonsus on the peace, to the emperor Frederic on his coronation, and to pope Nicholas V. Other works have been attributed to him, as a “History of Pistoria,” and the lives of Dante, Boccacio, and Nicholas V,; but we find no particular account of them.

, a celebrated astronomer and mathematician, was born at Bologna in 1674, and soon displayed a genius above his age. He wrote ingenious verses while he was but a child, and while very young formed in his father’s house an academy of youth of his own age, which in time became the Academy of Sciences, or the Institute, there. He was appointed professor of mathematics at Bologna in 1698, and superintendant of the waters there in 1704. The same year he was placed at the head of the college of Montalto, founded at Bologna for young men intended for the church. In 1711 he obtained the office of astronomer to the institute of Bologna. He became member of the Academy of Sciences of Paris in 1726, and of the Royal Society of London in 1729; and died on the 15th of February 1739. His works are: 1. “Ephemerides Motuum Coelestium ab anno 17 15 ad annum 1750;” 4 vols. 4to. The first volume is an excellent introduction to astronomy; and the other three contain numerous calculations. His two sisters were greatly assisting to him in composing this work. 2. “De Transitu Mercurii per Solem, anno 1723,” Bologna, 1724, 4to. 3. “De annuls Inerrantium Stellarum aberrationibus,” Bologna, 1729, in 4to; besides a number of papers in the Memoirs of the Academy of Sciences, and in other places, which are enumerated by Fabroni. The best edition of his Poems, which are still in repute, is that by Bodoni, in 1793, 8vo, with a life of the author.

, brother to the preceding, was born at Bologna, March 25, 1681, and having devoted himself to mathematical studies acquired the reputation of the best algebraist in Italy. At the age of twenty he composed a work on the equations of the first degree, which obtained the praises of the learned world. In 1708, the senate of Bologna appointed him one of their secretaries; and in 1720 he was made professor of mathematics in the university of that city, of which, in 1726, he became chancellor. He was much employed in hydrostatic labours, and with great success: nor did he shew less skill in the science of geography. He died in 1761. He published “De constructione aequationum differentialium primi gradus,” Bonon. 1707. This procured him a letter of congratulation from the celebrated Leibnitz. His other works are principally among the memoirs of the institute of Bologna.

, called, like other Benedictines, Dom Thomas, did considerable honour to his order by the extent of his learning, which obtained him the places of antiquary, librarian, and counsellor to Charles duke of Lorraine. He died in 1763, when he was preparing a work, which was published in the course of the same year, by the abbe Jacquin. The title is, “Introduction a la science des Medailles pour servir a la connoissance des Dieux, et de la Religion, des Sciences, des Arts, et de tout ce qui appartient a l'Histoire ancienne, avec les preuves tires des Medailles,” folio. Mangeart is here said to have comprised, in a single volume, the elementary knowledge of medals which had before been treated but too slightly; and the most valuable information which is scattered through many prolix dissertations on particular parts of the subject, Mr. Pinkerton, however, pronounces it to be a dry compilation concerning antiquities found on medals, in which the author shews no knowledge of the medals themselves. It is a kind of supplement to Montfaucon’s antiquities. Mangeart published also, 2. Eight sermons, with a treatise on Purgatory, at Nancy, 1739, in 2 vols. 12mo.

, a learned physician and laborious historian of that science, was horn June 19, 1652, at Geneva, where his father was an eminent merchant. His father’s brother, author of a work on fevers, was physician to the king of Poland. Manger, having finished his classical studies at the age of fourteen, bestowed two years on philosophy, and then studied theology for five years, when, changing his destination, he entered on a course of medical reading (for he says he had no teacher but his books), and made such proficiency, that in 1678, he received his doctor’s degree at Valence, along with the celebrated Hartman. On his return home he entered upon practice, to which he joined the laborious perusal of many medical works, which served as the foundation of his own publications. In 1699, the elector of Brandenburgh appointed him, by letters patent, his first physician, and the kings of Prussia continued this title to him during his life. He was dean of the faculty at Geneva at the time of his death, Aug. 15, 1742, in the ninetieth year of his age. His works are: l.“Messis Medico-spagyrica, &c.” Geneva, 1683, folio, which contains a most abundant collection of pharmaceutical preparations, arranged in a very complex order. 2. In the same year he edited, “Pauli Barbetti Opera omnia Medica et Chirurgica,” with additional cases and illustralions. 3. “Bibliotheca Anatomica,” 1685, two vols, folio a work which was executed in conjunction with Daniel le Clerc. He afterwards edited, 4. The “Compendium Medicinae Practicum,” of J. And. Sehmitz. 5. The “Pharmcopeia Schrodero-Hoffmanniana.” 6. The “Tractatus de Febribus,” of Franc. Pieus; and, 7. The “Sepulchretum” of Bonetus, to which he added several remarks and histories. 8. In 1695, he published his “Bibliotheca Medico-Practica,” four vqls. folio; a vast collection of practical matter relative to all the diseases of the human body, arranged in alphabetical order. 9. “Bibliotheca Chemica curiosa,” 1702, two vols. folio. 10 “Bibliotheca Pharmaceutico Medica,” 1711, two vols. folio; and 11. “Bibliotheca Chirurgica,” 1721, four vols. in two, folio. 12. “Theatrum Anatomicum, cum Eustachii Tabulis Anatomicis,” 1716, two vols. folio, a description of all the parts of the body, abridged from various authors. On the appearance of the plague at Marseilles, he published a collection of facts and opinions on that disease, under the title of “Traite de la Peste recueilli des meilleurs Auteurs,” 1721, two vols. 12mo; and in the following year, 14. “Nouvelles Reflexions sur l'Origine, la Cause, la Propagation, les Preservatifs, et la Cure de la Peste,” 12mo. 15. His “Observations sur la Maladie qui a commence depuis quelques annees a attaquer le gros Betail,” was a collection of the opinions of the Genevese physicians concerning the distemper of horned cattle. The last work of Manget was his “Bibliotheca Scriptorum Medicorum veterum et recentiorum,” at which he laboured when at least eighty years of age, and published it in 1731, in four vols. folio. It is the most important of his productions, being an useful collection of medical lives, and catalogues of writings. It has not been so much thought of since the appearance of Haller’s Bibliotheca, and particularly of Eloy’s; but the plans are different, and Manget’s, as well as the rest of his voluminous compilations, may be yet consulted with advantage. Although he was so intent on accumulating information, and reprinting scarce works and tracts, that he did not employ his judgment always, either in selection or arrangement, yet those, who, like himself, wish to trace the progress of medical knowledge, will find his works of great use. They contain, indeed, the substance of many libraries, and a variety of treatises which it would not be easy to procure in their separate form.

, a learned English divine, was born at Leeds in 1684, and was educated at St. John’s-college, Cambridge, where he was admitted to his degrees, that of B. A. in 1707, M. A. 1711, LL.D. 1719, and D.D. 1725. He was also a fellow of the society of antiquaries, and rector of St. Mildred, Bread-street, London. He was early distinguished by his “Practical Discourses upon the Lord’s Prayer, preached before the Honourable Society of Lincoln’s Inn; published by the special order of the Bench,” 1716, 8vo. These discourses were again printed in 1717, and in 1721; and in 1718 he published “Remarks upon Nazarenus; wherein the falsity of Mr. Toland’s Mahometan Gospel, and his misrepresentations of Mahometan sentiments in respect of Christianity, are set forth; the history of the old Nazaraeans cleared up, and the whole conduct of the first Christians, in respect to the Jewish laws, explained and described.” The author then stiled himself “Rector of St. Nicholas’s in Guilford,” to which he was instituted in 1717, and resigned in 1719-20. In, January 1719, he published “Plain Notions of our Lord’s Divinity,” a sermon preached on Christmas-day; in June 1719, “The eternal Existence of our Lord Jesus Christ,” a Visitation-sermon in October that year, “The Holiness of Christian-churches,” a sermon preached at Sunderland, on consecrating a new church there; and in 1720, “The providential Sufferings of good men,” a 30th of January sermon before the House of Commons. In 1719, Dr. Mangey wrote “A Defence of the Bishop of London’s Letter,” 8vo and, besides the sermons already mentioned, published five single ones, in 1716, 1726, 1729, 1731, and 1733. On May 11, 1721, he was presented to a prebend, the fifth stall in the cathedral church of Durham, being at that time chaplain to Dr. Robinson bishop of London, and vicar of Yealing, or Ealing, in the county of Middlesex. He was advanced to the first stall of Durham, Dec. 22, 1722; and, when treasurer of the chapter, greatly advanced the fines upon the tenants, and improved the rents of his prebendal lands nearly a hundred pounds a year. He was one of the seven doctors in divinity created July 6, 1725, when Dr. Bentley delivered the famous oration prefixed to his Terence; and at the end of 1726 he circulated proposals for an edition of “Philo Judaeus,” which he completed in 1742, under the title of “Philonis Judaei Opera omnia quas reperiri potuerunt,” 2 vols. folio. He died March 6, 1755, and was interred in the cathedral of Durham, where is an elegant Latin inscription to his memory, composed by Dr. Sharp, then a prebendary and archdeacon of Northumberland. His manuscript remarks on the New Testament came into the possession of Mr. Bowyer, who extracted from them many short notes, which are printed in his “Conjectures.” A very elegant inscription to Dr. Mangey by Dr. Taylor is prefixed to “Lysias Fragmenta.”

, 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:

which he could not have done with propriety, had his relation to that state commenced so lately, or had his ancestors had no interest in the losses and victories of Rome in that age. But this verse, as well as the 776th line of the. same book, Bentley proves to be spurious, and overthrows the whole of Creech’s conjectures. It may, however, still be allowed that he was conversant at court, and acquainted with the modish flattery of the palace, and that he made his compliments in the same phrase that was used by the most finished courtier of his time, which renders it not improbable that he was of a good family.

The “Astronomicon” of Manilius contains a system of the ancient astronomy and astrology, together with the philosophy of the Stoics. It consists of five books, and he also wrote a sixth, which has not been recovered. That he was young when he composed this work, his translator thinks demonstrable from almost every page of it; and had he lived to revise the whole composition, as he seems to have done the first book, we should perhaps have had a more correct performance. He had a genius equal to his undertaking; his fancy was bold and daring; his skill in mathematics great enough for his design; and his knowledge of the history and mythology of the ancients general. As he is now, some critics have placed him among the judicious and elegant writers; and all allow him to be useful, instructive, and entertaining. He hints at some opinions, in which later ages have been ready to glory as their own discoveries. Thus he defends the fluidity of the heavens against the hypothesis of Aristotle; he asserts that the fixed stars are not all in the same concave superficies of the heavens, and equally distant from the centre of the world: he maintains, that they are all of the same nature and substance with the sun, and that each of them hath a particular vortex of its own; and lastly, he says that the milky way is only the undistinguished lustre of a great many small stars, which the moderns now see to be such, through their telescopes. So that perhaps upon the whole, and notwithstanding all his defects, one may venture to say that he is one of the most discerning philosophers antiquity can shew. The first edition of Manilius, with a date, is that of Bologna, by ttugerius and Berthoqus, 1474. The best editions since, are that of Joseph Scaliger, printed at Leyden, 1600, 4to; that of Bentley,. at London, 1738, 4to; that of Edmund Burton, esq. “cum notis variorum,” London, 1783. 8vo; and that of Sioeber, published at Strasburg, in 1767, 8vo.

, an English lady, authoress of a noted piece of scandal called “The Atalantis,” was born in Guernsey, or one of those small islands, of which her father, sir Roger Mauley, was governor. He wa* the second son of an ancient family, and had been a great sufferer for his loyalty in the reign of Charles I. without receiving either preferment or recompense in that of Charles II. He was a man of considerable literary talents, wnich appeared in several publications, particularly his Latin commentaries on the rebellion, under the title of “Commentaria de Rebelhone Anglicana, ab anno 1640 ad annum 1685,” Lond. 1686, 8vo, and of which an English translation was published in 1691; and his “History of the late wars of Denmark,” 1670. He is also said to have been the author of the first volume of the “Turkish Spy,” which was found among his papers, and continued to its present number of volumes by Dr. Midgley, a physician, who had the care of his papers; but this has been justly doubted (See Marana). His daughter, the subject of this article, received an education suitable to her birth, and gave indications of genius above her years, and, as her biographer says, “much superior to what is usually to be found amongst her sex.” The loss of her parents before she was settled in life, seems to have been peculiarly unfortunate, for her father confided the care of her to his nephew, a married man, who first pretended that his wife was dead, then by a series of seductive manoeuvres cheated her into a marriage. When he could no longer conceal his infamy, he deserted her, and the world tamed its back upon her. While in this situation, she accidentally acquired the patronage of the duchess of Cleveland, one of Charles II.'s mistresses, having been introduced to her by an acquaintance to whom she was paying a visit; but the duchess, a woman of a very fickle temper, grew tired of Mrs. Manley in six months, and discharged her upon a pretence that she intrigued with her son. When this lady was thus dismissed, she was solicited by general Tidcomb to pass some time with him at his country-seat; but she excused herself by saying, “that her love of solitude was improved by her disgust of the world; and since it was impossible for her to be in public with reputation, she was resolved to remain concealed.” In this solitude she wrote her first tragedy, called “The Royal Mischief,” which was acted at the theatre in Lincoln’s-inn-fields, in 1696. This play succeeded, and she received such unbounded incense from admirers, that her apartment was crowded with men of wit and gaiety, which proved in the end very fatal to her virtue, and she afterwards engaged in various intrigues. In her retired hours she wrote her four volumes of the “Memoirs of the New Atalantis,” in which she was very free with her own sex, in her wanton description of loveadventures, and with the characters of many high and distinguished personages. Her father had always been attached to the cause of Charles I. and she herself having a confirmed aversion to the Whig ministry, took this method of satirising those who had brought about the revolution. Upon this a warrant was granted from the secretary of state’s office, to seize the printer and publisher of those volumes. Mrs. Mauley had too much generosity to let innocent persons suffer on her account; and therefore voluntarily presented herself before the court of King’s -bench, as the author of the “Atalantis.' 1 When she was examined before lord Sunderland, then the secretary, he was curious to know from whom she got information of some particulars which they imagined to be above her own intelligence. She pleaded that her only design in writing was her own amusement and diversion in the country, without intending particular reflections and characters; and assured them that nobody was concerned with her. When this was not believed, and the contrary urged against her by several circumstances, she said,” then it must be by inspiration, because, knowing her own innocence, she could account for it no other way.“The secretary replied, that” inspiration used to be upon a good account; but that her writings were stark naught.“She acknowledged, that” his lordship’s observation might be true; but, as there were evil angels as well as good, that what she had wrote might still be by inspiration.“The consequence of this examination was, that Mrs. Manley was close shut up in a messenger’s house, without being allowed pen, ink, and paper. Her counsel, however, sued out her habeas corpus at the King’s-bench bar, and she was admitted to bail. Whether those in power were ashamed to bring a woman to a trial for this book, or whether the laws could not reach her, because she had disguised her satire under romantic names, and a feigned scene of action, she was discharged, after several times exposing herself in person, to oppose the court before the bench of judges, with her three attendants, the printer, and two publishers. Not long after, a total change of the ministry ensued, when she lived in high reputation and gaiety, and aroused herself in writing poems and letters, and conversing with wits. To her dramatic pieces she now added” Lucius,“the first Christian king of Britain, a tragedy, acted in Drury-lane, in 1717. She dedicated it to sir Richard Steele, whom she had abused in her” New Atalantis,“but was now upon such friendly terms with him, that he wrote the prologue to this play, as Mr. Prior did the epilogue. This was followed by her comedy called the” Lost Lover, or the Jealous Husband,“acted in 1696. She was also employed in writing for queen Anne’s ministry, certainly with the consent and privity, if not under the direction, of Dr Swift, and was the author of” The Vindication of the Duke of Maryborough,“and other pamphlets, some of which would not disgrace the best pen then engaged in the” defence of government. After dean Swift relinquished “The Examiner,” she continued it with great spirit for a considerable time, and frequently finished pieces begun by that excellent writer, who also often used to furnish her with hints for those of her own composition. At this season she formed a connection with Mr. John Barber, alderman of London, with whom she lived in a state of concubinage, as is supposed, and at whose house she died July 11, 1724.

, marquis of Granby, was son of John duke of Rutland, and grandson of John the first duke, and was born in January 1721. He was bred to the army, and in the rebellion of 1745 raised a regiment of foot at his own expence, for the defence of the country against the rebels. In 1755 he was advanced to the rank of majorgeneral, and in 1758 was appointed lieutenant-general and colonel of the blues. With this rank he went into Germany with the British forces, which were sent to serve under prince Ferdinand of Brunswick; and in 1759 was promoted to the general command of the British troops, an appointment which gave much satisfaction, and for which he appears to have been well qualified. If he had not the great abilities requisite to a commander in chief, he had all the qualifications for an admirable second in command. With a competent share of military skill, he possessed that personal valour and ardour in the service, which inspired his soldiers with confidence; and that humane and generous attention to their comfort and welfare, joined with affability and open-hearted cheerfulness, which strongly attached them to his person. In 1760 he justified the high opinion which prince Ferdinand had expressed of him after the battle of Minden, by his good conduct at Warburg, where the British cavalry were particularly signalized. In the beginning of the ensuing campaign, he commanded under the hereditary prince, in his attack on the frontier towns of Hesse; and at the battle of KirkDenkern, bore the first and most violent onset of the enemy, and by the firmness of his troops contributed much to that victory. He maintained the same character at Grsebesteein and Homburgh, in 1762. He died at Scarborough, Oct. 19, 1770 He had been made a member of the privycouncil in 1760, and resigning the office of lieutenantgeneral of the ordnance, was in May 1763 constituted master-general of that department. In Feb. 1764, he was declared lord-lieutenant and custos rotulorum of Derbyshire. In 1766 he was constituted commander in chief of his majesty’s land forces in Great Britain; which he resigned a little before his death. He married Sept. 3, 1750, lady Frances Seymour, eldest daughter of Charles duke of Somerset, by whom, among other issue, he had Charles, the late duke of Rutland, who died lord-lieutenant of Ireland in 1787; and lord Robert Manners, a gallant officer of the navy, who died Jan. 23, 1782, of the wounds he received in an engagement, Sept. 1, 1781, in the West Indies, on board his majesty’s ship the Resolution, of which he was captain. A monument in hoiiour of his memory was ordered at the national expence for him, capt. Blair, and capt. Bayne, which is now in St. Paul’s cathedral.

, an eminent Italian writer, was born at Florence, April 8, 16yO He was early distinguished by great powers of retention, and a strong passion for research into facts, two attributes for which he was celebrated during the whole of his life. He was regularly instituted in every class of literature, but his particular bias was to history, in which he began his career by inquiries into the modern history of his native city. This produced in 1722 his “Series of Florentine Senators,” 2 vols. fol. a work which, under the modest garb of a collection of notices on private individuals, exhibited the most original, authentic, and curious information respecting the public law and government of Tuscany, from the extinction of the line of the marquises, to the creation of the grand dukes in 1332. In 1731 he published a work of yet greater interest, “De Florentine inventis Commentarium,” in which he gave the most satisfactory account of the manufactures which either originated or were improved in Florence; he showed how the art of banking was there first invented; how, in the subsequent times, the art ef engraving also originated there, &c. Among the discoveries made at Florence in the middle ages, there was one so highly beneficial as to demand * methodical disquisition for itself alone; this was the invention of spectacles, which in 1738 Manni illustrated by his “Historical Treatise on Spectacles.” In this, after a careful examination of evidence, he is inclined to attribute the invention to Salvino Armati.

Of the historical works of Manni v relative to other places, and more general subjects, we shall only mention his “History of the Jubilees,” published in 1750, in which he did justice to his subject in a philosophical and political light, by shewing who were the most distinguished persons who had ever visited Rome on those occasions, and how far, on their return to their native countries, they grafted on those countries the manners and practices of Italy. He also illustrated every particular by curious anecdotes, medals, fac-similes, &c. In biography, Manni wrote a singular work, but perhaps of local interest, entitled “Le Veglie Piacevoli,” &c. or “Agreeable Evenings,” being the lives of the most jocose and eccentric Tuscans. This was published in 1757, in 4 vols. 4to. He wrote also the “Life of the well-deserving prelate, Nicholas Steno, of Denmark,” published in 1775. Manni’s publications, not of the historical or biographical kind, were few, and none of them added much to his fame, except his “Lectures on Italian Eloquence,” 1758, 2 vols. 4to.

He died at Florence, Nov. 30, 1788, in his ninety-ninth year. He left behind him the fame not only of one of the most laborious and deserving writers of his time, but of a most exemplary moral character. He was particularly distinguished for his zeal and kindness in assisting with his superior knowledge, younger writers who wished to treat on any subject connected with his inquiries. A catalogue of all his works, amounting to 104, was published in 1789, by his friend count Tomitano, a patrician of Feltri.

, an excellent antiquary and topographer, the son of Mr. Owen Manning, of Orlingbury, co. Northampton, was born there Aug. 11, 1721. He was admitted of Queen’s-college, Cambridge, where he proceeded B. A. in 1740; and about this time met with two extraordinary instances of preservation from untimely death. Having been seized with the small pox, he was attended by Dr. Heberden, who thinking he could not survive, desired that his father might be sent for. On his arrival he found the young man to all appearance dying, and next day he was supposed to have expired, and was laid out, as a corpse, in the usual manner. An undertaker was sent for, and every preparation made for his funeral. His father, however, who had not left the house, could not help frequently viewing the seemingly lifeless body; and in one of his visits, without seeing any cause for hope, said, “I will give my poor boy another chance,” and at the same time raised him up, which almost immediately produced signs of life. Dr. Heberden was then sent for, and by the use of proper means, the young man recovered. As it was customary for the scholars of every college to make verses on the death of any one of their own college, which are pinned to the pall at the funeral, like so many escutcheons, this tribute of respect was prepared for Mr. Manning, who was much beloved by his fellow students; and it is said that the verses were presented to him afterwards, and that he kept them for many years as memoranda of his youthful friendships. Scarcely had he met with this narrow escape, when, his disorder having made him for some time subject to epileptic fits, he was seized with one of these while walking by the river, into which he feJl, and remained so long that he was thought to be drowned, and laid out on the grass, until he could be conveyed to the college, where Dr. Heberden being again called in, the proper means of recovery were used with success.

In 1741 he was elected to a fellowship of his college, in right of which he had the living of St. Botolph, in Cambridge, which he held until his marriage, in 1755. He took the degree of M. A. in 1744, and that of B. D. in 1753. In 1760, Dr. Thomas, bishop of Lincoln, to whom he was chaplain, gave him the prebend of Milton Ecclesia, in the church of Lincoln, consisting of the impropriation and advowson of the parish of Milton, co. Oxford. In 1763 he was presented by Dr. Greene, dean of Salisbury, to the vicarage of Godalming, in Surrey, and was instituted Dec. 22, he preferring the situation to that of St. Nicholas in Guildford (though a better living) which was offered to him by the same patron. Here he constantly resided till the time of his death, beloved and respected by his parishioners, and discharging his professional duty in the most punctual and conscientious manner. In 1769 he was presented to the rectory of Pepperharrow, an adjoining parish, by viscount Middleton. He was elected F. R. S. in 1767, and F. S. A. in 1770. To the sincere regret of his parishioners, and of all who knew him, Mr. Manning died Sept. 9, 1801, after a short attack of pleurisy, having entered his eighty-first year. By Catherine, his wife, daughter of Mr. Reade Peacock, a quaker, mercer, of Huntingdon, he had three sons and five daughters, all of whom survived him, except his eldest son, George Owen, and one of the daughters.

, called Giovanni da san Giovanni, from a village near Florence, where he was born, was a celebrated painter of the Florentine school, where he shone by a natural superiority of genius. He perfectly understood the poetical part of his art, and excelled, therefore, in the ingenuity of those designs by which he at once ornamented the palace, and illustrated the beneficence and taste of Lorenzo de Medicis. He was particularly successful in painting in fresco, and his colours remain uninjured to the present day: in the imitation of bas-relief he was so skilful, that the touch only could distinguish his paintings of that kind from sculpture. He had profound skill also in perspective and optics. With all these excellencies in his art, he was capricious, envious, and malevolent, and consequently raised himself enemies who were not a little inveterate. He died at the age of forty-six, in 1636.

, a very celebrated French architect, was born in 1598, and died in 1666. The magnificent edifices raised by him at Paris and elsewhere, are so many monuments of his genius and skill in his art. His ideas of general design were esteemed noble, and his taste in ornamenting the inferior parts delicate. The principal buildings of which he was the author, are the gate of the church of the Feuillans, in the street St. Honor6; the church of les filles St. Marie, in the street of S. Antoine; the gate of the Minims in the Place Royale; a part of the Hotel de Conti; the Hotels de Bouillon, Toulouse, and Jars; besides several buildings in the provinces, which were formed on his designs. Much as he was approved by the public, he was not equally able to satisfy himself. Colbert having inspected his plans for the facades of the Louvre, was so pleased with them, that he wished to engage him in a promise not to make any subsequent alterations. Mansard refused to undertake the work on those conditions, being determined, as he said, to preserve the right of doing better than he had undertaken to do. His nephew, Jules-Hardouin Mansard, had the office of first architect, and conductor of the royal buildings, and was the designer also of many very celebrated structures.

, a very learned Italian prelate, and voluminous editor, was born at Lucca, Feb. 16, 1692. At school and college he made rapid progress in every branch of study, but became particularly attached to ecclesiastical history and biography. He was for some years professor of theology at Naples; but the greater part of his life was spent in reading, and carefully exploring the contents of the Italian libraries, particularly the manuscripts, from all which he amassed a fund of information on subjects connected with ecclesiastical history, of vast extent and importance. His first station in the church was that of a clerk-regular in the congregation of the Mother of God; and from this, in 1765, at the age of seventy-two, he was promoted to the archbishopric of Lucca, by pope Clement XIII. who had a high esteem for him. He died Sept. 27, 1769. His life, in our authority, is little more than an account of his works, which indeed must have occupied the whole of his time. His first publication was entitled “Tractatus de casibus, et excommunicationibus episcopis reservatis, confectusad normam label lae Lucanse,” Lucca, 1724. He then published a translation into Latin of Calmet’s “Dictionary of the Bible,*' with additions; an, edition of Thomasini” De veteri et nova ecclesise disciplina,“3 vols. folio; a Latin translation of Calmet’s” Commentaries on the Bible,“1731, &c. 7 vols. an edition of Baronius’s annals, with great additions, in 30 vols. folio a new edition of the Councils, including Labbe, Cossart, &c. 1759, &c. 30 vols. folio; anew edition of yneas Sylvius (pope Pius II.) orations, with many hitherto unpublished, 1755, 2 vols. 4to. He was the editor of some other ecclesiastical collections and theological pieces of inferior note; but we must not omit the work by which he is perhaps best known in this country, his excellent edition of Fabricius’s” Bibliotheca Latina mediae et infimae aetatis," 6 vols. 4to, generally bound in three, printed at Padua, in 1754. This alone is sufficient to place him in the first rank of literary antiquaries.

, a celebrated Russian officer and writer, was born at Petersburgh in 1711. He was first a lieutenant in the Prussian service, and afterwards a captain of genadiers in the Russian regiment of Petersburgh. At the death of the czarina Anne, he was employed to arrest the Birons, who were then the regents and the tyrants of the young prince Iwan III. who rewarded his services by the rank of colonel, and some estates in Ingria. But when the throne of that prince was seized by the czarina Elizabeth, Manstein lost at once his regiment and his lands. Some time after, he entered again into the Prussian service, where he acted as a volunteer in 1745; and having sufficiently signalized his abilities and courage, was appointed major-general of infantry in 1754. In the war of 1756, he fell the very second year by a shot; leaving two sons and four daughters. His “Memoirs of Russia,” printed at Lyons in 1772, in 2 vols. 8vo, are at once historical, political, and military. They contain the principal revolutions of that empire, and the wars of the Russians against the Turks and Tartars; besides a short sketch of the military and marine establishments, and also of the commerce of his country. These memoirs comTnence in 1727, with the reign of Peter II. and close with the first year of the empress Elizabeth. They are considered as deserving of much reliance from the truth of the facts, and the sincerity of the author.

, an eminent Italian painter, was born in 1431, at Padua or in its district. His parents were poor, but Squarcione, whose pupil he became, was so deeply struck with his talents, that he adopted him for his son, and repented of it when Andrea married a daughter of Jacopo Bellini, his competitor. But the censure which now took place of the praise he had before lavishe'd on his pupil, only added to his improvement. Certain basso-relievos of the ancient Greek style, possessed by the academy in which Andrea studied, captivated his taste by the correctness of their outline, the simplicity of the forms, the parallelism of the attitudes, and strictness of the drapery: the dry servility with which he copied these, suffered him not to perceive that he had lost the great prerogative of the originals, the soul that animates them. The sarcasms of Squarcione on his picture of S. Jacopo, made him sensible of the necessity of expression and character; he gave more life to the figures in the story of S. Cristophoro; and in the face of St. Marc, in the church of S. Giustina, united the attention of a philosopher with the enthusiasm of a prophet. While the criticisms of Squarcione improved Mantegna in expression, the friendly advice of the Bellini directed his method, and fixed his principles of colour. During his short stay at Venice, he made himself master of every advantage of that school; and in some of his pictures there are tones and tints in flesh and landscape, of a richness and zest equal to the best Venetians of his day. Whether he taught Bellini perspective is uncertain; Lomazzo affirms “that Mantegna was the first who opened the eyes of artists in 'hat branch.”

The chief abode and the school of Mantegna were at Mantua, where under the auspices of Marchese Lodovico Gonzaga, he established himself with his family, but he continued to work in other places, and particularly at Rome, where the chapel which he had painted for Innocenzio VIII. in the Vatican existed, though injured by age, at the accession of Pius VI. The style of those frescoes proved that he continued steady in his attachment to the antique, but that from a copyist he was become an imitator. Of his works in oil Mantua possesses several; but the principal one, the master-piece of the artist, and the assemblage of his powers, the picture della Vittoria, afterwards in the Oratorio de Padri di S. Filippo, is now at Paris. It is a votive picture dedicated, for a victory obtained, to the Madonna seated on her throne with the infant standing on her lap, and giving benediction to the kneeling marquis in arms before her. At one side of the throne stands the archangel Michael, holding the mantle of the Madonna; at the other are S. George, S. Maurice, John the Baptist, and S. Elizabeth on her knees. The socle of the throne is ornamented with figures relative to the fall of Adam: the scene is a leafy bower peopled by birds, and here and there open to a lucid sky. No known work of Mantegna equals in design the style of this picture: they generally shew him dry and emaciated, here he appears in all the beauty of select forms: the two infants and St. Elizabeth are figures of dignity, so the archangel who seems to have been, by the conceit of his attitude and the care bestowed on him, the painter’s favourite object. The head has the beauty and the bloom of youth, the round fleshy neck and the breast, to where it confines with the armour, are treated with great art, the expression is to a high degree spirited, and as characteristic. The countenance of the Madonna is mild and benign, that of Christ humane. The future prophet is announced in the uplifted arm of St. John. The guardian angel kindly contemplates the suppliant, who prays with devout simplicity. The whole has an air of life, All the draperies, especially that of St. Elizabeth, are elegant, and correctly folded; with more mass and less intersection of surfaces, they would be perfect. The extreme finish of execution, as it has not here that dryness which disfigures most other works of this master, does not impair the brilliancy of colour. The head of the Madonna, of the infant, of St. Michael, have a genial bloom of tints. The lights are everywhere true, the shades alone are sometimes too grey or too impure. The general scale of light has more serenity than splendour, more the air of nature than of art, but the reflexes are often cut off too glaringly from the opaque parts. The whole of the picture has preserved its tone to this day, is little damaged, and in no place retouched.

Of the remainder of Mantegna' s works, besides some frescoes of considerable merit, but much injured, in a saloon of the castle of Mantua, and the well known triumph of Caesar in various compartments at Hampton court, little now remains. His name is more frequent in galleries and collections than his hand; lankness of form, rectilinear folds, yellow landscape, and minute polished pebbles, are less genuine signs of originals than correctness of design and delicacy of pencil. It is not probable that a man so occupied by large works, and so much engraving, should have had time to finish many cabinet-pictures: the series of his plates consist of upwards of fifty pieces, executed by his own hand; and though he was not the inventor of the art, he was certainly the first engraver of his time.

Andrea had great influence on the style of his age, nor was the imitation of his style confined to his own school; Francesco, and another of his sons, finished some of the frescoes which he had begun in the castle, and added the beautiful ceiling which shews that the science of foreshortening, and what the Italians call “del sotto in su,” though Melozio be its reputed author, was carried much farther by Mantegna and his followers. Mantegna died in 1505. Besides his talents for painting, Mantegna was one of the earliest engravers on metal, some, indeed, say the very first, but this does not appear to have been the case. Strutt, who gives a list of his principal engravings, has also exhibited a specimen in his Dictionary.

, one of the most learned and eminent nonconformists of the seventeenth century, was born at Lawrence Lydiard, in Somersetshire, in 1620. His father and grandfather were both clergymen, but of them we have no account, except that his father was settled at Whimpole in Devonshire, and sent his son to the freeschool at Tiverton. Here his progress was such that he was thought qualified to begin his academical studies at the age of fourteen, and about a year after, in 1635, he was entered of Wadham college, Oxford. From thence, in 1639, he removed to Hart-hall, where he took his bachelor’s degree in arts. Wood says, he was accounted in his college, “a hot-headed person,” a character very remote from that which he sustained throughout life, and when all eyes were upon him. After studying divinity, he was admitted to deacon’s orders by the celebrated Dr. Hall, bishop of Exeter, and although this was sooner than Mr. Man ton approved upon maturer thought, bishop Hall appears to have thought him duly qualified, and predicted that “he would prove an extraordinary person.” As he came into public life when principles of disaffection to the church were generally prevalent, it appears that he entered so far into the spirit of the times, as to be content with deacon’s orders, and to deny the necessity of those of the priest

His ministerial functions were exercised in various places, first at Sowton near Exeter, and then at Colyton in Devonshire, where he was much respected. Removing to London, he became more admired for his talents in the pulpit, and about 1643 was presented to the living of Stoke Newington, by colonel Popham, and here preached those lectures on the epistles of St. James and St. Jude, which he afterwards published in 1651 and 1652, 4to. During his residence at Newington, he often preached in London, and is said to have preached the second sermon before the sons of the clergy, an institution then set on foot, chiefly through the influence of Dr. Hall, son to the bishop, who preached the first. He was also one of those who were called occasionally to preach before the parliament, but being a decided enemy to the murder of the king, he gave great offence by a sermon in which he touched on that subject. In 1651 he shewed equal contempt for the tyranny of the usurpers, by preaching a funeral sermon for Mr. Love (see Christopher Love), and in neither case allowed the fears of his friends to prevent what he thought his duty. In 1650 he removed from Stoke-Newington, on being presented to the living of Covent garden by the earl, afterwards duke of Bedford, who had a high respect for him. At this church he had a numerous auditory. Archbishop Usher, who was one of his hearers, used to say that he was one of the best preachers in England, and had the art of reducing the substance of whole volumes into a narrow compass, and representing it to great advantage. Although he had already, by the two sermons above noticed, shewn that he was far from courting the favours, of government, Cromwell, who well knew how to avail himself of religious influence and popular talents, sent for him in 1653, when he assumed the protectorate, and desired him to pray at Whitehall on the morning of his installation; and about the same time made him one of his chaplains. He was nominated also by parliament one of a committee of divines to draw up a scheme of fundamental doctrines. In the same year he was appointed one of the committee for the trial and approbation of ministers, and appears to have acted in this troublesome office with considerable moderation. What influence he had with Cromwell, he employed for the benefit of others, and particularly solicited him to spare the life of Dr. Hewit, a loyalist, whom Cromwell executed for being concerned in a plot to restore Charles II. In 1660, when the days of usurpation were over, Mr. Manton co-operated openly in the restoration of Charles, was one of the ministers appointed to wait upon his majesty at Breda, and was afterwards sworn one of his majesty’s chaplains. In the same year he was, by mandamus, created doctor of divinity at Oxford.

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 elder of three justly celebrated printers, was born about 1447, at Bassiano, a small town in the duchy of Sermonetta, He was educated at Rome, under Caspar of Verona and Domitius Calderinus, both of whom he has mentioned in several of his prefaces, as men of talents and erudition. Having acquired a knowledge of the Latin language from them, he went to Ferrara to study Greek under Baptist Guarini, and, probably after his own studies were completed, became the preceptor of the prince of Carpi, a nephew of the celebrated Picus of Mirandula. In 1482, Ferrara being closely besieged by a Venetian army, he retired to Mirandula, and spent some time in the society of Picus, who, though not quite twenty years of age, was already a consummate master of almost all learning. From Mirandula, Aldus went, some time after, to reside with his pupil, who, though only twelve years of age, had made such advances in learning, that he was already qualified to take a part in the serious conversations, and the designs of his uncle and his preceptor; and it is believed to have been at this time, that Aldus conceived the project of his subsequent printing establishment at Venice, to the expences of which, Picus and his pupil probably contributed. He began, however, to print, at Venice, in 1488, with an edition of the small Greek poem of Musseus, in quarto, with a Latin translation, but without date. In 1494 he published the Gre*k grammar of Lascaris, and in 1495, in one collection, the grammatical treatises of Theodore Gaza, Apollonius, and Herodian.

He had already begun to prepare for the press the manuscripts of the then unprinted originals of the works of Aristotle, which, in number and extent, were sufficient to fill five volumes in folio. Although the state of these Mss. required almost incredible efforts of diligence and erudition, Aldus brought out a first volume in 1495; and the edition was completed in 1498. Aldus was from that time confessed, without dispute, to stand as an editor in the very first rank among his contemporaries. He was not, however, the very first that printed an entire Greek book. The Greek grammar of Lascaris had been printed in folio, at Milan, in 1476. The works of Homer were printed at Florence in i 488; and several other Greek works had also appeared in print, when Aldus began his establishment; yet he must be allowed the praise of having first used elegant Greek types, and printed from the most correct and authentic manuscripts.

In imitation, it is said, of the hand-writing of the celebrated Petrarch, Aldus procured the first examples of that which is called, in printing, the Italic character, to be cut and cast for him by Francesco of Bologna, about 1500. An edition of the works of Virgil, in octavo, was the first book he printed in this type, which was long known among printers by the name of Aldine. The inventor obtained a patent from the Senate of Venice, for its exclusive use for ten years, from the 13th of November, 1502; and another similar patent from pope Alexander the Sixth, from the 17th of November, 1502. The last of these was renewed for fifteen years more, by Julius the Second, on the 27th of January, 1513; and again by Leo the Tenth, on the 28th of the following November.

From 1502, the different works printed by Aldus, were reprinted at Lyons, with a close imitation of the Aldine type and edition. The very prefaces of Aldus and his assistants, were copied in the editions of Lyons. But the imitation was disgraced by many typographical errors. Aldus, observing and noting these, published on the 16th of March, 1503, a list in which they were particularly enumerated, and which he appears to have distributed to the purchasers of copies of his own genuine editions. The cunning and industrious Lyonnese took this list of their errors, corrected them in new editions of the same books; and thus still divided the market with Aldus, and now more successfully than at the first.

In 1501, 1502, 1503, 1504, and 1505, Aldus printed in folio, or in octavo, a considerable number of the best authors, Greek, Roman, and Italian, such as Demosthenes, Lucian, Dante, Horace, Petrarch, Cicero’s epistles to his familiar friends, Juvenal, Lucan, Homer, Sophocles, Euripides, &c. &c. He published, at the least, a volume every month. These publications were in all respects excellent. They were of works the most valuable in all literature, ancient or modern. The composition of the types was finely regular and uniform; the press-work was admirably executed; and the ink so truly good, that it retains to this day all its beauty and lustre of colour.

In the necessary pains upon these works, Aldus had the assistance of some of the best and most learned among his contemporaries. His house became a sort of new academy. The learned in Venice began, about 1500, to assemble there on fixed days of frequent recurrence, for conversation on interesting literary topics: and their meetings were continued for several years subsequent. The topics on which they conversed were, usually, what books were fittest to be printed, what manuscripts might be consulted with the greatest advantage, what readings, out of a diversity, for any one passage, ought to be preferred. Among those who attended these conversations, were, besides Aldus himself, the famous A. Navagerus, P. Bembo the celebrated cardinal, Erasmus, when he was at Venice, P. Alcionius, M. Musurus, Marc-Ant. Cocch. Sabellicus, Albertus Pius, prince of Carpi, and others, whose names, though they were then eminent, are not now equally in remembrance. Among those who assisted Aldus in the correction of the press, were men not less eminent than Demetrius Chalcondylas, Aleander, afterwards famous as a cardinal, and even Erasmus.

There are some curious circumstances in the history of the acquaintance and connexion between Erasmus and Aldus. The “Adagia” of Polydore Vergil had been printed at Venice, and well received in the world. Erasmus, aware of this fact, wrote from Bologna, to request that Aldus would undertake the printing of his “Adagia.” Aldus readily agreed to the proposal, and invited Erasmus upon it to Venice. When Erasmus came, it was not till after some delay that he obtained admittance to the printer’s closet, whose servants were not aware of the stranger’s Jiterary consequence. But Aldus no sooner knew that it was Erasmus who waited for him, than he hastened to rer ceive his visitor with open arms. He did more he stopped the progress, of several important Greek and Latin works, which he had then in the press, to make room for the printing of the great collection of Erasmus with the desired, expedition. Erasmus was, in the mean time, entertained in the house of Andrew d‘Asola, father-in-law to Aldus, with whom Aldus and his wife appear, by Erasmus’s account, to have lived. D’Asola was rich; yet his table was, even for that of an Italian family, parsimoniously served: and Erasmus loved good cheer. The Dutchman made frequent remonstrances to his friend Aldus, against the thinness of the soups, the absence of solid animal food, the weakness and sourness of the wine, the general scantiness of the whole provisions. The Italians, whose climate and natural habits had taught them to live much more sparingly than was usual for the Dutch and Germans, were astonished and offended by his complaints. Some small additions, such as a fowl or two, and perhaps half a dozen eggs a week, were made on his account to the commons of the family. But these dainties were sometimes intercepted by the women in the kitchen, on their way to the table. On the table, they were devoured by the rest who sat at it still more eagerly than by Erasmus. And if he was not absolutely starved, he wiis assuredly a good deal mortified in his appetite for a glass of good wine and a mess of delicate and savoury meat, before he could see the printing of his “Adagia” entirely at an end. His humours and complaints made him at length a very unpleasant inmate to the family; while he was, on the other hand, dissatisfied still more, that his murmurs were not more complaisantly attended to. They parted with mutual dislike. Erasmus wrote afterwards his dialogue, which has the title of “Opulentia Sordida,” in ridicule of the parsimonious spirit, and the scantily-served table of Andrea D'Asola. Aldus and his successors, whenever they, after this time, reprinted any work by Erasmus, avoided to mention his name, and gave him simply the appellation of “Transalpinus quidain homo.” Aldus, not thinking that he did enough for the interests of literature, in printing, for the first time, so many excellent books in the Latin, Greek, and Italian languages, gave, in his Latin grammar, in 1501, a short introduction to the knowledge of the Hebrew tongue; and even proposed to give a beautiful edition of the original Hebrew of the sacred Scriptures, with the Septuagint and the Vulgate Latin versions. Of this, however, he was diverted from printing more than a specimen sheet. That sheet, now ia the royal library at Paris, exhibits the text in the three different languages, each occupying one of three parallel columns on the same page. It is to be regretted that Aldus should have been hindered from completing a design so noble.

In 1500, Aldus married the daughter of the above-mentioned Andrew of Asola, who had been a printer of some reputation at Venice, and who soon after became his sonin-law’s partner. The “Letters of Pliny,” 1508, is the first book which marks this partnership, “in sedibus Aldi et Andreae Asulani soceri.” In 1506 Aldus was a great sufferer by the war which then rag;ed in Italy, and his printing was so much interrupted, that he was not able to resume it until 1512. From that to 1515, he executed several works, and was proceeding with others when he died, nearly seventy years of age, in the last mentioned year.

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.

, the son of the preceding, was born at Venice in 1512. After his father’s death, he lived with his mother and her other children at Asola, at some distance from Venice, while the business of the printing esablishment at Venice was carried on, for the general benefit of the family, by his grandfather, Andrea D'Asola, and the Torresani, his maternal uncles. At Asola Paul made but small progress in letters; he was, however, removed when very young to Venice, where he had every advantage of instruction and encouragement to study; Bembo, Sadolet, Bonamicus, Reginald Pole, and especially Rambertus and Gasp. Contarinus, who had been his father’s friends, took a pleasure to excite and direct him in hi literary pursuits. Under their tuition he applied to his studies with such zeal and assiduity as even to injure his health, but he suffered more from the disputes that took place respecting the partition of the estates of his father and hi; maternal grandfather, between himself and the other heirs. His uncles and himself could not agree in the management of the printing-house, and in 1529 it was shut up; but in 1533, having arrived at the age of twenty-one, he again opened it, and renewed the business in the names, and for the common benefit, of the heirs of Aldus, and Andrea D'Asola. In 1540, however, this partnership was dissolved and from this period, the business was continued in the names of the sons of Aldus only.

Paul became now indefatigable in the management of the printing establishment, and as the most valuable remains of Grecian literature were already in print, determined to give new editions of the best Latin authors. As his admiration had been principally directed to the style and eloquence of Cicero, the first work he printed was that author’s treatises on Oratory, which appeared from his press in 1533, and the same year he published Cicero’s Familiar Letters. He printed also at this time the fifth Decade of Livy, II Cortegiano, by Castiglione, II Petrarca, and Pontani Carolina, torn. I. In the following year the number of Italian and Latin books which he published was very considerable. His first Greek publication was Themistius, which was speedily followed by Isocrates and Aetius Amidenus. In these publications he availed himself of the literary assistance of various learned friends, whose attention and corrections gave that decided superiority to the Aldine editions which his father had endeavoured to establish.

In 1535 he accepted an invitation to Rome, upon the promise of an opulent and eligible situation; but, not being received with respect or attention, he returned to Venice, and resumed his studies and employment. Having, however, attained no degree of opulence, he engaged in the business of education, took twelve young men of family into his house, and superintended their education for three years. Of these, two were Matth. Senarega, who translated Cicero’s Letters to Atticus into Italian, and Paul Contarinus. In 1538 he went on an excursion to examine the manuscripts in certain old libraries, particularly the library of the Franciscans in Cesena, which contained some Mss. left to their convent by Malatesta Novellus; and such was his reputation at this time, that he was invited to fill the chair of the professor of eloquence at Venice, and had the offer of a similar situation at Padua, vacant by the death of Bonamicus. But his ill heahh, and his predilection for his business, induced him to devote his whole time to the printing-house, from which a great number of the classics issued.

After a second journey to Rome, in 1546, he married Margarita, the daughter of Jerome Odonus. His eldest son, Aldus, the subject of our next article, was the firstfruit of this marriage: he had also two other sons, who died young, and a daughter, who is often mentioned in his letters, and was married in 1573. In 1556 an academy was established at Venice, in the house of Frederick Badoarus, one of the principal senators of the republic, which was composed of about an hundred members, who endeavoured to unite every species of literary and scientific excellence. Belonging to this academy was a printing-house, in which it was proposed to print good editions of all books and manuscripts already known to exist, as well as the original writings of the academicians. Over this establishment, Paul was appointed to preside, and it was completely furnished with new founts of his own types, and he had under him several other skilful printers, particularly Dominick Bevilacqua. In 1558 and 1559, fifteen different books were printed in this house, none very large, but intended as a prelude to greater undertakings, of which a catalogue was published both in Italian and Latin, and may be seen in Renouard’s “Annales de Plmprimerie des Aides,” vol. I. The books printed in this academy were all executed with admirable correctness and beauty, and are become exceeding scarce, and valuable. Paul was farther honoured with the professorship of eloquence in this academy, which, however, did not exist long. It was probably thought to have been an engine in Badoarus’s hands, by which he might have become dangerous to the state; or perhaps its expences might exceed his resources, and drive him to pecuniary shifts of the discreditable kind. In August 1562, however, the academy was dissolved by a public decree.

In 1561 Paul had been invited by Pius IV. upon terms of great honour and advantage, to repair to Rome, and engage in printing the Holy Scriptures and the works of the lathers of the church. He accordingly undertook this journey, of which his holiness bore the expences, as well as of the removal of his printing-materials and of his family; and conditioned to allow him, from the time of his arrival, a yearly salary of at least 500 crowns. From this time, till the death of Pius, he continued to exercise his profession as a printer with great reputation at Rome, while he also kept open his printing-house at Venice. But at length dissatisfied with his situation, and in ill health, he left Rome in September 1570, and after visiting several distinguished places in Italy, returned to Venice in May 1572. From Venice, after a very short stay, he went back again to Rome, where he was cheered by the seasonable liberality of the pope, which was made more agreeable by being bestowed without any exaction of personal labour or attendance.

Much of his life appears to have been embittered by sickness, and in September 1573 his health began to decline very rapidly. Three months after, he thought himself better, but he had still an extreme weakness in his loins, with frequent and severe head-aches, and he received no benefit from medicines. On the 6th of April, 1574, he expired in the arms of his son, who had just arrived from Venice to attend him in his sickness. He had lived in general esteem; and his death was universally regretted. He left a variety of writings, which distinguish him as one of the most judicious critics, and one of the most elegant Latin writers that modern times have produced. Of these, the principal are his letters in Latin and Italian, his Commentaries on the works of his favourite Cicero, and his treatise “De Curia Rornana.” The productions of his presses are all of the highest value, for both accuracy and beauty.

, the younger, son of the preceding, was born in 1547. His father paid the utmost attention to his education; and so extraordinary was the progress of the youth in learning, that he was enabled to give the world “A collection of elegant phrases in the Tuscan and Latin languages,” when he was only eleven years of age. Other juvenile works at different periods marked his advances in classical literature, and he soon became his lather’s assistant in his labours. When very young, he conducted the printing-business at Venice while his father was engaged at Rome. In 1572 he married a lady of the Giunti family, so well known in the annals of typography; and on the death of his father in 1574, all the concerns of the Aldine press devolved upon him. He was, however, less calculated for the business of a printer than for the profession of an author. ' In 1577 he was appointed professor of the belles lettres in the school of the Venetian chancery, in which young men designed for public employments were educated. This office he held till 1585, when he was made professor of rhetoric at Bologna. In the same year he published the “Life of Cosmo de Medici,” which was so well received, that he was almost immediately invited to undertake the professorship of polite literature at Pisa, which he accepted, although he received an invitation at the same time to a professorship at Rome, which had been lately held by Muratus. During his stay at Pisa he received the degree of doctor of laws, and was admitted a member of the Florentine academy, on which occasion he delivered an eloquent oration “On the nature of Poetry.” He now paid a visit to Lucca in order to obtain materials for a “History of Castruccio Castracani,” which he afterwards published, and which is much applauded by Thuanus. The Roman professorship being reserved for him, he removed thither in 1588, and intending to spend his life there, he caused his whole library to be brought to Rome from Venice, at a very great expence. He was in high favour with Sixtus V. who gave him an apartment in the Vatican, and a table at the public expence. He was also patronized in various ways by Clement VIII. He died in the fifty-firstyear of his age, in October 1597. He left no posterity, and with him ended the glory of the Aldine press. His library, consisting of 8.0,000 volumes, collected by himself and his predecessors, was sold to pay his debts. He was author of many performances besides those already mentioned, but the most celebrated of his works were his “Commentaries on all the Works of Cicero,” in ten volumes. His “Familiar Letters,” published in 1592, were highly esteemed; but M. Renouard confesses, that were it not from his inheriting the Aldine offices, it might not have been remembered he bad ever been a printer; yet, though difference of taste gave his studies a different bent, his numerous writings, notwithstanding they were inferior to his father’s and grandfather’s, sufficiently prove his industry and learning, and justify, to a certain point, the commendations bestowed on him by many to whom his merits were known.

, 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 physician and scholar, ^was the son of a father of both his names, whom Wood calls “a sufficient shoemaker,” and was born in 1615 in St. Martin’sle-grand, London, and educated at Westminster-school. He was thence elected a student of Christ Church, Oxford, in 1630, where he took his degrees in arts. Wood gives it as a report that he was first admitted to holy orders, but it is more certain that he was made M. D. in 1647, and principal of Gloucester Hall. He then travelled on the continent with his pupil, Lucius, lord Falkland, for two years, and wrote an account of his travels in Latin, which. Guidot promised to publish. He then travelled with Henry, brother to Lucius lord Falkland, and on his return settled as a physician at Bath in summer, and at Bristol in winter, and had great practice. During the usurpation he had been ejected from his office of principal of Gloucester Hall, but was restored in 1660, and soon after resigned it. He died at Bath, Aug. 4, 1670, and was buried in the cathedral, with a monument and inscription celebrating his learning and skill as a physician. Wood speaks of his Consultations with certain physicians, his cosmetics, and his poems, and epitaphs, but does not say where these are to be found, or whether printed. He has not escaped the diligence of Eloy, who, however, merely copies from the Ath. Ox. The only publication printed appears to have been a collection of letters on the efficacy of the Bath waters, published by Guidot under the title “Epistolarum Medicarum specimen de Thermarum Bathoniensium effectis, ad clariss. medicos D. Bate Eraser, Wedderbourne, &c.” Lond. 1694, 4to. He appears to have been a different person from the J. Maplet who wrote “A Discourse of metals, stones, herbs, &c.” printed in 8vo. This is mentioned by Dr. Pulteney, who says the author was of Cambridge.

, a very learned Englishman, was descended from a good family in Huntingdonshire, and born at Margaret-Inge, in June 1631. He was educated under the famous Busby at Westminster-school, and being king’s scholar, was elected thence to Trinity college, Cambridge, in 1648. He took his degrees in arts at the regular time,' and was made fellow of his college in 1653. In 1658 he left the college in order to be tutor to Joscelin, son of Algernon, the last earl of Northumberland, with whom he continued till 1660, and then travelled at his own ex pence, to qualify himself for the profession of physic, into which he had resolved to enter some years before. He passed through France to Rome, where he lived near a year in the house of the hon. Algernon Sidney, to whom he was recommended by his uncle the earl of Northumberland. In 1663 he returned to England, and to that earl’s family; and, taking his doctor of physic’s degree at Cambridge in 1667, he practised in London. Here he contraded an acquaintance with many eminent persons in his own faculty, as Willis, Sydenham, Locke; and with several of the most distinguished divines, as Whichcote, Tillotson, Patrick, Sherlock, Stillingfleet, Sharp, and Clagget. In 1670 he attended lord Essex in his embassy to Denmark; and, in 1672, waited on the lady dowager Northumberland into France. In March 1675, he was chosen professor of physic in Gresbam college, London; and, in 1676, attended the lord ambassador Montague, and lady Northumberland, to France. The same year Dr. Sydenham published his “Observationes medicas circa morborum acutorum historiam et curationem,” which he dedicated to Dr. Mapletoft; who, at the desire of the author, had translated them into Latin. He held his professorship at Gresham till October 1679, and married the month following.

Soon after his marriage he relinquished the practice of physic, and retired, in order to turn his studies to divinity. In March 1682, he took both deacon’s and priest’s orders, and was soon after presented to the rectory of Braybrooke in Northamptonshire, by lord Griffin. In 1684 he was chosen lecturer of Ipswich, and a year after, vicar of St. Lawrence Jewry, and lecturer of St. Christopher’s in London. In 1689 he accumulated his doctor’s degree in divinity, while king William was at Cambridge. In 1707 he was chosen president of Sion college, having been a benefactor to their building and library. He continued to preach in his church of St. Lawrence Jewry till he was turned of eighty; and, when he was thinking of retiring, he printed a book entitled “The principles and duties of the Christian religion,” &c. 1710, 8vo, a copy of which he sent to every house in his parish. He lived the last ten years of his life with his only daughter Elizabeth, the wife of Dr. Gastrell, bishop of Chester, sometimes at Oxford, and in the winter at Westminster, where he died in 1721, in his ninety-first year. He' was a very polite scholar, wrote Latin elegantly, was a great master of the Greek, and understood well the French, Spanish, and Italian languages.

, an English divine, was born at North Thoresby in the county of Lincoln, in the beginning of 1610, of which place his father, Henry Mapletoft, was many years rector. He was educated at the free grammar school of Louth, and admitted of Queen’s college in Cambridge. When he had taken the degree of B. A. he removed to Pembroke hall, and was there made fellow January 6, 1630; and in or about 1633 was appointed chaplain to bishop Wren. He was one of the university preachers in 1641, and was some time after one of the proctors of the university. In 1644 (being then bachelor in divinity) he was ejected from his fellowship for not taking the covenant. After this he retired, and lived privately among his friends, and particularly with sir Robert Shirley in Leicestershire, where he became acquainted with Dr. Sheldon, who became archbishop of Canterbury. He had afterwards a private congregation in Lincoln, where he used to officiate according to the Liturgy of the church of England: this had like to have produced him much trouble; but it being found that he had refused a considerable sum of money offered him by his congregation, he escaped prosecution. On the restoration he returned to Cambridge, and was re-instated in his fellowship, and was presented by the Crown, August 1, 1660, on the death of Dr. Newell, to the prebend of Clifton in Lincoln cathedral, to which he was installed August 23, 1660: and then resigning it, he was also on the same day installed to the sub-deanery of the same church, which he resigned in 1671; and about the same time he became rector of Clayworth in Nottinghamshire, which living he afterwards exchanged for the vicarage of Soham, in Cambridgeshire. In 1661 he resigned his fellowship, and about that time was invited by archbishop Sheldon to be chaplain to the duchess of York, then supposed to be inclining to popery, and in want of a person of Dr. Mapletoft’s primitive stamp to keep her steady to her religion; but he could not be prevailed upon to accept the appointment. In 1664 he was elected master of Pembroke hall, and became doctor in divinity, and was by the king, August 7, 1667, promoted to the deanery of Ely. He served the office of vice-chancellor of the university of Cambridge in 1671, and died at Pembroke hall, August 20, 1677. His remains, according to his own desire, were deposited in a vault in the chapel of that college, near the body of bishop Wren, the founder of it, his honoured friend and patron, without any memorial.

Dr. Mapletoft lived very hospitably at Ely, and wherever he resided, and was esteemed for the many pious and charitable acts in his life-time; and, at his death, after many gifts, legacies, and charitable donations, he bequeathed to the university 100l. towards purchasing Golius’s library of Oriental books for the university library; and in case that design was not executed, then to some permanent university use, at the discretion of the vicechancellor and the two professors of divinity; lOOl. to poor widows, chiefly clergymen’s. His benefactions to the church of Ely were, to the dean and chapter for ever, all his close called hundred acres in the Wash in the town of Coveney, for the increase of the Dinging men’s stipends, and on condition that they should frequent early prayers in the cathedral. He also bequeathed to the same church his library of books, and 100l. toward fitting up a place to receive them, and furnishing it with more books; to each of the prebendaries a ring of 20,?. to each minor canon and schoolmaster 20s. to each singing-man and verger 10s. and to the choristers 5s. each.

, a learned author, born at Lucca in 1612, became a member of the congregation of regular clerks, “de la Mere de Dieu.” He obtained a name in the literary world by an edition of the Koran, published at Padua in 1698, in 2 vols. folio, and entitled “Alcorani Textus universus, Arabice et Latine,” to which he subjoined notes, with a refutation, and a life of Mahomet. The argumentative part, however, is not always solid; the critics in Arabic have found several faults in the printing of that language; and the editor appears to be more versed in the Mussulman authors than in philosophy or theology. Maracci had a large share in the edition of the Arabic Bible printed at Rome in 1671, in 3 vols. folio; and was certainly very successful as a professor of Arabic, in the college della Sapienza. Innocent XI. respected his virtues and knowledge, chose him for his confessor, and would have raised him to the purple, had not his great modesty declined that honour. He died in 1700. Niceron recounts a long list of his works.

, a learned astronomer and mathematician, was born in 1665 at Perinaldo in the county of Nice, a place already honoured by the birth of his maternal uncle, the celebrated Cassini. Having made a considerable progress in mathematics, at the age of twentytwo his uncle, who had been a long time settled in France, invited him there, that he might himself cultivate the promising genius of his nephew. Maraldi no sooner applied himself to the contemplation of the heavens, than he conceived the design of forming a catalogue of the fixed stars, the foundation of the whole astronomical edifice. In consequence of this design, he applied himself to observe them with the most constant attention; and he became by this means so intimate with them, that on being shown any one of them, however small, he could immediately tell what constellation it belonged to, and its place in that constellation. He has been known to discover those small comets, which astronomers often take for the stars of the constellation in which they are seen, for want of knowing precisely what stars the constellation consists f, when others, on the spot, and with eyes directed equally to the same part of the heavens, could not for a long time see any thing of them.

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

, the author of the Turkish Spy, a book cried up far beyond its merits, for a long time, both in France and England, was born about 1642, at or near Genoa. When he was only twenty-seven or twentyeight, he was involved in the conspiracy of Raphael de la Torre, who was desirous to give up Genoa to the duke of Savoy. After being imprisoned four years, he retired to Monaco, where he wrote the history of t&at plot, printed at Lyons, in 1682, in Italian. It contains some curious particulars.

Marana, who had always wished to visit Paris, in 16S2 went to settle there; and his merit being distinguished, he found patronage from several people of consequence. He there wrote his “Turkish Spy,” in 6 vols. duodecimo, to which a seventh was added in 1742, when the last edition appeared. Tnough the style of this work was neither precise, correct, nor elegant, it was greatly relished by the public. The author had the art to interest curiosity by an amusing mixture of adventures, half true and half fictitious, but all received at the time as authentic, by persons of confined information. Few supposed the author to be a real Turk, but credit was given to the unknown European, who, under a slight fiction, thus delivered opinions and anecdotes, which it might not have been safe to publish in a more open manner. The first three volumes were most approved; the next three, which are in reality much inferior, were received with a proportionable degree of attention. The whole are now the amusement of tew except very idle readers. Many other spies of a similar kind have been formed upon this plan. Marana lived at Paris, rather in a retired manner, which suited his taste, to 1689, when the desire of solitude led him to retire into Italy, where he died in 1693.

, a prominent actor in the French revolution, was born of protestant parents, in Neufchatel, in 1744. In early life he went to Paris to study physic, and appears to have made very great proficiency in it; but probably from not having patience to pursue the profession in a regular course, he became an empyric, selling his medicines at an extravagant price. On the breaking out of the revolution, he took the lead among the most violent and savage of all the factions that disgraced the capital; and had endeavoured to preach murder and robbery long before it appeared probable that such crimes could have been practised with impunity. His first publication was a periodical paper, entitled the “Publiciste Parisien,” in which he, without scruple, and without any regard to decency and truth, attacked Neckar, and other men eminent for their integrity and public talents. His next paper was entitled “The Friend of the People,” in which he more openly excited the troops to use their arms against their generals, the poor to plunder the rich, and the people at large to rise against the king. After the deposition of Louis XVI. he was named a deputy of the department of Paris to the convention, in which assembly he appeared armed with pistols. In April 1793, he publicly denounced the leaders of the Brissotine party, accusing them oF treason against the state he was supported by Robespierre; a violent tumult ensued, but Marat and his friends were subdued, and himself impeached and prosecuted; in a few days, being brought to trial, he was acquitted. The triumph of his party was now unbounded, and they soon gained such an ascendancy over their enemies, that they murdered or banished all that attempted to obstruct the progress of their nefarious projects; till at length their leader Marat fell a victim to the enthusiastic rage of a female, Charlotte Cord6, who bad travelled from Caen, in Normandy, with a determination of rescuing, as she hoped, her country from the hands of barbarians, by the assassination of one of the chief among them. He died unpitied by every human being who was not of the atrocious faction which he led, having, for some weeks, acted the most savage parts, and been the means of involving many of the most virtuous characters in France in almost indiscriminate slaughter. Previously to joining in revolutionary politics, he was known as an author, and published a work “On Man, or Principles of the reciprocal Influence of the Soul and Body,” in two volumes, 12mo: also some tracts on Electricity and Light, in which he attacked the Newtonian System. These works had been forgot long before he began to make a figure in the political world; but it is remarkable that his death occasioned a fresh demand for them. They are now, however, again sunk into oblivion, and his name is never mentioned but with contempt and horror.

, one of the most admired painters of the Italian school, was born in 1625, at Camerino in the march of Ancona. When quite a child he is said to have pressed out the juices of flowers, which he used for colours in drawing on the walls of his father’s house. This propensity most probably induced his parents to send him to Rome at eleven years old; where, by his manner of copying the designs of Raphael in the Vatican, he obtained the favour of Andrea Sacchi, and became his pupil. From the grace and beauty of his ideas he was generally employed in painting Madonnas and female saints; on which account he was, by Salvator Rosa, satirically called Carluccio delta Madonna. He was far from being ashamed of this name, and in the inscription placed by himself on his monument (nine years before his death), he calls it gloriosum cognomen, and professes his particular devotion to the Virgin Mary. The pope, Clement XI. gave him a pension, and the title of Cavaliero di Cristo and he was appointed painter in ordinary to Louis XIV. He died at Home, loaded with honours, in 1713, at the advanced age of eighty-eight. Extreme modesty and gentleness were the characteristics of his disposition; and Jiis admiration of the great models he had studied was such, that not content with having contributed to preserve the works of Raphael and the Caraccis in the Farnese gallery, he erected monuments to them in the Pantheon, at his own expence. Several plates are extant, etched hy him in aquafortis, in which he has displayed abundant taste and genius.

Of this artist Mr. Fuseli says, that although " he enjoyed in his life the reputation of one of the first painters of Europe, his talent seldom rose above mediocrity; he delighted in easel-pictures or altar-pieces, though not unacquainted with fresco. He is celebrated for the lovely, modest, and yet dignified air of his Madonnas, the grace of his angels, the devout character of his saints, and their festive dresses. His best pictures are in the style of Sacchi: those of his second manner are more elaborate, more anxiously studied, but, with less freedom, have less grandeur. The masses of his draperies are too much intersected, shew the naked too little, and sometimes make his figures appear too heavy or too short. He certainly aimed at fixing his principal light -to the most important spot of his picture; but, being unacquainted with the nature and the gradations of shade, involved its general tone in a certain mistiness, which was carried to excess by his pupils, and became a characteristic mark of his school. He studied in his youth the style and works of Raphael with the most sedulous attention, and strove to imitate him at every period of his practice; but it does not appear that he ever discriminated his principles of design or composition, notwithstanding the subsequent minute and laborious employment of restoring his frescoes.

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

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

He left the care of his manuscripts to Mr. Baluze, who had lived with him ever since June, 1656, and who has written his life, whence this account is taken. Baluze also published an edition of his work “De Concordia,” in 1704, as originally written. The only other works he wrote of any note are his “Histoire de Bearn,” Paris, 1640, fol. and his “Marca Hispanica, sive Limes Hispanicus,” Paris, 1688, fol. edited by Baluze. Le Clerc very justly thinks Baluze’s account of De Marca, a panegyric or an apology rather than a life. The most favourable trait in De Marca’s character was his ambition to rise by learning, which certainly first brought him into notice. He is said to have renounced all the pleasures of youth, while he was at school, for the love of books; and to have foretold to his school-fellows, who spent their time in vain amusements, the difference which would one day appear between their glory and his. It was at Toulouse that he laid the groundwork of his great learning; and he did not neglect to make himself a complete master of the Greek tongue, which greatly distinguished him from other learned men. He was early married to a young lady of the ancient family of the viscounts of Lavedan, who bore him several children; but she dying in 1632, he went into orders.

, 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.

, an author to whom the curious in literary history are greatly indebted, was probably a native of Paris, and born towards the conclusion of the seventeenth century. He was bred up as a bookseller in that city, a business which always requires some knowledge of books, but which he carried to an extent very unusual, and for forty years employed almost the whole of his time in inspecting the works of eminent authors, inquiring into their history, their editions, differences, and every species of information which forms the accurate bibliographer. During the time that Mr. Bernard published the “Nouvelles de la Republiques des Lettres,” Marchand was his constant correspondent, and contributed all the literary anecdotes from Paris, which appeared in that journal. Being, however, a conscientious protestant, and suspecting that in consequence of the repeal of the edict of Nantz, he might be interrupted in the exercise of his religion, he went to reside in Holland, and carried on the bookselling trade there for some time, until meeting with some lack of honesty among his brethren (pen de bonne-foi qiCil avoit trouvej, he relinquished business, and devoted his time entirely to literary history and biography. In both his knowledge was so conspicuous, that the booksellers were always happy to avail themselves of his opinion respecting intended publications, and more happy when they could engage his assistance as an editor. In the latter character, we find that he superintended an edition, 1. of Bayle’s “Dictionary,” and “Letters,” both which he illustrated with notes. 2. “Satyre Menippee,” Ratisbonne (Brussels), 1714, 3 vols. 8vo. 3. “Cymbalum mundi,” by Bonaventure de Perrieres, Amst. 1732, 12mo. 4. Fenelon’s “Direction pomla conscience d'un roi,” Hague, 1747, 8vo and 12mo. 5. The abbe Brenner’s “Histoire des Revolutions de Hongrie,” ibid. 1739, 2 vols. 4to, and 6 vols. 12mo. 6. “Lettres, Memoires, et Negociations du comte d'Estrades,” London (Hague)^ 1743, 9 vols. 12mo. 7. “Histoire de Fenelon,” Hague, 1747, 12mo. 8. “Oeuvres de Brantome,” ibid. 1740, 15 vols. 12mo. 9. “Oeuvres de Villon,” ibid. 1742, 8vo, &c. &c.

Marchand was also one of the principal writers in the “Journal Litteraire,” which was reckoned one of the best of the kind, and he contributed occasionally to other periodical works. He maintained at the same time a regular and extensive correspondence with the most learned men in different parts of Europe; to whom he communicated, and from whom he received communications, and often had it in his power to assist them from the stores of his ow, curious and well-chosen library.

Besides the “Anti-Cotton, ou Refutation de la lettre declaratoire du P. Cotton, avec un dissertation,” printed at the Hague in 1738, at the end of the history of Don Inigo de Guipuscoa, and the “Chef-d‘oeuvre d’un inconnu,” often reprinted, he published in 1740 “Histoire de PImprimerie,” Hague, 4to, a work of great research, and often consulted by typographical antiquaries, but deficient in perspicuity of arrangement. A valuable supplement to it was published by Mercier, the abbé of St. Leger, 1775, 2 vols. 4to, which French bibliographers say is better executed than Marchand’s work, and certainly is more correct. But the vvork which best preserves the name of Marchand, was one to which we have taken many opportunities to own our obligations, his “Dictionnaire Historique, ou Memoires Critiques et Litteraires, concernant la vie et les outrages de divers personnages distingués, particulierement dans la republique des-lettres,” 1758 9, 2 vols. folio. This has been by his editor and others called a Supplement to Bayle; but, although Marchand has touched upon a few of the authors in Bayle’s series, and has made useful corrections and valuable additions to them, yet in general the materials are entirely his own, and the information of his own discovering. The articles are partly biographical, and partly historical; but his main object being the history of books, he sometime*enlarges to a degree of minuteness, which bibliographers only can pardon, and it must be owned sometimes brings forward inquiries into the history of authors and works which his utmost care can scarcely rescue from the oblivion in which he found them. With this objection, which by no means affects the totality of the work, we know few volumes that afford more satisfaction or information on the subjects introduced. His accuracy is in general precise, but there are many errors of the press, and the work laboured under the disadvantage of not being handed to the press by the author. He often intended this, and as often deferred it, because his materials increased so that he never could say when his design was accomplished; and at length, when he had nearly overcome all his scruples, and was about to print, a stroke of palsy deprived him of the use of his right hand, and unfitted him for every business but that of preparing to die, and the settlement of his affairs. This last took up little time. He was a man of frugal habits, content with the decent necessaries of life, and laid out what remained of his money in books. The items of his will, therefore, were few, but liberal. He left his personal property to a society established at the Hague for the education of the poor; and his library and Mss. to the university of Leyden. He died, at an advanced age, June 14, 1756. His “Dictiormaire” he consigned to the care of a friend, who has given us only the initials of his name (J. N. S. A.) to whom he likewise intrusted a new edition of his “History of Printing,” which has never appeared. This friend undertook to publish the Dictionary with the. greater alacrity, as Mart-hand assured him that the manuscript was ready. Ready it certainly was, hut in such a state as frightened the editor, being all written upon little pieces of paper of different sizes, some not bigger than one’s thumb-nail, and written in a character so exceeding small, that it was not legible to the naked eye. The editor, therefore, said perhaps truly, that this was the first book ever printed by the help of a microscope. These circumstances, however, may afford a sufficient apology for the errors of the press, already noticed; and the editor certainly deserves praise for having so well accomplished his undertaking amidst so many difficulties.

, a French courtier and author, of the fifteenth century, was the son of a Burgundian gentleman. He was first page, and afterwards gentleman to Philip the Good, duke of Burgundy, who so highly esteemed his fidelity, that he refused to give him up at the demand of Louis XI. La Marche served afterwards with zeal under Charles the Rash, who was slain at the battle of Nancy, in 1477. After this, he had the office of grand maitre d'hotel to Maximilian of Austria, who had married the heiress of Burgundy; and, maintaining the same post under the archduke Philip, was sent on an embassy to France after the death of Louis XI. He died at Brussels Feb. 1, 1501. His works are, 1. “Memoirs, or Chronicles,” printed at Lyons in I 562, and at Brussels in 1616, 4to. They are reckoned inferior to the Memoirs of Comines, as to their style, but perhaps superior as to their sincerity. The author relates several curious anecdotes in a manner which, though flat, is rendered pleasing by its frankness. 2. “ATreatiseon Duels,” &c. 8vo. 3. “Triomphe des Dames d'Honneur,” 1520, 8vo; the Triumph of virtuous Women. This is a work of dull and trivial morality, full of quaint allusions and metaphors. Several other performances are said to be extant, in print, and. in manuscript, but from the account given of them there is little motive for making them the object of any further inquiry.

, 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 physician, was professor of anatomy at Padua, where he was born, and where he continued to teach that art from 1652 until 1669, when he was allowed to resign his chair to his son Anthony. In 1661, he also obtained the appointment to the first professorship of surgery, which he held along with that of anatomy. His merit in both procured him the honour of knighthood of the order of St. Mark. At the age of eighty years, he retired altogether from the university; and, after having enjoyed a short period of repose, he died in April 1673. He left the following works: “Anatomia,” Venice, 1654, 4to. “Sylloge Observationnm Medico-chirurgicarum rariorum,” Padua, 1664, several times reprinted, and translated into German. It contained fiftythree cases of some interest, and three tracts on. ulcers, on fistulas of the urethra, and on spina ventosa. His two sons, Dominic and Anthony de Majrchetti, were likewise both professors in their native university of Padua. The former was author of a good compendium of anatomy, according to the judgment of Haller, which passed through several editions, under the title of “Anatomia, cui Responsiones ad Riolanum, Anatomicum Parisiensem, in ipsius animadversionibus contra Veslingium, additae sunt,” Padua, 1652, &c.

, a nobleman of great learning and accomplishments, was born in 1708. He was the third in succession to, and the last inheritor of, that title; there being no male descendants of his grandfather, sir Patrick Hume, the first earl, and his lordship having survived his only son, Alexander lord Polwarth, who had been created an English peer, but died without issue of his marriage with the lady Isabella Grey, daughter of the earl of Hardwicke, and heiress of the last duke of Kent; a peeress in her own right, under a limitation by Charles II. of the barony of Lucas of Cruduell.

Sir Patrick Hume, the first earl, was raised to the peerage by king William III, for having taken a very leading and active part to counteract the arbitrary proceedings of Charles II.; and afterwards the more dangerous measures of James II. which threatened the annihilation of the liberties of the country, as well as the complete subversion of its religion; for which attempts he was long imprisoned in the former reign; and persecuted with a most unrelenting spirit in the latter, for having joined in the unsuccessful attempt of the^earl of Argyle in 1685. King William’s private regard for sir Patrick was marked by his majesty’s granting an addition to his arms of an orange, ensigned with an imperial crown; and by giving him an original portrait of himself.

Concerning the danger to which sir Patrick was exposed in the last of the two reigns above-mentioned, we have the following very interesting narrative in a work recently published , for extracting which it is needless to make any apology.

When a near relation, very dear to sir Patrick, was again imprisoned, he thought it adviseable to keep himself concealed. The following account of his concealment is taken, from the ms. preserved in the family by his grand-daughter. “After persecution began afresh, and my grandfather Baillie again in prison, sir Patrick thought it necessary to keep concealed; and soon found he had too good reason for so doing, parties being continually sent out in search of him, and often to his own house, to the terror of all in it, though not from any fear for his safety, whom they imagined at a great distance from home, for no soul knew where he was but my grandmother, and my mother, except one man, a carpenter, called Jamie Winter, who used to work in the house, and lived a mile off, on whose fidelity they thought they could depend; and were not deceived. The frequent examinations and oaths put to servants in order to make discoveries were so strict, they durst not run the risk of trusting any of them. By the assistance of this man they got a bed and bed-clothes carried in the night to the burying-place, a vault under ground at Polwarth church, a mile from the house, where he was concealed a month; and had only for light an open slit at the one end, through which nobody could see what was below; she (his daughter) went every night by herself at midnight, to carry him victuals and drink, and staid with him as long as she could to get home before day. In all this time my grandfather shewed the same constant composure and cheerfulness of mind that he continued to possess to his death, which was at the age of eighty -four; all which good qualities she inherited from, him in a high degree; often did they laugh heartily in that doleful habitation, at different accidents that happened. She at that time had a terror for a church-yard, especially in the dark, as it is not uncommon at her age, by idle nursery stories; but when engaged by concern for her father, she stumbled over the graves every night alone, without fear of any kind entering her thoughts, but for soldiers and parties in search of him, which the least noise or motion of a leaf put her in terror for. The minister’s house was near the church; the first night she went, his dogs kept such a barking as put her in the utmost fear of a discovery; my grandmother sent for the minister next day, and upon pretence of a mad dog, got him to hang all his dogs. There was also difficulty of getting victuals to carry him without the servants suspecting; the only way it was done, was by stealing it off her plate at dinner into her lap many a diverting story she has told about and other things of a like nature. Her father liked sheep’s head, and while the children were eating their broth, she had conveyed most of one into her lap; when her brother Sandy (the second lord Marchmont) had done, he looked up with astonishment, and said,” Mother, will ye look at Grizzel; while we have been eating our broth, she has eat up the whole sheep’s head.“This occasioned so much mirth among them, that her father at night was greatly entertained by it; and desired Sandy might have a share in the next. I need not multiply stories of this kind, of which I know many. His great comfort and constant entertainment (for he had no light to read by) was repeating Buchanan’s Psalms, which he had by heart from beginning to end; and retained them to his dying-day two years before he died, which was in 1724, I was witness to his desiring my mother to take up that work, which, amongst others, always lay upon his table, and bid her try if he had forgot his psalms, by naming any one she would have him repeat; and by casting her eye over it she would know if he was right, though she did not understand it; and he missed not a word in any place she named to him, and said they had been the great comfort of his life, by night and day, on all occasions. As the gloomy habitation my father was in, was not to be long endured but from necessity, they were contriving other places of safety for him; amongst others, particularly one under a bed which drew out, on a ground Moor, in a room of which my mother kept the key; she and the same man worked in the night, making a hole in the earth after lifting the boards, which they did by scratching it up with their hands not to make any noise, till she left not a nail upon her fingers, she helping the man to carry the earth as they dug it, in a sheet, on his back, out at the window into the garden; he then made a box at his own house, large enough for her father to lie in, with bed and bed-clothes, and bored holes in the boards for air; when all this was finished, for it was long about, she thought herself the most secure happy creature alive. When it had stood the trial for a month of no water coming into it, which was feared from being so low, and every day examined by my mother, and the holes for air made clear, and kept clean-picked, her father ventured home, having that to trust to. After being at home a week or two, the bed daily examined as usual, one day in lifting the boards, the bed bounced to the top, the box being full of water: in her life she was never so struck, and had near dropped down, it being at that time their only refuge; her father, with great composure, said to his wife and her, he saw they must tempt Providence no longer, and that it was now fit and necessary for him to go off, and leave them; in which he was confirmed hy the carrier telling for news he had brought from Edinburgh, that the day before, Mr. Baillie of Jerviswoode had his life taken from him at the Cross, and that every body was sorry, though they durst not shew it; as all intercourse by letters was dangerous, it was the first notice they bad of it; and the more shocking, that it was not expected. They immediately set about preparing for my grandfather’s going away. My mother worked night and day in making some alterations in his clothes for disguise; they were then obliged to trust John Allen, their grieve, who fainted away when he was told his master was in the house, and that he was to set out with him on horseback before day, and pretend to the rest of the servants that he had orders to sell some horses at Morpeth fair. Accordingly, my grandfather getting out at a window in the stables, they set out in the dark; though with good reason it was a sorrowful parting, yet after he was fairly gone they rejoiced, and thought themselves happy that he was in a way of being safe, though they were deprived of him, and little knew what was to be either his fate or their own.”

When his serene highness came over, and happily effected the bloodless revolution, sir Patrick Hume was one of those who accompanied him, and was by him created lord Polwarth of Polwarth, and afterwards earl of Marchmont. He was also made lord high chancellor of Scotland by king William; an office in that country, before the Union, of the highest rank, as it is here,

Alexander, the second earl, second son of the preceding, was ambassador to Denmark and Prussia in 1715; in 1716 was appointed lord register of Scotland; and in 1721 was named first ambassador in the congress at Cambray .

Hugh, of whom we now speak, the third earl, was the third son of the above-mentioned Alexander, and twin-­brother of Mr. Hume Campbell, who was in the first practice at the English bar, but retired from it on being appointed lord register of Scotland. The subject of our present article having finished his studies in the learned languages, in which at an early period of his life he was a most distinguished scholar, he was sent to Utrecht to complete his education. Here, under the instruction of one of the most eminent civilians of modern times, he succeeded in the attainment of a knowledge of the civil law to an extent seldom acquired, even by those who were to follow it as a profession; and at the same time became master of several modern languages, which he read and wrote with great facility.

These qualifications, with an unwearied industry to reach the bottom of every subject of discussion, and a habit of speaking, attracted great attention to him, very soon after his coming into parliament for the town of Berwick, in 1734. He was one of the most active members of the opposition of that period; and on the secession of Mr. Pulteney, afterwards earl of Bath, in 1739, he took the decided lead in it; but his career in the House of Commons was stopped by his succession to the peerage, on the death of his father, in 1740. On which occasion sir Robert Walpole said to an intimate and confidential friend, that an event had occurred which had rid him of the opponent by far the most troublesome to him in the House.

When the circumstances here alluded to are considered, it will not be thought surprising that the society of his lordship, anil his correspondence, should have been sought by some of the most distinguished characters of the time: he lived in close intimacy with lord Cobham, who placed his bust among the worthies at Stowe lord Cornbury, sir William Wyndham, lord Chesterfield, and Mr. Pope and notwithstanding an essential difference of opinion from lord Bolingbroke on some very important points, he was so attracted by his most extraordinary talents, as to form an intimate friendship with him, which continued to the death of the viscount, although with a short temporary interruption to it, owing to the part which lord Marchmont took in vindicating, rather or extenuating, the conduct of Pope, respecting the printing of lord Bolingbroke’s “Patriot King.” Of this affair we have taken some notice in our account of Mallet; and shall be able to throw additional light on it when we come to the article of Pope, from lord Marchmont’s account, with which we have been favoured.

The points on which lord Marchmont and lord Bolingbroke differed, were occasionally the subject of conversation between them; respecting which there was certainly some change in the mind of lord Bolingbroke, towards the close of his life. This is proved beyond the possibility of contradiction by the author of a recent publication, of which we have already availed ourselves . The evidence is clear as to the “Essays” having been written and addressed to lord Marchmont; and it is equally certain, they are not among the works of his lordship, as edited by Mr. Mallet, to whose care the whole was intrusted, in consequence of a decided influence he acquired over his lordship, not long previous to his death. How little either of fame or fortune accrued to Mallet from this advantage, we have already noticed in our account of him.

Lord Marchinont was also distinguished by Sarah duchess of Marlborough, in a very remarkable manner*, with whom he lived in the most friendly habits, and was appointed by her grace one of her executors, with a large legacy, and named in the succession to a part of her great estate, on failure of certain heirs of her body (excluding the duke of Marlborough) on whom she entailed the whole; the discharge of which trust fell principally on the earl.

After his lordship’s accession to the peerage in 1740, he did not mix in public business till 1747, when he was appointed first lord commissioner of police in Scotland; and had no opportunity of rendering himself conspicuous in polir tical life until 1750, when he was elected one of the sixteen peers, in the room of the earl of Crawford. From this time he took a very active share in most of the important debates that occurred, which led to his being appointed keeper of the great seal of Scotland in 1764 (on the death of the duke of Athol), the office substituted for that of lord chancellor. The last political act of his life, was the vote he gave on Mr. Fox’s India bill; on which occasion he was the first peer who went below the bar as a non-content.

In the new parliament which met in the spring of 1784, after the dissolution subsequent to the rejection of that famous measure, he was not included in the list of the sixteen representative peers of Scotland. He then sold his house in London, and retired to a small place in Hertfordshire, that had belonged to the father of the countess, where he continued to reside during the remainder of his life, never having quitted it for a single day. He read incessantly in the library which he built for the reception of his books from London, and for the most valuable of those from Marchmont house in Berwickshire, except during a few hours that he allotted for his daily exercise on horseback, and for making improvements that were constantly going on in his small domain near Hemel Hempstead. The visits he made were almost exclusively in a morning, and to his nearest neighbours only.

It may be truly said, that there have been few men in any age, who read more deeply than this distinguished nobleman. The notes he left behind him on almost every eminent author of antiquity, and on the most useful publications in modern times, afford an unequivocal proof of this. He was never himself an author; but it is to him the public are indebted for the publication of the records of parliament, from very nearly the earliest period of that assembly meeting, which have thrown most useful light on our constitutional history. The famous survey of all the counties in England made under the authority of William the Conqueror, called Domesday Book , was printed at the same time. The earl died at his house in Hertfordshire, January 10, 1794.

, a learned German critic, was born at Arnheim, a town of Gueldres, in 1548. His father, who was a man of rank and learning, observing in him a more than ordinary inclination for books, took particular care of his education. He had him taught at home the elements of the Latin tongue, and then sent him to school at Deventer, where he learned the Greek under Noviomagus. Marcilius, having made a great progress in both languages, was removed thence to the university of Louvain, where he applied himself to philosophy and civil law; and, having finished his studies, went to Paris, and thence to Toulouse, where he taught polite literature many years. Returning to Paris, he taught rhetoric in 1578, in the college of Grassins, and afterwards read lectures in several other colleges successively. In 1602, he was made royal professor of the Latin tongue, and the belles lettres: and died March 15, 1617. Though he was not a critic of the first rank, yet he did not deserve the contemptuous treatment which Scaliger has given him. He published an edition in Greek and Latin of “Pythagoras’s Golden Verses,” at Paris, 1585, with commentaries, which John Albeit Fabricius has called learned; and notes upon many of the ancient authors, Persius, Horace, Martial, Catullus, Suetonius, Aulus Gellius, &c. which are to be found in several editions of their works. He was also the author of some Latin works, as, “Historia Strenarum,” 1596, 8vo “Lusu’s de Nemine,” &c. and some poems and orations.

, a heretic, who lived in the second century of the church, was born at Sinope, a city of Paphlagonia, upon the Euxine sea, and had for his father the bishop of that city. Eusebius calls him 5 votumg, the mariner; and Tertullian, more than once, Ponticus Nauclerus. Whether he acquired this name from having learned the art of sailing in his youth, or from being born in a sea-port town, ecclesiastical antiquity has not told us. At first he professed continency, and betook himself to an ascetic life; but, having so far forgotten himself as to debauch a young lady, he was excommunicated by his father, who was so rigid an observer of the discipline of the church, that he could never be induced, by all his prayers and vows of repentance, to re-admithim into the communion of the faithful. This exposed him so much to the scoffs and insults of his countrymen, that he privily withdrew himself, and went to Rome, hoping to gain admittance there. But his case being known, he was again unsuccessful, which so irritated him, that he became a disciple of Cerdo, and espoused the opinions of that famous heretic. The most accurate chronologers have not agreed as to the precise time when Marcion went to Rome; but the learned Cave, after considering their reasons, determines it, and with the greatest appearance of probability, to the year 127; and supposes further, that he began to appear at the head of his sect, and to propagate his doctrines publicly, about the year 130. Indeed it could not well be later, because his opinions were dispersed far and wide in the reign of Adrian; and Clemens Alexandrinus, speaking of the heretics who lived under that emperor, mentions Basilides, Valentinus, and Marcion, who, he says, “conversed along with them, as a junior among seniors:” and Basilides died in the year 134.

The doctrines of this heretic were, many of them, the same with those which were afterwards adopted by Manes and his followers; that, for instance, of two co-eternal, and independent principles, jDne the author of all good, the other of all evil. In other to support and propagate this principle more successfully, he is said to have applied himself to the study of philosophy, that of the stoics especially. Marcion likewise taught, as Manes did after him, that the God of the Old Testament was the evil principle; that he was an imperious tyrannical being, who imposed the hardest laws upon the Jews, and injuriously restrained Adam from touching the best tree in Paradise; and that the serpent was a nobler being than he, for encouraging him to eat of its fruit: on which account, as Theodoret tells us upon his own knowledge, the Marcionites worshipped a brazen serpent, which they always kept shut up in an ark. He taught, that Christ came down from heaven to free us from the yoke, which this being had put upon us; that Christ, however, was not clothed with real flesh and blood, but only appeared to the senses to be so, and that his sufferings were nothing more than appearance; that when Christ descended into hell, and preached the Gospel there, he brought the followers of Cain, the inhabitants of Sodom, and other wicked people, who were converted from the error of their ways, back with him to heaven; but that he left Noah, Abraham, and the other patriarchs, who would not listen to his preaching, but trusted too much to their own righteousness, fast bound in that horrible dungeon; that there would be no resurrection of the body, but only of the soul, &c. &c. He rejected the law and the prophets, as being written tinder the inspiration of the evil god. He rejected also four epistles of St. Paul, together with all the gospels, except that of St. Luke; out of which, and the rest of St. Paul’s epistles, he composed, for the use of his followers, two books, which he persuaded them were of divine authority calling one “Evangelium,” and the other “Apostolicon.” Such is the account given in Irenaeus, in Tertullian’s five books against Marcion, and in Epiphanius.

While Marcion was at Rome, he happened to meet Polycarp of Smyrna: and upon asking that bishop, “whether he acknowledged him for a brother?” “I acknowledge you,” says Polycarp, “for the first-born of Satan.” Tertullian relates that Marcion at length repented of all his errors, and would have testified his repentance in public, provided they would have admitted him again into the church. This was agreed to, upon condition that he would bring back all those whom he had seduced from it; which before he could effect, he died. The precise time of his death cannot be collected from antiquity, any more than that of his going to Rome. It is certain, that he lived after Antoninus Pius began to reign; for, although his heresy had spread a great way under Adrian, yet, by his extraordinary vigilance and activity, it spread much further under Antoninus Pius. His first apology for the Christians was presented to Antoninus Pius about the year 140; and Justin Martyr tells us there, in express terms, that “Marcion of Pontus was then living, and taught his disciples at Rome.”

, an eminent protestant divine, was born at Sneck in Friesland, in 1655, and became professor of divinity at Franeker, and professor of divinity and ecclesiastical history at Groningen, whence in 1689 he was removed to the same office at Leyden, and died there, Jan. 30, 1731. His first publication was an inaugural dissertation in 1676, “De augmento scientiac theologicae.” He afterwards derived great reputation from his “Disputationes duodecim de Sibyllinis carminibus,” Franeker, 1682, 8vo, written in opposition to the sentiments of Crasset. 2. “Compendium theologiae,” Amst. 1712, 4to. 3. “Exercitationes Biblicae,” published at different times, amounting to eight volumes. 4. “Exercitationes miseellaneae.” These turn on various disputed passages in the holy Scriptures, concerning which he combats the opinions of the Roman catholics, Socinians, &c. A selection from his works was published at Groningen in 1748, 2 vols. 4to. In the Museum library are two of his orations, one on the agreement between the old and new errors of popery, Groningen, 16S3; the other on the reverence due to the sacred Scriptures, Leyden, 1689, both in 41O.

, was a principal magistrate of the Chatelet under Louis XIV. who reposed great confidence in him, and gave him a considerable pension. He was employed in several important affairs, particularly during the scarcity of corn in 1693, 1700, 1709, and 1710. He received a free gift of 300,000 livres, arising from the ninth part of the increased prices of admission to the public amusements, exhibited at the Hotel Dieu in Paris; but this sum did not increase his fortune, for he liberally employed it all in the expences attendant on the gratuitous functions of his office, the commissions with which he was entrusted, and the completion of his great work. He died April 15, 1723, aged near 82. This worthy magistrate established his fame by a most laborious treatise on the police, in 3 vols. folio, to which another author, M. le Clerc du Brillet, has since added a fourth. They contain a history of the French police, the privileges of the magistrates, the laws on that subject, &c. The two first volumes had supplements, which, in the edition of 1722, were thrown into the body of the work. The third volume was printed in 1719, and the fourth in 1738, and not reprinted. There is a valuable plate of the water-conduits of Paris, which is wanting in some copies.

, was a counsellor in the parliament of Dijon, deeply versed in literature and history, and esteemed almost as elegant a writer in Latin as the president de Thou, whom he had made his model. He died May 16, 1687, after having published several works, of which the most known is, his “Commentarius de Bello Burgundico.” This makes a part of his “Historicorum Burgundise conspectus,” published in 4to, in 1689. He wrote also “Huberti Langueti vita,” published by J. P. Ludwig, at Halle, 170O, 12D1O.

, a miscellaneous French writer, was born at Paris, Aug. 15, 1750, and was bred up to the bar, which he quitted for the more general pursuits of literature. He became librarian to the Mazarine college, and from time to time published a great many works, on various subjects of polite literature, criticism, manners, poetry, &c. most of which shew considerable genius and learning, and all were well received by the public. His very amiable private character appears to have procured him many friends and much respect, although his principles were not always sound, his person had little to recommend it, and an impediment in his speech rendered his conversation somewhat painful. He retired to the country about the close of his life, as he said, “that he might enjoy the sun more at his ease.” He died at Montrouge, Jan. 18, 1805. His principal works are: 1. “De Bergeries,” 1770, 12mo. 2. “Le Temple de Hymen,” 1771, 12mo. 3. “Bibliotheque des Amans,” 1777, J6mo. 4. “Tombeau de J. J. Rousseau,” 1779, 8vo. 5. “Le Livre de tous les ages,” 1779, 12mo. 6. “Fcagmens d'un poeme moral sur Dieu, ou, Nouvelle Lucrece,” 1781, a poem which the Diet. Hist, says is neither moral nor religious. 7. “L‘age d’or,” 1782, 12mo, an agreeable collection of anecdotes. 8. “Prophetic d'Arlamek,” 12mo. 9. “Livre echappe” au deluge,“1784, 12mo, a collection of psalms in the orie'ntal style, of which the moral is pure; but we are told it afforded his enemies a pretence to get him dismissed from his office of librarian to the Mazarine college. 10.” Recueil des poetes moralistes Franais r “1784, 2 vols. 18mo. 11.” Costumes civils actuels de tous les peuples,“1784, 4to. 12.” Tableau de la fable,“1787. 13.” Paris et la Province, ou Choix des plus beaux moriumens d'architecture en France,“1787. 14.” Catechisme de cure 1 Meslier,“1789, 8vo. 15.” Dictionnaire d'amour,“1789, 16mo. 16.” Le Pantheon, ou les figures de la fable, avec leurs histoires,“1791, 8vo. 17.” Almanee des honnetes gens,“1788, a publication containing some impieties, for which he suffered imprisonment. 18. ”Decades tlu cultivateur,“2 vols. 18mo. 19.” Voyage de Pythagore,“1798, 16 vols. 8vo, in imitation of the Anacharsis of Barthelemi, but greatly inferior. 20.” Dictionnaire des athees," 1800. He was also the author of prefaces and introductions to various collections of engravings, as the hjstory of Greece, 1795, 5 vols. 4to, the Florence Museum, 6 vols. 4to, &C.

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

These absurdities do not appear to have lessened hi& reputation among his countrymen, as the charge of inquisitor was bestowed upon him: and he showed himself very active in bringing about the extirpation of Jansenism. He had been a member of the French academy from its first establishment, and was always esteemed one of its principal ornaments. He wrote several dramatic pieces, which were received with great applause, especially that entitled “Les Visionaires.” He attempted an epic poem, entitled “Clovis,” which cost him several years’ labour; and he was of opinion, that it would have cost him a good many more to have finished it, if Providence had not destined his pen for works of devotion, and on that account afforded him supernatural assistance. This we learn from the preface of his “Delices de l'Esprit,” in which he professes that he dare not say in how short a time he had finished the nine remaining books of that poem, and retouched the rest. He also very seriously boasts, that “God, in his infinite goodness, had sent him the key of the treasure, contained in the Apocalypse, which was known but to few before him;” and that, “by the command of God, he was to levy an army of 144,000 men, part of which he had already enlisted, to make war upon the impious and the Jansenists.” He died in 1676, aged eighty-one.

His works are thus enumerated: 1. “A Paraphrase of the Psalms of David.” 2. “The Tomb of Card. Richelieu,” an ode. 3. “The Service to the Virgin,” turned into verse. 4. “The Christian Virtues,” a poem in eight cantos. 5. The four books, “On the Imitation of Jesus Christ,” 1654, 12mo, very badly translated into French verse. 6. “Clovis,” or France converted, an epic poem in twenty-six books, 1657. This poem, though the author thought so highly of it, as we have already seen, is wholly destitute of genius, and its memory is preserved more by a severe epigram of Boileau against it, than by any other circumstance. He wrote also, 7. “The Conquest of Franche Comte,” and some other poems not worth enumerating. Besides these works in verse, he published in prose, 8. “Les Delices de l'Esprit,” a fanatical and incomprehensible work above-mentioned, which was best criticized by a person who said, that at the head of the Errata should be put, “for Delices, read Delires;” instead of delights of the mind, ravings of it. 9. “Avis du St. Esprit an Roi,” still more extravagant if possible than the former. 10. “Several Romances, and among them one entitled” Ariane,“or Ariadne, at once dull and indecent. 11.” La Verit6 des Fables," 1648, 2 vols. 8vo. 12. A dissertation on Poets, in which the author ventures to attack the maxims of Aristotle and Horace. Some writings against the satires of Boileau, and several against the Jansenists, complete the list. His countrymen now consider the verses of Des Marets as low, drawling, and incorrect; his prose, as disgraced by a species of bombast which renders it more intolerable than his poetry.

His niece, Mary Dupre', was born at Paris, and educated by her uncle. She was endowed with a happy genius and a retentive memory. After reading most of the principal French authors, she learnt Latin, and went through Cicero, Ovid, Quintus Curtius, and Justin. With these books she made herself so familiarly acquainted, that her uncle proceeded to teach her the Greek language, the arts of rhetoric and versification, and philosophy; not that scholastic philosophy which is made up of sophistry and ridiculous subtleties, but a system drawn from the purer sources of sense and nature. She studied Descartes with such application, that she got the surname of la Cartesienne. She likewise made very agreeable verses in her own language, and acquired a thorough knowledge of the Italian. She held a friendly and literary correspondence with several of the learned her contemporaries, as also with the mademoiselles de Scudefi and de la Vigne. The answers of Isis to Climene, that is to mademoiselle de la Vigne, in the select pieces of poetry published by father Bouhours, are by this ingenious and learned lady.

, a celebrated divine of the reformed church, was born at Oisemond in Picardy, in 1599. At thirteen he was sent to Paris, where he made great advances in the belles lettres and philosophy; and three years after to Saumur, where he studied divinity under Gomarus, and Hebrew under Ludovicus Capellus. He returned to his father in 1618, and afterwards went to Geneva, to finish his course of divinity. The year following he went to Paris, and, by the advice of M. Durand, applied immediately for admission to the holy ministry, to the synod of Charenton, in March 1620, who received him, and settled him in the church of Laon. But his ministerial functions here were soon disturbed; for, the governor of La Fere’s wife having changed her religion, wrote him a letter in vindication of her conduct, and sent him a pamphlet containing the history of her conversion. His answer to this lady’s letter provoked his adversaries to such a degree, that a Jesuit was supposed to have suborned an assassin, who stabbed him deeply, but, as it happened, not mortally, with a knife into his breast. This induced Des Marets to leave Laon, and go to Falaise in 1624. He afterwards accepted a call to the church of Sedan; and soon after took the degree of doctor in divinity at Leyden, in July 1625. Having made a short visit to England, he returned to Sedan. In 1640, he had an invitation to a professorship at Franeker; and to another at Groningen, in 1642. This last he accepted; and from that time to his death, rendered such services to that university, that it was reckoned one of the most flourishing in the Netherlands. The magistrates of Berne, well informed of his abilities and learning, offered him, in 1661, the professor of divinity’s chair at Lausanne; and, in 1663, the university of Leyden invited him to a like professorship there. He accepted of this last, but died before he could take possession of it, at Groningen, May 18, the same year.

A chronological table of the works of this celebrated divine may be found at the end of his ' System of Divinity.“They are mostly of the controversial kind, and now seldom inquired after. He designed to collect all his works into a body, as well those which had been already published, as those which were in manuscript. He revised and augmented them for that purpose, and had materials for four volumes in folio; but his death prevented the execution of that project. The first volume was to have contained all those works which he had published before his being settled at Groningen. The second, his” Opera theologica didactica.“The third, his” Opera theologica polemica.“The title of the fourth was to have been” Impietas triumphata.“Its contents were to have been the” Hydra Socinianismi expugnata,“the” Biga fanaticorum eversa,“and the” Fabula Praeadamitaruru refutata" three works which had been printed at different times. Marets’s system of divinity was found to be so methodical, that they made use of it at other academies; and indeed this author’s reputation procured him so much authority in foreign countries as well as his own, that a person in Germany, who published some reflections on him, received orders to suppress his book.

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

, a French author and journalist, was born in Languedoc, in the diocese of Bezieres. He appeared at Paris about 1715, and espoused the cause of the Jesuits against the Jansenists; in which business he wrote with so much acrimony, that the court thought themselves obliged to banish him. He was sent to the isles of Larins, in the Mediterranean, and when these were taken by the Austrians in 1746, his liberty was granted on condition that he would retire into some religious house. He chose a monastery of Bernardines, where he died in 1760. His caustic and satirical disposition rendered him unpleasing in society as well as in his writings; and it is thought that his banishment and solitude much increased the acrimony of his character. He was concerned in several works, as, 1.“Memoirs of Marshal Villars,” 3 vols. 12mo, the two first of which are written by Villars himself. 2. “The Memoirs of the Duke of Berwick,” 2 vols. 12mo. 3. “Memoirs of Tourville,” 3 vols. 12mo, not much esteemed. 4. “Letters of Fitz-Moritz.” 5. Several small tracts, and some pieces of poetry of no great value.

, a celebrated chemist, was born at Berlin, March 3, 1709. His father was apothecary to the court, and assessor of the college of medicine, and under his care his attention was naturally turned to the pursuits of chemistry and pharmacy. To pursue these, his father sent him to study under the celebrated professor Neumann, for five years, and subsequently under professor Spielmann, at Strasburg. In 1733 he went to the university of Halle, where be became a pupil of Hoffmann in the study of medicine, and continued his chemical pursuits under the direction of Juncker, to which last science he ultimately devoted his sole attention. He also studied mineralogy, under Henckel, and the art of assaying under Susmilch. In the following year he visited the Hartz mines, and then returned to Berlin, where his incessant application to chemical labours so materially injured his health, that it was never afterwards vigorous. In 1738 he was received into the society of sciences, and furnished some memoirs for the “Miscellanea Berolinensia;” and when this society was renovated in 1744, as the royal academy of sciences and belles lettres, he was placed in the class of experimental philosophy, of which he was chosen director in 1760. He had also the high gratification of being entrusted with the laboratory of the academy in 1754, in which he almost lived, absorbed in the study or practice of his favourite art. He was, nevertheless, a man of great amenity of temper, and considerable conviviality, when mixing in the society of his friends. He had been for some years liable to spasmodic affections, and in 1774, was attacked with apoplexy, which left a paralysis behind it. He continued, however, to attend the meetings of the academy till the autumn of 1776; after which his mental and bodily powers gradually declined, and he died in August, 1782.

Margraf was held in considerable estimation as a chemist, throughout Europe, and had the honour of being elected a member of several learned bodies. All the writings which he produced were published in the Memoirs of the Literary Society of Berlin, before and after its renovation; tut they have been collected and published both in German and French. They contain the details of a great number of processes and analyses, described in clear and simple language. Some of the most important of his discoveries relate to phosphorus and its acid; to the reduction of zinc from calamine; to the fixed and volatile alkalies; to manganese, the Boiognian stone, platina, and the acid of sugar. In short, he is entitled to rank among the more accurate experimentalists who contributed to the advance*­ment of the science of chemistry, before the recent luminous improvements which it has gained.

, a laborious Dominican, was born about 1580, at Venice, of the noble family of Pinardi, He taught philosophy and theology for some time, but afterwards refused all offices in his order, that he might be more at liberty to study. He died 1660, at Venice, aged eighty, leaving several large theological works, the most curious among which is entitled “Bibliotheca Interpretum ad universam summam D. Thomae,” 1669, 4 vols. folio; and several “Declamations,” in Italian, against the liberties of the Galilean church, which involved the writer in great troubles, and occasioned him to be twice driven from Venice.

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

But the tiiost considerable by far of all his performances, is his “History of Spain,” divided into thirty books. This he wrote at first in Latin; but, fearing lest some unskilful pen should sully the reputation of his work by a bad translation of it into Spanish, he undertook that task himself, not as a translator, but as an author, who might assume the liberty of adding and altering, as he found it requisite, upon further inquiry into records and ancient writers. Vet neither the Latin nor the Spanish came lower down than the end of the reign of king Ferdinand, grandfather to the emperor Charles V. where Mariana concluded his thirty books; not caring to venture nearer his own times, because he could not speak with the freedom and impartiality of a just historian, of persons who were either alive themselves, or whose immediate descendants were. At the instigation of friends, however, he afterwards drew up a short supplement, in which he brought his history down to 1621, when king Philip 111. died, and Philip IV. came to the crown. After his death, F. Ferdinand Camargory Salcedo, of the order of St. Augustin, carried on another supplement from 1621, where Mariana left off, to 1649$ inclusive; where F. Basil Voren de Soto, of the regular clergy took it up, and went on to 1669, being the fifth year of the reign of Charles II. king of Spain. Gibbon says that in this work he almost forgets that he is a Jesuit, to assume the style and spirit of a Roman classic. It is a work of great research and spirit, although not free from the prejudices which may be supposed to arise from his education and profession. The first edition was entitled “Historiae de rebus Hispaniae, lib.iginti,” Toleti, 1592, folio. To some copies were afterwards added five more books, and a new title, with the date 1595, or in some 1592. The remaining five books were printed as “Histories Hispanic<E Appendix, libri scilicet XXI XXX, cum indice,” Francfort, 1616, fol. There is an edition printed at the Hague, with the continuations, 1733, 4 vols. in 2, fol. The best editions in the Spanish are, that of Madrid, 1780, 2 vols. folio, and that with Mariana’s continuation, ibid. 1794, 10 vols. 8vo. The French have various translations, and the English an indifferent one by capt. Stevens, 1699, fol.

Besides those already mentioned, he published several other pieces in Latin, theological and historical; among the rest, one entitled “Notes upon the Old Testament;” which father Simon, in his “Critical History,” says, and Dupin agrees with him, are very useful for understanding the literal sense of the Scripture, because he chiefly applies himself to find out the proper signification of the Hebrew words. It is, however, as the historian of Spain only that he now deserves to be remembered. He died at Toledo, in 1624, aged eighty-seven. After his death, was published in Italian, Latin, and French, another treatise of his, wherein he discovers the faults in the government of his society; but the Jesuits have thrown doubts on the authenticity of this work, which have not been altogether removed.

, a writer of several romances or novels much esteemed in France, was born at Marseilles in 1697, his family having been originally of Genoa. He was early in orders, and settled at Avignon, where, as a minim, he was much employed in all the offices of his order, and preached against the Jews with no little success. He published some works on pious discipline, which were much esteemed, and gained him the favour of pope Clement XIII. From this pontiff he received several marks of honour, and was employed by him to collect the “Acts of the Martyrs.” He had composed only two volumes in 12mo of this work, when he was seized with a dropsy in the heart, and died April 3, 1767, in his seventieth year. He was much esteemed by all worthy men; and his novels, as well as his other writings, were calculated to serve the cause of virtue and religion. The principal of his works are 1. “Conduct of Sister Violet, who died in odour of sanctity, at Avignon,” 12mo. 2. “Adelaide de Vitzburg, or the pious pensioner,” 12mo. 3. “The perfect Nun,” 12mo. 4. “Virginia, or the Christian Virgin,” 2 vols. 12mo. 5. “The Lives of the Solitaries of the East,” 9 vols. 12mo. 6. “Baron Van-Hesden, or the Republic of Unbelievers,” 5 vols. 12mo. 7. “Theodule, or the Child of Blessing,” 16mo. 8. “Farfalla, or the converted Actress,” 12mo. 9. “Retreat for a Day in each Month,” 2 vols. 12mo. 10. “Spiritual Letters,” 1769, 2 vols. 12mo; and a few more of less consequence.

, 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.

He went afterwards to France, where he found a patroness in Mary de Medicis, who settled a handsome pension upon him. In 1621 he sent a nephew whom he had with him at Paris, to Rome, about business, and conveyed by him his compliments to cardinal Louis Ludovisio, nephew to Gregory XV. then the reigning pope; which compliments were so well received by the cardinal, that he wrote to him immediately to return to Rome. Marini complied, and quitted France about the end of 1622; and on his arrival at Rome, was made president of the academy of the Umoristi. Upon the advancement of Urban VIII. to the pontificate, in 1623, he went to Naples, and was chosen president of one of the academies in that city, but soon after conceived an inclination to return to Rome, which he was about to indulge, when he was seized with a complaint which carried him off, in 1625.

Marini had a very lively imagination, but little judgment, and abandoned himself to the way of writing fashionable in those times, which consisted in points and conceits; so that he may be justly reckoned among the corruptors of taste in Italy, as his name and fame, which were very considerable, produced a number of imitators. His works are numerous, and have been often printed. The principal of them are, 1. “Strage degii Innocenti,” a poem on the slaughter of the Innocents, Venice, 1633. 2. “Rime,” or miscellaneous poems, in three parts. 3. “La Sampogna,” or the flageolet; 1620. 4. “La Murtoleide,” 1626, 4to, the occasion of which has been already noticed. 5. “Letters,” 1627, 8vo. 6. “Adone;” an heroic poem. This was one of the most popular poems in the Italian language, little less so than the Aminta of Tasso, and the Pastor Fido of Guarini and, says Baretti, “would cope with any one in our Italian, if Marini had not run away with his overflowing imagination, and if his language was more correct.” It has been frequently printed in Italy, France, and other parts of Europe. One of the most valued editions is the Elzevir, printed at Amsterdam, in 1678, in 4 vols. 16mo.

, an eminent French philosopher and mathematician, was born at Dijon, and admitted a member of the academy of sciences of Paris in 1666. His works, however, are better known than his life. He was a good mathematician, and the first French philosopher who applied much to experimental physics. The law of the shock or collision of bodies, the theory of the pressure and motion of fluids, the nature of vision, and of the air, particularly engaged his attention. He carried into his philosophical researches that spirit of scrutiny and investigation so necessary to those who would make any considerable progress in it. He died May 12, 16S4. He communicated a number of curious and valuable papers to the academy of sciences, which were printed in the collection of their Memoirs dated 1666, viz. from volume 1 to volume 10. And all his works were collected into 2 volumes in 4to, and printed at Leyden in 1717.

, a celebrated French writer of the drama and of romance, was born at Paris in 1688. His father was of a good family in Normandy; his fortune was considerable, and he spared nothing in the education of his son, who discovered uncommon talents, and a most amiable disposition. His first object was the theatre, where he met with the highest success in comic productions; and these, with the merit of his other works, procured him a place in the French academy. The great object of both his comedies and romances was, to convey an useful moral under the veil of wit and sentiment: “my only object,” says he, “is to make men more just and more humane;” and he was as amiable in his life and conversation as in his writings. He was compassionate and humane, and a strenuous advocate for morality and religion. To relieve the indigent, to console the unfortunate, and to succour the oppressed, were duties which he not only recommended by his writings, but by his own practice and example. He would frequently ridicule the excessive credulity of infidels in matters of trivial importance; and once said to lord Bolingbroke, who was of that character, “If you cannot believe, it is not for want of faith.”

Marivaux had the misfortune, or rather the imprudence, to join the party of M. de la Motte, in the famous dispute concerning the superiority of the ancients to the moderns. His attachment to the latter produced his travesty of Homer, which contributed but little to his literary fame. His prose works, while they display great fertility of invention, and a happy disposition of incidents to excite attention, and to interest the affections, have been censured for affectation of style, and a refinement that is sometimes too metaphysical. His “Vie de Marianne,” and his “Paysan Parvenu,” hold the first rank among French romances; yet, by a fickleness which was natural to him, he left one of them incomplete to begin the other, and finished neither. He died at Paris, Feb. 11, 1763, aged seventy-five. His works consist of, 1. “Pièces de Théâtre,” 5 vols. 12mo. 2. “Homere travesti,” 12mo. 3. “Le Spectateur François,” 2 vols. 12mo rather affected in style, but containing many fine thoughts. 4. “Le Philosophe indigent,” 12mo, lively and instructive. 5. “Vie de Marianne,” 4 vols. 12mo; one of the best romances in the French language. 6. “Le Paysan Parvenu,” 12mo; more ingenious, perhaps, than Marianne, but less instructive, and containing some scenes that ought to have been omitted. 7. “Pharsamon; ou les nouvelles follies romanesques;” inferior to the former. This was republished under the name of “Nouveau Dom Quichotte.” The chief objection made to this, and indeed many other writings of Marivaux, is a mixture of metaphysical style, sometimes too refined to be intelligible; but amends are generally made for this fault, by correct pictures of the human heart, and sentiments of great truth and beauty.

, or Marcus, the founder of the sect of the Marcosians, is said to have appeared about the year 160, or, according to some, about the year 127. Many learned moderns are of opinion that Mark belonged to the Valentinian school, but Rhenford and Beausobre say that the Marcosians were Jews, or judaizing Christians; and Grabe likewise owns that they were of Jewish extract. Irenseus leads us to imagine that Mark, who was an Asiatic, had come into Gaul and made many converts there. Nevertheless, learned moderns think that they were only disciples of Mark, who came into that country, where Irenaeus resided, of whom, in one place, he makes particular mention. Irenaeus represents him as exceedingly skilful in all magical arts, by means of which he had great success. Tertullian and Theodoret concur in calling Mark a magician. Irenseus, after giving an account of the magical arts of Mark, adds, that he had, probably, an assisting daemon, by which he himself appears to prophesy, and which enabled others, especially women, to prophesy likewise: this practice favoured his seduction of many females, both in body and mind, which gained him much wealth. He is also said to have made use of philters and love-potions, in order to gain the affections of women; and his disciples are charged with doing the same. Dr. Lardner suggests some doubts as to the justice of these accusations; and indeed there is considerable obscurity in every particular of his personal history. His followers, called Marcosians, are said to have placed a great deal of mystery in the letters of the alphabet, and thought that they were very useful in finding out the truth. They are charged unjustly with holding two principles, and as if they were Docetse, and denied the resurrection of the dead; for which there is no sufficient evidence. They persisted in the practice of baptism and the eucharist. As to their opinion concerning Jesus Christ, they seem to have had a notion of the great dignity and excellence of his person, or his ineffable generation: and, according to them, he was born of Mary, a virgin, and the word was in him, When ha came to the water, the supreme power descended upon him; and he had in him all fulness; for in him was the word, the father, truth, the church, and life. They said that the Christ, or the Spirit, came down upon the man Jesus. He made known the Father, and destroyed death, and called himself the Son of Man; for it was the good pleasure of the Father of all that he should banish ignorance and destroy death: and the acknowledgment of him is the overthrow of ignorance. From the account of Irenceus, we may infer that the Marcosians believed the facts recorded in the gospels and that they received most, or all the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament. Irenaeus also says that they had an innumerable multitude of apocryphal and spurious writings, which they had forged: and that they made use of that fiction concerning the child Jesus, that when his master bade him say, alpha, the Lord did so; but when the master called him to say beta, he answered, “Do you first tell me what is alpha, and then I will tell you what beta is.” As this story concerning alpha and beta is found in the gospel of the infancy of Jesus Christ, still in being, some are of opinion that this gospel was composed by the Marcosians.

, 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.

This likewise seems to confirm the opinion of some that he was an author by profession, and one of the earliest on record. Numerous, however, as were this writer’s works, his memory has not had the fate of being transmitted with any clearness to posterity. The time of his birth, death, and all other particulars regarding him, are utterly unknown.

, M. A. one of the most learned critics of the eighteenth century, was descended from an ancient family of that name, seated near Wigan, in Lancashire. He was one of the twelve children of the rev. Ralph Markland, M. A. vicar of Childwall, in that county, whose unblemished life and character gave efficacy to the doctrines he preached, and rendered him an ornament to the church of which he was a member. He was not, however, the author of a poem, frequently attributed to his pen, entitled “Pteryplegia, or the art of Shooting Fly-, ing,” as it was one of the juvenile productions of his relative, Dr. Abraham Markland, fellow of St. John’s college, Oxford, and above thirty years master of St. Cross, near Winchester, of whose life and more important writings Wood has made some mention.

Jeremiah was born Oct. 29, 1693, and in 1704 was admitted upon the foundation of Christ’s Hospital, London, whence, in 1710, he was sent to the university of Cambridge, with the usual exhibition of 30l. per annum for seven years, and admitted of St. Peter’s college. Here he took the degree of B. A. in 1713, and the following year appears among the poetical contributors to the “Cambridge Gratulations.” In 1717 he took his master’s degree, and about the same time ably vindicated the character of Addison against the satire of Pope, in some verses addressed to the countess of Warwick. He was the author also of a translation of “The Friar’s Tale,” from Chaucer, which is printed in Ogle’s edition of 1741. Curl), the bookseller, in some of his publications, includes poems by a Mr. John Markland of St. Peter’s college. If tliis is not a blunder for Jeremiah, these might be the production of Mr. Markland’s brother John, who was also educated at Christ’s Hospital; but this is doubtful, and not very important.

In 1717 Mr. Markland was chosen fellow of his college, and probably intended to have taken orders; but it soon appeared that from extreme weakness of lungs he could never have performed the duties of a clergyman, and even at this time reading a lecture for only one hour in a day disordered him greatly. He continued, however, for several years as a tutor in St. Peter’s college. He became first distinguished in the learned world by his “Epistola Critica ad eruditissimum virum Franciscum Hare, S. T. P. decanum Vigorniensem, in qua Horatii loca aliquot et aliorum veterum emendantur, Camb. 1723, 8vo. In this, which at once decided the course of his studies, he gave many proofs of extensive erudition and critical sagacity. He appears to have been also at this time employed on notes and emendations on Propertius, and promised a new edition of the Thebaid and Achiilaid of Statius, but he published only an edition of the” Sylvae," in 1728, 4to, printed by Mr. Bowyer. In this, probably his first connexion with that learned printer, he gave a proof of the scrupulous integrity which was conspicuous throughout his whole life; for, it not being convenient for him to pay Mr. Bowyer as soon as he wished and intended, he insisted on adding the interest.

Mr. Markland found the “Sylvae” of Statins in a very corrupt state, obscure in itself, and mangled by its editors; yet, notwithstanding the want of ms copies, of which there were none in England, he appears to have Accomplished his task by uncommon felicity of judgment and conjecture. It is not very easy to comprehend Ernesti’s objection, that he “sometimes rather indulged his ingenuity and exquisite learning against the expressed authority of books,” since his object was to prove how much those books had failed in exhibiting a pure text. Of the ancient editions, Mr. Markland owns his obligations to that of Venice, 1472, which he found in the duke of Devonshire’s library, and which is also in lord Spencer’s; and that of Parma, 1473, belonging to the earl of Sunderland. The “Statius,” as well as the “Epistola Critica,” was dedicated to his friend bishop Hare.

It appears that he had begun an edition of “Apuleius” at Cambridge, of which seven sheets were printed off, from MorelPs French edition; but on Dr. Bentley’s sending him a rude message concerning his having left out a line that was extant in one of the Mss. he went no farther. Bowyer, who knew the value of Mr. Markland’s labours, would have carried on this work, but never could obtain a copy of the printed sheets, which remained for many years in Mr. Bentham’s warehouse at Cambridge.

After several years residence at St. Peter’s college, he undertook in 1728 the education of William Strode, esq. of Punsborn in Herts, with whom he continued above two years at his house, and as long abroad in France, Flanders, and Holland. Some time after their return, Mr. Strode married, and when his eldest son was about six years old, Mr. Markland undertook the care of his education, and was with him seven years. This pupil, who was afterwards a gentleman of the bed-chamber to his majesty, a man of extensive benevolence and generosity, and always very attentive to Mr. Markland, died in 1800.

After his return from France, Mr. Markland again took up his residence at college, and resumed his learned labours. In 1739 we find Mr. Taylor acknowledging his obligations to Mr. Markland for the “Conjecturse” annexed to his “Orationes et Fragmenta Lysiae,” an incomparable edition, on which Taylor’s fame may securely rest. In 1740 Mr. Markland contributed annotations to Dr. Davies’s second edition of Maximus Tyrius. This volume was printed by Mr. Bowyer, uncier the sanction of the society for the encouragement of learning; and such was Mr. Markland’s care, that this society, although on their part not very consistently, complained of the expence which Mr. Markland occasioned by his extreme nicety in correcting the proof-sheets. In an address to the reader, prefixed to his annotations, Mr. Markland brought forward a very singular discovery, that Maximus had himself published two editions of his work. It is very surprizing, therefore, that at this time, when Markland was receiving the thanks and praises of his learned contemporaries, Warburton only should under-rate his labours, and say in a letter to Dr. Birch, “I have a poor opinion both of Markland’s and Taylor’s critical abilities.” Whether this “poor opinion” proceeded from temper or taste, we find that it was afterwards adopted by Warburton’s friend Dr. Kurd, who went a little farther in compliment to his correspondent, and, somewhat luckily for Mr. Markland, involves himself in a direct contradiction, calling Mr. Markland, in the same sentence, a “learned man,” and a man of “slencjer parts and sense.” It cannot be too much regretted that bishop Hurd should have left his Warburtonian correspondence to be printed, after he had, in the republication of his own works, professed to recant many of the harsh opinions of his early days.

In 1743, we find Mr. Markland residing at Twyford, where, in June of that year, he talks of the gout as an old companion: and at this period of life, it appears that he was twice encouraged to offer himself a candidate for the Greek professorship; but had either not ambition enough to aspire to this honour, or had some dislike to the office, to which, however, abilities like his must have done credit. From 1744 to 1752, his residence was at Uckfield in Sussex, where he boarded in the house of the schoolmaster under whose care young Mr. Strode had been placed, and where he first formed an intimacy with the rev. William Clarke, whose son Edward was placed uncier his private tuition. In 1745, he published “Remarks on the Epistles of Cicero to Brutus, and of Brutus to Cicero, in a letter to a friend. With a dissertation upon four orations ascribed to Cicero; viz. I. Ad Quirites post rediturn: 2. Post reditum in seriatu 3. Pro domo sua, ad pontifices 4. De haruspicum responsis To which are added, some extracts out of the notes of learned men upon those orations, and observations on them, attempting to prove them all spurious, and the works of some sophist,” 8vo. These remarks, which were addressed to Mr. Bowyer, although very ingenious, brought on the first controversy in which Mr. Markland was concerned; but in which he was unwilling to exert himself. He seems to have contented himself with his own conviction upon the subject, and with shewing only some contempt of what was offered. “I believe,” says he, in a letter to Mr. Bowyer, “I shall drop the affair of these spurious letters, and the orations I mentioned; for, though I am as certain that Cicero was not the author of them, as I am that you were not, yet I consider that it must be judged of by those who are already prejudiced on the other side. And how far prejudice will go, is evident from the subject itself; for nothing else could have suffered such silly and barbarous stuff as these Epistles and Orations to pass so long, and through so many learned men’s hands, for the writings of Cicero; in which view, I confess, I cannot read them without astonishment and indignation.”

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.

In 1748, Mr. Markland contributed some notes to Arnald’s “Commentary on the book of Wisdom,” which are noticed at the end of the author’s preface, in the second edition, 1760. In 1750, he communicated some very judicious remarks on an edition, then printing by Bowyer, of “Kuster de Verbo medio.” He was also at this time employed on his Euripides. In 1752, having completed the education of his amiable pupil Mr. Strode, he first began, to seclude himself from the world. “By this time,” he says, “being grown old, and having moreover long and painful annual fits of the gout, he was glad to find, what his inclination and infirmities, which made him unfit for the world and for company, had for a long time led him to, a very private place of retirement near Dorking in Surrey.” In this pleasant and sequestered spot, in the hamlet of Milton, he saw little company his walks were almost coufined to the narrow limits of his garden: and he described himself, in 1755, to be as much out of the way of hearing, as of getting. “Of this last,” he adds, “I have now no desire: the other I should be glad of.” What first induced him to retire from the world is not known. It has been supposed to have proceeded from disappointment: but of what nature is matter of conjecture. There is a traditionary report, that he once received a munificent proposal from Dr. Mead, to enable him to travel, on a most liberal plan, in pursuit of such literary matters as should appear eligible to himself; and that his retirement arose from a disgust his extreme delicacy occasioned him to take during the negociation. He was certainly disinterested to an extreme: and money was never considered by him as a good, any farther than it enabled him to relieve the necessitous.

In 1756 appeared an edition by Musgrave of the Hippolytus of Euripides, under the title of “Euripidis Hippolytus, ex Mss. Bibliothecse regias Parisiensis emendatus. Variis lectionibus et notis editoris accessere viri clarissimi Jeremiae Markland emendationes,” a title which was printed without Mr. Markland’s knowledge, and very contrary to his inclination, as he has written on the margin of his own copy, now in Dr. Burney’s possession; and it is said that his notes were obtained by a friend, and did not pass directly from Mr. Markland to Mr. Musgrave, In 1758, he contributed some notes to an edition of seven plays of Sophocles printed by Mr. Bowyer.

In 1760, Mr. Markland printed in quarto, at the expence of his friend William Hall, esq. of the Temple, an excellent little treatise, under the title of “De Grsecorum quinta declinatione imparisyllabica, et inde formata Latinorum tertia, quaestio Grammatica,” 4to. No more than forty copies having been printed, which were all given away, it was annexed, in 1763, to an edition of Euripides’s “Supplices Mulieres,” 4to. This book was published without the editor’s name perhaps owing to the discouragement shewn to critical learning, as appears from a memorandum of his own hand-writing in a copy of it, in which he says, “There were only 250 copies printed, this kind ol study being at that time greatly neglected in England. The writer of the notes was then old and infirm; and, having by him several things of the same sort, written many years before, he did not think it w&rth while to revise them; and was unwilling to leave them behind him. as they were, in many places not legible to any body but himself; for which reason he destroyed them. Probably it will be a long time, if ever, before this sort of learning will revive in England; in which it is easy to foresee, that there must be a disturbance in a few years, and all public disorders are enemies to this sort of literature.” In the same dejected tone he speaks, in 1772, of the edition of Euripides lately published: “The Oxonians, I hear, are about to publish Euripides in quarto; two volumes, I suppose. Dr. Musgrave helps them with his collections, and perhaps conjectures. In my opinion, this is no time for such works; I mean for the undertakers.”

These melancholy views of literary patronage and support did not hinder Mr. Markland from hazarding his little property on the more uncertain issue of a law-suit, into which he was drawn by the benevolence of his disposition. His primary object in this affair, which occurred in 1765, was to support the widow with whom he lodged against the injustice and oppression of her son, who, taking advantage of maternal weakness, persuaded her to assign over to him the whole of her property. The consequence was a law-suit , which, after an enormous expence to Mr. Markland, was decided against the widow; and his whole fortune, after this event, was expended in relieving the distresses of the family. Some assistance he appears to have derived from his friends; but such was his dislike of this kind of aid, that he could rarely be prevailed upon to accept it. Yet at this time his whole property, exclusive of his fellowship (about seventy pounds a-year), consisted of five hundred pounds three per cent, reduced annuities; and part of the latter we find him cheerfully selling out for the support of his poor friends, rather than accept any loan or gift from his friends. He appears indeedabout this time to have been weaning himself from friendly connections, as well as his customary pursuits. In October of this year he even declined entering into a correspondence with his old acquaintance bishop Law, who wished to serve him, and desires Mr. Bowyer to write to the bishop, that “Mr. Markland is very old, being within a few days of seventy-three, with weak eyes and a shaking hand, so that he can neither read nor write without trouble: that he has scarce looked into a Greek or Latin book for above these three years, having given over all literary concerns and therefore it is your (Mr. Bowyer’s) opinion that he (the bishop) had much better not write to Mr. Markland, which will only distress him; but that you are very sure that he will not now enter into any correspondence of learning.” At length, in 1768, after much negotiation, and every delicate attention to his feelings, his pupil, Mr. Strode, prevailed on him to accept an annuity of one hundred pounds, which, with the dividends arising from his fellowship, was, from that time, the whole of his income.

Fortunately for the world of letters, the notes on the two “Iphigenias,” which Mr. Markland at one time intended to destroy, from despair of public encouragement, were preserved and given by him to Dr. Heberden, with permission to burn or print them as he pleased; but if the latter, then they should be introduced by a short Latin dedication to Dr. Heberden, as a testimony of his gratitude for the many favours he had received from that gentleman. Dr. Heberden, whose generosity was unbounded, readily accepted the gift on Mr. Markland’s own conditions, paid the whole expence of printing, as he had before done that of the “Supplices Mulieres,” and in 1770 had secured a copy of it corrected for a second edition, though at that time it was intended that the first should not be published till after Mr. Markland’s death. He had then burnt all his notes, except those on the New Testament; and the disposal of his books became now to him a matter of serious concern. He wished them to be in the hands of Dr. Heberden, to whom he presented the greater part of them in his life-time, and the remainder at his death. These notes n the New Testament had often made part of Mr. Markland’s study, and many of them have since appeared in Bowyer’s “Conjectures on the New Testament.” Thej T were written in Kuster’s edition.

Contrary to the original intention, his edition of the “Two Iphigeniae,” which had been printed in 1768, 8vo, with a view to posthumous publication, was given to the world in 1771, under the title of “Euripidis Dramata, Iphigenia in Aulide, et Iphigenia in Tauris; ad codd. Mss. recensuit, et notulas adjecit, Jer. Markland, Coll. D. Petri Cant. Socius.” Of this, the “Supplices Mulieres,” and the “Quaestio grammatica de Gnecorum quinta declinatione imparisyllabica,” &c. an elegant and correct edition has just been published at Oxford, in 8vo and 4to, under the superintendance of one of the most profound Greek scholars of the age, Mr. Gaisford of Christ-church.

Repeated attacks of the gout, and an accumulation of infirmities, at length put an end to Mr. Markland’s life, at Milton-court, July 7, 1776, in the eighty-third year of his age. His will was short. He bequeathed his books and papers to Dr. Heberden, and every thing else to Mrs. Martha Rose, the widow with whom he lived, and whom he made sole executrix, although he had a sister, Catherine, then living, and not in good circumstances. This is the more remarkable, as we find in his letters, expressions of affectionate anxiety for this sister; but he delayed making his will until the year before his death, when his memory and faculties were probably in some degree impaired. He had formerly entertained hopes of being able to make some acknowledgment to Christ’s-hospital for his education, and to Peterhouse, from which he had for so many years received the chief part of his maintenance; but, to use his own words, “as the providence of God saw fit that it should be otherwise, he was perfectly satisfied that it was better it should be as it was.” Immediately on his death, his friend Mr. Strode and Mr. Nichols went to Milton-court, to give directions for the funeral, which was performed, strictly agreeable to his own request, in the church of Dorking, where a brass plate commemorates his learning and virtues. Several of his books, with a few ms notes in them, after the death of Dr. Heberden, were sold to Mr. Payne; and some of them were purchased by Mr. Gough, and others are now in the possession of Dr. Burney, Mr. Heber, Mr. Hibbert, &c. c. Such are the outlines of the history of this excellent scholar and critic, concerning whom many additional particulars may be found in our authority. The most conspicuous trait in his character was his singular and unwearied industry. The scholar, who secludes himself from tlic world for the purposes of study, frequently abandons himself to desultory reading, or at least is occupied at intervals only, in deep and laborious research. This, however, was not the case with Markland. The years that successively rolled over his head, in the course of a long life, constantly found him engaged in his favourite pursuits, collating the classic authors of antiquity, or illustrating the book of Revelation. Of the truth of this remark, which we borrow from his amiable relative, his correspondence affords sufficient testimony; and the proofs which he there displays, even after he had passed his eighty-first year, of vigour and clearness of intellect, are perfectly astonishing. To this we may add what has recently been said of iMr. Markland, that “for modesty, candour, literary honesty, and courteousness to other scholars, he has been considered as the model which ought to be proposed for the imitation of every critic.” With exception to the opinions of Warburton and Hurd, which were concealed when they might have been answered, and published when they were not worth answering, his deep and extensive learning appears, from the concurrent testimony of his contemporaries and survivors, to have been at all times most justly appreciated; and a tribute, of great value, has lately been paid to his memory by Dr. Burney in tho preface to his “Tentamen de Metris ahæschylo in Choricis Cantibus adhibitis,” where he places him among the “magnanimi heroes” of the eighteenth century, Bentley, Dawes, Taylor, Toup, Tyrwhitt, and Porson.

It is to be regretted, however, that the splendour of his abilities was obscured by the extreme privacy of his life, and the many peculiarities of his disposition. The latter indeed seem to have been produced by the former, and that by some circumstances in his early life, which prevented him from making a choice among the learned professions. It is well known that bishop Hare would have provided for him, if he would have taken orders; but what his reasons were for dec-lining them, we are not told. It may be inferred from his correspondence that in maturer age he had some scruples of the religious kind, but these do not appear inconsistent with the liberty which many great and good men have thought consistent with subscription to the formularies of the church. By whatever means he was prevented from taking orders, it appears to have been a misfortune to him, as the patrons who were the best judges of his merit had no means of providing for him in any other direction. If he ever fancied that he could make his way through the world by the talents of a mere scholar employed in writing, we have evidence in his letters that he soon found his mistake, and that in his time classical criticism was not an article in great demand. Another reason for his frequent despondency, and love of retirement, appears to have been his interesting himself too much in the politics of the time, which he always viewed through a gloomy medium. We may, however, conclude this article with the striking and just observation made by his pupil Mr. Strode, in a letter to Mr. Nichols, that “Do friend of Mr. Maryland can reflect on his life without great satisfaction, although, for the further benefit of society, one might be led to wish some few circumstances of it had been otherwise.'”

, whom Phillips calls “a kind of second Shakspeare,” was born, as Mr. Elfis conjectures with great probability, about 1562. There is no account extant of his family, but it is well known, says Baker, that he was of Bene't college, in the university of Cambridge, where he took the degree of B. A. 1543, and M. A. 1597; he, however, quitted the academic life, and went on the stage, where he became one of the most distinguished tragic poets of the age. Thomas Heywood styles him the “best of poets;” and Draytoa also has bestowed a high panegyric on him, in the “Censure of the Poets,” in these lines

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.

Marloe’s tragical death is thus related by Wood: “This Marloe, we are told, presuming upon his own little wit, thought proper to practise the most Epicurean indulgence, and openly professed Atheism. He denied God our Saviour; he blasphemed the adorable Trinity; and, as it was reported, wrote several discourses against it, affirming our Saviour to be a deceiver, the sacred Scriptures to contain nothing but idle stories, and all religion to be a device of policy and priestcraft. But Marloe came to a very untimely end, as some have remarked, in consequence of his execrable blasphemies. It happened, that he fell deeply in love with a low girl, and had for his rival a fellow in livery, who looked more like a pimp than a lover. Marloe, fired with jealousy, and having some reason to believe that his mistress granted the fellow favours, rushed upon him to stab him with his dagger: but the footman being quick, avoided the stroke, and catching hold of Marloe' s wrist, stabbed him with his own weapon; and notwithstanding all the assistance of the surgery, he soon after died of the wound, before the year 1593.”

Marloe has found an apologist in Warton , who can seldom conceal his abhorrence of the puritans. “Marlowe’s wit and sprightliness of conversation had often the unhappy effect of tempting him to sport with sacred subjects; more perhaps from the preposterous ambition of courting the casual applause of profligate and unprincipled companions, than from any systematic disbelief of religion. His scepticism, whatever it might be, was construed by the prejudiced and peevish puritans into absolute atheism, and they took pains to represent the unfortunate catastrophe of his untimely death, as an immediate judgment from heaven upon his execrable impiety.” The story was certainly current at the time. It occurs not only in Beard’s “Theatre of God’s Judgments,” but in a work which if we mistake not preceded it, Vaughan’s “Golden Grove.” Vaughan gives the place where the catastrophe happened, Deptford, and his antagonist’s name, Ingram , and adds, that Marloe “wrote a book against the Trinitie.” There is also in the British Museum (Mss. Harl. 6853, 8vo. fol. 320) “An Account of the blasphemous and damnable opinions of Christ. Marley and three others who came to a sudden and fearful end of this life.”

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

, a dramatic writer, was born of an ancient family at Aynhoe in Northamptonshire, about the beginning of January, 1602. He went to school at Thame in Oxfordshire, and was thence removed to Wadham-college, Oxford, as a gentleman-commoner, and took his master of arts’ degree in 1624. Wood says, that “he was a goodly proper gentleman, and had once in his possession seven hundred pounds per annum at least.” The whole of this he dissipated, and afterwards went to serve in the Low Countries. Not being promoted there, after three campaigns, he returned to England, and was admitted in 1639, by sir John Suckling, into a troop raised for Charles I. in his expedition against Scotland, but at York he fell sick, and was obliged to return to London, where he died the same year. Marmion, although not a voluminous writer, for he produced only four dramas, is considered by the author of the Biographia Dramatica as one of the best among the dramatic writers of his time. “His plots are ingenious,” says that author, “his characters well drawn, and his language not only easy and dramatic, but full of lively wit and solid understanding.” His plays are, 1 “Holland’s Leaguer, an excellent comedy, as it hath bin lately and often acted with great applause, by the high and mighty prince Charles his servants, at the private house in Salisbury court,” 1632, 4to. According to Oldys, in his ms notes on Langbaine, there was a tract in prose, published under the same title of “Holland’s Leaguer,” in the same year, from which this drama might possibly be taken 2. “A fine Companion, acted before the King and Queen at Whitehall, and sundrie times with great applause at the private house in Salisbury-court, by the Prince his servants,” 1633, 4to. 3. “The Antiquary, a comedy, acted by her Majesty’s servants at the Cockpit,” 1641, 4to. This is also printed in Dodsley’s Collection of Old Plays, vol. X. second edition. The Biographia Dramatica, and other books, add to these, 4. “The Crafty Merchant, or the Souldier'd Citizen;” which, as welt as the rest, was a comedy; but they all state that it was never printed, and neglect to tell where it is extant in manuscript. He also published, 5. “Cupid and Psiche; or an epic poem of Cupid and his Mistress, as it was lately presented to the Prince Elector.” Prefixed to this are complimentary verses, by Richard Brome, Francis Tuckyr, Thomas N abbes, and Thomas Hey wood. He wrote, be sides these, several poems, which are scattered in different publications; and Wood says that he left some things in ms. ready for the press, but what became of them is not known.

, one of the most distinguished French writers of the eighteenth century, was born in 1723, at Bort, a small town in Limosin. His father, who was in very moderate circumstances, and had a very large family, bestowed great pains on this, his eldest son, and was ably assisted in the cultivation of his talents, by his wife, who appears to have been a woman of superior sense and information. Young Marmoutel first studied the classics and rhetoric in the Jesuits’ college of Mauriac, and at fifteen was placed by his father with a merchant at Clermont. As this, however, was very little to his taste, he applied for admission into the college of Clermont, and having been received into the philosophical class, maintained himself by teaching some of the junior scholars. He afterwards went to Toulouse, and became teacher of philosophy in a seminary of the Bernardines, where his abilities acquired considerable distinction.

Encouraged by this, he was a candidate for one of theprizes given by the academy of Floreal games at Toulouse; but the ode which he wrote on this occasion being rejected, he sent a copy of it to Voltaire, who not only returned it with high praise, but sent him a copy of his works. To a young man like Marmontel, nothing ceuld be more gratifying than the praise and kindness of a man of such high rank in the literary world; and eager to justify Voltaire’s good opinion, he applied more closely to his studies, and obtained the prizes of several succeeding years. It is much to his honour, that while his reputation increased, and his income became considerable, he devoted the latter to the maintenance of his father’s family.

We find him afterwards connected with D'Alembert and Diderot, in the compilation of the Encyclopedie, which is supposed to have had no small share in producing the French revolution. Of this, too, however, he lived to repent, as his attachments were to the royal cause, although he held that changes to a certain degree were necessary. He afterwards became a contributor to the “Mercure Francois,” and it was in this publication that he wrote his “Tales.” In 1758 he became sole editor of the “Mercure/‘ which he very greatly improved but having in a gay party repeated a satire on the duke D’Aumont, which was not his own writing, and having refused to give up the author, he was sent to the Bastille, and lost his situation in the Mercure. His confinement, however, was short, and the reputation his” Tales“acquired in every part of Europe, procured him riches and distinction. After gaming the prize of the French academy, by his” Epitre aux Poetes,“though Thomas and Delille were his competitors, he was admitted into that academy in 1763, as successor to Marivaux, and his fame was afterwards completely established by his” Belisarius,“and his” Les Incas," both which acquired an uncommon degree of popularity.

After the death of D'Alembert in 1783, he was elected perpetual secretary to the French academy, where his employment was to compose eloges on the deceased members, and other pieces to be read in the academy, both in prose and verse. Under the ministry of Lamoignon, keeper of the seals, he was solicited to draw up a memoir on national education, which was a very elaborate composition; but the commencement of the revolution prevented the progress of this undertaking.

As the revolution advanced, be withdrew himself from all share in those proceedings which ended in scenes of blood and violence, and retired to a distant part, where he employed his time in the education of his children, and in the composition of some works which have added considerably to his reputation. In 1797 he was once more called into public life, by being elected a representative in the national assembly; but, after this assembly was dissolved, he again retired to his cottage, where he died of an apoplexy, Dec. 1799, in the seventy-seventh year of his age.

He was fifty-four before he married but this step, there is every reason to think, added much to his felicity, and secured the regular habits of his life. His reputation as a writer, although it was gradually augmented by his various publications, his plays, operas, poems, eloges, and other compositions on miscellaneous subjects, rests now principally on his “Tales,” in this country, and on his Belisarius and Incas on the continent. His “Tales” have never been surpassed for lively and characteristic dialogue and sentiment, and have been such universal favourites, that there is no European language into which they have not been translated. They speak, indeed, to the passions of general nature, but the author’s imagination is not always under the strictest guidance of his judgment, and they are not among the books which we should recommend to young readers. Of this the French themselves appear sensible, and they are of opinion that the “New Tales,” which he wrote at a more advanced period of life, better deserve the epithet “Moral.” So valuable, however, have they appeared to dramatic writers, that they have formed not only the plot, but much of the dialogue of some very favourite pieces, both on the English and French stage. Since his decease, his “Life” written by himself has been published and translated into English. Of his former works, the best French edition is that of 1787, 32 vols. 8vo.

, seigneur du Mont, sainte Aldegonde, by which last name he is recorded by some biographers, was born in 1538, at Brussels, of noble parents, who were originally of Savoy. He was Calvin’s disciple at Geneva, and appointed ecclesiastical counsellor to Charles Louis, elector palatine; but William, prince of Orange, invited him back again some time after, and employed him usefully in affairs of the utmost importance. Sainte Aldegonde was afterwards consul at Antwerp, which city he defended against the duke of Parma, in 1584, and died at Leyden, December 15, 1598, aged sixty, while he was employed in a Flemish version of the Bible. He left “Controversial Theses,” Antwerp, 1580, 8vo; “Circular Epistles to the Protestants;” “Apologies;” a “Portrait of different Religions,” in which he ridicules the church of Rome, Leyden, 1603, and 1605, 2 vols. 8vo; and other works. Sainte Aldegonde drew up the form of the celebrated confederacy, by which several lords of the Netherlands engaged to oppose the odious tribunal of the inquisition, in 1566.

, an industrious French translator, was born in 1600. He was the son of Claude de Marolles, a military hero, but entered early into the ecclesiastical state, and by the interest of his father, obtained two abbeys. He early conceived an extreme ardour for study, which never abated; for from 1610, when he published a translation of Lucan, to 168 1, the year of his death, he was constantly employed in writing and printing. He attached himself, unfortunately, to the translating of ancient Latin writers; but, being devoid of all classical taste and spirit, they sunk miserably under his hands, and especially the poets. If, however, he was not the most elegant, or even the most faithful of translators, he appears to have been a man of considerable learning, and discovered all his life a love for the arts. He was one of the first who paid any attention to the collection of prints, and formed a series amounting to about an hundred thousand, which made afterwards one of the ornaments of the king’s cabinet. There are by him translations of “Plautus,” “Terence,” “Lucretius,” “Catullus,” “Virgil,” “Horace,” “Juvenal,” “Per&ius,” “Martial” (at the head of which Menage wrote “Epigrammes centre Martial”); also “Statius,” “Aurelius Victor,” “Ammianus Marcellinus,” “Athena3us,” &c. He composed “Memoirs of his own Life,” which were published by the abbe Goujet, in 1775, in 3 vols. 12mo. They contain, like such publications in general, some interesting facts, but many more which are trifling. His poetry was never much esteemed. He said once to Liniere, “My verses cost me very little,” meaning little trouble. “They cost you quite as much as they are worth,” replied Liniere.

, 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.

, son of the preceding, was born at Cahors, in Querci, about 1496. In his youth he was page to seigneur Nicholas de Neusville, secretary of state; and afterwards to princess Margaret, the king’s sister, and the duke of Alen.con’s wife. He followed the duke to the army in 1521, and was wounded and taken prisoner at the battle of Pavia. While Francis I. was Charles the Fifth’s’ prisoner in Spain, Marot was imprisoned at the instigation of Dr. Bouchard, who accused him of being a protestant; but in an epistle to that doctor, he assured him that he was orthodox, and a very good catholic. After his release he retired to his old mistress, the duchess of Alen^on, who was then become queen of Navarre, by her marriage with John d'Albret. In 1536 he obtained leave of Francis I. to return; but, being suspected for a follower of the new opinions, he was obliged to make his escape to Geneva, where, whatever his religious principles might be, his moral conduct was highly exceptionable. After remaining here some years, he went into Piedmont, where he died at Turin, in 1544, in his forty-ninth year; and as some say, very poor.

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.

, a French grammarian of high reputation, was born at Marseilles, July 17, 1676, and entered into the congregation of die oratory, but disgusted at the too great confinement of that institution, soon quitted it, and went to Paris. There he married in 1704, and practised for a time with some success as an advocate. Ere long, however, we find him quitting that profession, as not continuing to be advantageous, and separated from his wife, on finding her temper intolerable. He then undertook the care of educating pupils in several great families; among others, that of the president des Maisons, of the Scottish adventurer Law, and the marquis de Beaufremont. Some of these pupils did great honour to his care of their principles and learning. Still he was not fortunate enough to obtain any permanent provision; and undertook a kind of academy, which did not succeed; and he was for a considerable time reduced to go about giving lessons at private houses, and subsisting in a very straitened and precarious manner. At length, the persons who conducted the Encyclopedia, engaged him to bear a part in that great work, to which the articles on the subject of grammar, furnished by him, proved a most important aecession. They are distinguished by a sound and luminous philosophy, an extent of learning by no means common, great precision in the rules, and no less accuracy in the application of them. He had now struggled for the chief part of his life with adverse circumstances; when the count de Lauragais, struck with his merit, and affected by his situation, settled upon him an annuity of a thousand livres. He died June 11, 1756, at the age of eighty. Du Marsais had been considered during his life as sceptical, but is said to have returned to a sense of religion before his death. Several anecdotes were circulated respecting his indifference to religion, which materially injured his fortune. It was even said, that being called upon to educate three brothers in a great family, he asked the parents in what religion they would have them brought up? A story of little probability, but which passed sufficiently current to injure him in the minds of many respectable persons. His disposition was mild and equal, his understanding clear and precise; and his manners had a kind of simplicity which occasioned him to be called the Fontaine of philosophers. Fontenelle said of him, “C‘est le nigaud le plus spirituel, & l’homme d'esprit le plus nigaud que je connoisse,” that is, “He is for a simpleton the most ingenious, and for a man of genius the most of a simpleton of any one I know.” As his own character was so natural, so also was he an ardent admirer of nature, and an enemy to all affectation; and his precepts are said to have had great effect in teaching the celebrated actress le Couvreur, that simple and natural style of declamation which made her performance so pathetic, and raised her reputation to so great a height.

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

, an exemplary Irish prelate, was descended from a Saxon family, formerly seated in Kent, whence his great-grandfather removed; and was born at Hannington, in Wiltshire, Dec. 20, 1638. He received the first rudiments of learning in his native place; and being there well fitted for the university, was admitted of Magdalen-hall, in Oxford, in 1654. He became B. A. in 1657, master in 16 60, bachelor of divinity in 1667, and doctor in 1671. In the mean time he was made fellow of Exetercollege, in 1658; afterwards chaplain to Dr. Seth Ward, bishop of Exeter, and then to chancellor Hyde, earl of Clarendon. In 1673, he was appointed principal of Alban-hall, Oxford, by the duke of Ormond, chancellor of that university; and executed the duties of his office with such zeal and judgment, that, according to Wood, “he made it flourish more than it had done many years before, or hath since his departure.” In 1678 he was removed by the interest of Dr. John Fell, together with that of the duke of Ormond, then lord-lieutenant of Ireland, to the dignity of provost of Dublin-college. He was promoted to the bishopric of Leighlin and Ferns in 1683, translated to the archbishopric of Cashell in 1690, thence to Dublin in 1699, and then to Armagh in 1703. After having lived with honour and reputation to himself, and benefit to mankind in general, he died Nov. 2, 1713, aged seventy-five, and was buried in a vault in St. Patrick’s church-yard.

Dr. Marsh appears to have employed the greater part of his life and income in acts of benevolence and utility. While he presided over the see of Dublin, he built a noble library, and filled it with a choice collection of books; having for that purpose bought the library of Dr. Stillingfleet, late bishop of Worcester, to which he added his own collection; and to make it the more useful to the public, he settled a handsome provision on a librarian and sublibrarian, to attend it at certain hours. This prelate also endowed an alms-house at Drogheda, for the reception of twelve poor clergymen’s widows, to each of whom he assigned a lodging, and 20l. per annum. He likewise repaired, at his own expence, many decayed churches within his diocese, and hought-in several impropriations, which he restored to the church. Nor did he confine his good actions to Ireland only; for he gave a great number of manuscripts in the oriental languages, chiefly purchased out of Golius’s collection, to the Bodleian library. He was a very learned and accomplished man. Besides sacred and profane literature, he had applied himself to mathematics and natural philosophy: he was deep in the knowledge of languages, especially the oriental; he was also skilled in music, the theory as well as the practice; and he frequently, in the earlier part of his life, had concerts of vocal and instrumental music for his own amusement, both at Exeter-college and Alban-hall. Dean Swift must have been under the influence of the most virulent spleen, when he wrote of such a man as Dr. Marsh, the gross caricature published in his works. As an antidote, we would recommend a letter from this excellent prelate, published in “Letters written by eminent persons,” &c. 1813, 3 vols. 8vo.

, a late eminent anatomist and physician, was born in Fifeshire, in 1742, at Park-hill, a large farm on the side of the Tay, near Newburgh, held by his father, Mr. John Marshal, of the earl of Rothes. His lather had received a classical education himself; and being desirous that his son should enjoy a similar advantage, sent him first to the grammar-school at Newburgh, and afterwards tothat of Abernethy, then the most celebrated place of education among the Seceders, of which religious sect he was a most zealous member. Here he was regarded as a quick and apt scholar. From his childhood he had taken great delight in rural scenery. One day, while under the influence of feelings of this kind, being then about fourteen years old, he told his father that he wished to leave school, and be a farmer, but he soon shewed that it had not arisen from any fondness for ordinary country labours. In the following harvest-time, for instance, having been appointed to follow the reapers, and bind up the cut corn into sheaves, he would frequently lay himself down in some shady part of the field, and taking a book from his pocket, begin to read, -utterly forgetful of his task. About two years after, however, he resumed his studies, with the intention of becoming a minister: and soon after, he was admitted a student of philosophy at Abernethy; and next became a student of divinity. In his nineteenth year he went to Glasgow, and divided his ­time between teaching a school, and attending lectures in the university. The branches of learning which he chiefly cultivated were Greek and morals. At the end of two years passed in this way, he became (through the interest of the celebrated Dr. Reid, to whom his talents and diligence had recommended him), tutor in a gentleman’s family, of the name of Campbell, in the Island of Islay. He remained here four years, and removed to the university of Edinburgh, with Mr. -Campbell’s son, whom the following year he carried back to his father. Having surrendered his charge, he returned to Edinburgh, where he subsisted himself by reading Greek and Latin privately with students of the university; in the mean time taking no recreation, but giving up all his leisure to the acquisition of knowledge. He still considered himself a student of divinity, in which capacity he delivered two discourses in the divinity-hall; and from motives of curiosity began in 1769 to attend lectures on medicine. While thus employed, he was chosen1 member of the Speculative society, where, in the beginning of 1772, he became acquainted with lord Balgonie, who was so much pleased with the display which he made of genius and learning in that society, that he requested they“should read together; and in the autumn of the following year made a proposal for their going to the Continent, which was readily accepted. They travelled slowly through Flanders to Paris, where they stayed a month, and then proceeded to Tours, where they resided eight months, in the house of a man of letters, under whose tuition they strove to acquire a correct knowledge of the French language and government. They became acquainted here with several persons of rank, among whom were a prince of Rohan, and the dukes of Clioiseul and Aguilon, at whose seats in the neighbourhood they were sometimes received as gnests. An acquaintance with such people would make Marshal feel pain on account of his want of external accomplishments; and this, probably, was the reason of his labouring” to learn to dance and to fence while he was at Tours, though he was then more than thirty years old. He returned to England in the summer of 1774; and proceeded soon after to Edinburgh, where he resumed the employment of reading Latin and Greek with young men. Hitherto he seems to have formed no settled plan of life, but to have bounded his views almost entirely to the acquisition of knowledge, and a present subsistence. His friends, however, had been induced to hope that he would at some time be advanced to a professor’s cl; ir and it is possible that he entertained the same hope himself. In the spring of 1775, this hope appeared to be strengthened by his being requested by Mr. Stewart, the professor of humanity at Edinburgh, to officiate for him, as he was then unwell: Marshal complied, but soon after appears to have given up all hopes of a professorship, and studied medicine with a determination to practise it. In the spring of 1777, he was enabled by the assistance of a friend, Mr. John Campbell of Edinburgh, to come to London for professional improvement; and studied anatomy under Dr. W. Hunter, and surgery under Mr. J, Hunter. After he had been here a twelvemonth, he was appointed surgeon to the S3rd, or Glasgow regiment, through the interest of the earl of Leverv, the father of his late pupil, lord Balgonie. The first year after was passed with his regiment, in Scotland. In the following he accompanied it to Jersey, where he remained with it almost constantly till the conclusion of the war in the beginning of 1783, when it was disbanded. In this situation he enjoyed, almost for the first time, the pleasures best suited to a man of independent mind. His income was more than sufficient for his support; his industry and knowledge rendered him useful; and his character for integrity and honour procured him general esteem. From Jersey he came to London, seeking for a settlement, and was advised by Dr. D. Pitcairn (with whom he had formed a friendship while a student at Glasgow) to practise surgery here, though he had taken the degree of doctor of physic the preceding year at Edinburgh; and to teach anatomy at St. Bartholomew’s hospital, it being at the same time proposed, that the physicians to that hospital (of whom Dr. Pitcairn was one) should lecture on other branches of medical learning. He took a house, in consequence, in the neighbourhood of the hospital; and proceeded to prepare for the execution of his part of the scheme. This proving abortive, he began to teach anatomy, the following year, at his own house; and at length succeeded in procuring annually a considerable number of pupils, attracted to him solely by the reputation of his being a most diligent and able teacher. In 1788 he quitted the practice of surgery, and commenced that of medicine, having previously become a member of the London college oF physicians. In the ensuing year a dispute arose between John Hunter and him, which it is proper to relate, as it had influence on his after-life. When Marshal returned to London, he renewed his acquaintance with Mr. Hunter, who thought so well of him, that he requested his attendance at a committee of his friends, to whose correction he submitted his work on the venereal disease, before it was published. He became also a member of a small society, instituted by Dr. Fordyce and Mr. Hunter, for the improvement of medical and surgical knowledge. Having mentioned at a meeting of this society, that, in the dissection of those who had died insane, he had always found marks of disease in the head, Mr. Hunter denied the truth of this in very coarse language. The other members interfering, Mr. Hunter agreed to say, that his expressions did not refer to Dr. Marshal’s veracity, but to the accuracy of his observation. Marshal, not being satisfied with this declaration, at the next meeting of the society demanded a.i ample apology; but Mr. Hunter, instead of making one, repeated the offensive expressions; on which Marshal poured some water over his head out of a bottle which had stood near them. A scuffle ensued, which was immediately stopped by the other members, and no father personal contention between them ever occurred. But Marshal, conceiving that their common friends in the society had, from the superior rank of Mr. Hunter, favoured him more in this matter than justice permitted, soon after estranged himself from them. He continued the teaching of anatomy till 1800, in which year, during a tedious illness, the favourable termination of which appeared doubtful to him, he resolved, rather suddenly, to give it up. While he taught anatomy, almost the whole of the fore-part of the day, during eight months in the year, was spent by him in his dissecting and lecture rooms. He had, therefore, but little time for seeing sick persons, except at hours frequently inconvenient to them; and was by this means prevented from enjoying much medical practice; but as soon as he had recovered his health, after ceasing to lecture, his practice began to increase. The following year it was so far increased as to render it proper that he should keep a carriage. From this time to within a few months of his death, an interval of twelve years, his life flowed on in nearly an equable stream. He had business enough in the way he conducted it to give him employment during the greater part of the day; and his professional profits were sufficient to enable him to live in the manner he chose, and provide for the wants of sickness and old age. After having appeared somewhat feeble for two or three years, he made known, for the first time, in the beginning of last November, that he laboured under a disease of his bladder, though he must then have been several years affected with it. His ailment was incurable, and scarcely admitted of palliation. For several months he was almost constantly in great pain, which he bore manfully. At length, exhausted by his sufferings, he died on the 2nd of April, 1813, at his house in Bartlett’s buildings, Holborn, being then in the seventy-first year of his age. Agreeably to his own desire, his body was interred in the church-yard of the parish of St. Pancras. His fortune, amounting to about bOOO/. was, for the most part, bequeathed to sisters and nephews.

Though Dr. Marshal’s genius, with the assistance of great industry, enabled him to attain a very considerable proficiency in many different parts of learning, it was not equally well adapted for every purpose of a literary man. It was better fitted to acquire than digest, to heap up than arrange, to make a scholar than render its possessor a, philosopher; and hence he often appeared to less advantage in conversation than other persons of much inferior possessions. The successful exertion of his talents had given him a confidence in them, which otherwise would have been justly regarded as presumptuous. At the age of forty-one, with little previous knowledge of the subject, he began to prepare for being a teacher of anatomy in London, and, in the following year, actually gave a course of lectures upon it. These lectures were not superficial: they were, on the contrary, remarkable for minuteness of description and copiousness of illustration. When he could derive assistance from his other studies, as while speaking ofthe uses of the bones and muscles, he was particularly full and instructive. In his lectures, however, his want of a methodical mind would not unfrequently appear; for he often seemed to be seeking for a thought which was not readily to be found, and sometimes confessed that what he said was not so clear, from want of proper words, as he wished it to be. Though he began thus late to cultivate anatomy, it was ever after a favourite pursuit with him, particularly that part which relates to the ascertaining the seats of diseases. He kept in his house, for many years after ceasing to lecture, at no inconsiderable expense, a person for the purpose of assisting him in anatomical inquiries.

He had probably never, without aid, conducted a patient through an acute and dangerous disorder, before he was appointed surgeon to the Glasgow regiment, at which time he was nearly thirty-six years of age. He must, therefore, have less readily acquired, the faculty of distinguishing diseases as they occur in nature, than if he had entered upon the exercise of medicine at an earlier period of life; and it was probably, in part, owing to this circumstance, that, even in his later years, he was slower in the examination of the sick, and more distrustful of his opinion respecting their ailments, than many physicians of much less talent and experience. A strong conscientiousness, however, contributed greatly to the production of these effects. That he might be the less liable to err, he look upon the spot short notes of the states of his patients; these formed the bases of entries which he afterwards made in his Case Book, an employment which for many years occupied nearly three hours every evening. His practice in the army is said to have been bold; that it was successful, is evident from a fact related in his inaugural dissertation, but modestly ascribed by him to the excellent regulations established by his colonel, that, in the regiment in which he served, consisting of about 1000 men, and, from being hastily formed, containing more than the usual proportion of persons unfit for a military life, only sixteen died of disease in the course of nearly four years, and of these, four were not under the management of their own officers at the time of their decease. In London, from having patients to operate upon for the most part originally less strong than soldiers, and afterwards rendered still weaker by long residence in impure air, his mode of treating diseases was necessarily different, and during the last eight years of his life, it was somewhat too inert.

Dr. Marshal’s many amiable qualities placed him high in the estimation of those who knew him well; but unfortunately the alloy mixed with them was considerable. His temper was extremely irritable; and, when he had once taken offence, he seldom returned to his former state with respect to the person who had given it, if an equal or superior, though he might afterwards discover that his resentment was without sufficient cause. He seemed to be afraid, in this case, that a confession of error would be attributed to some base motive for when he found that he had taken offence improperly with persons beneath him, with his servants for instance, he was very ready to avow his fault, and atone for it. He was, besides, of a. melancholy disposition; and, like other men of this temperament, frequently believed, that persons of the most honourable conduct were conspiring to betray and to ruin him. From the nature of his early pursuits, these parts of his character seem not to have exhibited themselves very strongly before he returned to London in 1783; but when he came to mix and jostle in this great city with a crowd of persons intent on their own concerns, and little regardful of those of others, when he found himself neglected by some on whom he fancied he had claims for assistance, and experienced unexpected opposition from others, they became very conspicuous, and often rendered him miserable. The causes of irritation, indeed, ceased in a great measure with his lecturing, and the remainder of his life was passed with comparative tranquillity; but he was now almost without a friend to whom he could freely communicate his thoughts, and, from long disuse, with little relish or fitness for the pleasures of society. In this desolate state his chief amusement consisted in reading the ancient classics, after he had closed his professional labours for the tiay. He generally carried one of these to bed, and read it there till he composed himself for sleep. The Greek authors were more frequently used by him in this way than the Latin; and of the former, Plato more frequently than any other.

, a celebrated preacher at the beginning of the last century, was of Emanuel college, Cambridge, where he took his degree of D. D. in 1717. He was lecturer at Aldermanbury church, and curate of Kentish-town, in Jan. 1715, when, at the recommendation of the princess of Wales, who was pleased with his manner of preaching, he was appointed one of the king’s chaplains in 1717, he was rector of the united parishes of St. Veclast and St. Mich;iel-le-Q.nerne, London and, in Feb. 1731, rector of St. Vedast, lecturer of St. Lawrence Jewry, and St. Martin Ironmonger-lane, prebendary of Windsor, and king’s chaplain. These dates and preferments are collected from his title-pages. He died Feb. 4, 1729. His principal publications are, “The genuine Works of St. Cyprian,” 1717, folio; “A Defence of our Constitution in Church and State,” &c. 1717, 8vo, (on which Dr. Sykes published some “Remarks;” and which was also replied to by Matt. Earbury in a tract added to his “Serious Admonition to Dr. Kennett.” Dr. Marshall’s “Sermons on several occasions” appeared in 1730, 3 vols. 8vo, to which another was added in 1750. These were posthumous, and inscribed to queen Caroline by the author’s widow, who was left with eight children, the eldest of whom was preacher at St. John’s chapel, Bedford-row, which he opened Feb. 10, 1722. He died Aug. 23,. 173 1. Bishop Clayton, in his “Letters to his Nephew,” recommends Dr. Marshall’s Sermons, as preferable to Sherlock’s and Atterbury’s for pathos, and for lively and warm applications.

, an English divine, was born at Barkby in Leicestershire, about 1621, and educated there in grammar learning, under the vicar of that town. He was entered of Lincoln college, Oxford, in 1640; and, about the same time, being a constant hearer of archbishop Usher’s sermons in All-hallows church in that university, he conceived such a high opinion of that prelate, as to wish to make him the pattern of his life. Soon after, Oxford being garrisoned upon the breaking out of the civil wars, he bore arms for the king at his own charge; and therefore, in 1645, when he was a candidate for the degree of bachelor of arts, he was admitted to it without paying fees. Upon the approach of the parliamentary visitors, who usurped the whole power of the university, he went abroad, and became preacher to the company of English merchants at Rotterdam and Dort. In 1661, he was created bachelor of divinity; and, in 1663, chosen fellow of his college, without his solicitation or knowledge. In 1669, while he was at Dort in Holland, he was made doctor of divinity at Oxford; and, in 1672, elected rector of his college, in the room of Dr. Crew, promoted to the bishopric of Oxford. He was afterwards appointed chaplain in ordinary to his majesty, rector of Bladon near Woodstock in Oxfordshire, in May 1680, and was installed dean of Gloucester on April 30, 1681. He resigned Bladon in the year 1682. He died at Lincoln-college in 1685. By his will he gave to the public library at Oxford all such of his books, whether manuscript or printed, as were not then in the library, excepting such only as he had not other-­wise disposed of, and the remaining part to Lincoln-college library; in which college also he fitted up the common room, and built the garden-wall.

He produced some writings; as, 1. “Observationes in Evangeliorum versiones perantiquas duas, Gothicas scilicet & Anglo-Saxonicas,” &c. Dordrecht, 1665. 2. “The Catechism set forth in the book of Common Prayer, briefly explained by short notes, grounded upon Holy Scripture/' Oxf. 1679. These short notes were drawn up by him at the desire of Dr. John Fell, bishop of Oxford, to be used by the ministers of his diocese in catechising their children. 3.” An Epistle for the English reader, prefixed to Dr. Thomas Hyde’s translation into the Malayan language of the four Gospels, and the Acts of the Apostles,“Oxf. 1677. 4. He took a great deal of pains in completing” The Life of Archbishop Usher,“published by Dr. Richard Parr, sometime fellow of Exeter college, Lond. 1686. Wood tells us,” that he was a person very well versed in books, a noted critic, especially in the Gothic and English-Saxon tongues, a painful preacher, a good man and governor, and one every way worthy of his station in the church; and that he Whs always taken to be an honest and conscientious puritan.“Dr. Hickes, in” The Life of Mr. John Kettlewell,“p. 3, styles him” a very eminent person in the learned world; and observes, that what he has published shewed him to be a great man.“Dr. Thomas Smith styles him also a most excellent man,” vir pra’stantissimus," and adds, that he was extremely well skilled in the Saxon, and in the Eastern tongues, especially the Coptic; and eminent for his strict piety, profound learning, and other valuable qualifications.

, a very learned English writer, was the second son of Thomas Marsham, esq. alderman of London, and born in the parish of St. Bartholomew’s, Aug. 23, 1602. He was brought up at Westminster school, and sent thence, in 1619, to St. John’s college in Oxford, where betook, in due time, his degrees in arts. In 1625, he went to France, and spent the winter at Paris; in 1626 and 1627, he visited most parts of that kingdom, and of Italy, and some parts of Germany, and then returned to London. In 1629, he went through Holland and Guelderland, to the siege of Boisleduc; and thence by Flushing to Boulogne and Paris, in the retinue of sir Thomas Edmondes, ambassador extraordinary, who was sent to take the oath of Louis XIII. to the peace newly concluded between England and France. During his residence in London, he studied the law in the Middle Temple; and, in 1638, was sworn one of the six clerks in chancery. Upon the breaking out of the civil wars, he followed the king and the great seal to Oxford for which he was deprived of his place by the parliamentarians, and suffered a vast loss by the plundering of his estate. After the surrender of the garrison at Oxford, and the ruin of the king’s affairs, he returned to London; and, having compounded for his estate, he betook himself wholly to retirement and study. In the beginning of 1660, he served as a burgess for the city of Rochester, in the parliament which recalled Charles the Second; about which time, being restored to his place in chancery, he had the honour of knighthood conferred upon him, and three years after was created a baronet. He died at Bushy-hall in Hertfordshire, in May 1685; and his body was interred at Cuckstone near Rochester, where he had an estate. By Elizabeth his wife, daughter of sir William Hammond of St. Alban’s, in East Kent, he left two sons; sir John Marsham, of Cuckstone, bart. and sir Robert Marsham, of Bushy-hall, knt. both of them studious and learned men, and the ancestors of the Romney family. Sir John Marsham was a very accomplished gentleman, and had acquired a critical knowledge of history, chronology, and languages. He published in 1649, 4to, “Diatriba chronologica;” in which he examines succinctly the principal difficulties which occur in the chronology of the Old Testament.“The greatest part of this was afterwards inserted in another work, entitled” Canon chronicus, Ægyptiacus, Ebraicus, Groecus, & disquisitiones,“Lond. 1672, folio. The principal object of this is to reconcile the Egyptian dynasties. The Egyptians, as is well known, pretended to excessive antiquity, and had framed a list of thirty successive dynasties, which amounted to a number of years (36,525) greatly exceeding the age of the world. These were rejected as fabulous by some of the ablest chronologers; but sir John Marsham first conjectured that these dynasties were not successive, but collateral; and therefore without rejecting any, he endeavoured to reconcile the entire series in this manner, to the scripture chronology. The attempt, which was highly ingenious, gained him great reputation, and many contemporary as well as succeeding authors, have been liberal in their praises. Mr. Wotton represents him as the first” who has made the Egyptian antiquities intelligible: that most learned gentleman,“says he,” has reduced the wild heap of Egyptian dynasties into as narrow a compass as the history of Moses according to the Hebrew account, by the help of a table of the Theban kings, which he found under Eratosthenes’s name in the Chronography of Syncellus. For, by that table, he, 1. Distinguished the fabulous and mystical part of the Egyptian history, from that which seems to look like matter of fact. 2. He reduced the dynasties into collateral families, reigning at the same time in several parts of the country; which, as some learned men saw before, was the only way to make those antiquities consistent with themselves, which, till then, were confused and incoherent.“Dr. Shuckford, after having represented the foundation of sir John Marsham’s Canon with regard to Egypt, says that,” upon these hints and observations, he has opened to us a prospect of coming at an history of the succession of the kings of Egypt, and that in a method so natural and easy, that it must approve itself to any person who enters truly into the design and conduct of it.“Afterwards, having given a view of sir John’s scheme, from the beginning of the reigns of the Egyptian kings down to his Sesostris, or Sesac, he observes, that,” if the reader will take the pains thoroughly to examine it, if he will take it in pieces into all its parts, review the materials of which it is formed, consider how they He in the authors from whom they are taken, and what manner of collecting and disposing them is made use of, he will find that however in some lesser points a variation from our very learned author may be defensible, yet no tolerable scheme can be formed of the ancient Egyptian history, that is not in the main agreeing with him. Sir John Marsham has led us to a clear and natural place for the name of every Egyptian king, and time of his reign," &c. But although sir John Marsham’s system has been followed by some, it has been strenuously opposed by other writers, who have represented it as not only false, but even prejudicial to revelation.