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

The “Canon Chronicus” was reprinted at Leipsic, in 1676, in 4 to, and at Franeker, 1696, in 4to, with a preface before each edition, in which the editor, Menckenius, endeavours to confute his author; who thought, as Spencer and others have done, that the Jews derived part of their ceremonies from the Egyptians. The edition of Leipsic pretends, in the title-page, to be much more correct than that of London, which is infinitely more beautiful but its only merit is, that it is more correct than that of Franeker. Sir John Marsham wrote the preface to the first volume of Dugdale’s “Monasticon Anglicanum,” which was printed at London, 1655, in folio. He left behind him at his death unfinished, 1. “Canonis chronici liber quintus: sive, Imperium Persicum.” 2. “De provinciis & legionihus Romanis.” 3. “De re numeraria,” &c. We are likewise in some measure obliged to him for the “History of Philosophy,” by his very learned nephew, Thomas Stanley, esq. which excellent work was undertaken chiefly at his instigation, as we are told by Mr. Stanley himself, in the dedication of it, “to his honoured uncle sir John Marsham.”

, an Italian, famous for letters as well as arms, was descended from an ancient and noble family, and born at Bologna in 1658. He was educated with great care, and instructed in all the arts and sciences by the best masters in Italy; learning mathematics of Borelli, anatomy of Malpighi, &c. He went to Constantinople in 167S); and, as he had destined himself for the military profession, he contrived to take a view of the Ottoman forces, and made other observations of a like nature. He examined at the same time, as a philosopher, the Thracian Bosphorus, and its currents. He returned to Italy in 1680; and, the Turks soon after threatening an irruption into Hungary, he went to Vienna, to offer his service to the emperor Leopold II. which was readily accepted. Discovering great knowledge in fortifications and in the science of war, he had the command of a company conferred on him in 1683; and the same year, after a very sharp action, fell unfortunately into the hands of the Tartars. He was sold by them to two Turks, with whom he suffered great hardships; but at length, conveying intelligence of his situation to his friends, who had believed him dead, he was redeemed, and returned to Bologna towards the latter end of 1684. He went again into Germany, was employed by the emperor in several military expeditions, and made a colonel in 1639. A reverse of fortune afterwards overtook him. In the general war which broke out in 1701, on account of the Spanish, succession, the important fortress of Brisac surrendered to the duke of Burgundy, Sept. 6, 1703, thirteen days after the trenches were open: and it being judged that the place was capable of holding out much longer, the consequence was, that count d‘Arco, who commanded, lost his head; and Marsigli, who was then advanced to be a marshal, was stripped of all his honours and commissions, and had his sword broken over him. This sentence was executed on Feb. 18 following. He afterwards attempted to justify the surrender before the emperor; but, not being able to get admittance, he published a memorial, the purport of which was to shew, that long before the siege of Brisac, it had been represented and proved, that the place could not be defended for any long time. It was in fact the geneEfd opinion that d’Arco and he had been sacrificed, to exculpate the prince of Baden, who had posted a numerous artillery in a bad situation, and with a very weak garrison. When Marsigli went afterwards into France, and appeared at court without a sword, the king presented him with that which he himself wore, and assured him cf his favour.

Released now from public concerns, he returned to his studies; and it was his peculiar good fortune, that amidst the hurry, and noise, and fatigue of war, he had made all the advantages which the most philosophic man ecu i have made, who had travelled pureiy in quest of knowledge; hact determined the situation of places by, astronomical methods, measured the course and swiftness of rivers, studied the fossils, the vegetables, the animals of each country, made anatomical and chemical experiments, and done, in short, every thing which a man of science could do, and with such a fund of knowledge, knew how to fill up his time in the most agreeable as well as honourable manner. While at Marseilles, he was called by pope Clement XL in 1709, and invested with a military commission. Returning soon after to Bologna, he began to execute a design which he had long been meditating. He had a rich collection of every thing that might contribute to the advancement of natural knowledge: instruments proper for astronomical and chemical experiments, plans for fortifications, models of machines, &c. &c. All these he presented to the senate of Bologna, by an authentic act, dated Jan. 11, 1712; forming, at the same time, a body out of them, which he called “The institute of the arts and sciences at Bologna.” He afterwards founded a printing-house, and furnished it with the best types for Latin, Greek, Hebrew, and Arabic. He presented this to the Dominicans at Bologna, in 1728, ‘on condition that ’all the writings of the “Institute, &c.” should be printed there at prime cost. It was called “The printing-house of St. Thomas of Aquinas.”

Having executed these munificent designs, he returned to Marseilles in 1728, for the sake of finishing some philosophical observations upon the sea ywhich he had formerly begun there but was interrupted by the stroke of an apoplexy in 1729, which occasioned the physicians to send him back to his native air, where he died Nov. 1, 1730. He was a member of the academy of sciences at Paris, of the royal society at London, and of that of Montpelier. His writings are numerous and valuable, in French, Italian, and Latin, and upon philosophical subjects. The principal are, 1. “Observations concerning the Thracian Bosphorus,” Rome, 1681, 4to. 2. “Histoire Physique de la Mer,” Amst. 1725, fol. 3. “Danubius Pannonico-mysicus,” a description of the Danube in its Hungarian and Turkish course, 1726, 6 vols. atlas folio. It commences with geographical and hydrographical observations; from thence it proceeds to the history and antiquities of all the places washed by its stream; to the mineralogy, zoology, and botany of its borders, and concludes with meteorological and physical remarks. He published also “A Dissertation n the Bolognian Phosphorus;” “Memoir concerning the Flowers of Coral;” “Dissertation on the Generation of Fungi;” “On Trajan’s Bridge.”

, a French historian of some credit, was born at Paris in 16*7. He took the habit of a canon regular of St. Gdnevieve, and was sent to regulate the chapter of Usez, where he was made provost. This office he resigned in favour of the abbe Poncet, who was afterwards bishop of Angers. Some time after, he was made archdeacon of Usez, and died in that city Aug. 30, 1724, at the age of 78. Marsollier published several histories, which are still read by his countrymen with some pleasure: the style, though occasionally debased by low and familiar expressions, being in general rather lively and flowing. There are extant by him, 1. “A History of Cardinal Ximenes,” in 1693, 2 vols. 12mo, and since frequently reprinted. The only fault found with this work is, that the author gives up his attention to the public man so much, as almost to forget his private character. 2. “A History of Henry VII. King of England,” reprinted in 1727, in 2 vols. 12mo. Some consider this as the master-piece of the author. 3. “The History of the Inquisition and its origin,” 1693, 12mo. A curious work, and in some respects a bold one. 4. “Life of St. Francis de Sales,” 2 vols. 12mo. 5. “The Life of Madame de Chantal,” 2 vols. 12mo. 6. “The Life of Dom Ranqe, abbe and reformer of La Trappe,” 1703, 2 vols. 12mo. Some objections have been made to the veracity of this history, but the journalists de Trevoux seem disposed to prefer it upon the whole to Maupeou’s life of Ranee. 7. “Dialogues on many Duties of Life,” 1715, 12mo. This is rather verbose than instructive, and is copied in a great degree from Erasmus. 8. “The History of Henry de la Tour d'Auvergne, duke of Bouillon,” 3 vols. 12mo. Not much esteemed. 9. “An Apology for Erasmus,” 12mo; whose catholic orthodoxy the author undertakes to prove from passages in his works. 10. “A History of Tenths, and other temporal Goods of the Church,” Paris, 1689, 12mo. This is the most scarce, and at the same time the most curious, of all the works of Marsollier.

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

Marston contributed eight plays to the stage, which were all acted at the Black-Friars with applause and one of them, called “The Dutch Courtezan,” was once revived since, the restoration, under the title of “The Revenge, or a Match in Newgate.” In 1633, six of this author’s plays were collected, and published in one volume, dedicated to the lady viscountess Falkland. Besides his dramatic poetry, he wrote three books of satires, entitled, “The Scourge of Villainy,'” which were printed at London in 1599, and reprinted in 1764, by the rev. John Bowie. We have no account when Marston died; but he was certainly living in 1633. As a specimen of his poetry, Mr. Dodsley has republished the “Malecontent^” in his Collection of Old English Plays, vol. IV. Marston was a chaste and pure writer, avoiding all that obscenity, ribaldry, and scurrility which too many of the playwrights of that time, and much more so in periods since, have made the basis of their wit, to the great disgrace of the age. He abhorred such writers, and their works, and pursued so opposite a practice in his performances, that “whatsoever even in the spring of his years, he presented upon the public and private theatre, in his autumn and declining age he needed not be ashamed of.”

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

, a French surgeon under Henry IV. in whose service he was employed about 1590, attended that prince in the wars of Dauphiny, Savoy, Languedoc, and Normandy; and at Mothe-Frelon saved his life by bleeding him judiciously, in a fever brought on by fatigue. In consequence of this, he gained the full confidence of the king, and was made his chief surgeon. He was the author of a work entitled “L‘Apologie pour les Chirurgiens, centre ceux qui publient qu’ils ne doivent se meler de remettre les os rompus et demis.” He wrote also, “Paradoxes on the practice of Surgery,” in which some modern improvements are anticipated. His works are printed, with the surgery of Philip de Flesselle, at Paris, in 1635, 12mo.

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

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

, a benedictine of the congregation of St. Maur, was born in 1654, at St. Jean-deLosne, in the diocese of Langres. Among his brethren, so highly famous for arduous efforts in literature, he was distinguished for his very laborious researches, no less than for his eminent virtues. The vast extent of his learning did not interfere with the simplicity of his manners, any more than his great attachment to study, with his attention to monastic duties. He died of an apoplexy in 1739, at the age of 85. His principal works are, 1. “A Latin Commentary on the monastic rules of St, Benedict,” a work of curious research on that subject, Paris, 1690, 4to. 2. “De antiquis monachorum ritibus,” Lyons, 1690, 2 vols. 4to. Many curious points of history, besides the concerns of the Monks, are illustrated by these volumes. 3. A Latin treatise, “on the ancient Ecclesiastical Rites, and on the Sacraments,” Rheims, 1700 and 1701, 3 vols. 4to. 4. A Latin treatise on the Discipline of the Church. 5. “Thesaurus anecdotorum novus,” 1717, 5 vols. folio, a valuable collection of ecclesiastical documents. 6. “Voyage Literaire de deux Benedictins,” Paris, 1717, 4to. 7. “Veterum Scriptorum et Monumentorum Ecclesiasticorum, et dogmaticorum, amplissima collectio,” 1724, 9 vols, folio. In this he was assisted by Durand. All these works are full of learned labour but the author is content to amass, without giving much grace to the materials he compiles.

, an eminent printer, was born at Alost, in Flanders, in 1454. He began printing in 1473, and died in 1534. He is celebrated as the person who first introduced the art of printing into the Netherlands; having exercised this useful and noble art nearly sixty years at Alost, Louvain, and Antwerp. He was an author as well as a printer; and wrote Latin hymns in honour of the saints, a dialogue on the virtues, and other pieces; but he is more renowned for the many beautiful editions of other men’s works which issued from his presses. He was highly esteemed by the learned men of the period in which he lived, arf8 enjoyed the friendship of Erasmus, who lodged in his house. He employed the double anchor as a sign of the books that were printed at his office.

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

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

, a Benedictine monk, who distinguished himself by an edition of St. Jerome, was born at St. Sever, a village in Gascony, in 1647. He entered into the congregation of St. Maur at twenty years of age; and applied himself to the study of the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew languages. He read lectures upon the holy scriptures in several monasteries, at x\rles, at Avignon, at Bourdeaux: in the last of which places he accidentally met with father Pezron’s book called “The antiquity of time re-established;” “L'Antiquite du temps retablie.” The authority of the Hebrew text, and the chronology of the Vulgate, being attacked in this work, Martianay resolved to defend them in two or three pieces, published against Pezron and Isaac Vossius, who maintained the Septuagint version. This monk died of an apoplexy in 1717, after having spent fifty years in a scrupulous observance of all the duties belonging to his order, and in writing more than twenty works, of which the most distinguished is his edition of the works of St. Jerome, in 5 vols. folio; the first of which was published at Paris in 1693, the second in 1699. In his notes on these two volumes he criticized several learned men, as well papists as protestants, with much severity, and even contumely; which provoked Le Clerc, who was one of them, to examine the merits of this edition and of the editor. This he did in a volume published in 12mo, at Amsterdam, in 1700, with this title, “Quaestiones Hie,ronymianae, in qnibus expenditur Hieronymi nupera editio Parisina, &c.” in which he endeavours to shew that Martianay, notwithstanding the indecent petulances he had exercised towards other critics, had none of the requisites to qualify him for an editor of St. Jerome; that he had not a competent skill either in the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew languages, or in the ancient interpreters of scripture, or in profane authors, or in the science of manuscripts, for this work. Martianay published the third volume in 1704, the fourth in 1705, and the fifth in 1706; and Le Clerc published, in the seventeenth tome of his “Bibliotheque choisee,” some copious remarks upon these three last volumes, in order to confirm the judgment he had passed on the two first. Nevertheless, Martianay’s edition of Jerome was by many thought the best, even after the appearance of Vallarsius’s edition.

, an eminent optician, was born at Worplesdon, in Surrey, in 1704, and began life as a plough-boy at Broad-street, a hamlet belonging to that parish. By some means, however, he contrived to learn reading, writing, and arithmetic, so as to be soon enabled to teach them to others. For some time he continued to assist in the farming business, but, as our authority states, “finding that he became a poor husbandman in proportion as he grew a learned one, he prudently forsook what indeed he had no great inclination for,” and having a strong inclination to mathematics and philosophical speculations, now entered upon such a course of reading and study as in some measure supplied the want of a learned education. The historian of Surrey says that he first taught reading and writing at Guildford. It was probably some time after this that a legacy of five hundred pounds bequeathed to him by a relation encouraged his laudable ambition, and after purchasing books, instruments, &c. and acquiring some knowledge of the languages, we find him, in 1735, settled at Chichester, where he taught mathematics, and performed courses of experimental philosophy. At this time he published his first work, “The Philosophical Grammar; being a view of the present state of experimental physiology, or naturaf philosophy, &c.” London, 8vo. When he came up to London we have not been able to discover, but after settling there he read lectures on experimental philosophy for many years, and carried on a very extensive trade as an optician and globe-maker in Fleet-street, till the growing infirmities of old age compelled him to withdraw from the active part of business. Trusting too fatally to what he thought the integrity of others, he unfortunately, though with a capital more than sufficient to pay all his debts, became a bankrupt. The unhappy old man, in a moment of desperation from this unexpected stroke, attempted to destroy himself; and the wound, though not immediately mortal, hastened his death, which happened Feb. 9th, 1782, at seventy-eight years of age.

He had a valuable collection of fossils and curiosities of every species, which after his death were almost given away by public auction. He was indefatigable as an artist, and as a writer he had a very happy method of explaining his subject, and wrote with clearness, and even considerable elegance. He was chiefly eminent in the science of optics; but he was well skilled in the whole circle of the mathematical and philosophical sciences, and wrote useful books on every one of them; though he was not distinguished by any remarkable inventions or discoveries of his own. His publications were very numerous, and generally useful some of the principal of them were as follow 1 “The Philosophical Grammar,” already mentioned. 2. “A new, complete, and universal system or body of Decimal Arithmetic,” 1735, 8vo. 3. “The young student’s Memorial Book, or Patent Library,” 1735, 8vo. 4. “Description and use of both the Globes, the Armillary Sphere and Orrery,” 1736, 2 vols, 8vo. 5. “Elements of Geometry,” 1739, 8vo. 6. “Memoirs of the Academy of Paris,” 1740, 5 vols. 8vo. 7. “Panegyric of the Newtonian Philosophy,” 1754. 8. “On the new construction of the Globes,” 1755. 9. “System of the Newtonian Philosophy,” 1759, 3 vols. 8vo. 10. “New Elements of Optics,” 1759. 11. “Mathematical Institutions, viz. arithmetic, algebra, geometry, and fluxions,” 1759. 12. “Natural History of England, with a map of each county,” 1759, 2 vols. 8vo. 13. “Philology and Philosophical Geography,” 1759. 14. “Mathematical Institutions,” 1764, 2 vols. 15. “Biographia Philosophica, or Lives of Philosophers,” 1764, 8vo. 16. “Introduction to the Newtonian Philosophy,” 1765. 17. “Institutions of Astronomical Calculations,” two parts, 1765. 18. “Description and use of the Air Pump,” 1766. 19. “Description of the Torricellian Barometer,” 1766. 20. “Appendix to the Description and Use of the Globes,” 1766. 21. “Philosophia Britannica,” 1778, 3 vols. 22. “Philosophical Magazine.” This when complete consists of 14 volumes, but there are parts sold separately, as “The Miscellaneous Correspondence,” 4 vols. It was discontinued for want of encouragement, which, however, it appears to have deserved, as it afforded a very correct state of scientific knowledge at that time.

, a protestant divine, was born at Revel, in Languedoc, in 1639, but settled in Holland after the revocation of the edict of Nantes. He was at once a good theologian, and a good philosopher, in both of which capacities he gave lectures at Utrecht, when he was settled as a pastor in that city. Though he was much absent from France, he retained a critical and accurate knowledge of its language, and when the French academy announced the second edition of their dictionary, he transmitted to them some remarks which were received with applause. He died at Utrecht, of a violent fever, in 1721. He was universally regretted in that place, from his probity, modesty, and ex9ellence of character; his heart was affectionate and compassionate, and-he delighted in doing good offices without being solicited, and without expecting even gratitude in return. He published, 1. “A History of the Old and New Testament,” in 2 vols. folio, printed at Amsterdam in 1707, with 424 fine plates. It is often, called Mortier’s Bible, from the name of the printer; and the early impressions are distinguished by the absence of a little defect in the last plate, which arose from a fracture of the plate after a few had been taken. 2. “Eight Sermons,” 1708, 8vo. 3. “A treatise on Natural Religion,” 1713, 8vo. 4. “An Explanation of the 110th Psalm,” against John Masson, 1715, 8vo. 5. “Two Dissertations,” one in defence of the authenticity of the controverted text, 1 John v. 7. the other in favour of the passage of Josephus, in which Christ is mentioned, 1722, 8vo. 6. “A Bible with short notes,” Amsterdam, 1707, 2 vols. fol. 7. “A treatise on Revealed Religion,” in which he ably supports the divine inspiration of the sacred books; reprinted at Amsterdam in 1723, in 2 vols. 8vo. This useful and judicious work has been translated into English. Martin wrote with ease, but not with a facility of style; but his talents were considerable, his memory good, and hisjudgment sound.

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

, a learned Benedictine of the congregation of St. Maur, was born at Tanjaux in Upper Languedoc, in 1694, and became a Benedictine in 1709. After having taught the learned languages in his native province, he removed to the capital in 1727. He was there regarded as a man of a singular and violent temper; rather whimsical as a scholar, and not always sufficiently prudent or modest as a writer; yet he was one of the ablest authors produced by the congregation of St. Maur, and would have been excellent had he met with any judicious friend to correct the sallies of his too active imagination. His latter years were much embittered by the gravel and the gout, under the torments of which complaints he suffered, with great piety, a kind of lingering death, which did not dismiss him from his sufferings till 1751, when he was in his seventieth year. He wrote, 1. “A treatise on the Religion of the ancient Gauls,” Paris, 1727, 2 vols. 4to. This book is much esteemed for the curious and learned researches of the author; but contains some uncommon opinions, which have not been generally adopted by his readers. One point which he particularly labours, is to derive the religion of the ancient Gauls from that of the patriarchs. Tbis subject has been more successfully handled lately by Mr. Maurice, with the aid of oriental knowledge. 2. “History of the Gauls, &c. from their origin to the foundation of the French monarchy,” 1754, 2 vols. 4to, continued and published by his nephew de Brezillac, and much esteemed. 3. “An Explication of several difficult Texts of Scripture,” Paris, 1730, 2 vols. 4to. The fire, the ingenuity, and the presumption of the author, are sufficiently manifest in this book; which would be much more valuable if deprived of several discussions and citations about trifles, and some points by no means suited to a book of divinity. 4. “An Explanation of ancient Monuments, &c. wiih an examination of an edition of St. Jerom, and a treatise on Judicial Astrology,” Paris, 173u, 4to. Besides a vast scope of erudition, this book is adorned by many lively traits, and a very animated style. 5. “A Project for an Alphabetical Library,” containing much learning, and many misplaced witticisms. 6. “A Translation of -the Confessions of St. Augustin,” which is exact, and is accompanied with judicious notes.

, an eminent civilian, the son of Thomas Martin, was born at Cerne, in Dorsetshire, and educated at Winchester school, whence he was admitted fellow of New college, Oxford, in 1539. He applied himself chiefly to the canon and civil law, which he likewise studied at Bourges, and was admitted doctor. On entering upon practice in Doctors’ Commons, he resigned his fellowship; and in 1555, being incorporated LL. D. at Oxford, he was made chancellor of the diocese of Winchester. This he owed to the recommendation of bishop Gardiner, who had a great opinion of his zeal and abilities, and no doubt very justly, as he found him a ready and useful assistant in the persecution of the protestants in queen Mary’s time. Among other instances, he was joined in commission with Story in the trial of archbishop Cranmer at Oxford. His proceedings on that occasion may be seen in Fox’s “Acts and Monuments” under the years 1555 and 1556. His conduct probably was not very grosser tyrannical, as, although he was deprived of his offices in Elizabeth’s reign, he was allowed quietly to retire with his family to Ilfield in Sussex, where he continued in privacy until his death in 1584. He wrote two works against the marriage of priests; but that which chiefly entitles him to some notice here, was his Latin “Life of William of Wykeham,” the munificent founder of New college, the ms. of which is in the library of that college. It was first published in 1597, 4to, and reprinted, without any correction or improvement, by Dr. Nicholas, warden of Winchester, in 1690, who does not seem to have been aware how much more might be recovered of Wykeham, as Dr. Lowth has proved. This excellent biographer says that Martin seems not so much to have wanted diligence in collecting proper materials, as care and judgment in digesting and composing them. But it is unnecessary to say much of what is now rendered useless by Dr. Lowth’s work. Dr. Martin bequeathed, or gave in his life-time, several valuable books to New college library.

, an English antiquary, was born at Thetford, in the school-house in St. Mary’s parish (the only remaining parish of that town in Suffolk), March 8, 1697. His grandfather, William, was rector of Stantori St. John, in Suffolk, where he was buried in 1677, His father William was rector of Great Livermere, and of St. Mary’s in Thetford, both in the same county. He married Elizabeth, only daughter of Mr. Thomas Eurrough, of Bury St. Edmonds, and aunt to the late sir James Burrough, master of Caius college, Cambridge: he died in 1721, aged seventy-one, and was buried in Livermere chancel, where his son Thomas, not long before his death, placed a monument for him, and his mother, and their children, who were then all dead except himself, “now by God’s permission residing at Palgrave.” Thomas was the seventh of nine children. His school education was probably at Thetford. In 1715 he had been some time clerk to his brother Robert, who practised as an attorney there; but it appears by some objections to that employment in his own hand-writing, in that year, that he was very uneasy and dissatisfied with that way of life. As these give us the state of his mind, and the bent of his inclination at that early period, and may perhaps account for his succeeding unsettled turn "and little application to his business, they may be worth preserving in his own words.

Objections.—" First, my mind and inclinations are wholly to Cambridge, having already found by experience that I can never settle to my present employment. 2. I was always designed for Cambridge by my father, and I believe am the only instance in the world that ever went to school so long to be a lawyer’s clerk. 3. 1 always wished that I might lead a private retired life, which can never happen if I be an attorney but on the contrary, I must have the care and concern of several people’s business besides mine own, &c. 4. If I be a lawyer, the will of the dead can never be fulfilled, viz. of my sister Elizabeth, who left 10l. to enter me at college; and aunt Burrough, to whom I have promised (at her earnest request) that I never would be a lawyer; nay, my brother himself had promised her I never should. 5. It was always counted ruination for young persons to be brought up at home, and I'm sure there’s no worse town under the sun for breeding or conversation than this. 6. Though I should serve my time out with my brother, I should never fancy the study of the law, having got a taste of a more noble and pleasant study. Questions. But perhaps these questions may be asked me, to which I shall answer as follows: Why I came to my brother at all? and have absented myself thus long from school? Or why I have not spoke my mind before this time? Answers. 1. Though I am with my brother, it was none of my desire (having always confessed an aversion to his employment), but was almost forced to it by the persuasion of a great many, ringing it in my ears that this was the gainfullest employment, &c. 2. Though I have lost some time in school learning, I have read a great deal of history, poetry, &c. which might have taken up. as much time at Cambridge had 1 kept at school. 3. I have staid thus long, thinking continual use might have made it easy to me; but the longer I stay, the worse I like it.

He was, however, by some means or other, kept from executing his favourite plan of going to Cambridge. In 1722 be still probably resided at Thetford; for, having married Sarah the widow of Mr. Thomas Hopley, and daughter of Mr. John Tyrrel, of Thetford, his first child was born there that year; in 1723 his second was born at Palgrave in Suffolk, as were the rest. This wife bore him, eight children, and died Nov. 15, 1731, ten days after she had been delivered of twins. He very soon, however, repaired this loss, by marrying Frances, the widow of Peter le Neve, Norroy king at arms, who had not long been dead, and to whom he was executor. By this lady he came into the possession of a very valuable collection of English antiquities, pictures, &c. She bore him also about as many children as his former wife (four of whom, as well as five of the others, arrived at manhood), and died, we believe, before him. He died March 7, 1771, and was buried, with others of his family, in Palgrave church-porch, where no epitaph as yet records the name of that man who has so industriously preserved those of others , though Mr. Ives had promised his friends that he would erect a monument for him, and had actually drawn up a plain inscription for it.

Mr. Martin’s desire was not only to be esteemed, but to be known and distinguished by the name of, “Honest Tom Martin of Palgrave f,” an ambition in which his acquaintance saw no reason not to gratify him; and we have observed, with pleasure, several strokes of moral sentiment scattered about his rough church notes. These were the genuine effusions of his heart, not designed for the public eye, and therefore mark his real character in that respect. Had he desired the appellation of wise and prudent, his inattention to his business, his contempt and improper use of money, and his fondness for mixed and festive company, would have debarred him, as the father of a numerous, family, of that pretension. As an antiquary, he was most skilful and indefatigable; and when he was employed as an attorney and genealogist, he was in his element. He had the happiest use of his pen, copying, as well as tracing, with dispatch and exactness, the different writing of every aera, and tricking arms, seals, &c. with great neatness. His taste for ancient lore seems to have possessed him from his earliest to his latest days. He dated all the scraps of paper on which he made his church-notes, &c. Some of these begin as early as 1721, and end but the autumn before his death, when he still wrote an excellent hand; but he certainly began his collections even before the first mentioned period; for he appears among the contributors to Mr. Le Neve’s “Monumenta Anglicana,” printed in 1719. The latter part of his life was bestowed on the History of his native town of Thetford. His abilities, and the opportunities he derived from the collections of Peter Le Neve, esq. Norroy king at arms, render it unnecessary to enlarge on this, which Mr. Blomefield, thirty years before this publication encouraged the public to expect from his hands. The materials being left without the last finishing at Mr. Martin’s death, were purchased by Mr. John Worth, chemist, of Diss, F. S. A. who entertained thoughts of giving them to the publick, and circulated proposals, dated July 1, 1774, for printing them by subscription. Upon the encouragement he received, he had actually printed five sheets of the work, and engraved four plates. This second effort was prevented by the immature death of Mr. Worth, in 1775; who dying insolvent, his library, including what he had reserved of the immense collections of Le Neve and Martin at their dispersion on the death of the latter, being sold, with his other effects, for the benefit of his creditors, was purchased the same year by Mr. Thomas Hunt, bookseller at Harleston. Of him Mr. Gough bought the manuscript, with the undigested materials, copy-right, and plates. The first of these required a general revisal, which it received from the great diligence and abilities of Mr. Gough, who published it in 1779, 4to.

Mr. Martin’s collection of antiquities, particularly of such as relate to Suffolk, was very considerable, greater than probably ever were before, or will be hereafter, in the possession of an individual; their fragments have enriched several private libraries. His distresses obliged him to dispose of many of his books, with his manuscript notes on them, to Mr. T. Payne, in his life-time, 1769. A catalogue of his library was printed after his death at Lynn, in 1771, in octavo, in hopes of disposing of the whole at once. Mr. Worth, above mentioned, purchased the rest, with all his other collections, for six hundred pounds. The printed books he immediately sold to Booth and Berry of Norwich, who disposed of them by a catalogue, 1773. The pictures and lesser curiosities Mr. Worth sold by auction at Diss; part of his manuscripts in London, in April 1773, by Mr. Samuel Baker; and by a second sale there, in May 1774, manuscripts, scarce books, deeds, grants, pedigrees, drawings, prints, coins, and curiosities.

, a physician, appears to have been a native of Scotland, where he was born in 1702, and entered upon the study of medicine at Edinburgh in 172O, whence he went to Leyden; and, after prosecuting the same study there for some time, was admitted to his degree of M. D in 1725. He then returned to Scotland, and practised his art at St. Andrew’s. In 1740, while about to publish his Commentaries on Eustachius, he was r< quested by lord Cathcart, to accompany him, as physician to the forces under his command on the American expedition. The difficulties of the voyage, and the change of climate, he bore with chearfulness, but the death of that muchloved commander greatly afflicted him. Soon after he was seized with a bilious fever, which proved fatal in 1743, in the forty-first year of his age. His first publication was entitled “Tractatus de similibus animalibus, et animalium calore:” after which appeared his “Essays Medical and Philosophical,” 1740, 8vo. He contributed also some papers to the Edinburgh “Medical Essays,” and to the “Philosophical Transactions.” We find in Dr. Thomson’s list of the fellows of the royal society the name of George Martini, M. D. elected in 1740, who was probably our author. Being possessed, when a student at Edinburgh, of the earliest edition of “Eustachius’s Tables,” he applied himself diligently to correct and enlarge Lancisi’s explanation of those tables, and compared the descriptions of the parts as delivered by authors with these figures, and carefully registered what he read upon the subject. Being at length furnished with many rich materials, he considered of repairing, in some measure, the loss of Eustachius’s commentaries “De dissentionibus et controversiis anatomicis,” and was, as we have observed, about to publish his own Commentaries, when he went abroad. It fell at length into the hands of the first Dr. Monro of Edinburgh, who published it in 1755, under the title of “Georgii Martinii, M. D. in Bartholomaei Eustachii Tabulas anatomicas Coinmentaria,” 8vo. Notwithstanding Albinus’s explanation, Dr. Monro considers this work as indispensably necessary to those who are in possession of Eustachius’s Tables.

, known all over Europe by the name of Padre Martini, was born at Bologna in 1706, and entered into the order of the friars minor, as offering him the best opportunities for indulging his taste for music, which he cultivated with so much success as to be regarded, during the last fifty years of his life, as the most profound harmonist, and the best acquainted with the history and progress of the art and science of music in Italy. All the great masters of his time were ambitious of becoming his disciples, and proud of his approbation; and young professors within his reach never thought themselves, or were thought by others, sufficiently skilled in counterpoint, till they had received lessons from this deep theorist, and most intelligent and communicative instructor.

, a Jesuit, born at Trent, who resided many years as a missionary in China, and there compiled several curious works on the history and geography of that country, returned to Europe in 1651, and published a description of China, with an exact map of that empire, and fifteen separate maps of the fifteen provinces; to which he added two others, of Corea and Japan. We have met with an account, though on no warranted authority, that he returned afterwards te Asia, and died at Hang-chew in China, at the age of seventy-four. His works consist of, 1. “Sinicae Historiae Decas prima, a gentis origine ad Christum natum,” 4to, and 8vo. This has been translated by le Pelletier, 1692, in 2 vols. 12mo. 2. “China Illustrata,” already mentioned, Amsterdam, 1649, in folio. This was the best account of China, before that of du Halde. 3, “De Bello inter Tartaros et Sinenses,” which has also been translated. 4. “An account of the number and quality of the Christians in China.” Like other missionaries, he is apt to speak in exaggerated terms of the antiquity, riches, policy, &c. of the Chinese.

, a Dominican friar, and eminent orientalist, who flourished in the thirteenth century, was born at Sobiras in Catalonia; and was one of those of his order who were appointed, at a general chapter held at Toledo in 1250, to study Hebrew and Arabic, in order to confute the Jews and Mahometans. The occasion of it was this: Raymond de Pennafort, general of the order, having a strong desire to extirpate Judaism and Mahometanism, with which Spain was infected, procured an order from this chapter, that the religious of his society should apply themselves to the study of Hebrew and Arabic. This task he imposed on Martin among others; and he obtained a pension of the kings of Arragon and Castile, for such as should study those languages, pn purpose that they might be able to exert themselves in the conversion of infidels. Martin accordingly applied himself to those studies with great success; and, having sufficiently studied the works of the rabbins, they furnished him with such arguments, as enabled him to combat the Jews very skilfully. This appears from his “Pugio fidei,” which waa finished, as we learn from himself, in 1278, though the first publication of it at Paris was not till 1651. Bosquet, who died bishop of Montpelier, met with the manuscript, while he was with great ardour examining the library of the college de Foix at Toulouse, about 1629, and, after copying some things out of it, he gave it to James Spieghel, a learned German, and his preceptor in the Hebrew tongue. Spieghel advised Maussac to publish it; who, though very able to do it by himself, had however for an assistant Mr. de Voisin, son of a counsellor in the parliament at Bourdeaux, who took upon him the greatest part of the task. Thomas Turc, another general of the Dominicans, was very earnest in spurring on the promoters of this edition; and, not satisfied with soliciting them by letters equally importunate and obliging, he gave orders that they should be provided with all the manuscripts of the “Pugio fidei” that could be recovered, In short, the Dominican order interested themselves so much in it, that they bore the charges of the impression. Some assert, that Martin wrote another book, entitled, “Capistrum Judaeorum,” and also “A Confutation of the Alcoran;” and that a copy of the “Pugio fidei,” written by his own hand in Latin and Hebrew, was preserved at Naples in the convent of St. Dominic. The great knowledge which he has discovered of the books and opinions of the Jews, has made some imagine that he was of that religion; but this is thought to be a mistake. The time of Martin’s death is uncertain.

, a French author of considerable celebrity about the beginning of the last century, was born in 1684 at Dieppe. He studied at Paris, partly under the instruction of his learned grand-uncle Richard Simon, who then resided in the college of Fortet. In 1709, he went to the court of Mecklenburgh, and began his researches into the history and geography of that state; but, on the death of the duke, and the troubles which followed, and interrupted his labours, he removed elsewhere, probably to Parma, as we find him, in 1722, publishing, by order of the duke Philip Farnese, whom he calls his most serene master, an historical dissertation, “Dissertation historique sur les duchés de Parme et de Plaisance,” 4to. It appears also that the Sicilian monarch appointed him his secretary, with a salary of twelve hundred crowns. The marquis de Beretti Landi, the Spanish minister at the Hague, had a high regard for Martiniere, and advised him to dedicate his geographical dictionary to the king of Spain, and procured for him, from his catholic majesty, the title of royal geographer. Martiniere passed several years at the Hague, where all the foreign ministers paid him much attention, receiving him often at their tables. He died here June 19, 1749. Moreri makes him eighty-three years of age; but this is inconsistent with a date which he gives on the authority of Martiniere himself, viz. that in 1709 he was twenty-five years old. His personal character is represented in a very favourable light by M. Bruys, who lived a long time with him at the Hague, and objects nothing to him but a want of oeconomy in his domestic matters: he was a man of extensive reading and memory, excelled in conversation, which abounded in striking and original remarks, and was generous, liberal, and candid. His favourite studies were history and geography, which at length produced his wellknown dictionary, “Dictionnaire Geographique, Historique, et Critique,” Hague, 1726 1730, 10 vols. folio; reprinted with corrections and additions at Dijon in 6 vols, folio; and at Venice, and again at Paris in 176S, 6 vols. folio. This was the most comprehensive collection of geographical materials which had then appeared, and although not without the faults inseparable from so vast an undertaking, was of great importance to the science, and the foundation of many subsequent works of the kind. He also published several editions of Puftendorff’s “Introduction to History;” a work on which he appears to have bestowed more pains than will perhaps be approved, as his zeal for the Roman catholic religion induced him to omit Puffendorff’s remarks on the temporal power of the popes. His other works were, 1. “Essais sur l'origine et les progres de la Geographic,” with remarks on the principal Greek and Latin geographers. These two essays were addressed to the academy of history at Lisbon, and that of belles lettres at Paris, and are printed in Camusat’s “Memoires Historiques,” Amst. 1722. 2. “Traites geographiques et historiques pour faciliter l‘intelligence de l’Ecriture Sainte, par divers auteurs celebres, M. M. Huet et Le Grand, D. Calmet, &c. &c.” Hague, 1730, 2 vols. 12mo. 3. “Entretiens des ombres aux Champs Elyseés,” taken from a German work under that title, 2 vols. 4. “Essai d‘une traduction d’Horace,” in verse, with some poetical pieces of his own. 5. “Nouveau recueil des Epigrammatistes Francois anciens et modernes,” Amst. 1720, 2 vols. 12mo. 6. “Introduction generate a l'etude des Sciences et des Belles Lettres, en faveur des pefsonnes qui ne savent que le Frangois,” Hague, 1731, 12mo. 7. “Lettres choisies de M. Simon,” a new edition, with the life of the author, Amst. 1730, 4 vols. 12mo. 8. “Nouvelles politiques et litteraires,” a literary journal which did not last long. 9. “Vie de Moliere,” said to be more correct and ample than that by Grimarest. 9. “Continuation de VHistoire de France sous la regne de Louis XIV. commencée par M. de Larrey.” Some other works have been improperly attributed to Martiniere, as “Lettres serieuses et badines,” which was by M. Bruys, and “Relation d'une assemble tenue au bas du Parnasse,” a production, of the abbé D'Artigny. After his death, his name was put to a species of Ana, entitled, “Nouveau portefeuille historique et litteraire,” an amusing collection; but probabljr not of his forming.

, a learned German divine of the Protestant persuasion, was born in 1572, and studied at Paderborn, under the celebrated Piscator. In his twenty-third year he was called to officiate as minister in the courts of the counts of Nassau Dillembourg; the following year was appointed professor in the college of Paderborn, and in 1592 was appointed regent of the schools. He was afterwards called to be rector of the school at Bremen, and, in 1618, was deputed by the magistrates of Bremen to the synod of Dort, where he maintained the opinions of Cameron, Amyraut, Dai lie, and others; but signed all the acts of the synod. He died in 1630, leaving behind him many theological treatises, now forgotten, and a “Lexicon philologicum, in quo Latinae et a Latinis auctoribus usurpatae turn purae, turn barbaroe voces ex originibus declarantur, &c.: accedit Cadmus Graeco-Phoanix etGlossarium Isidori,” Utrecht, 1697, 2 vols. folio; reprinted at Amsterdam, 1701. This work, at one time, enjoyed considerable reputation, and it is said that some philologists have availed themselves of it, without acknowledgment.

, professor of botany at Cambridge, was born Sept. 12, 1699, in Queen-street, London, where his father Thomas was a merchant. His mother, whose maiden name was Catharine Weedon, died Nov. 1, 1700. After being educated at a private school in the neighbourhood, he was taken, at the age of sixteen, into the counting-house of his father; but, without neglecting the duties of this station, he had already so strong a taste for literature, that he constantly devoted much of the night to study, allowing himself, for many years, only four hours for sleep. In the summer of 1718 he first acquired a taste for botany, in consequence of his acquaintance with Mr. Wilmer, an apothecary, who afterwards became demonstrator in the Chelsea-garden, Dr. Patrick Blair, and Dr. William Sherard, under whose instructions his progress was rapid. He soon became desirous of commencing author, and began by translating Tournefort’s History of the plants growing about Paris, from French into English, in 1720. This, however, he did not print till 1732, when the title was “Tournefort’s History of Plants growing about Paris, with their uses in Physic, and a mechanical account of the operation of medicines. Translated into English, with many additions. And accommodated to the plants growing in Great Britain,” 2 vols. 8vo. This year he undertook various botanical excursions, which were chiefly performed on foot, that he might observe plants in their natural situations, as ueU as insects, which had now likewise excited his attention. The leading character of his mind seems to have been a taste for inquiry, which prompted him to examine every thing for himself. His observation of the works of God directed his thoughts to the divine origin of all things, and his perusal of the writings of some of the most famous adversaries of revealed religion, served but to confirm him in its truth. About the year 1721 he became acquainted with the celebrated Dillenius, and in conjunction with him and several others, amongst whom we find the names of Deering, Thomas Dale, and Philip Miller, established a botanical society, which met every Saturday evening, first at the Rainbow coffee-house in Watlingstreet, and afterwards in a private house. Dillenius was president, and Martyn, who was secretary, read before this society a course of lectures, upon the technical terms of the science, the foundation, as it is presumed, of what he afterwards published. These meetings were continued for about five years only.

We are not informed of the period at which Mr. Martyn changed his mercantile occupation for the medical profession, to which he was, doubtless, led by the general tenour of his pursuits. In 1723 he was offered admission into the royal society, which he declined, as it appears by one of his letters to Dr. Blair, from pure modesty. His objections, however, were overcome the next year; and he soon proved himself an active and worthy member, by his various communications, to be found in the Transactions of that learned body. In 1726 he published his tables of Officinal Plants, in twenty pages folio, disposed according to Ray’s system, under the title of “Tabulae Synopticae,” &c. Lond.fol. dedicated to Sir Hans Sloane. He had given a public course of lectures in Botany the preceding year, and had, with the assistance of Dr. Blair, undertaken to make a collection of birds. His herborizing excursions were from time to time continued, notwithstanding his various labours and engagements in town. His second course of lectures there, in 1726, being much approved, he was recommended by Dr. Sherard and Sir Hans Sloane as fit to teach the science in which he excelled, in the University of Cambridge. Accordingly he gave, in 1727, the first botanical course ever read in that university; and for the use of his pupils reduced the alphabetical catalogue of Cambridge Plants, printed by Ray, into a systematic form, according to the principles of its author, and published it under the title “Methodus Plantarum circa Cantabrigiam nascentium,” Lond. 12mo. As he excelled in the knowledge of cryptogamous vegetables, he improved the work in that department; and he now very judiciously laid aside the old systematic practice, of separating trees and shrubs from herbs, in his classification. In 1728 he published the first Decade of a sumptuous work, entitled “Historia Plantarum Rariorum,” in imperial folio, in which his merit in description is conspicuous. The plates were drawn by that great artist Van Huysum, engraved in mezzotinto by Kirkall, and printed in colours; but in the latter part of their execution they fail very much, that mode of colouring plates having scarcely ever been found to answer. Four more Decades of this work appeared in the course of nine years; after which it ceased, on account of the great expence of the undertaking. When this publication commenced, its author is said to have “sedulously applied himself to the practice of physic.” Sir James Smith thinks this must have been as an apothecary, for Mr. Martyn was not, by any medical degree, authorized to practise as a physician.

In 1729, he had a design of reading botanical lectures at Oxford, and it is not known what prevented this scheme, unless that he might, upon reflection, consider it as interfering with the recent establishment of the Sherardian professorship there, in favour of his friend Dillenius. In the following year we find him projecting, in conjunction with Dr. Russell, a new edition of Stephens’s Latin Thesaurus; but this design was dropped, and he engaged in a far more easy and pleasant work, along with the same friend, and some others, entitled the “Grub-street Journal,” a periodical publication, which had a large sale, and contains a great variety of satirical remarks on, and anecdotes of living authors, forming indeed a kind of prose and verse “Dunciad,” and, like that celebrated poem, sometimes takes liberties with characters that ought to have been noticed with more respect. The best papers were afterwards collected in 2 vols. 12mo, 1737, under the title of “Memoirs of the Society of Grub-street.” Mr. Martyn’s papers are distinguished by the signature B. and Dr. Russel’s by that of M. The poetical part was published in a separate volume, with an emblematic frontispiece, and is more scarce.

On the 26th of May, 1730, Mr. Martyn was admitted of Einanuel college, Cambridge, with an intention of taking his degrees in physic; but after keeping five terms, his marriage, and the necessary attendance to his profession, caused him to relinquish this design *.*He had resided for three years in Great St. Helen’s; but the town

*About this time he was an unsuc- Transactions“from 1720 to that time, cessful candidate for the post of secre- in conjunction with Mr, John Eames, taryto the royal society. His oppo- who, however, abridged only three nent was Dr. Mortimer, who had the chapters, while Mr. Martyn completinterest of s r Hans Sloane and of the ed the whole in 3 vols. 4to. 1734, as coim, which, Mr. Martyn’s son says, a continuation of the previous abridgwas” too prevalent for 1 he literary ment in 5 vols, by Lowthorp and part of the society;“In 1731 he was Jones. Among his other literary laengaged in putung together Churchill’s hours, he was also engaged in the Collect ion of Voyages and Travels;” General Dictionary, including Bayle,“published proposals fir an edition of 1 vols, fol. but his articles appear only Virgil’s Georgics, anl entered into ar- in the first three volumes, tides for abridging the” Philosophical air disagreeing with his constitution, which was asthmatic, he removed to Chelsea, where he married, on the 20th of August, 1732, Eulalia, youngest daughter of John King, D. D. rector of Chelsea, and prebendary of York, by whom he had three sons and five daughters. Four of the latter died young, but the other children survived him.

At the close of this year the Professorship of Botany at Cambridge becoming vacant, by the death of Mr. Bradley, all eyes were directed towards Mr. Marty n as the properest person for this situation; and, after some slight opposition to him as a nonjuror, which he removed, by taking the requisite oaths, he was unanimously elected Feb. 8, 1733. In two or three years, however, after obtaining the appointment, he finally ceased to lecture, from want of encouragement, and especially the want of a botanic garden, at Cambridge. There had been hopes of the latter being established in 1731, through the liberality and zeal of a Mr. Brownell of Willingham; but the scheme fell to the ground, nor was it revived with effect till many years afterwards.

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

This worthy man died at Chelsea, to which place his increasing infirmities had induced him, about a year previous, to return, Jan. 29, 1768, in the sixty- ninth year of his age, and was interred in the burying-ground there, near his first wife.

, recorder of Exeter, was born in that city in 1562, and educated in the grammar school, whence he was sent to Broadgates-hall, now Pembroke college, Oxford, in 1579. Here he is supposed to have taken one degree in arts, and then removed to some of the inns of court in London to study law. In 1605, he was elected reeofder of his native city, where he died April 12, 1617. He is noticed here as the author of a history or chronicle of the kings of England, entitled “The History and Lives of the Kings of England, from William the Conqueror to King Henry VIII.” Lond. 1616, folio, reprinted in 1618, an amusing, and not ill-written work, taken principally from the Chronicles. An appendix was published in 1638, by B. R M. A. including the history of Edward VI., Mary, and Elizabeth. It is said that king James took offence at some passages in Mr. Martyn’s work respecting his own family or the Scottish nation, and that the author was brought into some trouble. Of what kind this trouble was we are not told, but that it preyed on his mind, and hastened his death. Mr. Martyn also published a book for the use of one of his sons, entitled “Youth’s Instruction,” Lond. 1612, 'Jto, which Wood saysj shows a great deal of reading. His family appears to have been somewhat poetical, as his history was preluded by copies (if verses by his three sons, and his son-in-law. 1 Ma&Tyr, Justin, see Justin. Martyr, Peter. See Anghiera. Martyr (Peter), a very distinguished divine, was born at Florence, Sept. 8, 1500. His family name was VermiliUs; but his parents gave him that of Marty*, from one Peter a martyr, whose church happened to stand near their house. The first rudiments of literature he received from his mother, who was a very ingenious lady; and used, as it is said, to read Terence and other classics to him in the original. When he was grown up, he became a regular Augustine in the monastery of Fiesoli; and, after three years’ stay there, was sent to the university of Padua, to study philosophy and the Greek language. At twenty-six, in 1526, he was made a public preacher, and preached first at Brixia, in the church of Afra, then at Rome, Venice, Mantua, and other cities of Italy. He read lectures of philosophy and divinity in his college, and applied himself to the study of the Hebrew tongue, the knowledge of which he attained by the assistance of one Isaac, a Jewish physician. Such was his fame at this time, that he was made abbot of Spoletto, in the duchy of Umbria, where he continued three years. Afterwards, he was made go1 Prince’s Worthies 6f Devon. Fuller’s Worthies. Ath. Ox. vol I. vernor of the monastery of St. Peter ad aram in Naples. Here he first became acquainted with the writings of Zuinglius and Bucer, which led him to entertain a good opinion of protestantism: and afterwards his conversation with Valdes, a Spanish lawyer, so confirmed him in it, that he made no scruple to preach it at Rome privately to many persons of quality, and sometimes even publicly. Thus when he came to I Cor. iii. 13, he boldly affirmed, that place not to be meant of purgatory “because,” said he, “the fire there spoken of is such a fire, as both good and bad must pass through and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is.” “And this,” says Fuller, in his quaint manner, “seeming to shake a main pillar of purgatory, the pope’s furnace, the fire whereof, like the philosopher’s stone, melteth all his leaden bulls into pure gold; some of his under-chemists, like Demetrius and the craftsmen, began to bestir themselves, and caused him to be silenced.”

It was not, however, this opposition, but a severe illness, which obliged him to go from Naples in quest of a more healthy air; and being chosen general visitor of his order, that he might be absent from his cure without inconveO

nience, he went to Lucca, where he was made superior of St. Fridian, a house of his own order; and there he lived with Tremellius and Zanchius, whom he is said to have converted. But, finding himself in more danger here, he left the city secretly, and travelled to Pisa; whence, by letters to cardinal Pole, and to the society of Lucca, he fully explained the reasons of his departure. Then coming to Florence, but making no long stay there, he set forward for Germany; and, passing the Alps, went to Zurich with Ochinus, who had been one of the most celebrated preachers of Italy, but had now forsaken his former superstitions. From Zurich he went to Basil; and thence, by Bucer’s means, was brought to Strasburg; Here he married a young nun that had left her convent, who lived with him eight years, and died at Oxford, as will be noticed hereafter. After he had spent five years at Strasburg, he was, through the management of Seymour the protector, and archbishop Cranmer, sent for to England by Edward VI. who made him professor of divinity at Oxford in 1549. Here he read lectures, to which even the popish party, from the fame of his learning, resorted: and though they could not be easily reconciled to his doctrines, yet they bore him with some patience, till he came to handle that of the Lord’s Supper. Then they began to disturb him in his lectures, to fix up malicious and scandalous libels against him, and to challenge him to disputes; uhich challenges he did not disdain to accept, but disputed, first privately in the vice-chancellor’s lodge, and afterwards in public, before his majesty’s commissioners, deputed for that purpose. His adversaries, finding no advantage could be gained by argument, stirred up the multitude so successfully, that he was obliged to retire to London till the tumult was suppressed. In 1550, the king bestowed on him a canonry of Christ church, on which he returned, and entered on the lodgings belonging to him, near the great gate of Christ church leading into Fish-street. Here being still much disturbed by the rabble, who broke his windows in the night-time, and rendered the situation very uneasy, he was obliged to exchange his lodgings for those in the cloister, where he quietly passed the remainder of his abode in the university. For the more privacy in his studies, he erected a fabric of stone in his garden, situated on the east side of his apartments, in which he partly composed his commentaries on the first epistle to the Corinthians, and his epistles to learned men. This fabric, which contained two stories, remained until 1684, when it was pulled down by Dr. Aldrich, then canon.

He continued at Oxford till queen Mary came to the throne; when he was suffered to depart the kingdom, and passed undiscovered through Brabant, and other popish territories, to Strasburg; though it is said, not without considerable risk. Thence he went to Zurich, upon an honourable invitation from the magistrates of that place, to be their divinity professor; and was accompanied thither by Jewel, afterwards bishop of Salisbury, who was then an exile for his religion. At Zurich Martyr lived seven years in high esteem with the inhabitants of the place, and in great friendship with Bullinger, and other learned men. He was afterwards invited to Geneva, to be pastor of the Italian church there; and in queen Elizabeth’s reign, when protestantism was re-established in England, bishop Jewel endeavoured to prevail on him to return, but in vain; he continued at Zurich to the time of his death, Nov. 12, 1562, in his sixty-third year. The year before he died, however, he was prevailed upon by letters from the queenmother of France, the king of Navarre, the prince of Conde", and other peers of that realm, to go over into France to the solemn conference at Poissy, where he disputed against the papists, with Beza and others. Not long after his arrival at Zurich, he took a second wife, who was recommended to him from the Italian church at Geneva, where she lived an exile for religion. He had two children by her, who both died very young, and before him; and he left her with child of a third, which proved a daughter.

Peter Martyr is described to have been a man of an able, healthy constitution, large-boned, well limbed, and of a countenance which expressed an inwardly grave and settled turn of mind. His parts and learning were very uncommon; as was also his skill in disputation, which made him as much admired by the protestants, as hated by the papists. He was very sincere and indefatigable in promoting a reformation in the church; yet his zeal was never known to get the better of his judgment. He was always moderate and prudent in his outward behaviour; nor, even in the conflict of a dispute, did he suffer himself to be transported into intemperate warmth, or unguarded expressions ever to escape him. But his pains and industry were not confined to preaching and disputing against the papists; he wrote a great many books against them, none of which raised his reputation higher, than his “Defence of the orthodox doctrine of the Lord’s Supper,” against bishop Gardiner. He wrote also several tracts of divinity, and commentaries on many books of Scripture; for all which he was as much applauded by one party, as he was condemned by the other. Dupin, however, with his usual candour, bestows the highest praise on the learning and critical skill of Martyr as a commentator. It is easy to conceive, that Peter Martyr would be ranked at Rome amongst the heretics of the first class; yet, as bishop Jewel observes in his “Defence of the Church of England,” he “was an illustrious man, and must never be named without the highest respect and honour.”

We have mentioned that Peter Martyr’s wife died at Oxford, in 1551, and was buried in the cathedral of Christ church. Here her remains quietly reposed until 1556, when cardinal Pole appointed a set of commissioners to reform the university of Oxford, from all remains of the new religion, or heresy, as it was called. In the discharge of their functions, they were ordered to take into their consideration the manners and life “of one Catherine Cathie, or Dampmartin, the late wife of Dr. Peter Martyr, who died about four years ago, and was buried in the cathedral of Christ church, near to the reliques of St. Frideswyde.” They accordingly summoned several persons of her acquaintance, “to the end that if they could find any thing of her, favouring of heresy, they might take up her body and commit it to the fire” but, as these witnesses pretended they did not understand her language, and therefore could not tell what religion she professed, they informed the cardinal of their progress, who immediately wrote to Dr. Marshall, the dean, a letter, which by no means exhibits Pole as a man possessed of that greatness of mind which his late biographers have attributed to him. He tells the dean that “forasmuch as Catherine Cathie, of detestable memory, who had professed herself the legitimate wife of Peter Martyr, a heretic, though he and she had before marriage entered into solemn vows of religion, and that she had lived with him in Oxford in cursed fornication, when he denied the truth of the Sacrament, and that also after her death she was buried near the sepulchre of that religious virgin St. Frideswyde; he should according to his discretion deal so with her carcass that it should be far enough cast from ecclesiastical sepulture.” Melchior Adam imputes this conduct on the part of the cardinal, to a motive of resentment, which he had conceived against Peter Martyr. The cardinal had formerly been his most intimate friend, and even continued to appear so, after Martyr had expressed his disgust at the errors and superstitions of Rome; but when Martyr left Italy, he became his most inveterate enemy, and exercised that indignity, and even cruelty upon the wife, which it was not in his power to shew to the husband.

The body was accordingly taken up and buried in the dunghill near the dean’s stable, and remained there, until queen Elizabeth was settled on the throne, when a singular act of retaliation took place. The archbishop of Canterbury, bishop of London, and others, having ordered some of the society of Christ church to replace the body, Dr. Calfhill, the subdean, not content with this, made search for the relics of St. Frideswyde, and having found them, put them into the coffin along with the remains of Martyr’s wife, that in time they might become (indistinguishable. In this state the coffin was solemnly interred in Christ church. On this occasion one of the Oxford wits proposed by way of epitaph, “Hie jacet religio cum superstitione.” Dr. Calfhiil published in the following year (1562), an account of this affair, entitled “Historia cte exhuumione Katherinee nuper uxoris Petri Martyris,” in 8vo.

, a very ingenious and witty English writer, was the son of Mr. Andrew Marvel!, minister and schoolmaster of Kingston upon -Hull, in Yorkshire, and was born in that town in 1620, His abilities being very great, his progress in letters was proportionable; so that, at thirteen, he was admitted of Trinity-college in Cambridge. But he had not been long there, when he fell into the hands of the Jesuits; for those busy agents of the Romish church, under the connivance of this, as well as the preceding reign, spared no pains to make proselytes; for which purpose several of them were planted in or near the universities, in order to make conquests among the young scholars. Marvell fell into their snares, as ChilJingworth had fallen before him, and was inveigled up to London; but his father being apprised of it soon after, pursued him, and finding him in a bookseller’s shop, prevailed with him to return to college. He afterwards applied to his studies with great assiduity, and took a bachelor of arts degree in 1639. About this time he lost his father, who was unfortunately drowned in crossing the Humber, as he was attending the daughter of aa intimate female friend; who by this event becoming childless, sent for young Marvell, and, by way of making all the return in her power, added considerably to his fortune. Upon this the plan of his education was enlarged, and he travelled through most of the polite parts of Europe. It appears that he had been at Rome, from his poem entitled “Flecknoe,” an English priest at Rome in which he has described with great humour that wretched poetaster, Mr. Richard Flecknoe, from whom Dryden gave the name of Mac- Flecknoe to his satire against Shadwell. During his travels, another occasion happened for the exercise of his wit. In France, he found much talk of Lancelot Joseph de Maniban, an abbot; who pretended to understand the characters of those he had never seen, and to prognosticate their good or bad fortune, from an inspection of their band-writing. This artist was handsomely lashed by our author, in a poem written upon the spot, and addressed to him. We know no more of Marvell for several years, only that he spent some time at Constantinople, where he resided as secretary to the English embassy at that court.

In 1653, we find him returned to England, and employed by Oliver Cromwell as a tutor to a Mr. Button; as appears from an original letter of Marvell to that usurper, still extant. His first appearance in any public capacity at home, was his being made assistant to the celebrated Milton, Latin secretary to the protector, which, according to his own account, happened in 1657. “I never had,” says he, “any, not the remotest relation to public matters, nor correspondence with the persons then predominant, until the year 1657; when indeed I entered into an employment, for which I was not altogether improper, and which I considered to be the most innocent and inoffensive towards his majesty’s affairs, of any in that usurped and irregular government, to which all men were then exposed. And this I accordingly discharged without disobliging any one person, there having been opportunity and endeavours since his majesty’s happy return to have discovered, had it been otherwise.”

A little before the Restoration, he was chosen by his native town, Kingston-upon-Hull, to sit in that parliament which began at Westminster, April 25, 1660, and afterwards in that which began May 8, 1661. In this station he acquitted himself so much to the satisfaction of his electors, that they allowed him a handsome pension all the time he continued to represent them; which was to the time of his death. This was probably the last borough in England that paid a representative. He seldom spoke in parliament, but had much influence without doors upon the members of both houses. Prince Rupert, particularly, paid the greatest regard to his counsels; and whenever he voted according to the sentiments of Marvell, which he often did, it used to be said by the opposite party, that “he had been with his tutor.” Such certainly was the intimacy between the prince and Marvell, that when he was obliged to abscond, to avoid falling a sacrifice to the indignation of those enemies among the governing party whom his satirical pen had irritated, the prince frequently went to see him, disguised as a private person.

The first attack he made with his pen was in 1672, upon Dr. Parker, a man of parts and learning, but a furious partizan, and virulent writer on the side of arbitrary government, who at this time published “Bishop Bramhall’s Vindication of himself, and the rest of the episcopal clergy, from the presbyterian charge of popery, &c.” to which he added a preface of his own. This preface Marvell attacked, in a piece called “The Rehearsal transprosed; or, animadversions on a late book, intituled, A preface, shewing what grounds there are of fears and jealousies of Popery, the second impression, with additions and amendments. London, printed by J. D. for the assigns of John Calvin and Theodore Beza, at the sign of the king’s indulgence, on the south side of the Lake Leman; and sold by N. Ponder in Chancery-lane,” 1672,“in 8vo. The title of this piece is taken in part from the duke of Buckingham’s comedy, called” The Rehearsal;“and, as Dryden is ridiculed in that play under the name of Bayes, Marvell borrowed the same name for Parker, whom he exposed with much strength of argument, and force of humour. Parker answered Marvell in a letter entitled” A Reproof to the Rehearsal transprosed;“to which Marvell replied in,” The Rehearsal transprosed, the second part. Occasioned by two letters: the first printed by a nameless author, entitled A Reproof, &c. the second left for me at a friend’s house, dated Nov. 3, 1673, subscribed J. G. and concluding with these words: If thou darest to print any lie or libel against Dr. Parker, by the eternal God I will cut thy throat. Answered by Andrew Marvell,“Lond. 1673, 8vo. Marveil did not confine himself in these pieces to Parker’s principles, as they appear in the” Preface and the Reproof;“but he exposed and confuted likewise various opinions which the doctor had advanced in his” Ecclesiastical Polity,“published in 1670, and in his” Defence“of it in 167 1. Parker made no reply to Marvell’s last piece:” He judged it more prudent,“says Wood,” to lay down the cudgels, than to enter the lists again with an untowardly combatant, so hugely well versed and experienced in the then but newly refined art, though much in mode and fashion almost ever since, of sporting and buffoonery. It was generally thought, however, by many of those who were otherwise favourers of Parker’s cause, that the victory lay on Marvell’s side; and it wrought this good effect on Parker, that for ever after it took down his high spirit.“Burnet, speaking of Parker, says that,” after he had for some years entertained the nation with several virulent books, he was attacked by the liveliest droll of the age, who wrote in a burlesque strain; but with so peculiar and entertaining a conduct, that from the king down to the tradesman, his books were read with great pleasure. That not only humbled Parker, but the whole party; for the author of the Rehearsal transprosed had all the men of wit on his side.“Swift likewise, speaking of the usual fate of common answerers to books, and how short-lived their labours are, adds, that” there is indeed an exception, when any great genius thinks it worth his while to expose a foolish piece: so we still read MarvelPs answer to Parker with pleasure, though the book it answers be sunk long ago." Several other writers fell with great fury and violence upon Marvell; but Parker being considered as the principal, Marvell took but slight notice of the others.

A few years after, another divine fell under the cognizance of MarvfclPs pen. In 1675, Dr. Herbert Croft, bishop of Hereford, published without his name, a discourse in 4to, entitled, “The Naked Truth; or the true state of the Primitive Church. By an humble Moderator.” This was immediately answered by several persons, and among the rest by Dr. Turner, master of St. John’s-colJege, Cambridge, in a book called “Animadversions upon a late pamphlet, entitled, The Naked Truth,” &c. This animadverter being against moderation, which the author of “Naked Truth” had written his book on purpose to recommend, provoked Marvell to take him to task, in a piece entitled “Mr. Smirke, or the divine in mode; being certain annotations upon the animadversions on The Naked Truth, together with a short historical essay concerning general councils, creeds, and impositions in matters of religion, fiy Andreas Rivetus, junior. Anagrammatised, Res nuda veritas” 1676, 4to. The “Historical Essay” was afterwards printed by itself in folio. The last work of our author, which was published during his life, was “An account of the growth of Popery and arbitrary government in England; more particularly, from the long prorogation of Nov. 1675, ending the 15th of Feb. 1676, till the last meeting of parliament the 16th of July, 1677; _1678,” folio: and reprinted in State tracts in 1689. In this the author, having imputed the Dutch war to the corruption of the court, asserts, that the papists, and particularly the French, were the true springs of all the councils at this time: and these, and other aspersions upon the king and ministry, occasioned the following advertisement to be published in the Gazette: “Whereas there have been lately printed and published several seditious and scandalous libels against the proceedings of both houses of parliament, and other his majesty’s courts of justice, to the dishonour of his majesty’s government, and the hazard of public peace; these are to give notice, that what person soever shall discover unto one of the secretaries of state the printer, publisher, author, or hander to the press, of any of the said libels, so that full evidence may be made thereof to a jury, without mentioning the informer; especially one libel, intituled, An account of the growth of Popery, &c. and another called, A seasonable argument to all the grand juries, &c. the discoverer shall be rewarded as follows: he shall have fifty pounds for such discovery, as aforesaid, of the printer or publisher of it from the press and for the hander of it to the press, \00l. &c.”

Marvell, as we have already observed, by thus opposing the ministry and their measures, created himself many enemies, and made himself very obnoxious to the government: notwithstanding which, Charles II. took great delight in his conversation, and tried all means to win him over to his side, but in vain; nothing being ever able to shake his resolution. There were many instances of his firmness in resisting the offers of the court, in which he showed himself proof against all temptations. The king, having one night entertained him, sent the lord treasurer Danby the next morning to find out his lodgings; which were then up two pair of stairs, in one of the little courts in the Strand. He was busily writing, when the treasurer opened the door abruptly upon him; upon which, surprized at so unexpected a visitor, Marvell told his lordship, “he believed he had mistaken his way” Lord Danby replied, “Not now I have found Mr. Marvell” telling him, that he came with a message from his majesty, which was to know, what his majesty could do to serve him? to which Marvell replied, with his usual facetiousness, that “it was not in his majesty’s power to serve him.” Coming to a serious explanation, our author told the treasurer, “that he knew full well the nature of courts, having been in, many; and that whoever is distinguished by the favour of the prince, is always expected to vote in his interest.” Lord Danby told him, that his majesty, from the just sense he had of his merit alone, desired to know, whether there was any place at court he could be pleased with? To which Marvell replied, “that he could not with honour accept the offer; since, if he did, he must either be ungrateful to the king in voting against him, or false to his country in giving into the measures of the court. The only favour therefore which he begged of his majesty was, that he would esteem him as faithful a subject as any he had, and more truly in his interest by refusing his offers, than he could have been by embracing them.” Lord Danby, finding no arguments would make the least impression, told him, “that the king had ordered him lOOOl. which he hoped he would receive, till he could think of something farther to ask his majesty.” This last offer he rejected with the same steadiness as the first; though, as soon as the treasurer was gone, he was forced to borrow a guinea of a friend.

Marvell died in 1678, in his fifty-eighth year, not without the strongest suspicions of being poisoned; for he was always very temperate, and of an healthful and strong constitution to the last. He was interred in the church of St. Giles’s in the Fields; and ten years after (in 1688), the town of Kingston upon Hull, to testify her grateful remembrance of his honest services to her, collected a sum of money to erect a monument over him, and procured an epitaph to be written by an able hand: but the minister of the parish forbid both the inscription and monument to be placed in that church. Wood tells us, that Marvell in his conversation was very modest, and of few words; and Cooke, the writer of his life, observes, that he was very reserved among those he did not well know, but a most delightful and improving companion among his friends. After his death were published, “Miscellaneous Poems,” in 1681, folio, with this advertisement to the reader prefixed:

But Cooke says, that “these were published with no other but a mercenary view, and indeed not at all to the honour of the deceased, by a woman with whom he lodged, who hoped by this stratagem to share in what he left behind him: for that he was never married.” This gentleman gave an edition, corrected from the faults of former editions, of“The works of Andrew Marvell, esq.” Lond. 1726, in 2 vols. 12mo; in which, however, are contained only his poems and letters, and not any of the prose pieces above-mentioned. Cooke prefixed also the life of Marvell, which has been principally used in drawing up this account of him. A more complete edition of all his works was published by captain Thompson, in 1776, 3 vols. 4to; but some pieces are here attributed to him which were written by other authors. Marvell is now little read, but there are many descriptive touches in his poems of great beauty and delicacy. In his controversial works he was unquestionably the greatest master of ridicule in his time: it is only to be regretted, for his fame, that his subjects were temporary.

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

, queen of England, and eldest daughter of Henry VIII. by his first wife, Catharine of Arragon, was born at Greenwich in Kent, Feb. 18, 1517. Her mother was very careful of her education, and provided her with tutors to teach her what was fitting. Her first preceptor was the famous Linacer, who drew up for her use “The rudiments of Grammar,” and afterwards, “De emendata structura Latini sermonis libri sex.” Linacer dying when she was but six years old, Ludovicus Vives, a very learned man of Valencia in Spain, became her next tutor; and composed for her, “De ratione studii puerilis.” Under the direction of these excellent men, she became so great a mistress of Latin, that Erasmus commends her for her epistles in that language.

Towards the end of her father’s reign, at the earnest solicitation of queen Catharine Parr, she undertook to translate Erasmus’s “Paraphrase on the gospel of St. John*' but being cast into sickness, as Udall relates, partly by overmuch study in this work, after she had made some progress therein, she left the rest to be done by Dr. Maliet, her chaplain. This translation is printed in the first volume of” Erasmus’s Paraphrase upon the New Testament,“London, 1548, folio; and before it is a Preface, written by Udall, the celebrated master of Eton-school, and addressed to the queen dowager. This Preface contains some remarks illustrative of the history of the times. Among other things, Udall takes occasion in it to observe to her majesty,” the great number of noble women at that time in England, not only given to the study of human sciences and strange tongues, but also so thoroughly expert in the Holy Scriptures, that they were able to compare with the best writers, as well in enditing and penning of godly and fruitful treatises, to the instruction and edifying of realms in the knowledge of God, as also in translating good books out of Latin or Greek into English, for the use and commodity of such as are rude and ignorant of the said tongues. It was now,“he said,” no news in England, to see young damsels in noble houses, and in the courts of princes, instead of cards, and other instruments of idle trifling, to have continually in their hands either Psalms, Homilies, and other devout meditations, or else Paul’s epistles, or some book of Holy Scripture matters, and as familiarly both to read or reason thereof in Greek, Latin, French, or Italian, as in English. It was now a common thing to see young virgins so trained in the study of good letters, that they willingly set all other vain pastimes at nought for learning’s sake. It was now no news at all, to see queens and ladies of most high estate and progeny, instead of courtly dalliance, to embrace virtuous exercises of reading and writing, and with most earnest study, both early and late, to apply themselves to the acquiring of knowledge, as well in all other liberal arts and disciplines, as also most especially of God and his holy word. And in this behalf,“says he,” like as to your highness, as well for composing and setting forth many godly Psalms, and divers other contemplative meditations, as also for causing these paraphrases to be translated into our vulgar tongue, England can never be able to render thanks sufficient; so may it never be able, as her deserts require, enough to praise and magnify the most noble, the most virtuous, the most witty, and the most studious lady Mary’s grace, for taking such pain and travail in translating this paraphrase of Erasmus upon the gospel of St. John. What could be a more plain declaration of her most constant purpose to promote God’s word, and the free grace of his gospel“&c. Udall, however, was mistaken; as she never entertained any such purpose; for, soon after her accession to the throne, a proclamation was issued for calling in and suppressing this very book, and all others that had the least tendency towards furthering the Reformation. And Walpole is of opinion, that the sickness which came upon her while she was translating St. John, was all affected;” for,“says he,” she would not so easily have been cast into sickness, had she been employed on the Legends of St. Teresa, or St. Catharine of Sienna."

King Edward her brother dying the 6th of July, 1553, she was proclaimed queen the same month, and crowned in October, by Stephen Gardiner, bishop of Winchester. In July 1754, she was married to Philip prince of Spain, eldest son of the emperor Charles the Fifth; and now began that persecution against the Protestants, for which her reign is so justly infamous. Until her marriage with that tyrant, she appears to have been merciful and humane, for Holinshed tells us, that when she appointed sir Richard Morgan chief justice of the Common Pleas, she told him, “that notwithstanding the old error, which did not admit any witness to speak, or any other matter to be heard, (her majesty being party,) her pleasure was, that whatsoever could be brought in favour of the subject should be admitted to be heard; and moreover, that the justices should not persuade themselves to put in judgment otherwise for her highness than for her subject.” Hence some have carried their good opinion of her so far, as to suppose that most of those barbarities were transacted by her bishops, without her knowledge or privity; but as this was impossible, it would be a better defence, if she must be defended, to plead that a strict adherence to a false religion, and a conscientious observance of its pernicious and cruel dictates, overruled and got the better of that goodness of temper, which was natural to her. Yet neither this can be reasonably admitted when we consider her unkind and inhuman treatment of her sister, the lady Elizabeth; her admitting a council for the taking up and burning of her father’s body; her most ungrateful and perfidious breach of promise with the Suffolk men; her ungenerous and barbarous treatment of judge Hales, who had strenuously defended her right of succession to the crown; and of archbishop Cranmer, who in reality had saved her life. These actions were entirely her own; her treatment of Cranmer becomes aggravated by the obligations she had been under to him. Burnet says, “that her firm adherence to her mother’s cause and interest, and her backwardness in submitting to the king her father, were thought crimes of such a nature by his majesty, that he came to a resolution, to put her openly to death; and that, when all others were unwilling to run any risk in saving her, Cranmer alone ventured upon it. In his gentle way he told the king, That she was young and indiscreet, and therefore it was no wonder if she obstinately adhered to that which her mother and all about her had been infusing into her for many years; but that it would appear strange, if he should for this cause so far forget the father, as to proceed to extremities with his own child; that, if she were separated from her mother and her people, in a little time there might be ground gained on her; but that to take away her life, would raise horror through all Europe against him;” by which means he preserved her. Queen Catharine, hearing of the king’s bloody intention, wrote a long letter to her daughter, in which she encouraged her to suffer cheerfully, to trust to God, and keep her heart clean. She charged her in all things to obey the king’s commands, except in the matters of religion. She sent her two Latin books; the one, “De vita Christi, with the Declaration of the Gospels;” the other, “St. Jerome’s Episles to Paula and Eustochium.” This letter of Catharine may be seen in the Appendix to Burnet’s second volume of the “History of the Reformation.” She fell a sacrifice, however, at last to disappointed expectations, both of a public and domestic kind, and especially the absence and unkindness of Philip; which are supposed, by deeply affecting her spirits, to have brought on that fever of which she died, Nov. 7, 1558, after a reign of five years, four months, and eleven days. “It is not necessary,” says Hume, “to employ many words in drawing the character of this princess. She possessed few qualities either estimable or amiable, and her person was as little engaging, as her behaviour and address. Obstinacy, bigotry, violence, cruelty, malignity, revenge, tyranny; every circumstance of her character took a tincture from her bad temper and narrow understanding. And amidst that complication of vices, which entered into her composition, we shall scarcely find any virtue but sincerity; a quality which she seems to have maintained throughout her whole life; except in the beginning of her reign, when the necessity of her affairs obliged her to make some promises to the Protestants which she certainly never intended to perform. But in these cases a weak bigoted woman, under the government of priests, easily finds casuistry sufficient to justify to herself the violation of a promise. She appears also, as well as her father, to have been susceptible of some attachments of friendship; and even without the caprice and inconstancy which were so remarkable in the conduct of that monarch. To which we may add, that in many circumstances of her life she gave indications of resolution and vigour of mind, a quality which seems to have been inherent in her family.”

, queen of Scots, celebrated for her beauty, her wit, her learning, and her misfortunes, was born Dec. 8, 1542, and was the daughter and sole heiress of James the Fifth king of Scots, by Mary of Lorrain, his second queen, and dowager of Longueville. She was not eight days old when her father died; and therefore, after great animosities among the nobility, it was agreed, that the earl of Arran, as being by proximity of blood the next heir to the crown in legitimate descent, and the first peer of Scotland, should be made governor of the kingdom, and guardian of the queen: who remained, in the mean time, with her mother, in the royal palace of Linlithgow. Urgent application being made by Henry VIII. in the behalf of his son Edward, for this princess in her childhood, it was at last agreed between the chief peers of both kingdoms, that she should be given in marriage to that prince; but this was afterwards refused by her governor. She was, according to the custom of the day taught the Latin, French, Spanish, and Italian tongues; in which she afterwards arrived at so great perfection, that few were found equal to her in any of them, and none superior in them all.

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

All these accomplishments, added to a fine person, rendered her so amiable to Henry II. of France and his queen, as to make them desirous of marrying her to the dauphin, which was accordingly arranged: and the nuptials were solemnized the 20th of April, 1558. But this happy marriage, for such it seems to have been, lasted only a little while; as Francis II. as he then was, died Dec. 5, 1560. His disconsolate queen, being left without issue, returned soon after to Scotland; where she had not been long, before Charles archduke of Austria was proposed to her as an husband, by the cardinal of Lorrain. But queen Elizabeth interposed, and desired she would not marry with any foreign prince, but make choice of an husband out of her own nobility. She recommended to her either the earl of Leicester, or the lord Dandy; giving her to understand, that her succession to the crown of England would be very pred&rious, if she did not comply. Being thus overawed by Elizabeth, and not a little pleased with lord Darnly, who was extremely handsome, she consented to marry him; and creating him earl of Ross and duke of Rothesay, July 28, 1565, he was the same day proclaimed king at Edinburgh, and married to the queen the day after. By this husband she had one son, born at Edinburgh, June 19, 1566, who was afterwards James the Sixth of Scotland, and the First of England. Queen Elizabeth congratulated her upon this occasion; though, as Camden says, she inwardly grieved at being prevented by her rival in the honour of being a mother. She openly favoured her title to the succession; and the prince was commended to her majesty’s protection.

In Feb. 1567, the new king of Scotland was murdered in a very barbarous manner, by the contrivance of the earl of Murray, who was the queen’s illegitimate brother; and, in May following she was married to John Hepburn, earl of Bothwell, a man of an ambitious temper and dissolute manners, and who in reality had been lord Darnly’s murderer. From this time a series of infelicities attended her to the end of her life. The different views and interests of the nobility, clergy, and gentry, in regard to religious and political affairs, had so broken the peace of the kingdom, that all things appeared in the greatest disorder and confusion. The earl of Bothwell was forced to fly into Denmark to save his life; the queen was seized, carried prisoner to Lochleven, and was treated on the road with such scorn and contempt, as her own personal dignity might, one would think, have prevented. She was conveyed to the provost’s lodgiogs, and committed to the care of Murray’s mother; who, “having been James the Fifth’s concubine, insulted much,” says Camden, “over the unfortunate and afflicted =queen, boasting that she was the lawful wife of James the Fifth, and that her son Murray was his lawful issue.” What aggravated Mary’s misfortunes was, that she was believed to have been the cause of lord Darnly’s death, in order to revenge the loss of David Rizzio, an Italian musician, supposed her gallant, and whom lord Darnly had killed on that account. Be this as it will, when queen Elizabeth heard of this treatment of the queen of Scots, she seemed fired with indignation at it; and sent sir Nicholas Throgmorton into Scotland, to expostulate with the conspirators, and to consult by what means she might be restored to her liberty. But Elizabeth, as we have noticed in her article, was by no means in. earnest: she was not the friend to the queen of Scots which she pretended to be; and, if not in some measure the contriver of these troubles, there is great reason to think that she secretly rejoiced at them. When queen Elizabeth was crowned, the queen of Scots had assumed the arms and title of the kingdom of England, 'an indignity Elizabeth could never forget, as not thinking herself quite safe while Mary harboured such pretensions.

Having been detained a prisoner at Lochleven eleven months, and forced to comply with many demands which she conceived to be highly detrimental to her honour and interest, she escaped thence on May 2, 1568, to Hamiltoncastle. Here, in an assembly of many of the nobility, a declaration was drawn up, stating that the grants extorted from her majesty in prison, among which was a resignation of the crown, were actually void from the beginning: upon which such numbersof people came in to her assistance, that, within two or three days, she acquired an army of at least 6000. On the other side, Murray, with great expedition, made preparation to attack the queen’s forces before they became too formidable; and, when they joined battle, her majesty’s army consisting of raw soldiers, was soon defeated, and she obliged to save herself by flight, travelling in one day sixty miles, to the house of Maxwell lord Herris. Thence she dispatched a messenger to queen Elizabeth with a diamond, which she had formerly received from her, as a pledge of mutual amity; signifying, that she would come into England, and beg her assistance, if her rebellious subjects continued to persecute her any further. Elizabeth returned her a very kind answer, with large but not very sincere promises of doing her the most friendly offices. Before the messenger came back, she, rejecting the advice of her friends, found means to convey herself into England, landing, May 17, at Workington, in Cumberland; and on the same day wrote letters in French, with her own hand, to queen Elizabeth, in which she gave her a long detail of her misfortunes, desiring her protection and aid against her rebellious subjects. Elizabeth affected to comfort her; promised to protect her according to the equity of her cause; and, under pretence of greater security, commanded that she should be carried to Carlisle. The unfortunate queen of Scots began now to perceive her own error, in not following the advice of her friends. England, instead of being a sanctuary, was perhaps the worst place she could have visited: for, being denied access to queen Elizabeth from the first, and tossed from one prison to another for the space of about eighteen years, in which she had often struggled for liberty, she was at length brought to trial, condemned, and beheaded, for being concerned in a conspiracy against the life of queen Elizabeth. She professed to die for the Romish religion, and has since been considered as a saint by that church. She was executed within the castle of Fotheringay, on Feb. 8, 1587, and interred, some time after, in the cathedral of Peterborough; but her remains were taken up afterwards by her son, and removed to a vault in Henry the Vllth’s chapel in Westminster-abbey, where a most magnificent monument was erected to her memory.

, queen of England, and wife of William III. with whom she reigned jointly, was born at the royal palace of St. James’s, Westminster, the 30th of April, 1662. She was the daughter of James the Second, by a daughter of lord Clarendon, whom that prince married secretly, during the exile of the royal family. She proved a lady of most uncommon qualities: she had beauty, wit, good-nature, virtue, and piety, all in an eminent degree; and she shone superior to all about her, as well at the ball and the masque, as in the presence and the drawing-room. When she was fifteen, William prince of Orange, and afterwards king of England, made his addresses to her in person, and married her. Many suppose that the prince was so sagacious as to foresee all which afterwards came to pass; as that Charles II. would leave no children; that the duke of York, when he came to the throne, would, through his bigoted attachment to popery, be unable to keep possession of it; and that himself, having married the eldest daughter of England, would naturally be recurred to, as its preserver and deliverer in such a time of danger. If he had really any motives of policy, he had art enough to conceal them; for, having communicated his intentions to sir William Temple, then ambassador at the Hague, he frankly expressed his whole sentiments of marriage in the following terms; namely, that “the greatest things he considered were the person and disposition of the young lady; for, though it would not pass in the world for a prince to seem concerned in those particulars, yet for himself without affectation he declared that he was so, and in such a degree, tljat no circumstances of fortune or interest could engage him, without those of the person, especially those of humour or disposition: that he might, perhaps, be not very easy for a wife to live with; he was sure he should not be so to such wives as were generallj 7 in the courts of this age; that if he should meet with one to give him trouble at home, it was what he should not be able to bear, who was likely to have enough abroad in the course of his life; and that, after the manner he was resolved to live with a wife, which should be the best he could, he would have one that he thought likely to live well with him, which he thought chiefly depended upon their disposition and education.”

They were married at St. James’s, Nov. 4, 1677; and, after receiving the proper congratulations from those who were concerned to pay them, embarked for Holland about a fortnight after, and made their entrance into the Hague with the utmost pomp and magnificence. Here she lived with her consort, practising every virtue and every duty; till, upon a solemn invitation from the states of England, she followed him thither, and arrived at Whitehall, Feb. 12, 1689. The prince of Orange had arrived Nov. 5 preceding; and the occasion of their coming was to deliver the kingdom from that popery and slavery which were just ready to oppress it. King James abdicated the crown; and it was put on their heads, as next heirs, April 11, 1689. They reigned jointly till Dec. 28, 1694, when the queen died of the small-pox at her palace of Kensington. It would lead to an excursion of too much extent, to describe the many virtues and excellences of this amiable princess; a picture of her, however, may be seen in Burnet’s Essay on her memory, printed in 1695, which contains a delineation of every female virtue, and of every female grace. He represents her saying, that she looked upon idleness as the great corrupter of human nature, and as believing, that if the mind had no employment given it, it would create some of the worst to itself: and she thought that any thing which might amuse and divert, without leaving a dreg and impression behind it, ought to fill up those vacant hours that were not claimed by devotion or business. When her eyes, adds the bishop, were endangered by reading too much, she found out the amusement of work; and in all those hours that were not given to better employments, she wrought with her own hands, and that sometimes with so constant a diligence, as if she had been to earn her bread by it. It is said by another writer, that when reflections were once made before queen Mary of the sharpness of some historians who had left heavy imputations on the memory of certain princes, she answered, “that if these princes were truly such as the historians represented them, they had well deserved that treatment and others who tread their steps might look for the same for truth would be told at last.” This excellent princess was so composed upon her deathbed, that when archbishop Tillotson, who assisted her in her last moments, stopped, with tears in his eyes, on coming to the commendatory prayer in the office for the sick, she said to him, “My lord, why do you not go on? I am not afraid to die.”

King William has been supposed not to have been a very kind husband to his consort. He was, however, much affected by her death, and said she had never once given him any reason to be displeased with her during the course of their marriage. After his demise a locket, containing some hair of queen Mary, was found hanging near his heart.

, or Tomaso Da San Giovanni, an eminent artist, was born at St. Giovanni di Valdarno, in 1401, and was the disciple of Masolino da Panicale; but he proved as much superior to his master, as his master was superior to all his contemporaries: and is accounted the principal artist of the second or middle age of modern painting, from its revival under Cimabue. His genius was very extensive, his invention ready, and his manner of design had unusual truth and elegance. He considered painting as the art of representing nature with truth, by the aid of design and colouring: and therefore he made nature his most constant study, till he excelled in a perfect imitation of it. He is accounted the first who, from judicious observations, removed the difficulties that impeded the study and the knowledge of the art, by setting the artists an example in his own works, of that beauty which arises from a proper and agreeable choice of attitudes and motions, and likewise from such a spirit, boldness, and relief, as appears truly just and natural. He was the first among the painters who studied to give the draperies of his figures more dignity, by omitting the multitude of small folds, so customarily practised by the preceding artists, and by designing them with greater breadth and fulness. He was also the first who endeavoured to adapt the colour of his draperies to the tint of his carnations, so as to make the one harmonize with the other. He was uncommonly ^killed in perspective, which he had learned from P. Brujielleschi. His works procured him universal approbation: but the very same merit which promoted his fame, excited envy; and he died, to the regret of every lover of the art, not without strong suspicions of having been poisoned. Most writers agree that this event happened in 1443, but Sandrart fixes his death in 1446. Fuseli says, “Masaccio was a genius, and the head of an epoch in the art. He may be considered as the precursor of Raphael, who imitated his principles, and sometimes transcribed his figures. He had seen what could be seen of the antique, at his time at Rome: but his most perfect work are the frescoes of S, Pietro al Carmine at Florence; where vigour of conception, truth and vivacity of expression, correctness of design, and breadth of manner, are supported by truth and surprising harmony of colour.”

, a distinguished person in the republic of letters, was born at Sarzana, in the state of Genoa, in 1591. He spent the early partofhis life among the Jesuits, and afterwards became chamberlain to pope Urban VIII. He vvas naturally so eloquent, that this same pope, merely to exercise his talent, founded a professorship of rhetoric for him, in the college de la Sapienza, in 1628, and settled upon him for life a pension of 500 crowns. Mascardi filled the chair with great reputation; but his love of letters made him neglect the management of his affairs, and he was always poor, and always in debt. He is described in “Erytbrsei Pinacotheca/' as never being able to supply his own wants, but by borrowing from others, and removing from place to place, without a fixed habitation. He wrote a great many compositions in verse and prose, the principal of which is entitled,” Dell' arte historica.“Of this he printed so large an edition at his own expence, that he would have been a considerable loser by it, if a great number of copies had not been sold at Paria by the influence of cardinal Mazarine. He had some literary contests with several authors. In his” History of the Conspiracy of the Compte de Fiesco" he has very frequently attacked the religion of Hubert Folietta; and in his other books he used some writers in the same way, which occasioned him to be attacked in his turn. The objections which were made to him, together with his answers, were added to the second edition of the history just mentioned. H& died at Sarzana, in 1640, in his forty-ninth year.

, an eminent French preacher, the son of a celebrated advocate to the parliament of Aix, was born, 1634, at Marseilles. He entered early among the priests of the oratory, was employed at the age of twentytwo to teach rhetoric at Mans, and preached afterwards with such applause at Saumur and Paris, that the court engaged him for Advent 1666, and Lent 1667. Mascaroa was so much admired there, that his sermons were said to be formed for a court; and when some envious persons would have made a crime of the freedom with which he announced the truths of Christianity to the king, Louis XIV. defended him, saying, “He has done his duty, it remains for us to do our’s.” P. Mascaron was appointed to the bishopric of Tulles, 1671, and translated to that of Agen in 1678. He returned to preach before the king in Advent 1694, and Louis XIV. was so much pleased, that he said to him, “Your eloquence alone, neither wears out nor grows old.” On going back to Agen, he founded an hospital, and died in that city, December 16, 1703, aged sixty-nine. None of his compositions have been printed, but “A collection of his Funeral Orations,” among which, those on M. de Turenne and the chancellor Seguier, are particularly admired. It may be proper to mention, that M. Mascaron having been ordained priest by M. de Lavardin, bishop of Mans, who declared on his death-bed, that he never intended to ordain any priest, the Sorbonne was consulted whether this prelate’s ordinations were valid. They decided “That it was sufficient if he had the exterior intention to do what the church does, and that he certainly b.ad it, because he did so: therefore it was not needful to ordain those priests again, which this bishop had ordained.” But notwithstanding this decision, M. Mascaron chose to be ordained again; which proves, says L'Avocat, that he was a better preacher than casuist, and that his conscience was more scrupulous than enlightened on this point.

, a French theologian, was at first only a rector in the diocese of Amiens, but afterwards a person in great confidence with the bishop, and by him placed at the head of the seminary of that district. He was deeply skilled in languages, particularly the Oriental. The virtuous bishop de Brou made him also a canon of Amiens; but when that prelate died, in 1706, he was not equally in favour with his successor, as they did not agree on the subject of Jansenism, then an object of great contention. He was now removed from the seminary, and every other public function, but consoled himself by his studies, which he pursued with new ardour. He died in November, 1728, at the age of sixty-six. His principal works are, 1. “A Hebrew Grammar,” according to a new method, in which the points are discarded, printed in 1716; improved and reprinted in 2 vols. 12mo, by M. de la Bletterie, in 1730. 2. “Ecclesiastical Conferences of the diocese of Amiens.” 3. “The Catechism of Amiens,” 4to. He left also in manuscript a system of philosophy and of theology, which would have been published, had they not been thought to contain some seeds of Jansenism. Masclef was no less respectable by his character than by his learning.

, a French abbé, rather an author by profession than by genius, was born in 1697, at Caen. His works were chiefly formed upon the labours of others, either by translating them, or by working up the materials into a new form. He died at Paris in 1760, at the age of sixty-three. His publications were, l.“A Description of Egypt, from the Memoirs of M. Maillet,” 1735, 4to. This work is fundamentally good, and contains judicious remarks, and curious anecdotes, but the style would be improved by the retrenchment of many affectations and other faults. 2. “An Idea of the ancient and modern Government of Egypt,” 1745, 12mo; a work of less research than the foregoing. 3. “A translation of Caesar’s Commentaries,” 1755, 12mo. 4. “Christian Reflections on the great truths of Faith,” 1757, 12mo. 5. “History of the last Revolution in the East Indies” a work that is curious, but not quite exact. 6. “Lommius’s Table of Diseases,” 1760, 12mo.- He was concerned also in the great work on religious ceremonies, published by Picart, and in the translation of de Thou’s History. 7. A translation of the Epigrams of Martial, 2 vols. 12mo. He published besides, editions of several works: as, of the Memoirs of the marquis de Fouquieres; of Pelisson’s History of Louis XIV. and some papers of de Maillet, under the name of Telliamed, which is de Maillet reversed. He generally published through necessity, and the subjects varied according to the probability of advantage.

, a Jesuit, and a writer of Latin poetry, was born at Dalen in the dutchy of Juliers, in 1606. He professed eloquence and poetry with great credit at Cologne; and wrote, among other things, a long Latin poem entitled “Sarcotis,” or “Sarcothea,” which Lauder brought into new celebrity, by pretending that Milton had borrowed from it. It was an allegory describing the fall of man. Masenius wrote good Latin, and good verses, but full of amplification and declamation. The tracts occasioned by Lander’s accusation of Milton, were translated into French, and published collectively by Barbou, in 2 vols. 12mo, in 1759. Masenius produced also, 1. A kind of art of poetry, under the title of “Palaestra eloquentiae ligatae,” in 4 vols. 12mo. 2. Another treatise entitled “Palaestra styli Romani.” 3. “Anima Historic, seu vita Caroli V. et Ferdinandi,” in 4to. 4. Notes and additions to the Antiquitates et Annales Trevirensium, by Brower, 1670, in folio. 5. “Epitome Annalium Trevirensium,” 1676, 8vo. He died in 1681.

, a lady distinguished by her piety and extraordinary accomplishments, was the daughter of Dr. Ralph Cudworth, and born at Cambridge on the 18th of January, 1658. Her father, perceiving the bent of her genius, took such particular care of her education, that she quickly became remarkable for her uncommon learning and piety. She was the second wife of sir Francis Masham, of Gates in the county of Essex, bart. by whom she had an only son, the late Francis Cudworth Masham, esq. one of the masters in chancery, accomptant-general of that court, and foreign opposer in the court of exchequer. She was well skilled in arithmetic, geography, chronology, history, philosophy, and divinity; and owed a great part of her improvement to the care of the famous Mr. Locke, who lived many years in her family, and at length died in her house at Gates; and whom she treated with the utmost generosity and respect. She wrote “A Discourse concerning the Love of God,” published at London in 1696; and “Gccasional Thoughts in reference to a virtuous and Christian Life.” This amiable lady died in 1708, and was interred in the cathedral church of Bath, where a monument is erected to her memory, with the following inscription “Near this place lies Dame Damans Masham, daughter of Ralph Cudworth, D. D. and second wife of sir Francis Masham, of Gates, in the county of Essex, bart. who, to the softness and elegancy of her own sex, added several of the noblest accomplishments and qualities of the other. She possessed these advantages in a great degree unusual to either, and tempered them with an exactness peculiar to herself. Her learning, judgment, sagacity, and penetration, together with her candour and love of truth, were very observable to all that conversed with her, or were acquainted with those small treatises she published in her life-time, though she industriously concealed her name. Being mother of an only son, she applied all her natural and acquired endowments to the care of his education. She was a strict observer of all the virtues belonging to every station of life, and only wanted opportunities to make those talents shine in the world, which were the admiration of her friends. She was born on the 18th of January, 1658, and died on the 20th of April, 1708.”

, or Dumas, born in 1516, at Linnich, near Brussels, was one of the most learned men of the sixteenth century. He was secretary to John de Weze, bishop of Constance, after whose death he was sent as an agent to Rome. He married at Cleves in 1558, and was appointed counsellor to William duke of Cleves. He died in April 1573. He was a master of the ancient and oriental languages to such a degree, that Sebastian Minister said he seemed to have been brought up in ancient Rome, or ancient Jerusalem. He produced, 1. “A Collection of various pieces, ancient and modern, translated from the Syriac,” Antwerp, 1569. 2. “Syrorum Peculium,” 1571, folio. This is a Syriac lexicon. 8. “Grammatica Linguae Syricae,” 1571, folio. 4. “A Commentary on the Book of Joshua,” Antwerp, 1574, folio, and also in the Critici Sacri. Dr. Henry Owen, who published a “Critical Disquisition” on this work in 1784, observes, that v although Masius’s professed design was to correct and restore the Greek text, yet his latent intention was merely to confirm the authority of the Septuagint. 5. “Disputatio de Ccena Domini,” Antwerp, 1575. 6. Commentaries on some chapters of Deuteronomy. He was in possession of the famous Syriac ms. written in the year 606, which afterwards belonged to D. E. Jablonsky. This manuscript is the only one that preserves the readings of Joshua as given by Origen.

, an eminent astronomer and mathematician, the son of Edmund Maskelyne, esq. of Purton, in Wiltshire, was born at London in 1732, and educated at Westminster school, where he made a distinguished progress in classical learning. Before he left school his studies appear to have been determined to astronomy by his accidentally seeing the memorable solar eclipse of 1748, exhibited through a large telescope in a camera obscura. From this period he applied himself with ardour to astronomy and optics, and as a necessary preparation, turned his attention to geometry and algebra, the elements of which he learned in a few months without the help of a master. In 1749 he entered of Catherine hall, Cambridge, but soon after removed to Trinity college, where he pursued his favourite studies with increased success; and on taking his degree of B. A. in 1754, received distinguished honours from the university. He took his degrees of A.M. in 1757, B. D. in 1768, and D. D. in 1777. Being admitted into holy orders he officiated for some time as curate of Barnet; and in 1756 became a fellow of his college.

In 1758 he was chosen a fellow of the royal society, and soon after became an important contributor to the Philosophical Transactions. Such was his reputation already, that the society appointed him to go to the island of St. Helena, to observe the transit of Venus over the sun’sdisk, which was to take place June 6, 1761. On this occasion he remained ten months on the island, making astronomical observations and philosophical experiments; and although his observation of the transit of Venus was not completely successful, owing to the cloudy state of the weather, his voyage afforded him an opportunity of taking lunar observations, which were now for the first time made with effect. This method of finding the longitude at sea was long a great desideratum, and plans had been made by many of his predecessors, but the honour was reserved for Dr. Maskelyne to reduce their theories to successful practice. This he was enabled to do by Hadley’s quadrant recently invented, and also by professor Mayer’s lunar tables, for which a parliamentary reward of 3000l. was afterwards given, on Dr. Maskelyne’s report of their correctness. The results of his other observations and experiments were inserted in the Philosophical Transactions of the above period. Soon after his return from St. Helena, he published his well-known work, entitled “The British Mariner’s Guide,” which contained, among various new and practical illustrations and articles in nautical astronomy, rules and examples for working the lunar observations; but, in order to shorten and simplify these laborious operations, other tables and calculations were still wanted, which he afterwards supplied by his *' Nautical Almanack,“and” Requisite Tables."

In 1763 he undertook another scientific royage by appointment of the lords of the admiralty and the board of longitude. He sailed for Barbarioes for the following purposes: to find the longitude of that island by astronomical observations; to determine the rate of going of Mr. Harrison’s new time-keeper; and to try Mr. Irwin’s marinechair, which was intended for making steady observations at sea, but which did not answer. He was besides, in the course of his voyage, to take lunar observations with a curious new Hadley’s sextant, and to determine the longitude by the eclipses of Jupiter’s satellites, and the occultations of fixed stars by the moon. All these objects of 1 the expedition he executed to the entire satisfaction of his employers.

In 1764, the office of astronomer-royal becoming vacant by the death of Mr. Bliss, Dr. Maskelyne’s celebrity immediately pointed him out as the most competent person to fill the situation, and to carry into effect the purpose for which the royal observatory haid been established, that o preparing tables for finding the longitude at sea. Accordingly, his appointment to it, which was announced in the London Gazette, Feb 16, 1765, gave universal satisfaction. During the long period of Dr. Maskelyne’s official services, his time may be considered as chiefly occupied either at the observatory, the board of longitude, or the royal society; and his biography, therefore, like that of most other scientific men, consists chiefly in a history of his labours. ­Soon after his appointment he laid belor^he board of longitude the plan of an annual publication, to be entitled the “Nautical Almanac, and Astronomical Ephemeris.” The first volume was for 1767 and it has been continued under his direction, up to the present time, making in the whole fifty volumes a lasting monument of labour and profound learning. It is universally allowed to be the most useful work on practical astronomy ever published. In such high estimation has it been held by foreign astronomers, that they have generally and implicitly adopted its computations, and acknowledged its superior accuracy. M. Lalande, in giving an account of similar publications, says, “Le Nautical Almanac de Londres est l‘Ephemeride la plus parfaite qu’il y aitjarnais eu.”

In 1767 he published an auxiliary work, entitled “Tables requisite to be used with the Nautical Almanac, in order to find the Latitude and Longitude at sea.” This performance, well known to seamen by the name of “The Requisite Tables,” has passed through several editions, and has been successively enlarged, particularly by different methods of working the lunar observations, by Messrs. Lyons, Dunthorne, Witchel!, Wales, and by Dr. Maskelyne himself; and it has been also improved by the latitudes and longitudes of places supplied by captain Cook, captain Huddart, Messrs. Bailey, Wales, and other scientific navigators. Some time after this he published Mayer’s Tables, with both Latin and English explanations, to which he added several tracts and tables of his own, and prefixed to the whole a Latin preface, with the title “Tabulae motuum Soils et Lunae, &c.” It was published, like the foregoing works, by order of the commissioners of longitude; and the various other publications issued by that board during his time were also printed under his inspection, and are too numerous to be here stated.

Another important and laborious duty that devolved on him in consequence of his office was, to examine the pretensions of the various candidates who claimed the parliamentary rewards for new or improved methods of finding the longitude. His appointment took place at a period peculiarly interesting in the history of astronomy. His success in introducing and promoting the lunar observations greatly excited the public attention to the subject of the longitude, which was rendered still more interesting by the great rewards held out by parliament for further improvements in the problem, whether by astronomical or mechanical methods. These offers, united with the powerful motives of honour and emulation, called forth, flaring several years, many extraordinary efforts of genius, and produced useful inventions both in arts and sciences, and particularly in the construction of time-keepers. The parliamentary offers likewise encouraged numerous candidates of very slight pretensions, and even visionaries, whose applications became very troublesome. The claims of all were referred by the board of longitude to the astronomer royal, by whom scientific plans were examined, and the rates of chronometers ascertained. Thus by his office he was constituted arbiter of the fame and fortune of a great number of anxious projectors; and it is easy to conceive how arduous as well as unpleasant such a duty must have been. It was not indeed to be expected that the sanguine hopes and self-love of such a variety of candidates could be gratified, with justice to the high trust and confidence thus 1 reposed in him; and hence complaints were frequently heard, and pamphlets published, expressive of discontent and disappointment. Appeals even were made to parliament; but whatever difference of opinion might have then existed, time and experience have since fully proved the truth and impartiality of Dr. Maskelyne’s decisions.

In giving a general view of his labours at the royal observatory, we shall begin with his publication of the Greenwich Observations, which were printed in 1774, by command of his majesty. The first volume began with the observations of 1765, and they have been continued annually since. M. Lalande, in mentioning this performance in 1792, calls it “le recueil le plus pre*cieux que nous’ ayons.” Since that period they have been considerably improved, and are universally allowed to possess an unrivalled degree of accuracy. His catalogue of the right ascensions and declinations of 36 principal fixed stars, with tables for their correction, is a most useful and important performance, and is adopted in all observatories. It is mostly distinguished by the appellation of “Dr Maskelyne’s 36 Stars.” His observations also of the sun, moon, and planets, are equally esteemed, and have been made the basis of the solar and lunar tables, lately computed in France according to the theory of M. Laplace; and which are fepublished in professor Vince’s Astronomy, vol. III. The solar tables were calculated by M. Delambre, and the lunar by M. Burg: copies of which have been transmitted to Dr. Maskelyne, by order of the French board of longitude, with a grateful acknowledgment of the important assistance derived from his Greenwich Observations. But it would greatly exceed our limits to enumerate all the corrections and improvements effected by Dr. Maskelyne’sobservations, many of which will be found in professor Vince’s Astronomy, and in the Philosophical Transactions. His communications to the royal society are distinguished, like his other productions, for great attention to utility as well as accuracy. They consist chiefly of astronomical observations; improvements of mathematical and optical instruments; computations of the eclipses of the sun, moon, and Jupiter’s satellites; articles on parallaxes, light, vision, refraction, weights, measures, gravitation, &c. with calculations and predictions of comets; making in the whole above thirty communications. It should be noticed that, in 1774, he went to Shehallien, in Perthshire, in order to ascertain the lateral attraction of that hill; by which the mean density of the earth was computed, and its central attraction according to the Newtonian theory first demonstrated. For this paper he was presented by the council of the royal society with sir George Copley’s gold medal.

In the history of science, few persons can be mentioned who have contributed more essentially to the diffusion of astronomical knowledge than Dr. Maskelyne; and perhaps no man has been so successful in promoting practical astronomy, both by land and sea. During his time private observatories became very general, though scarcely known before; nor could such be made useful without his “Nautical Almanac,” and other tables, except by men of great science, and by very laborious calculations. Beside the assistance thus derived from his publications, he was always ready to give advice concerning any plans that were likely to promote the science. Among the observatories that were erected through his encouragement, may be mentioned that of the late Alexander Aubert, esq. whose excellent collection of instruments has been rarely equalled, even in national institutions; and several other instances might be adduced of observatories which were erected by the advice or direction of the astronomer royal. He was besides a great improver of instruments, and the inventor of some, among which may be noticed the prismatic micrometer; but though profoundly skilled in optics, and ingenious in mechanical contrivances, he always paid great deference to the opinions of opticians, and other practical mechanists. His plans were mostly directed to substantial objects, while a steady perseverance gave an efficiency to all his undertakings: and notwithstanding his profound knowledge of physical astronomy, his attention was chiefly directed to reduce the scientific theories of his predecessors to the practical purposes of life. In this he was eminently successful, particularly in his labours for the longitude, by which he essentially contributed to the advancement of navigation, the prosperity of commerce, and the wealth, honour, and power of his country.

Dr. Maskelyne’s private character was likewise truly estimable. He was indeed exemplary in the discharge of every duty. In his manners he was modest, simple, and unaffected. To strangers he appeared distant, or rather diffident; but among his friends he was cheerful, unreserved, and occasionally convivial. He was fond of epigrammatic thoughts and classical allusions; and even somelimes indulged in playful effusions of this kind, at an advanced period of life. He maintained a regular correspondence with the principal astronomers of Europe. He was visited also by many illustrious foreigners, as well as eminent characters of his own country, but his warmest attachments were always manifested to the lovers of astronomy. Among his most intimate friends may be reckoned Dr. Herschel, Dr. Hutton, Messrs. Wollastons, Mr. Aubert, bishop Horsley, sir George Shuckburgh, baron Maseres r professor Robertson; and also professor Vince, whose publications so ably illustrate Dr. Maskelyne’s labours, and whom he appointedthe depositary of his scientific papers.

Dr. Maskelynehad good church preferment from his college; and his paternal estates (of which he was the last male heir), were also considerable. He married, when rather advanced in life, a young lady of large fortune, the sister and co-heiress of lady Booth of Northamptonshire, by whom he had one daughter, whose education he superintended with the fondest care. These ladies survive him, aad also his sister Margaret, who was married to Robert, the late lord Clive.

, an English divine, and able vindicator of his church, was born in 1566, in the county of Durham, and was educated in grammar learning at home. In 1583, he entered of Merton-college, Oxford, where, after taking his bachelor’s degree, he was chosen probationerfellow in 1586. He then received orders, and, besides teing presented to the rectory of Orford, in Suffolk, was made chaplain to king James I. who, in his punning humour, usually styled him a “wise builder (Mason) in God’s house.” In 1619, he was installed archdeacon of Norfolk. He died 1621, and was buried in the chancel of the church of Orford, where is a monument to his memory; and was lamented as a man of learning and piety. His writings in defence of the church of England, are, 1. “The authority of the Church in making canons and constitutions concerning things indifferent,” a Sermon, Lond. 1607, Oxon. 1634, 4to. 2. “Vindication of the Church of England concerning the consecration and ordination of Priests and Deacons, in five books,” Lond. 1613, folio. This is, among other things, a complete refutation of the falsehood propagated about that time, respecting archbishop Parker, who, it was said, had been consecrated at the Nag’s- head, a tavern in Cheapside. So successful was he in this work, that the story was no more heard of for thirty years, when it was again revived by some of the Roman Catholic writers at Doway, but with as little proof as before. 3. Two Sermons preached at court. Lond. 1621, 8vo. The rev. Henry Mason, rector of St. Andrew Undershaft, London, was, according to Walker, a brother of the preceding, and was chaplain to Dr. King bishop of London. Having been ejected from his living, or, as Wood says, vexed out of it, he retired to his native place, Wigan in Lancashire, where he became a great benefactor to the poor, and to the school of that place. He died in 1647. Wood gives a list of some pious tracts by him.

, a non-conformist divine, chiefly known for his excellent work entitled “Self-Knowledge,” was descended from ancestors who were for several generations beneficed clergymen of the established church. His grandfather was the rev. John Mason, rector of Water-Stratford in Buckinghamshire, whose “Select Remains” were published by his grandson, the subject of this article: “a little work,” we are told by his biographer, “highly esteemed and warmly recommended by Dr. Watts.” This little work we have not seen, but from two accounts of the author’s life, one published anonymously in 1694, 4to, and the other by the rev. H. Maurice, rector of Tyringham in Bucks, in 1695, 4to, we are justified in ranking him among those enthusiasts who have done much to bring religion into disgrace; and our readers will probably be of the same opinion, when we inform them, that after having discharged his pastoral duties for several years, as a pious and useful clergyman, he propagated the notion that Christ’s second appearance was to be at Water- Stratford, where all his faithful people were to be collected, and reign with him a thousand years. This brought a great many persons to reside at that place, in hopes of meeting the Saviour, who were for some time called Mr. Mason’s followers; nor was it until his death had disappointed their hopes, that this delusion gradually abated. One of the sons of this enthusiast, John, the father of our author, became a dissenter, and, while pastor of a congregation at Dunmow in Essex, his son was born there, in 1705-6. He was educated at a dissenting academy, and in 1730 accepted an invitation to the pastoral charge of a congregation at Dorking in Surrey, where he had a numerous auditory. His earliest production was a Sermon on “Subjection to the higher powers,” preached Nov. 5, 1740, and published at the request of the congregation.

In the same spirit he published, in 1743, a tract entitled “A plain and modest plea for Christianity: or a sober and rational appeal to Infidels, occasioned by a perusal of some of their late productions, particularly a treatise entitled ‘ Christianity not founded on argument’.” This was at first published anonymously, but was possessed of a merit so prominent, that the author was soon inquired after and discovered, and it procured for him, unsolicited and without his knowledge, the degree of M. A. from the university of Edinburgh. His next publication was that on which his reputation now chiefly rests, entitled “Selfknowledge: a treatise shewing the nature and benefit of that important science, and the way to attain it.” It was first printed in, 1745, and instantly became so popular, that a new edition was annually demanded for several years, and it was, and continues to be, reprinted in various forms in other parts of the three kingdoms. It has also been translated into various European languages. Without entering minutely into the merits of this excellent practical manual, we may adopt the words of the editor to whom we are indebted for this account, that while the language is rendered purposely as plain as possible consistent with common elegance, “it is full of sense and sentiment: it comes home to every man’s business and bosom: the sentences are short and apothegmatic: replete with maxims of the utmost importance, and often rivalling the wisdom of those sages of antiquity whose valuable precepts and happy turns of expression are quoted so largely, and with such exquisite taste and appropriation, in the notes. It was written chiefly for the improvement of young persons: and a more valuable present cannot easily be made to them.”

In July 1746, Mr, Mason was induced to quit Dorking for Cheshunt in Hertfordshire, upon the warm and urgent invitation of a large congregation of dissenters in that place. Here his first exertion was to prepare for the press a volume of “Sermons for the benefit of young persons,” preached by his predecessor, a Mr. Oakes, and selected from his manuscripts. Having complied with this last act of duty to his friend, we find him progressively engaged in a multiplicity of original works; some of them of a smaller extent, as single sermons, but many of a much wider range, and giving ample scope to his talents. The largest of his works consists of four 8vo volumes of sermons, entitled “The Lord’s-Dav evening entertainment,” intended as “a complete set of practical discourses for the use of families, recommending and urging the grand and substantial points of Christianity in a plain and striking manner, and tree from all distinguishing peculiarities in style and sentiments.” Of this, which soon became popular, a second edition was published in 1754. In 1758, he published; a single octavo volume of “Fifteen Discourses, devotional and practical, together with an Historical Dissertation on the analogy between the behaviour of God’s people towards him in the several periods of the Jewish and Christian church, and his correspondent dispensations towards them in those respective periods.” In 1761 he published another set of sermons, in 2 vols. 8vo, under the title of “Christian Morals.” This was followed by a “Letter to a Friend upon his entrance to the ministerial office,” and “The Student and Pastor, or Directions how to attain to eminence and usefulness in those respective characters.” These were occasioned bv his having become tutor to several students intended for the ministry among the dissenters. Some parts of his “Theological Lectures,” which he delivered to them, have been published in the Protestant Dissenter’s Magazine for 1794 1796.

But while thus employed, he found leisure for directing his taste and acquaintance with classical criticism to all the elegancies of literature. The result of these less serious pursuits was the three following tracts, all of which passed through several editions, and one of them not less than five or six “Essay on the power and harmony of Prosaic numbers” “Essay on the power of Numbers, and the principles of Harmony in Poetical compositions and” Essay on Elocution“which last became the most popular, and was long employed as a text-book in one of the English universities. Mr. Mason died Feb. 10, 1763, and was buried in Cheshunt church-yard, leaving an excellent character for piety, learning, and a conciliating and liberal temper. After his” Self-Knowledge" had been reprinted a great number of times, often very inaccurately, and, what is more censurable, once, at least, with such alterations as tended to suppress his opinions, and make him the follower of a party which he would have despised, his relative John Mason Good, esq. a gentleman well known in the learned world, became editor of a very correct edition, and prefixed a life of the author, of which we have availed ourselves in this account.

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

In 1747, by means of Gray, with whom he had become acquainted, and who, on account of ill-treatment, had left Peter-house for Pembroke-hall, he was nominated to a vacant fellowship in the latter college; but, owing to a dispute between the fellows and their master, he was not elected till 1749. His own account of this affair has lately been published: “I have had the honour, since I came here last, to be elected by the fellows of Pembroke into their society; but the master, who has the power of a negative, has made use of it on this occasion, because he will not have an extraneus when they have fit persons in their own college. The fellows say they have a power from their statutes indijferenter eligere ex utraque academia, and are going to try it with him at common law, or else get the king to appoint a visitor. If this turns out well, it will” be a very lucky thing for me, and much better than a Platt*, which I carne hither with an intention to sit for, for they are reckoned the best fellowships in the university."

His intimacy with Gray was cordial and lasting. Their correspondence shews the high respect they had for each other, and their friendship was never interrupted by the freedom and unfeigned candour with which they criticised each other’s performances. About this time, Gray describes him as a young man “of much fancy, little judgment, and a good deal of modesty,” as " a good and wellmeaning creature, but in simplicity a child: he reads little or nothing, writes abundance, and that with a design

'dation. Their original number was in which Mr. Mason’s account cf this

He appears to have been early attached to what he considered as the cause of freedom. Of this he gave proof in a poem entitled “Isis,” which was printed in 1748, directed chiefly against the supposed Jacobitism of Oxford. Whatever truth might be in the accusation, it had the happy effect of producing “The Triumph of Isis” by Mr. Thomas Warton, which Mason candidly allowed was a superior poem. Thus early these two writers attracted notice by the defence of their respective universities; but their generous rivalship did not end in mutual respect, for which, perhaps, the difference of political principle may in some measure account. Mason was now requested to compose an ode for the installation of the duke of Newcastle as chancellor of the university of Cambridge, in 1749, to which he does not appear to have acceded with much love of the subject. Gray thought his production “uncommonly well for such an occasion,” but the author had no pleasure in the recollection, and omitted it in his works.

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

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

The severity exercised on his “Odes” deprived him of no fame but what he amply recovered by the publication of “Caractacus”* in 1759, another dramatic poem on the plan of the ancients, and possessing all the beauties and defects of the former, with more poetry and passion, yet with touches of nature, which, although sometimes spoiled by useless expletives, are in general just, natural, and affecting. Gray bestows high praise on the chorusses of this drama, particularly that beginning “Hark heard ye not yon footstep dread, &c.” Notwithstanding the objections of the critics, Caractacus continued to be read with interest, and the author was not the only person who thought that with some alterations, under the inspection of a connoisseur in stage-effect, it might become an acting-play. Accordingly it was performed on Covent-garden theatre ia 1776, and received with considerable applause; but it obtained no permanent rank on the stage, and it was thought that the alterations which made it more dramatic, made it less poetical. Some years after it was again brought into public notice by a translation into Greek from the pen of the late unfortunate rev. G. H. Glasse, who proved himself by this effort one of the first writers of Greek poetry in England.

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

Mason was probably not enrolled among the friends of liberty when Churchill wrote. That libeller takes frequent opportunities to turn his writings into ridicule, but pays him, perhaps inconsciously, a well-turned compliment on his extreme correctness.

Against the author of these unprovoked attacks, our author betrayed no immediate resentment; and when he speaks of Churchill’s abuse of his friend Whitehead, disdains to recollect that he had been the object of the same malignity. His principal residence about this time was at Aston, where he displayed his taste in improving the grounds and scenery near his parsonage-house, and was yet more assiduous in discharging the duties of his clerical function. In Sept. 1765, he married Miss Sherman, daughter of William Sherman, esq. of Kingston upon Hull, a very amiable lady with whom his happiness was but short. Throughout the greater part of their connection, he had little intermission from the misery of watching the progress of consumption, which terminated her life, in 1767, at Bristol, whither he had been advised to remove her in hopes of recovery. The lines he wrote on this occasion need no recommendation to a feeling heart, nor would it be easy to discover a poem, which conveys more quick sympathy, in the whole range of elegiac poetry.

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

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

The “Memoirs of Gray” were published in 1775, in aa elegant quarto volume, including an edition of his poems, with additions, and a series of his correspondence illustrative of those particulars of education, genius, opinion, and temper, which, insignificant as they may often appear, are all that form the life of a scholar. In executing this task, Mr. Mason has been accused of partiality; but his partiality appears to be more in intention than proof. Some things he may have omitted, and others are certainly thrown into shade; but, by exhibiting so much of his friend’s correspondence, he has laid him more open to public inspection than could have been done by any species of narrative. So much may be known of Gray from this volume, that probably very little is concealed which was necessary to be told; and accordingly we find that it has been appealed to with equal confidence by Gray’s enemies and by liis admirers.

In 1779, he published his political creed in the shape of an animated “Ode to the Naval Officers of Great Britain,” written immediately after the trial of admiral Kepjjel in February of that year. Although attached to a retired life, he became tired of forbearance, when the disappointments of the American war had incited the whig party to discover the more distant or latent sources of national misfortune, and to propose remedies by which Britain should be always, prosperous, and always victorious. He was already one of those who thought the decision of parliament on the Middlesex election, a violation of the rights of the people; and when the counties began, in 1779, to associate for parliamentary reform, he took an active part in assisting their deliberations, and wrote several patriotic manifestos, which raised him as high in the opinion of his own party, as they degraded him in the eyes of the other. He is even said to have given so much offence at court, that he found it convenient to resign his chaplainship. It appears, however, by the poems he wrote in his latter days, that the fever of reform bad abated, and that his cure, which was begun by Mr. Fox’s India bill, was afterwards completed by the French revolution. His “Ode to Mr. Pitt,” published in 1782, expresses the sanguine hopes he entertained of the virtues and talents of that young statesman. When be prepared this ode for a new edition in 1795, he altered the last line from

Among Mr. Mason’s accomplishments, his taste for painting was perhaps not inferior to that he displayed for poetry; and it has been thought that his judgment was more uniformly correct in the former than in the latter. His “Translation of Du Fresnoy’s Art of Painting,” which appeared in 1783, was begun, as he informs us, in his early years, with a double view of implanting in his memory the principles of a favourite art, and of acquiring a habit of versification, for which purpose the close and condensed style of the original seemed peculiarly calculated, especially when considered as a sort of school exercise. The task, however, proved so difficult, that it was long laid aside for original composition, and his translation would have never been made public, if sir Joshua Reynolds had not requested a sight of it, and offered to illustrate it by a series of notes. This induced him to revise the whole with such scrupulous care, that it may be considered, in a great measure, as the production of his mature talents, and whether perused as an original or a translation, is certainly not inferior to his most favourite works. In the poetical address, however, to sir Joshua Reynolds, he has not been thought so happy; and some inaccuracies of rhyme may be objected to a translation which is generally elegant and faithful. How much its value was enhanced to the artist, and to the connoisseur, by the annotations of sir Joshua Reynolds, is too obvious to be noticed.

His last separate publication of the poetical kind was a “Secular Ode in Commemoration of the Glorious Revolution,” 1688, and appeared when men of all parties joined in festal meetings to celebrate the restoration and establishment of English liberty. In the same year he condescended to be the biographer and editor of the poems of his friend William Whitehead, esq. Of his life of Whitehead some notice will be taken hereafter. Neither his subject nor his materials could furnish such memoirs as he has given of Gray, but it is interesting in an inferior degree, and would not have detracted much from his fame as a biographer, had he suppressed his splenetic notice of Dr. Johnson, and shewn that he had preserved that simplicity of character, and those generous feelings, which Gray once attributed to him. He appears to have been equally mistaken in a pamphlet which he published about this time, animadverting on the government of the York Lunatic Asylum; but the mistake was rather of the head than the heart, for he was a cordial and liberal supporter of that institution, and was betrayed into a degree of intemperance of remark by excess of zeal for its prosperity. Of his general humanity, or what he has termed *' moral patriotism," he afforded during this year an eloquent proof in a discourse delivered in York cathedral on the subject of the African slave trade. He was one of the first who contributed to expose the infamy of that trade, and to invigorate those remonstrances which have at length been heard with effect.

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

His death, although he had reached his seventy-second year, was not the consequence of age. His health was yet more robust than most men enjoy at that advanced period, and his faculties had undergone no perceptible alteration, when he received a hurt in stepping into a carriage, which, producing a mortification, terminated his life on the 7th of April, 1797. A monument has been since erected to his memory in Westminster abbey, adjoining to that of Gray, with a short Latin inscription. The countess Harcourt also erected an urn to his memory in the flower-garden at Nuneham, with an inscription celebrating his “simple manners, piety, and steady friendship.” A yet higher tribute of respect has been paid by his friend Mr. Gisborne in some elegant verses. The opinion of so good a man as Mr. Gisborne is entitled to confidence, and there is no reason to doubt that Mason deserved the praise be has given him; nor, considering the general and acknowledged frailty of human nature, will this panegyric suffer by the few

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

fined taste, and was a very good judge character of our ecclesiastical compoof modern rnnsu but his ideas of re- sers, in his 'Copious Collection of

Mr. Mason’s life appears to have been principally devoted to the duties of his profession, occasionally relieved by the cultivation of the fine arts. His associates, at least in the latter part of his life, were few. He had the misfortune to survive the greater number whose friendship he had cultivated in his early years, and he was not ambitious *t>f new connections. This brought on him the imputation of that pride, or distance of manner, which is ascribed to men of unsocial habits. But Mason’s heart was not inaccessible, and his friendships were inviolable. The simplicity, hdwever, attributed to him in his young days by Gray, and the patience with which lord Orford informs us, he heard his faults, did not accompany him through life. On the publication of Gray’s life, he was ready to allow that “twenty-five years had made a very considerable abatement in his general philanthropy” and by philanthropy he seems here to mean a diffidence of opinion on matters of literature, and an -unwillingness to censure acknowledged merit. It can have no reference to philanthropy in the more general acceptation of the word, for he was to the last, liberal, humane, and chai-itaWe. What it really means, indeed, we find in the work just alluded to. The contemptuous notice of Waterland, Akenside, and Shenstone, which he did not suppress in Gray, he employed himself with more harshness whenever he could find an opportunity to attack the writings of Dr. Johnson. The opinion this great critic pronounced on Gray may be probably, quoted as the provocation, and great allowance is to be made for the warmth and zeal with which he guards the memory of his departed friend. But surely one of his notes on Gray’s Letters may be here fairly quoted against him. “Had Mr. Pope disregarded the sarcasms of the many writers that endeavoured to eclipse his poetical fame, as much as Mr. Gray appears to have done, the world would not have been possessed of a Dunciad; but it would have been impressed with a more amiable idea of its author’s temper.” Nor was his prosecution of Murray, for taking about fifty lines from his works of Gray into an edition which that bookseller published, much to the credit of his liberality, especially as he refused to drop the prosecution, when requested to name his own terms of compensation. Such httlenesses are to be regretted in a maa who was the friend of genius and literature, whose circumstances placed him far above want, and whose regular discharge of the duties of piety and humanity bespoke an ambition for higher enjoyments than fame and wealth caa yield. Of his regard for sacred truth, and the respect due to it, he exhibited a proof in a letter to lord Orford on his lordship’s childish epitaph on two piping bullfinches, to which he received an answer that was probably not very satisfactory.

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

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

It is now necessary to advert to a series of poems which have been added to Mr. Mason’s works in the late edition of the English poets. The author of the “Heroic Epistle” was long concealed from the world, and for reasons which are obvious; but the poem had merit enough to be ascribed to the best living satirists, to Mason, Walpole, Hayley, Cowper, Anstey, and others. It appears, however, to be now universally given to Mason. Mr. Thomas Warton was of opinion that “it might have been written by Walpole and buckram 'd by Mason.” Mr. Malone, in a note on this opinion, which occurs in Boswell’s Life of Johnson, says, “It is now known that the Heroic Epistle was written by Mason.” Mr. Mant, in his life of Warton, informs us that when it was first published, Warton ascribed it to Mason, and endeavoured to confirm his opinion by internal evidence. Mason heard of this, and sent to him a letter in 1777, published by Mr. Mant, in which he professes to expostulate with him for raising a report merely from critical conjecture. "I have been told that you have pronounced me very frequently in company to be the author of the Heroic Epistle to sir William Chambers, and I am told too, that the premier himself suspects that I am so upon your authority. Surely, sir, mere internal evidence (and you can possibly have no other) can never be sufficient to ground such a determination upon, when you consider how many persons in this rhyming age of ours are possessed of that knack of Pope’s versification, which constitutes one part of the merit of that poem, and as to the wit, humour, or satire, which it contains, no part of my writings could ever lead you, by their analogy, to form so peremptory a judgment. I acquit you, however, in this procedure of every, even the slightest degree of ill nature; and believe that what you have said was only to show your critical acumen. I only mention it that you may be more cautious of speaking of other persons in like manner, who may throw such anonymous bantlings of their brain into the wide world. To some of these it might prove an essential injury; for though they might deserve the frown of power (as the author in question certainly does), yet I am persuaded that your good nature would be hurt if that frown was either increased or fixed by your ip$e dixit.

What our author has here remarked concerning internal evidence, has probably occurred to all who fixed their suspicions on him. From the works published under his name, no person could for a moment suppose him to be a man of humour, or inclined to personal and political satire. He might even have asked whether it was probable that a man whose pen had been uniformly devoted to solemn and serious poetry, and who had never brought forward the shadow of a claim for the honours of wit, should at an advanced period of life suddenly eclipse his contemporaries and some of his predecessors by exhibiting a humour which he had never been suspected to possess, and a spirit which would have better become a Paul Whitehead, or a Charles Churchill: and that he should carry this humour and this spirit through six poems of no inconsiderable length, on dissimilar subjects. Yet as even this, however remarkable, is not beyond the reach of genius, it was surely in his power to bring the question to a more prompt issue. But this he evades, and uses every argument against Mr.Warton’s opinion but that which must have at once refuted it, the plain and flat denial of a man of honour and principle. On this account, therefore, the “Heroic Epistle,” and the other pieces published under the name of Macgregor, are now added to Mr. Mason’s works, but not without a wish that they could have been attributed to some writer of less private and public worth. If they be his, they will add to his literary reputation, by placing him among the first satirical poets of his day, if not above the first; but whoever contemplates the disaffected spirit in which they are written, will probably be of opinion that by adopting the floating invectives and prejudices of a party and of a turbulent period, he did not consult the consistency of his character, or the dignity of his Muse.

, an excellent Frencn miniature painter, was horn at Paris in December 1687, and died in September 1767. He preserved his liveliness and gaiety to his death. His religion was that of the protestant communion, but so averse was he to the interference of any principle but fair conversion, that he dismissed a Roman catholic servant who had long served him faithfully, because he wished to change his religion to please him. Being questioned about his mode of thinking, he answered, “I serve God, and 1 feel myself so free, as to depend on nothing upon earth except my own exertions.” The collection of prints from the great gallery and other apartments at Versailles, were copied from the originals of Le Brun, by Massac, and engraved by the best artists under his inspection.

, an ingenious and learned French writer, was born in 1665, of a good family at Caen, where he continued till he had gone through the classics. At sixteen he went to Paris, and performed a course of philosophy in the college of the Jesuits; and, after he had finished his noviciate, was appointed, according to the usage of the society, to teach polite literature. They sent him to Rennes to teach rhetoric; and, after a due time, he returned to Paris to study theology: for succeeding in which he seemed so particularly formed, that his superiors desired him to devote himself wholly to it. This destination affected him much, his love of the belles lettres far exceeding his taste for theology; and therefore he quitted his society, and re-entered the world. His uncommon talents soon made him known, and recommended him to the favour of those who could serve him. M de Sacy (Le Maistre) took him into his house, as a preceptor to his children; and M. de Tourreil borrowed his assistance in translating Demosthenes. He became a pensionary of the academy of inscriptions in 1705, and was elected professor royal of the Greek language in 1710. Homer, Pindar, Theocritus, and Demosthenes, were his favourite authors; and his lectures on them were highly admired, and much attended. Though he had yet given nothing to the public, yet his merit was so well known, and his connections with the learned so numerous, that, in 1714, he was chosen a member of the French academy. Massieu may be ranked among the unfortunate literati. The circumstances of his family were extremely narrow, so that he had to struggle with poverty during his youth. In the family of M. de Sacy, he saved some money, but afterwards lost it by placing it in bad hands. Towards the latter end of his life, he suffered bodily grievances: he had frequent and severe attacks of the gout; and two cataracts deprived him of his sight A paralytic disorder seized him in August 1722, which being followed by an apoplexy, proved fatal Sept. 26.

, an eminent French preacher, was born in 1663, the son of a notary at Hieres in Provence In 1681, he entered into the congregation, of the Oratory, and wherever he was sent gained all hearts by the liveliness of his character, the agreeableness of his wit, and a natural fund of sensible and captivating politeness. These advantages, united with his great talents, excited the envy of his brethren, no less than the admiration of others, and, on some ill-founded suspicions of intrigue, he was sent by his superiors to one of their houses in the diocese of Meaux. The first efforts of his eloquence were made at Vienne, while he was a public teacher of theology; and his funeral oration ou Henri de Villars, archbishop of that city, was universally admired. The fame of this discourse induced father de la Tour, then general of the congregation of the Oratory, to send for him to Paris. After some time, being asked his opinion of the principal preachers in that capital, “they display,” said he, “great genius and abilities; but if I preach, I shall not preach as they do.” He kept his word, and took up a style of his own, not attempting to imitate any one, except it was Bourdaloue, whom, at the same time, the natural difference of his disposition did not suffer him to follow very closely. A touching and natural simplicity is the characteristic of his style, and has been thought by able judges to reach the heart, and produce its due effect, with much more certainty than all the logic of the Jesuit Bourdaloue. His powers were immediately distinguished when he made his appearance at court; and when he preached his first advent at Versailles, he received this compliment from Louis XIV. “My father,” said that monarch, “when I hear other preachers, I go away much pleased with them; but whenever I hear you, I go away much displeased with myself.” On one occasion, the effect of a discourse preached by him “on the small number of the elect,” was so extraordinary, that it produced a general, though involuntary murmur of applause in the congregation. The preacher himself was confused by it; but the effect was only increased, and the pathetic was carried to the greatest height that can be supposed possible. His mode of delivery contributed not a little to his success. “We seem to behold him still in imagination,” said they who had been fortunate enough to attend his discourses, “with that simple air, that modest carriage, those eyes so humbly directed downwards, that unstudied gesture, that touching tone of voice, that look of a man fully impressed with the truths which he enforced, conveying the most brilliant instruction to the mind, and the most pathetic movements to the heart.” The famous actor, Baron, after hearing him, told him to continue as he had began. “You,” said he, “have a manner of your own, leave the rules to others.” At another time he said to an actor who was with him “My friend, this is the true orator; we are mere players.” Massillon was not the least inflated by the praises he received. His modesty continued unaltered; and the charms of his society attracted those who were likely to be alarmed at the strictness of his lessons. In 1717, the regent being convinced of his merits by his own attendance on his sermons, appointed him bishop of Clermont. The French academy received him as a member in 1719. The funeral oration of the duchess of Orleans in 1723, was the last discourse he pronounced at Pans. From that time he resided altogether in his diocese, where the mildness, benevolence, and piety of his character, gained all hearts. His love of peace led him to make many endeavours to conciliate his brethren of the Oratory and the Jesuits, but he found at length that he had less influence over divines than over the hearts of any other species of sinners. He died resident on his diocese, Sept. 28, 1742, at the age of 79. His name has since been almost proverbial in France, where he is considered as a most consummate master of eloquence. Every imaginable perfection is attributed by his countrymen to his style. “What pathos” says one of them, “what knowledge of the human heart What sincere effusions of conviction What a tone of truth, of philosophy, and humanity! What an imagination, at once lively and well regulated Thoughts just and delicate conceptions brilliant and magnificent; expressions elegant, select, sublime, harmonious; images striking and natural; representations just and forcible; style clear, neat, full, numerous, equally calculated to be comprehended by the multitude, and to satisfy the most cultivated hearer.” What can be imagined beyond these commendations? Yet they are given by the general consent of those who are most capable of deciding on the subject. His works were published complete, by his nephew at Paris, in 1745 and 1746, forming fourteen volumes of a larger, and twelve of a smaller kind of 12mo. They contain, 1. A complete set of Sermons for Advent and Lent. 2. Several Funeral Orations, Panegyrics, &c. 3, Ten discourses, known by the name of “Le petit Care'me.” 4. “Ecclesiastical Conferences.” 5. Some excellent paraphrases of particular psalms Massillon once stopped short in the middle of a sermon, from defect of memory; and the same happened from apprehension in different parts of the same day, to two other preachers whom he went to hear. The English method of readitfg their discourses would certainly have been very welcome to all these persons, but the French conceive that all the fire of eloquence would be lost by that method: this, however, seems by no means to be necessary. The most striking passages and beauties of Massiilon’s sermons were collected by the abbe de la Porte, in a volume which is now annexed as a last volume to the two editions of his works; and a few years ago, three volumes of his “Sermons” were translated into English by Mr. William Dickson.

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

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

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

, an enterprizing botanist, was born at Aberdeen, in North-Britain, in 1741, and after coming to London, probably in pursuit of employment as a gardener, in which capacity he was known to Mr. Aiton, the superintendant of Kevv gardens, he was sent in 1771 or 1772 to the Cape of Good Hope. That country had been, for near a century, celebrated as a mine of botanical riches, which had scarcely reached our gardens but through the medium of those of Holland. This deficiency, however, in our supply of curious plants, was little felt while Mr. Masson continued at the Cape, and the Dutch appear not to have restrained his inquiries or acquisitions. He was allowed to travel many hundred miles up the country, and having amply effected the purpose of his mission, he was, in 1776, ordered to explore the Canary islands, the Azores, Madeira, and part of the West-Indies, especially the island of St. Christopher. In this he employed about five years more, and returned to England in 1781.

During his stay at the Cape, he entered into a correspondence with Linnæus. Having discovered a bulbous plant of a new genus, he was not only laudably ambitious of botanical commemoration in its name, but he was particularly anxious, as appears by one of his letters, to receive this honour from no less a hand than that of his illustrious correspondent. This indeed, his learned biographer remarks, was the unicum prteinium, the only reward to which he aspired for all his labours. That he sought no pecuniary advancement, the extreme slenderness of the stipend which could be obtained for him, and his disregard of such objects at all times, abundantly evinced. He obtained the honour to which he aspired. The specimen of Massonia in the herbarium of Linnæus, named by his own trembling hand near the close of his life, proves that the name had his sanction, though it appears to have beea originally suggested by Thunberg, in whose company Masson botanized for two years at the Cape. In 1783, he visited Portugal and Madeira, and returned to the Cape of Good Hope in 1786, where, inconsequence of the knowledge he had already acquired, it was settled, in consultation with his able adviser, sir Joseph Banks, that his travels should now be restrained to within forty miles of the Cape town. In 1795, Mr. Masson returned to England, and spent two years there among his botanical friends, after which he was sent to explore such parts of North America, under the British government, as appeared most likely to produce new and valuable plants; and his success was equal to the expectations that had been formed. Newplants, of interesting characters and properties, sprang up under his steps, and it seemed probable that much practical knowledge was likely to result from his discoveries, but he did not live to reap or to communicate more than a foretaste of these advantages. He died about Christmas, 1805, in the sixty-fifth year of his age, at Montreal, in Canada. He was a man of a mild temper, persevering in his pursuits, even to a great enthusiasm. Of great industry; which his specimens and drawings of fish, animals, insects, plants, and views of the countries he passed through, evince. And though he passed a solitary life, in countries distant from society, his love of natural history never forsook him. In 1796 he published a splendid work on the genus Stapelia, consisting of a thin folio volume, with forty-one coloured plates of as many species, almost entirely non-descript, accompanied by descriptions.

, a reformed minister, who died in Holland about 1750, was originally of France, but fled into England to enjoy that liberty in religion which his country refused him, and was employed as tutor in bishop Burnet’s family. In 1710 he travelled with his pupils, through Holland, and thence to France and Italy, according to Saxius, though we doubt whether the bishop had at that time any sons so young as to be only beginning their education. Be this as it may, he soon became known in. the literary world, and we should suppose must have often resided in Holland, as most of his publications were printed there. The first we can trace with certainty is his “Jani templum Christo nascente reseratum, seu Tractatus Chronologico-historicus vulgarem refellens opinionem existimantium, pacem toto terrarum orbe sub tempus Servatoris natale stabilitam fuisse,” &c. Rotterdam, 1700, 4to and 8vo. We are also indebted to him for, 1. “Histoire critique de la Republique des Lettres, from 1712 to 17 17,” in 15 vols. 12mo. 2. “Vitae Horatii, Oviciii, et Plinii junioris,” 3 vols. small 8vo, and printed abroad, though dedicated to Englishmen of rank: the first at Leyden, 1708, to lord Harvey; the second at Amsterdam, 1708, to sir Justinian Isham; the third at Amsterdam, 1709, to the bishop of Worcester. These lives are drawn up in a chronological order, very learnedly and very critically; and serve to illustrate the history, not only of these particular persons, but of the times also in which they lived. In the “Life of Horace,” Masson found occasion to interfere with M. Dacier; who, however, defended his own opinions, and prefixed his defence to the second edition of his Horace. 3. “Histoire de Pierre Bayle & de ses ouvrages,” Amsterdam, 1716, 12mo. This at least is supposed to be his, though at first it was given to M. la Monnoye. Many other critical dissertations by Masson are enumerated by Saxius.

, a French historical and miscellaneous writer, was the son of a rich merchant, and born at St. Germain-Laval, in the territory of Forez, May 16, 1544. He lost his father when a child; and, though his mother married again, she appears to have taken great care of his education. At a proper age he was put under the Jesuits at Billon, in Auvergne, with whom he continued four years; and was then called to Lyons by an uncle, who intended to send him to Toulouse, to study the law: but the civil wars rendering this unsafe, he returned to Billon, where he applied himself to the belles lettres and philosophy. Here contracting an intimacy with a fellow-student, Anthony Challon, he joined with him in a resolution of entering into the society of Jesuits: and accordingly they went soon after to Rome, where they took the habit. Masson made a funeral oration at Rome for some cardinal, in the presence of several others, and acquired by it great credit and reputation. Afterwards these two friends went to Naples, where Masson taught two years in the college of Jesuits. They returned together to France, when Challon quitted the society, as did Masson some time after, and defended this step with so much moderation and candour that the society were not displeased at it.

The marriage of Charles IX. of France with Elizabeth, daughter of the emperor Maximilian, being celebrated in 1570 at Mezieres, Masson, who was present, wrote an elegant description of it, which was published the same year in 8vo, and was the first thing from which he derived literary reputation. He then resolved to apply to the law, and with this vie<v went to Angers to study under the celebrated Baudouin, or Balduinus. After two years he returned to Paris, and became librarian to the chancellor de Cheverney, a lover of literature, in which place he continued ten years. In 1576 he was made an advocate of parliament; yet never pleaded more than one cause, which however he gained with universal applause. The rest of his life appears to have been devoted to study, and when the troubles of France were at an end, he married the sister of a counsellor in parliament, with whom he lived thirty-four years, but had no children. The infirmities of age attacked him some time before his death, which happened Jan. 9, 1611. Rewrote, 1. “Annals of France,” a good work, the best edition of which is, 1598, 4to. 2. “Eulogies on illustrious Men,” 1656, 8vo. 3. “A Description of France by its Rivers,” 1685, 8vo. 4. “An Account of the French Bishoprics,” 8vo. “De Episcopis Urbis,” 4to, a history of the popes; and several other works, which discover great genius and learning. “Vita Joannis Calvini,” 4to, a well-written work, is also ascribed to him by some, and, by others, to James Gillot. The above-mentioned are all in Latin. His friend, M. de Thou, has written his life, which is prefixed to his Eulogies.

, a very learned Benedictine, of the congregation of St. Maur, was born at S. Owen de Macelles, in 1665. He is chiefly known for the new edition of St. Irenceus, which he published in 1710, fol. Gr. & Lat. He consulted, for that purpose, several manuscripts, which had never been examined; and made new notes and learned dissertations, prefixed to the work. The first of these dissertations is employed upon the person, character, and condition of Irenoeus, and sets forth particularly the writings and tenets of the heretics he encountered; the second enlarges further upon the life, actions, martyrdom, and writings of this saint; and the third relates his sentiments and doctrine. But, although this edition is reckoned better and more correct than any which had appeared before it, Salomon Deyling published a work at Leipsic in 1721, in order to expose the unfair representations Massuet had made of the opinions of Irenocus. Massuet was afterwards engaged to write a continuation of the acts and annals of the saints of the order of St.Benedict and accordingly he published a fifth volume. He died, aged 50, Jan. 19, 1716, after having written and published several other works.

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

, a divine and antiquary, probably a relative of the preceding, was the great-grandson of sir William Masters of Cirencester, in Gloucestershire. His father, William, was a clergyman, who among other livings, held that of St. Vedast, Foster-lane, London, where the subject of this article was born in 1713. He was admitted of Corpus-Christi college, Cambridge, in 1731, took his degree of B. A. in 1734, that of M. A. in 1738, and that of S. T. B. in 1746. He also obtained a fellowship of the college, and was tutor from 1747 to 1750. In 1752 he was chosen a fellow of the society of antiquaries, and was presented by Corpus college, in 1756, to the rectory of Landbeach in Cambridgeshire. He was also presented to the vicarage of Linton, which he resigned for that of Waterbeach in 1759; but this last he afterwards, by leave of the bishop of Ely, resigned tr his son. In 1797 he resigned, by consent of the respective colleges, the living of Landbeach to one of his sons-in-law, the rev. T. C. Burroughs, but continued to reside there. He was in the commission of the peace for the county of Cambridge. He died at Landbeach July 5, 1798, in his eightythird year.

As a divine he published only one sermon, “The Mischiefs of faction and rebellion considered,” preached at Cambridge in 1745. He is chiefly known, as an antiquary, by his valuable “History of the College of Corpus-Christi,” &.c. 1753, 4to, the most complete account ever published, of any college in either university, and upon the best plan, that which includes the lives of the principal members, as well as the foundation and progress of the college. We have been too much indebted to this work not to bear this testimony to its satisfactory information and accuracy. Mr. Masters, however, was less fortunate in prefixing to this publication a plan and elevation of the intended new building, which he claimed the merit of designing, although it really belonged to that excellent architect James Essex. Mr. Masters also published a Section and Ichnography of Pythagoras’ s school at Cambridge, with the seal of Mertoncollege, Oxford, to uhich it belongs. To the Archseologia he contributed “Remarks on Mr. Walpole’s Historic Doubts,” who answered them with no small display of vanity and arrogance; “An account of stone coffins found near Cambridge castle;” and of “an ancient painting on glass, representing the pedigree of the Stewart family.” In 1784 he published “Memoirs of the Life and Writings of the late rev. Thomas Baker, B. D. of St. John’s-college, from the papers of Dr. Zachary Grey, with a Catalogue of his ms Collections,” Cambridge, 8vo; and in 1790 “A Catalogue of the several pictures in the public library and respective colleges of the university of Cambridge,” 12mo. His last work was, “A short account of the parish of Waterbeach, in the diocese of Ely, by a late Vicar,” 1795, 8vo, with a slight sketch of Denny abbey; but of this only a small number were given as presents. Mr. Masters, from certain peculiarities of temper, appears to have been frequently at variance with his literary friends, of which instances may be found in our authorities.

, the first of a family of nonconformist divines, of considerable reputation both in the new and old world, was born at Lowton, in the parish of Winwick, in Lancashire, in 1596. After some education at Winwick-school, he was, in 1611, at the early age of fifteen, appointed master of a public school at Toxteth-park, near Liverpool, where, as Wood says, “he was converted to godliness.” In 1618, however, he was admitted a student of Brazenose college Oxford, where his stay must have been short, as the same year we are told he preached his first sermon at Toxteth, having been ordained by Dr. Morton, bishop of Chester, and chosen minister of that place. Here he officiated until 1633, when he was suspended for nonconformity; and although this suspension was soon taken off, his prejudices against the church establishment became so strong, that he was again suspended, and then determined to seek the kind of church-government which he fancied the most pure, in New England. The year after his arrival there, in 1635, he was chosen minister of a congregation newly formed at Dorchester, where he remained until his death April 22, 1669, in the seventy-third year of his age. He was the author of one or two pious treatises, but of more respecting church government. He had four sons, Samuel, Nathanael, Eleazer, and Increase, who all imbibed their father’s principles, and became sufferers for nonconformity. Of these, the eldest and youngest seem entitled to some notice.

, eldest son of the preceding, was born in Lancashire in 1626, and going with his father to New England in 1635, was educated at Harvard-college, of which he became the first fellow who took a degree there. In 1650 he returned to England, spent some time at Oxford, where and at Cambridge he again took his degrees, was chaplain of Magdalen-college, and often a preacher at St. Mary’s. He then went with the English commissioners to Scotland, and preached at Leith for two years. He returned to England in 1655, and having visited Ireland with Henry Cromwell, and Drs. Harrison, Winter, and Charnock, he was made senior fellow of Trinity-college, and became a favourite preacher. Wood says that though he was reckoned a congregational man, and a high nonconformist, yet he was moderate in his behaviour to the episcopals, when it was in his power to hurt them. When the lord deputy gave him and others a commission for displacing the episcopal ministers in Munster, he declined it, as he did afterwards in Dublin, giving as a reason that “he was called into the country to preach the gospel, and not to hinder others from doing it.” Soon after the restoration, he was suspended for preaching against the revival of the liturgy, on which he returned to England; but when the Bartholomew act took place, removed again to Dublin, where for some time he preached to a small congregation in his own house, until the laws against nonconformity obliged him to desist. He died Oct. 26, 1671. He published various tracts relative to the controversies of the times; and after his death appeared a course of sermons that were very popular, entitled “The Figures and Types of the Old, Testament explained and improved,” Dublin, 1683, 4to. He also wrote a pamphlet against Greatrakes, the noted quack but, says Calamy, he was not allowed to publish it, such a favourite was Greatrakes at that time.

, youngest son of the preceding, was born at Dorchester, in NewEngland, in 1635, and studied at Harvard college, where he took his degree of B. A. in 1656. In the following year he arrived in England, and thence went to Ireland, and joined his brother. He then entered himself of Trinity college, in which he pro-' ceeded M. A. in 1658, having performed the necessary exercises with great applause, and was offered a fellowship in that institution; but, finding the climate unfavourable to his health, returned to England, and officiated for some time as minister, in the place of Mr. Howe, at Great Torrington, in Devonshire. In 1659, he became chaplain to colonel Bingham, governor of the island of Guernsey, and preached every Sunday, as well before the garrison, as in the town of Peter-le Port. After the restoration, as he could not conform, he sailed for New England, where he was chosen minister to the New church at Boston. Shortly after this, he married the daughter of Mr. John Cotton, once a gentleman of considerable eminence in England, but then an exile on account of his non-conformity, and minister at Boston. In 1664, Mr. Mather was ordained to the pastoral office, the duties of which he performed through life with credit to himself, and highly esteemed by his people. In 1683, when king Charles II. required the inhabitants of New England to surrender their charter, Mr. Mather attended at a meeting of the freemen of Boston, and by his zealous persuasions determined them to reject a motion for that purpose unanimously; and this spirited measure had considerable influence in prevailing on the country in general to imitate the example set by the Bostonians. Upon the publication of king James’s second declaration for liberty of conscience, some of the ministers of New England, and their churches, drew up addresses of thanks to him for the benefits which they enjoyed in consequence of it, and Mr. Mather embarked for England April 7, 1688, for the purpose of presenting them. He was favourably received at court, and laid before the king the state of the country. While he continued in England, the revolution took place, and he was consulted by the new administration on many political topics, particularly on an attempt to obtain the re-settlement of the Massachusetts colony, upon their chartered foundation, by an act of parliament, which was frustrated by its dissolution. He at length obtained from his majesty a new charter, containing the whole of the old one, with the addition of new and more ample privileges. Having rendered this important service to his fellow citizens, he set sail for America in 1692, and on his return he received the public thanks of the house of ^representatives for his faithful and zealous endeavours to benefit his country. He now returned to his labours in the church, and at Harvard college, of which he was chosen president in 1684, and also created doctor of divinity. He died in 1723, at the age of 84. He was author of many theological tracts, of which his biographer gives a list of above eighty among which are, “A brief History of the war with the Indians in New England” of “An Essay for the recording of illustrious Providences, wherein an account is given of many remarkable and memorable events which have happened in this last age, especially in New England” of “A Discourse on Comets;” “A Discourse concerning Earthquakes,” &c.

, son to the preceding Increase Mather, and the most eminent of the family, was born Feb. 12, 1663, at Boston, where he was educated at school till he was twelve years old. By this time he had made an uncommon progress in the Greek and Latin languages, and even entered on the Hebrew; so that he was then, young as he was, admitted into Harvard-college, where he took his first degree at sixteen, and his second at nineteen. When about seventeen years old, he undertook the tuition of several young gentlemen, composed for their use catechetical systems of the several sciences, and continued this employment for seven years with great success. He had from infancy an impediment in his speech, which seeming incurable, he laid aside all thoughts of the ministry, and applied himself to the study of medicine; but having at length, by persevering in a deliberate mode of speaking, got rid of the impediment, he returned to the study of divinity. He began to preach in 1680, and in May 1684, became the minister of Boston- in the diligent discharge of which office, and in writing books, he spent his life. As an instance of his piety and diligence, his biographer informs us that in one year he composed and published fourteen books, and kept sixty fasts and twenty-two vigils. He applied himself also to the study of modern languages, the French and Spanish particularly; and, in his forty-fifth year, made himself so far master of the Iroquois Indian tongue, that he wrote and published treatises in it. In short he became so considerable a person in Boston, that he was several times consulted by the magistrates upon affairs of state; and more than once quelled riots, merely by the force of his persuasions. For the public good, he there planned and promoted several excellent societies, particularly a society for suppressing disorders; a society for reforming manners; and a society of peace-makers, whose professed business it was to compose differences, and prevent law-suits. He published also a proposal for an evangelical treasury, in order to build churches, distribute books of piety, relieve poor ministers, &c. His fame was not confined to his own country; for, in 1710, the university of Glasgow in Scotland sent him a diploma for the degree of doctor in divinity; and, in 1714, the royal society of London chose him one of their fellows. He was farther honoured by an epistolary correspondence with several persons of eminent character for piety and learning; and, among others, the lord-chancellor King. After a laborious and well-spent life, he died on the 13th of Feb. 1728, being the day after he had completed his 65th year.

He is said to have published during his life 382 pieces, many of them indeed but small, as single sermons, essays, &c. yet several of larger size. Among these were “Magnalia Christi Americana,” or “An Ecclesiastical History of New-England, from its first planting in 1620 to 1698,” folio. “The Christian Philosopher,” 8vo. “Ratio disciplines fratrum Nov-Anglorum,” that is, “The reason of the discipline of the brethren in New-England.” “Directions to a candidate for the ministry.” “Psalterium Americanum,” or “American psalter,” &c. But the most remarkable of all his works was that in which, like Glanville, he defended the reality of witchcraft. This is entitled “The wonders of the invisible world; being an account of the trials of several witches, lately executed in New-England, and of several remarkable curiosities therein occurring. Together with, 1. Observations upon the nature, the number, and the operations of the devils. 2. A short narrative of a late outrage committed by a knot of witches in Swedeland, very much resembling, and so far explaining that under which New-England has laboured. 3. Some counsels directing a due improvement of the terrible things lately done by the unusual and amazing range of evil spirits in New-England. 4. A brief discourse upon those temptations, which are the more ordinary devices of Satan. By Cotton Mather. Published by the special command of his excellency the governor of the province of Massachusets-Bay in New-England.” Printed first at Boston in New-England, and reprinted at London, in 1693, 4to.

It may perhaps appear surprizing that a man so highly praised by his biographers for learning, judgment, and piety, should not only give credit to, but assistance in the propagation of, such falsehoods and absurdities as were followed by the inhuman execution of several innocent persons. But whoever looks into his most useful work, his “Ecclesiastical History of New England,” will discover what his more recent biographers have suppressed, an uncommon degree of enthusiasm in his mind, on the most ordinary occurrences. Neal, only, speaks impartially on this shocking subject. He observes that those suspected wizzards and witches “were convicted on very slender evidence,” a necessary consequence of their being tried at all, for what but the most slender evidence could be expected in the case of a crime which it was impossible to commit? Neal also allows, that there is some unfairness in the report of the trials by Mather: for, when he has given the depositions of the witnesses against the prisoners at large, he passes over their defence in general terms, and leaves the reader in the dark, and incapable of judging the merits of the cause. Yet upon such evidence twenty-eight persons received sentence of death, of whom nineteen were executed. They all suffered without the least acknowledgment of their guilt, laying their blood at the door of false witnesses. But neither integrity of manners, nor the strongest protestations of innocence with their dying breath, were sufficient to move compassion, or stop the tide of the people’s zeal against those unhappy persons at this time. Nor, says Neal, were these all who were in danger of their lives: there were then a hundred and fifty more in prison, and above two hundred under accusation. The worst part of this affair, however, as far as respects the conduct of our author, is, that no stop was put to these murders until the pretended sufferers, by witchcraft, began to accuse some of his relations, and the relations of the governor himself. “It was time then,” says Neal, “to make a stand,” and it is curious to observe how easily this stand appears to have been made for the very next sessions, out of fifty-six who were accused, three only were found guilty, whom the governor pardoned; and at length both judge and jury publicly acknowledged their error, and a phrenzy abated which had lasted about fifteen months, and struck all Europe with astonishment. As to Dr. Mather, his apology does little credit to his understanding; for the only thing which appears to have affected him was the great number of the persons accused, and the quality of some of them. These circumstances, he says, gave just ground to suspect some mistake; but he appears to have retained his former belief in the existence and practice of witchcraft, as we may infer from many parts of his History of New England. Let us not, however, press this accusation too far. Let us recollect, that it was not until the 10th George II. that the laws against witchcraft in this country ceased to be a disgrace to our statute-book; and that the rev. John Brown of Haddington, the eminent divine among the sect of Seceders in Scotland, and their principal tutor, published a very few years ago, as a ground of lamentation, that the British parliament had “repealed the penal statutes against witchcraft”

, an eminent artist, was born at Antwerp, in 1460, and for several years followed the trade of a blacksmith or farrier, at least till he was in his twentieth year. Authors vary in their accounts of the cause of his quitting his first occupation, and attaching himself to the art of painting, some attributing it to his falling in love with the daughter of a painter; others to the accidental sight of a piece of art. Whatever may have been his motive, it is certain that he appears to have had an uncommon talent: his manner was singular, not resembling the manner of any other master; and his pictures were strongly coloured, and carefully finished, though somewhat dry and hard. By many competent judges it was believed, when they observed the strength of expression in some of his compositions, that if he had been acquainted with the great masters of the Roman school, he would have proved one of the most eminent painters of the Low Countries. But he only imitated ordinary life, and seemed more inclined, or at least more qualified, to imitate the defects than the beauties of nature. Some historical compositions of this master deserve commendation particularly a Descent from the Cross, which is in the cathedral at A ntwerp, justly admired for the spirit, skill, and delicacy of the whole. Sir Joshua Reynolds says there are heads in this picture not excelled by Raphael. But the most remarkable and best known picture of Matsys, is that of the Two Misers in the gallery at Windsor, which has been engraved. Of this there is a duplicate at Hagley, the seat of lord Lyttleton. Matsys died in 1529, aged sixty-nine. — He had a son, John Matsys, who was born at Antwerp, and became his father’s disciple. He painted in the same style and manner, but not with a reputation equal to his father; though many of his pictures are sold to unskilful purchasers, for the paintings of Quintin. His most frequent subject was the representation of misers counting their gold, or bankers examining and weighing it, very common occurrences when Antwerp was in her glory.

, an English historian, who flourished, according to some, in 1377; while Nicolson thinks he did not outlive 1307, was a Benedictine of the abbey at Westminster, and thence has taken his name. From the title of his history, “Flores historiarum,” he has often been called Florilegus. His history commences from the foundation of the world, but the chief object of which is the English part. It is entitled, “Flores Historiarum, per Matthoeum Wesmonasteriensem collecti, prsecipue de Rebus Britannicis, ab exordio mundi, usque ad annum 1307,” published at London in 1567, and at Franckfort in 1601, both in folio. It is divided into six ages, butis comprised in three books. The first extends from the creation to the Christian aera; the second, from the birth of Christ to the Norman conquest; the third, from that period to the beginning of Edward the Second’s reign. Seventy years more were afterwards added, which carried it down to the death of Edward III. in 1377. He formed his work very much upon the model and plan of Matthew Paris, whom he imitated with great care. He wrote with so scrupulous a veracity/ that he is never found to wander a tittle from the truth; and with such diligence, that he omitted nothing worthy of remark. He is commended also for his acuteness in tracing, and his judgment in selecting facts, his regularity in the method or his plan, and his skill in chronological computations. He is, on the whole, except by bishop Nicolson, very highly esteemed, as one of the most venerable fathers of English history.

, an eminent English prelate, was the son of John Matthew, a merchant of Bristol, and born in that part of the city which lies in Somersetshire, in 1546. He received the first rudiments of learning in the city of Wells, and at the age of thirteen became a student in the university of Oxford, in the beginning of 1558-9. In Christ Church college he took the degree of bachelor of arts, Feb. 11, 1563, and in June 1566, was made master of arts; about which time he entered into holy orders, and was greatly respected for his learning, eloquence, conversation, friendly disposition, and the sharpness of his wit. On the 2nd of November 1569, he was unanimously elected public orator of the university; which office he filled with great applause. In 1570, he was made canon of the second stall in the cathedral of Christy-church, and November 28 following was admitted archdeacon of Bath. In 1571, he petitioned for his degree of bachelor of divinity, but was not admitted to it for two years. In 1572, he was made prebendary of Teynton-Regis with Yalmeten in the church of Salisbury; and in July following was elected president of St. John’s college, Oxford: at which time, being in high reputation as a preacher, he was appointed one of the queen’s chaplains in ordinary. On December lOth, 175S, he was admitted bachelor of divinity; and next year, May 27, proceeded doctor. On the 14th of June, 1576, being archdeacon at Bath, he was commissioned by archbishop Grindal, with some others, to visit the church, city, and deanry of Bristol. In the same year, he was made dean of Christ-church; and then obtained, from the pen of Camden, the distinguished character of " Theologus praestantissimus/' Camden adds, that learning and piety, art and nature, vied together in his composition. Sir John Harrington is also full of his praises, and even Campian the Jesuit speaks highly of his learning and virtues.

In 1579, he served the office of Vice-chancellor of the university. At a convocation held in 1580, archbishop Grindal being then under the queen’s displeasure, it was agreed, that our prelate, then dean of Christ-church, should, in the name of that assembly, draw up an humble address to her majesty, for the archbishop’s restitution; but it was not favourably received. June 22, 1583, he was collated to the precentorship of Salisbury; and Sept. 3 following, was made dean of Durham, being then thirtyseven years of age, on which he resigned his precentorship. From this time, says Le Neve, to the twenty-third Sunday after Trinity in 1622, he kept an account of all the sermons he preached, the place where, the time when, the text what, and if any at court, or before any of the prime nobility; by which it appears, that he preached, while dean of Durham, seven hundred and twenty-one; while bishop of Durham five hundred and fifty; and while archbishop of. York, to the time above mentioned, seven hundred and twenty-one; in all one thousand nine hundred and ninety-two sermons; and among them several extempore. This prelate, adds Le Neve, certainly thought preaching to be the most indispensible part of his duty; for in the diary before quoted, wherein, at the end of each year, he sets down how many sermons he had preached at the end of 1619, “Sum. Ser. 32, eheu! An. 1620, sum. ser. 35, eheu! An. 1621, sore afflicted with a rheume and coughe diverse months together, so that I never could preach until Easter-daye. The Lord forgive me!” On the 28th of May, 1590, he was inducted to the rectory of Bishopwearmouth, co. Durham; and in 1595, April 13, was consecrated bishop of Durham, and resigned Bishopwearmouth.

Our prelate was much engaged in political matters: Strype gives a letter of his, dated April 9, 1594, whilst dean of Durham, to lord Burleigh, touching Bothwell’s protection; in which he says, “I pray God the king’s protestations be not too well believed, who is a deep dissembler, by all men’s judgement that know him best, than is thought possible for his years.” Such was the character he gave of the prince who was shortly to come to the throne of England. In 1596, commissioners were appointed by the queen to treat with Scotland, and redress grievances on the borders: the English commissioners were the bishop of Durham, sir William Bowes, Francis Slingsby, esq. and Clement Colmer, LL.D. The place of convention was Carlisle, and many months were spent on that duty; but the good effect of their assiduous application to the work of peace was much retarded, and almost rendered abortive, by the outrages repeatedly committed on the eastern and middle marches. The first article of this treaty, however, says Ridpath, in his “Border History,” does honour to the character of the prelates of the church, one of whom stood first in the list of commissioners from each nation. In this article it was resolved, “that the sovereigns of each king should be addressed, to order the settlement of ministers at every border-church, for the sake of reforming and civilizing the inhabitants, by their salutary instructions and discipline: and for this purpose, the decayed churches should be repaired: and for the safety of the persons of their pastors, and due respect to be paid them in the discharge of their offices, the principal inhabitants of each parish should give security to their prince.”

Notwithstanding the unfavourable opinion he had formed of king James VI. when that monarch was on his journey to take possession of the throne of England, our prelate met him at Berwick, and preached a congratulatory sermon before him. He was also at the Hampton -court conference, in January 1603, of which he gave an account at large to archbishop Button. On the 26th of July, 1606> he was translated to York, and enjoyed that dignity till March 29, 1628, on which day he died, at Cawood, and was buried in our lady’s chapel, at the east of York cathedral, with a very prolix Latin epitaph inscribed on his tomb. He married Frances Barlow, daughter of Barlow bishop of Chichester, who was first married to Matt. Parker, son of Matthew Parker, archbishop of Canterbury. She has also a monument in York cathedral, the inscription upon which is too remarkable to be omitted. “Frances Matthew, first married to Matt. Parker, &c. afterwards to Tobie Matthew, that famous archb. of this see. She was a woman of exemplary wisdom, gravity, piety, beauty, and indeed all other virtues, not only above her sex, but the times. One exemplary act of hers, first devised upon this church, and through it flowing upon the country, deserves to live as long as the church itself. The library of the deceased archbishop, consisting of about 3000 books, she gave entirely to the public use of this church: a rare example that so great care to advance learning should lodge in a woman’s breast; but it was the less wonder in her, because herself was of kin to so much learning. She was the daughter of Will. Barlow, bp. of Chichester, and in k. Henry VIII.'s time ambassador into Scotland, of the ancient family of the Barlows in Wales. She had four sisters married to four bishops, one to Will. Whickham, bishop of Winchester, another to Overton bp. of Coventry and Litchf. a third to Westphaling bp. of Hereford, and a fourth to Day, that succeeded Whickham in Winchester; so that a bishop was her father, an archbishop her father-in-law; she had four bishops her brethren, and an archbishop her husband.” She died May 10, 1629, in the seventy-sixth year of her age.

Archbishop Matthew appears to have been a man of great wit (including perhaps the punning rage of the time), of a sweet disposition, very bountiful and learned, and as a divine, most exemplarily conscientious and indefatigable both in preaching, and other duties. Preferment never once induced him to desist from preaching, and there was scarcely a pulpit in the dioceses of Durham or York, in which he had not appeared. No imputation, says Mr. Lodge, remains on his memory, except the alienation of York house in the Strand to the duke of Buckingham, for which he is said to have accepted lauds in Yorkshire of inferior value.

Notwithstanding Dr. Matthew was so industrious a preacher, it is rather singular that we have nothing of his in print, except his “Concio apologetica contra Campianum,” 1581 and 1638, 8vo. Fuller has since printed a long letter, which was written by him in the name of the convocation, respecting archbishop Grindal’s suspension; and Dr. Parr another to Usher. Dr. Smith has also printed a letter of his to Catnden, and Strype a remarkable one concerning the Hampton-court conference. In Mr. Lodge’s “Illustrations,” are a few of his letters; and probably many more, as well as Mss. of other kinds, are among the archives of the cathedral at York, to which, as already mentioned, his widow gave his library.

, eldest son of the preceding, and a very singular character, was born at Oxford, in 1578, while his tather was dean of Christ church; and matricuJated in 1589, when only eleven years of age. He was the year after admitted student, and by the advantage of quick parts, and a good tutor, he soon acquired considerable distinction as an orator and disputant. After taking his degrees in arts, he left England in 1605, for such improvement as travelling could confer, and made himself a master of some foreign languages. This journey, however, was much against his father’s inclination, who expressly forbade his going to Italy, suspecting probably what happened when he broke his word and went to that country, where he was converted to popery by the celebrated Jesuit Parsons, to the great grief of his father, who was theu in so distinguished a station in the church. He himself informs us that the first impressions made upon him arose from the devout behaviour of the rustics in the churches abroad, and from being convinced of the reality of the liquefaction of the blood of St. Januarius at Naples; but that his complete conversion was reserved for father Parsons, who gave him to read Mr. William Reynolds’ s “Reprehension of Dr. Whitaker,” which he esteemed the most valuable work on wit and humour he had ever seen. It affords, however, no very favourable idea of Mr. Matthew’s conversion, that it was begun by an imposture, and perfected by wit and humour.

In 1606 he returned to London, and wrote to sir Francis Bacon, a kinsman, friend, and servant of secretary Cecil, desiring him to acquaint the secretary of his conversion, and to assure him at the same time of his loyalty to the king. This intelligence, he tells us, was graciouslyaccepted by the secretary, and no harm threatened him from that quarter. He then waited on archbishop Bancroft, to make his apology for changing his religion, and to request his grace’s interference with his friends. The archbishop received him courteously, but blamed him for so sudden a change without hearing both sides, and appointed certain days when he should come to Lambeth and canvass the matter. Several interviews accordingly took place, in all which Mr. Matthew would have us believe he held the better argument. At length the archbishop, by the king’s order, tendered him the oath of allegiance; and, upon Matthew’s refusal, committed him to the Fleet prison. Here he remained six months, visited by several people of rank: bishop Morton, sir Maurice Berkeley, sir Edwin Sandys, sir Henry Goodyear, &c. &c. Some of these endeavoured to argue with him, but, according to his own account, he was able to answer them. The plague raging in London, his friend sir Francis Bacon procured him a temporary release; and some time after he was finally released, on condition of going abroad, and not returning without the king’s leave. Such is his own account. Mr. Lodge adds another circumstance, that he was a member of parliament, and that the House of Commons silentlyacquiesced in a precedent (his banishment) so dangerous to their privileges. Be this as it may, he went abroad, and remained on the continent about twelve years. When in France he became acquainted with Villiers, afterwards duke of Buckingham, who, when he came into favour with king James, obtained leave for Mr. Matthew to return to England, which he did in 1617; and in 1622, by the king’s command, followed prince Charles into Spain. On their return, he was received into full favpur with the king, who, he adds, “managed his parents also to forgive him, and to take proper notice of him. They rather chose,” he says, “to attack me with sighs and short wishes, and by putting now and then some books into my hands, rather than by long discourses.” Yet these efforts of paternal affection appear to have had no effect on him.

In 1623, the king conferred the honour of knighthood upon him, and he was frequently and always favourably received at court. In Charles I.'s reign he was invited by the earl of Strafford, when appointed lord lieutenant of Ireland, to accompany him thither, which gave just alarm to some of the council, who probably suspected that his insinuating manners were a cloak to hide his zeal for the advancement of the Romish church in England. Wood, who speaks more favourably of him than he deserves, doubts his being in holy orders; but Dodd, an unquestionable authority in this point, mentions the attestations of various persons who had heard him say mass; and there seems every reason to suppose that he was a spy from the church of Rome. His character being probably understood in this light, when the rebellion broke out he left his country, and joined the Jesuits at Ghent, where he died Oct. 13, 1655.

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

, a French historian, was born at Porentrui, in the diocese of Basle, Dec. 10, 1583, and was first principal of the college of Verceil, and afterwards an advocate at Lyons. He was a zealous partizan of the league, and much attached to the Guises. When he went to Paris, he quitted poetry, which he had followed hitherto, for history, to which he attached himself from that time. He acquired the esteem of Henry IV. who manifested it by giving him the title of historiographer of France, and furnishing him with all the memoirs necessary to make him so effectually. He attended Louis Xiji. to the siege of Montauhan; but, falling sick, was removed to Toulouse, where he died October 12, 1621, at the age of fifty-eight. Matthieu was only a moderate author: he wrote easily, but in an undignified style. He produced, l.“A History of the memorable Events which happened in the reign of Henry the Great,” 1624, 8vo. This contains some curious anecdotes communicated to the author by Henry himself; but the flatness of the style destroys, in a great measure, the interest of the work. 2. “The History of the deplorable Death of Henry the Great,” 1611 folio; 1612, 8vo. 3, “The History of St. Louis,” 1618, 8vo. 4. “The History of Louis XI.” in folio. This work is esteemed. 5, “The History of France,” from Francis I. to Louis XIII. inclusive, Paris, 1631, 2 vols, folio, published by his son, who added the reign of Louis XIII. 6. “Quatrains on Life and Death;” very languid and fatiguing, but often printed after those of Pibrac. 7. “La Guisiade,” the Guisiad, a tragedy, was published at Lyons, 1589, in 8vo. He was also the writer of some other tragedies, published in the same year in 2 vols. 12mo and of some other historical pieees of less note than what we have mentioned.

, an eminent physician, and medical botanist, and the son of a physician, was born at Sienna, in Tuscany, in 1501; and educated first at Venice; and afterwards at Padua. The law was his original destination, which he exchanged for the study of medicine, and having obtained his degree at Padua, returned to Sienna, where he speedily acquired extensive practice. For some reasons, however, he varied his places of abode, and practised at Home, at Anania, and at Gorizia, where, as well as at Anania, he was extremely beloved, of which he had here a singular proof: a fire having consumed all his furniture, the people flocked to him the next day, with presents of goods and money, that made him richer than before, and the magistrates advanced him a year’s salary. After a residence of twelve years at Gorizia, he accepted an invitation from Ferdinand, king of the Romans, to take the office of physician to his son, the archduke Ferdinand. He was greatly honoured at the imperial court, and in 1562 was created aulic-counsellor to the emperor Ferdinand. Afterwards Maximilian II. prevailed upon his brother to part with him, and made him his first physician. Finding, however, the weight of age pressing upon him, Matthiolus took leave of the court, and retired to a life of repose at Trent, where he soon after died of the plague, in 1577.

The great work, however, by which this physician acquired his fame and honour, was his commentary on the writings of Dioscorides, printed at Venice in 1548, in the Italian language, and soon twice reprinted. He afterwards published it in the Latin language, and with the addition of small cuts, in 1554, with the title of “Commentarii in sex Libros P. Dioscoridis,” &c. Numerous editions, in Latin, enlarged and improved, were afterwards given; and the work was also many times reprinted in Italian, and in French and German translations by different persons. The best edition is that of Venice, 1565, folio, with large plates. This work, with all its imperfections, must be allowed to have contributed much to lay the foundation of botanical science; but, as Eloy remarks, the multitude of editions and versions of it eviuces the penury of the age in botanical books. An edition of all his works was published by Caspar Bauhin, with the addition of more than three hundred figures, at Basle, in 1598, folio, which was reprinted in 1674.

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

, M. D. an eminent physician and polite writer, was born in Holland in 1718. He was the son of Paul Maty, a protestant clergyman, and was originally intended for the church; but, in consequence of some mortifications his father received from the synod, on account of particular sentiments which he entertained about the doctrine of the Trinity, he turned his thoughts to physic. He took his degree at Leyden, and in 1740, came to settle in England, his father having determined to quit Holland for ever.

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

He was an early and active advocate for inoculation; and when there was a doubt entertained that one might have the small-pox after inoculation a second time, tried it upon himself, unknown to his family. He was a member of the medical club (with the doctors Parsons, Templeman, Fothergill, Watson, and others), which met every fortnight in St. Paul’s church-yard. He was twice married, viz. the first time to Mrs. Elizabeth Boisragon; and the second to Mrs. Mary Deners. He left a son and three daughters. A portrait of Dr. Maty, by his own order, was engraved after his death by Bartolozzi, to be given to his friends; of which no more than 100 copies were taken off, and the plate destroyed. He had nearly finished the “Memoirs of the Earl of Chesterfield” which were completed by his son-in-law Mr. Justamond, and prefixed to that nobleman’s Miscellaneous Works, 1777, 2 vols. 4 to.

, son of the former, was born ini 1745. He was educated at Westminster-school, whence, in 1763, he was elected to Trinity college, Cambridge. After a time, he obtained a travelling fellowship of that college, which enabled him to pass three years on the continent; and in 1774$ he was appointed chaplain to lord Stormont, then ambassador at the court of France. Soon after this, he married one of the daughters of Joseph Clark, esq. of Weatherfield in Essex; whose brother, captain Charles Clark, afterwards became famous, as being successor in command to the celebrated Cook, in that unfortunate voyage which proved fatal to both those officers. By this lady he had one son, who survived his father, but died while yet at school. Mr. Maty, much respected for his abilities, acquirements, and character, by persons able to contribute to his advancement, would have been very likely to gain preferment in the church, after his return to England, had not some scruples arisen in his mind on the subject of those articles of faith which formerly he had subscribed. From that time he determined, from the most conscientious motives, never to accept of any ecclesiastical appointment; and, after the death of his father in 1776, he withdrew himself entirely from the functions of the ministry in the established church. His reasons for this step, dated Oct. 22, 1777, were printed at his own request in the Gent. Mag for that year. They are chiefly the doctrines of the Trinity, of original sin, and of absolute predestination; which last he finds in the seventeenth article. His own inclination is to the Arian hypothesis, and to a liturgy somewhat like Dr. Clarke’s; and he says, although he has left the church, he has no objection to preach to a congregation holding the same opinions. His life was thenceforward more particularly devoted to literary pursuits, which were highly favoured by the appointment he obtained, at the same time, of an assistant librarian in the British Museum. He was afterwards advanced to be one of the underlibrarians of the same establishment, in the department of Natural History and Antiquities. In November 1778, on the resignation of Dr. Horsiey, he was appointed one of the secretaries to the Royal Society. In January 1782, he began a review of publications, principally foreign, which be continued with considerable success, though with little assistance, till September 1786, when he was compelled by ill health to discontinue it. The motto which he took for this work was modest, and well appropriated “Sequitur patrem non passibus sequis” alluding to his father’s “Journal Britannique” and the truth appears to be, that, though he was far from being deficient either in learning or critical abilities, he was inferior in both to his father; and being the avowed author of this review, is thought to have created at least as many enemies as admirers. In the disputes which arose in the Royal Society, in 1784, respecting the re-instatement of Dr. Hutton, as secretary for foreign correspondence, he took so warm a part, that becoming very angry, he resigned his office of secretary. In this, as in other instances in his life, his vivacity outran his judgment. As a secretary, an officer of the societv, he was not called upon to take any active part; and the advantages he derived from the situation were such as he could ill afford to relinquish. In preferring always his conscience to his interest, he certainly was highly commendable; but in this question his conscience had no occasion to involve itself. To make himself amends for this diminution of his income, Mr. Maty undertook, on moderate terms, to read the Greek, Latin, French, or Italian classics, with such persons as might be desirous of completing their knowledge of those languages: but it does not appear that this employment turned out very profitable. In 1787, an asthmatic complaint, under which he long had laboured, completed the subversion of his constitution, and he died on the 16th of January in that year, at the early age of forty-two. Besides his review, he published a translation of the travels of Riesbeck through Germany; and translated into French, the accounts of the gems, in that magnificent work, the “Gemmae Marlburienses,” which Mr. Bryant had first written in Latin. For this he received lOOl. from the duke of Marlborongh, and a copy of the book. After his death, a volume of his sermons was published by subscription, in which, by an oversight, that has sometimes happened in other cases, two or three which he had transcribed from other author^ were reprinted. Notwithstanding much irritability of temper, he was of a warm and friendly disposition, which often manifests itself in his Review.

, a noted political adventurer, and well known about sixty years ago, as the editor of the Brussels Gazette, was born at Rouen in 1721. He took the habit of a capuchin in 1740, but broke through his religious engagements as soon as he found them incompatible with his inclinations, and determined to seek that fortune in foreign countries which he could no longer hope for in France. Of his future proceedings we have two accounts; the one, that he eloped with a nun, professed himself a protestant, and came to Brussels, where he obtained the protection of M. Kinschot, resident of the States, by whose means he got safe to Holland. Here a Saxon count falling in love with his nun, carried her with him to Dresden, and, at the same time recommended Maubert to a Saxon nobleman in that city, as preceptor to his sons. The other account, not the more true for being his own, conducts him in a more honourable manner, to the office of tutor to the young count de Rutowski, while he had also obtained an introduction to count Bruhl. The father of his pupil being an inveterate enemy of count Bruhl, had engaged with some friends to ruin him, and found Maubert by no means reluctant to assist in the plot. He accordingly drew up a deduction of grievances, which gained him the applause and confidence of the party, and greatly flattered his ambition. The plot being discovered, however, Maubert was arrested at the hotel de Rutowski, and irv a few weeks was sent to the fortress of Konigstein, where, he says, he was treated handsomely, allowed even luxuries, provided with books, and the liberty of walking and visiting in the fortress, with no other guard than a subaltern officer. Of his release we have also two accounts; the one, that it was accomplished by interest, the other by fraud. This was not the only prison, however, which he had occasion to visit and escape from; the rest of his life forms a series of adventures, more fit for a romance than any other species of narrative, and consists of the vicissitudes to which he was exposed by selling his talents, such as they were, to the best bidder, and writing on the side of that nation or government which paid him best.

The first publication that made him noticed, was his “Testament politiquedu Cardinal Alberoni,” one of those fictions that were very common in France and Holland on the death of any minister of state of great eminence. Of this kind were the Testaments of Richelieu, Mazarin, Colbert, Louvois, &c. vehicles for political sentiment, but of no authority as to the parties whose names are assumed. The reputation he acquired by this work, which was well enough written to deceive Voltaire into the opinion that it was the production of one long acquainted with the courts and politics of Europe, encouraged Maubert to publish “Histoire politique de siecle,” 1757, 2 vols. 4to. About this time, or soon after, we find him in England, where he boasts of the patronage of lord Bolingbroke, and his friend Mr. Henry Furnese, one of the lords of the admiralty, who endeavoured to procure him a place in that office at the head of which the duke of Newcastle then was, but that the death of his protector put an end to his hopes. In this account are some of those blunders which French writers seem to delight to commit, in speaking of the affairs of England. Mr. Furnese was a commissioner of the treasury for a year, and the duke of Newcastle first lord; but, whatever truth or falsehood there may be in his account of his connexions here, Maubert was at last obliged to make a precipitate retreat, being taken for a spy, and once more landed in Holland, where he published several political pamphlets, for which, such was his tergiversation, he was paid by that very count Bruhl who had prosecuted him some years before. At length he became obnoxious here too, and was obliged to go to Brussels, where he became editor of the Brussels Gazette, a paper, that under his management was for some time proverbial for want of veracity, marked hostility to the principles of liberty, and ignorance of the real state of the political affairs it professed to discuss or narrate. This character applied also with peculiar justice to Maubert’s “Historical and Political Mercury,” two numbers of which were translated and published in English in 1760, and to his other political pamphlets, “Testament politique de Walpole;” “Ephruimjustifie,” &c. As to the conclusion of his life, there are many reports, but they all agree that he died at Altona in 1767.

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

, a divine of some eminence in France, was born at Vire in Normandy, in 1634. He at first taught the learned languages in the society to which he belonged, and afterwards was employed entirely in preaching, and in missions. He produced also several useful works, and died at Paris, Jan. 19, 1709. His principal productions are, 1. “A Treatise on Religion, against the Atheists, the Deists, and the new Pyrrhonians,” written in French; the best edition is that of 1698. 2. “A translation of the Psalms, in French verse,” of no great excellence. 3. “Miscellanies,” among which is some poetry, of various merit. 4. Excellent analyses of most of the tooks of the New Testament, in 8 vols. 12mo. These still maintain their character. 5. “Meditations for an ecclesiastical retreat of ten days,” 12mo. 6. “A Disserta.­tion on the Gout,” 12mo, 1689. Father Mauduit was candid as a scholar, and exemplary as a minister.

, a person of some celebrity in his time, as a writer of political pamphlets, was the son of Isaac Mauduit, a dissenting minister at Bermondsey, and was horn there in 1708, and was himself educated for the ministry among the diss.enters. After some time, however, he quitted his clerical employment, and became a partner with his brother Jasper Mauduit, as a merchant; and, when that brother died, carried on the business with equal credit and advantage. His first appearance as aw author was in 1760, when he published anonymously a pamphlet entitled “Considerations on the present German war.” It was intended to shew the impropriety of involving this nation in continental wars, and obtained some attention from the public; which the author supported by publishing soon after, “Occasional thoughts oo the present German War.” When Mr. Wilkes published in 1762, “Observations on the Spanish Paper,” the credit of Mr. Mauduit was so far established by the former pamphlets, that many persons ascribed this also to him. In 1763 he was appointed customer of Southampton, and some time after agent for the province of Massachuset’s, which led him to take an active part in the disputes between the American colonies and the mother country. In consequence of this he published, in 1769, his “Short view of the History of the New- England Colonies.” In 1774, he voluntarily took up the cause of the dissenting clergy, in a pamphlet entitled “The Case of the Dissenting Ministers; addressed to the lords spiritual and temporal.” In the same year he published “Letters of governor Hutchinson,” &c. In 1778 and 1779, he produced several severe tracts against sir William and lord Howe; as, “Remarks upon general Howe’s Account of his Proceedings on Long Island,” &c. Also “Strictures on the Philadelphia Mischianza,” &c. And, “Observations upon the conduct of sir William Howe at the White Plains,” &c. In 1781 he again attacked the same brothers, in “Three Letters addressed to lieut-gen. sir William Howe,” &c. and “Three Letters to lord viscount Howe.” In May 1787, he appointed governor of the society among the dissenters for propagating the gospel in foreign parts, but died on the 14th of the ensuing month, at the age of seventy-nine, in Clement’s-lane, Lombard-street, a bachelor, and possessed of an ample fortune. He is said by some to have been the author of a letter to lord Blakeney, on the defence of Minorca in 1757; and some other tracts on political and temporary subjects, which, whatever effect they might have produced at the time, are now sinking fast into oblivion. The historian of Surrey says ofhim, that “his love of liberty, civil <fnd religious, was tempered with that moderation which Christianity inculcates in every branch of conduct. His acquaintance with mankind taught him that impartiality was the best rule of conduct. In the contests for civil liberty he distinguished the intemperate zeal of the Americans, and soon saw the propriety of withdrawing from such as had separated themselves from their allegiance to Great Britain a fund for propagating the gospel among the subjects of this crown, in which he was supported by the opinions of no less lawyers than Scott and Hill. In like manner he tempered the application of his brethren in England for toleration.”

, a celebrated French mathematician and philosopher, was born at St. Malo in 1698, and at first educated there. In 1714 he studied in the college of La Marche, at Paris, where he discovered a strong inclination for mathematics. He fixed, however, on no profession until he arrived at his twentieth year, when he entered into the army, and during the space of five years in which he remained in it, pursued his mathematical studies with great vigour. In 1723 he was received into the royal academy of sciences, and read his first performance, a memoir upon the construction and form of musical instruments. When he commenced his travels, his first visit was to England, and during his residence at London he became a zealous admirer and follower of Newton. His next excursion was to Basil in Switzerland, where he formed a friendship with the celebrated John Bernouilli and his family, which continued till his death. At his return to Paris he applied himself to his favourite studies with greater zeal than ever. And how well he fulfilled the duties of an academician, may be seen in the Memoirs of the academy from 1724 to 1744; where the most sublime questions in the mathematical sciences, received from his hand that elegance, clearness, and precision, so remarkable in all his writings. In 1736 he was sent to the polar circle to measure a degree of the meridian, in order to ascertain the figure of the earth; in which expedition he was accompanied by Messrs. Clairault, Camus, Monnier, Outhier, and Celsus, the celebrated professor of astronomy at Upsal. This business rendered him so famous, that on his return he was admitted a member of almost every academy in Europe.

In 1740 Maupertuis had an invitation from the king of Prussia to go to Berlin; which was too flattering to be refused. His rank among men of letters had not wholly effaced his love for his first profession, that of arms. He followed the king to the field, but at the battle of Molwitz was deprived of the pleasure of being present when victory declared in favour of his royal patron, by a' singular kind of adventure. His horse, during the heat of the action, running away with him, he fell into the hands of the enemy; and was at first but roughly treated by the Austrian hussars, to whom he could not make himself known for want of language; but, being carried prisoner to Vienna, he received such honours from the emperor as never were effaced from his memory. Maupertuis lamented very much the loss of a watch of Mr. Graham’s, the celebrated English artist, which they had taken from him; the emperor, who happened to have another by the same artist, but enriched with diamonds, presented it to him, saying, “the hussars meant only to jest with you: they have sent me your watch, and I return it to you.”

He went soon after to Berlin; but as the reform of the academy which the king of Prussia then meditated was not yet mature, he repaired to Paris, where his affairs called him, and was chosen in 1742 director of the academy of sciences. In 1743 he was received into the French academy; which was the first instance of the same person, being a member of both the academies at Paris at the same time. Maupertuis again assumed the soldier at the siege of Fribourg, and was pitched upon by marshal Coigny and the count d'Argenson to carry the news to the French king of the surrender of that citadel. Maupertuis returned to Berlin in 1744, when a marriage was negociated and brought about by the good offices of the queen mother, between our author and mademoiselle de Borck, a lady of great beauty and merit, and nearly related to M.de Borck, at that time minister of state. This determined him to settle at Berlin, as he was extremely attached to his new spouse, and regarded this alliance as the most fortunate circumstance of his life.

In 1746 Maupertuis was declared, by the king of Prussia, president of the royal academy of sciences at Berlin, and soon after by the same prince was honoured with the order of merit. However, all these accumulated honours and advantages, so far from lessening his ardour for the sciences, seemed to furnish new allurements to labour and application. Not a day passed but he produced some new project or essay for the advancement of knowledge. Nor did he confine himself to mathematical studies only: metaphysics, chemistry, botany, polite literature, all shared his attention, and contributed to his fame. At the same time Jie had, it seems, a strange inquietude of spirit, with a dark atrabilious humour, which rendered him miserable amidst honours and pleasures. Such a temperament did not promise a pacific life; and he was in fact engaged in several quarrels. One of these was with Koenig the professor of philosophy at Franeker, and another more terrible with Voltaire. Maupertuis had inserted in the vohime of Memoirs of the Academy of Berlin for 1746, a discourse upon the laws of motion; which Koenig was not content with attacking, but attributed to Leibnitz. Maupertuis, stung with the imputation of plagiarism, engaged the academy of Berlin to call upon him for his proof; which Koenig failing to produce, his name was struck out of the academy, of which he was a member. Several pamphlets were the consequence of this measure and Voltaire, for some reason or other, engaged in the quarrel against Maupertuis, although they had been apparently upon the most amicable terms. Voltaire upon this occasion exerted all his wit and satire against him; and upon the whole was so much transported beyond what was thought right, that he found it expedient in 1753 to quit the court of Prussia. Our philosopher’s constitution had Jong been considerably impaired by the great fatigues of various kinds in which his active mind had involved him; though, from the amazing hardships he had undergone in his northern expedition, most of his bodily sufferings may be traced. The intense sharpness of the air could only be supported by means of strong liquors; which helped but to lacerate his lungs, and bring on a spitting of blood, which began at least twelve years before he died. Yet still his mind seemed to enjoy the greatest vigour; for the best of his writings were produced, and most sublime ideas developed, during the time of his confinement by sickness, when he was unable to occupy his presidial chair at the academy. He took several journeys to St. Malo during the last years, of his life, for the recovery of his health: and though he always received benefit by breathing his native air, yet still, upon his return to Berlin, his disorder likewise returned with greater violence. His last journey into France was undertaken in 1757; when he was obliged, soon after his arrival there, to quit his favourite retreat at St. Malo, on account of the danger and confusion which that town was thrown into by the arrival of the English in its neighbourhood. From thence he went to Bourdeaux, hoping there to meet with a neutral ship to carry him to Hamburgh, in his way back to Berlin; but, being disappointed in that hope, he went to Toulouse, where he remained seven months. He had then thoughts of going to Italy, in hopes a milder climate would restore him to health but finding himself grow worse, he rather inclined towards Germany, and went to Neufchatel, where for three months he enjoyed the conversation of lord Marischal, with whom he had formerly been much connected. At length he arrived at Basil, October 16, 1758, where he was received by his friend Bernoulli and his family with the utmost tenderness and affection. He at first found himself much better here than he had been at Neufchatel: but this amendment was of short duration; for as the winter approached, his disorder returned, accompanied by new and more alarming symptoms. He languished here many months, during which he was attended by M. de la Condamine; and died in 1759, at sixty-one years of age.

The works which he published were collected into 4 volumes, 8vo, published at Lyons in 1756, where also a new and elegant edition was printed in 1768. These contain the following works: 1. Essay On Cosmology. 2. Discourse on the different Figures of the Stars. 3. Essay on Moral Philosophy. 4. Philosophical reflections upon the Origin of Languages, and the signification of words. 5. Animal Physics, concerning Generation, &c. 6. System of Nature, or the formation of bodies. 7. Letters on various subjects. 8. On the progress of the Sciences. 9. Elements of Geography. 10. Account of the expedition to the Polar Circle, for determining the figure of the Earth; or the measure of the Earth at the Polar Circle. 11. Account of a Journey into the heart of Lapland, to search for an ancient Monument. 12. On the Comet of 1742. 13. Various Academical Discourses, pronounced in the French and Prussian academies. 14. Dissertation upon Languages. 15. Agreement of the different Laws of Nature, which have hitherto appeared incompatible. 16. Upon the Laws of Motion. 17. Upon the Laws of Rest. 18. Nautical Astronomy. 19. On the Parallax of the Moon. 20. Operations for determining the figure of the Earth, and the variations of Gravity. 21. Measure of a Degree of the meridian at the Polar Circle.

Beside these works, Maupertuis was author of a great multitude of interesting papers, particularly those printed in the Memoirs of the Paris and Berlin academies, far too numerous here to mention; viz. in the Memoirs of the academy at Paris, from 1724 to 1749; and in those of the academy of Berlin, from 1746 to 1756.

, grandson of the count de Pontchartrain, who was minister under Louis XIV. was born in 1701, anJ obtained an appointment of secretary at court so early as 1715. He was superintendant of the king’s household in 1718, and of the marine in 1723. In 1738 he was appointed minister of state, and was in all situations full of genius, activity, and sagacity. Being exiled to Bourges in 1749, by the intrigues of a lady very powerful at court, he made no secret of the manner in which he felt that change. “The first day,” said he, “I was piqued, the second I was contented.” When he arrived at the place of his exile, he talked in a lively manner of the dedications he should lose, and of the disappointments of the authors who had wasted their fine phrases upon him. He continued to amuse himself with the pleasures of society, and enjoyed the invariable esteem of many Valuable friends, and of the public. Being recalled to the ministry in 1774, by Louis XVI. who treated him with unbounded confidence, he disdained to revenge any former neglect oy ill offices, and lived rather with the ease of a rich private gentleman, than with the ostentation of a minister. His views of objects were rapid, yet were generally considered as profound; though in recommending the conduct which France pujsued with respect to America, at the time of the revolt of that country, he certainly laid the foundation for the destruction of the French monarchy. He was, however, a man of much public spirit, and one who contributed not a little to the improvement of the French marine. His correspondence was a model of precision, expressing much meaning in very few words. He died at the age of eighty, Nov. 21, 1781. He left some curious “Memoirs,” of which there are three editions, published in 1790 and 1792, 4 vols. 8vo, by the editor Soulaire.

, an eminent French accoucheur, was born at Paris, where he applied with great industry to the study and practice of surgery, for many years, especially in the great hospital, the Hotel-Dieu. He had already acquired there so much experience in the obstetrical department before he commenced public practice, that he rose almost at once to the head of his profession. His reputation was farther increased by his writings, and maintained by his prudent conduct and acknowledged skill during a series of years; after which he quitted practice entirely, and retired into the country, where he died Oct. 17, 1709, at an advanced age. His works, which are more useful for the facts than the reasoning they contain, are, 1. “Traite des Maladies des Femmes grosses, et de celles qui sont accouchées,” Paris, 1688, 4to, which has been often reprinted, and translated into Latin, as well as into most' of the modern European languages. 2. “Aphorismes touchant l'Accouchement, la Grossesse, et les Maladies des Femraes,” ibid. 1694, a summary of the preceding. 3. “Observations sur la Grossesse et l'Accouchement des Femmes, et sur leurs Maladies, et celles des Enfans nouveaux ne*s,” ibid. 1695, 4to. This may be considered as a second volume of the first treatise. 4. “Dernieres Observations sur les Maladies des Femmes . grosses et accouchées,” 1708, ibid. 4to which contains an additional collection of cases. The whole of these works were collected and reprinted together after his death, in 1712, and subsequently, with figures.

, a celebrated Italian mathematician, was born in 1494 at Messina, where he afterwards taught mathematics with great success. In that employment he was particularly admired, for the astonishing clearness with which he expressed himself, making the most difficult questions easy, by the manner in which he explained them. He had a penetrating mind, and a prodigious memory. He was abbe of Santa Maria del Porto, in Sicily; but, as mathematicians in his time were generally supposed to be able to read the stars, he could not resist the temptation of assuming to himself such powers; and delivered some predictions to don Juan of Austria, for which, as he happened to guess rightly, he obtained the credit of being a prophet, besides considerable rewards. He died July 21, 1575, at the age of eightyone. His principal works are, 1. An edition of the “Spherics of Theodosius,” 1558, folio. 2. “Emendatio et restitutio Conicorum Apollonii Pergasi,” 1654, folio. 3. “Archimedis monumenta omnia,” 1685, folio. 4. “Euclidis phenomena,” Rome, 1591, 4 to. 5. “Martyrologium, 1566, 4to. 6.” Sinicarum rerum Compendium.“7. Also, in 1552,” Rimes,“in 8vo. He published also, 8.” Opuscula Mathematica,“1575, 4to. 9.” Arithmeticorum libri duo," 1575. These, with a few more, form the list of his works, most of which are upon subjects of a similar nature.

, a counsellor in the parliament of Toulouse, where he was born in 1580, and afterwards president of the court of aids at Montpelier, died in 165O, at the age of seventy, with the reputation of being one of the best Greek scholars of his time. We have by him some notes on Harpocration, Paris, 1614, 4to. 2. Some remarks on a treatise on mountains and rivers, attributed to Plutarch. 3. And some “Opuscula,” which display him in the light of a judicious critic.

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

, There are two saints of this name, of whom some notice may be taken; the oldest Maximus, of Turin, so called because he was bishop of that city in the fifth century, was eminent for his learning and piety. Many of his “Homilies” remain, some of which bear the name of St. Ambrose, St. Augustin, and Eusebius of messa, in the Library of the fathers. The other St. Maximus was an abbot, and confessor in the seventh century, born of an ancient and noble family at Constantinople. He warmly opposed the heresy of the Monothelites, and died in prison, August 13, 662, in consequence of what he had suffered on that occasion. We have a commentary of his on the books attributed to St. Dionysius the Areopagite, and several other works, which father Combesis published, 1675, 2 vols. folio; and they are also in the Library of the fathers.

, usually called Maximus Tyrius, to distinguish him from several other Maximuses of antiquity, though chiefly distinguished by his eloquence, has obtained some degree of celebrity as a philosopher. According to Suidas, he lived under Commodus; according to Eusebius and Syncellus, under Antoninus Pius, in the second century; perhaps he flourished under Antoninus, and reached the time of Commodus, in both whose reigns he is said to have made a journey to Rome, but spent his life chiefly in Greece. We have extant of Maximu> Tyrius forty-one “Dissertations, upon various arguments;” a manuscript copy of which was first brought out of Greece into Italy by Janus Lascaris, and presented to Lorenzo de Medici. From this copy a Latin translation was made, and published by Cosmus Paccius, archbishop of Florence, in 1519. The work was then published in Greek by Henry Stephens, in 1557 in Greek and Latin by Daniel Heinsius, in 1607 byJ. Davies, of Cambridge, in 1703; by Markland in 1740, 4to; and by Reiske, in 1774, 8vo. The French have two good translations by Formey, 1764, and by Dounous, 1802. Isaac Casaubon, in the epistle dedicatory of his “Commentaries upon Persius,” calls Maximus Tyrius “mellitissimus Platonicorum;” and Peter Petit (in his “Misc. Observat.” lib. i. c. 20.) represents him as “auctorem imprimis elegantem in Philosophia, ac disertum.” He has spoken a good deal of himself in his thirtyseventh dissertation, and seemingly in a style of panegyric. Upon this account his editor Davies has accused him of vanity, but Fabricius has defended him by observing, that Davies did not sufficiently attend to Maximus’s purpose in speaking thus of himself; “which was,” he says, “not at all with a view of praising himself, but to encourage and promote the practice of those lessons in philosophy, which they heard from him with so much applause.” These dissertations are for the most part written upon Platonic principles, but sometimes lean towards scepticism.

, a French historian of the seventeenth century, was a protestant, and passed the chief part of his life in the courts of Germany. He died September 22, 1681. He calls himself in the titles of his works Seigneur de Sallettes, chevalier of the order of St. Michael, counsellor secretary to the elector of Mentz, and counsellor to the duke of Wirtemberg, titles which, Marchand remarks, do not very well agree with that of “teacher of the French language in the college of Tubingen.” His writings are now considered as feebly written, and are little known or consulted, but they had a degree of reputation in their day. The principal of them are, 1. “Etat de l'Empire,” State of the Empire, or an abridgment of the public law of Germany, 12 mo. 2. “Science des Princes,” which is an edition of the political considerations of Gabriel Naudee; with reflections added by du May, 1683, 8vo. 3. “The prudent Voyager,” 1681, 12mo.

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

Besides these plays, we have several translations of his from some Latin authors, and other original compositions also in verse. Among the former are, “Virgil’s Georgics,” with annotations, published in 1622; to which are subjoined, selected epigrams from Martial; but he acquired most reputation by his translation of “Lucan’s Pharsalia,” and his own continuation of that poem to the death of Julius Caesar, both in Latin and English. The translation of the Pharsalia was first printed in 1627, and the continuation of it in English in 1630. The Latin continuation of it was printed at Leydenin 1640, 12mo, under this title, “Supplementum Lucani, libri viii. Authore Thoma Maio, Anglo:” to which edition are prefixed Latin commendatory poems to him by Boxhornius, Nicholas Heinsius, sir Richard Fanshaw, and others. It is certainly much to this author’s honour, that his Latin “Supplement” was reprinted several times after with some good editions of Lucan abroad; and, it is probable, that his character would not have stood so low with posterity as it does at present, if certain political deviations afterwards had not made him obnoxious to the party which at length prevailed. Dr. Johnson preferred the Latin poetry of May to that of Cowley and Milton; an opinion which Mr. Thomas Warton controverts*. He was concerned also in the translation of two books written by the celebrated Scotch wit John Barclay, namely, his “Argenis,” and “Icon animorum.” Among his original compositions are, “The reign of king Henry II. written in seven books, by his majesty’s command, a poem: to which is added, in prose, The description of Henry II. with a short survey of the changes of his reign; also, The single and comparative characters of Henry and Richard, his sons,” 1633, 8vo. In 1635 he published, by the king’s special command also, an historical poem in seven books, entitled “The victorious reign of Edward Jh.” On these compositions some recent critics, especially Mr. Headley, have bestowed high praise; but we cannot think their merit very conspicuous, unless in detached parts.

tylist, and was sufficiently accom- archetype, which, it may be presumed,

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

A few months after the publication of “The Breviary,” the 13th of Nov. 1650, May died, at the age of fifty-five years. He went well to rest over night, after a chearful bottle as usual, and died in his sleep before morning: upon which his death was imputed to his tying his night-cap too close under his cheeks and chin, which caused his suffocation; but the facetious Andrew Marvell has written a long poem of an hundred lines, to make him a martyr of Bacchus, and die by the force of good wine. He was interred near Camden, in Westminster-abbey, which caused Fuller to say that “if he were a biassed and partial writer, yet he lieth buried near a good and true historian indeed.” Soon after the restoration, his body, with those of several others, was dug up, and buried in a pit in St. Margaret’s church-yard; and his monument, which was erected by the appointment of parliament, was taken down and thrown aside.

, a Lutheran divine, was born at Leipsic in 1650. He was deeply skilled in the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin languages, and was a professor, first at Wittemburg, then at Hamburgh, and afterwards at Stetin in Pomerania, where he became the general superintendant of the churches of that province. Fabricius dedicated the first edition of his “Bibliotheca Latina” to him at Hamburgh in 1696; which Saxius says is the only thing he knows to his honour; but why Saxius speaks thus slightingly of him does not appear. He himself published, 1. in 1697, “De fide Baronii et Bellarmini, ipsis Pontificiis ambigua,” “on the faith of Baronius and Bellarmin, which is suspicious even to the Papists,” printed at Amsterdam, in 8vo. 2. A “Bibliotheca Biblica,” in which he examines the characters of the various authors, Jewish, Roman Catholic, and Protestant, who have commented upon the Bible. The best edition of this work was printed at Rostock, in 1713, 4to. 3. A treatise on the manner of studying the Scripture, 4to. 4. A treatise “de Osculo pedum Pontificis Romani;”" on kissing the Pope’s foot, now become scarce, Leipsic, 1714, 4to. 5. Many dissertations on important passages in the Bible. Mayer died in 1712. His learning was undoubtedly great, but is not thought to be set off to advantage by his style, which is dry and harsh.

, one of the greatest astronomers and mechanics of the last century, was born at Maspach in the duchy of Wirtemberg, in 1723. He taught himself mathematics, and at the age of fourteen designed machines and instruments, which was his father’s profession, with the greatest dexterity and justness. These pursuits did not hinder him from cultivating the belles lettres: he acquired the Latin tongue, and wrote it with elegance. In 1750, the university of Gottingen chose him for their mathematical professor; and every year of his short, but glorious life, henceforward was marked with some considerable discoveries in geometry and astronomy. He published several works on those sciences, that are all reckoned excellent; and some are inserted in the second volume of the “Memoirs of the University of Gottingen.” His labours seem to have exhausted him; for he died worn out in 1762.

His table of refractions, deduced from his astronomical observations, very nicely agrees with that of Doctor Bradley; and his theory of the moon, and astronomical tables and precepts, were so well esteemed, that they were rewarded by the English Board of longitude, with the premium of three thousand pounds, which sum was paid to his widow after his death. These tables and precepts were published by the Board of longitude in 1770. Besides these, he published, 1. “A new and general method of resolving all Geometrical Problems, by geometrical lines,” printed at Eslingen, 1741, in 4to. 2. “A Mathematical Atlas, in which all mathematical science is comprised in sixty tables,” Augsburg, 1748, folio. 3. “Account of a Lunar Globe constructed by the Cosmographical Society of Nuremberg, from new observations,” 1750, 4to. All these were written in German. He published also many very exact maps. A first volume of his works in folio was published. at Gottingen in 1775.

, baron of Albone, first physician to their Britannic majesties James I. and Charles I. was the son of Louis de Mayerne, author of a “General History of Spain,” and of the “Monarchic aristo-democratique,” dedicated to the States-general. His mother was Louisa, the daughter of Antoine le Masson, treasurer of the army to Francis I. and Henry II. in Piedmont. Louis de Mayerne retired to Geneva about the end of 1572, after having had two houses at Lyons pulled down on account of his religion. On Sept. 28, 1573, his son Theodore was born, and had for his godfather Theodore Beza. He learnt polite literature in his own country, and he was thence sent to Heidelberg, where he stayed some years; after which, as he had made choice of physic for his profession, he went to Montpellier, and there he took the degree of bachelor in 1596, and of doctor in 1597. Thence he went to Paris, where, by way of introducing himself into practice, he gave lectures in anatomy to the young surgeons, and in pharmacy to the apothecaries. He acquired reputation by his prescriptions, and became known to Riverius, first physician to Henry IV. who recommended him so effectually to the king, that he made him one of his physicians in ordinary; and, in 1600, appointed him to attend Henry duke of Rohan, in his embassies from France to the princes of Germany and Italy. Upon his return, he acquitted himself in the exercise of his office very much to his credit, and was in high favour with the king, who promised to do great things for him, provided he would change his religion; and, it is said, notwithstanding that obstacle, would have appointed him his first physician, if the Jesuits, who were aware of it, had not prevented him by the means of queen Mary de Medicis. Of this circumstance and intended favour, Mayerne knew nothing till he learnt it, in 1642, in England, from Caesar duke of Vendosme, a natural son of France. In 1607, he had under his care an Englishman of quality, who after his recovery carried him into England, where he had a private conference with king James. He then returned to Paris, and remained there till after the assassination of Henry IV. in May 1610. In the following year, the king of England caused him to be invited by his ambassador, to serve in quality of first physician to himself and his queen, and gave him a patent, sealed with the great seal of England; in which office he served the whole royal family with great honour and approbation, till the day of his death. He was admitted to the degree of doctor in both universities, and into the college of physicians, and treated with the greatest respect by these learned bodies. He incurred some obloquy on account of the fatal sickness of Henry prince of Wales, in October 1612; in the treatment of which he differed in opinion from the other physicians, with respect to the use of blood-letting. But his conduct obtained the approbation of the king and council, of which certificates, couched in the most satisfactory terms, were given him. He received the honour of knighthood from James, in 1624; and on the accession of Charles I. he was appointed first physician to him and his queen, and rose to high favour, particularly with the latter. During the civil commotions he still adhered to the royal party, for he was appointed first physician to Charles II. after the death of his father, although the office was not merely nominal. Thus he enjoyed the extraordinary honour of serving four kings successively in his medical capacity; and during all this period he -was most extensively employed by persons of the first rank in this kingdom, by which he accumulated a large fortune. He made an exact collection of his prescriptions. He composed a very curious dispensatory of medicines, galenical and chemical but never published any of his works, except an “Apology” for himself, against the faculty of physic at Paris, who had attacked him for his application to the practice of chemistry, which was greatly cried down by the physicians of that place. Guy Patin has given an account of this dispute; in which he has shewn himself greatly prejudiced against Mayerne, and calls him a quack, on account of his pretensions to chemistry. He died March 15, 1655, at Chelsea, of the effects of bad wine, a slow, which, says Granger, the weakness of old age rendered a quick poison. He foretold the time of his death to his friends, with whom he had been moderately drinking at a tavern in the Strand; and it happened according to his prediction. He was buried at St. Martin’s-in-the-tields. He left behind him one only daughter, who brought her great fortune in marriage to the marquis de Montpouvillan, grandson of the marshal duke de la Force; but she died in childbed at the Hague, in 1661.

His works, which contain some valuable facts and observations, not, however, unmixed with erroneous doctrines and superstitions, were published by Dr. Joseph Brown, at London, in 1701, fol. divided into two books. The first contains his “Consilia, epistolrc, & observationes” the second his “Pharmacopoeia, variteque medicamentorum formulae.” At the beginning of the book is placed the author’s portrait, such as it was in his 82d year, and under the print are words to this purpose: “Theo. Turquet. de Mayerne, knight, by birth a Frenchman, by religion a Protestant, and by dignity a baron; in his profession, a second Hippocrates: and, what has very seldom happened to any but himself, first physician to three kings; in erudition unequalled; in experience second to none; and, as the result of all these advantages, celebrated far and near.”

The library at the college of physicians was partly given to that society by sir Theodore Mayerne. Granger says, that some valuable papers by him, written in elegant Latin, are in Ashmole’s Museum, and that they were read by Dr. Smyth, an eminent physician of Oxford, who informed him that they contain many curious particulars, show the state of physic in the reign of Charles I. and the first invention of several medicines. Lord Orford, in his “Anecdotes of Painting,” says that the famous Petitot owed the perfection of his colouring in enamel to some chemical secrets, communicated to him by sir Theodore Mayerne.

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

, a learned English lawyer, the eldest son of Alexander Maynard, esq. of Tavistock, in Devonshire, was born thereabout 1602. In 1618 he entered as a commoner of Exeter college, Oxford, where, as we have often seen in the case of gentlemen of the law, he took only one degree in arts, and then went to the Middle Temple. After the usual routine of study he was called to the bar, and in 1640 obtained a seat in parliament for Totness. The part he took in the political contests of the day, procured him to be appointed one of the managers of the evidence against the earl of Strafford, and that against archbishop Laud. Yet in 1644 he was appointed, with Bulstrodte Whitlocke, at the particular desire of the lord chancellor of Scotland, and other commissioners from that kingdom, to consult with them and general Fairfax concerning the best method of proceeding against Cromwell as an incendiary between the two kingdoms. He was also one of the laymen nominated in the ordinance of the Lords and Commons to sit with the assembly of Divines, whose object was to establish the presbyterian form of church government in England. Notwithstanding this, we find him in 1647 opposing the violence of the parliament-army, for which he and serjeant Glynn were sent to the Tower; and when the parliament voted that no more addresses should be sent to the king, he told them that by such a vote they dissolved themselves. He even went farther, and after being secluded from his seat in the House of Commons for two months, he broke in among them, and pleaded for the life of the king with such strength of reasoning, that Cromwell several times demanded that he should be brought to the bar of the House.

His abilities, or that charm with which an independent mind never fails to conciliate its enemies, seem to have preserved him while thus apparently “serving two masters;” for in 1653, he was by writ called to the rank of serjeant at law; and in May of the same year was made, by patent, Cromwell’s serjeant. Here, too, his love of justice predominated, and he zealously pleaded the cause of a merchant of London, who had the boldness to oppose paying a tax imposed by Oliver without the consent of parliament. For this Oliver sent serjeant Maynard, serjeant Twysden, and counsellor Wadham Wyndham, to the Tower; nor were they released without making submission in some form or other. Maynard was afterwards continued serjeant to Richard Cromwell during his short period of usurpation.

Notwithstanding these many compliances with the parliamentary and Oliverian interest, his conduct must, upon the whole, have appeared in a favourable light to Charles II. as, immediately after the restoration, he was called again to be serjeant at law, in June 1660, and made the king’s serjeant Nov. 9 following, to which his majesty added the honour of knighthood. He was also nominated to be one of the judges, but did not chuse to give up his practice, which is said to have been very lucrative, for an office which at that time depended on the king’s pleasure. Whitlocke tells us that as far back as 1647 he got in one circuit seven hundred pounds, which was thought to be a larger sum than any of the profession had ever got before. Whitlocke indeed gives this as a report, but there is no doubt that his practice was most extensive, and his knowledge in law universally acknowledged.

In 1661 he was chosen member of parliament for Beralston in Devonshire, and soon after, disliking the measures of the king’s ministers, engaged in opposition to them. He appears also to have sat, either for Beralston or Plymouth, in every parliament until the revolution. In 1679-80, he was one of the committee appointed to manage the evidence against William Viscount Stafford, impeached of high treason for being concerned in the popish plot. He was afterwards a member of the convention which brought about the revolution, and was active in promoting that event, ably supporting the parliamentary vote that the king had abdicated, and that the throne was thereby vacant.“He was now about eighty-seven years old, yet possessed his original vigour of understanding. Burnet has recorded a bon mot of his, on his first waiting on the prince of Orange, afterwards William III. which has been often repeated to his praise. On the prince noticing his great age, and that he had outlived all the men of the law of his time, Sir John Maynard replied, that” he had like to have out-lived the law itself, if his highness had not come over." The old serjeant had forgot that he had once seen the law as near its dissolution as ever it was in king James’s time.

In March 1689, sir John was appointed one of the lords commissioners of the great seal of England, and next year was chosen member of parliament for Plymouth; but being now very infirm, he resigned his commissioner’s place, and returned to his house at Gunnersbury, near Ealing, where he died Oct. 9, 1690. He was thrice married. Elizabeth, his first wife, was buried at Ealing in 1654-5. Jane, his second wife (daughter of Cheney Selherst, esq. and relict of Edward Austen, esq.) was buried there in 1668. His last wife, who was daughter of Ambrose Upton, canon of Christ- church, Oxford, and relict of sir Charles Vermuyden, survived him many years, and died in 1721, being then the widow of Henry earl of Suffolk.

Serjeant Maynard was esteemed a very able advocate, and has been called the best old book lawyer of his time. All parties, says Mr. Lysons, seem to have been willing to employ him, and he seems to have been equally willing to be employed by all. Some of his reports and speeches have been printed. There is also a report of his of a very singular case of murder, in “The Works of the Learned,” for August 1739, communicated by Dr. Rawlinson. Bishop Warburton has not inaptly characterised serjeant Maynard by a comparison with Whitlocke. They were both lawyers of family, and in the long parliament; both of the presbyterian faction; both learned and eminent in their profession; moderate, sage, and steady. So far they agreed. In this they differed: Maynard had strong parts with a serious modesty; Whitlocke was weak and vain: and by these defects only, more self-interested. A sense of honour made Maynard stick to the presbyterian faction, and to fall with them; but, as he had much phlegm and caution, not, like Hollis and Stapleton, to fall for them. So that he was never marked out by the independents for their first sacrifices. On the contrary, Whitlocke forsook his party in distress but as he had the other’s moderation, it was by slow and gentle degrees and so, as it happened, decently. Maynard, by adhering steadily, but not violently, to the party he set out with, was reverenced by all and had he not been more intent on the affairs of his profession, than on public business, might have become considerable by station. “He went,” adds Warburton, “through the whole reign of Charles and James II. with the same steady pace, and the same adherence to his party; but by his party, 1 rather mean presbytery for the sake of civil liberty, than to civil liberty for the sake of presbytery.”

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

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

After his return from France, he was made one of the commissioners of the customs, in which office he distinguished himself by his skill and fidelity. Of the latter, Oldmixon gives a remarkable instance, in his treatment of a person who solicited to be a tide-waiter. This man, understanding that Mr. May 11 waring had the best interest at the board of any of the commissioners, with the lords of the treasury, left a letter for him with a purse of fifty guineas, desiring his favour towards obtaining the place for which he applied. After that, he delivered a petition to the board, which was read, and several of the commissioners spoke on the subject; upon which Mr. Maynwaring took out the purse of fifty guineas, and the letter, and told them, that, “as long as he -could help it, that man should never have this nor any other place.” In the beginning of queen Anne’s reign, he was made auditor of the imprests, by the lord -treasurer Godolphin, an office worth 2000l. per annum in a time of business. In the parliament which met in 1705, he was chosen a burgess for Preston in Lancashire. He died at St. Alban’s, Nov. 13, 1712, leaving Mrs. Oldfield, the celebrated actress, his executrix. This lady had lived with him as his mistress, and by her he had a son, named Arthur Maynwaring. He divided his estate, which did not amount to much more than 3000l. equally between that child, Mrs. Oldfield, and his sister. He published a great number of compositions in verse and prose, which gained him credit and reputation. Sir Richard Steele dedicated to him the first volume of the Tatler. Even his adversaries could not deny him merit. Thus the Examiner, his antagonist in politics, allowed that he wrote with “a tolerable spirit, and in a masterly style.” He was severely reflected upon for his will, particularly by the “Examiner;” in answer to which, there came out a paper, two months after his death, in defence of him; and this defence was in a few days followed by another, in a letter to a friend, supposed to be written by Robert Walpole, esq. In 1715 Mr. Oldmixon published “The Life and Posthumous Works of Arthur Maynwaring, esq. containing several original pieces and translations, in prose and verse, never before published,” 8vo, dedicated to sir Robert Walpole, of whom Mr. Maynwaring was a firm adherent, and, according to Mr. Coxe, the first who predicted the figure that statesman would one day make. This volume contains many curious particulars of the political history of the times; but, like all Oldmixon’s writings, must be read with caution.

, a very learned and ingenious physician of the seventeenth century, appears to have been born in Cornwall, in 1645, was a scholar of Wadham college, Oxford, and a probationary fellow of All Souls’ college. He took his degrees in civil law, but studied and practised physic; and principally at Bath, in the summer. He died at the house of an apothecary in York-street, Covent-garden, in September 1679, and was buried in the church of that parish. He published, “Tractatus quinque medicophysici, 1. de sale nitro, et spiritu nitro-aerio; 2. de re spiratione; 3. de respiratione foetus in utero, et ovo; 4. de motu musculari et spiritibus animalibus; 5. de Rachitide.” These were published together at Oxford, in 1674, 8vo; but there is an edition of two of them, “de respiratione,” and “de Rachitide,” published together at Leyden, in 1671. The fame of this author has been lately renewed and extended by Dr. Beddoes, who published in 179O, “Chemical Experiments and Opinions, extracted from a work published in the last century,” 8vo, in which he gives to Mayow the highest credit as a chemist, and ascribes to him some of the greatest modern discoveries respecting air; giving many extracts from the three first of his treatises. His chief discovery was, that dephlogisticated air (or as he called it, with Scheele) fire-air, exists in the nitrous acid, and in the atmosphere; which he proved by such decisive experiments, as to render it impossible to explain how Boyle and Hales could avoid availing themselves, in their researches into air, of so capital a discovery. Mayow also relates his manner of passing aeriform fluids under water, from vessel to vessel, which is generally believed to be a new art. He did not collect dephlogisticated air in vessels, and transfer it from one jar to another, but he proved its existence by finding substances that would burn in vacuo, and in water when mixed with nitre; and after animals had breathed and died in vessels filled with atmospheric air, or after fire had been extinguished in them, there was a residuum, which was the part of the air unfit for respiration, and for supporting fire; and he further shewed, that nitrous acid cannot be formed, but by exposing the substances that generate it to the atmosphere. Mayow was undoubtedly no common man, especially since, if the above dates are right, he was only thirty-four at the time of his death. But he was not so unknown as Dr. Beddoes supposed, for, since the repetition of the same discovery by Priestley and Scheele, reference has frequently been made by chemists to Mayow, as the original inventor; though no other person appears so closely to have examined his work as that writer. At the same time it appears, that with the partiality of a commentator, he has exalted his author unwarrantably at the expence of other chemists, and to a height, which, without the aid of strained interpretations, cannot be justified by the text.

, cardinal, and first minister of state in France, was born at Piscina, in the province of Abruzzo, in Italy, on July 14, 1602. His abilities enabled him to make a considerable figure, even in his early years, whilst he was studying the belles lettres, in which he had the happiness of being instructed by the abbe Jerome of Colonna, who afterwards became a cardinal. This illustrious person went to reside in the university of Alcala in Spain, whither he was followed by Mazarin, who applied himself to the law, and at his return to Italy, took his doctor’s degree. He went afterwards to the court of Rome, where he became acquainted with cardinal Sacchetti, whom Urban VIII. sent into Lombardy. It was through his means, that Mazarin was instructed in every particular relating to the interest of the difff rent princes who were then at war respecting Cassel and Montserrat. Soon after this, the cardinal Antonio Barberini, nephew to the pope, came into the Milanese and Piedmont, in the character of legate, to conclude a peace. Mazarin embraced his cause so warmly, that he was ordered to remain upon the spot with the nuncio James Pancirole, and to assist him in his endeavours to conclude this great affair. He here scrutinized closely the designs of the French, the imperialists, the Spaniards, the duke of Mantua, and the duke of Savoy; and took such measures as might best reconcile and strengthen their various interests. When it happened that peace had been concluded at Ratisbon on the 3d of October, but the French and Spaniards refused to accept it in Italy, Mazarin, who perceived that By such an opposition his care would have proved nugatory, sought for new expedients to render the peace general, and to prevent these two armies from coming to an engagement. The Spaniards, who were besieging Cassel, had made entrenchments for six miles round, and were determined vigorously to defend themselves against the French, who approached extremely near, with an intention to force their lines. On Oct. 26, 1630, the Spaniards waited only for the signal to fire, and the forlorn hope of the French army had been drawn out to force their lines; when Mazarin, after offering an accommodation in many forms, quitted the Spanish trenches, and, riding on a full gallop towards the French, waved his hat to them, crying out, “Peace! peace!” He then addressed himself to the commander in chief, the marshal duke de Schomberg, and gave in such proposals as were accepted by the generals, and followed by the peace concluded in the April following. The nuncio Pancirole and Mazarin were joint agents for the pope; but all the credit of the negociation was given to the latter.