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

Sir Gilbert Eliott, of Stobbs, had nine sons, of whotn our general was the youngest; and two daughters. His eldest brother, sir John Eliott, left the title and estate to his son sir Francis Eliott, nephew to the general. The general was born about the year 1718, and received thefirst rudiments of his education under a private tutor retained at the family seat. At an early age he was sent to the university of Leydcn, where he made a rapid progress in classical learning, and spoke with elegance and fluency the German and French languages. Being designed for a military life, he was sent from thence to the celebrated military school at La Fere in Picardy. This school was rendered the most famous in Europe by the great Vauban, under whom it was conducted. It was afterwards committed to the management and care of the comte d'Houroville. Here it was that the foundation was laid of that knowledge of tactics in all its branches, and particularly in the arts of engineering and fortification, which afterwards so greatly distinguished this officer. He completed his military course on the continent by a tour for the purpose of seeing in practice what he had been studying in thetsry, Prussia was the model for discipline, and he continued for some time as a volunteer in this service. Such were the steps taken by the young men of fashion in that day to accomplish themselves for the service of their country. Many of his contemporaries were then similarly engaged, nobly abandoning the enjoyments of ease and luxury at home, for the opportunity of seeing actual service.

In 1601, Elizabeth held a conference with the marquis de Rosni, who is better known in history as s the celebrated Sully, for the purpose of establishing, in concurrence with England, a new system of European power, with a view of controlling the vast influence of the house of Austria, and producing a lasting peace. The queen coincided with his projects, and the French minister departed in admiration of the solidity and enlargement of her political views. The queen, having suppressed an insurrection in Ireland, and obliged all the Spanish troops sent to its assistance to quit the island, she turned her thoughts towards relieving the burdens of her subjects; she abolished a number of monopolies, and became extremely popular. But the execution o her favourite, the earl of Essex, gave a fatal blow to her happiness. When she learnt from the countess of Nottingham, that he had solicited her pardon, which had been concealed from her, she at first became furious with rage, and when the violence of anger subsided, she fell into the deepest and most incurable melancholy, rejecting all consolation, and refusing food and sustenance of every kind. She remained for days sullen and immoveable, “feeding,” says the historian, “her thoughts on her afflictions, and declaring life and existence an insufferable burden to her.” Few words she uttered, and they were all expressive of some inward grief, which she cared not to reveal: but sighs and groans were the chief vent which she gave to her despondency, and which, though they discovered her sorrows, were never able to ease or assuage them. Ten days and nights she lay upon the carpet, leaning on cushions which her maids brought her, and her physicians could not persuade her to allow herself to be put to bed, much less to make trial of any remedies which they prescribed to her. Her anxious mind at last had so long preyed on her frail body, that her end was visibly approaching; and the council being assembled, sent the keeper, admiral, and secretary, to know her will with regard to her successor. She answered with a faint voice, that, as she had held a regal sceptre, she desired no other than a royal successor. Cecil requesting her to explain herself more particularly, she subjoined, that she would have a king to succeed her, and who should that be, but her nearest kinsman, the king of Scots Being then advised by the archbishop of Canterbury to fix her thoughts upon God, she replied, that she did so, nor did her mind in the least wander from him. Her voice soon after left her her senses failed she fell into a lethargic slumber, which continued some hours, and she expired gently, without farther struggle or convulsion, in the 70th year of her age, and forty-fifth of her reign.

Referring to lord Orford, &c. for a catalogue of her translations from the French, her prayers and meditations, her speeches in parliament, and her letters, which last are dispersed in vast numbers through a variety of collections, we may remark that education and principle led her to favour the reformation; nor could she hesitate on the subject, but acted with caution, not to alarm the adherents to popery by too explicit a declaration of her sentiments, and yet taking care to afford early indications of her favourable views to the cause, some of them displayed in a manner pleasing and ingenious. At the time of her coronation, when she was solemnly conducted through London, a boy, who personated Truth, was let down from one of the triumphal arches, and presented her with a copy of the Bible, which she received in the most gracious manner, placing it in her bosom, and declaring, that amidst all the costly testimonies which the citizens had that day afforded of their attachment, this present was by far most precious and acceptable.

, daughter of Peter the great, by the revolution of 1741, renewed in her person the line of that monarch on the throne of Russia. Elizabeth was born in 1709, and when arrived at years of maturity, was extremely admired for her great personal attractions. Her beauty, as well as her exalted rank, and large dowry, occasioned her several offers, none of which, however, took effect; and she died in celibacy. During the life of her father Peter I. a negotiation had commenced for her marriage with Lewis XV. but although not seriously adopted by the court of France, it was never relinquished until the daughter of Stanislaus, titular king of Poland, was publicly affianced to the young monarch. By the will of Catharine, Elizabeth was betrothed to Charles Augustus, bishop of Lubec, duke of Sleswick and Holstein, and brother to the king of Sweden; but he died before the completion of the ceremony. In the reign of Peter II. she was demanded by Charles margrave of Anspach in 1741, by the Persian tyrant Kouli Kan; and at the time of the revolution, the regent Ann endeavoured to force her to espouse prince Louis of Brunswick, for whom she entertained a settled aversion. From the period of her accession she renounced all' thoughts of the connubial state, and adopted her nephew Peter. Her dislike to marriage, however, certainly did not proceed from any rooted aversion to the other sex; for she would freely and frequently own to her confidants, that she was never happy but when she was in love; if we may dignify by that name a capricious passion ever changing its object. The same characteristic warmth of temper hurried her no less to the extremes of devotion: she was scrupulously exact in her annual confessions at Easter of the wanderings of her heart; in expressing the utmost contrition for her frequent transgressions; and in punctually adhering both in public and private to the minutest ceremonies and ordinances of the church. With respect to her disposition and turn of mind, she is generally styled the humane Elizabeth, as she made a vow upon her accession to inflict no capital punishments during her reign; and is reported to have shed tears upon the news of every victory gained by her troops, from the reflection that it could not have been obtained without great bloodshed. But although no criminal was formally executed in public, yet the state prisons were filled with wretched sufferers, many of whom, unheard of and unknown, perished in clamp and unwholesome dungeons: the state inquisition, or secret committee appointed to judge persons suspected of high treason, had constant occupation during her reign many upon the slightest surmises were tortured in secret many underwent the knoot, and expired under the infliction. But the transaction which reflects the deepest disgrace upon her reign, was the public punishment of two ladies of fashion; the countesses Bestuchef and Lapookin: each received fifty strokes of the knoot in the open square of Petersburg: their tongues were cut out; and they were banished into Siberia. One of these ladies, Madame Lapookin, esteemed the handsomest woman in Russia, was accused of carrying on a secret correspondence with the French ambassador; but her real crime was, her having commented too freely on the amours of the empress. Even the bare recital of such an affecting scene, as that of a woman of great beauty and high rank publicly exposed and scourged by the common executioner, must excite the strongest emotions of horror; and forbid us to venerate the memory of a princess, who, with such little regard to her own sex, could issue those barbarous commands. But let us at the same time lament the inconsistency of human nature; and, in considering the character of Elizabeth, let us not deny that her heart, perhaps naturally benevolent, was eventually corrupted by power, and steeled with suspicion; and that although mercy might predominate whenever it did not interfere with her passions and prejudices; yet she by no means deserves the appellation of humane, the most noble attribute of a sovereign when it interposes to temper and mitigate the severity of justice. Elizabeth died in 1761, in the twenty-first year of her reign, and in the fifty-third year of her age; she expired in December (the 25th), the same month in which she was born, and in which she acceded to the throne. It is asserted on unquestionable authority, that it was impossible to obtain this tzarina’s consent for the execution of a felon who had even committed the most horrid species of premeditated murder, and that the master of the police used secretly to order the executioner to knoot to death those delinquents who were found guilty of the most atrocious crimes. It is a pity that she did not reserve her humanity, which in this instance was cruelty to her people, for more respectable objects. By way of conclusion to the present article, it will not be unapt to add the following anecdote, especially as it must at the same time give pleasure to the reader. Although the sovereign of this empire is absolute in the most unlimited sense of the word; yet the prejudice of the Russians in regard to the necessity of torture (and a wise legislator will always respect popular prejudices, be they ever so absurd and unreasonable) was so deeply rooted by immemorial usage, that it required great circumspection in the present tzarina not to raise discontents by an immediate abolition of that inhuman practice. Accordingly, the cautious manner in which it was gradually suppressed, discovered no less judgment than benevolence. In 17C2, Catherine II. soon after her accession, took away the power of inflicting torture from the vayvodes, or inferior justices, by whom it had been shamefully abused. In 1767, a secret order was issued to the judges in the several provinces, that whenever they should think torture requisite to force a criminal to confession, they should draw up the general articles of the charge, and lay the case before the governor of the province for his consideration: and all the governors had received previous directions to determine the case according to the principles laid down in the third question of the tenth chapter of her majesty’s instructions for a code of laws; wherein torture is proved to be no less useless than cruel. This, therefore, was a tacit abolition of torture, which has been since formally and publicly annulled. The prohibition of this horrid species of judicature, throughout the vast dominions of the Russian empire, forms a memorable aera in the annals of humanity.

, a physician of Prussia, was born at Pletzaw, in the principality of Anhalt-Bernburgh, in 1689. He received the first rudiments of education at home under a private tutor, and was then sent to the university of Quedlinburgh, and thence to Jena, in 1709. His father intended him for the law; but a passion which he expressed for mathematical and physical researches, soon altered that design, and determined young Eller to follow the profession of physic. As Jena afforded no opportunity for the study of anatomy, he was removed to Halle, and soon after to Ley den, to finish his education under the celebrated Albinus, and the learned Sengerd and Boerhaave. Thence he passed to Amsterdam for the advantage of hearing the lectures of Rau, and examining the preparations of iluysch, and he followed Rau to Leyden, on the latter being appointed to succeed professor Bidloe. Having quitted Leyden, he spent some time in the mines of Saxony and Hartz, where he completed his chemical studies, and made astonishing progress in metallurgy and other parts of natural knowledge. On his visiting Paris, he attended several new courses in chemistry, under Lemery and Homberg, while he was pursuing his anatomical studies under the direction of Pecquet, du Verney, Winslow, and acquiring physiological and practical knowledge by the assistance of Astruc, Helvetius, Jussieu, &c. Though every branch of medical knowledge, and particularly surgery, was successfully practised in Paris, the reputation of Cheselden’s operation for the stone, and the ambition of being known to the immortal Newton, drew Mr. Eller to England, where he arrived in company with the earl of Peterborough, and remained five months. Leaving London in 1721, he returned to his own country, and was immediately honoured with the place of first physician to his sovereign the prince of Anhalt-Bernburgh; but he afterwards removed to Magdeburgh, where he soon attracted the notice of the king of Prussia, Frederick I. by whom he was made physician in ordinary, counsellor of the court, professor of the royal college of physic and surgery at Berlin, physician to the army, and perpetual dean of the superior college of medicine; employments equally honourable and lucrative. On the accession of Frederick II. he was farther promoted, and in 1755 was created a privy counsellor, the greatest honour to which he could possibly arrive, in his career as a scholar; and the same year he was appointed director of the academy called “Curieux de la nature,” where, according to the custom of the society, he was introduced by the name of Euphorbio. These employments and dignities he retained to his death in 1759. After his death was published a work by him, entitled “Observationes de cognoscendis et curandis morbis, praescrtim acutis, 1762, 8vo, which was translated into French by Le Roy, 1774, 12mo. This work is chiefly founded on the results of his long practice. He wrote also various papers in the Transactions of the Academy of Berlin, for the years 1748, 1749, and 1752, which with other pieces by him were collected and published, in German, under the title of” Physical, chemical, and medical treatises," Berlin, 1764, 2 vols. 8vo.

In 1720 Mr. Ellis wrote a poem entitled “The Soutlj Sea Dream,” in Hudibrastic verse. In 1739 he translated a whimsical performance from the Latin, which he received from Cambridge, entitled “The Surprise, or the gentleman turned apothecary.” This was a tale written originally in French prose, and afterwards translated into Latin. Mr. Ellis’s versification of it was printed in 12mo, and is to be found in some of the libraries of the curious. Of the translation of Dr. King’s “Templum Libertatis,” in 1742, we have already spoken. In 1758 he was prevailed upon to permit the publication of his travesty of Maphacus.

His history of th'e Saracens has been translated from Arabic into Latin by Erpenius, and printed in those two languages at Leyden, 1625, in folio. Erpcnius died hetore the publication; and Golius took care of it, writing also a preface. Elmacinus began his work at the creation of the world; and Holtinger had in manuscript that part which reaches from thence to the flight of Mohammed. The translation of Erpenius is full of mistakes, especially as to geography and proper names; on which accdunt, however, he deserves some excuse, il we consider the difficulty of reading the Arabic manuscripts, and that he was the first who made any tolerable progress in this kind of learning. The French translation made by Peter Vat tier, and printed at Paris in 1657, is equally incorrect. The Arabic text was printed apart in 12mo, at the same time with the folio edition and dedicated by Erpeniuct’s widow to Andrews, bishop of Winchester.

, a French physician and biographer, was born at Mons, Sept. 20, 1714, and was educated to the practice of physic, in which he acquired great reputation both for skill and humanity. He was a man of extensive learning, and notwithstanding the time he devoted to study, and that which was necessary in his practice, he found leisure to write several valuable works. His first, which was published in 1750, was a small treatise, entitled “Reflexions sur l'Usage du The.” His next publication was an attempt at a history of medicine, arranged in the form of a dictionary, and entitled “Essai du Dictionnaire Historique de la Medicine ancienne et moderne,” in two volumes octavo, which appeared in 1755: this work was afterwards greatly enlarged, by extending the different articles which it contained, and was published in 1778, in four volumes quarto, with the title of “Dictionnaire Historique de la. Medicine ancienne et moderne;” a work in many respects more useful than Haller’s Bibliotheca. Eloy likewise published, in 1755, a small volume, entitled “Cours elementaire des Accouchemens;” and, a few years previous to his death, viz. in 17 So and 1781, he committed to the press two other essays, the first of which was entitled “Memoire sur la marche, la nature, les causes, et le traitement de la Dysenteric” and the other, “Question Medico-politique si l'usage du cafe” est avantageux a la sante, et s’il peut se concilier avec le bien de Petat dans les Provinces Belgiques“As a slight reward for the patriotic zeal manifested in this tract, the estates of Hainault presented him with a superb snuffbox, with this inscription,” Ex Dono Patria?;" the Gift of his Country. He held the honourable office of physician, to prince Charles of Lorraine until his death, March 10, 1788.

, a miscellaneous writer and schoolmaster, was born at Edinburgh, Dec. 6, 1721, and was the son of the Rev. William Elphinston. He was educated at the high school of Edinburgh, and afterwards at the university, where, or soon after he left it, and when only in his seventeenth year, he was appointed tutor to lord Blantyre, a circumstance which seems to indicate that his erudition was extraordinary, or his place nominal. When of age he accompanied Carte, the historian, on a tour through Holland and Brabant, and to Paris, where he acquired such a knowledge of the French language as to be able to speak and write it with the greatest facility. On leaving France he returned to Scotland, and became private tutor to the son of James Moray, esq. of Abercairny, in Perthshire, and an inmate in the family. How long he remained here is uncertain, but in 1750 he was at Edinburgh, and superintended an edition of Dr. Johnson’s “Ramblers,” by the author’s permission, with a translation of the mottos, which was completed in 8 vols. 12 mo, beautifully printed, but imperfect, as being without the alterations and additions introduced in the subsequent editions by Dr. Johnson. In 1751 he married, and leaving Scotland, fixed his abode near London, first at Brompton, and afterwards at Kensington, where for many years he kept a school in a large and elegant house opposite to the royal gardens, and had considerable reputation; his scholars always retaining a very grateful sense of his skill as a teacher, and his kindness as a friend.

, an eminent Scotch prelate, descended from a noble family in Germany, the counts of Helphinstein, was the son of John, or as some say, William Elphinston and Margaret Douglas, daughter of Douglas of Drumlanrig, and was horn at Glasgow in 1431, or, according to another account, in 1437. He was educated in the newly-erected university of Glasgow, and in the twentieth year of his age became M. A. He then applied himself to the study of divinity, and was made rector of Kirkmichael. After continuing four years in this situation, he went to Paris, where he acquired such reputation in the study of the civil and canon law, as to attract the attention of the university; and he was advanced to the professorship of civil and canon law, first at Park, and afterwards at Orleans, where his lectures were attended by a great concourse of students. The improvement of his own mind, however, being the particular object of his solicitude, he canvassed the most abstruse and difficult parts of his profession with the most eminent and learned doctors of the age. After nine years’ intense study in France, he returned home at the earnest solicitations of his friends, particularly bishop Muirhead, who made him parson of Glasgow, and official of his diocese; and as a mark of respect he was chosen rector of that university in which he had been educated. After the death of his friend and patron, Ivluirbead, he was made official of Lolhian, by archbishop Schevez, of St. Andrew’s; and at the same time was called to parliament, and to a seat in the privycouncil. As his talents were of the most acute and discerning kind, he embraced subjects remote from his religious studies, and became conspicuous as an able politician and skilful negociator. In this capacity he was employed by James III. on an embassy to France, in conjunction with Livingstone, bishop of Dunkeld, and the earl of fiuchan. It is said that he managed so dextrously, that the old league and amity were renewed, and all cause of discord between the two kingdoms removed. The French monarch was so charmed with his conduct and conversation, that he loaded him with valuable presents. When he returned home, he was made archdeacon of Argyle, in 1479, and soon after bishop of Ross; and in 1484, he was translated to the see of Aberdeen. His address in negociation induced the king to send him as one of the commissioners from Scotland to treat of a truce with England, and a marriage between his son and the lady Anne, the niece of Richard III.

, an English gentleman, clerk of the house of commons in the reign of Charles I. was born at Battersea in Surrey, in 1598; being the eldest son of Henry Elsynge, esq. who was clerk of the house of lords, and a person of great abilities. He was educated at Westminster school; and thence, in 1621, removed to Christ Church, in Oxford, where he took the degree of B. A. 1625. Then he travelled abroad, and spent at several times above seven years in foreign countries; by which he became a very accomplished person, and was greatly esteemed by men of the highestquality and bestjudgment. He was in particular so much valued by archbishop Laud, that his grace procured him the place of clerk of the house of commons, to which he proved of excellent use, as well as a singular ornament. For he was very dextrous in taking and expressing the sense of the house; and also so great a help to the speaker and to the house in stating the questions, and drawing up the orders free from exceptions, that it much conduced to the dispatch of business, and the service of the parliament. His discretion also and prudence were such, that though the long parliament was by faction kept in continual disorder, yet his fair and temperate carriage made him commended and esteemed by all parties, how furious and opposite soever they were among themselves. And therefore for these his abilities and good conduct) more reverence was paid to his stool, than to the speaker Lenthall’s chair; who, being obtioxious, timorous, and interested, was often much confused in collecting the sense of the house, and drawing the debates into a fair question; in which Elsynge was always observed to be so ready and just, that the house generally acquiesced in what he did of that nature. At length, when he saw that the greater part of the house were imprisoned and secluded, and that the remainder would bring the king to a trial for his life, he desired, the 26th Dec. 1648, to resign his place. He alleged for this his bad state of health; but most people understood his reason to be, and he acknowledged it to Wbitelock and other friends, because he would have no hand in the business against the king. After which, quitting his advantageous employment, he retired to his house at Hounslow, in Middlesex, where he presently contracted many bodily infirmities, of which he died in 1654. He was a man of very great parts, and very learned, especially in the Latin, French, and Italian languages he was, what was far above all these accomplishments, a very just and honest man and Whitelock relates, that the great Selden was particularly fond of him, which is no small circumstance to his honour.

Sir Thomas Elyot’s “Governor,” says Strype, waa designed to instruct men, especially great men, in good morals, and to reprove theirvices. It consisted of several chapters, treating concerning affability, benevolence, beneficence, the diversity of flatterers, and other similar subjects. In these chapters were some sharp and quick sentences, which offended many of the young men of fashion at that time. They complained of sir Thomas’s strange terms, as they called them; and said that it was no little presumption in him to meddle with persons of the higher and nobler ranks. The complaints of these gentlemen, who were always kicking at such examples as did bite them, our author compared to a galled horse, abiding no plasters. King Henry read and much liked sir Thomas Elyot’s treatise; and was particularly pleased with his endeavours to improve and enrich the English language. It was observed by his majesty, that throughout the book there was no new term made by him of a Latin or French word, and that no sentence was hereby rendered dark or hard to be understood.

He is said to have been very nice and scrupulous in regard to his works, having always some correction to make; hence Erasmus imputes the same fault to him that was objected to the painter Protogenes, who thought he had never finished his pieces; “That very learned man Paulus Emilius (says he) gave pretty much into this fault he was never satisfied with himself but, as often as he revised his own performances, he made such alterations, that one would not take them for the same pieces corrected, but for quite different ones; and this was his usual custom. This made him so slow, that elephants could bring forth sooner than he could produce a work; for he took above thirty years in writing his history.” Lipsius was much pleased with this performance: “Paulus Emilius (says that author) is almost the only modern who has discovered the true and ancient way of writing history, and followed it very closely. His manner of writing is learned, nervous, and concise, inclining to points and conceits, and leaving a strong impression on the mind of a serious reader. He often intermixes maxims and sentiments not inferior to those of the ancients. A careful examiner, and impartial judge of facts; nor have J met with an author in our time, who has less prejudice or partiality. It is a disgrace to our age that so few are pleased with him; and that there are but few capable of relishing his beauties. Among so many perfections there are, however, a few blemishes, for his style is somewhat unconnected, and his periods too short. This is not suitable to serious subjects, especially annals, the style of which, according to Tacitus, should be grave and unaffected. He is also unequal, being sometimes too studied and correct, and thereby obscure; at other times (this however but seldom) he is loose and negligent. He affects also too much of the air of antiquity in the names of men and places, which he changes, and would reduce to the ancient form, often learnedly, sometimes vainly, and in my opinion always unbecomingly.” Emilius’s history is divided into ten books, and extends from Pharamond to the fifth year of Charles VIII. in 1438. The tenth book was found among his papers in a confused condition, so that the editor, Daniel Xavarisio, a native of Verona, and relation of Emilius, was obliged to collate a great number of papers full of rasures, before it could be published. He has been censured by several of the French writers, particularly by M. Sorel: “It does not avail (says this author) that his oratorical pieces are imitations of those of the Greeks, and Romans: all are not in their proper places; for he often makes barbarians to speak in a learned and eloquent manner. To give one remarkable circumstance: though our most authentic historians declare, that Hauler, or Hanier, the counsellor, who spoke an invective, in presence of king Lewis Hautin, against Enguerrand de Mar rigny, came off poorly, and said many silly things; yet Paulus Emilius, who changes even his name, calling him Annalis, makes him speak with an affected eloquence. He also makes this Enguerrand pronounce a defence, though it is said he was not allowed to speak; so that what the historian wrote on this occasion was only to exercise his pen.” He has been also animadverted upon for not taking notice of the holy vial at Ilheims. “I shall not (says Claude de Verdier) pass over Paulus Emilius of Verona’s malicious silence, who omitted mentioning many things relating to the glory of the French nation. Nor can it be said he was ignorant of those things, upon which none were silent before himself; such as that oil which was sent from heaven for anointing our monarchs; and also the lilies. And even though he had not credited them himself, he ought to have declared the opinion of mankind.” Vossius, however, commends his silence in regard to these idle tales. Julius Scaliger mentions a book containing the history of the family of the Scaligers, as translated into elegant Latin by Paulus Emilius; and in his letter about the antiquity and splendour of the family, he has the following passage: “By the injury of time, the malice of enemies, and the ignorance of writers, a great number of memoirs relating to our family were lost; so that the name of Scaliger would have been altogether buried in obscurity, had it not been for Paulus Emilius of Verona, that most eloquent writer and preserver of ancient pedigrees; who having found in Bavaria very ancient annals of our family, written, as himself tells us, in a coarse style, polished and translated them into Latin. From this book my father extracted such particulars as seemed to reflect the” greatest honour on our family." Scaliger speaks also of it in the first edition of his Commentary on Catullus, in 1586, and in the second, in 1600, but in such a manner as differs somewhat from the passage above cited. Scioppius has severely attacked Scaliger on account of these variations: he observes, that no mention being made of the place where this manuscript was pretended to be found, nor the person who possessed it, and such authors as had searched the Bavarian libraries with the utmost care, having met with no such annals; he therefore asserts, that whatever the Scaligers advanced concerning this work, was all im posture. Emilius, as to his private life, was a man of exemplary conduct and untainted reputation. He died in 1529, and was buried in the cathedral at Paris.

After about ten weeks’ absence, though Mr. Emlyn received discouraging accounts of the rage that prevailed against him in Dublin, he thought it necessary to return, to his family. Finding that both his opinions and his person lay under a great odium among many who knew little of the subject in dispute, he wrote his “Humble Inquiry into the Scripture account of Jesus Christ: or, a short argument concerning his Deity and Glory, according to the Gospel.” A few days after this work was prinjted, our author intended to return to England; but some zealous dissenters, getting notice of his design, resolved to have him prosecuted. Two of them, one of whom was a presbyterian, and the other a baptist-church officer, were for presenting Mr. Emlyn; but, upon reflection, this method was judged to be too slow, and too uncertain in its operation. Mr. Caleb Thomas, therefore, the latter of the two dissenters, immediately obtained a special warrant from the lord chief justice (sir Richard Pyne) to seize our author and his books. Our author, with part of the impression of his work, being thus seized, was carried before the lord chief justice, who at first refused bail, but afterwards said that it might be allowed with the attorney-general’s consent; which being obtained, two sufficient persons were bound in a recognizance of eight hundred pounds for Mr. Emlyn’s appearance. This was in Hilary term, February 1703, at the end of which he was bound over to Easter term, when the grand jury found the bill, wherein he was indicted of blasphemy. To such a charge he chose to traverse. The indictment was altered three times before it was finally settled, which occasioned the trial to be deferred till June 14, 1703. On that day, Mr. Emlyn was informed, by an eminent gentleman of the long robe, sir Richard Levins, afterwards lord chief justice of the common pleas, that he would not be permitted to speak freely, but that it was designed to run him down like a wolf, without law or game; and he was soon convinced that this was not a groundless assertion. The indictment was for writing and publishing a book, wherein he had blasphemously and maliciously asserted, that Jesus Christ was not equal to God the father, to whom he was subject; and this with a seditious intention. As Mr. Emlyn knew that it would be difficult to convict him of being the author of the work, he did not think himself bound to be his own accuser, and the prosecutor not being able to produce sufficient evidence of the fact, at length sent for Mr. Boyse. This gentleman, being examined as to what Mr. K.mlyn had preached of the matters contained in the book, acknowledged that he had said nothing of tlu-tn in the pulpit directly, but only some things that gave ground of suspicion. Mr. Boyse being farther asked, what our author had said in private conference with the ministers, answered, “that what he had declared there was judged by his brethren to be near to Arianism.” Though this only proved the agreement of the book with Mr. Emlyn’s sentiment, it yet had a great effect upon the minds of the jury, and tended more than any other consideration to produce a verdict against him. The queen’s counsel, having thus only presumption to allege, contended,that strong presumption was as good as evidence; which doctrine was seconded by the lord chief justice, who repeated it to the jury, who brought him in guilty, without considering the contents of the book whether blasphemy or not, confining themselves, as it would appear, to the fact of publishing: for which some of them afterwards expressed their concern. The verdict being pronounced, the passing of the sentence was deferred to June 16, being the last day of the term. In the mean time Mr. Emlyn was committed to the common jail. During this interval, Mr. Boyse shewed great concern for our author, and used all his interest to prevent the rigorous sentence for which the attorney-general (Robert Kochford, esq.) had moved, viz. the pillory. It being thought proper that Mr. Emlyn should write to the lord chief justice, he accordingly did so; but with what effect we are not told. When he appeared to have judgment given against him, it was moved by one of the queen’s counsel (Mr. Brodrick) that he should retract: but to this our author could not consent. The lord chief justice, therefore, proceeded to pass sentence on him; which was, that he should suffer a year’s imprisonment, pay a thousand pounds fine to the queen, and lie in prison till paid; and that he should find security for good behaviour during life. The pillory, he was told, was the punishment due; but, on account of his being a man of letters, it was not inflicted. Then, with a paper on his breast, he was led round the four courts to l>e exposed. After judgment had been passed, Mr. Emlyn was committed to the sheriffs of Dublin, and was a close prisoner, for something more than a quarter of a year, in the house of the under-sheriff. On the 6th of October he was hastily hurried away to the common jail, where he lay among the prisoners in a close room filled with six beds, for about five or six weeks; and then, by an habeas corpus, he was upon his petition removed into the Marshalsea for his health. Having here greater conveniences, he wrote, in 1704, a tract, entitled “General Remarks on Mr. Boyse’s Vindication of the true Deity of our blessed Saviour.” In the Marshalsea our author remained till July 21, 1705, during the whole of which time his former acquaintances were estranged from him, and all offices of friendship or.civility in a manner ceased; especially among persons of a superior rank. A few, indeed, of the plainer tradesmen belonging to his late congregation were more compassionate; but not one of the dissenting ministers of Dublin, Mr. Boyse excepted, paid him any visit or attention. At length, through the zealous and repeated solicitations of Mr. Boyse, the generous interference of Thomas Medlicote, esq. the humane interposition of the duke of Ormond, and the favourable report of the lord chancellor (sir Richard Cox, to whom a petition of Mr. Emlyn had been preferred), and whose report was, that such exorbitant fines were against law, the fine was reduced to seventy pounds, and it was accordingly paid into her majesty’s exchequer. Twenty pounds more were paid, by way of composition, to Dr. Narcissus March, archbishop of Armagh, who, as queen’s almoner, had a claim of one shilling a pound upon the whole fine. During Mr. Emlyn’s confinement in the Marshalsea, he regularly preached there. He had hired a pretty large room to himself; whither, on the Sundays, some of the imprisoned debtors resorted; and from without doors there came several of the lower sort of his former people and usual hearers. Soon after his release Mr. Emlyn returned to London, where a small congregation was found for him, consisting of a few friends, to whom he preached once every Sunday. This he did without salary or stipend; although, in consequence of his wife’s jointure having devolved to her children, his fortune was reduced to a narrow income. The liberty of preaching which our author enjoyed, gave great offence to several persons, and especially to Mr. Charles Leslie, the famous nonjuror, and Mr. Francis Higgins, the rector of Balruddery, in the county of Dublin. Complaint was made upon the subject to Dr. Teniaon, archbishop of Canterbury, who was not inclined to molest him. Nevertheless, in the representation of the lower house of convocation to the queen in 1711, it was asserted, that weekly sermons were preached in defence of the Unitarian principles, an assertion which Mr. Emlyn thought proper to deny in a paper containing some observations upon it. After a few years, his congregation was dissolved by the death of the principal persons who had attended upon his ministry, and he retired into silent obscurity, but not into idleness; for the greater part of his life was diligently spent in endeavouring to support, by various works, the principles he had embraced, and the cause for which he had suffered. The first performance published by him, after his release from prison, was “A Letter to the Rev. Dr. Willis, 'dean of Lincoln; being some friendly remarks on his sermon before the honourable house of commons, Nov. 5, 1705.” The intention of this letter was to shew that the punishment even of papists for religion was not warranted by the Jewish laws; and that Christians had been more cruel persecutors than Jews. In 1706 Mr. Emlyn published what his party considered as one of his most elaborate productions, “A Vindication of the worship of the Lord Jesus Christ, on Unitarian principles. In anMver to what is said, on that head, by Mr. Joseph Boyse, in his Vindication of” the Deity of Jesus Christ. To which is annexed, an answer to Dr. Walerland on the same head.“Two publications came from our author in 1707, the first of which was entitled” The supreme Deity of God the Father demonstrated. In answer to Dr. Sherlock’s arguments fur the supreme Divinity of Jesus Christ, or whatever can be urged against the supremacy of the first person of the Holy Trinity.“The other was” A brief Vindication of the Bishop of Gloucester’s (Dr. Fowler) Discourses concerning the descent of the man Christ Jesus from Heaven, from Dr. Sherlock the dean of St. Paul’s charge of heresy. With a confutation of his new notion in his late book of The Scripture proofs of our Saviour’s divinity.“In 1708 Mr. Emlyn printed three tracts, all of them directed against Mr. Leslie. The titles of them are as follow: 1. Remarks on Mr. Charles Leslie’s first Dialogue on the Socinian controversy. 2. A Vindication of the Remarks on Mr. Charles Leslie’s first Dialogue on the Socinian controversy. 3. An Examination of Mr. Leslie’s last Dialogue relating to the satisfaction of Jesus Christ. Together with some remarks on Dr. Stillingfleet’s True reasons of Christ’s Sufferings. In the year 1710 he published” The previous question to the several questions about valid and invalid Baptism, Lay-baptism, &c. considered viz. whether there be any necessity (upon the principles of Mr. Wall’s History of infant baptism) for the continual use of baptism among the posterity of baptised Christians.“But this hypothesis, though supported with ingenuity and learning, has not obtained many converts. Our author did not again appear from the press till 1715, when he published” A full Inquiry into the original authority of that text, 1 John v. 7. There are three that bear record in heaven, &c. containing an account of Dr. Mill’s evidence, from antiquity, for and against its being genuine; with an examination of his judgment thereupon.“This piece was addressed to Dr. William Wake, lord archbishop of Canterbury, president, to the bishops of the same province, his grace’s suffragans, and to the clergy of the lower house of convocation, then assembled. The disputed text found an advocate in Mr. Martin, pastor of the French church at the Hague, who published a critical dissertation on the subject, in opposition to Mr. Emlyn’s Inquiry. In 1718 our author again considered the question, in” An Answer to Mr. Martin’s critical dissertation on 1 John v. 7; shewing the insufficiency of his proofs, and the errors of his suppositions, by which he attempts to establish the authority of that text from supposed manuscripts." Mr. Martin having published an examination of this answer, Mr. Emlyn printed a reply to it in 1720, which produced a third tract upon the subject by Mr. Martin, and there the controversy ended; nor, we believe, was it revived in a separate form, until within these few years by Mr. archdeacon Travis and professor Person.

, a French woman by extraction, was eminent for her fine writing in the time of queen Elizabeth and James I. Many of her performances are still extant both in our libraries and private hands; particularly one in the Harcourt family, entitled “Histories memorabiles Genesis per Esteram Inglis Gallam,” Edenburgi, ann. 1600. It appears by Hearne’s spicilegium to Gul. Neubrigensis, vol. III. p. 751, 752, that she was the most exquisite scribe of her age. A curious piece of her performance was in the possession of Mr. Cripps, surgeon in Budge- row, London, entitled “Octonaries upon the vanitie and inconstancie of the world. Writin by Ester Inglis. The firste of Januarie, 1600.” It is done, on an oblong 8vo, in French and English verse; the French is all in print hand, and the English mostly Italian or secretary, and is curiously ornamented with flowers and fruits painted in water-colours, and on the first leaf is her own picture, in a small form, with this motto,

is a Spanish writer, who among biographers is classed under different names. In Moreri, we find him under that of Dryander, by which, perhaps, he is most generally known; but in France he took the name of Du Chesne, and by the Germans was called Evck, Eycken, or Eyckman. Referring to Marchand for a dissertation on these different names, it may suffice here to notice that Enzinas was of a distinguished family of Burgos, the capital of Old Castille, where he was probably born, or where at least he began his studies. He appears afterwards to have gone into Germany, and was the pupil of the celebrated Melancthon for some years, and thence into the Netherlands to some relations, where he settled. Having become a convert to the reformed religion, which was there established, he translated the New Testament into Spanish, and dedicated it to Charles V. It was published at Antwerp in 1543. He had met with much discouragement when he communicated this design to his friends in Spain, and was now to suffer yet more severely for his attempt to present his countrymen with a part of the scriptures in their own tongue. The publication had scarcely made its appearance, when he was thrown into prison at Brussels, where he remained from November 1543 to Feb. I, 1545, on which day finding the doors of his prison open, he made his escape, and went to his relations at Antwerp. About three years after, he went to England, as we learn from a letter of introduction which Melancthon gave him to archbishop Cranmer. About 1552 Melancthon gave him a similar letter to Calvin. The time of his death is not known. He published, in 1545, “A History of the State of the Low Countries, and of the religion of Spain,” in Latin, which was afterwards translated into French, and forms part of the “Protestant TYIartyrology,” printed in Germany. Mavchand points out a few other writings by him, but which were not published separately. Enzinas had two brothers, James and John. Of the former little is recorded of much consequence; but John, who resided a considerable time at Rome, and likewise became a convert to the protestant religion, was setting out for Germany to join his brother,' when some expressions which he dropped, relative to the corruptions and disorders of the church, occasioned his being accused of heresy, and thrown into prison. The terrors of a dungeon, and the prospect of a cruel death, did not daunt his noble sou), but when brought before the pope and cardinals to be examined, he refused to retract what he had said, and boldly avowed and justified his opinions, for which he was condemned to be burnt alive, a sentence which was put into execution at Rome in 1545.

, a very ingenious and benevolent French abbé, and the extensive promoter, if not the inventor, of a method of relieving the deaf and dumb, and rendering them useful members of society, was the son of an architect, who educated him for the church. Having obtained a canonry of Troyes, by the presentation of the bishop of that diocese, he soon became intimate with the prelate Soanen, famous for his attachment to Quesnel, and his opposition to the bull Unigenitus, and coinciding in his religious opinions, shared in the persecution of which Soanen was the object, and was laid under an interdict. He was first induced to turn his thoughts towards the unhappy case of the deaf and dumb, from observing two young girls in that situation, and although some not altogether unsuccessful attempts had been made before his time, in individual cases, the abbé L'Epee soon outdid the most skilful of his predecessors, by reducing his means to a sort of system. Under his care numerous pupils acquired useful knowledge, and were enabled to hold a communication with their friends. Some of them were enabled to learn several languages; others became profound mathematicians, and others obtained academical prizes by poetical and literary works. Without other means than a moderate personal fortune, for he held no place or preferment, he defrayed the whole expences of his establishment, and always deprived himself of luxuries, and often of necessaries, that his poor pupils might not want. When the emperor Joseph II. came to Paris, he admired the institution and its founder, and asked permission to place under his care an intelligent man, who might diffuse through Germany the blessings of his labours; and he sent him a magnificent gold box with his picture. In 1780 the Russian ambassador came to offer him the compliments of his sovereign, and a considerable present. “Tell Catherine,” said L'Epee, “that I never receive gold; but that if my labours have any claim to her esteem, all I ask of her is to send me from her vast dominions one born deaf and dumb to educate.” This amiable man died in February 1790, justly regretted by his country, and was succeeded in his school by the abbé Sicard. L'Epee wrote, 1. “An Account of the Complaint and Cure of Marianne Pigalle,” 1759, 12mo. 2. “Institution des Sourds et Muets, par la voie des signes methodiques,” 1776, 12mo, reprinted in 1784, under the title “La veritable maniere d'instruire les Sourds et Muets, confirmee par une longue experience.” A translation of this was published in London, 1801, 8vo. We cannot conclude this article without adverting to the success of the methods of teaching the deaf and dumb as now practised in this country, and eminently promoted by the “Society for the Deaf and Dumb,” in their Asylum, Kent Road: few charitable foundations have been more wisely laid, more judiciously conducted, or more liberally supported.

He left Italy soon after his pupil, without understanding the language of that country, which made his journey less advantageous as well as pleasant to him. It is said that when he was at Venice, he met Bernard Ocricularius of Florence, who had written Latin history in the manner of Sallust Erasmus desired a conversation with him, and addressed him in Latin: but the Florentine obstinately refused to speak any thingexcept Italian; which Erasmus not understanding, they separated without edification on either part. Why Erasmus should not understand Italian, it is. not difficult to conceive; but it is somewhat singular that he should be ignorant of French, which was in a great measure the case, though he had spent so much time in that country. In his way from Italy to England, he passed first to Curia, then to Constance, and so through the Martian forest by Brisgau to Strasburgh, and from thence by the Rhine to Holland; whence, after making some little stay at Antwerp and Louvain, he took shipping for England. Some of his friends and patrons, whom he visited as he came along, made him great offers, and wished him to settle among them; but his heart was at this time entirely fixed upon spending the remainder of his days in England, not only upon account of his former connections and friendships, which were very dear to him, bxit the great hopes that had lately been held out to him, of ample preferment, provided he would settle there. Henry VII. died in April 1509; and Henry VIII. his son and successor, was Erasmus’s professed friend and patron, and had for some time held a correspondence with him by letters. That prince was no sooner upon the throne, than Montjoy wrote to Erasmus to hasten him into England, promising him great things on the part of the king, and of Warham archbishop of Canterbury, though indeed he had no particular commission to that end from either the one or the other. More, and some other friends, wrote him also letters to the same purpose. But he had no sooner arrived in the beginning of 1510, than he perceived that liis expectations had been raised too high, and began secretly to wish that he had not quitted Rome. However, he took no notice of the disappointment, but pursued his studies with his usual assiduity. At his arrival in England he lodged with More; and while he was there, to divert himself and his friend, he wrote, within the compass of a week, “Encomium Moriæ,” or “The praise of Folly,” a copy of which was sent to France, and printed there, but with abundance of faults; yet it became so popular, that in a few months it went through seven editions. The general design of this ludicrous piece is to shew, that there are fools in all stations, and more particularly to expose the errors and follies of the court of Rome, not sparing the pope himself; so that he was never after regarded as a true son of that church. It was highly acceptable to persons of quality, but as highly offensive to dissolute monks, who disapproved especially of the Commentary which Lystrius wrote upon it, and which is printed with it, because it unveiled several things from whose obscurity they drew much profit. Soon after he came to England he published a translation of the Hecuba of Euripides into Latin verse; and, adding some poems to it, dedicated it to archbishop Warham. The prelate received the dedication courteously, yet made the poet only a small present. As he was returning from Lambeth, his friend Grocyn, who had accompanied him, asked, “what present he had received” Erasmus replied, laughing, “A very considerable sum” which Grocyn would not believe. Having told him what it was, Grocyn observed, that the prelate was rich and generous enough to have made him a much handsomer present; but certainly suspected that he had presented to him a book already dedicated elsewhere. Erasmus asked, “how such a suspicion could enter his head” “Because,” said Grocyn, “such hungry scholars as you, who stroll about the world, and dedicate books to noblemen, are apt to be guilty of such tricks.”

In 1513, he wrote from London a. very elegant letter to the abbot of St. Berlin, against the rage of going to war, which then possessed the English and the French. He has often treated this subject, and always with that vivacity, eloquence, and strength of reason, with which he treated every subject as in his Adagia, under the proverb “Dulce Bellum inexpertis” in his book entitled “Querela Pads,” and in his “Instruction of a Christian Prince.” But his remonstrances had small effect, and the emperor Charles V. to whom the last-mentioned treatise was dedicated, persisted in his belligerent plans. Erasmus was so singular in his opinions on this subject, that bethought it hardly lawful for a Christian to go to war; and in this respect, as Jortin observes, was almost a quaker.

Another of his works was upon the subject of the eucharist, in answer to a famous book of Paschasius Radbertus, concerning the body and blood of Christ. Upon this head, Erigena had the good sense to oppose the doctrine of transubstantiation. While our author was employed in these discussions, an incident occurred, which drew upon him the displeasure of the Roman pontiff. Michael Balbus, the Greek emperor, had sent, in the year 824, a copy of the works of Dionysius, the philosopher, to the emperor Lewis the pious, as a most acceptable present. In France these treatises were esteemed to be an invaluable treasure; and therefore Charles the bald, who could not read Greek, was earnestly desirous of perusing them in a Latin translation. This desire was undoubtedly increased by an opinion which at that time universally prevailed, though without any proof, that Dionysius the Areopagite, or St. Denys, was the first Christian teacher, or apostle, in France. At the request of Charles, Scotus undertook the task of translating the works in question, the titles of which were, “On the celestial Monarchy;” “On the ecclesiastical Hierarchy;” “On divine Names;” and, “On mystic Theology.” These books were received with great eagerness by the western churches; but the translation having been made without the license of the sovereign pontiff, and containing many things contrary to the received faith of the church of Rome, the pope, Nicholas the first, was highly displeased, and wrote a threatening letter to the French king, requiring that Scotus should be banished from the university of Paris, and sent to Rome. Charles had too much affection and respect for our author to obey the pope’s order; but Erigena thought it advisable, for his safety, to retire from, Paris. According to some writers, it was upon this occasion that he returned to England. It was the translation of the works of the pretended Dionysius which revived the knowledge of Alexandrian Platonism in the west, and laid the foundation of the mystical system of theology, which afterwards so generally prevailed. Hence it was, that philosophical enthusiasm, born in the east, nourished by Plato, educated in Alexandria, matured in Asia, and adopted into the Greek church, found its way into the western church, and there produced innumerable mischiefs.

After four years spent in his travels, he returned to Leyden in July 1612, about which time there was a design to invite him to England, and to settle a liberal stipend on him; but in the February following, he was chosen by the curators of that university, professor of the Arabic. and other oriental tongues, except the Hebrew, of which there was already a professor. He filled this chair with, great applause, and soon after set up, at an extraordinary expence, a press for the eastern languages, at which he printed a great many excellent works. October 1616, he married a daughter of a counsellor in the court of Holland, by whom he had seven children, three of whom survived him. In 1619 the curators of the university erected a second chair for the Hebrew language, of which they appointed him professor. In 1620 he was sent by the prince of Orange and the states of Holland into France, to solicit Peter du Moulin, or Andrew Rivet, to undertake the professorship of divinity at Leyden but, not prevailing then, he was sent again the year following, and after six months stay in France, procured Rivet, with the consent of the French churches, to remove to Leyden. Some time after his return the states of Holland appointed him their interpreter, and employed him to translate the letters they received from the several princes of Africa and Asia, and also to write letters in the -oriental languages; and the emperor of Morocco was so pleased with the purity of his Arabic style, that he shewed his letters to his nobles, as a great curiosity, for their elegance and propriety. In the midst, of these employments, he was seized with a contagious disease, then epidemical, of which he died Nov. 13, 1621, aged only forty years. The learned of his time lamented him, and wrote the highest eulogiums upon him, as indeed he well deserved, for he was not only most eminent as a scholar, but as a man of great piety and benevolence. Besides the advantageous ofler made him in Italy, he rejected another from the king of Spain and the archbishop of Seville, who invited him into that kingdom to explain certain Arabic inscriptions. Gerard John Vossius made his funeral oration in Latin, which was printed at Leyden, 1625, in 4to; and the same year were published at the same place, in 4to, Peter Scriverius’s “Manes Erpeniani, cum epicediis variorum.”

, a French protestant divine in the seventeenth century, was born at Dauphine, and became minister of the French church in London, an office which he sustained during the reigns of James I. and Charles I. He published several s’mall tracts, which were afterwards collected and published at Geneva and the Hague, in three and in two volumes 12mo, about 1670. He also published a work, which he dedicated to Charles I. entitled “Erreurs Populaires en points generaux qui concernent Pintelligence de la Religion,” and in some of his works has a criticism on the catechism of Calvin, which was so much used in the schools at Geneva.

, president of the parliament of Bourdeaux, a man of learning in the seventeenth century, acquired considerable fame by publishing in 1623, a book entitled “Enchyridion physicse restitutae.” He did not put his name to this, but it is proved to be his by several of his acquaintance, as well as by the device at the beginning, “Spes mea est in agno,” and before the treatise of chemistry, “Pene nos unda Tagi,” which are both anagrams of his name. It was the first work that appeared in France, professing to contain a complete system of physics contrary to that of Aristotle. The author, however, while he says that he has only re-established the ancient philosophy, has added many things of his own invention. He confutes the opinion of materia prima, which was held to be extended every where without being any where perceived, and incessantly tending to the uuion of forms without having any, being the basis and support of contraries, viz. of the elements which are said to be produced out of it. He shows that this system of nature is imaginary, that there is no contrariety in the elements, and that which is observed in them proceeds from the excess of their qualities, and that when they are tempered there is no contrariety in them. Yet he believes that there is a materia prima from whence the elements result and become the second matter of things, which are earth and water; for he holds neither air nor fire for elements. The elements, according to his notion, are not transformed into each other: water only becomes vapour, and vapour water, by circulation. He places the real fire of the world in the sun, which he calls not only the eye of the universe, but the eye of the creator of the universe, by which he beholds in a sensible manner his creatures, and which is the first agent of the world. The rest of his book abounds in curious particulars concerning the origin of things, their subsistence and various alterations, relating to the design of this philosopher to treat of chemical matters. He therefore subjoins another treatise, entitled “Arcanum Hermeticae philosophic opus,” in which he discourses of the matter of the philosopher’s stone and its digestions, of the degrees of fire, of the figure of the vessels and furnace, of the composition of the elixir and its multiplication. This book was translated into French under the title of “La Philosophic des Anciens retablie en sa purete.” In 1616 he published an old manuscript, entitled “Le Rozier des Guerres;” and added to it a treatise of his own upon the institution of a young prince. This ms. was found at Nerac in the king’s closet. Mr. d'Espagnet thought his edition to be the first, but it had been printed in 1523, in folio, which edition is more complete than this of 1616. In the ms. of Nerac, was wanting all the second part, and the three last chapters of the first. For this account the reader is referred to Naude“'s” Addition a Phistoire de Louis XI.“p. 72; and to” Syntagma de studio militari,“p. 73. The prologue alone suunces to convince us that Louis XI. is not the author of that work, as the title pretends, though he speaks in it as giving instructions to the dauphin his son. See the” Bibliotheque Choisie“of M. Colomie’s. In the publication of the” Rozier des Guerres,“he punctually retains the old spelling and in his advertisement to the reader gives this reason for it” This little tract, du Rozier,“says he,” seemed to me so good that I would not embellish or disguise it, but have left in its native simplicity: and though the language of it is not in use in our times, yet it may be understood, being so full of good sense and meaning, that with all its jargon it may silence the affected diction of the court and bar. 1 have also carefully preserved the orthography; because in adding or diminishing a letter, a word is often changed, and of ancient made modern. By this means, in my judgment, the language of Philip de Commines, in his history, has been corrupted: the editors, thinking to mend the spelling, and polish the diction, have destroyed the marks of its antiquity, so that the style of his book is not the style of his times; as we may judge both by this little manuscript, and by many others of the same age, which are to be found in famous libraries, especially by the history of Charles VI. written by John Juvenal des Ursins, and lately published by the sieur de Godefroy. I imagine this error proceeds from the insufficiency of the correctors; who, pretending to correct the orthography, have adulterated it, and thereby rendered themselves plagiaries."

, a learned French divine, was born at Chalons-sur-Marne in 1511, of noble parents, became a doctor of the Sorbonne, and was rector of the university of Paris. He preached with considerable applause; but having in one of his sermons called the “Légende Doreée” the “Légende Ferrée,” it was concluded that he did not believe in the worship of the saints; especially from his doubting of certain facts related by the legendary writers in the “Golden Legend,” of which he ventured to speak thus disrespectfully. The faculty of Paris was about to pass a censure on him; but he explained himself in another discourse, and the transient storm was succeeded by a calm. The cardinal de Lorraine, who was well aware of his merit, employed him in several affairs of importance. D‘Espence attended him to Flanders in 1544, for the purpose of ratifying the peace between Charles V. and Francis I. His eminence took him afterwards to Rome in 1555, where he made so conspicuous a figure, that Paul IV. would have honoured him with the purple, in order to retain him. But his intention was set aside (says fatrjer, Berthier) as being apparently contrary to the interests of France. The imperialists requested the hat for three monks; and therefore the cardinal de Lorraine, who IV voured the design of getting D’Espence into the sacred college, relinquished the idea. “I rather chose,” says he in a letter to the king, “that he should not be there, than that three monks should get in; accordingly I entreated his holiness to think no more of it, and, by that means, I kept out the whole crew.” D'Espence, liking far less to live at Rome than at Paris, returned to France, and appeared with consequence at the assembly of the states of Orleans in 1560, and at the conference of Poissy in 1561, where he attached himself to the Calvinists, which gave much offence to his popish brethren. He died of the stone at Paris, Oct. 5, 1571, in the sixtieth year of his age. He was one of the most moderate and judicious doctors of the age in which he lived, and with all his attachment to popery, was the declared enemy of all violent measures, and disapproved of persecutions. He was well versed in the sciences, both ecclesiastical and profane. His works are almost all written in Latin, with an elegance scarcely known to the theologians of that period. The principal of them are, 1. “A treatise on Clandestine Marriages;” in which he proves that the sons of distinguished families cannot validiy contract marriage, without the consent of their relations. 2. “Commentaries on the Epistles of St. Paul to Timothy and Titus,” full of long digressions on the hierarchy and the ecclesiastical discipline. 3. Several controversial tracts, some in Latin and others in French. Ah his Latin works were collected at Paris in 1619, folio.

, a French moral writer, was boni at Beziers in loll, and entered in 1629 into the oratory, which he quitted five years afterwards to mix again in society; in which, indeed, he -possessed all the qualities adapted to please sense, wit, and the advantages of a good figure. The duke de la Rochefoucault, the chancellor Se'guier, and the prince de Conti, gave him unequivocal testimonies of their esteem and friendship. The first introduced him into the circles of fashion the second obtained for him a pension of 2000 livres and a brevet of counsellor of state; the third heaped his favours upon him, and consulted him upon all occasions. Esprit died in 1678, at the age of sixty-seven. He was a member of the French academy, and one of those who shone in the infancy of that society. His works are: 1. “Paraphrases on some of the Psalms,” which cannot be read with much pleasure since the appearance of those of Masillon. 2. “The fallacy of Human Virtues,” Paris, 1678, 2 vols. 12mo; and Amsterdam, 1716, 8vo, which was intended as a commentary on the Maxims of the duke de la Rochefoucault; but In some places, say his countrymen, it may be compared to the ingenious and lively Horace commented by the heavy Dacier. He cannot, however, be censured for directing his reflections more on persons than on vices a defect too frequent among modern moralists; and it is to his credit that after having shewn the fallacy of merely human virtues, he concludes all his chapters by proving the reality of the Christian virtues. Louis de Bans has taken from this book, his “Art of knowing mankind.”

, an eminent Dutch divine of the popish persuasion, was born at Gorcum, in Holland, about 1542, and was a descendant of an illustrious family of the lords of the castle of Est, from whom he took his name. He finished his classical studies under Macropedius, at Utrecht) studied divinity and philosophy at Louvain, and taught these two sciences for ten years at that place. In 1580 he was admitted to his degree of D. D. and some time after was appointed to lecture on divinity at Doway, and was made superior of the seminary of that city, and provost of the church of St. Peter. He was also elected chancellor of the university of Doway, and employed all his time in teaching or writing. Although esteemed highlylearned, he was no less distinguished for his modesty and benevolence. He died at Doway Sept. 20, 1613, and was buried in the church of St. Peter. His works are, 1. “Martyrium Edmundi Campiani, societatis Jesu,” translated from the French; Louvain, 1582, 8vo; (see Campian). 2. “Historia martyrum Gorcomensium majori numero fratrum minorum,” Doway, 1603, 8vo. 3. “Orationes Theologies,” Doway, 1614, 8vo. 4. “Commentarii in quatuor lihros Sententiarum,” Doway, 1615, 4 vols. fol. reprinted at Paris, 1638, 3 vols. fol. Dupin says this is one of the best theological works the Roman church can boast, and recommends it to students in divinity. 5. “Annotationes in praecipua difficiiiora S. Scriptura; loca,' 1 Antwerp, 1621, fol. a work on which a high value appears to have been placed, as it passed through several editions. It resulted from the conferences he held in the seminary of Doway, but, according to Dupin, his observations ar rather practical than critical. 6.” In omnes B. Pauli et aliorum apostolorumepistolas Commentaria,“Doway, 1614, 2 vols. fol. Dupin praises this as one of the best works of the kind, but it appears that Estius was prevented by death from proceeding farther than 1 John v. and that the rest of the commentary was supplied by Barth. de la Pierre. He wrote also some Latin verses, and an essay” Contra avaritiam scientiae,“censuring the selfishness of learned men who keep their improvements and discoveries to themselves. This is inserted in a work by Francis Vianen of Brussels, entitled” Tractatus triplex de ordine amoris," Louvain, 1685, 8vo.

, son of the foregoing, is not so noted as his father, though he was one of the five authors employed by cardinal Richelieu in making his bad plays. He was received into the French academy in 1632, and died in 1652, at about the age of fifty-four. Moderately provided with the goods of fortune, but a man of strict honour, he rather chose to quit the capital with a woman of worth but of no fortune, whom he had married, than to beg at the table of a financier, or to be troublesome to his friends. Pelisson says of him, “that he had more genius than learning and knowledge.” Yet he had no small knowledge of the laws of the drama, and was a fastidious critic, both in regard to himself and to others. It is said that he caused a young man of Languedoc to die of grief, who came to Paris with a comedy which he fancied to be a chef-d'oeuvre, and in which the severe critic pointed out numerous defects. The same thing is related of Claude de Estoile which is told of Malherbe and of Moliere, that he read his works to his maid-servant. He wrote several pieces for the stage, not above mediocrity some odes that are rather below it and a few other pieces of poetry that have great merit. His odes are in the “Re­^ueil des Poetes Francois,” 1692, 5 vols. 12mo.

, cardinal, archbishop of Rouen, was son of John d'Estouteville, of an ancient and illustrious family of Normandy, and born in 1403. He was charged with important commissions during the reigns of Charles VII. and of Louis XI. reformed the university of Paris, and patronized the learned. He was a man of great firmness of character, and a very stern executor of justice. It is said that the Barigel of Rome having caught a thief in the fact, and resolved to put him to death upon the spot, as there was no hangman to be found, he obliged a French priest who happened to be travelling through that place, to execute an office so unworthy of his character. The cardinal being informed of the transaction, and unable to account for it, sent for the Barigel, and caused him immediately to be hanged at a window of his house. Being a zealous partisan for the pragmatic sanction, he called an assembly of bishops at Bourges, to discuss the means for a strict observance of that regulation, and measures were adopted for that end, notwithstanding the remonstrances of the deputies of the church of Bourdeaux and Peter their archbishop, in favour of the pope, to whom they were desirous of leaving a plenary power. D‘Estouteville died at Rome, being dean of the cardinals, the 22d of December, 1483, at the age of eighty. Besides the archbishopric of Rouen, he possessed six bishoprics in France, and in, Italy four abbeys and three grand priories; but he employed the greater part of the revenues in the decoration of the churches of which he had the care, and in relieving the poor. It was he who completed the castle of Gaillori, one of the finest pieces of architecture of the sixteenth century, which had been begun by the cardinal George D’Amboise.

, marshal of France, and viceroy of America, was born at A gen, in 1627, and served a long time in Holland, under prince Maurice, with whom he acted as agent of France, and proved at once a good general and an able negociator. Being appointed ambassador extraordinary to England, in 1661, he had an affront offered to him there, Oct. 10 of that year, by the baron de Vatteville, ambassador from Spain, which his sovereign not only disavowed, but issued orders to his ministers at foreign courts, not to contest with the ambassadors of France in any public ceremonies. Count d‘Estrades having negotiated in 1662 the sale of Dunkirk, was commissioned to receive that town from the hands of the English. Though Charles II. had signed the treaty, the parliament strongly opposed its execution, and the English garrison refused to evacuate the place. But the count d’Estrades (according to the French historian’s account) judiciously distributed considerable sums of money; and the governor and the garrison embarked for London. On their passage they met the packet conveying to them the order of parliament not to surrender Dunkirk to the French; but the affair was already settled, owing to the active and ingenious address of d'Estrades. Being returned to Paris, he was dispatched again to London, in 1666, in quality of ambassador extraordinary; and the year following went over to Holland, invested with similar powers, and there concluded the treaty of Breda. He distinguished himself not less in 1673, when sent ambassador extraordinary to the conferences of Nimegucn for the general peace. He died the 26th of February, 1686, at the age of seventy-nine. He had been appointed two years before, governor to the duke of Chartres, and superintendant of his finances. The negociations of the count d'Estrades were printed at the Hague, 1742, in 9 vols. 12mo, which is merely an extract from the originals, which form 22 vols. folio, the thinnest of which is of 900 pages. John Aymon published some of them at Amsterdam, in 1709, 12mo.

, grand-master of the artillery of France, was born in 1486, of a distinguished and ancient family, and died in 1567, at the age of eighty-one. He was at first page to queen Anne of Brittany, and afterwards performed great services to the kings Francis I. and Henry II. being the first who put the French artillery on a respectable footing. He signalized himself at the taking of Calais in 1558, and on several other occasions gave eminent proofs of sagacity and courage. He is also said to have been the first gentleman of Picardy who embraced the protestant religion. Brantome, in his Capitaines François, says, “that M. d'Estrées was one of the worthy men of his rank, without offence to others, and the most intrepid in trenches and batteries; for he went to them holding up his head, as if it had been to a hunting party in the fields; and the greatest part of the time he went on horseback, mounted on a great German hack, above twenty years old, and as intrepid as his master; for as to cannonades and arquebusades that were fired in the trench, neither the one nor the other ever lowered their heads for them; and he shewed himself half the body high above the trench, for he was tall and conspicuous as well as his horse. Hq was the ablest man in the world in knowing the fittest spots for erecting a local battery, and in directing it best; accordingly, he was one of the confidents that mons. de Guise wished to have about him for making conquests and taking towns, as he did at Calais. It was he who the first provided us with those fine founderies of artillery which we make use of to this day; and even of our cannon, which do not fear being fired a hundred times one after the other, as I may say, without bursting, without splitting, without breaking, as he proved in one before the king, when the first essay was made; but we do not choose to cram them in this manner, for we spare goodness as much as we can. Before this mode of casting, our cannons were not near so good, but a hundred times more fragile, and requiring to be very often refreshed with vinegar, which occasioned much more trouble. He was of a very large person, a fine and venerable old man, with a beard that reached down very low, and seemed to have been his old comrade in war in the days of yore, which he had all along made his profession, and where he learned to' be somewhat cruel.”

, born in 1660, succeeded John, count d'Estrees, his father, in the post of vice-admiral of France, which he filled with great reputation in the maritime parts of the Levant. He bombarded Barcelona and Alicant in 1691, and commanded in 1G97 the fleet at the siege of Barcelona; being appointed in 1701 lieutenant-general of the naval forces of Spain by Philip V. a station which he held together with that of vice-admiral of France, and thus had the command of the Spanish and French fleets. Two years afterwards, in 1703, he was made marshal of France, and took the name of marechal des Cceuvres. This dignity was followed by those of grandee of Spain, and knight of the golden fleece; all which he merited by his heroic but prudent courage. Though the abb de St. Pierre describes him as a man of a capricious temper, he had an excellent disposition, and was capable of strong attachments. The French academy, that of sciences, and that of inscriptions, admitted him of their societies. Amidst the tumultuous occupations of war, he never forgot the cultivation of letters. He died at Paris, Dec, 28, 1737, in the seventy-seventh year of his age, equally lamented by the citizen, the scholar, and the philosopher. He left no issue by his wife, Lucia Felicia de Noailles.

, king of Kent, and the first Christian king among the Anglo-Saxons, succeeded to the throne about the year 560. He began his reign, in order to revive the reputation of his family, by making war upon the king of Wessex, by whom he was twice defeated, though he was afterwards triumphant, and acquired the complete ascendancy over Wessex and the other states, except Northumberland, and reduced them to the condition of his tributaries or dependants. In the reign of Ethelbert, Christianity was introduced into England. The king had married Bertha, daughter of the king of Paris, who, being a Christian, had stipulated for the free exercise of her religion, and had carried over in her train a French bishop. So exemplary in every respect were her life and conduct, that she inspired the king and his court with a high respect for her person, and for the religion by which she appeared to be influenced. The pope, taking advantage of this circumstance, sent a mission of forty monks, at the head of whom was Augustin, to preach the gospel in the island. They landed in Kent, in the year 597, and were well and hospitably received by Ethelbert, who assigned them habitations in the isle of Thanet. A conference was held, and the king took time to consider of the new doctrines propounded to him; and in the mean while gave them full liberty to preach to his subjects. Numbers were converted, and at length the king submitted to a public baptism. (See Augustine). Christianity proved the means of promoting knowledge and civilization in this -island; and the king, with the consent of his states, enacted a body of laws, which was the first written code promulgated by the northern conquerors. Ethelbert died in the year 616, and left his crown, after a reign of fifty years, to his son Edbald.

, archbishop of Lyons, of the fifth century, was of an illustrious family, and so reputed for his piety that he was afterwards sainted. He retired with his sons Salonius and Veranius into the solitude of Lerins r after having distributed a part of his property among the poor, and divided the other part between his daughters. After some time he quitted the isle of LeVins, where the fame of his virtues brought him much applause, and went over to that of Le'ro, at present called St. Marguerite. Itwas not till after repeated solicitations that he was prevailed upon to leave this desert for the see of Lyons, which dignity he accepted about the year 434. In this capacity he assisted at the first council of Orange in the year 441, where he acquired much reputation for his judicious speeches. He died about the year 454. History has not handed down to us the events of his episcopate: but Claudian Mamertius informs us, that Eucherius frequently held conferences at Lyons, in which he gave proofs of his learning and judgment, that he often preached, and always with success, and that he was accounted the greatest prelate of his age. He wrote several books in the ascetic taste of the times. 1. “In praise of the desert,” addressed to St. Hilary; in which, it must be owned, he paints that of Lerins in very pleasing colours, and the style is in general elegant. 2. A tract “On the contempt of the world;.” translated into French by Arnaud d'Andilly, as well as the former, 1672, 12mo. They are both in the form of letters; the latter addressed to his kinsman Valerian. 3. “On spiritual formularies;” for the use of Veranius, one of his sons, 4. “The history of St. Maurice aud the Martyrs of the Thebaic legion.” All these are in the Bibliotheca Patrum. His two sons, Salonius and Veranius, were bishops even during the life-time of their father.

, prince of Savoy, an illustrious general, was born in 1663, and descended from Carignan, one of the three branches of the house of Savoy. His father was Eugene Maurice, general of the Swiss and Grisons, governor of Champaigne in France, and earl of Soissons; his mother donna Olympia Mancini, neice to cardinal Mazarin. In 1670 he was committed to the tuition of a doctor of the Sorbonne; but his father dying before he was ten years of age, after the French king had given him the grant of an abbey as a step to a cardinal’s hat, and the government of Champaigne being given out of his family, occasioned an alteration in his intended profession; which was indeed by no means suitable to his genius, although he gave great and early hopes of proficiency in the belles lettres, and is said to have been particularly fond of Curtius and Cæsar. He was a youth of great spirit, and so jealous of the honour of his family, that when his mother was banished by the king’s order from the French court to the Low Countries, soon after her husband’s decease, he protested against the injustice of her banishment, and vowed eternal enmity to the authors and contrivers of it. After being for a time trained to the service of the church, for which he had no relish, he desired the king, who maintained him according to his quality, to give him some military employment. This, however, was denied him, sometimes on account of the weakness of his constitution, sometimes for want of a vacancy, or a war to employ the troops in. Apprehending from hence that he was not likely to be considered so much as he thought he deserved in France, and perceiving that he was involved in the disgrace of his mother, he resolved to retire to Vienna with one of his brothers, prince Philip, to whom the emperor’s ambassador had, in his master’s name, promised a regiment of horse. They were kindly received by the emperor; and Eugene presently became a very great favourite with his imperial majesty. He had in the mean time many flattering promises and invitations to return to France; but his fidelity to the emperor was unshaken, and he resolved to think no more of France, but to look on himself as a German, and to spend his life in the service of the house of Austria.

In 1688 Belgrade was besieged and taken; where Eugene, who was always among the foremost in any onset, received a cut through his helmet by a sabre, but repaid the blow by laying the Turk who gave it him dead at his feet. Lewis XIV. had now invaded the empire with a powerful army, and declared war against the emperor; which caused a great alteration in the affairs of Vienna, and forced that court to form a new plan for the campaign of 1689. As the emperor was more concerned to defend himself against the French than the Turks, the dukes of Lorrain and Bavaria were appointed to command upon the Rhine, and prince Lewis of Baden in Hungary. The duke of Savoy having informed the court of Vienna of the danger he was in by the approach of French troops, the imperial ministers promised themselves great advantages from the war in Italy, on the account of the powerful diversion that his royal highness might be able to make there in favour of the empire. Eugene was intrusted by the court of Vienna to manage this expedition; and was thought the most proper person, not only because he was related to the duke of Savoy, but because of the vast reputation he had lately acquired in Hungary, which rendered him yet more acceptable to his royal highness, who received him with all the marks of sincere friendship. Accordingly, he took upon him the command of the emperor’s forces in Italy, and blocked up Mantua, which had received a French garrison, of whom he killed above 500 in several sallies: so that during 1691 and 1692 they never durst attempt the least excursion. In 1692, at his return from Vienna, whither he had been to give the emperor an account of the last campaign, he entered Dauphiny. The inhabitants of Gap brought him the keys of the town, and all the neighbouring country submitted to contribution: but the great designs he had formed soon vanished; for the Spaniards would stay no longer in the army, nor keep the post of Guillestre, though Eugene, whom they very much esteemed, endeavoured to make them change their resolution. This miscarriage is also partly attributed to the sickness of the duke of Savoy, who was persuaded to make a will at this time, wherein he declared Eugene administrator, or regent, during the minority of his successor.

In 1696, after the separate peace between France and Savoy, at which Eugene was extremely dissatisfied, the French king made very large offers to draw him over to his interest. He offered him particularly his father’s government of Champaigne, the dignity of a marshal of France, and an annual pension of 2000 pistoles: but nothing was capable of shaking his fidelity to the emperor, who afterwards made him commander of his army in Hungary, preferably to many older generals. In 1697, being commander in chief of the imperial army in Hungary, he gave the Turks the greatest blow they had ever received in the whole war, and gained a complete victory over them at Zenta, not far from Peterwaradin. The grand seignior came to command his armies in person, and lay encamped on both sides [of] the Thiesse, having laid a bridge over the river. Eugene marched up to him, and attacked his camp on the west side of the river; and, after a short dispute, broke in, made himself master of it, and forced all who lay on that side over the river, whither he followed them, and gave them a total defeat. In this action the Germans had no more than 430 men killed, and 1583 wounded: but of the Turks 22,000 were killed in the field, among whom were the grand visier, and the aga of the janisaries; 10 or 12,000 were drowned in the Thiesse, and 6000 wounded and taken prisoners, among whom were 27 pashas, and several agas. The Imperialists took 9000 laden waggons, after 3000 had been thrown into the river; the grand seignior’s tent, valued at 40,000 livres, with all the rest belonging to his army; 17,000 oxen, 6000 camels, all heavy laden; 7000 horses, 100 heavy cannon, and 70 field-pieces, besides 500 drums, and as many colours, 707 horses tails, 83 other standards, a scymitar of inestimable value, the sultan’s great seal, his coach drawn by eight horses, wherein were ten of the women of his seraglio; 74 pair of silver kettle-drums, all the grand seignior’s papers, and all the money that was to pay the army, which came to above 3,000,000 livres; and it is said, that the whole booty amounted to several millions of pounds sterling.

In 1699 the peace of Carlowitch was concluded, and an end put at length to the war, which had lasted fifteen years: and it was a great satisfaction to Eugene to have contributed so much to the finishing of it by this famous victory at Zenta. He had passed the first years of his youth in the wars of Hungary; was in almost all the battles, where he had eminently distinguished himself; and it seemed now, that he had nothing to do but to enjoy at Vienna that tranquillity which is sometimes, although not always, relished by men who have spent their lives amidst the noise of arms and dangers. But this repose was not to last long. The king of Spain’s death, and the dreaded union of that monarchy with France which followed, kindled a new war, which called him to Italy to command the emperor’s army there. His Imperial majesty published a manifesto, setting forth his title to the crown of Spain, when Eugene was upon the point of entering Italy. The progress of his arms under this general made the French king resolve to send marshal Villeroy into Italy, in the room of marshal Catinat, who had not given satisfaction. But Eugene soon let him see that numbers alone, in which the French were greatly superior, could not gain a victory; for he foiled him in every skirmish and engagement, and at length took him prisoner by a contrivance conducted with so much secrecy, that the French had not the least suspicion of it. Eugene went to put himself at the head of a body he brought from the Oglio, and ordered another to come from the Parmezan at the same time to force the bridge. He marched with all secrecy to Cremona; and sent in, through the ruins of an old aqueduct, men who got through and forced one of the gates; so that he was within the town before Villeroy had any apprehension of an army being near him. Awakened on a sudden with the noise, he got out to the street, and there was taken prisoner. At the instant that one of the German officers laid hold on him he whispered him, and said, “I am marshal de Villeroy: I will give you ten thousand pistoles, and promise you a regiment, if you will carry me to the castle.” But the officer answered him, “I have a long time faithfully served the emperor my master, and will not now betray him.” So he was sent to the place where Eugene was; who sent him to one more secure, under a strong guard. But, notwithstanding this, the other body neglecting to come up at the time appointed, an Irish regiment secured the bridge; and the design of capturing the garrison failed, although it was so well contrived and so happily executed on one part. Eugene had but four thousand men with him, and the other body not being able to join him, he was forced to march back, which he did without any considerable loss, carrying marshal Villeroy and some other prisoners with him. In this attempt, though he had not an entire success, yet he gained all the glory to which the ambition of a military man could aspire, and was considered as the greatest and happiest general of the age.

In 1713, though forced to act only defensively on the Rhine against the French, who now threatened to overrun the empire, he nevertheless so signalized himself by his vigilance and conduct, that he obliged them to spend one whole summer in taking Landau and Friburg. March 6, 1714, he concluded with marshal Villars, at Rastadt, preliminary articles of a general peace between the empire and France; which were signed by him, as his imperial majesty’s plenipotentiary, Sept. the 27th following, in a solemn treaty of peace, at Baden in Ergau: in which treaty he is entitled “The most high prince and lord Eugene, prince of Savoy and Piedmont, knight of the golden fleece, counsellor of state to his sacred imperial majesty, president of the council of war, lieutenant-general and marshal of the holy Roman empire.” Upon his return to Vienna, he was received with the loudest acclamations of joy by the people, and with the most cordial affection by the emperor, who presented him with a fine sword richly adorned with diamonds. He now seemed to have some respite from the fatigues of war but neither was this to last long: for, though peace was concluded with France, yet war broke out on the side of the Turks, who in 1716 began to make extraordinary preparations. Eugene was sent with the command of the imperial army into Hungary, attacked the Turks in their camp, and obtained a complete victory over them. He took the important fortress of Temeswaer, after the Turks bad been in possession of it 164 years; and next invested Belgrade, which he also took.

, a very eminent mathematician, was born at Basil, on the 14th of April, 1707: he was the son of Paul Euler and of Margaret Brucker (of a family illustrious in literature), and spent the first year of his life at the village of Richen, of which place his father was protestant minister. Being intended for the church, his father, who had himself studied under James Bernoulli!, taught him mathematics, as a ground-work of his other studies, or at least a noble and useful secondary occupation. But Euler, assisted and perhaps secretly encouraged by John Bernoulli, who easily discovered that he would be the greatest scholar he should ever educate, soon declared his intention of devoting his life to that pursuit. This intention the wise father did not thwart, but the son did not so blindly adhere to it, as not to connect with it a more than common improvement in every other kind of useful learn-, ing, insomuch that in his latter days men often wondered how with such a superiority in one branch, he could have been so near to eminence in all the rest. Upon the foundation of the academy of sciences at St. Petersburgh, in, 1723, by Catherine I. the two younger Bernouillis, NichoJas and Daniel, had gone thither, promising, when they set out, to endeavour to procure Euler a place in it: they accordingly wrote to him soon after, to apply his mathetics to physiology, which he did, and studied under the best naturalists at Basil, but at the same time, i. e. in 1727, published a dissertation on the nature and propagation of sound; and an answer to the question on the masting of ships, which the academy of sciences at Paris judged worthy of the accessit. Soon after this, he was called to St. Petersburgh, and declared adjutant to the mathematical class in the academy, a class, in which, from the circumstances of the times (Newton, Leibnitz, and so many other eminent scholars being just dead), no easy laurels were to be gathered. Nature, however, who had organized so many mathematical heads at one time, was not yet tired of her miracles and she added Euler to the number. He indeed was much wanted the science of the calculus integralis, hardly come out of the hands of its creators, was still too near the stage of its infancy not to want to be made more perfect. Mechanics, dynamics, and especially hydrodynamics, and the science of the motion of the heavenly bodies, felt the imperfection. The application of the differential calculus, to them, had been sufficiently successful; but there were difficulties whenever it was necessary to go from the fluxional quantity to the fluent. With regard to the nature and properties of numbers, the writings of Fermat (who had been so successful in them), and together with these all his profound researches, were lost. Engineering and navigation were reduced to vague principles, and were founded on a heap of often contradictory observations, rather than a regular theory. The irregularities in the motions of the celestial bodies, and especially the complication of forces whitfh influence that of the moon, were still the disgrace of geometers. Practical astronomy had jet to wrestle with the imperfection of telescopes, insomuch, that it could hardly be said that any rule for making them existed. Euler turned his eyes to all these objects he perfected the calculus integralis he was the inventor of a new kind of calculus, that of sines he simplified analytical operations and, aided by these powerful help-mates, and the astonishing facility with which he knew how to subdue expressions the most intractable, he threw a new light on all the branches of the mathematics. But at Catherine’s death the academy was threatened with extinction, by men who knew not the connection which arts and sciences have with the happiness of a people. Euler was offered and accepted a lieutenancy on board one of the empress’s ships, with the promise of speedy advancement. Luckily things changed, and the learned captain again found his own element, and was named Professor of Natural Philosophy in 1733, in the room of his friend John Bernouilli. The number of memoirs which Euler produced, prior to this period, is astonishing, but what he did in 1735 is almost incredible, An important calculation was to be made, without loss of time; the other academicians had demanded some months to do it. Euler asked three days—in three days he did it; but the fatigne threw him into a fever, and the fever left him not without the loss of an eye, an admonition which would have made an ordinary man more sparing of the other. The great revolution, produced by the discovery of fluxions, had entirely changed the face of mechanics; still, however, there was no complete work on the science of motion, two or three only excepted, of which Euler felt the insufficiency. He saw, with pain, that the best works on the subject, viz. “Newton’s Principia,” and “Herman’s Phoronomia,” concealed the method by which these great men had come at so many wonderful discoveries, under a synthetic veil. In order to lift this up, Euler employed all the resources of that analysis which had served him so well on so many other occasions; and thus uniting his own discoveries to those of other geometers, had them published by the academy in 1736. To say that clearness, precision, and order, are the characters of this work, would be barely to say, that it is, what without these qualities no work can be, classical of its kind. It placed Euler in the rank of the first geometricians then existing, and this at a time when John Bernouilli was still living. Such labours demanded some relaxation; the only one which Euler admitted was music, but even to this he could not go without the spirit of geometry with him. They produced together the essay on a new theory of music, which was published in 1739, but not very well received, probably, because it contains too much geometry for a musician, and too much music for a geometrician. Independently, however, of the theory, which is built on Pythagorean principles, there are many things in it which may be of service, both to composers, and to makers of instruments. The doctrine, likewise, of the genera and the modes of music is here cleared up with all the clearness and precision which mark the works of Euler. Dr. Burney remarks, that upon the whole, Euler seems not to have invented much in this treatise; and to have done little more than arrange and methodize former discoveries in a scientific and geometric manner. He may, indeed, not have known what antecedent writers had discovered before; and though not the first, yet to have imagined himself an inventor. In 1740, his genius was again called forth by the academy of Paris (who, in 1738, had adjudged the prize to his paper on the nature and properties of fire) to discuss the nature of the tides, an important question, which demanded a prodigious extent of calculations, aud an entire new system of the world. This prize Euler did not gain alone; but he divided it with Maclaurin and D. Bernouilli, forming with them a triumvirate of candidates, which the realms of science had not often beheld. The agreement of the several memoirs of Euler and Bernouilli, on this occasion, is very remarkable. Though the one philosopher had set out on the principle of admitting vortices, which the other rejected, they not only arrived at the same end of the journey, but met several times on the road; for instance, in the determination of the tides under the frozen zone. Philosophy, indeed, led these two great men by different paths; Bernouilli, who had more patience than his friend, sanctioned every physical hypothesis he was obliged to make, by painful and laborious experiment. These Euler’s impetuous genius scorned; and, though his natural sagacity did not always supply the loss, he made amends by his superiority in analysis, as often as there was any occasion to simplify expressions, to adapt them to practice, and to recognize, by final formulae, the nature of the result. In 1741, Euler received some very advantageous propositions from Frederic the Second (who had just ascended the Prussian throne), to go and assist him in forming an academy of sciences, out of the wrecks of the Royal Society founded by Leibnitz. With these offers the tottering state of the St. Petersburgh academy, under the regency, made it necessary for the philosopher to comply. He accordingly illumined the last volume of the “Melanges de Berlin,” with five essays, which are, perhaps, the best things in it, and contributed largely to the academical volumes, the first of which was published in 1744. No part of his multifarious labours is, perhaps, a more wonderful proof of the extensiveness and facility of his genius, than what he executed at Berlin, at a time when he contrived also that the Petersburgh acts should not suffer from the loss of him. In 1744, Euler published a complete treatise of isoperimetrical curves. The same year beheld the theory of the motions of tb.e planets and comets; the well-known theory of magnetism, which gained the Paris prize; and the much-amended translation of Robins’ s “Treatise on Gunnery.” In 1746, his “Theory of Light and Colours” overturned Newton’s “System of Emanations;” as did another work, at that time triumphant, the “Monads of Wolfe and Leibnitz.” Navigation was now the only branch of useful knowledge, for which the labours of analysis and geometry had done nothing. The hydrographical part alone, and that which relates to the direction of the course of ships, had been treated by geometricians conjointly with nautical astronomy. Euler was the first who conceived and executed the project of making this a complete science. A memoir on the motion of floating bodies, communicated to the academy of St. Petersburgh, in 1735, by M. le Croix, first gave him this idea. His researches on the equilibrium of ships furnished him with the means of bringing the stability to a determined measure. His success encouraged him to go on, and produced the great work which the academy published in 1749, in which we find, in systematic order, the most sublime notions on the theory of the equilibrium and mo. tion of floating bodies, and on the resistance of fluids. This was followed by a second part, which left nothing to be desired on the subject, except the turning it into a language easy of access, and divesting it of the calculations which prevented its being of general use. Accordingly in 1773, from a conversation with admiral Knowles, and other assistance, out of the “Scientia Navalis,” 2 vols. 4to, was produced, the “Theorie complette de la Construction et de la Manoeuvre des Vaisseaux.” This work was instantly translated into all languages, and the author received a present of 6000 livres from the French king: he had before had 300l. from the English parliament, for the theorems, by the assistance of which Meyer made his lunar tables . And now it was time to collect into one systematical and continued work, all the important discoveries on the infinitesimal analysis, which Euler had been making for thirty years, and which lay dispersed in the memoirs of the different academies. This, accordingly, the professor undertook; but he prepared the way by an elementary work, containing all the previous requisites for this study. This is called “An Introduction to the analysis of Infinitesimals,” and is a work in which the author has exhausted all the doctrine of fractions, whether algebraical or transcendental, by shewing their transformation, their resolution, and their developernent. This introduction was soon, followed by the author’s several lessons on the “calculus integralis, and differentialis.” Having engaged himself to count Orlow, to furnish the academy with papers sufficient to fill their volumes for twenty years after his death, the philosopher is likely to keep his word, having presented seventy papers, through Mr. Golofkin, in the course of his life, and left two hundred and fifty more behind him; nor is there one of these that does not contain a discovery, or something that may lead to one. The most ancient of these memoirs form the collection then published, under the title of “Opuscula Analytica.” Such were Euler’s labours, and these his titles to immortality His memory shall endure till science herself is no more! Few men of letters have written so much as Euler no geometrician, has ever embraced so many objects at one time or has equalled him, either in the variety or magnitude of his discoveries. When we reflect on the good such men do their fellow-creatures, we cannot help indulging a wish (vain, alas as it is) for their illustrious course to be prolonged beyond the term allotted to mankind. Euler’s, though it has had an end, was very long and very honourable; and it affords us some consolation for his loss, to think that he enjoyed it exempt from the ordinary consequences of extraordinary application, and that his last labours abounded in proofs of that vigour of understanding which marked his early days, and which he preserved to his end. Some swimmings in the head, which seized him on the first days of September, 1783, did not prevent his laying hold of a few facts, which reached him through the channel of the public papers, to calculate the motions of the aerostatical globes; and he even compassed a very difficult integration, in which the calculation had engaged him . But the decree was gone forth: on the 7th of September he talked with Mr. Lexell, who had come to dine with him, of the new planet, and discoursed with him upon other subjects, with his usual penetration. He was playing with one of his grand-children at tea-time, when he was seized with an apoplectic fit. “I am dying,” said he, before he lost his senses; and he ended his glorious life a few hours after, aged seventy-six years, five months, and three days. His latter days were tranquil and serene. A few infirmities excepted, which are the inevitable lot of an advanced age, he enjoyed a share of health which allowed him to give little time to repose. Euler possessed to a great degree what is commonly called erudition he had read all the Latin classics was perfect master of ancient mathematical literature and had the history of all ages, and all nations, even to the minutest facts, ever present to his mind. Besides this, he knew much more of physic, botany, and chemistry, than could be expected from any man who had not made these sciences his peculiar occupation. “I have seen,” says his biographer, Mr. Fuss, “strangers go from him with a kind of surprise mixed with admiration; they could not conceive how a man, who for half a century had seemed taken up in making and publishing discoveries in natural philosophy and mathematics, could have found means to preserve so much knowledge that seemed useless to himself, and foreign to the studies in which he was engaged. This was the effect of a happy memory, that lost nothing of what had ever been entrusted to it nor was it a wonder that the man who was able to repeat the whole Æneis, and to point out to his hearers the first and last verses of every page of his own edition of it, should not have lost what he had learned, at an age when the impressions made upon us are the strongest. Nothing can equal the ease with which, without expressing the least degree of ill-humour, he could quit his abstruse meditations, and give himself up to the general amusements of society. The art of not appearing wise above one’s fellows, of descending to the level of those with whom one lives, is too rare in these days not to make it a merit in Euler to have possessed it. A temper ever equal, a natural and easy chearfulness, a species of satirical wit, tempered with urbane humanity, the art of telling a story archly, and with simplicity, made his conversation generally sought. The great fund of vivacity which he had at all times possessed, and without which, indeed, the activity we have just been admiring could not have existed, carried him sometimes away, and he was apt to grow warm, but his anger left him as quickly as it came on, and there never has existed a man to whom he bore malice. He possessed a precious fund of rectitude and probity. The sworn enemy of injustice, whenever or by whomsoever committed, he used to censure and attack it, without the least attention to the rank or riches of the offender. Recent examples of this are in the recollection of all who hear me.” As he was filled with respect for religion, his piety was sincere, and his devotion full of fervour. He went through all his Christian duties with the greatest attention. Euler loved all mankind, and if he ever felt a motion of indignation, it was against the enemy of religion, particularly against the declared apostles of infidelity. He was of a very religious turn of mind. He published a New Demonstration of the Existence of God, and of the Spirituality of the Soul, which last has been admitted into several divinity schools as a standard book. With scrupulous exactness he adhered to the religion of his country, that of Calvinism, and, fortified by its principles, he was a good husband, a good father, a good friend, a good citizen, a good member of private society.

The learned works for which he is chiefly memorable are his “Commentaries upon Homer and Dionysius Periegetes.” His “Commentaries upon Homer” were first published with that poet at Rome in 1550, under the pontificate of Julius Hi. to whom they were dedicated; and were reprinted by Frobenius at Basil ten years after. They are very copious, and frequently illustrate the text; but are principally valued by grammarians, for the great assistance they afford, in understanding the Greek language. The learned Duport, in his f< Gnomologia Homerica,“wonders that Eustathius, who was a Christian and an archbishop, should never mention Holy Scripture, and very seldom the ecclesiastical writers, throughout his Commentaries, though he had so many opportunities of introducing both. Fabricius, however, imputes this silence to his having collected the materials of them from the more ancient commentators upon Homer, who knew nothing of the sacred books, which is not improbable. Eustatliius’s” Commentaries upon the Periegesis of Dionysius,“were first published at Paris in 1577, but very imperfectly; they were afterwards greatly augmented by Fabricius, who supplied a hiatus between verses 889 and 917; and this addition was inserted in its proper place by Hudson, in his edition at Oxford, 1697, 8vo. From the similarity of the name, the” Loves of Ismenias and Ismene“have very unjustly been attributed to him.” Eustathii Comment, in Hexaemeron,“Leyden, 1629, has also by some been attributed to him, but the real author and the time he lived are unknown. Among the Mss. in the library of the Escurial, are two discourses attributed to him; the one,” Oratio ad eos qui in templo erant Sancti Myroblytæ, id est Demetrii, in principio indictionis, anno mundi 670.2 (A. C. 1194);“the other,” Oratio ad Michaelem Stathmitem, Saccularium et Chartophylacem, quod saepe cum melodiis celebrare debeaut inemoriam Sancti martyris Demetrii.“Oudin, who informs us of these manuscripts, adds, that among the Mss. upon paper in the library of Basil, theVe is a very beautiful oije in Greek, of the quarto size, whii'h is titled” The Homilies of Eustathius the metropolitan of Thessalo.iica,“and in the Bodleian are some Mss. attributed to him, as, an” Oratio in Imperatorem Em. Comnenuin;“” Supplicatio,“as it appears to be,” ad eundem Imperatorem, nomine civitatis cum siccitate laboiMvit,“&” Lamentatio in obitu fratris." In the same collection also, are two funeral orations delivered on the death of Eustathius, one of which, Fabricius assures us was by Michael Chonita Acominat, archbishop of Athens; the other bears the name of Euthymius, who, according to Fabricius and Oudin, was Eutbynius Zigubeaus, or Zigadenus, who flourished under Alexis Camnenus, but this is doubtful. Du Cange notices a correspondence between Eustathius and Michael Psellus in the French king’s library, and in that of Vienna is a commentary by him on John of Damascus’s hymn for the day of Pentecost. In Aldus’s collection of Greek grammarians is a treatise by him on the dialects used by Homer. The manuscript copies of his Commentary on Homer are not scarce in France, and there are some in Italy, of which Polito availed himself when he began his new edition of Eustathius in 1730, &c. but he finished only the first five books of the Iliad. The only complete editions are those mentioned above.

, an Italian sophist, according to Snidas, but probably a Greek by birth, wrote a compendious history of Roman affairs, divided into ten books, from the foundation of the city to the reign of Valens, to whom it was dedicated: that is, to A. D. 364. He was secretary to Constantine the Great, and afterwards served as a soldier under Julian the Apostate, whom he attended in his unfortunate expedition against the Persians. It appears, too, that he bore the offices of Proconsul, and Praetorian Praefect. There have been two opinions about his religion, some supposing him to have been a Christian, others a heathen. The former ground their opinion chiefly upon a passage, where he speaks of Julian as a persecutor of Christians: “Nimius Religionis Christianas insectator, perinde tamen ut cruore abstineret;” a persecutor of the Christian religion, yet abstaining from sanguinary methods. But it is more probable that he was an heathen, not only from his situation and character under Julian, but from the testimony of Nicephorus Gregoras, who declares him to have been “of the same age and sect” with that emperor. Vossius thinks that he might be neither Christian nor heathen; and seems inclined to rank him with many ethers of his times, who hesitated between the two religions, without embracing either. A passage in some editions of his history, in which he speaks of Jesus Christ as our God and Lord, is acknowledged to be spurious. The best editions of Eutropius, are those of Havercarnp, 1729, and ofVerheyk, published at Leyden in 1762, in 8vo, with every useful illustration. At the end of the tenth book, he promises another historical work, or rather a continuation of this; and he tells us, that he “must raise his style, and double his diligence, when he enters upon the reign of such respectable and illustrious princes as Valens and VaJentian:” but death, probably, prevented the execution of his purpose. There are two Greek versions of this short history of Eutropius, one by Capito Lycius, and another by Paeanias, both ancient. There is a French translation by the abbé Lezeau but no good one in English. Eutropius has long been one of our most common school-books but as his style is not of the first purity, some eminent teachers have lately discontinued the use of his history.

, a Greek writer of the fifth century, composed a book under the title of “Altercatio Symonis Judaei & Theophili Christiani,” which may be seen in Martenne’s­“Thesaurus Anecdotorum.” The authors of the “Histoire literaire de la France,” torn. II. have shewn that the author of this writing mentioned by Gennadius was not a Greek, but a French priest, who had been the disciple of St. Martin. They place him accordingly in the former half of the fifth century, and ascribe to him likewise the “Consultationes seu deliberationes Zachan Christiani & Apollonii philosophi,” which Luke d'Acheri has printed in his “Spicilegium,” tom. X.

, a king of the Arabs, is said to have lived in the first century, and to have applied himself with great industry to the study of medicine. Pliny mentions that he wrote a book “De simplicium effectibus,” which he dedicated to Nero. But it is proved, both by Salmasius and Hardouin, that this account is not found in the best manuscripts of Pliny for which reason the former delivers it as his opinion, that by an error of transcribers, from Cratevas, who in some copies is also named Cratevax, this Evax has arisen. A manuscript is still found in several libraries “On the properties and effects of precious stones,” which is attributed to a certain Evax but Salmasius has remarked, that this piece was first cited by Marbodee, a French poet of the eleventh century, and therefore spurious in regard to its pretended antiquity. It was published by Henry llantzovius at Leipsic in 1585, 4to. under the title “De Gemmis scriptum, olim a poeta quodam non infeliciter carmine redditum, et mine primuin in lucem editum.”

Mr. Evelyn’s early affection to, and skill in, the fine arts, appeared during these travels; for we find that he delineated upon the spot, the prospects of several remarkable places that lie between Rome and Naples, particularly “The three Taverns or the forum of Appius,” mentioned in the twenty-eighth chapter of the Acts “The promontory of Auxur” “A prospect of Naples from mount Vesuvius;” “A prospect of Vesuvius, as it appears towards Naples,” and “The mouth of mount Vesuvius.” All these were engraved from our author’s sketches, by Hoare, an artist of character at that time, though some have attributed these engravings to himself. Architecture, painting, and sculpture, Mr. Evelyn particularly studied, and seems to have contracted an acquaintance with those persons who were most eminent in each branch of these arts. Nanteuil, the celebrated French engraver, appears to have been his particular favourite, who, besides drawing a portrait of him in black and white, with Indian ink, engraved a print of him in 1650, which is mentioned by Florent Le Comte in these words, “Yvelin, dit le petit milord Anglois, ou Je portrait Grec; parcequ'il y a du Grec au bas; ou est ecrit aussi, meliora retinete.” The Greek is a sentence from Isocrates, to this purpose, “Let your pictures rather preserve the memory of your virtues, than of your person.”

Being now recommended to sir Richard Brown, bart. the king’s minister there, he made his addresses to his only daughter Mary, whom he married June 27, 1647, and in her right became possessed of Sayes-court near Deptford, in Kent, where he resided after his return to England, which was in October of that year. Soon after his arrival he went to Hampton court, where he had the honour to kiss his majesty’s hand, and gave him an account of several things he had in charge. On Jan. 21, 1648-9, he published his tract on liberty and servitude, for which he wasseverely threatened, and probably on this account he went again to France in July 1649, and in November of that year he attended his father-in-law sir Richard Brown, when he had his first audience at the French court, after the death of Charles I. and delivered his credentials from Charles II. In July 1650 he went again to England, but returned to Paris in the following month. In Jan. 1651-2 he left France, and returning to England, settled at Sayescourt near Deptford, and in May was joined by his wife from France. In all he appears to have spent about seven years in his travels, and with a mind highly improved by what he had seen and read, he silently pursued his studies at this retirement (for such it then was), and wrote and published some of those works which afterwards gave him a distinguished name in the learned world. It was here also that he first shewed his skill in planting and gardening, both then very little understood in England, and rendered this place the wonder and admiration of the most judicious men of his time. The situation, indeed, of public affairs induced him to consider privacy as a very great blessing; and so fond was he of his rural retreat, that he very rarely quitted it, though but a young man, with a considerable fortune, and extremely admired and courted by all his acquaintance. This studious disposition, together with his disgust of the world, occasioned by that strange scene of violence and confusion that was then acted upon the public stage, was so strong, that he actually proposed to the honourable Mr. Robert Boyle, the raising of a kind of college for the reception of persons of the same turn of mind, where they might enjoy the pleasure of agreeable society, and at the same time pass their days without care or interruption. His plan was thus formed: “I propose the purchasing of thirty or forty acres of land, in some healthy place, not above twenty-five miles from London, of which a good part should be tall wood, and the rest upland pastures, or downs sweetly irrigated. If there were not already an house which might be converted, &c. we wonld erect, upon the most convenient site of this near the wood, our building, viz. one handsome pavillion, containing a refectory, library, withdrawing-room, and a closet this the first story for, we suppose the kitchen, larders, cellars, and offices, to be contrived in the half-story under ground. In the second should be a fair lodging-chamber, a palletroom, gallery, and a closet, all which should be well and very nobly furnished, for any worthy person that might desire to stay any time, and for the reputation of the college. The half-story above, for servants, wardrobes, and like conveniences. To the entry fore-front of this court, and at the other back-front, a plot walled in, of a competent square for the common seraglio, disposed into a garden, or it might be only carpet, kept curiously, and to serve for bowls, walking, or other recreations, &c. if the company please. Opposite to the house, towards the wood, should be erected a pretty chapel, and, at equal distances, even within the flanking walls of the square, six apartments or cells for the members of the society, and not contiguous to the pavillion, each whereof should contain a small bed-chamber, an outward room, a closet, and a private garden, somewhat after the manner of the Carthusians. There should likewise be an elaboratory, with a repository for rarities and things of nature; aviary, dovehouse, physic-garden, kitchen-garden, and a plantation of orchard-fruit, &c. all uniform buildings, but of single stories, or a little elevated. At a convenient distance, towards the olitory garden, should be a stable for two or three horses, and a lodging for a servant or two. Lastly, a garden-house and conservatory for tender plants. The estimate amounts thus the pavillion 400l. the chapel, 150. apartments, walls, and out-housing, 600l. the purchase of a fee for thirty acres, at fifteen pounds 1600/, will be the utmost. Three of the cells, or apartments, that is, one moiety with the appurtenances, shall be at the disposal of one of the founders, and the other half at the others. If, I and my wife take up two apartments (for we are to be decently asunder, however, I stipulate, and her inclination will greatly suit with it, that shall be no impediment to the society, but a considerable advantage to the ceeonomicpart), a third shall be for some, worthy person; and, to facilitate the rest, I offer to furnish the whole pavillion completely to the value of 500l. in goods and moveables, if need be for seven years, till there shall be a public stock, &c. There shall be maintained, at the public charge, only a chaplain, well qualified, an ancient woman to dress the meat, wash, and do all such offices; a man to buy provision, keep the garden, horses, &c. a boy to assist him and serve within. At one meal a day, of two dishes only, unless some little, extraordinary upon particular days or occasions (then never exceeding three) of plain and wholesome meat a small refection at night wine, beer, sugar, spice, bread, fish, fowl, candle, soap, oats, hay, fuel, &c. at four pounds per week, 200l. per annum; wages, fifteen pounds; keeping the gardens, twenty pounds; the chaplain, twenty pounds per annum. Laid up in the treasury 145l. to be employed for books, instruments, drugs, trials, &c. The. total, 400l. a year, comprehending the keeping of two horses for the chariot, or the saddle, and two kine; so that 200l. per annum will be the utmost that the founders shall be at to maintain the whole society, consisting of nine persons (the servants included), though there should no others join capable to alleviate the expence. But, if any of those who desire to be of the society be so well qualified as to support their own particulars, and allow for their proportion, it will yet much diminish the charge; and of such there cannot want some at all times, as the apartments are empty. If either of the founders thinks expedient to alter his condition, or that any thing do humanitus contingere, he may resign to another, or sell to his colleague, and dispose of it as he pleases, yet so as it still continue the institution. Orders. At six, in summer, prayers in the chapel. To study till half an hour after eleven. Dinner in the refectory till one. Retire till four. Then called to conversation (if the weather invite) abroad, else in the refectory. This never omitted but in case of sickness. Prayers at seven. To bed at nine. In the winter the same, with some abatements for the hours, because the nights are tedious, and the evening’s conversation more agreeable. This in the refectory. All play interdicted, sans bowls, chess, &c. Every one to cultivate his own garden. One month in spring a course in the claboratory on vegetables, &c. In the winter a month on other experiments. Every man to have a key of the elaboratory, pavillion, library, repository, &c. Weekly fast. Communion once every fortnight, or month at least. No stranger easily admitted to visit any of the society, but upon certain days weekly, and that only after dinner. Any of the society may have his commons to his apartment, if he will not meet in the refectory, so it be not above twice a week. Every Thursday shall be a music-meeting at conversation hours. Every person of the society shall render some public account of his studies weekly, if thought fit, and especially shall be recommended the promotion of experimental knowledge, as the principal end of the institution. There shall be a decent habit and uniform used in the college. One month in the year may be spent in London, or any of the universities, or in a perambulation for the public befiefit, &c. with what other orders shall be thought convenient.”

As considerable light is thrown on the history and merits of Mr. Evelyn from the account given of his works, little apology need be made for the length of the article, taken principally from the Biographia Britannica. These were, 1. His treatise “Of Liberty and Servitude,” 1649, 12mo. This was a translation, and in all probability the first essay of our author’s pen. 2. “A Character of England, as it was lately presented in a letter to a nobleman of France, with reflections upon Callus Castratus,” 1651, 16to. The third edition of this book appeared in 1659; at present it is very scarce. 3. “The State of France,” London, 1652, 8vo. 4. “An Essay on the First Book of Titus Lucretius Carus, de renim natura, interpreted, and made into English verse, by J. Evelyn, esq.” London, 1656, 8vo. The frontispiece to this book was designed by his lady, Mary Evelyn. There is a copy of verses by F.dmun.l Waller, esq. of Beaconsfield, prefixed and directed to his worthy friend Mr. Evelyn, perhaps too extravagant. As there are many faults, however, in this work which do not belong to the author, we shall subjoin the transcript of a ms note in his own hand-writing in the copy at Wotton: “Never was book so abominably misused by printer; never copy so negligently surveied by one who undertooke to looke over the proofe-sheetes with all exactnesse and care, naqely Dr. Triplet, well knowne for his abiilitie, and who pretended, to oblige me in Hiv absence, and so readily offer'd himselfe. This good yet I received by it, that publishing it vaiiu-ly, its ill succese at the printer’s discouraged me with troubling the world with the rest.” 5. “The French Gardener, instructing how to cultivate all sorts of fruit-trees and herbs for the garden, together with directions to dry and conserve them in their natural,” &c. Lond. 1658, in 12mo, and several times after. In most of the editions is added, “The English Vineyard vindicated, by John Rose, gardener to his majesty king Charles II. with a' tract of the making and ordering of wines in France.” The third edition of this French Gardener, which came out in 1676, was illustrated with sculptures. 6. “The golden book of St. Oh ry sos torn, concerning the Education of Children.” Lond. 1659, 12mo, in the preface to which is a very interesting account of his son Richard, an amiable and promising child, who died in infancy, Jan. 27, 1657. This little narrative, as Mr. Evelyn’s work is scarce, may be seen in decade first of Barksdale’s Memorials, which, however, is almost as scarce. 7. “An Apology for the Royal Party, c.” 1659, 4to, mentioned above. 8. “The late News or Message from Brussels unmasked,” 1659, 4 to, also mentioned above. 9. A Panegyric at his, majesty king Charles II. his Coronation,' 1 Loncl. 1661, fol. 10. “Instructions concerning the erecting of a Library, written by Gabriel Naude”, published in English, with some improvements,“Lond. 1661, 8vo. ll.” Fumifugium or the inconveniences of the air and the smoke of London dissipated together with some remedies humbly proposed,“London, 1661, 4to, in five sheets, addressed to the king and parliament, and published by hisma jesty’s express command. Of this there was a late edition in 1772. 12.” Tyrannies or the Mode in a discourse of sumptuary laws“Lond. 1661, 8vo. 13.” Sculptnra; or the history a-id art of Chalcography and Engraving in Copper, with an ample enumeration of the most renowned masters and their works; to which is annexed, a new manner of engraving, or mezzo-tinto,. communicated by his highness prince Rupert to the author of this treatise,“Lond. 1662, 8vo. In the dedication to Mr. Robert Boyle, dated: at Sayes-court, April 5th, 1662, he observes, that he wrote this treatise at the reiterated instance of that gentleman. The first chapter treats of sculpture, howderived and distinguished, with the styles and instruments belonging to it. The second, of the original of sculpture in general. la this chapter our author observes, that letters, and consequently sculpture, were lon.g before the flood, Suidas ascribing both letters and all the rest of the sciences to Adam. After the flood, as he supposes, there were but few who make any considerable question, that it might not be propagated by Noah to his posterity, though some admit of none before Moses. The third chapter treats of the reputation and progress of sculpture among the Greeks and Romans down to the middle ages, with a discussion of some pretensions to the invention of copper cuts and their impressions. The fourth, of the invention and progress of chalcography in particular, together with an ample enumeration of the most renowned masters and their works. The fifth, of drawing and design previous to the art of chalcography, and of the use of pictures in order to theeducation of children. In this chapter, our author, in honour of the art upon which he writes, discourses thus:” It was in the former chapter that we made rehearsal of the most renowned gravers and their works, not that we had no more to add to that number, but because we would not mingle these illustrious names and qualities there, which we purposely reserved for the crown of this discourse. We did, therefore, forbear to mention what his highness prince Rupert’s own hands have contributed to the dignity of that art, performing things in graving, of which some enrich our collection, comparable to the greatest masters; such a spirit and address there appears in all that he touches, and especially in that of the mezzotinto, of which we shall speak hereafter more at large, having first enumerated those incomparable gravings of that his new and inimitable style, in both the great and little decollations of St. John the Baptist, the soldier holding a spear and leaning his hand on a shield, the two Mary Magdalens, the old man’s head, that of Titian, &c. after the same Titian, Georgion, and others. We have also seen a plate etched by the present French king, and other great persons; the right honourable the earl of Sandwich, sometimes, as we are told, diverting himself with the burine, and herein imitating those ancient and renowned heroes, whose names are loud in the trumpet of fame for their skill and particular affection to these arts. For such of old were Lucius Manilius, and Fabius, noble Romans, Pacuvius, the tragic poet, nephew to Ennius. Socrates, the wisest of men, and Plato himself, Metrodorus and Pyrrhus the philosopher, did both desigii and paint and so did Valentinian, Adrian, and Severus, emperors so as the great Paulus ^milius esteemed it of such high importance, that he would needs have his son to be instructed in it, as in one of the most worthy and excellent accomplishments belonging to a prince. For the art of graving, Quintilian likewise celebrates Euphranor, a polite and rarely endowed person; and Pliny, in that chapter where he treats of the same art, observes that there was never any one famous in it, but who was by birth or education a gentleman. Therefore he and Galen in their recension of the liberal arts, mention that of graving in particular, amongst the most permanent; and in the same catalogue, number it with rhetoric, geometry, logic, astronomy, yea, r grammar itself, because there is in these arts, say they, more of fancy and invention, than strength of hand, more of the spirit than of the body. Hence Aristotle informs us, that the Grecians did universally institute their children in the art of painting and drawing, for an oeconomique reason there signified, as well as to produce proportions in the mind. Varro makes it part of the ladies 1 education, that they might have the better skill in the works of embroidery, &c. and for this cause is his daughter Martia celebrated among those of her fair sex. We have already mentioned the learned Anna Schurman; but the princess Louisa has done wonders of this kind, and is famous throughout Europe for the many pieces which enrich our cabinets, examples sufficient to vindicate its dignity, and the value that has been set upon it, since both emperors, kings, and philosophers, the great and the wise, have not disdained to cultivate and cherish this honourable quality of old, so nobly reputed, that amongst the Greeks a slave might not be taught it. How passionately does Pereskius, that admirable and universal genius, deplore his want of dexterity in this art Baptista Alberti, Aldus Pomponius, Guaricus Durer, and Rubens, were politely learned and knowing men, and it is hardly to be imagined of how great use and conducible a competent address in this art of drawing and designing is to the several advantages which occur, and especially to the more noble mathematical sciences, as we have already instanced in the lunary works of Hevelius, and are no less obliged to celebrate some of ur own countrymen famous for their dexterity in this incomparable art. Such was that Blagrave, who himself cut those diagrams in his Mathematical Jewel; and such at present is that rare and early prodigy of universal science, Dr. Chr. Wren, our worthy and accomplished friend. For, if the study of eloquence and rhetoric were cultivated by the greatest geniuses and heroic persons which the world has produced, and that, by the suffrage of the most knowing, to be a perfect orator a man ought to be universally instructed, a quality so becoming and useful should never be neglected.“In the sixth chapter he discourses of the new way of engraving or mezzotinto, invented and communicated by prince Rupert and he therein observes,” that his highness did indulge him the liberty of publishing the whole manner and address of this new way of engraving; but when I had well considered it, says he (so much having been already expressed, which may suffice to give the hint to all ingenious persons how it is to be performed), I did not think it necessary that an art so curious, and as yet so little vulgar, and which indeed does not succeed where the workman is not an accomplished designer, and has a competent talent in painting likewise, was to be prostituted at so cheap a rate as the more naked describing of it here would too soon have exposed it to. Upon these considerations then, it is, that vvg leave it thus enigmatical; and yet that this may appear no disingenuous rhodomontade in me, or invidious excuse, I profess myself to be always most ready sub sigillo, and by his highness’s permission, to gratify any curious and worthy person with as full and perfect a demonstration of the entire art as my talent and address will reach to, if what I am now preparing to be reserved in the archives of the royal society concerning it be not sufficiently instructive.“There came, however, into the hands of the communicative and learned Richard Micldleton Massey, M. D. and F. 11. S. the original manuscript, written by Mr. Evelyn, and designed for the royal society, entitled” Prince Rupert’s new way of engraving, communicated by his highness to Mr. Evelyn;“in the margin of which is this note:” This I prepared to be registered in the royal society, but I have not yet given it in, so as it still continues a secret.“In this manuscript he first describes the two instruments employed in this new manner of engraving, viz. the hatcher and the style, and then proceeds to explain the method of using them. He concludes with the following words:” This invention, or new manner of chalcography, was the result of chance, and improved by a German soldier, who, espying some scrape on the barrel of his musket, and being of an ingenious spirit, refined upon it, till it produced the effects you have seen, and which indeed is, for the delicacy thereof, much superior to anyinvention extant of this art, for the imitation of those masterly drawings, and, as the Italians call it, that morhidezza expressed in the best of their designs. I have had the honour to be the first of the English to whom it has been yet communicated, and by a special indulgence of his highness, who with his own hands was pleased to direct me with permission to publish it to the world; but I have esteemed it a thing so curious, that I thought it would be to profane it, before I had first offered it to this illustrious society. There is another way of engraving, by rowelling a plate with an instrument made like that which our scriveners and clerks use to direct their rulers by on parchment, only the points are thicker set into the rowel. And when the plate is sufficiently freckled with the frequent reciprocation of it, upon the polished surface, so as to render the ground dark enough, it is to be abated with the style, and treated as we have already described. Of this sort I have seen a head of the queen Christina, graved, if I mistake not, as big as the life, but not comparable to the mezzotinto of prince Rupert, so deservedly celebrated by J. Evelyn."

Mr. Evelyn’s next publication was the most important of all his works: 15. “Sylva; or, a dicourse of Foresttrees, and the propagation of timber in his majesty’s dominions 5 as it was delivered in the royal society the 15th of October, 1662, Upon occasion of certain queries propounded to that illustrious assembly by the honourable the principal officers and commissioners of the navy.” To which is annexed, “Pomona, or, an appendix concerning fruit-trees, in relation to cider, the making and several ways of ordering it: published by express order of the royal society,” Lond. 1664, fol. This was the first work written by the command, and published in virtue of an order, of the royal society, signed by the lord viscount Brouncker, their president, and dedicated to the king. The second edition of it was published in 1669, with a new dedication to king Charles II. dated from Sayes-court, Aug. 24; the first paragraph of which deserves the reader’s notice. “Sir, This second edition of Sylva, after more than a thousand copies had been bought up and dispersed of the first impression, in much less than two years space (which booksellers assure us is a very extraordinary thing in volumes of this bulk), conies now again to pay its homage to your serene majesty, to whose auspices alone it owes the favourable acceptance which it has received in the world. But it is not that alone which it presumes to tell your majesty, but to acquaint you that it has been the sole occasion for furnishing your almost exhausted dominions with more, I dare say, than two millions of timber-trees, besides infinite others, which have been propagated within the three nations at the instigation and by the direction of this work; and that the author of it is able, if need require, to make it out by a competent volume of letters and acknowledgments, which are come to his hands, from several persons of the most eminent quality, many of them illustrious, and divers of them unknoun to him, in justification of what he asserts; which he the rather preserves with the more care, because they are testimonials from so many honourable persons ‘of the benefit they have received from the endeavours of the royal society, which now-a-days passes through so many censures; but she has yet your majesty for her founder and patron, and is therefore the’ less concerned, since no man of worth can lightly speak ill of an assembly v.hich your majesty has thought fit to dignify by so signal a relation to it.” The third edition, with great additions and improvements, was published in 1G79; the fourth in 1705, and the fifth in 1729, both very incorrect. In 1776 a new edition of the “Sylva” was published in 4to, by Dr. Andrew Hunter, of York, a gentleman eminently qualified for the undertaking. Under the care of this gentleman the work appeared with every possible advantage; and was enriched by the judicious editor with ample and copious notes, and adorned with a set of fine engravings. A head of Mr. Evelyn is prefixed, drawn and engraved by Battolozzi. Dr. Hunter’s edition of the Sylva has been four times reprinted. The edition of 1812 contains the deceased editor’s last corrections . 16. “A parallel of the antient architecture with the modern, in a collection of ten principal authors who have written upon the five orders, viz. Palladio and Scammozzi, Serlio and Vignola D. Barbaro and Cataneo L. B. Alberti and Viola, Bullant and De Lorme compared with one another. The three Greek orders, Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian, comprise the first part of this treatise, and the two Latin, Tuscan and Composite, the latter written in French by Roland Freart, sieur de Chambray made English for the benefit, of builders to which is added, an account of architects and architecture^ in an historical and etymological explanation of certain terms, particularly affected by architects; with Leon Baptista Alberti’s treatise of statues,” London, 1664, folio. This work, as well as the former, is dedicated to king Charles II.; and the dedication dated from Sayes-court, August 20th, contains^some curious facts. After an apology for prefixing his royal name to a translation, our author proceeds thus: “I know none, indeed, to whom I could more aptly inscribe a discourse of building, than to so royal a builder, whose august attempts have already given so great a splendour to our imperial city, and so illustrious an example to the nation It is from this contemplation, sir, that after I had, by the commands of the royal society, endeavoured the improvement of timber and the planting of trees, I have advanced to that of building, as its proper and mutual consequent, not with a presumption to incite or instruct your majesty, which were a vanity unpardonable, but, by it, to take occasion of celebrating your majesty’s great example, who use your empire and authority so worthily, as fortune seems to have consulted her reason, when she poured her favours upon you; so as I never cast my eyes on that generous designation in the epigram, Ut donem pastor K tedificem, without immediate reflection on your majesty, who seem only to value those royal advantages you have above others, that you may oblige, and that you may build. And certainly, sir, your majesty has consulted the noblest way of establishing your greatness, and of perpetuating your memory, since, while stones can preserve inscriptions, your name will be famous to posterity; and, when those materials fail, the benefits that are engraven in our hearts will outlast those of marble. It will be no paradox, but a truth, to affirm, that your majesty has already built and repaired more in three or four years, notwithstanding the difficulties and the necessity of an extraordinary ceconomy for the public concernment, than all your enemies have destroyed in twenty, nay than all your majesty’s predecessors have advanced in an hundred, as I could easily make out, not only by what your majesty has so magnificently designed and carried on at that your ancient honour of Greenwich, under the conduct of your most industrious and worthy surveyor, but in those splendid apartments and other useful reformations for security and delight about your majesty’s palace at Whitehall the chargeable covering first, then paving and reformation of Westminster-hall care and preparation for rebuilding St. Paul’s, by the impiety and iniquity of the late confusions almost dilapidated; what her majesty the queen-mother has added to her palace at Somerset-house, in a structure becoming her royal grandeur, and the due veneration of all your majesty’s subjects, for the lioirnir she has done both this your native city, and the whole nation. Nor may I here omit, what I so much desire to transmit to posterity, those noble and profitable amoenities of your majesty’s plantations, wherein you most resemble the divine architect, because your majesty has proposed in it such a pattern to your subjects, as merit their imitation and protoundest acknowledgments, in one of the most worthy and kingly improvements tbat nature is capable of. 1 know not what they talk of former ages, and of the now contemporary princes with your majesty these things are visible and should I here descend to more particulars, which yet were not foreign to the subject of this discourse, I would provoke the whole world to produce me an example parallel with your majesty, for your exact judgment and marvellous ability in all that belongs to the naval architecture, both as to its proper terms and more solid use, in which your majesty is master of one of the most noble and profitable arts that can be wished, in a prince to whom God has designed the dominion of the ocean, which renders your majesty’s empire universal; where, by exercising your royal talent and knowledge that way, you can bring even the antipodes to meet, and the poles to kiss each other; for so likewise, not in a metaphorical but natural sense, your equal and prudent government of this nation has made it good, whilst your majesty has so prosperously guided this giddy bark, through such a storm, as no hand, save your majesty’s, could touch the helm, but at the price of their temerity.” There is also another dedication to sir John Denham, knight of the bath, superintendent and surveyor of all his majesty’s buildings and works, in which there are several matters of fact worth knowing, as indeed there are in all Mr. Evelyn’s dedications; for, though no man was naturally more civil, or more capable of making a compliment handsomely, yet his merit was always conspicuous in his good manners; and he never thought that the swelling sound of a well-turned period could atone for want of sense. It appears from the dedication of the second edition of the Sylva to king Charles II. that there was a second edition of this work also in the same year, viz. 1669, as there was a third in 1697, which was the last in the author’s life-time. In this third edition, which is very much improved, “the account of Architects and Architecture,” which is an original work of Mr. Evelyn’s, and a most excellent one of its kind, is dedicated to sir Christopher Wren, surveyor to his majesty’s buildings and works; and there is in it another of those incidental passages that concern the personal history of our author. Having said in the first paragraph, that, if the whole art of building were lost, it might be found again in the noble works of that great architect, which, though a very high, is no unjust compliment, more especially, continues our author, St. Paul’s church and the Monument; he then adds, “I have named St. Paul’s, and truly not without admiration, as oft as I recall to mind, as frequently I do, the sad and deplorable condition it was in, when, after it had been made a stable of horses and a den of thieves, you, with other gentlemen and myself, were, by the late king Charles, named commissioners to survey the dilapidations, and to make report to his majesty, in order to a speedy reparation. You will not, I am sure, forget the struggle we had with some who were for patching it up any how, so the steeple might stand, instead of new-building, which it altogether needed: when, to put an end to the contest, five days after (August 27, Sept. 1666), that dreadful conflagration happened, out of whose this phoenix is risen, and was by providence designed for you. The circumstance is too remarkable, that I could not pass it over without notice. I will now add no more, but beg your pardon for this confidence of mine, after I have acquainted you that the parallel to which this was annexed being out of print, I was importuned by the bookseller to add something to a new impression, but to which I was no way inclined; till, not long since, going to St. Paul’s, to contemplate that august pile, and the progress you have made, some of your chief workmen gratefully acknowledging the assistance it had afforded them, I took this opportunity of doing myself this honour.” The fourth edition of this work, printed long after our author’s death, viz. in 1733, was in folio, as well as the rest; to which is added “The Elements of Architecture,” by sir Henry Wotton, and some other things, of which, however, hints were met with in our author’s pieces. 17. “Mwrtyj/ov Tjjj AvaiMos; that is, another part of the mystery of Jesuitism, or the new heresy of the Jesuits, publicly maintained at Paris, in the college of Clermont, the twelfth of December, 1661, declared to all the bishops of France, according to the copy printed at Paris. Together with the imaginary heresy, in three letters; with divers other particulars relating to this abominable mystery never before published in English;” Lond. 1664, 8vo. This, indeed, has not our author’s name to it; but that it is really his, and that he had reasons for not owning it more publicly, appears from a letter from him to Mr. Boyle. 18. “Kalendarium Hortense, or the gardener’s almanac, directing what he is to do monthly throughout the year, and what fruits and flowers are in prime,” Lond. 1664, 8vo. The second edition of this book, which seems to have been in folio, and bound with the Sylva and Pomona, as it was in the third edition, was dedicated to Cowley, with great compliments from our author to that poet, to whom it had been communicated before; which occasioned Cowley’s addressing to John Evelyn, esq. his mixed essay in verse and prose, entitled “The Garden.” This passed through at least nine editions. The author made many additions as long as he lived and the best was that printed by way of appendix to the fourth and last edition of the Sylva in his life-time. 19. “The history of the three late famous impostors, viz. Padre Ottotnano, pretended son and heir to the late grand signior; Mahomet Bei, a pretended prince of the Ottoman family, but, in truth, a Wallachian counterfeit: and Sabbatai Sevi, the supposed Messiah of the Jews, in the year 1666; with a brief account of the ground and occasion of tjie present war between the Turk and the Venetian: together with the cause of the final extirpation, destruction, and exile, of the Jews out of the empire of Persia,” Lond. 1668, 8vo. This piece is dedicated to Henry earl of Arlington, and the dedication is subscribed J. E. and, if Mr. Wood had seen it, he would not have said, “I know nothing yet to the contrary but this may be a translation.” The nature and value of this little piece were much better known abroad: one of the best literary journals, “Act. Eruditorum Lipsiensiutn,” A. D. 1690, p. 605, having given, though at some distance of time, a very just character of it, with this very remarkable circumstance, that the pretended Mahomet Bei was at that very juncture in the city of Leipsic. There is added, at the end of this piece, an account of the extirpation of the Jews in Persia during the reign of Shah Abbas the second, which is not so large or perfect as the rest; of which circumstance the author gives a hint, and does not press any thing farther than he is supported by authorities. He mentions a person, who, the very year that the book was published, took upon him the title of brother to the famous count Serini, and that he had the misfortune to be shipwrecked in the west of England, by which he imposed upon persons of quality, till, by unluckily calling for drink upon the road in very audible English, he discovered the cheat. He farther remarks, with regard to Sabbatai Sevi, that he was the twenty-fifth false Messiah that had attempted to impose upon the Jews, even according to their own account. 20. “Public employment and an active life preferred to solitude, in a reply to a late ingenious essay of a contrary title,” Lond. 1667, in 8vo. This was written in answer to a discourse of sir George Mackenzie’s, preferring solitude to public employment, which was at the time of its publication much admired; and, as our author apprehended this might prove an encouragement to indolence and timidity, he therefore wrote against it. We have in the Transactions of the royal society a character of this, and thie piece before mentioned, which follows the account given of the second edition of the “Sylva,” Philosoph. Trans. No. 53; and the reader will find some ingenious strictures on “Public employment, &c.” in vol. 1. of the Censura Literaria, by one who knows well how to improve solitude. 21. “An idea of the perfection of painting, demonstrated from the principles of art, and by examples conformable to the observations which Pliny and Quintilian have made upon the most celebrated pieces of the ancient painters, paralleled with some works of the most famous modern painters, Leonardo da Vinci, Raphael, Julio Romano, and N. Poussin. Written in French by Roland Freart, Sieur de Cambray, and rendered English by J. E. esquire, fellow of the royal society;” Lond. 1668, 8vo, This translation is dedicated to Henry Howard, of Norfolk, heir apparent to that dukedom and the dedication is dated from Say es-court, June the 24th, 1668, 8vo. This piece, like most of Mr. Evelyn’s works, is now become exceeding scarce. In the preface he observes, that the reader will find in this discourse divers useful, remarks, especially where the author “treats of costume, which we, continues he, have interpreted decorum, as the nearest expression our language would bear to it. And I was glad our author had reproved it in so many instances, because it not only grows daily more licentious, but even ridiculous and intolerable. But it is hoped this may universally be reformed! when our modern workmen shall consider, that neither the exactness of their design, nor skilfulness in colouring, ha.s been able to defend their greatest predecessors from just reproaches, who have been faulty in this particular. I could exemplify in many others, whom our author has omitted; and there is none but takes notice what injury it has done the fame of some of our best reputed painters, and how indecorous it is to introduce circumstances, wholly improper to the usages and genius of the places where our histories are supposed to. have beeq acted.” Mr. Evelyn then remarks, that this was not only the fault of Bassano, who would be ever bringing in his wife, children, and servants, his dog and his cat, and very kitchen-stuff, after the Paduan mode; but of the great Titian himself, Georgipn, Tintoret, and the rest; as Paulo Veronese is observed also to have done, in his story of Pharaoh’s daughter drawing Moses out of the river, attended with a guard of Swisses. Malvogius likewise, in a picture then in the king’s gallery at Whitehall, not only represents our first parents with navels upon their bellies, but has placed an artificial stone fountain, carved with imagery, in the midst of his paradise. Nor does that excellent and learned painter, Rubens, escape without censure, not only for making most of his figures of the shapes of brawny Flemings, but for other sphalmata and circumstances of the like nature, though in some he has acquitted himself to admiration, in the due observation of costume, particularly in his crucifixes, &c. Raphael Urbino was, doubtless, one of the first who reformed these inadvertencies; but it was more conspicuous in his latter than in his former pieces. “As for Michael Angelo,” continues Mr. Evelyn, “though I heartily consent with our critic in reproving that almost idolatrous veneration of his works, who hath certainly prodigiously abused the art, not only in the table this discourse arraigns him for, but several more which I have seen; yet I conceive he might have omitted some of those embittered reproaches he has reviled him with, who doubtless was one of the greatest masters of his time, and however he might succeed as to the decorum, was hardly exceeded for what he performed in sculpture and the statuary art by many even of the ancients themselves, and haply by none of the moderns: witness his Moses, Christus in Gremio, and several other figures at Rome to say nothing of his talent in architecture, and the obligation the world has to his memory, for recovering many of its most useful ornaments and members out of the neglected fragments, which lay so long buried, and for vindicating that antique and magnificent manner of building from the trifling of Goths and barbarians.” He observes next, that the usual reproach of painting has been the want of judgment in perspective, and bringing more into history than is justifiable upon one aspect, without turning the eye to each figure in particular, and multiplying the points of sight, which is a point even monsieur Freart, for all the pains he has taken to magnify that celebrated Decision of Paris, has failed in. For the knowing in that art easily perceive, that even Raphael himself has not so exactly observed it, since, instead of one, as monsieur Freart takes it to be, and as indeed it ought to have been, there are no less than four or five; as du Bosse hath well observed in his treatise of “The converted painter,” where, by the way also, he judiciously numbers amongst the faults against costume, those landscapes, grotesque figures, &c. which we frequently find abroad especially for, in our country, we have few or none of those graceful supplements of steeples painted, horizontally and vertically on the vaults and ceilings of cupolas, since we have no examples for it from the ancients, who allowed no more than a frett to the most magnificent and costly of those which they erected. But, would you know whence this universal caution in most of their works proceeded, and that the best of our modern painters and architects have succeeded better than others of that profession, it must be considered, that they were learned men, good historians, and generally skilled in the best antiquities; such were Raphael, and doubtless his scholar Julio; and, if Polydore arrived not to the glory of letters, he yet attained to a rare habit of the ancient gusto, as may be interpreted from most of his designs and paintings. Leon Baptist Alberti was skilled in all the politer parts of learning to a prodigy, and has written several curious things in the Latin tongue. We know that, of later times, Rubens was a person universally learned, as may be seen in several Latin epistles of his to the greatest scholars of his age. And Nicholas Poussin, the Frenchman, who is so much celebrated and so deservedly, did, it seems, arrive to this by his indefatigable industry “as the present famous statuary, Bernini, now living,” says Mr. Evelyn, “has also done so universal a mastery, that, not many years since, he is reported to have built a theatre at Rome, for the adornment whereof he not only cut the figures and painted the scenes, but wrote the play, and composed the music, which was all in recitative. And I am persuaded, that all this is not yet by far so much as that miracle and ornament of our age and country, Dr. Christopher Wren, were able to perform, if he were so disposed, and so encouraged, because he is master of so many admirable advantages beyond them. I alledge these examples partly to incite, and partly to shew the dignity and vast comprehension of this rare art, and that for a man to arrive to its utmost perfection, he should be almost as universal as the orator in Cicero, and the architect in Vitruvius. But, certainly, some tincture in history, the optics and anatomy, are absolutely requisite, and more, iri the opinion of our author, than to be a steady designer, and skilled in the tempering and applying of colours, which, amongst most of our modern workmen, go now for the only accomplishments of a painter.”

On his advancement to the board of trade, he published, 22. “A short and plain discourse, the chief heads of the history of trade and navigation,” which he dedicated to the king, and which was very graciously rereirecl, and thought then to contain as much matter in as small a compass as any that was ever written upon a topic so copious as well as so important. 23. “Terra: a philosophical discourse of earth, relating to the culture and improvement of it for vegetation, and the propagation of plants, &c. as it was presented to the royal society, April 29th, 1675,” London, 1675, folio and 8vo. Of this, also, Dr. Hunter published an improved edition in 1778. 24. “Mundus Muliebris; or, the ladies dressing-room unlocked, and her toilette spread. In burlesque. Together with the Fop- Dictionary, compiled for the use of the fairsex,” Lond. 1690, 4to. 25. “Monsieur de la Quintinye’s treatise of Orange-Trees, with the raising of Melons, omitted in the French editions; made English by John Evelyn, esq.” Lond. 1693. 26. “Numismata; a discourse of medals, ancient and modern; together with some account of heads and effigies of illustrious and famous persons, in sculps and taille douce, of whom we have no medals extant, and of the uses to be derived from them. To which is added, a digression concerning physiognomy,” Lond. 1697, folio.

He was also very assiduous in procuring, as early as possible, from abroad, all new books upon curious and useful subjects; as also such as, from their universal high character, were become scarce and dear; some of which he communicated to the secretary of the society, and of others he made large and curious extracts himself; and, as is very justly observed, his translations were doubly valuable, on account of that clearness and fidelity with which he expressed the author’s sense, and the improvements that he added from his own observations, as he rendered no treatises into English, without being perfectly versed in the subject upon which, as well as the language in which, they were written. He likewise, in testimony of his respect and duty to the society, bestowed upon them those curious tables of veins and arteries, which he brought with him from Padua, and consequently deserved to be honourably mentioned in their registers, and to have his picture, as it is, hung up in their apartments. He might, therefore, justly style himself, as we have already noticed, a pioneer in the service of the society. Amongst other advantages that attended the institution of the royal society, one was its giving birth to, and the highest encouragement for, free and open inquiries; nor was it any wonder that, amongst these, some turned upon those learned persons who first exerted themselves in favour of this method of improving knowledge. Amongst, these, Mr. John Houghton, though with great decency and good manners, censured our author’s great performance, on account of its crossing a notion he had advanced, “that it would be highly advantageous for the nation, if all the timber within twelve miles of a navigable river were destroyed.” It is but fair that he should speak for himself: his words then are these: Collections on husbandry and trade, vol. IV. p. 273. “I question not but you eagerly expect to hear what may be said, in answer to Mr. Evelyn’s Sylva. There he seems to be quite of another opinion, and to give many instances of profits from woods, so great that few other parts of husbandry can equal them. 1 must confess Mr. Evelyn is a great man, one that I have the honour to be acquainted with, and happy is he that is so he is a gentleman of great piety, modesty, and. complacency and also endowed with such an universality of useful learning, that he may very well be esteemed a darling of mankind. But he is particularly well versed in the affairs of the woodman; and his Sylva is so good a book, that I have not heard of any thing written on the subject like it. To answer it, I will not pretend; to gainsay what he affirms I cannot, for I believe he loves veracity more than life. I will only make some observations, and, if my sentiments differ from his, I know he will pardon me, he being well inclined to allow freedom of thought, and also well versed in a motto, Aw­Ihis in verba, which is that of the royal society. Now, I first observe the reason why this Sylva, or discourse of forest-trees, was delivered to the royal society. It was, as I am told in the title-page, upon occasion of certain queries propounded to that illustrious assembly, by the honourable the principal officers and commissioners of the navy. What these queries were, does not altogether appear; but, by the discourse, one of them seems to be hour timber might be propagated in his majesty’s dominions. An answer to this our ingenious author hath bravely given. But my considerations are not how, or how not, to propagate timber; but a query, `Whether it is best, within certain limits, to propagate it or no?' a thing quite beside his design. Indeed, in his introduction, he, like a very good Englishman, laments the notorious decay of our wooden walls, which he thought likely to follow, when our then present navy should be worn out or impaired; and I must confess, when he considered the great destruction of our wood that had been made in the foregoing twenty years, by some through necessity, and others through ill ends and purposes; together with our not being used to fetch much timber from abroad, and a general cry that none could furnish us with any for shipping, especially so good as our own; with the addition of what amounted to a complaint from the honourable commissioners of his majesty’s navy: when he considered all this, I say, every good man will rather commend than blame his zeal. But now since that destruction of our timber hath forced us to look out for a more convenient supply to London, and some other places, and our having greater experiences of sea-fights than ever we had before, other things are known; and it is believed, to my certain knowledge, by some of the commissioners of the navy, and others that have been, greatly concerned in building of ships, that there is some other timber in the world that will build ships as well as ours: for instance, the French Ruby that we took from France, when he joined with Denmark and Holland against tis, had such good timber in it, that, as I have been told, England never had better. The bullets that entered this French ship made only round holes without splinters, the thing our timber is valued for and it was so hard, that the carpenters with their tools could hardly cut it it was like a piece of iron. I fancy it some of that oak Mr. Evelyn speaks of in his fore-cited Sylva, chap. iii. p. 25. ‘ There is,’ saith he, `a kind of it so tough, and so extremely compact, that our sharpest tools will hardly enter it, and scarcely the very fire itself, in which it consumes but slowly, as seeming to partake of a ferruginous and metal0 line shining nature, proper for sundry robust uses.' These last thirty ships that were built have a great deal of foreign timber in them; and, although there is some decay in them already, yet I am told that the fault is not attributed to the foreign timber, but rather to the hasty building; the king having not a stock before-hand, the timber had not time enough for a seasoning. For these reasons, and what I said before about the increase of seamen, persuades me to believe, that such means will never lessen our strength; and I question not but that, for our money, we may be furnished sufficiently from abroad.”

, third son of the former, was born at his father’s house at Sayes-court, near Deptford, January 14, 1654-5, and was there very tenderly educated in his infancy, being considered (after the death of his brother Richard Evelyn, January 27, 1657, who, though but five years of age, was esteemed a kind of prodigy) as the heir of the family. He was likewise universally admired for the pregnancy of his parts, of which he gave a pleasing proof in a Latin letter written to his father in Dec. 1665, and which induced his father to send him in 1666 to Oxford, where he remained in the house of the ingenious and learned Dr. Ralph Bathurst, then president of Trinity-college, before he was admitted a gentleman-commoner, which was in Easter term 1663. It is not clear at what time he left Oxford; but Mr. Wood seems to be positive that he took no degree there, but returned to his father’s house, where he prosecuted his studies under the directions of that great man. There is, however, good reason to believe that it was during his residence in Trinity-college, and when he was not above fifteen years of age, that he wrote that elegant Greek poem which is prefixed to the second edition of the Sylva, and is a noble proof of the strength of his genius, and wonderful progress in learning in the early part of his life. In Nov. 1675, he set out for Paris with lord Berkley, ambassador to the French court; and in May 1676, returned to England. He discovered his proficiency soon afterwards, both in the learned and modern languages, by his elegant translations, as well as his intimate acquaintance with the muses, in some original poems which were very justly admired. If we consider the father’s turn of mind, we need not wonder that he should employ his pen first upon gardening, especially in the easy way of translation, and from a book so justly as well as generally admired as the French Jesuit’s has ever been. The title of our author’s little treatise was, 1. “Of gardens, four books, first written in Latin verse, by Renatus Rapinus; and now made English by John Evelyn, esq.” 1673, 8vo. His father annexed the second book of this translation to his “Sylva,” and it must be allowed that the sense is very faithfully rendered, and the poetry is more easy and harmonious than could have been expected from a youth of his age. 2. “The life of Alexander the great,” translated from the Greek of Plutarch, printed in the fourth volume of Plutarch’s lives by several hands. 3. “The history of the grand visiers, Mahomet and Achmet Coprogli; of the three last grand signiors, their sultanas, and chief favourites; with the most secret intrigues of the seraglio,” &c. Lond. 1677, 8vo. This was a translation from the French, and has been esteemed an entertaining and instructive history. Our author wrote also several poems occasionally, of which two are printed in Dryden’s Miscellanies, and more are in Nichols’s Collection of Poems. The one entitled “On virtue,” has been esteemed excellent in its kind by the best judges and the other, styled “The remedy of love,” has been also much admired. On Feb. 24, 1679-80, he married Martha, daughter and coheiress of Richard Spenser, esq. Turkey merchant, whose widow married sir John Stonehouse, of Radley, in Berks, bart. Mr. Evelyn, who had a turn for business as well as study, and had been introduced to the prince of Orange in 1688, was in 1690 made one of the chief clerks of the treasury, and quitting that situation in 1691, became one of the commissioners of the revenue in Ireland, which country he visited in 1692. He would probably have been advanced to higher employments if he had not been cut off in thd flower of his age, dying at his house in Berkeleystreet, London, March 24, 1698, in the forty-fifth year of his age. He had by his wife two sons and three daughters. His eldest son, Richard, -died an infant at Sayes-court, as did his eldest daughter Martha Mary. His second daughter, Elizabeth, married Simon Harcourt, esq. eldest son and heir of Simon lord viscount Harcourt, lord high chancellor of Great Britain, by whom she became mother to the first earl Harcourt. Jane, his third daughter, died an infant at his house in the parish of St. Martin’s in the fields, and was interred at Kensington. John Evelyn, his second and only surviving son, born at Sayes-court, March 2, 1681, succeeded to his grandfather’s estate. He was married at Lambeth chapel, September 18,- 1705, to Anne, daughter of Edward Boscawen, of Worthivil, co. Cornwall, esq. He was by letters-patent bearing date July 30, 1713, created a baronet. This worthy gentleman, who inherited the virtue and learning as well as the patrimony of his ancestors, made several alterations and additions to the family-seat at Wotton, in 1717, one of which was the erecting a beautiful library, forty-five feet long, fourteen feet broad, and as many high, for the reception of that large ajtd curious collection of books made by his grandfather, his father, and himself, and where they still remain. He was long one of the commissioners of the customs, a fellow of the royal society, and was succeeded by his eldest son, John, who dying in 1767, was succeeded by sir Frederick Evelyn, on whose death, in 1812, the title descended to Mr. John Evelyn, the grandson of Charles, a younger son of the first baronet of the Wotton branch.

The works of Secundus have gone through several editions, of which the most copious is that of Scriverius, published at Leyden, 1631. It consists of the “Basia,” and of epigrams, elegies, &c. &c. A French critic who maintains that the genius of Secundus never p'roduced anything that was not excellent in its kind, adds with too much truth, “Mais sa muse est un peu trop lascive.” His “Basia” were first translated into English by Mr. Stanley,- author of the “Lives of the Philosophers,” but he omitted the 8th, loth, llth, 12th, and 14th. In 1731, a translation of the whole was published by an anonymous writer, who adopted a poetical version of the first and second by Elijah l‘enton, and of the I’th and iNsth by Mr. Ward. This translation is accompanied with the original Latin, and embellished with the cuts of Secundus and Julia from the Scriverian edition, for Secundus appears to have been somewhat of an engraver, and the cut of his mistress Julia is said to have been executed by him. A superior translation appeared at London in 1775, with a life of the author, of which we have availed ourselves. Secundus excelled his brothers in the elegance and classical purity of his Latin poetry, as much as he fell short of them in respect for decency.

M. de St. Evremond distinguished himself in the army by his politeness and wit, as well as by his bravery; and his accomplishments procured him the esteem of the mareschals d'Etrées and Grammont, of viscount Turenne, of the count de Moissens, afterwards mareschal de Albret, of count Palluau, afterwards marescUal de Clerembaut, and of the marquis de Crequi, who also became a mareschal of France. He had a share in the confidence of these distinguished noblemen, and they always testified their friendship towards him. In 1640, M. de St. Evremond was at the siege of Arras; and, in the ensuing year, he obtained a post in the horse, which gave him fresh opportunities of signalizing himself. Soon after the duke of Enguien, afterwards prince of Condé, became so much pleased with his conversation, that he made him lieutenant of his guards, that he might have him constantly near him. He often read with him and sometimes communicated to him his most secret projects, and entrusted him with affairs of the greatest moment. After the campaign of Rocroy, in 1643, M. de St. Evremond wrote a kind of satire against the French academy, which was published in 1650, and entitled, “The Comedy of the Academicians for reforming the French tongue .”

When the civil war broke out, the French king, being acquainted with St. Evremond’s merit and bravery, and knowing that he had constantly refused to join with those who were in opposition to the court, made him a mareschal de. camp, or major-general. His commission was dated Sept. 6, 1652; and the next day he received a warrant for a pension of three thousand livres a year. He served afterwards in the war of Guienne, under the duke of Candale; but, after the reduction of Guienne, he was committed to the Bastile, where he ivas confined as a prisoner two or three months. Some jests that had been thrown out relative to cardinal Mazarin, in a company wherein St. Evremond was present, but in which he had no greater share than the rest, were the pretence for his confinement. But the true reason of it was supposed to be, a suspicion that he had given some advice to the duke of Candale, which was inconsistent with the cardinal’s views. However, when St. Evremond obtained his liberty, he went to return thanks to the cardinal for his enlai?gement. Mazarin told him on this occasion, that “he was persuaded of his innocence, but that a man in his station was obliged to hearken to so many reports, that it was very difficult for him to distinguish between truth and falsehood, and not sbmetimes to do injustice to an honest man.”

During his stay in Holland, St. Evremond became acquainted with most of the foreign ministers and persons of distinction there and also visited several eminent literary men, who happened then to be at the Hague particularly Heinsius, Vossius, and Spinoza. Of the latter he gave the following account to Mr. Des Maizeaux: lt He was,“said he,” of a middle stature, and pleasing countenance. His learning, modesty, and disinterestedness, made him esteemed by all the ingenious persons then at the Hague. It did not appear, from his ordinary conversation, that he had those sentiments which were afterwards found in his posthumous works." About 1667, some applications were made to the French king, by means of M. de St. Evremond’s friends, particularly of the marquis de Lionne, to induce that monarch to permit him to return to his own country but these applications were not successful. In 1668, the prince of Tuscany arrived in Holland and, as he designed to make some stay at the Hague, he hired a house there: but it happened, that, in the house which was taken for him, M. de St. Evremond had an apartment, as had also some other persons of distinction. They were, therefore, obliged to seek for other lodgings; but, when St. Evremond was preparing to remove like the rest, the prince not only desired him to stay, but likewise to use his table whilst he continued at the Hague. He also ever afterwards testified his esteem for him, and sent him every year a present of some of the best Italian wines.

St. Evremond now thought of passing the remainder of his days in Holland but, in 1670, sir William Temple delivered to him letters from the earl of Arlington, by which he was informed, that king Charles -II. desired his return to England. This induced him to change his intentions; and, on his arrival in England, the king conferred on him a pension o:' three hundred pounds a-year. In 1675, the duchess of Mazarin arrived in England; and we are told, that “her house was the usual rendezvous of the politest persons in England; and in these assemblies the people of fashion found an agreeable amusement, and the learned an excellent pattern of politeness.” It is added, that, in her house, “all manner of subjects were discoursed upon, as philosophy, religion, history, pieces of wit and gallantry, plays, and authors ancient and modern.” St. Evremond spent much of his time at the house of the duchess of Mazarin, and appears to have had a great friendship for her. He was also on very friendly terms with the celebrated Ninon de PEnclos, with whom he often corresponded. He sometimes passed the summer season with the court at Windsor, where he conversed much with Isaac Vossius, who had been made one of the prebendaries of Windsor by king Charles II. By the death of that prince, St. Evremond lost his pension; but, in 1686, the earl of Sunderland proposed to king James II. to create for him an office of secretary of the cabinet, whose province should be to write the king’s private letters to foreign princes. The king agreed to the proposal, but St. Evremond declined accepting the office. He made his acknowledgments to lord Sunderland, and to the king; and said, “he should account himself very happy to be able to serve his majesty; but that a man of his age ought to think of nothing, but how to husband the little time he had to live, and to spend it in ease and tranquillity.” After the Revolution, he was so well treated in England by king William, that he declined returning again to his own country, though the French king now gave him permission, and even promised him a favourable reception. Yet king William’s characteristic address to him, when first introduced at court, could not be very acceptable to a man who valued himself on his literary reputation “I think you was a major-general in the French service” About 1693, the abbot de Chaulieu sent a poem to the duchess of Mazarin, accompanied with a letter in verse, which contained a high compliment to St. Evremond, whom he compared to Ovid. St. Evremond made some remarks on the abbot’s poetical epistle, in which he objected to the comparison between himself and the Roman poet. “Ovid,” said he, “was the most witty and the most unfortunate man of his time. I am not like him, either as to wit or misfortunes. He was exiled among barbarians, where he made fine verses; but so doleful and melancholy, that they excite as much contempt for his weakness as compassion for his disgrace. Where I am, I daily see the duchess of Mazarin. I lire among sociable people, who have a great deal of merit and a great deal of wit. I make very indifferent verses; but so gay, that they make my humour to be envied, while they make my poetry to be laughed at. I have too little money but I love to be in a country where there is enough besides, the nse of it ends with our lives and the consideration of a greater evil is a sort of remedy against a lesser. Thus you see I have several advantages over Ovid. It is true, that he was more fortunate at Rome with Julia than I have been at London with Hortensia: but the favours of Julia were the occasion of his misfortune; and the rigours of Hortensia do not make a man of my age uneasy.”

By his wiil, St. Evremond, who died worth about 800l. left 20l. to the poor French refugees; and the same sura to “the poor Roman catholics, or of any other religion.” His manuscripts he left to Dr. Sylvestre. The earl of Galway was his executor.

The works of St. Evremond consist of a variety of essays and letters, containing many ingenious and acute remarks on polite literature, and on life and manners, but very unequally written, together with some insipid poems, and several dramatic pieces. He possessed a considerable degree of wit and humour, and great knowledge of the world. He appears to have had a very intimate acquaintance with Roman literature; but acknowledged that he did not understand the Greek language. His works in French have passed through many editions, and been printed in different sizes. One edition is in two volumes, 4to,and some of the editions are in seven volumes, 12mo. An English translation of 'some of his works was published in two volumes, in 1700, 8vo; and a translation of some other of his pieces in 1705, in one volume, 8vo, under the title of “The posthumous Works of M. de St. Evremond, containing variety of elegant essays, letters, poems, and other miscellaneous pieces on several curious subjects.” Another translation, in two volumes, 8vo, was published by Mr. Des Maizeaux, in 1714, with a dedication to lord Halifax. But the best edition was published by the same editor, with the life of the author prefixed, in 1728, in three volumes, 8vo. This translation, however, does not cqntain our author’s poems, nor his dramatic pieces. There is also a collection of his anecdotes and opinions among the “Ana.” His reputation has sunk considerably among his own coun-r trymen, nor has there been any edition of his works printed in Franco for more than half a century. They consider none of his writings as worthy of perusal, except what he wrote on the genius of the Greeks and Romans, on manners, on the peace of the Pyrenees, on the duke of LongueviHe, and the conversation of the marshal Hocquincourt with father Canaye. In his comedies they find neither wit nor interest, and assert that his verses have more vivacity than genuine poetry; but they bestow higher praise on his prose, and except only to his frequent affectation of antithesis and point. La Harpe, in a well-written character of his works, ascribes his reputation more to fashion and artful management, than to real merit. As to his personal character, enough has been said in the preceding sketch to exhibit its most striking features, those of the wit, the courtier, and the voluptuary.

, president of the parliament of Grenoble, was born Dec. 22, 1561, at Voiron in Dauphiny. His father Claude Expilli had acquired great reputation in the army. This his son studied first at Turin, and in 1581 and 1582 went through a course of law studies at Padua, where he became acquainted with many of the most learned men of his time, particularly Speroni, Torniel, Decianus, I'ancirollus, Pinelli, Zabarella, Picolomini, &c. On his return to France, he took his doctor’s degree at Bourges, where the celebrated James Cujas bestowed high praise on. him. He then settled at Grenoble, and acquired such distinction among the advocates of the parliament, that the king Henry IV. considered him as fit for the highest offices in law. Expilli was accordingly promoted to that of king’s procurator in the chamber of finances, king’s advocate in parliament, and lastly that of president. The same monarch, as well as Louis XIII. employed him in many important affairs in thecomte Venaissin, Piedmont, and Savoy, where he was first president of the parliament of Chamberi, after that city was taken in 1C 30. Three years after, the king made use of his services at Piguerol; but on his return to Grenoble, he died July 22 or 23, 1636, in the seventy- fifth year of his age. James Philip Thomasini, bishop of Citta Nova, wrote his eloge, and his life was written by Antony Boniel de Catilhon, his nephew, and advocate general of the chamber of accounts in Dauphiny. It was printed at Grenoble in 1660, 4to. Cherier, in his History of that province, says of him, that his works are an incontestable proof of his learning, which was by no means confined. He. was an orator, lawyer, historian, and poet, a man of excellent private character, and a liberal patron of merit, which alone was a sure introduction to his favour. His works are both in prose and verse. His “Pleadings” were printed at Paris, 1612, 4to. His French poems, after the greater part of them had been printed separately, were collected in a large volume, 4to, printed at Grenoble in 1624; and among them are some prose essays on the fountains of Vals and Vivarez, and on the use of medicinal waters; a supplement to the history of the chevalier Bayard, &c. He wrote also a treatise on “French orthography,” Lyons, 1618, folio, in which, however, he has not shewn much judgment, having proposed to spell according to pronunciation; and upon the whole, it appears that, although a man of learning as well as probity, he was a better magistrate than a writer.

, a French writer, and canontreasurer of the chapter of St. Marine at Tarascon, was born at St, llemy in Provence, of an obscure family, in 1719. He was educated for the church, but his course of studies was general, and he early manifested a taste for voyages and works of geography, and expended all he was worth in gratifying this inclination, by travelling over part of Europe and the coasts of Africa to verify the relative situations of places, and correct the errors of former geographers. On his return, he employed himself in arranging and methodizing the observations and information he had collected on the climate, manners, population, and 1 political interests of the different countries he had visited. These labours appeared so meritorious, that he was elected a member of the academies of Madrid, Stockholm, and Berlin. He died about the commencement of the French revolution, after having passed his life in successful study, and established an excellent character for benevolence. He published, as the result of his travels, 1. “Cosrnographie,” 1749, folio. 2. “Delia casa Milano,” 1753, 4to. 3. “Polychorographie,” Avignon, 1755, 8vo, an abridged account of astronomy, chronology, history, geography, hydrography, &c. but too short to be useful, and altogether the worst of Expilli’s works. 4. “Topographic de TUnivers,” 1758, 2 vols. 8vo. 5. “Description de l‘Angleterre, de l’Ecosse, et de Irelande,” 1759, 12mo, executed with great truth and impartiality, and illustrated with many judicious reflections; the narrative is entertaining, but the author’s inattention to his authorities has betrayed him into some blunders, although they do not affect the general merit of the performance. 6. “De la population de la France,” 1765, folio, one of the best statistical accounts of the produce of French industry and cultivation, and very superior' to all that had preceded. 7. “Dictionnaire geographique des Gaules et de la France,” 1762 1770, 6 vols. folio. This work was left incomplete, but as far as it goes, appears to have given general satisfaction. 8. “Manuel geographe,” 1782, a small volume for the use of schools, and well written.

, a painter, born at Maaseyk in 1366, is regarded as the founder of the Flemish school of painting, the Giotto of Flanders; and exhibited, for that early period of art, great genius and skill. In concert with his brother John, he was celebrated for many extraordinary and curious works, executed in oil, after the latter had made his discovery of that mode of painting., He painted well also in distemper, but gave that up after he adopted the other. One work of his, painted in conjunction with John, was in a chapel of the cathedral of Ghent. Sir Joshua Reynolds, who saw it there, says of it, “it represents the adoration of the lamb taken from the Apocalypse: it contains a great number of figures in a hard manner, but there is great character of truth and nature in the heads, and the landscape is well coloured.” It is now among the spoils of the French in the gallery of the Louvre; but whileat Ghent it was held in such estimation as to be shut up from public view, except on festivals; and at other times was only shewn to ambassadors or princes themselves who desired to see it. Philip I. of Spain wished to purchase it; but that not being practicable, he employed Michael Coxis to copy it, who spent two whole years about it, and received four thousand florins for his labour from the king, who placed it in the Escurial. This artist died in 1426, aged sixty.

, an eminent French officer, was the son of a bookseller at Mentz (author of “Notes sur la Couturhe de Lorraine,” 1657, fol.) He was educated with the duke d'Epernon, and saved the royal army at the famous retreat of Mentz; which has been compared by some authors to that of Xenophon’s 10,000. Being wounded in the thigh by a musket at the siege of Turin, M. de Turenne, and cardinal de la Valette, to whom he was aid de camp, intreated him to submit to an amputation, which was the advice of all the surgeons but he replied, “I must not die by piece-meal death shall have me intire, or not at all.” Having, however, recovered from this wound, he was afterwards made governor of Sedan; where he erected strong fortifications, and with so much ceconomy, that his majesty never had any places better secured at so little expence. In 1654 he took Stenay, and was appointed marechal of France in 1658. His merit, integrity, and modesty, gained him the esteem both of his sovereign and the grandees. He refused the collar of the king’s orders, saying it should never be worn but by the ancient nobility; and it happened, that though his family had been ennobled by Henry IV. he could not produce the qualifications necessary for that dignity, and “would not,” asi he said, “have his cloke decorated with a cross, and his soul disgraced by an imposture.” Louis XIV. himself answered his letter of thanks in the following terms: “No person to whom I shall give this collar, will ever receive more honour from it in the world, than you have gained in my opinion, by your noble refusal, proceeding from so generous a principle.” Marechal Fabert died at Sedan, May 17, 1662, aged sixty-three. His Life, by father Barre, regular canon of St. Genevieve, was published at Paris, 1752, 2 vols. 12mo. There is one older, in one thin vol. 12ino.

, one of the agents in the French revolution, was born at Carcassane, Dec. 28, 1755, and was educated in polite literature and natural philosophy by his parents, whom he quitted in his youth, and became by turns a painter, musician, engraver, poet, and actor. He performed on the stages of Versailles, Brussels, and Lyons, but with no great success. As a writer for the stage, however, he was allowed considerable merit, and obtained, on one occasion, at the Floral ia, the prize of the Eglantine, the name of which he added to his own. In 1786 he published in a French periodical work, “Les Etrennes du Parnasse,” a little poem called “Chalons sur Marne,” in which he drew a very charming picture of the moral pleasures that were to be found in that place and its neighbourhood. This piece, however, fell very short of the celebrity to which he afterwards attained. In 1789 and 1790 he published two comedies, “Le Philinte,” and “L'Intrigue Epistolaire,” the former of which was reckoned one of the best French pieces of the last century.

, a voluminous French writer, or rather compiler, was born April 25, 1668, at Paris, the son of an eminent surgeon. He was subdeacon, and bachelor of the Sorbonne, and had been second teacher at St. Quintin, when he entered the congregation of the oratory at Paris. He rose to be successively professor of philosophy at Itumilly in Savoy, at Toulon, Riom, Mans, and Nantes; afterwards taught theology three years at Riom, and during three more at the seminary of the congregation at Lyons. While he lived in the last named city, he published a small dictionary, Latin and French, 8vo, compiled from the best classical authors, which has passed through several editions; and he also published at Lyons, in 1709, a new edition of Richelet’s dictionary, 2 vols. folio, under the title of Amsterdam, which edition was suppressed on account of several theological articles respecting the affairs of the times; and because in his list of authors, he bestowed great encomiums on Messrs, of Port Royal, but none on their adversaries. This obliged him to quit the oratory, and retire to Clermont in Auvergne, where, being destitute of a maintenance, he undertook the education of some children, and had recourse to father Tellier, a Jesuit, the king’s confessor, who twice supplied him with money. In the latter end of 171 Fabre again entered the congregation of the oratory, and was sent to Douay, where he wrote a small pamphlet, entitled “Entretigns de Christine^ et de Pelagie, sur la lecture de PEcriture-Sainte” which is still in request. Having afterwards preached the Sunday sermons of the oratory of Tragany with great credit (for he had also talents for preaching), he went to reside at Montmorency, towards the end of 1723, and there began his “Continuation de l'Histoire Ecclesiastique, de feu M. TAbbe Fleury;” and published 16 vols. 4to or 12mb, which induced his superiors to invite him again to their houses, Rue St. Honore*, at Paris, where he died, October 22, 1755, aged eighty-five, much lamented by his brethren and friends, for his mildness, candour, modesty, and virtue. The discourse “Sur le renouvellement des etudes ecclesiastiques,” &c. at the beginning of the thirteenth volume of the Continuation, is by the abbe Goujet. This Continuation discovers great learning, and facility in writing, but has neither the wit, penetration, character, style, nor accuracy of judgment possessed by the abbe Fleury. Fabre would have carried it on much farther, but was forbidden to print any new volumes. He made the index to M, de Thou’s history translated into French, 4to, and had begun one to the “Journal des Sgavans,” but soon gave up his undertaking to the abbe* de Claustre, to whom the public owes that useful work, 10 vols. 4to. Fabre also left a moderate translation of Virgil, 4 vols. 12mo, and a translation of the Fables of Phaedrus, Paris, 1728, 12mo, with notes.

, sirnamed Luscinus, an illustrious Roman, was much and justly celebrated for his inflexible integrity, and contempt of riches. He was twice consul, first in the year before Christ 282, when he obtained a triumph for his victories over the Samnites, Lucani, and Bruttii. Two years after this, Pyrrhus invaded Italy; and, after the defeat of the Romans near Tarentum, Fabricius was sent to that monarch to treat of the ransom and exchange of prisoners, on which occasion he manifested a, noble contempt of every endeavour that could be made, in any shape, to shake his fidelity, and excited the admiration of Pyrrhus. His second consulship was in the year 273, when, his refined generosity yet further secured the esteem of the royal enemy, whom he informed of the treacherous design of his physician to give him poison. According to some authors, he again triumphed this year over the allies of Pyrrhus. It was remarked, that when the comitia were held for the ensuing consuls, Cornelius Rufinus, a man of notorious avarice, and detested by Fabricius for that vice, but an excellent general, obtained the consulship chiefly by his interest. Being asked the reason of this unexpected proceeding, he said, “In times of danger it is better that the public purse should be plundered, than the state betrayed to the enemy.” But when he became censor in the year 275, he proved his fixed dislike to that man’s character, by removing him from the senate, for possessing an unlawful amount of silver plate. The war with Pyrrhus was then concluded. St. Evremond, with the contemptible sneer of a man who has no conception of disinterested virtue, insinuates that his poverty was ambitious, and his severity envious; but it is not for a French Epicurean to judge the motives of a Fabricius. His frugality and poverty became almost proverbial; and Virgil has characterized him in very few words:

, professor of divinity in the university of Leipsic, was born at Amsterdam April 10, 1663. His father was a divine and pastor of the church of Meurs, but he had the misfortune to lose both parents when he was only five years old. His education then devolved upon his maternal grandfather, Francis Felbier, who appears to have done ample justice to him, and particularly introduced him to that intimate acquaintance with the French language for which he was afterwards distinguished. He began to be taught Latin in the public school of Amsterdam in 1673; “but in less than three months his grandfather died, and on his death-bed advised him to devote himself to the study of divinity, which was the wish and intention both of himself and of his parents. He accordingly pursued his classical studies with great assiduity; and in 1679, when in his sixteenth year, was much applauded for a discourse he pronounced, according to the custom of the school. His subject was that” justice elevates a nation.' 7 After this he remained two more years at Amsterdam, and studied philosophy and rhetoric under the ablest professors; and at his leisure hours David Sarphati Pina, a physician and rabbi, gave him lessons in the Hebrew, Chaldaic, and Syriac languages, and enabled him to read the works of the Jewish doctors. In Sept. 1681 he removed to Leyden, where for two years he studied philosophy, Greek and Roman antiquities, and ecclesiastical history and geography, under the celebrated masters of that day, De Voider, Theodore Ryckius, James Gronovius, and Frederic Spanheim; and went on also improving himself in the Oriental languages. Such was his proficiency in this last pursuit, that he already was able to carry on a correspondence with his master at Amsterdam, the above-mentioned Pina, in the Hebrew language, and he translated the gospels of St. Matthew and Mark into that language.

, an eminent protestant divine of the seventeenth century, was born at Schafhousen, July 29, 1639. He began his studies under the inspection of his father, who was rector of thq college; but in 1647 went to Cologne, where his brother Sebaldus lived, and there for about a year studied Greek and Latin. In 1643 he returned to Schafhousen, but left it for Heidelberg in the following year, where his brother had been appointed professor of history and Greek. In 1650 he went to Utrecht, and for about two years was employed in teaching. At the end of that time he visited Paris as tutor of the son of M. de la Lane, governor of Reez, and remained in tnis station for three years. Having returned to Heidelberg in 1656, he took his degree of master of arts, and the following year was admitted into holy orders, and appointed professor extraordinary of Greek, but was, not long after, requested by the elector to go again to Paris as tutor to the baron Rothenschild, and in 1659 he accompanied his pupil to the Hague, and afterwards into England. On their return to France they parted, and Fabricius went to Leyden, where he took his degree of doctor in divinity. Soon after he was appointed professor of divinity at Heidelr berg, superintendant of the studies of the electoral prince, inspector of the college of wisdom, and philosophy professor. In 1664 he was appointed ecclesiastical counsellor to the elector, who, in 1666, sent him to Schafhousen to explain to that canton the reasons for the war of Lorraine, which office Dr. Boeckelman had discharged in the other cantons. In 1674, when the French army advanced towards Heidelberg, Fabricius retired to Fredericksburgh, and to Cologne, but returned the same year. In 168O, although a Calvinist, he was commissioned with a Roman catholic to open the temple of concord at Manheim. In 1688, the French, who had taken possession of Heidelberg, showed so much respect for his character as to give him a passport, which carried him safely to Schafhousen; but the continuance of the war occasioned him again to shift his place of residence, and when at Francfort, he was employed by the king of England (William III.) and the States General to join the English envoy in Swisserland, and watch the interests of the States General. In the execution of this commission he acquitted himself with great ability, and was particularly successful in adjusting tjbe differences between the Vaudois and the duke of Savoy, and afterwards in accomplishing an alliance between the duke and the States General. We find him afterwards at Heidelberg, and Francfort, at which last he died in 1697. From these various employments it appears that he was a man of great abilities and political weight, and he derived likewise considerable reputation from his writings as a divine. Such was his abhorence of Socinianism that he opposed the settlement of the Socinian Poles when driven out of their own country in the Palatinate; in which, however, at that time he was not singular, as, according to Mosheim, none of the European nations could be persuaded to grant a public settlement to a sect whose members denied the divinity of Christ. The same historian informs us that he “was so mild and indulgent” as to maintain, that the difference between the Lutherans and Roman catholics was of so little consequence, that a Lutheran might safely embrace popery; an opinion, which, mild and indulgent as Mosheim thinks it, appears to us more in favour of popery than of Lutheranism. His works, on controversial topics, were collected and published in a quarto volume, by Heidegger with a life of the author, printed at Zurich in 1698.

, a French Dominican, was born in 1726 at St. Maximin in Provence, and, in 1757, was appointed secretary to the library of la Casanati in Rome; and in 1771 French theologist to that establishment. He was also admitted a member of the Arcadi. He died Jan. 13, 1800. His principal works’ are, 1. “Recherches sur Tepoque de l‘equitation, et de i’usage des chars equestres, chez les anciens,” Rome, 1764, 1765, 2 vols. 8vo. 2 f “Memoire pour servir a Thistoire litteraire de la vie des deux P. P. Ansaldi, des P. P. Mamachi, Palnzzi, Richini, 6t Rubeis,” inserted in Richards’s “Diet. Univ. des Sciences Ecclesiastiques,” vol. V. and Vj. 3. “Des litres primitifs de la revelation, ou, considerations critiques sur la purete* et I‘integrit6 du texte original des livres saints de l’Ancien Testament,” Rome and Paris, 1772, 2 vols. 8vo, recommending a new translation of the Bible. 4. “Diatribe qua bibliographies antiquarise et sacrae critices capita aliquot illustrantur,” Rome, 1782, 8vo. He wrote also some papers in the literary journals.

, an eminent Italian scholar and biographer, was born Sept. 25, 1732, at Marradi in Tuscany, of a family once so opulent as to be able to assist the falling fortunes of the Medici. He was the youngest of the eleven children of Alexander and Hyacinth Fabroni. He was educated first at home under able masters, and afterwards went to Rome, in 1750, to the college founded by Bandinelli for the youth of Tuscany, who were also required to attend the public schools of the Jesuits. Here he studied rhetoric, logic, geometry, physics, and metaphysics. After he had been here three years, Peter Francis Foggini, who had acted as a second father to him (for his own died in 1750), introduced him to Bottari, as his assistant in the duties of a canonicate which he held in the church of St. Mary; and as Bottari was a great favourer of the Jansenists, Fabroni thought to please him by translating from the French of Quesnel, and publishing “La preparazione alia morte;” and “Principi e regale della vita Cristiana.” About the same time he published “Ler Massime della Marchesa di Sable,” also translated from the French, with notes. This, he informs us, was a work of little consequence, yet served to show that he was at this time tolerably versed in the reading of ancient authors.

At Pisa, in 1771, he began a literary journal which extended to 102 parts or volumes; in this he had the occasional assistance of other writers, but often entire volumes were from his pen. At length the grand duke, who always had a high regard for Fabroni, furnished him liberally with the means of visiting the principal cities of Europe. ing this tour he informs us that he was introduced to, and lived familiarly with the most eminent characters in France, with D'Alembert, Conclorcet, La Lande, La Harpe, Mirabeau, Condilliac, Rousseau, Diderot, &c. and laments that he found them the great leaders of impiety. He then came to England, where he resided about four months, and became acquainted with Waring, Maskelyne, Priestley, and Dr. Franklin, who once invited him to go to America, which, he informs us, he foolishly refused. With what he found in England he appears to be little pleased, and could not be brought to think the universities of Oxford and Cambridge equal, for the instruction of youth, to those of Italy. In short he professes to relish neither English diet, manners, or climate; but perhaps our readers may dispute his taste, when at the same time he gives the preference to the manners, &c. of France. In 1773 he returned to Tuscany, and was desired by the grand duke to draw up a scheme of instruction for his sons, with which he insinuates that the duke was less pleased at last than at first, and adds that this change of opinion might arise from the malevolent whispers of literary rivals. He now went on to prosecute various literary undertakings, particularly his “Vitas Italorum,” and the life of pope Leo, &c. The greater part were completed before 1800, when the memoirs of his life written by himself end, and when his health began to be much affected by attacks of the gout. In 1801 he? desisted from his accustomed literary employments, and retired to a Carthusian monastery near Pisa, where he passed his time in meditation. Among other subjects, he reflected with regret on any expressions used in his works which might have given offence, and seemed to set more value on two small works he wrote of the pious kind at this time, than on all his past labours. When the incursions of the French army had put an end to the studies of the youth at Pisa, Fabroni removed to St. Cerbo, a solitary spot near Lucca, and resided for a short time with some Franciscans, but returned to Pisa, where an asthmatic disorder put an end to his life Sept. 22, 1803. He left the bulk of his property, amounting to about 1500 scudi, to the poor, or to public charitable institutions; and all the classics in his library, consisting of the best editions, to his nephew, Raphael Fabroni.

His other works, not already mentioned, are, 1. f< Dialochi di Focione del Mably, trad, del Francese.“2.” Lettere del Magolotti,“Florence, 1769. 3.” Lettered'Uomini dotti a Leopoldo Medici.“4.” Istoria dell' arte del disegno.“5.” Dissertazione sulla fabola di Niobe.“5.” Prefazioni al I. e II. tomo degli Uomini Illustri Pisani.“6.” Vita Laurentii Medicei,“4to. 7.” Historia Lycaei Pisani,“3 vols. 4to. He was at one time rector of the university of Pisa, but his employment ceased with the incursions of the French army. 8.” Viaggi d'Anacarsi.“9.” Vita Leonis X.“4to. 10.” Vita Cosnii Medicei,“4to. 11.” Epistolae Francisci Petrarchae,“4to. 12.” Vita F. Petrarchae,“4to. 13.” Vita Pallantis Stroctii,“4to. 14.” Elogi d'illustri Italiani, cioe di Michelangelo Giacomelli, Eust. Zanotti, Tomaso Perelli, Paolo Frisi, Innocenzo Frugeni, e Pietro Metastasio.“15.” Elogi di Dante Alighieri, di Angelo Poliziano, di Ludovico Ariosto, e di Torquato Tasso,“Parma, 1800. 16.” Oratio ad S. R. E. Cardinales cum subrogandi Pontificis causa conclave Venetiis ingressuri essent,“Pisa, 1800. 17.” Oratio in funere Franc. Leopoldi Austriaci,“Pisa, 1800. 18.” Devoti AfFetti in prepa.;zione alle Feste del S. natale,“&c. ibid. 1801. 19.” Novena in onore di Maria S. S. Ausiliatrice, colP aggiunta di dodici Meditazioni," isa, 1803.

, a very learned lawyer and scholar, was born in 1580, at Aix in Provence, whither his father, a native of Nismes in Languedoc, had retired during the civil wars. After making very distinguished progress in Greek and Latin, the belles lettres, and jurisprudence, he was admitted doctor of laws in 1606, and then became an advocate in the parliament of Aix. Among the many friends of distinction to whom his talents recommended him, were M. de Peiresc, a counsellor of that parliament, and William de Vair, first president. By the interest of this last-mentioned gentleman, he was promoted to the law-professorship at Aix, which office he filled until 1617, when Du Vair being made keeper of the seals, invited him to Paris. On Du Vair’s death in 1621, Fabrot resumed his office in the university of Aix, where he was appointed second professor in 1632, and first professor in 1638. At this time he was absent, having the preceding year gone to Paris to print his notes on the institutes of Theophilus, an ancient jurist. This work he dedicated to the chancellor Seguier, who requested him to remain in Paris, and undertake the translation of 1 the Basilics, or Constitutions of the Eastern emperors, and gave him a pension of 2000 livres. This work, and his editions of some of the historians of Constantinople, which he published afterwards, procured him from the king the office of counsellor of the parliamentof Provence, but the intervention of the civil wars rendered this appointment null. During his stay at Paris, however, several of the French universities were ambitious to add him to the number of their teachers, particularly Valence and Bourges, offers which his engagements prevented his accepting. His death is said to have been hastened by the rigour of his application in preparing his new edition of Cujas; but his life had already been lengthened beyond the usual period, as he was in his seventy-ninth year when he died, Jan. 16, 1659. His works are: 1. “Antiquite’s de la ville de Marseille,” Lyons, 1615 and 1632, 8vo. This is a translation from the Latin ms. of Raymond de Soliers. 2. “Ad tit. Codicis Theodosiani de Paganis, Sacrificiis, et Templis notae,” Paris, 1618, 4to. 3. “Exercitationes duae de tempore humani partus et de numero puerperii,” Aix, 1628, 8vo; Geneva, 1629, 4to, with a treatise by Carranza, on natural and legitimate birth. 4. “Car. Ann. Fabroti Exercitationes XII. Accedunt leges XIV. quae in libris digestarum deerant, Gr. et Lat. mine primum ex Basilicis editnc,” Paris, 1639, 4to. 5. rt Thcophili Antecessoris InstituiK-iies,“Gr. et Lat. Paris, 1638 and 1657, 4to. 6.” Inatiuuiones Justiniani, cum notis Jacobi Cujacii,“ibid. I, 12mo. 7.” Epistolae de Mutuo, cum responsionc Claudii Salmasii ad ^gidium Menagium,“Leyden, 1645, 8vo. 8.” Replicatio adversus C. Salmasii refutationem,“&c. Paris, 1647, 4to. 9.” Basilicorum libri sexaginta,“Gr. et Lat. ibid. 1647, 7 vols. folio. The whole of the translation of this elaborate collection of the laws and constitutions of the Eastern emperors, was performed by Fabrot, except books 38, 39, and 60, which had been translated by Cujas, whose version he adopted. 10.” Nicetae Acominati Choniatoe Historia,“ibid. 1647, fol. 11.” Georgii Cedreni Compendium historiarum,“Gr. et Lat. ibid. 1647, 2 vols. fol. 12.” Theophylacti Simocattse Hist, libri octo,“ibid. 1647, fol. 13.” Anastasii Bibliothecarii Hist. Ecclesiastica,“ibid. 1649, fol. 14.” Laonici Chalcondyla? Hist. de origine ac rebus gestis Turcarum, libri decem,“ibid. 1650. fol. 15.” Praelectio in tit. Decret. Gregorii IX. de vitaet honestate Clericorum,“ibid. 1651, 4to. 16.” Constantini Manassis Breviarium Historicum,“Gr. et Lat. ibid, 1655, fol. 17.” Cujacii Opera omnia,“ibid. 1658, 10 vols. fol. 15.” J. P. de Maurize Juris Canonici Selecta,“ibid. 1659, 4to. 19.” Notae in T. Balsamonis collectionem constitutionum Ecclesiasticarum." This is inserted in the second volume of Justel and VoePs Bibliotheca of Canon law. Ruhnkenius published a supplementary volume to his edition of Cujas at Leyden in 1765.

From several passages in Fabyan’s history, it is evident that he was conversant in French, and no layman of the age he lived in is said to have been better skilled in the Latin language. With these accomplishments, with great opportunities, and with a taste for poetry, he endeavoured to reconcile the discordant testimonies of historians, and therefore named his work “The Concordance of Histories;” adding the fruits of personal observation in the latter and more interesting portion of his Chronicle. His poetry, indeed, is not of a superior cast. Mr. Warton considered “The Complaint of king Edward II.” to be the best of his metres but observes, that it is a translation from a Latin poem attributed to that monarch, but probably written by William of Wyrcestre. “Our author’s transitions,” he adds, “from prose to verse, in the course of a prolix narrative, seem to be made with much ease, and when he begins to versify, the historian disappears only by the addition of rhyme and stanza.”

, a man of considerable learning, but unfortunately connected with the French prophets, was a native of Switzerland, whither his family, originally Italians, were obliged to take refuge, for religion’s sake, in the beginning of the reformation. He was born Feb. 16, 1664. His father intending him for the study of divinity, he was regularly instructed in Greek and Latin, philosophy, mathematics, and astronomy; learned a little of the Hebrew tongue, and began to attend the lectures of the divinity professors of Geneva: but his mother being averse to this, he was left to pursue his own course, and appears to have produced the first fruits of his studies in some letters on subjects of astronomy sent to Cassini, the French king’s astronomer. In 1682 he went to Paris, where Cassini received him very kindly. In the following year he returned to Geneva, where he became particularly acquainted with a count Fenil, who formed the design of seizing, if not assassinating the prince of Orange, afterwards William III. This design Faccio having learned from him communicated it to bishop Burnet about 1686, who of course imparted it to the prince. Bishop Burnet, in the first letter of his Travels, dated September 1685, speaks of him as an incomparable mathematician and philosopher, who, though only twenty-one years old, was already become one of the greatest men of his age, and seemed born to carry learning some sizes beyond what it had hitherto attained. Whilst Dr. Calamy studied at the university of Utrecht, Faccio resided in that city as tutor to two young gentlemen, Mr. Ellys and Mr. Thornton, and conversed freely with the English. At this time he was generally esteemed to be a Spinozist; and his discourse, says Dr. Calamy, very much looked that way. Afterwards, it is probable, that he was professor of mathematics at Geneva. In 1687 he came into England, and was honoured with the friendship of the most eminent mathematicians of that age. Sir Isaac Newton, in particular, was intimately acquainted with him. Dr. Johnstone of Kidderminster had in his possession a manuscript, written by Faccio, containing commentaries and illustrations of different parts of sir Isaac’s Principia. About 1704 he taught mathematics in Spitafnelds, and obtained about that time a patent fora species of jewel-watches. When he unfortunately attached himself to the new prophets, he became their chief secretary, and committed their warnings to writing, many of which were published. The connexion of such a man with these enthusiasts, and their being supported, likewise, by another person of reputed abilities, Maximilian Misson, a French refugee, occasioned a suspicion, though without reason, that there was some deep contrivance and design in the affair. On the second of December, 1707, Faccio stood in the pillory at Charing-cross, with the following words affixed to his hat: “Nicolas Fatio, convicted for abetting and favouring Elias Marion, in his wicked and counterfeit prophecies, and causing them to be printed and published, to terrify the queen’s people.” Nearly at the same time, alike sentence was executed upon Elias Marion, one of the pretended prophets, and John d'Ande, another of their abettors. This mode of treatment did not convince Faccio of his error; and, indeed, the delusion of a man of such abilities, and simplicity of manners, was rather an object of compassion than of public infamy and punishment. Oppressed with the derision and contempt thrown upon himself and his party, he retired at last into the country, and spent the remainder of a long life in silence and obscurity. He died at Worcester in 1753, about eightynine years old. When he became the dupe of fanaticism, he seems to have given up his philosophical studies and connections. Faccio, besides being deeply versed in all branches of mathematical literature, was a great proficient in the learned and oriental languages. He had read much, also, in books of alchymy. To the last, he continued a firm believer in the reality of the inspiration of the French prophets. Dr. Wall of Worcester, who was well acquainted with him, communicated many of the above particulars to Dr. Johnstone, in whose hands were several of Faccio’s fanatical manuscripts and journals; and one of his letters giving an account of count Fenil’s conspiracy, and some particulars of the author’s family was communicated to the late Mr. Seward, and published in the second volume of his Anecdotes. In the Republic of Letters, vol. I. we find a Latin poem by Faccio, in honour of sir Isaac Newton; and in vol. XVIII. a communication on the rules of the ancient Hebrew poesy, on which subject he appears to have corresponded with Whiston. There are also many of his original papers and letters in the British Museum; and among them a Latin poem, entitled “N. Facii Duellerii Auriacus Throno-Servatus,” in which he claims to himself the merit of having saved king William from the above-mentioned conspiracy.

, an elegant Latin poet and philologist, was born at Cremona in the early part of the sixteenth century, and by his accomplishments in polite literature, gained the esteem and friendship of the cardinal de Medicis, afterwards pope Pius IV. and of his nephew the cardinal Borromeo. Having acquired a critical knowledge of the Latin language, he was enabled to display much judgment in the correction of the Roman classics, and in the collation of ancient manuscripts on which he was frequently employed, and indeed had an office of that kind in the Vatican library. Ghilini says that he was equally learned in the Greek language, but Muret asserts that he was quite unacquainted with the Greek. That he was a very elegant Latin poet, however, is amply proved by his “Fables,” and perhaps his being accused of stealing from Phgedrus may be regarded as a compliment to his style. Thuanus appears to have first suggested this accusation. He says that the learned world was greatly obliged to him, yet had been more so, if, instead of suppressing, he had been content with imitating the Fables of Phaedrus, and asserts that Faeruo dealt unfairly with the public concerning Phoedrus, who was then unknown; having a manuscript of that author, which he concealed from the world for fear of lessening the value of the Latin fables he had made in imitation of Æsop. Perrault, however, who published a translation of Faerno’s Fables into French verse at Paris in 1699, has defended his author from Thuanus’s imputation. His words in the preface are as follow “Faerno has been called a second Phsedrus, by reason of the excellent style of his Fables, though he never saw Phaedrus, who did not come to our knowledge till above thirty years after his death; for Pithoeus, having found that manuscript in the dust of an old library, published it in the beginning of this century, Thuanus, who makes very honourable mention of our author in his history, pretends, that Phcedrus was not unknown to him; and even blames him for having suppressed that author, to conceal what he had stolen from him. But there is no ground for what he says; and it is only the effect of the strong persuasion of all those who are so great admirers of antiquity as to think that a modern author can do nothing that is excellent, unless he has an ancient author for his model. Out of the hundred fables which Faerno published in Latin verse, there are but five that had been treated by Phsedrus $ and out of those five there are but one or two that have been managed nearly in the same manner: which happened only because it is impossible that two men, who treat on the same subject, should not agree sometimes in the same thoughts, or in the same expressions.”

, a French comic writer of some eminence within the last century, was born at Paris in 1702. He was son of a clerk in a public office at Paris, in which he also obtained an appointment that gave him little trouble, and left him leisure for literary occupations. He wrote for several of the French theatres, and his works were collected into four volumes, 12mo,1760. The general character of his comedies is a delicate and natural liveliness. The most approved of them were, “The Rendezvous,” and “The Ward.” In his own character, as well as in talents, he was not unlike la Fontaine, indolent, averse to business, negligent of his appearance, absent, timid, and by no means likely to be taken by a stranger for a man of genius. He died April 28, 1755, at the age of fifty-three.

, an eminent French physician in the reign of Louis XIV. was born at Paris, May 11, 1638. He was the son of Henry Fagon, commissioner in ordinary of war, and of Louisa de la Brosse, niece of Guy de la Brosse, physician in ordinary to Louis XIII. and grandson of a physician in ordinary to Henry IV. He studied first in the Sorbonne, under M. Gillot, an eminent doctor, with whom he resided as student, and who persuaded him to chuse the medical profession. M. Fagon never forgot M. Gillot in his highest prosperity; but, if he met him in the street, alighted from his coach, and conducted him to the house where he was going. This young physician had scarcely begun to dispute, when he ventured to maintain, in a thesis, the circulation of the blood, which was at that time held as a paradox among the old doctors; and also another on the use of tobacco, published long afterwards; “An frequens Nicotian ye usus vitam abbreviet,” Paris, 1699, 4to. He took his doctor’s degree 1664, M. Vallot wishing to repair and replenish the royal garden, M. Fagon offered his services; and going, at his own expence, to Auvergne, Languedoc, Provence, the Alps, and the Pyrenees, returned with an ample collection of curious and useful plants. He had the principal share in the catalogue of the plants in that garden, puhlished 1665, entitled “Hortus Regius,” to which he prefixed a little Latin poem of his own. M. Fagon was made professor of botany and chemistry at the royal garden, and began to have the plants engraved; but there are only forty -five plates finished, which are very scarce. The king appointed bim first physician to the dauphiness in 1680, and to the queen some months after. In 1693 he was made first physician to the king, and superintendant of the royal garden in 1698, to which he retired after the king’s death, and, for the improvement of which, he persuaded Louis XIV. to send M. de Tournfort into Greece, Asia, and Egypt, which produced the scientific voyage so well known to the learned world. Fagon died March 11, 1718, aged near eighty. The academy of sciences had chosen him an honorary member in 1699. He left “Les Qualités du Quinquina,” Paris, 1703, 12mo. He married Mary Nozereau, by whom he had two sons Anthony, the eldest, bishop of Lombez, then of Vannes, died February.16, 1742 the second, Lewis, counsellor of state in ordinary, and to the royal council, and intendant of the finances, died at Paris May 8, 1741, unmarried. The Fagonia, in botany, was so called by Tournfort in honour of him.

, a French topographical writer, was born at Castelnaudari in Upper Languedoc, Oct. 30, 1616. after going through a course of studies at Toulouse, he was in 1638 appointed king’s advocate to the presidial of his native city, which office he resigned in 1655 on being chosen syndic to the city of Toulouse, and came to reside in the latter, where he was enabled to cultivate his taste for the belles lettres; and during the discharge of the duties of his office, which he executed with zeal and disinterestedness, the opportunity he had of inspecting the archives suggested to him the design of writing the annals of Toulouse. On making known his intentions, the parliament granted him permission to examine its registers, and the city undertook to defray the expense of printing his work. Having been advanced to the rank of capitoul, or alderman of the city, which office he served for the third time in 1673, he communicated to his brethren a plan of ornamenting their capitolium, or town -hall, with busts of the most distinguished personages who had filled the offices of magistracy, and they having allowed him to make choice of the proper objects, a gallery was completed in 1677 with the busts of thirty persons whom he had selected as meriting that honour. This, and other services which he rendered to the citizens of Toulouse, induced them to confer a handsome pension on him, and likewise to bestow the reversion of the place of syndic on his nephew, who dying before La Faille, they gave it to his grand-nephew. In 1694 the academy of the “Jeux Floraux” elected him their secretary, a situation which he filled for sixteen years with much reputation; for, besides the fame he had acquired as an historian and magistrate, he possessed considerable literary taste and talents, and even in his ninetieth year produced some poetical pieces in which there was more spirit and vivacity than could have been expected at that very advanced period. He died at Toulouse Nov. 12, 1711, in his ninety-sixth year. His “Annales de la ville de Toulouse” were published there in 2 vols. fol. 1687 and 1701. The style, although; somewhat incorrect, is lively and concise. The annals are brought down only to 1610, the author being afraid, if he proceeded nearer to his own times, that he might be tempted to violate the impartiality which he had hitherto endeavoured to preserve. He published also “Traité de la noblesse des Capitouls,” 1707, 4to, a very curious work,. which is said to have given offence to some of the upstart families. To the works of Goudelin of Toulouse, a poet, published in 1678, 12mo, he prefixed a life, and criticism on his poems. Some of his own poetical pieces are in the “Journal de Verdun,” for May 1709.

In 1751, Thomas Martin, esq. second son of his sister Frances, came over to Virginia to live with his lordship; and a circumstance happened, a few years after his arrival, too characteristic of lord Fairfax not to be recorded. After general Braddock’s defeat in 1755, the Indians in the interest of the French committed the most dreadful massacres upon all our back settlements. Their incursions were every where stained with blood; and slaughter and devastation marked the inroads of these cruel and merciless savages. Every planter of name or reputation became an object of their insidious designs; and as lord Fairfax had been pointed out to them as a captain or chief of great renown, the possession of his scalp became an object of their sanguinary ambition, and what they would have regarded as a trophy of inestimable value. With this view they made daily inroads into the vicinage of Greenwaycourt; and it is said that not less than 3000 lives were sacrificed to their cruel barbarity between the Apalachian and Alleghenny mountains. The most serious apprehensions were entertained for the safety of lord Fairfax and the family at Greenway-court. In this crisis of danger his lordship, importuned by his friends and the principal gentry of the colony to retire to the inner settlements for security, is said to have addressed his nephew, who now bore the commission of colonel of militia, nearly in the following manner: “Colonel Martin, the danger we are exposed to, which is undoubtedly great, may possibly excite in your mind apprehension and anxiety. If so, I am ready to take any step that you may judge expedient for our common safety. I myself am an old man, and it is of little importance whether 1 fall by the tomahawk of an Intlian, or by disease and old age: but you are young, and, it is to be hoped, may have many years before you. I will therefore submit it to your decision, whether we shall remain where we are, taking every precaution to secure ourselves against the ravages of the enemy, or abandon our habitation, and retire within the mountains, that we may be sheltered from the danger to which we are at present exposed. If we determine to remain, it is possible, notwithstanding our utmost care and vigilance, that we may both fall victims if we retire, the whole district will immediately break up and all the trouble and solicitude which 1 have undergone to settle this fine country will be frustrated, and the occasion perhaps irrecoverably lost.” Colonel Martin, after a short deliberation, determined to remain, and as affairs in that quarter soon took a more favourable turn, the danger gradually diminished, and at length, entirely disappeared.

“In person,” says Mr. Clarke, “Falconer was about five feet seven inches in height of a thin light make, with a dark weather-beaten complexion, and rather what is termed hard-featured, being considerably marked with the small-pox his hair was of a brownish hue. In point of address, his manner was blunt, awkward, and forbidding but he spoke with great fluency and his simple yet impressive diction was couched in words which reminded his hearers of the terseness of Swift. Though he possessed a warm and friendly disposition, he was fond of controversy, and inclined to satire. His observation was keen and rapid; his criticisms on any inaccuracy of language, or expression, were frequently severe; yet this severity was always intended eventually to create mirth, and not by any means to show his own superiority, or to give the smallest offence. In his natural temper he was cheerful, and frequently used to amuse his messmates by composing acrostics on their favourites, in which he particularly excelled. As a professional man he was a thorough seaman; and, like most of that profession, was kind, generous, and benevolent. He often assured governor Hunter, that his education had been confined merely to reading English, writing, and a 4ittle arithmetic; notwithstanding which he was never at a loss to understand either French, Spanish, Italian, or even German.”

, born at Lyons in 1671, was bred a physician, in which profession his family had long been celebrated, but distinguished himself more iii general literature than in medicine. He settled at Paris, became a friend of Malebranche, and in 1716 was elected into the French academy. He had a library of forty-five thousand volumes, from which, in 1742, he presented to the royal library all those that were wanting to that collection. He died Feb. 8, 1762, at the age of 91, being supposed (like Fagon), to have prolonged his life by his skill. He was of a lively disposition, with a ready natural eloquence; and though he was not so famous in the practice of medicine, he was much esteemed in consultation. His chief works are, 1. A translation of Viliemont’s “Systema Planetarum,” published in 1707. 2. An edition of the Greek pastoral of “Daphnis and Chloe,” translated by Amyot, with curious notes. 3. An edition of Desperier’s “Cymbalum Mundi,” with notes. 4. Several dissertations in the inemoirs of the academy; and some medical theses. He was uncle to Stephen Falconet, the celebrated sculptor, of whom we regret that no good account has yet reached this country, where he has long been known for his writings.

, a celebrated medallist, was the son of a jeweller, and born at Stockholm in 1658. His father dying in his infancy, he was sent to Stettin to the care of his maternal uncle, and afterwards being brought back to Stockholm, employed himself in goldsmith’s work, painting, and modelling in wax. In 1680 he went to Copenhagen, and thence to Lubeck, Hamburgh, and many other places, for the sake of improvement in his art. At Augsburgh he learned to work on steel. In 1683, after studying the French language, he went to Paris, and was employed by Cheron the French king’s medallist, and having acquired a very high reputation for his workmanship, he began business on his own account, and executed a great number of excellent medals illustrative of the history of Louis XIV. who was so well pleased with his performances as to settle a pension of 1200 livres upon him, besides paying him liberal prices for his works. In 1686 he took a trip to the Netherlands, and thence into England. After returning to the continent, he re-visited his native country, Sweden, where the king gave him an handsome pension; and in 1688, Frederic, elector of Brandenburgh, invited Falz to his court, and appointed him his medallist. After increasing his fame in Sweden, at Berlin, and at Hanover, he died at Berlin May 26, 1703.

, a French wit and poet, was born in 1600 at Bourg en Bresse, and going very young to Paris, attached himself to Vaugeias, Boisrobert, and Coeffetau; and was afterwards made secretary to the count d'Harcourt, and then steward of his house. Faret was one of the first members of the French academy, and employed to settle its statutes. He was very intimate with St. Amand, who celebrates him in his verses, as an illustrious debauchee, inertly to furnish a rhyme to Cabaret. He was at length appointed secretary to the king, and died at Paris in September 1640, leaving several children by two marriages. His works are, a translation of Eutropius; “L'Honnete Homme,” taken from the Italian of Castiglione, J2mo; “Vertus necessaires a un Prince;” and several poems in the collections of his time. He also left a life of Rene II. dhke of Lorraine, and Memoirs of the famous count d'Harcourt, ms.

, a learned grammarian, was born in London about 1575. His father was a carpenter in that city his grandfather had been mayor of Truro in Cornwall and his great-grandfather was an Italian musician, who had settled in England. After having received a proper grammatical education, he was admitted of Merton-college, Oxford, in the beginning of 1590, where he became servitor to Mr. Thomas French, fellow of that college, and soon distinguished himself as a youth of lively parts and great hopes. Being, however, of an unsettled disposition, he abruptly quitted the university, and, abandoning both his religion and his country, passed over to Spain, and was for some time educated there in a college belonging to the Jesuits. At length, growing weary of the severe discipline of the institution, he found a way to leave it, and went with sir Francis Drake and sir John Hawkins in their last voyage, in 15^5. By the former of these great naval commanders he is said to have been held in some esteem. Mr. Farnabie is afterwards reported to have served as a soldier in the Low Countries. No advantage was gained by him in these expeditions; for, having been reduced to much distress, he landed in Cornwall, and from the urgency of his necessities was obliged to descend to the humble employment of teaching children their horn-book. Whilst he was in this low situation he did not cbuse to go by his own name, but changed it to Thomas Baimafe, the anagram of Farnabie. By degrees he rose to those higher occupations of a school-master for which he was so well qualified, and after some lime, he fixed at Martock in Somersetshire, where he taught a grammarschool with great success. In 1646, when Mr. Charles Darby was called to teach the same school, he found in that town, and the neighbourhood, many persons who had been Mr. Farnahie’s scholars, and who, in their grey hairs, were ingenious men and good grammarians. From Martock Mr. Farnabie removed to London, and opened a school in Goldsmiths’-rents, behind Red-Cross-street, near Cripplegate, where were large gardens and handsome houses, together with all the accommodations proper for the young noblemen and gentlemen committed to his care. So established was his reputation, that at one time the number of his scholars amounted to more than three hundred. Whilst he was at the head of this school, he was created master of arts in the university of Cambridge, and on the 24th of April, 1616, was incorporated to the same degree at Oxford.

, distinguished by translating some capital authors, was born (as is presumed) at Bonteshall in Derbyshire, where his father, of the same names, was rector. He was bred first at Chesterfield school under Mr. William Burrow, a celebrated master, and afterwards removed to Eton. He was admitted of Jesus college, Cambridge; and matriculated Dec. 17, 1730. In 1734 he took his degree of B. A, and in 1738 that of M. A. In 1762 he was presented by Dr. James Yorke, dean of Lincoln, to the rectory of Carsington in Derbyshire; but did not enjoy it long, as he died March 25, 1763, His publications were, 1. “The life of Pope Sixtus V. translated from the Italian of Gregorio Leti, with a preface, prolegomena, notes, and appendix, 1754,” folio. 2. “Davila’s History of France,” 1757, 2 vols. 4to. 3. “A translation of the works of Machiavel, illustrated with annotations, dissertations, and several new plans on the art of war,” 1761, 2 vols. 4to: reprinted in 1775, 4 vols. 8vo. 4. “A short history of the Israelites, from the French of the -abbe” de Fleury,“1756, 8vo, has been attributed to him, but it was his only by the kindness of Mr. Thomas Bedford (son of Hilkiah), who gave him the translation, in hopes that he might raise some money by it, as he was then poor. None indeed of his works appear to have been profitable* although his translation of Maehiavel, which he literally” hawked round the town/' nowsells at a very high price. On one occasion Dr. Addenbroke, dean of Lichfield, recommended him to translate Spelman’s Life of Alfred from the Latin into English, and Farneworth was about to have begun, when Dr. Pegge luckily informed him that the Life of Alfred was originally written in English, and thence translated into Latin. Mr. Farneworth is supposed to have been the author of a ludicrous and pleasant account of Powell, the fire-eater, in Gent. Mag. 1755, signed Philopyrphagus Asliburniensis. He was at that time curate to the rev. John Fitzherbert, vicar of Ashbourne.

Encouraged by the great success of his last play, he wrote a continuation of it, in 1701, called, “Sir Harry Wildair, or, The Sequel of the Trip to the Jubilee:” in which Mrs. Oldfield obtained as much reputation, and was as greatly admired in her part, as Wiiks was m his. In 1702 he published his “Miscellanies, or, collection of poems, letters, and essays,” which contain a variety of humourous and pleasant sallies of fancy. It is said, that some of the letters were published from copies returned to bun. at his request, by Mrs. Oldfield, There is at the end of them, “A discourse upon Comedy, in reference to the English stage;” and in one of the letters, ' The Picture,“containing a description and character of himself, from which we learn that he was very ingenuous, very good-natured, and very thoughtless. In 1703 he brought out another lively comedy called” The Inconstant, or, the way to win him:" but the fashion now turning towards Italian and French operas, this comedy, although not inferior, was received more coldly than the former. Farquhar was married this year, and, as was at first reported, to a great fortune; which indeed he expected, but was miserably disappointed. The lady had fallen in love with him, and so violent was her passion, that she resolved to have him at any rate: and as she knew he was too much dissipated to fall in love, or to think of matrimony, unless advantage was annexed to it, she first caused a report to be spread of her being a great fortune, and then had him persuaded that she was in love with him. He married her: and though he found himself deceived, his circumstances embarrassed, and his family increasing, he never once upbraided her for the imposition, but behaved to her with all the delicacy and tenderness of an indulgent husband.

, of Pavia, an artist who flourished about 1518, was a pupil or imitator of Lionardo da Vinci, and the most successful of all his imitators, Luino perhaps excepted, if he be judged by the only picture, which, without hesitation, may be ascribed to him. This picture, which belonged to the gallery of prince Braschi, was carried by the French to that of the Louvre, and represents, in a groupe of natural size, the Madonna with the. infant on her lap: the mother in quiet repose, with bent eyes, and absorbed in meditation; her simple attitude is contrasted by the lively one of the child, who seems to take refuge at her neck and breast from some external object. The picture is inscribed “Bernardinus Faxolus de Papia fecit, 1518.”

, knight, and knight-banneret, a valiant and renowned general, governor, and nobleman in France, during our conquests in that kingdom, under king Henry IV. V. and VI. of England, and knight-companion of the most noble order of the garter, has been supposed, from the title of his French barony, and from his name being so often corruptly mentioned in the French histories^ owing to his long residence, and many engagements in the wars there, to have been born in France, at least of French extraction. Others, allowing him to have been a native of England, have no less erroneously fixed hist birth-place in Bedfordshire; but it is well known that he was descended of an ancient and famous English family in the county of Norfolk, which had flourished there and in other parts of the kingdom, in very honourable distinction, before the conquest: and from a train of illustrious ancestors, many of them dignified with the honour of knighthood, invested with very eminent employments, and possessed of extensive patrimonies. But one of the principal branches being seated at Castre in Fleg near Great Yarmouth in that county, which estate descending to these ancestors, he afterwards adorned with a noble family seat, it is presumed he was born therej or in Yarmouth. His father was John Fastolff, esq. of that town, a man of considerable account, especially for his public benefactions, pious foundations, &c. His mother was Mary, daughter of Nicholas Park, esq. and married to sir Richard Mortimer, of Attleburgh; and this their son was born in the latter end of king Edward the Illd’s reign. As he died at the age of eighty, in 1459, his birth could not happen later than 1378. It may fairly be presumed he was grounded as well in that learning and other accomplishments which afterwards, improved by his experience and sagacity, rendered him so famous in war and peace, as in those virtuous and religious principles which governed his actions to the last. His father dying before he was of age, the care of his person and estate were committed to John duke of Bedford, who was afterwards the most wise and able regent of France we ever had there; and he was the last ward which that duke had: others, indeed, say that he was trained up in the Norfolk family, which will not appear improbable when we consider that it was not unusual in those times for young noblemen whilst under wardship to be trained under others, especially ministers of state, in their houses and families, as in academies of behaviour, and to qualify them for the service of their country at home pr abroad. But if he was under Thomas Mowbray duke pf Norfolk, while he enjoyed that title, it could be but one year, that duke being banished the kingdom by king Richard II. in 1398, though his younger son, who was restored to that title many years after, might be one of sir John FastoltFs feoffees. And it is pretty evident that he was, but a few years after the banishment of that duke, in some considerable post under Thomas of Lancaster, after^ wards duke of Clarence, and second son of the succeeding king Henry IV. This Thomas was sent by his father so early, according to some writers, as the second year of his reign, which was in 1401, lord lieutenant of Ireland. And it is not improbable that Fastolff was then with him; for we are informed by William of Wyrcestre, that in the sixth, and seventh years of the said king Henry, that is, in 1405 and 1406, this John Fastolff, esq. was continually with, him. And the same lord lieutenant of Ireland was again there in 1408, 10 Henry IV. and almost to the beginning of the next year, when it is no less probable that Fastolff was still with him; for, in the year last mentioned, we find that he was married in that kingdom to a rich young widow of quality, named Milicent, lady Castlecomb, daughter of Robert lord Tibetot, and relict of sir Stephen Scrope, knight; the same, perhaps, who is mentioned, though not with the title of knighthood, by sir P. Leycester, to have been the said lord lieutenant’s deputy of Ireland, during most of the intervals of his return to England; which deputy-lieutenant died in his office the same year. This marriage was solemnized in Ireland on the feast of St. Hilary, 1408, and Fastolff bound himself in the sum of 1000l. to pay her 100l. a year, for pin-money during life; and she received the same to the 24th year of king Henry VI. The lands in Wiltshire and Yorkshire which came to Fastolff by this marriage with the said lady, descended to Stephen Le Scrope, her son and heir. We may reasonably believe that this marriage in Ireland engaged his settlement in that kingdom, or upon his estate in Norfolk, till his appointment to the command of some forces, or to some post of trust under the English regency in France, soon after required his residence in that kingdom. For, according to the strictest calculation we can make from the accounts of his early engagements in France, the many years he was there, and the time of his final return, it must be not long after his marriage that he left either England or Ireland for that foreign service; being employed abroad by Henry IV. V. and VI. in the wars in France, Normandy, Anjou, Mayne, and Guyenne, upwards of forty years; which agrees very well with what Caxton has published, in his concise, yet comprehensive character of him, little more than twenty years after his death, where he speaks of his “exercisyng the warrys in the royame of Fraunce and other countrees, &c. by fourty yeres enduryng.” So that, we cannot see any room, either in the time or the temper, in the fortunes or employments of this knight, for him to have been a companion with, or follower and corrupter of prince Henry, in his juvenile and dissolute courses; nor, that Shakspeare had any view of drawing his sir John Falstaff from any part of this sir John Fastolff’s character; or so much as pointing at any indifferent circumstance in it that can reflect upon his memory, with readers conversant in the true history of him. The one is an old, humourous, vapouring, and cowardly, lewd, lying, and drunken debauchee, about the prince’s court when the other was a young and grave, discreet and valiant, chaste and sober, commander abroad continually advanced to honours and places of profit, for his brave and politic atchievements, military and civil; continually preferred to the trust of one government or other of countries, cities, towns, &c. or as a genera^ and commander of armies in martial expeditions while abroad; made knight-banneret in the field of battle; baron, in France, and knight of the garter in England and, particularly, when finally settled at home, constantly exercised in acts of hospitality, munificence, and chanty; a founder of religious buildings, and other stately edifices ornamental to his country, as their remains still testify; a generous patron of worthy and learned men, and a public benefactor to the pious and the poor. In short, the more we compare the circumstances in this historical character, with those in that poetical one, we can find nothing discreditable in the latter, that has any relation to the former, or that would mislead an ignorant reader to mistake or confound them, but a little quibble, which makes some conformity in their names, and a short degree in the time wherein the one did really, and the other is feigned to live. And, in regard to the prince of Wales, or our knight’s being engaged in any wild or riotous practices of his youth, the improbabilities may also appear from the comparison of their age, and a view of this prince’s commendable engagements till that space of time in which he indulged his interval of irregularities, when the distance of our knight will clear him from being a promoter of, or partaker in them. For it is apparent, that he had been intrusted with a command in France some time before the death of king Henry IV. because, in 1413, the rery first year of his son, who was now grown the reformed, and soon after proved the renowned, Henry V. it appears that Fastolff had the castle and dominion of Veires in Gascoigne committed to his custody and defence: whence it is very reasonably inferred, that he then resided in the said duchy, which at that time was possessed by the English. In June 1415, Fastolff, then only an esquire, was returned, by indenture, with ten men of arms, and thirty archers, to serve the king at his arrival in France. Soon after king Henry was arrived in Normandy, in August following, with above 30,000 men, the English army having made themselves masters of Harfleur, the most considerable port in that duchy, Fastolff was constituted lieutenant thereof, with 1500 men, by the earl of Derby, as Basset in his ms history informs us; but, as we find it in others, the king, upon this conquest, constituted his said uncle Thomas Beaufort, earl of Dorset and duke of Exeter, governor of Harfleur, in conjunction sir John Fastolff; and, having repaired the fortificaplaced therein a garrison of two thousand select men, as Titus Livius numbers them; or of fifteen hundred ien at arms, and thirty-five knights, according to Hall’s account; to which number Monstrelet also adds a thousand archers. Towards the latter end of October, in the year last mentioned, he was dangerously engaged in the evermemorable battle of Agincourt, where it is said that Fastolff, among others, signalized himself most gallantly by taking the duke of Alengon prisoner; though other historians say that duke was slain after a desperate encounter with king Henry himself, in which he cut off the crowned crest of the king’s helmet. The fact is, that, in a succeeding battle, Fastolff did take this duke’s son and successor prisoner. In the same year, 1415, he, with the duke and 3000 English, invaded Normandy, and penetrated almost to Rouen; but on their return, loaded with booty, they were surprised, and forced to retreat towards Harfleur, whither the enemy pursuing them, were totally defeated. The constable of France, to recover his credit, laid siege to Harfleur, which made a vigorous defence under sir John Fastolff and others till relieved by the fleet under the duke of Bedford. He was at the taking of the castle of Tonque, the city of Caen, the castle of Courcy, the city of Sees, and town of Falaise, and at the great siege at Rouen, 1417. For his services at the latter he was made governor of Conde Noreau; and for his eminent services in those victories, he received, before the 29th of January following, the honour of knighthood, and had the manor and demesne of Fritense near Harfleur bestowed upon him during life. In 1418 he was ordered to seize upon the castle and dominion of Bee Crispin, and other manors, which were held by James D'Auricher, and several other knights; and had the said castle, with those lands, granted him in special tail, to the yearly value of 2000 scutes. In 1420 he was at the siege of Monsterau, as Peter Basset has recorded; and, in the next year, at that of Meaulx-en-Brie. About five months after the decease of king Henry V. the town of Meulent having been surprized in January 1422, John duke of Bedford, regent of France, and sir John Fastolff, then grand master of his household, and seneschal of Normandy, laid siege to the same, and re-took it. In 1423, after the castle of Craven t was relieved, our knight was constituted lieutenant for the king and regent in Normandy, in the jurisdictions of Rouen, Evreux, Alengon, and the countries beyond the river Seine: also governor of the countries of Anjou and Maine, and before the battle of Verneuil was created banneret, About three months after, being then captain of Alengon, and governor of the marches thereof, he laid siege to the castle of Tenuye in Maine, as a French historian informs us, which was surrendered to him; and, in 1424, he was sent to oppose the delivery of Alenon to the French, upon a discovery made that a Gascoigner had secretly contracted to betray the same. In September 1425, he laid siege to Beaumont le Vicompt, which surrendered to him. Then also he took the castle of Sillie-Je-Guillem, from which he was dignified with the title of baron: but this, revolting afterwards again to the French, was assaulted by the earl of Arundel, and retaken about seven years after. In the year last mentioned, our active warrior took also St. Ouen D'Estrais, near Laval, as likewise the castle of Gravelle, with other places of strength, from the enemy; for which dangerous and indefatigable service in France he was about the same time elected in England, with extraordinary deference to his merits, knight companion of the order of the garter. In 1426 John lord Talbot was appointed governor of Anjou and Maine, and sir John Fastolff was removed to another place of command, which, in all probability, might be the foundation of that jealousy, emulation, or competition, between them, which never was cordially reconciled. In October 1428, he had a protection granted him, being then going into France; and there he performed an enterprise of such bravery and conduct as is scarcely thought to have been paralleled in ancient or modern history. The English army, at the siege of Orleans, being in great want of provisions, artillery, and other necessaries, sir John Fastolff, with some other approved commanders, was dispatched for supplies by William de la Pole duke of Suffolk, to the regent at Paris; who not only provided him plentifully therewith, but allowed him a strong guard at his return, that he might convey the same safely to the siege. The French, knowing the importance of this succour, united two armies of very superior numbers and force to meet him; but, either in different encounters, or in a pitched battle, as the French thetnselv es allow, he totally overthrew them; slew greater numbers than he had under his command, not to mention the wounded and the prisoners; and conducted his convoy safe to the English camp. And because it was in the time of Lent, and he had, among his other provision, several of his carriages laden with many barrels of herrings, which he applied to form a fortification, the French have ever since called this victory “The battle of herrings.” But as the fortune of war is precarious, the English army was soon after obliged to raise the siege of Orleans, and though they received recruits from the duke of Bedford, they were in no degree strong enough to encounter the French army at Patay. At the battle which happened there in June 1429, many of the English, who were of most experienced and approved valour, seeing themselves so unequal, and the onset of the French so unexpected, made the best retreat they could and, among them who saved themselves, as it is said, was sir John Fastolff vfho, with such as could escape, retired to Corbeil thus avoiding being killed, or, with the great lord Talbot, lord Hungerford, and sir Thomas Ramps ton, taken prisoner of war. Here the French tales, which some English historians have inconsiderately credited, contradict or invalidate themselves; for, after having made the regent most improbably, and without any examination, or defence, divest Fastolff of his honours, they no less suddenly restore him to them, for, as they phrase it, “apparent causes of good excuse; though against the mind of the lord Talbot;” between whom there had been, it seems, some emulous contests, and therefore it is no wonder that Fastolff found him upon this occasion an adversary. It is not likely that the regent ever conceived any displeasure at this conduct, because Fastolff was not only continued in military and civil employments of the greatest concern, but appears more in favour with the regent after the battle of Patay than before. So that, rather than any dishonour here can be allowed, the retreat itself, as it is told, must be doubted. It was but in 1430 that he preferred him to the lieutenancy of Caen in Normandy. In 1432 he accompanied him into France, and was soon after sent ambassador to the council of Basil, and chosen, in the like capacity, to negociate a final or temporary peace with France. And that year, Fastolff, with the lord Willoughby, commanded the army which assisted the duke of Bretagne against the duke of Alen^on. Soon after this he was for a short space in England; for, in 1433, going abroad again, he constituted John Fastolff, of Olton, probably a near relation, his general attorney. In 1434, or the beginning of the year after, sir John was again with the regent of France;'and, in 1435, he was again one of the ambassadors to conclude a peace with France. Towards the latter end of this year the regent died at Rouen, and, as the greatest proof he could give of his confidence in the honour and integrity of sir John Fastolff, he made him one of the executors of his. last will. Richard, duke of York, who succeeded in the regency of France, made Fastolff a grant of an annuity of twenty pounds a year of his own estate, “pro notabili et landdbili servicio, ac bono consilio;” which is sufficient to shew this duke’s sentiments also of his merits. In 1436, and for about four years longer, he seems to have been well settled at his government in Normandy; after which, in 1440, he made his final return home, and, loaclen with the laurels he had gathered in France, became as illustrious in his domestic as he had been in his foreign character. The late Mr. Gough, by whom this article was much enlarged, had an inventory of all the rich jewels, plate, furniture, &c. that he either had, or left in France, at his return to England. In 1450 he conveyed to John Kemp, cardinal archbishop of York, and others, his manor of Castre in Fleg, and several other lands specified in the deed of conveyance. The same year, Nov. 8, the king by writ directed Richard Waller, esq. David John William Needham, and John Ingoldsby, to cause Thomas Danyell, esq. to pay to sir John FastolfF, knight, the lOOl. that he was indebted to him for provisions, and for his ship called the George of Prussia, alias Danyell’s Hulk, which ship the said Danyell took on the sea as a prize, and never had it condemned; so that the king seized it, ordered it to be sold, and sir John to be paid out of it. At length being arrived, in 1459, beyond the age of fourscore years, he says of himself, that he was “in good remembrance, albeit I am gretly vexed with sickenesse, and thurgh age infebelyd.” He lingered under an hectic fever and asthma for an hundred and forty-eight days; but before he departed he made his will on the fifth of November in that year, and died at his seat at Castre the next day after, being the festival of St. Leonard, or the eve before, as appears in the escheats, in the 39th or last year of king Henry the Vlth’s reign, and no less than thirty-six years beyond the extravagant period assigned by Fuller. He was buried with great solemnity under an arch, in a chapel of our lady of his own building, on the south side of the choir at the abbey-church of St. Bennet in the Holm, in Norfolk, which was ruined at the dissolution; and so much was he respected after his decease, that John Beauchamp, lord of Powyke, in his last will dated the 15th of Edward IV. appointed a chantry, more especially for the soul of sir John Fastolff.

The ruins of his house at Castre still remaining, shew it to have been alike capacious and strong. It was moate4 round, but the moat is now for the most part filled up. The grand entrance was on the West. The house formed a rectangled parallelogram the south and north sides longer than east and west the stables in front the best rooms on the right hand of the square, under which side is a noble vault, and over it probably the hall. The embattled brick tower at the north west corner is standing, above one hundred feet high; and over one of the windows were carved his arms in the garter as above described, supported by angels, now removed; on one of the doors a saltire engrailed. To it adjoined a dining-parlour, fifty-nine feet long, and twenty-eight broad. East from the castle stood the college, forming three sides of a square larger than the former, with two round towers; the whole converted into barns and stables. The castle moat is said to have communicated with a navigable creek, and in a farm housa north west of the mansion, called the barge-house, is shewn a large arch, capable of receiving a boat of considerable burthen. Weever says he had licence from Henry VI. to build his house castle-wise as a fortification on that side of Yarmouth, to which perhaps relates the licence granted him 1443, 22 Hen. VI. to employ some of the king’s ships to carry materials for building and furnishing one of his mansion-houses. The current tradition is, that this house was erected by a French nobleman, who was taken prisoner by our famous knight, according to the model and architecture of his own castle in France, as the price of his ransom.

February 10, 1474, 13 Edw. IV. an indenture was made between sir William Yelverton, William Jenny, serjeant at law, and William Worcester, executors of sir John on one part, and Thomas Cager and Robert Kytton on the other, whereby the said Robert was appointed surveyor of the lands and tenements in Southwark, and other places in Surrey, late sir John’s, to perform his last will, and also> receiver of the rents; who was to have six marks per annum, and to be allowed, besides all reasonable costs, that he shall do in the defence and keeping out John Paston, esq. and of all others claiming by him. Anthony lord Scales, at another time, took possession of it in the name of king Edward IV. under pretence that Paston was the king’s villan (though absolutely false), all which proved a great destruction to the goods and effects in the same; but sir John Paston, through the favour and protection of king Edward IV. had afterwards possession. Another misfortune also happened to this seat or castle about the same time, owing to the negligence of a girl, who in making a bed set fire to it by her candle, and did considerable damage. Sir John Fastolff had a house at Norwich in Pokethorp opposite St. James’s church, called Fastolff’s place; in the windows of which Mr. Blomefield saw several paintings of saints and scripture worthies, and two knights fighting, which he imagined represented sir John and his French prisoner. He likewise built a splendid seat in Yarmouth, and a palace in Southwark.

, a French antiquary of great fame, whose laborious researches into the earliest and most obscure parts of the history of his country, obtained him more celebrity than profit, was born at Paris in 1529. Having gone to Italy with cardinal de Tournon, his eminence often sent him with dispatches to the French court, which served to introduce him there with advantage, and procured him the place of first president of the Cour des Monnoies; and he is said by some to have obtained a pension from Henry IV. with the title of historiographer. He died in 1601, overwhelmed with debts. His works were collected in 4to at Paris, in 1610. The principal of them are, 1. His “Gaulish and French antiquities,” the first part of which treats chiefly of matters anterior to the arrival of the Franks, the second is extended to Hugh Capet. 2. “A treatise on the Liberties of the Gallican church.” 3. “On the origin of knights, armorial bearings, and heralds.” 4. “Origin of dignities and magistracies in France.” All these contain much curious matter, not to be found elsewhere, but are written in a harsh, incorrect, and tedious style. Saxius mentions an edition of his works printed at Paris in 1710, 2 vols. 4to, which we conceive to be a mistake for 1610. It is said, that the pei'usal of his French Antiquities gave Louis XIII. an invincible distaste to reading.

, a French protestant preacher of the highest estimation in his time. He preached originally at Montpellier, then at Charenton, and afterwards at Paris; where his eloquence was not less admired than in the provinces. He preached one day against duels in so persuasive and forcible a style, and with so much energy, that the marechal de la Force, who was present, declared to some brave officers who were near him, that should a challenge be sent him, he would not accept it. Le Faucheur was not less esteemed for his integrity than for his extraordinary talents as a preacher. He died at Paris in a very advanced age, April 1, 1657, leaving several volumes of sermons, 8vo; “Traité de l‘Action de l’Orateur,” Leyden, 1686, 12mo, an excellent work, which appeared first under the name of Conrart; “Recueil de Prieres et de Meditations Chrétiennes,” and a “Traite” sur l'Eucharistie," Geneva, 1635, folio, against cardinal du Perron. This work was so much admired by the protestant churches, that it was printed at their expence, by order of a national synod.

, a brave English officer, the descendant of a very ancient family, was born in 1728 at Shipdenhall, near Halifax, in Yorkshire, which, for many centuries, had been in the possession of his ancestors, and is now the property and residence of their lineal descendant. His father dying when he was very young, his education was superintended by an uncle, a very worthy clergyman. He was brought up at a free school in Lancashire, where he was well grounded in classical learning, and became also a remarkable proficient in mathematics. He has very frequently been heard to declare, that, from his earliest youth, he always felt the strongest predilection for the army, which his mother and nearest relations constantly^ endeavoured to dissuade him from; but, finding all their arguments ineffectual, they either bought, or he had an ensigncy given him, in general Oglethorpe’s regiment, then in Georgia; but the war being then going on in Flanders, he gave up his ensigncy, and went there as a volunteer, furnished with letters from the late marquis of Rockingham and Mr. Lascelles (afterwards lord Harewood) to the commander and several others of the officers. This step was at the time frequently taken by young men of spirit of the first rank and fortune, fte entered as a volunteer, but messed with the officers, and was very soon presented with a pair of colours. Some time after, he married a lady of good fortune and family, and, at the pressing entreaties df her friends, he most reluctantly resigned his commission; which he had no sooner done, than he felt himself miserable, and his new relations finding that his propensity to a military life was invincible, agreed to his purchasing an ensigncy in the third regiment of guards. Having now obtained the object of his most anxious wishes, he determined to lose no opportunity of qualifying himself for the highest situations in his favourite profession. With this view he paid the most unremitting attention to his duty, and every hour he could command was given up to the study of the French and German languages, in which (by the assistance of his classical learning) he soon became such a proficient as not only to understand and write both, grammatically and elegantly, but to speak them fluently. When he was a lieutenant in the guards, he translated from the French, “The Reveries; Memoirs upon the Art of War, by field-marshal count Saxe,” which was published in 1757, in 4to, and dedicated “To the general officers.” He also translated from the German, “Regulations for the Prussian cavalry,” which was also published in 1757, and dedicated to major-general the earl of Albemarle, colonel of the king’s own regiment of dragoons. And he likewise translated from the German, “llegulations for the Prussian Infantry,” to which was gelded “The Prussian Tactics,” which was published in 1759, and dedicated to lieutenant-general the earl of Rothes, colonel of the third regiment of foot guards. Having attained the situation of adjutant in the guards, his abilities and unremitting attention soon became conspicuous; and, on the late general Elliot’s being ordered to, Germany in the seven years war, he offered to take him as his aid-de-camp, which he gladly accepted, as it gave him an opportunity of gaining that knowledge which actual service could alone impart. When he served in Germany, his ardour, intrepidity, and attention to all the duties of his situation, were such, that, on the death of general Elliot, he had immediately offers both from the late prince Ferdinand, the commander in chief, and the late marquis of Granby, to be appointed aid-de-camp. By the advice of a noble earl (who hinted to him that the German war would not last for ever) he accepted the offer of the latter, after making due acknowledgements for the honour intended him by the former. In this his new situation his ardour and attention were, if possible, increased, which gained him the friendship of all those attached to lord Granby, particularly of a noble lord who, being fixed upon to bring to England the account of the battle of Warburgh, gave up his appointment to captain Fawcett; an instance of generous friendship which he always spoke of with the most heartfelt gratitude. On his arrival in England, he was introduced by the then great minister to his late majesty king George the Second, who received him most graciously, and not the less so on his giving the whole account in German. Soon after he was promoted to a company in the guards, with the rank of lieutenant-colonel in the army, and became military secretary to, and the intimate and confidential friend of lord Granby. His manners were formed with equal strength and softness; and to coolness, intrepidity, and extensive military knowledge, he added all the requisite talents of a man of business; and the most persevering assiduity, without the least ostentation. Notwithstanding the most unassuming modesty, his abilities were now so generally known, that he was fixed upon as the most proper person to manage and support the interest of his country, in settling many of the concerns of the war in Germany; and by that means necessarily became known to the great Frederic of Prussia, from whom he afterwards had the most tempting offers, which he declined without hesitation, preferring the service of his king and country to every other consideration.

, a priest of Riom, once well known by his singular opinions, entered the congregation of the oratory in 1662, but was obliged to quit it in 1671, being a friend to Cartesianism, which was then a heresy. He preached against the conduct of Innocent XI. towards France, and published a treatise on the Trinity 1696, in which appearing to favour tritheisnr, he was confined at St. Lazare in Paris, but afterwards received orders from the king to retire to his country, where he died 1709. He left “a life of St. Amable,” 12mo; “Remarks on Homer, Virgil, and the poetical style of Scripture,” 2 vols. 12mo; a collection in Latin verse, and French prose, entitled, “Tombeau de M. de Santeuil,” 12mo; '“La Telemacomanie, ou Critique du Telemaque de M. Fenelon,” 12mo, a foolish attack on Fenelon’s celebrated performance. All his works contain singular opinions, great reading and learning, but little taste or judgment. “Le Moines emprunte*s,” 2 vols. 12mo, have been attributed to him, but they are by Haitze.

, a French lady, daughter of Aymar de la Vergne, marechal-de-camp, and governor of Havre-deGrace, bat more distinguished by her wit and literary productions than by her family, was married to the count de Fayette in 1655, and died in lt'i.93. She cultivated letters and the fine arts; and her hotel uas the rendezvous of all who were most distinguished for literary taste. The duke de la Rochefuucault, Huetius, Mennge, La Fontaine, Segrais, were those she saw most frequently. The last, when obliged to quit the house of Mad. de Montpensier, found an honourable retreat with her. The author of “The Memoirs of madame de Maintenon,” has not spoken favourably of this lady, nor represented her manners to be such as from her connections we should suppose. But madame de Sevigne, who had better opportunities of knowing her, and is more to be relied on than the author of the memoirs, has painted her very differently. This lady says, in a letter to her daughter, “Mad. la Fayette is a very amiable and a very estimable woman; and whom yon will love when you shall have time to be with her, and to enjoy the benefit of her sense and wit; the better you luiow her, the more you will like her.”

, an ex-jesuit, was born at Brussels Aug. 18, 1735, and became professor of rhetoric at Liege, Luxemburgh, and Turnau in Hungary, after which he travelled in Italy, Poland, Austria, and Bohemia. After the suppression of the society of the Jesuits in 1773, he took the name of Flexierue Reval, which he exchanged afterwards for that of Feller, under which he published at Luxemburgh, from 1774 to 1794, a political and literary journal, entitled “Clef des cabinets,” in which he is said to display considerable knowledge, riot unmixed with bigotry. The profits of this work not being adequate to his wants, he endeavoured to derive emolument from the less reputable employment of literary piracy. In this way he republished Vosgien’s Geographical Dictionary and the “Dictionnare Historique,” of which last he published three editions, with his name, the third a little before his death, in 8 vols. When he wished to steal the contents of a book, and make them pass for his own, he generally began by an attack upon it in his journal, as a work good for nothing. He usually resided at Liege, but when the French revolution broke out, he went to Maestricht, and afterwards to other places of safety; in 1797 he went to Ratisbon, where he died May 23, 1802. Whatever trutti there may be in this character of Feller as a compiler, his original works are creditable to his talents. Among these are: K “Jugement d'un ecrivain protestant touchant le livre de Justinus Fabronius,” Leipsic, 1771,' 8vo. 2. “Lettre, sur le diner du comte de Boulainvilliers.” 3. “Examen critique de THistoire Naturelle de M. de Buffon,” 1773. This is chiefly an attack on Buffon’s theory of the earth. 4. A translation of Soame Jenyns’s “Internal evidence of the Christian religion, with notes and observations, which he published in 1779, under his assumed name of Flexier de Reval. 5.” Observations philosophiques sur le systeme de Newton, le mouvement de la terre, et la pluralite des mondes,“1771 and 1788, in which he attempts to prove that the motion of the earth has not been demonstrated, and that a plurality of worlds is impossible. La Lande answered this work. 6.” Examen impartial des epoques de la nature de M. de Buffon,“Luxemburgh, 1780, 12mo, and reprinted a fourth time at Maestricht in 1792. 7.” Catechisme philosophique,“a collection of remarks in favour of the Christian religion,” Paris, 1777, 8vo. 8. “Discours sur divers sujets de religion, et de morale,” 1778, 12mo. 9. “Observations sur les rapports physiques de Phuile avec les flots de la mer,” 1778, 8vo. He left also a great many Mss. and upon the whole appears to have been a man of extensive knowledge, and, as his biographer allows, of prodigious memory, but had the misfortune to make many enemies by the severity of his criticisms, and the warmth of his temper.

Having finished his mission, he returned to Paris, and was presented to the king: but lived two years afterwards without going to court, being again entirely occupied in the instruction of the new female converts. That he might forward this good work by writings as well as lectures, he published, in 1688, a little treatise, entitled “Education de Filles;” which the author of the Bibliotheque Universelle, calls the best and most useful book written upon the subject, in the French language. In 1688, he published a work “Concerning the functions of the Pastors of the Church;” writtenchiefly against the protestants, with a view of shewing, that the first promoters of the reformation had no lawful call, and therefore were not true pastors. In 1689, he was made tutor to the dukes of Burgundy, Anjou, and Berri; and in 1693, was chosen member of the French academy, in the room of Pelisson deceased. In this situation, he was in favour with all. His pupils, particularly the duke of Burgundy, improved rapidly under his care. The divines admired the sublimity of his talents; the courtiers the brilliancy of his wit. The duke, to the end of his life, felt the warmest regard for his illustrious preceptor. At the same time, Fenelon preserved the disinterestedness of an hermit, and never received or asked any thing either for himself or friends. At last the king gave him the abbey of St. Valery, and, some months after, the archbishopric of Cambray, to which he was consecrated by Bossuet bishop of Meaux, in 1695.

Fenelon published several works besides his “'Telemachus,” and the “Explanation of the Maxims of the Saints,” already mentioned, which first appeared in 1697. These were, 1. “Dialogues of the Dead,” in two volumes, 12mo, composed for the use of the duke of Burgundy, and intended in general to cure him of some fault, or teach him some virtue. They were produced as the occasions arose, and not laboured, 2. “Dialogues on Eloquence in general, and that of the. Pulpit in particular,” 12mo, published in 1718, after his death. He there discusses the question, whether it is better to preach by memory, or extemporaneously with more or less preparation. The rules of eloquence are also delivered in a neat and easy manner. 3. “Abridgment of the Lives of the ancient Philosophers,” 12 mo, written for the duke of Burgundy, of which an excellent translation, with notes, was lately published by the rev. John Cormack, 1808, 2 vols. 12mo. 4. “A Treatise on the Education of Daughters,” 12mo, an excellent work. 5. “Philosophical Works, or a demonstration of the Existence of God, by proofs drawn from Nature,” 12mo; the best edition is of Paris, 1726. 5. “Letters on different subjects of Religion and Metaphysics,” 1718, 12mo. 6. “Spiritual Works,” 4 vols. 12mo. 7. “Sermons,” printed in 1744, 12mo the character of these discourses is rather pathetic writing than strong reasoning; the excellent disposition of Fenelon appears throughout; but they are unequal and negligent. He preached extemporaneously with facility, and his printed sermons are in the same style. 8. Several works in favour of the bull 41 Unigenitus,“against Jansenism. 9.” Direction for the Conscience of a king,“composed for the duke of Burgundy; a small tract, but much esteemed, published in 1748, and re-published in 1774. There is a splendid French edition of his works in 9 vols. 4to, Paris, 1787 1792; and one of his” OEuvres choices,“1799, 6 vols. 12mo. In 1&07 appeared at Paris a new volume of his” Sermons choisies," 12mo, which is said to do credit to his established reputation.

, an eminent writer and statesman during the reigns of Elizabeth and James I. was brother to the preceding, but the time of his birth does not appear. He was certainly educated liberally, though we cannot tell where; since, while a young man, he gave many proofs of his acquaintance with ancient and modern learning, and of his being perfectly versed in the French, Spanish, and Italian languages. He is well known for a translation from the Italian of “The History of the Wars of Italy, by Guicciardini,” the dedication of which to queen Elizabeth bears date Jan. 7, 1579. This was, however, his last work. He had published before, 1. “Certaine Tragical Discourses written oute of French and Latin,” 1567, 4to, reprinted 1579. Neither Ames nor Tanner appear to have seen the first edition. The work is, says Warton, in point of selection and size, perhaps the most capital miscellany of the kind, a. e. of tragical novels. Among the recommendatory poems prefixed is one from Turberville. Most of the stories are on Italian subjects, and many from Bandello. 2. “An Account of a Dispute at Paris, between two Doctors of the Sorbonne, and two Ministers of God’s Word,”1571, a translation. 3. “An Epistle, or Godly Admonition, sent to the Pastors of the Flemish Church in Antwerp, exhorting them to concord with other Ministers: written by Antony de Carro, 1578,” a translation. 4. “Golden Epistles; containing variety of discourses, both moral, philosophical, and divine, gathered as well out of the remainder of Guevara’s works, as other authors, Latin, French, and Italian. Newly corrected and amended. Mon heur viendra, 1577.” The familiar epistles of Guevara had been published in English, by one Edward Hellowes, in 1574; but this collection of Fenton’s consists of such pieces as were not contained in that work. The epistle dedicatory is to the right honourable and vertuous lady Anne, countess of Oxen ford; and is dated from the author’s chamber in the Blackfriars, London, Feb. 4, 1575. This lady was the daughter of William Cecil lord Burleigh; and it appears from the dedication, that her noble father was our author’s best patron. Perhaps his chief purpose in translating and publishing this work, was to testify his warm zeal and absolute attachment to that great minister.

The work of Ferdusi remains entire, a glorious monument of eastern genius and learning; which, if ever it should be understood in its original language, will contest the merit of invention with Homer himself, whatever be thought of its subject, or the arrangement of the incidents. The whole collection of his works is called “Shahnama,” and contains the history of Persia, from the earliest times to the invasion of the Arabs, in a series of very noble poems; the longest and most regular of which is an heroic poem of one great and interesting action, namely the delivery of Persia by Cyrus from the oppressions of Afrasiab, king of the Transoxan Tartary, who, being assisted by the emperors of India and China, had carried his conquests very far, and had become exceeding formidable to the Persians. The poem is longer than the Iliad the characters in it are various and striking the figures bold and animated; and the diction every where sonorous, yet noble; polished, yet full of fire. Of Ferdusi’s satire against the sultan, there is a translation in a “Treatise on Oriental Poetry,” added to the Life of Nader-Shah in French. Sir William Jones said it is not unlike the XagiTts of Theocritus, who, like the impetuous Ferdusi, had dared to expose the vices of a low-minded king.

, a very celebrated French mathematician, though by profession a lawyer, was considered by the writers of his own country as having rendered no less service to mathematical science than Descartes, and as having even prepared the way for the doctrine of infinites, afterwards discovered by Newton and Leibnitz. He was not only the restorer of the ancient geometry, but the introducer of the new. He was born at Toulouse in 1590, educated to the law, and advanced to the dignity of counsellor to the parliament of Toulouse. As a magistrate, his knowledge and integrity were highly esteemed. As a mani of science he was connected with Descartes, Huygens, Pascal, and many others. He is said also to have cultivated poetry. He died in 1664. His mathematical works were published at Toulouse in 1679, in two volumes, folio. The first volume contains the treatise of arithmetic of Diophantus, with a commentary, and several analytical inventions. The second comprises his mathematical discoveries, and his correspondence with the most celebrated geometricians of his age. His son, Samuel Fermat, was also eminent as a literary man, and wrote some learned dissertations.

, a French lawyer, born at Toulon, in 1645, became an advocate in the parliament of Paris, and died in that city, in 1699. Though a layman, he lived with the rigour of a strict ecclesiastic; and though a lawyer, his works turn chiefly upon subjects of sacred learning. They are full of erudition, but not remarkable for brilliancy or clearness. They are, 1. “A large Commentary on the Psalms,” in Latin, 1683, 4to. 2. “Reflections on the Christian Religion,” 1679, 2 vols. 12mo. 3. “A Psalter,” in French and Latin. 4. Some controversial writings against the Calvinists, and others. 5. “A Letter and Discourse to prove that St. Augustin was a Monk,” an opinion which several learned men have rejected.

The only publication by Mr. Ferrar, but without his name, was a translation from Valdesso, entitled “The hundred and ten Considerations, &c. written in Spanish, bi ought out of Italy by Vergerius, and first set forth in Italian, at Basil by Caelius Secundus Curio, 1550. Afterwards translated into French, and printed at Lyons, 1563, and again at Paris, 1565. And now translated out of the Italian into English, with notes. Whereunto is added a preface of the author’s to his Commentary on the Romans, Oxford, printed by Litchfield, 1638.”

, of the same family with the former, was born at Milan about 1577. Heapplied with great success to philosophy and divinity, as well as to the Latin, Greek, Spanish, and French languages, and was admitted a doctor of the Ambrosian college. His vast knowledge of books, and abilities in all kinds of learning, induced Frederic Borromeo, archbishop of Milan, to appoint him to travel into divers parts of Europe, in order to purchase the best books and manuscripts, to form a library at Milan. Ferrari accordingly went over part of Italy and Spain, and collected a great number of books, which laid the foundation of the celebrated Ambrosian library. About 1638, he was appointed director of the college of the nobles, lately erected at Padua; which office he discharged two years, and then, on account of indisposition, returned to Milan. He died in 1669, aged 92.

His works are, 1. “De re vestiaria libri tres,” Hua, 1642. In 1654 he added four books more to a s:ond edition. 2. “Analecta de re vestiaria, sive exercitcQiies ad Alberti Rubenii Commentarium de re vestiaria dato clavo. Accessit Dissertatio de veterum lucernis sepvhralibus,” Padua, 1670. This was afterwards, in 168 subjoined to his book “De re vestiaria,” and both are insated in the sixth and twelfth books of Graevius’s “Roman Aniquities.” 3. “Pallas Suecica; Panegyricus Sueconm Reginas imperium auspicanti dictus.” 4. “De laudibus Francisci Putei.” 5. “Prolusiones xxvi. Epistolae. —Formulae ad capienda Doctoris insignia. Inscriptiones. —Panegyricus Ludovico Magno Francorum Regi dictus.” Al these little pieces, and several others which had been printed separately, were collected and disposed into proper order by John Fabricius, who published them at Helmstad, 1710, in 2 vols. 8vo. 6. “Veneta Sapientia, seu de optimo civitatis statu prolusio.” 7. “Electorum libri duo.” In this work our author treats of several points of antiquity. 8. Origines Linguae Italicse,“Padua, 1676, folio. The authhor of the” Journal des Scavans, for April 1677,“gives the following judgment of this work” Scaliger had before treated of this subject, in twenty-four books, which are unfortunately lost. Though Ferrari has not taken so great an extent, yet we find a great deal of learning in him. But he appears so jealous of the language of his country, that he thinks every other origin, but what he gives it, as well as the French and Spanish from the Latin tongue, would be injurious to it. This hinders him from assenting to the opinion of cardinal Bembo, who supposes tha the Italian owes many of its words to the jargon of Langueedoc and Provence.“Menage has written a book upon the same subject, to correct the errors of Ferrari. 9.” De Pantomimis et Mimis Dissertatio.“10. ' Dissertiones dure altera de balneis, de gladiatoribus altera.” These two last are posthumous, and were published by John Fabricius, the former at Wolfenbuttel, 1714, in 8vo; the latter at Helmstad, 1720, in 8vo.

, a learned lawyer, a good historian, a celebrated poet, and a most accomplished courtier, in the reigns of Henry VIII. Edward VI. Mary, and Elizabeth, was descended from an ancient family in Hertfordshire, and born in a village near St. Alban’s, about 1512. He was bred at Oxford, and removed thence to Lincoln’s-inn, where he applied himself with so much success to the study of the law, that he was soon taken notice of in Westminster-hall as an advocate, at the same time that he was much admired at court for his wit and good-breeding. His first rise in his profession, and at court, was owing to Cromwell earl of Essex, who was himself a man of great parts, and took a pleasure in countenancing and advancing others who had talents. Upon the fall of this patron, he quitted the public exercise of his profession as a lawyer; not, however, before he had given evident testimonies of his knowledge and learning, as appears from, 1. “The double translation of Magna Charta from French into Latin and English.” 2. “Other laws enacted in the time of Henry III. and Edw. I. translated into English.”

, an eminent French anatomist and surgeon, was born Oct. 27, 1693, at Frepech in Agenois. He practised at Montpellier, and was a member of the faculty of that city and of Paris, member of the academy of sciences, and professor of physic in the royal colllege. He was the author of two works; one entitled “Lectures on Medicine,” the other, “Lectures on the Materia Medica” each in three volumes, 12ino, which were published in 1783, and proved the soundness of his knowledge. He held, however, some peculiar notions as to the formation of the voice, which he was not able to demonstrate to the satisfaction of his contemporaries. He died at Paris Feb. 28, 1769.

, a noble and learned Spaniard, was born at Labanezza, in 1652. After having gone through his studies at the university of Salamanca, he took orders, and obtained the cure of St. James of TaJavera, and afterwards was removed to that of St. Peter at Madrid, where he became distinguished by his wit and learning. He refused two bishoprics, although he was pressed by the court to accept them, preferring a quiet and literary life. The academy of Madrid chose him for one of its members in 1713, the year of its foundation; and the king confirmed this unanimous approbation of the literati, by appointing him his librarian. Ferreras was very useful to this growing academy, particularly by assisting in the composition of a Spanish Dictionary, which was undertaken and published by the academy, 1739, in six volumes, folio. He died, four years before, in 1735. He left several works in theology, philosophy, and history; the most considerable of which was a. general history of Spain, written in Spanish, and translated into French by licnnilly, in ten volumes, 4to. Though Mariana’s history is more elegantly written, yet all the Spanish literati agree, that it is not so exact and faithful as that of Ferreras. It ends in the reign of Philip II.

, in Latin Ferrettus, one of the learned civilians in the sixteenth century, was born at Castello Franco in Tuscany, Nov. 14th, 1489. At twelve years old he was sent to Pisa, where he studied the civil and canon law for three years; he spent two other years in the university of Sienna, after which he went to Rome, and was made secretary to cardinal Salviati. He was admitted an advocate at the age of nineteen years, after a public disputation before a numerous audience of cardinals and bishops. He then left his Christian name of Dominicus, and took that of Æmilius, according to a custom very prevalent among the literati of Italy. Having accepted of the chair of law-professor, he explained so learnedly the law de Rebus creditis (of things with which persons are trusted) that it gained him the title of secretary to Leo the Xth. He exercised that office for some years, after which he regigned it voluntarily, and retired into his native country. He left it again at the end of two years, his father having been killed there, and went to Tridino in the dukedom of Montferrat, where he married; and having continued there four years, he attended the marquis of Montferrat to Rome and to Naples, that marquis commanding part of the French army. This expedition of, the French proving unsuccessful, Ferreti endeavoured to return into his native country, but he was taken by the Spaniards, and could not obtain his liberty but by paying a ransom. He went into France, and taught the law at Valencewith so much reputation, that Francis I. made him counsellor in the parliament of Paris, and sent him as envoy to the Venetians, and to the Florentines. He acquitted himself so well of that employment, that it determined the marquis of Montferrat to send him to the court of Charles V. after he had obtained Francis I.'s consent for that journey. Ferreti attended the emperor in the expedition of Africa; and as soon as he was returned into France, the king sent him to the Florentines during the war in which they were engaged against the emperor. He went back to France when they were subdued, and followed the court to Nice, where the pope, Charles V. and the king of France had an interview: having afterwards resigned the post of counsellor in the parliament, he went to Lyons, and thence to Florence, where he was admitted a citizen. He was sent for to Avignon to teach the law there. His yearly stipend was at first 550 crowns, then 800, and then 1000; a sum that had never been given to any professor in that university. He gained the love both of the inhabitants and of the students, who shewed it in a very remarkable manner after his death; for when his successor Craveta began his lectures by strictures upon Ferreti, the scholars shewed their attachment to their old master by hissing and driving him from the place. He died at Avignon July 14, 1552. Ferreti was a man of general learning, and well acquainted with classical literature. He gave an edition of the principal orations of Cicero, printed at Lyons by Gryphius, 8vo, “M. T. Ciceronis Orationes Verrinae ac Philippics,” dedicated to cardinal Salviati. His “Opera Juridica” were published in 1553, and 1598, 4to. An epitaph written for him by Antonius Goveanus, speaks of him in the most extravagant terms of encomium.

, an eminent lawyer, called sometimes the Cato of France, was born at Toulouse in 1506. He was admitted a doctor of law at Padua; and from a professor in the university of Toulouse, was raised to be a counsellor in the parliament of the same city. It is remarkable of him, that though he was a protestant in his heart for a good part of his life, he did not profess himself to be so till a little before his death. He had indeed often discovered that he was no bigotted papist; and was so strongly suspected of heresy in 1559, that he would have been imprisoned if he had not made his escape. He harangued, in 1562, in the council of Trent, whither he was sent ambassador by the French king; and he expressed himself in so bold a manner in favour of the interests of France, that the Italian priests were highly offended at him. He went afterwards ambassador to Venice, where he continued several years; and took occasion to assist father Paul in collecting materials for his “History of the Council of Trent.” On his return from Venice, Du Plessis Mornay, who knew his thoughts, pressed him so earnestly to declare the truth, that Ferrier openly professed himself a protestant, and the king of Navarre made him his chancellor. He was about seventy-six years old at the time of his renouncing popery; and he only lived to seventy-nine. He died in 1585. It has been said that he conspired with the chancellor de l'Hospital to break the knot which united the French king with the holy see; to assemble a national council, in which the king of France, after the example of the king of England, should be declared head of the Gallican church; and to usurp all the estates of the church of France. He was reckoned among the greatest men in Europe, and was the author of some literary works.

, a French Jesuit, and a native of Rouergue, and confessor to the king of France, was born in 1614, and turned a Jesuit in 1632. He had taught philosophy fonr years, divinity twelve years, and ethics two years. He had been principal of the college of Toulouse, and had acquitted himself very well of that employment. The Jesuits probably looked upon him as a very able man, since they designed to make him the king’s confessor, to which office he was promoted in 1670. He died in the convent of the Jesuits at Paris, October 29, 1674. He was one of the ablest antagonists of Jansenius’s followers, and his thesis concerning probability, which hq maintained at Toulouse the 8th and the llth of June 1659, made a considerable noise. He wrote a Latin answer to father Baron’s objections against the “Scientia media,” entitled “Responsio ad Objectiones Vincentianas,” Toulouse, 1668, 8vo. He intended also to publish a body of divinity, but only the first volume of it has been printed, which treats <c Of the Unity of God according to St. Augustin and St. Thomas’s principles." His other works are written in French, and relate for the most part to Jansenism. He wrote two letters against Arnauld, and he gave an account of all that passed in 1653, concerning the affair of Jansenism. According to the bibliographer of the Jesuits, he wrote a book concerning the immortality of the soul in 1660, and another on the beauty of Jesus Christ in 1657 but these were the production of John Ferrier, a Jesuit of Guienne.

a learned French civilian, was doctor of law in the university of Paris, in which city he was born 1639, and taught law at Paris, as fellow, till 1694, when he was appointed professor at Rheims, where he acquired great reputation, and died May 11, 1715, aged seven-seven, leaving a great number of works, which became very popular, and the booksellers of Paris, for whom he wrote, were enriched, but he was not. His talents were considerable; but a certain arrogance of manner, and bigotry to his own opinions, prevented him from being distinguished in his profession. The principal of his works are, 1.“Comtnentaires sur la Coutume de Paris,” 2 vols. 12mo. 2. “Traité des Fiefs,” 1680, 4to. 3. “Recueil des Commentateurs de la Coutume de Paris,” 1714, 4 vols. fol. 4. “La Jurisprudence du Code,” 1684, 2 vols. 4to. 5. “Du Digeste,” 1688, 2 vols. 4to. 6. “Des Novelles,” 1688, 2 vols. 4to. 7. “La Science des Notaires,” 1771, 2 vols. 4to. '8. “Le Droit du Patronage,” 1686, 4to. 9. *; Institution Coutumiere,“3 vols. 12mo. 10.” Introduction a la Pratique,“1758, 2 vols. 12mo.” Le Diet, de Droit," 1771, 2 vols. 4to, is by Claudius Joseph, his son, who was dean of the law faculty in the university of Paris.

, a French lawyer, was born in 1515, and was a counsellor of the parliament of Bourdeaux. He was an elegant writer in Latin, an imitator of the style of Terence, admired by Scaliger, and honoured by him with the name of Atticus. --He continued the history of France in Latin (which Paulus Æmilius, a writer of Verona, had given from the reign of Pharamond to 1488) as far as the end of the reign of Francis I. This work was published at Paris, by Vascosan, in 1554, fol. and 1555, 8vo. It is copious, but not too long, and abounds with curious anecdotes and very exact details. He wrote also “Observations sur la Coutume de Bourdeaux,” Lyons, 1565, fol. He had considerable employments. His death happened in 1563, when he was no more than forty-eight.

, one of the bravest French officers in the seventeenth century, was the son of Francis de Pas, head chamberlain to Henry IV. descended from the ancient house of Pas in Artois, and of Magdeleine de la Fayette, and was born June I, 1590, at Saumur. He rose by his merit and birth to the highest military offices, commanded the king’s forces twice as chief, conducted the famous siege of Rochelle, where he was taken prisoner, and contributed greatly to the surrender of that important place, through the intrigues of Mad. de Noailles, his wife’s mother. Being afterwards sent into Germany as ambassador extraordinary, he did great service to the state, was made lieutenant-general of Metz, Toul, and Verdun at his return, and died at Thionville, March 14, 1640, of the wounds he had received the precceding year at the siege of that city, during which he was made prisoner. His “Negociations” were printed in Germany, 163:*, and 1634, Paris, 175:3, 3 vols. 12mo. Isaac de Pas, marquis de Keuqu.eres, his son, was also lieutenant-general of the king’s armies, counsellor of state in ordinary, governor of Verdun, and lieutenant-general of Toul. He was sent as ambassador to Germany, and Sweden, 1672, gave proofs of his courage and prudence during this latter embassy, and died ambassador extraordinary in Spain, May 6, 1688, after having been viceroy in America, 1660.

, a Franciscan friar, was born at Coutances in Lower Normandy, in 1541; and might have inherited a large estate, had he addicted himself to the military profession. Bayle thinks that he judged rightly of himself and his talents, and obtained a much greater reputation as a divine than as a soldier. It does not appear, however, that he attained any just eminence. Daille observes, that “he deserved his name Feu-ardent perfectly well: for that he was so transported with anger, hatred, and fury, as to be seldom in his right senses;” and he certainly was as fiery a zealot, and as bitter a persecutor, as the protestants ever had. He was one of the most seditious preachers who raised the disturbances against Henry III. and Henry IV. nor did he spare even the chief of the leaguers, when he thought him guilty of something that might prejudice the cause of the rebels. He wrote commentaries on some books of scripture, and translated some works of the fathers into French. He published at Pearls, in 1576j “The five books of Irenseus,” revised and corrected in several places from an ancient manuscript, with an addition of five entire chapters, which were in his manuscript 4t the end of the fifth book. He has added at the end of each chapter, such notes as he thought necessary for the better understanding of his author, which are for the most part useful and learned. The second edition, printed at Cologne in 1596, and again i 1630, and at Paris in 1639, is better than the first, as it contains the Greek passages of Irenseus, which were in Epiphanius, and some other ancient writers. Feuardent published also some books of controversy, which the catholics themselves own to have been written with too much passion. He died at Paris in 1610, and before his death is said to have attained a more calm and christian-like temper.

, Or Giudo Fabricius Boderianus, was born of a noble family in the territory of Boderie, in Lower Normandy, in 1541. He acquired great knowledge in the Oriental languages, and had, with his brother Nicholas, the principal part in the edition of the Polyglott of Antwerp, though that honour is usually given to the learned Arias Montanus. Le Fevre was secretary to the duke d'Alengon, brother of king Henry 111. and composed several works in French, verse and prose, but in a style so vulgar and confused, that none of them are read. He died 1598. Nicholas le Fevre de la Boderie, his brother, was also very ingenious; he died after 1605. Anthony le Fevre de la Boderie, another brother, distinguished himself in the reigns of Henry IV. and Louis XIII. by his skill in negociations, and his embassies to Rome, the Low Countries, and England, where he was loaded with presents. He discovered the marechal de Biron’s correspondence at Brussels, and rendered important services to Henry IV. He died 1615, aged sixty, and left “Traitc de la Noblesse, traduit de Tltalien de Jean-Baptiste Nenna,” printed 1583, 8vo. His “Letters on Negociations” were published 1749, 5 vols. 12mo, and he is also supposed to have been among the authors of the “Catholicon.” He married the sister of the marquis de Feuquieres, governor of Verdun, by whom he had two daughters; one died very young, the other married M. Arnauld d'Andilli 1613, who by her obtained the estate of Pomponne, and la Briotte.

Some very singular things are related of his last hours. Margaret of Navarre was very fond of Faber, and visited him often. He and other learned men, whose conversation greatly pleased the queen, dined with her one day; when, in the midst of the entertainment, Faber began to weep. The queen asking the reason, he answered, That the enormity of his sins threw him into grief; not that he had ever been guilty of debaucheries, but he reckoned it & very great crime, that having known the truth, and taught it to persons who had sealed it with their blood, he had had the weakness to keep himself in a place of refuge, far from the countries where crowns of martyrdom were distributed. The queen, who was eloquent, comforted him; yet he was found dead a few hours after going to bed, which, considering his very advanced age, was not very extraordinary. He wrote several works in divinity, besides those above-mentipned, particularly an edition of the Psalter, in five languages, Paris, 1509, fol. “Traite de, Duplici, et unica Magdalena,” 4to “Agones martyruia mensis Januarii,” fol. without date of place or year, but of the beginning of the sixteenth century; a French version of the Bible, Antwerp, 1530, fol. very scarce, known by the name of the Emperor’s Bible, from the printer’s name. This translation, say the catholics, was the foundation of those which the protestants and doctors of Louvahi have published.

, of Villebrune, where he was born in 1732, was a man of considerable classical learning, and the author of many useful translations into the French language. Of his personal history we are only told, that he was a doctor of medicine, professor of oriental languages in the French college, one of the forty members of the French academy, and keeper of the national library, in which he succeeded Chamfort. He was not much attached to the principles which occasioned the French revolution, and was proscribed by the French directory for having written a pamphlet in which he maintained that France ought to be governed by a single chief. After residing occasionally in several places, he was made professor of natural history at la Cbarente; and when the central school, as it was called, was shut up, he taught mathematics and humanity in the college. The iast ten yearsof his life were spent at Angouleme, where he died Oct. 7, 1809. His character was lively, and his temper sometimes impetuous and unguarded, which made him many enemies in the literary world. He was, however, a man of indefatigable study, and was a master of fourteen languages ancient and modern. His reading was most extensive, but not well digested, and such was his love of variety, that he seldom adhered to any one subject long enough to produce a work in which it was completely discussed. He was, however, a valuable assistant to scholars employed on any arduous undertaking; and among others, is said to have contributed to the two editions of Strabo lately printed at Utrecht and Oxford, by examining manuscripts for the editors. Among his translations are, a valuable one of Athenreus, and the only one France can boast of since that of the abbd Marolles fell into disrepute. He translated also Hippocrates’ s Aphorisms; Epictetus Cebes’s Table; “Silius Italicus,” of whom also he published an edition of the original, in 1781, containing various readings from four Mss. and from Laver’s edition of 1471, never before collated by any editor. Yet in this he is sometimes rash in his conjectures, and pettishly intemperate in noticing his predecessors. Le Fevre’s other translations are, the “Memoirs of Ulloa,” and “Cervantes’s Tales,” from the Spanish “Carli’s American Letters” from the Italian Zimmerman “On Experience,” and on the “Epidemic Dysentery,” &c. from the German “Rosen’s treatise on Infants,” from the Swedish and the works of Armstrong and Underwood on the same subject, from the English. He published some other works relative to the arts, sciences, and politics, the titles of which are not given in our authority; and left complete, or nearly so, a translation of Aretseas, which he undertook at the request of the School of health of Paris.

Though he laboured intensely all his life, he was one of those learned men who are not ambitious of the character of author, but content with studying for themselves and their friends. He applied himself in his youth to the belles lettres and history, which he never neglected. Civil law, philosophy, and morality, were afterwards his occu^ jnition: and at the latter part of life, he spent his time chiefly among ecclesiastical antiquities. As he kept up a correspondence with all the learned of Europe, when he heard of any person about to publish an author, or to compose a work of his own, he was ever ready to assist him with Mss. and to furnish him with memoirs, but without suffering any mention to be made of his name, though his injunctions upon this point were not always observed. His own works, which were but few, were collected after his death by John le Begue, his friend, and printed at Paris, 1614, in a small volume, 4to. They consist of biblical criticism, questions on morals, and philological pieces in Latin and French.

He published, 1. “Luciani de morte Peregrini libellus, cum notis,” 1653, 4to. He thought this the best of Luclan’s pieces; and had a design to give an edition of all his works, which, however, he never executed, 2. “Diatribe, Flavii Josephi de Jesu Christo testimonium suppositurn esse,” 1655, 8vo. 3. “Luciani Timon,” with a Latin version and notes. 4. “Epistolarum pars prima,” 1659, 4to. “Pars secunda: cui accedunt Aristophanis Concionatrices, Graece & Latine, cum notis,” 1665, 4to. 5. “Journal du Journal, ou, Censure de la Censure;” and afterwards, 6. “Seconde Journaline;” both in 1666, 4to. 7. “Abrege* des Vies des Poetes Grecs,” &c. with “the marriage of Belphegor, and the life of Theseus, from Plutarch,” 1665, in 12mo. 8. “Convivium Xenophontis.” 9. “Platonis Alcibiades primus.” 10. “Plutarchus de Superstitione” all in French translations, 1666; as was the year after, 11. “Aristippi Vita a D. Laertio.” This last was inserted by De Sallengre, in his “Memoirs de Literature,” torn. ii. p. 2. In the same volume of the same work was published, 12. “Methode pour commencer les humanites Grecques et Latines:” translated in English, and published by Phillips, in a book entitled “A compendious way of teaching ancient and modern languages, formerly practised by the learned Tanaquil Faber, in the education of one of his sons, and of his daughter the celebrated madam Dacier. To which are added, some tracts and observations on the same subject by several eminent men, namely, Roger Ascham, Richard Carew, Milton, Locke, &c. With an account of the education of the dauphin, by Bossuet bishop of Meaux,” 1723, 8vo. 13. “Fabulse ex Locmanis Arabico-Latinis versibus redditae,” 1673, 12n; and subjoined, the year after, to the first volume of the second edition of his “Epistolse.” 14. He published notes upon several Greek and Latin authors of antiquity namely, Apollodorus, Longinus, Anacreon, Aristophanes, Ælian, Lucretius, Phyedrus, Virgil, Horace, Terence, Eutropius, Justin, Dionysius Periegetes, aad others.

Huet, bishop of Avranches, assures us that our author was well skilled in the Greek and Roman, and all the ancient learning. Niceron observes, that “his Latin style is fine and delicate, without any points or affectation; every thing is expressed very happily in it. He had likewise a good genius for Greek and Latin poetry; and his verses are worthy of the better ages. His French style has not the graces of his Latin. He knew well enough the rules of our language, but he did not truly understand the true genius and natural propriety of it. As he lived in the Province, that is, almost out of the world, he wrote by study than custom, and he has not always observed the French turn and idiom. Besides, he spoiled his style by a vicious affectation, endeavouring to mix the serious of Balzac with the hutnour and pleasantry of Voiture. Notwithstanding these defects, what he has written in our language will still please; and if his translations have not all the elegance possible, they support themselves by their accuracy, and the learned remarks which accompany them.” Mr. William Baxter, in the dedication of his edition of Anacreon, styles him “futilis Callus,” and affirms that our author in his notes upon that poet every where trifles, and with all his self-conceit and vanity has shewn himself absolutely unfit for that task. In another place he writes thus: ' Nugatur etiam Tanaquillus Faber, ut solet;“and at last he styles him,” Criticaster Callus." Some modern critics have not been much more favourable to his critical talents.

, an eminent French civilian, was born at Semur, the capital of Auxois, Dec. 16, 1583. After studying at Dijon, Orleans, and other places, he was received as an advocate of parliament in 1602, when only nineteen years old, and the same year he went into Germany to attend the celebrated Bongars, who was sent by Henry IV. resident from France, into the empire; but soon left him, to study the law at Heidelberg, where the well-known Codefroy was at that time law-professor. Godefroy paid great attention to Fevret, who was recommended by several persons of quality: he received him into his house, and caused him to hold public disputations, which; he did with great applause. In 1607, Fevret returned to Dijon, where he married Mrs. Anne Brunet of Beaulne, by whom he had nineteen children; fourteen of which they brought up together during eight years. After his wife’s death, which happened in 1637, he very whimsically caused his bed to be made one half narrower, and never would marry again. He gained great reputation at the bar at Dijon; and was chosen counsellor to the three estates of the province. In 1629, Lewis the Thirteenth being come to Dijon in order to punish a popular insurrection, Fevret was chosen to petition the king that he would graciously be pleased to pardon the guilty. He spoke for all the corporations, and made so elegant a discourse, that the king commanded him to print it, and to send it to him at Lyons. His majesty then pardoned the authors of the sedition, and granted to Fevret the place of counsellor in the parliament of Dijon; but not being permitted to employ a deputy, he refused it, because he would not quit his profession of an advocate, and contented himself with the posts of king’s counsellor and secretary to the court, with a pension of 900 livres. He wrote a history of this insurrection, which was published some time after. As he was frequently sent a deputy to the court, he was known to de Morillac, keeper of the seals of France, who honoured him with his friendship. As early as 1626 and 1627, Monsieur, the king’s brother, had chosen him for his counsellor in ordinary in all his affairs; and the prince of Conde had made him intendant of his house, and of his affairs in Burgundy. He was continued in the same post by his son Louis de Bourbon prince of Cond6; and, during the life of these two princes, he was honoured with their favour in a distinguished manner. Frederic Casimir, prince palatine of the Rhine, and his consort Amelia Antwerpia, born princess of Orange, chose him also their counsel and intendant for their affairs in Burgundy. He had an extensive correspondence with all the learned civilians in his time. He died at Dijon, in 1661.

, great grandson of the former, was born at Dijon in 1710, and educated to the profession of the law. By distinguishing himself in some great causes, he obtained a pension from the government. He laboured for several years in the publication of a new edition of Le Long’s “Bibliothe*que Historique de la France,” and compiled so much matter as to extend that work from a single volume in folio, to four vast folios, besides a fifth containing indexes, &c. At the time of his death, which happened in 1772, he was a member of the French academy of Belles-lettres, and director of the university of Dijon. He was a man pleasing in society, and of much zeal, both literary and patriotic. He lived to see only two volumes of his edition of Le Long published. The rest were edited by Barbeau de Bruyere.

, a French clergyman of the Jansenist party, was born at Paris in 1616, and studied in the college of the Sorbonne, where he obtained the esteem of persons of all ranks. In 164,5, he was engaged by M. de Bellegarde, archbishop of Sens, to deliver a course of instructions to the candidates for holy orders in his diocese. He obtained some preferment in the church, and composed several useful books, among which was one entitled “A Catechism on Grace 3” which was afterwards reprinted with the title of “Illustrations of certain difficulties respecting Grace.” This work was condemned by a decree of the inquisition at Home, which M. Fouquet, attorneygeneral of the parliament at Paris, would not permit to be promulgated in that city. In 1656, M. Feydeau was one of the seventy-two doctors who were expelled by the faculty of the Sorbonne for refusing to subscribe to the condemnation of M. Arnauld; and on this account he was obliged to relinquish his preferments. After this, for several years, he lived chiefly in retirement, and produced his “Reflections on the History and Harmony of the Gospels,” in 2 vols. 12mo; a work which has gone through several editions. In 1665, he was presented by the bishop of Aleth with a prebend in his diocese, which he resigned in 1668, in order to undertake the cure of Vitri le Francois, in Champagne, which after seven years he was obliged to give up, in consequence of the persecutions with which his party was harassed. He was banished to Bourges, in 1677; and afterwards was sent to Annonai in the Virares, where he died July 24, 1694. He published many works besides those above-mentioned, and left behind him many others that have not yet appeared, particularly memoirs of himself, as far as 1678, and many letters. A long Latin epitaph, engraved on his tomb, which is preserved by Moreri, was written by a religious of the Celestine order.

, was a learned physician of the order of St. Benedict, born in Spain, who died in 1765. By his writings many have thought that he contributed as much towards curing the mental diseases of his compatriots and reforming the vitiated taste of his countrymen, by introducing liberal notions in medicine and philosophy, as the great Michel Cervantes had done those of a preceding age, by his incomparable history of Don Quixote. In the “Teatro Critico, sopra los Errores communes,” which he published in fourteen volumes, are many severe reflections against the ignorance of the monks, the licentiousness of the clergy, ridiculous privileges, abuse ef pilgrimages, exorcisms, pretende-d miracles, &c. &c. by which he made a formidable host of enemies, and would certainly have been also a martyr, had the numerous calls of vengeance been listened to by those in power. The learned part of the nation, however, undertook his defence, and he escaped the grasp of the inquisition; and, notwithstanding the freedom he had taken with the faculty, the medical college at Seville conferred on him the degree of doctor, and honoured him with a seat at their board. M. Bourgoing observes, that Dr. Feyjoo, or Feijoo, was one of those writers who treated this conjectural art in the most rational manner, but he is certainly far from consistent, and sometimes lays down a doctrine which he is obliged afterwards to abandon. A considerable part of tis “Teatro Critico” was translated into French by D'Hermilly, in 12vols. 12mo; and several of his Essays have been published at various times in English, the largest collection of which is entitled “Essays or Discourses, selected from the works of Feyjoo, and translated from the Spanish, by John Brett, esq.” 1780, 4 vols. 8vo. The best are those on subjects gf morals and criticism.

“It will be an humane and generous office to set down to the account of slander and defamation, a great part of that abuse which was discharged against him by his enemies in his life-time; deducing, however, from the whole, this useful lesson, that quick and warm passions should be early controuled, and that dissipation and extravagant pleasures are the most dangerous palliations that can be found for disappointments and vexations in the first stages of life.” We have seen,“adds he,” how Mr. Fielding very soon squandered away his small patrimony, which, with oeconomy, might have procured him independence; we have seen how he ruined, into the bargain, a constitution, which in its original texture seemed formed to last much longer. When illness and indigence were once let in upon him, he no longer remained the master of his own actions; and that nice delicacy of conduct which alone constitutes and preserves a character, was occasionally obliged to give way. When he was not under the immediate urgency of want, those who were intimate with him are ready to aver, that he had a mind greatly superior to any thing mean or little; when his finances were exhausted, he was not the most elegant in his choice of the means to redress himself, and he would instantly exhibit a farce or a puppet -shew, in the Haymarket theatre, which was wholly inconsistent with the profession he had embarked in. But his intimates are witness how much his pride suffered wben he was forced into measures of this kind no man having a juster sense of propriety, or more honourable ideas of the employment of an author and a scholar." Many years after the death of Fielding, the French consul at Lisbon, le Chev. de Meyrionnet, wrote an elegant epitaph for him, and proposed to have erected a monument; but the English factory, stimulated by this generosity in a foreigner, took the matter into their own hands.

, a celebrated Italian political writer, the descendant of a very illustrious but decayed family at Naples, was born there Aug. 18, 1752. His parents had very early destined him for the military profession, but the attachment he showed to the acquisition of literary knowledge, induced them to suffer him to pursue his own course of study. His application to general literature became then intense, and before he was twenty years of age, he was not only an accomplished Greek and Latin scholar, but had made himself intimately acquainted with mathematics, ancient history, and the laws of nature and nations as administered in every country. He had also begun at this time to write two works, the one on public and private education, and the other on the duties of princes, as founded on nature and social order, and although he did not complete his design in either, yet he incorporated many of the sentiments advanced in his great work on legislation. He afterwards studied law, more in compliance with the will of his friends, who considered the bar as the introduction to public honour and preferment, than from his own inclination; and the case of an arbitrary decision occurring, he published an excellent work on the subject, entitled “Riflessioni Politiche sull' ultima legge Sovrana, che riguarda ramministrazione della giustizia,” Naples, 1774, 8vo. This excited the more attention, as the author was at this time only in his twenty-second year, and a youth averse to the pleasures and amusements of his age, and intent only on the most profound researches into the principles of law and justice. Nor were these studies much interrupted by his obtaining in 1777 a place at court, that of gentleman of the bedchamber, with the title of an officer of the marines, which appears to have been usually conferred on gentlemen who were near the person of the monarch. In 1780 he published the first two volumes of his celebrated work on Legislation, “Scienza della Legislatione,” at Naples the third and fourth appeared in 1783 the fifth, sixth, and seventh in 1785; and the eighth, after his death, in 1789. This was reprinted at Naples, Venice, Florence, Milan, &c. and translated into French, German, and Spanish. The encomiums bestowed on it were general throughout Europe, and although some of his sentiments were opposed with considerable violence, and some of them are perhaps more beautiful in theory than in practice, a common case with speculators who take upon them to legislate for the whole world; yet it has been said with justice, that he brought to his great task qualifications in which both legislators and authors, who have made great exertions on the same subject, have been lamentably deficient, knowledge, temper, and moderation; and if assent is withheld from any proposition, or conviction does not attend every argument, the sentiment of esteem and respect for an enlightened, industrious, and virtuous man, labouring for the benefit of his fellow-creatures, and seeking their good by temperate and rational means, is never for a moment suspended. This valuable writer had not quite completed his plan, when his labours were ended by a premature death, in the spring of 1788, when he was only in his thirty-sixth year. He was universally lamented by his countrymen at large; and the king, who a little before his death had called him to the administration of the finances, testified his high regard for so useful a servant, by providing for his children, by a wife whom he had married in 1783. His biographer applies to him, with the change of name, what Tacitus says of Agricola, “Quidquid ex Filangierio amavimus, quidquid mirati sumus, manet mansurumque est in animis hominum, in aeternitate temporum, famarerum.” In 1806, sir Richard Clayton published an excellent translation of Filangieri in 2 vols. 8vo, as far as relates to political and Œconomical laws, and omitting what is said on criminal legislation, which the translator conceived was not wanted in this country, where the distribution of public justice is scarcely susceptible of amendment.

, in French Finé, professor of mathematics in the Royal college at Paris, was the son of a physician, and born at Briungon, in Dauphine, in 1494. He went young to Paris, where his friends procured him a place in the college of Navarre. He there applied himself to polite literature and philosophy; yet devoted himself more particularly to mathematics, for which he had a strong natural inclination, and made a considerable progress, though without the assistance of a master. He acquired likewise much skill in mechanics; and having both a genius to invent instruments, and a skilful hand to make them, he gained high reputation by the specimens he gave of his ingenuity. He first made hinaself known by correcting and publishing Siliceus’s “Arithmetic,” and the “Margareta Philosopiiica.” He afterwards read private lectures in mathematics, and then taught that science publicly in the college of Gervais; by which he became so famous, that he was recommended to Francis I. as the fittest person to teach mathematics in the new college which that prince had founded at Paris. He omitted nothing to support the glory of his profession; and though he instructed his scholars with great assiduity, yet he found time to publish a great many books upon almost every part of the mathematics. A remarkable proof of his skill in mechanics is exhibited in the clock which he invented in 1553, and of which there is a description in the Journal of Amsterdam for March 29, 1694. Yet his genius, his labours, his inventions, and the esteem which an infinite number of persons shewed him, could not secure him from that fate which so often befalls men of letters. He was obliged to struggle all his life with poverty; and, when he died, left a wite and six children, and many debts. His children, however, found patrons, who for their father’s sake assisted his family. He died in 1555, aged sixty-one. Like all the other mathematicians and astronomers of those times, he was greatly addicted to astrology; and had the misfortune to be a long time imprisoned, because he had foretold some things which were not acceptable to the court of France. He was one of those who vainly boasted of having found out the quadrature of the circle. His works were collected in 3 vols. folio, in 1535, 1542, and 1556, and there is an Italian edition in 4to, Venice, 1587.

, of the family of the lord keeper, was the son of sir Thomas Finch of Eastwell in Kent, and was born in that county, and educated at Oriel college, Oxford. From that he went to Gray’s Inn, and after pursuing the usual course of law studies, became a counsellor of reputation, and was autumn or summer reader of that house in 2 James I. In 1614 he attained the rank of a Serjeant, and two years after was knighted. He died Oct. 11, 1625, leaving a son, John, who was afterward created lord Finch of Fordwich, and was keeper of the great seal. Sir Henry Finch wrote “Nomotechnia, ou description del Commun Leys d'Angleterre, &c.” Lond. 1613, fol. This “Description of the Common Law” was afterwards published by himself in English, under the title “Of Law, or a Discourse thereof,” Lond. 1627, (636, and 1661, 8vo. But a better translation was published in 1758 by an anonymous hand. He published also “On the Calling of the Jews,” a work which Wood has so imperfectly described that it is not easy to discover its drift. Finet (Sir John), a man considerable enough to be remembered, was son of Robert Finet of Soulton, near Dover, in Kent, and born in 1571. His great grandfather was of Sienna, in Italy, where his family was ancient; and coming into England a servant to cardinal Campegius, the pope’s legate, married a maid of honour to queen Catherine, consort to Henry VIII. and settled here. He was bred up in the court, where, by his wit, mirth, and uncommon skill in composing songs, he very much pleased James I. In 1614 he was sent into France about matters of public concern; and the year after was knighted. In 1626 he was made assistant to the master of the ceremonies, being then in good esteem with Charles I. He died in 1641, aged seventy. He wrote a book entitled “Fineti Philoxenus: Some choice observations touching the reception and precedency, the treatment and audience, the punctilios and contests of foreign ambassadors in England, 1656,” 8vo published by James Howel, and dedicated to lord LTsle. He also translated from French into English “The beginning, continuance, and decay of Estates, &c. 1606;” written originally by R. de Lusing.

In 1680 and 1681, came over the French protestants, who furnished new work for Mr. Firrnin’s zeal and charity: and, in 1682, he set up a linen manufacture for them at Ipswich. During the last twenty years of his life, he was one of the governors of Christ’s hospital in London; to which he procured many considerable donations. About the revolution, when great numbers of Irish nobility, clergy, gentry, and others, fled into England from the persecution and proscription of king James, briefs and other means were set on foot for their relief, in all which Mr. Firmin was so active, that he received a letter of thanks for his diligence and kindness, signed by the archbishop of Tuam, and seven bishops. In April 1693, he became a governor of St. Thomas’s hospital in Southwark, nor was there hardly any public trust or charity, in which he either was not ia one shape or other concerned. He died Dec. 20, 1697, in the sixty-sixth year of his age, and was buried, according to his desire, in the cloisters of Christ’s hospital. In the wall near his grave is placed an inscription, in which hii benevolence is recorded with a just encomium.

Wood has given a very long list of his productions, which are mostly Latin poems, epitaphs, or orations in praise of the leading characters or events of his day. Among the most remarkable are, 1. “Marston-Moore, sive de obsidione praelioque Eboracensi carmen,” Lond. 165O, 4to. 2. “Irenodia gratulatoria, &c.” in honour of Cromwell, and dedicated to the infamous Bradshaw, ibid. 1652, 4to. 3. “Oratio anniversaria,” in honour of the inauguration of Cromwell, and delivered in the Middle temple hall, ibid. 1655, fol. 4. “Threnodia triumphans, &c.” on the death of Cromwell, 1658, fol. Latin and English. 5. “Epinicion; vel elogium fcelicissimi sereniss. fortiss. Ludovici XIV. &c.” fol. without date or place. This panegyric on the French king is curiously illustrated on the margins of each leaf with cuts of arms and military trophies, &c. He wrote also a book of Heraldry, printed at London, in 1682, with the coats of arms of such of the gentry as he waited upon with presentation copies, in hopes of a reward. From the little we have seen of his works, he appears to have been a man of considerable talents, but in his character and conduct, irregular, vain, and conceited.

This learned lawyer’s works are, 1. “The Grand Abridgment collected by that most reverend judge, Mr. Anthony Fitzherbert, lately conferred with his own manuscript corrected by himself, together with the references of the cases to the books, by which they may be easily found; an improvement never before made. Also in this edition the additions or supplements are placed at the end of their respective titles.” Thus runs the title of the edition of 1577; but the most esteemed edition appears to be that printed in folio by Pynson, in 1516, with additions to the first part under the title “Residuum.” Ames also mentions an edition by Wynken de Worde, in 1516, and dates, Pynson’s edition 1514, but it is questionable whether this edition attributed to Wynken de Worde be not the production of a foreign printer. To the edition of 1577, is added a most useful and accurate table, by the care of William Rastall, serjeant at law, and also one of the jus tices of the common pleas, in the reign of queen Mary; which table, as well as the work, together with its author, is very highly commended by the lord chief justice Coke. It is indeed one of our most ancient and authentic legal records, as it contains a great number of original authorities quoted by different authors, which are not extant in the year-books, or elsewhere to be found in print. 2. “The Office and Authority of Justices of Peace, compiled and extracted out of the old books, as well of the Common Law, as of the Statutes, 1538,” and reprinted often, the last edition in 1617. 3. “The Office of Sheriffs, Bailiffs of Liberties, Escheators, Constables, Coroners,” &c. 1538. Though we give the titles in English, these three works are written in French only part of the second is in English. 4. “Of the. Diversity of Courts,” 1529, in French but translated afterwards by W. H. of Gray’s inn, and added by him to Andrew Home’s “Mirrour of Justices.” 5. “The New Natura Brevium,” 1534, in French; but afterwards translated, and always held in very high esteem. The last edition, published in 1794, 2 vols. 8vo, has the addition of a commentary, supposed to be written by chief justice Hale, and was collated with the former editions, and corrected, with some notes and references added, and the index considerably enlarged. 6. “Of the Surveying of Lands,” 1539. 7. “The Book of Husbandry, very profitable and necessary for all persons,” 1534, and several times after in the reigns of Mary and Elizabeth. It is said, in an advertisement to the reader, that this book was written by one Anthony Fitzherbert, who had been forty years an husbandman; from whence many have concluded, that this could not be the judge. But in tqe preface to his book “Of Measuring Lands,” he mentions his book “Of Agriculture,” and in the advertisement prefixed to the same book, it is expressly said, that the author of that treatise of “Measuring,” was the author likewise of the book “Concerning the Office of a Justice of Peace.” Whence it appears, that both those books were written by this author, who perhaps in the seasons which allowed him leisure to go into the country, might apply himself as vigorously to husbandry in the country, as to the law when in town; and commit his thoughts to paper. He appears to have been the first Englishman who studied the nature of soils, and the laws of vegetation, with philosophical attention. On these he formed a theory confirmed by experiments, and rendered the study pleasing as well as profitable, by realizing the principles of the ancients, to the honour and advantage of his country. These books being written at a time when philosophy and science were but just emerging from that gloom in which they had long been buried, were doubtless replete with many errors; but they contained the rudiments of true knowledge, and revived the study and love of agriculture.

, duke of Berwick, natural son of James II. when duke of York, and of Arabella Churchill, sister to the great duke of Marl borough, was born at Moulins in 1670, when his mother was on her return from the medicinal waters of Bourbon. He was bred to arms in the French service, and in 1686, at the age of fifteen, was wounded at the siege of Buda; he signalized himself also in 1687, at the battle of Mohatz, where the duke of Lorraine defeated the Turks. In 1688, after'his father’s abdication, he was sent to command for him in Ireland, and was distinguished, both at the siege of Londonderry, in 1690, and at the battle of the Boyne, where he had a horse killed under him. In 1703 he commanded the troops that Louis XIV. sent to Spain to support the claim of Philip V. In a single campaign he made himself master of several fortified places. On his return to France he was employed to reduce the rebels in the Cevennes. He then besieged Nice, and took it in 170. For his services in this campaign he was raised the next year to the dignity of mareschal of France; after which he greatly signalized himself in Spain against the Portuguese and others. In 1707 he gained the celebrated battle of Almanza, against the English under lord Galloway, and the Portuguese under Das-Minas, who had above 5000 men killed on the field. This victory fixed the crown on the head of Philip V. who was studious to prove his gratitude to the general to whom he was indebted for it. In 1714 he took Barcelona, being then generalissimo of the armies of Spain. When the war between France and Germany broke out in 1733, he again went out at the head of the French army; but in 1734 he was killed by a cannon-bail before Philipsburg, which he was besieging. It was the fortune of the house of Churchill, says Montesquieu, speaking of the dukes of Marlborough and Berwick, to produce two heroes, one of whom was destined lo shake, and the other to support, the two greatest monarchies^ jf Europe. The character of Fitzjames was in some degree dry and severe, but full of integrity, sincerity, and true greatness. He was unaffectedly religious; and, though frugal in his personal expences, generally in debt, from the expences brought upon him by his situation, and the patronage he gave to fugitives from England, who had supported the cause of his father. The French are lavish in his Braise, and certainly not without reason. His character has been well and advantageously drawn by the great Montesquieu; and there are memoirs of him written by himself, with a continuation to his death by the English editor, Mr. Hooke, a doctor of the Sorbonne, and son of the Roman historian. They were published in 2 vols. 8vo, in 1779.

, an eminent naval commander, and earl of Southampton, in the sixteenth century, was the second son of sir Thomas Fitzvviliiam, of Aldwarke, in Yorkshire, knt. by Lucia, his wife, daughter and co-heir to John Neville, marquis Montacute. In 151O he was made one of the esquires for the body of king Henry VIII. which office was renewed to him for life ia 1512. The year following he was one of the chief commanders in the fleet sent out against France, to clear the sea of French ships before Henry and his allies attacked France by land; and he was seriously wounded by an arrow in attempting to destroy the French fleet at Brest. Shortly after he attended king Henry at the siege of Tournay, where his bravery procured him the honour of knighthood. In 1620 he was vice-admiral of England, and em^ ployed in guarding the channel at the time the emperor Charles V. came to England. He so ingratiated himself with his royal master that he obtained from him, in 1521, 9. grant of the manor of Navesby in Northamptonshire, part of the possessions of Edward Stafford, duke of Buckingham, then lately attainted. At that time he was ambassador in France; but, upon a rupture between that kingdom and England, he was recalled, Jan. 1521-2, and ordered to sea with a strong fleet of twenty-eight sail, to secure our merchants, and take what French ships he could. Shortly after he assisted at the taking of Morlaix, in Bretagne; and with sir William Sandes and sir Maufice Berkeley, went and burnt Marguison, which was newly built and fortified, and many villages. In 1523, the king of France, preparing to send John duke of Albany, regent of Scotland, into that kingdom in order to invade England from that quarter, sir William was made admiral, and dispatched with a strong fleet to intercept him. Having missed him, he landed on the French coast at Treport, in Normandy, and burnt the suburbs of that town and several ships in the harbour, though there were but 700 English opposed to 6000 French. The year following, being captain of Guisnes, in Picardy, he greatly annoyed Boulogne, and other places adjacent. Before the end of that year he was made treasurer of the king’s household; and in October sent to France with Dr. John Taylor, a civilian, to see the lady regent (whose son, Francis I. was then prisoner in Spain) swear to observe the articles of a treaty newly concluded between the two crowns. In 1529 he was one of those who subscribed the articles exhibited in parliament against cardinal Wolsey. At the grand interview between the ki:igs of England and France, in 1532, he attended his master Henry V11I. to Boulogne, the place of interview between many other persons of the highest quality. In May 1535, he was sent with the duke of Norfolk, the of Ely, and Dr. Fox, to treat with the French king’s commissioners about a league between the crowns of England and France; one of the articles of which was, that the duke of Angonleme, third son to the king of France, should marry Elizabeth, second daughter of king Henry. Shortly after, he was made knight of the garter, and chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster; and in 1536 constituted admiral of England, Wales, Ireland, Normandy, Gascony, and Aquitaine. On Oct. 18, 1537, he was advanced to the title of earl of Southampton, and made lord privy-seal Oct. 27,1539. In April following, some disputes having arisen between England and France, he, with John lord Russel, lately made high admiral, were sent over to Calais with a few troops of horse, and returned quickly after executing their orders. He was also employed as captain of the Foreward in the expedition to Scotland, in October 1542, but died in his way thither, at Newcastle, so much esteemed, that, in honour of his memory, his standard was borne in the vanguard in all that expedition. By his will bearing date Sept. 10, of the same year, he ordered his body to be buried in the church of Midhurst, in Sussex. He left no issue by Mabel his wife, daughter to Henry lord Clifford, and sister to Henry first earl of Cumberland. Of his personal character it is only recorded that there was not a serviceable man under his command whose name he knew not; not a week passed but he paid his ships; not a prize but his seamen shared in as well as himself; and it was his opinion, that none fought well but those who did it for a fortune, which may be admitted, in some measure, if we consider that fortune and honours in the naval and military services are generally joined.

The important service rendered to the science of astronomy by Fixlmillner, is well known to all astronomers. The great number of his observations of Mercury at a time when they were rare and difficult to be made, enabled Lalande to complete his accurate tables of that planet, for which the French astronomer publicly returned him thanks. Fixlmillner was one of the first astronomers who observed the orbit of the newly-discovered planet Uranus. He was also the first who supported Bode’s conjecture, that the star 34 in the Bull, observed by Flamsteed in 1690, and which afterwards disappeared, was the new planet. Fixlinillner was a man of so great application and activity, that he not only made observations, but calculated them all himself, and deduced from them the necessary results. All his observations, of whatever kind, he calculated on the spot; and to avoid errors, he always calculated them a second time. To uncommon industry he united great penetration and deep reflection, as is proved by the many excellent remarks and discoveries to be found in his works. It must here be added, that this able astronomer lived in a remote part of the country, at a distance from all literary helps, and from others who pursued the same studies; from every thing, indeed, that could animate his zeal; yet he continued to the last day of his life, a singular instance of perseverance and attachment to his favourite study. But few men were so little subject to the imperious power of the passions. Simple in his manners, he possessed great equanimity and firmness, like the immutable laws of nature which he studied. His wide extended celebrity did not render him proud; whatever was written or said in his praise, he endeavoured rather to conceal than to publish. His close application at length impaired his health, and brought on obstinate obstructions, which ended in a diarrhoea. He died Aug. 27, 1791, in the seventy-first year of his age, the fifty-third of his residence in the convent; and the forty-sixth after his entering into the priesthood,

His works are, 1. “CEuvres Mesle*es,” miscellaneous works, 12mo, in verse and prose, both French and Latin, Of his compositions in the latter language, it is generally remarked, that they are distinguished by classical purity and good taste. 2. An edition of Gratiani, “De casibus iliustriuni Virornm,” 4to. S. “Panegyrics of the Saints,” esteemed one of the best works of the kind. 4. His funeral Orations, which are* eight in number. 5. His Sermons, in 3 vols. If mo, less forcible than his panegyrics, or his orations. He had studied old quaint discourses, which he ridiculed, and called his buffoons; yet they had in some degree vitiated his style of writing sermons. 6. “The History of Theodosius,” above-mentioned. 7. “The Life of cardinal Ximenes,” one volume, 4to, or two volumes, 12mo. 8. “Letters,” 2 vols. 12mo, in a pure, but not an epistolary style, y. “The Life of cardinal Commendon, translated from the Latin of Gratiani,” one vol. 4 to, or two vols. 12mo. 10. Posthumous Works, containing pastoral letters of the most excellent paternal tenderness, and other matters. Of all these a handsome edition was printed in 1782, 9 vols. 8vo. But in this edition the correspondence with Baville, the persecuting intendant of Languedoc, which had been promised, was suppressed by authority.

His occupations prevented him from publishing much, yet there are some small pieces of his extant; as, 1. “An Oration made at Guildhall before the mayor, &c. concerning the late attempts of the queen’s majesties seditious subjects, Oct. 15,1571,” l'2mo. 2. “Annalium tarn Regum EdwardiV. Richard! II I. et Henrici VII. quam Henrici VIII. titulorum ordine alphabetico multo jam melius quam ante digestorum Elenchus, 1579 et 1597.” 3. “A Table to the Reports of Edmund Plowden,” in French. 4. “The Office of a Justice of Peace; together with instructions how and in what manner statutes shall be expounded, 1658,” 8vo, a posthumous publication. 5. A short copy of Latin verses prefixed to sir Thomas Chaloner’s “Repub. Anglorum instauranda.” 6. Notes upon Lambarde’s “ Areheion;” and several political discourses in ms. He is said also to have contributed much towards the last of the old editions of Holinshed.

Notwithstanding his difference with the ministry, when a fast was appointed to be kept, Jan. 16, 1711-12, he was chosen by the house of lords to preach before them; but, by some means or other getting intelligence that he had censured the peace, they contrived to have the house adjourned beyond that day. This put it indeed out of his power to deliver his sentiments from the pulpit; yet he put the people in possession of them, by sending them from the press. Though without a name, from the spirit and language it was easily known whose sermon it was. It gave offence to some ministers of state, who now only waited for an opportunity to be revenged; and this opportunity the bishop soon gave them, by publishing, 8. “Four Sermons; viz. On the Death of queen Mary, 1694; on the Death of the duke of Gloucester, 1700; on the Death of king William, 1701; on the Queen’s accession to the throne, 1702. With a preface,” 1712, 8vo. This preface, bearing very hard upon those who had the management of public affairs, was made an object of attack, and, upon a motion made for that purpose in the house of commons, an order was made to burn it, which was accordingly done on the 12th of May. The bishop, knowing this to be the effect of party rage, was very little affected with it; but rather pleased to think that the very means they had used to suppress his book, was only a more effectual way of publishing and exciting the whole nation to read it. It was owing to this, certainly, that it was printed in the Spectator, No. 384, and thereby dispersed into several thousand hands. This same year, and indeed before his sermons, he published, but without his name, 9. “The Judgment of the Church of England in the case of LayBaptism, and of Dissenter’s Baptism; by which it appears that she hath not, by any public act of hers, made or declared Lay-Baptism to be invalid. The second edition. With an additional letter from Dr. John Cosin, afterwards bishop of Durham, to Mr. Cordel, who scrupled to communicate with the French Protestants upon some of the modern pretences,” 8vo. This piece was occasioned by the controversy about Lay-Baptism, which was then au object of public notkv. In 1713, he published without his name, 10. “The Life and Miracles of St. Wenefrede, together with her Litanies, with some historical observations made thereon.” In the preface, he declares the motives which induced him to bestow so much pains upon this life of St. Wenefrede; and these were, that the concourse of people to the well which goes by her name was very great that the papists made use of this to influence weak minds that they had lately reprinted a large life of this saint in English; that these considerations might justly affect any protestant divine, and th,at for certain reasons they affected him in particular. Upon the demise of the queen, and the Hanover succession, this prelate had as much reason to expect that his zeal and services should be rewarded, as any of his rank and function: but he did not make any display of his merit, either to the king or his ministers. However, upon the death of Moore, bishop of Ely, in 1714, Tenison, then archbishop of Canterbury, strenuously recommended Fleetwood to the vacant see; and he was accordingly, without the least application from himself directly or indirectly, nominated to it.

, son of the preceding, was born and partly educated in Scotland, but studied afterwards at the universities of Leyden and Utrecht, where he prosecuted all those branches of learning which were deemed necessary to qualify him for the ministerial profession. His first settlement was with the English church at Leyden, whence he afterwards removed to become minister of the Scotch church of Amsterdam. In the course of a few years, he came over to London, and became pastor of a Scotch church in Lothbury, London; urged, as it is said, to make the exchange by king William, who often advised with him on the concerns of his own country, and frequently received him at court. His great learning and talents procured him much respect abroad, and also in this country, where he was esteemed by churchmen and dissenters, as well as by those belonging to the Scotch presbytery. He was on terms of friendship with the archbishop of Canterbury; and was chosen one of the preachers of the lecture, instituted by the merchants of London, at Salters’­hall, every Tuesday. From his early years he was eminently devout; and he xvas firmly attached to the British monarchy and constitution. He died May 24, 1716. His works were numerous, consisting of various sermons, and tracts; particularly, 1. “The History of Hereditary Right.” 2. “The Mirror of Divine Love,” in which is a dramatic poem, called the “Monarchical Image, or Nebuchadnezzar’s Dream.” 3. “Theocraty, or Divine Government of Nations.” 4. “A practical discourse on the death of king William.” 5. “Christology, or a discourse concerning Christ.” 6. “The Rod of the Sword.” 7. “Speculum Davidicum Redivivum, or the Divine right of the Revolution evinced and applied,” and “Discourses on several subjects, viz. the Rise and Fall of Papacy,” c. published in 1701. In the dedication of this last mentioned work to lord Carmichael, principal secretary of state for Scotland, and chancellor of the college of Glasgow, Mr. Fleming mentions his being related to his lordship, and acknowledges his obligations for the offer of so considerable au office as that of principal of the college of Glasgow; which very honourable and beneficial situation he declined, being a dissenter from the church of Scotland. This work, some years ago, was very much the subject of public attention, from the remarkable coincidence between Fleming’s conjectural interpretation of a prophecy in the Revelations, which he supposed to relate to the humbling of the French monarchy, about 1794, and the calamitous events which, within a year of that very period, befel the unhappy Louis XVI. There being at that time a very numerous party in this and other countries, whose object was the humbling of every monarchy and established government, this lucky conjecture of Mr. Fleming’s encouraged the appearance of various prophets (at the head of whom was a lunatic, still in confinement), and their publications for a considerable time agitated the public mind, and produced, in some degree, what was intended, a damp on the spirits of the credulous, and a reluctance to support the war. This, however, like every other popular delusion, was not of long duration, and more recent events have given a happier direction to public sentiment.

In 1410, being then rector of Boston in Lincolnshire, he exchanged his prebend of South Newbold for that of Langford in the cathedral church of York, and on April 28, 1420, was promoted to the see of Lincoln. In 1424 he was sent to the council of Sienna, where, in a dispute about precedency, he vindicated the honour and superiority of his country, against the Spanish, French, and Scotch deputies. This council was called to continue the proceedings of that of Constance against the Hussites, and other continental reformers, and our prelate distinguished himself so much as to become a favourite with Pope Martin V. who would have promoted him to be archbishop of York, had not the king as well as the dean and chapter opposed his -election with such firmness as to oblige the pope to yield. Flemming consequently remained in his diocese of Lincoln. In 1428, he executed that decree of the council of Constance which ordered that the bones of Wicklilf should be taken up and burned; the harmless remains of a man whom he once honoured with the warmth of his zeal, and supported with the vigour of his talents.

, zm evninmt French hydrographer, was born at Lyons in 1738, of a fatally distinguished in the profession of the law, but devoted his attention from his infancy to marine studies. He arrived at the rank of a naval captain in the French service, and was employed many years before the revolution in the office of their marine, under the title of director of the ports and arsenals. His countrymen impute to his labours and skill the figure which the French navy was enabled to make in the American war. In 1790 he was appointed minister of the marine, and filled that important situation with great integrity; but dreading the influence of popular opinion, he gave in his resignation in 1791, when the mob were gaining a fatal ascendancy. He had before requested of the king to separate the colonial department of the marine from the other, and make it a distinct office, with which his majesty did not at that time think it necessary to comply. During his administration he published a work to illustrate the history of navigation, entitled “Decouvertes des Francois en 1768 et 1769, dans le sud-est de la Nouvelle-Guine,” Paris, 1790, 4to; the professed object of which is to restore to the French navigators, and particularly to Bougainville, the merit of those discoveries of which the English have endeavoured to deprive them.

, the celebrated cardinal of that name, was born in 1653, at Lodeve in Languedoc, but was brought to Paris at the age of six, and there educated for the church. He distinguished himself in the progress of his studies; and when he began to mix with the world, appeared there with the natural advantages of a handsome figure, pleasing address, and wellmanaged wit. His first preferment was that of a canon of Montpellier; he was also a doctor of the Sorbonne. But his friends becoming numerous, much interest was made for him, and in 1698, Louis XIV. named him bishop of Frejus. “I have made you wait a long time,” said the king, “but you have so many friends, that I was determined to stay till I could have the sole merit of preferring you.” Louis XIV. a little before he died, appointed him preceptor to his grandson, in which office he succeeded Bossuet and Fenelon. In 1726 he was made cardinal, and soon after advanced to the place of prime-minister. He was then turned seventy. Yet the weight of this active: post did not alarm him; and, to the age of ninety, he manifested a mind in full vigour, and capable of conducting affairs. From 1726 to 1740, every thing prospered. He commenced and brought to a glorious conclusion for his country, the war for the succession in Spain; and he added Lorraine to the French territory. In the war which commenced in 174-0 he was not so fortunate; and in 1743 he died, full of grief for a succession of misfortunes, of which the nation reproached him as the author. A too rigid attention to economy had led him to neglect the marine of his country; and the successes of England by sea completed the evil which had been thus begun. We was of a mild and tranquil character, a lover of peace, and not a man to make himself feared. He governed, says Millot, if not like a sublime genius who executes great things, at least like a prudent man, who accommodates his plans to circumstances, prefers essential to specious adVantages, and regards tranquillity and order as the foundation of public happiness. He had neither the pride of Richelieu, nor the avarice of Mazarin. No minister could be less costly to the state; his income did not amount tq five thousand pounds sterling a year, one half of which was employed in secret acts of benevolence. In the state of disorder to which the profusion of Louis XIV. had reduced the finances of France, it was happy for that country to have such a minister as Fleury, whose pacific turn counterbalanced the impetuosity of Villars, which would continually have plunged the country in new wars.

, a celebrated French ecclesiastical historian, was the son of an advocate, and born at Paris. Dec. 6, 1640. He discovered early a strong inclination, for letters, but applied himself particularly to the law, in. consequence of which he was made advocate for the parliament of Paris in 1658, and attended the bar nine years. He then took orders, for which he was more eagerly disposed, and more highly qualified by virtues as well as learning; and in 1672 was made preceptor to the princes of Conti. In 1680 he had the care of the education of the count de Vermandois, admiral of France. After the death of this prince, which happened in about four years, the king preferred him to the abbey of Loc-Dieu, belonging; to the Cistercians, and in the diocese of Rhodez. In 1689 the king made him sub-preceptor to the dukes of Burgundy, Anjou, and Berri, in which important employment he acted under the celebrated Fenelon. In 1696 he was admitted a member of the French academy. In 1706, when the education of the three princes was finished, the king gave him the rich priory of Argenteuil, belonging to the Benedictines, in the diocese of Paris, upon which promotion he resigned the abbey of Loc-Dieu. If he had possessed ambition to solicit the greatest situations, he would have obtained them, but his disinterestedness was equal to his other virtues. He was a hermit in the midst of the court. In 1716 he was chosen confessor to Louis XV. in which situation it was said of him that his only fault wati that of being seventy-five years old; and on July 14, 1725, he died, in his eighty-third year.

, or Frodoard, a French historian, was born in the year 894, at Epernai, and afterwards had preferment in the church of Rheims, where he wrote a chronicle, which extends from the year 919 to 966, and a history of the church of Rheims, regularly continued from its foundation to the year 949. The best edition is tij.it of 1617. Flodoard was also a poet. He composed in verse the history of the popes, as far as Leo VII. and the triumphs of Jesus Christ and the saints, in nineteen bonks. He was once near being promoted to be bishop of Noyon, but was disappointed. He died in the year 966, at the age of seventy-three.

, a Spanish Augustine, and one of the most learned Spaniards of the eighteenth century, who died at Madrid about 1772, was the author of a most elaborate collection of ecclesiastical history, in 34 vols. 4to, printed from 1747 to 1784, entitled “L'Espana sagrada, theatro geographico-historico de la Iglesia de Espana,” which, say the editors of the “Diet. Historique,” answers to the French collection entitled “Gallia Christiana.” About 1743 he also published a “Clave historial,” which answers to their “Art de verifier les dates;” and as the latter did not appear until 1750, they do not refuse Florez the merit of the original plan. Another very valuable publication by Florez affords the most complete knowledge we have of the ancient coins of Spain. It is entitled “Meclallas de las Colonias municipios, y pueblos antiguos de Espana,” Madrid, 1757 and 1758, 2 vols. 4to, to which the author added a third, which was published after his death. The merit of this work procured his being elected an associate correspondent of the French academy. He is said also to have been the editor of some Spanish authors; but their names, except that of Ambrosio Moralcz, are not given in our authority.

, a very popular French writer, was born in 1755, at the chateau de Flonan, in the province of Languedoc. His father, Charles Claris, was a gentleman of small fortune, who, being by no means of an enterprising disposition, died poor. His mother was Gillette de Sulgue, a Castilian Spaniard; and it may be presumed that in this circumstance originated that high esteem and peculiar affection which Florian has since expressed for that sensible, generous, and highspirited nation. This affectionate mother dying in childfred, the care of young Florian devolved wholly on his father, who obtained for him the best masters, and spared no expence nor trouble in the superintendance of his education, and the cultivation of his mind. In his earliest days young Florian displayed that love of his fellow-creatures’which ever after so strongly marked his character; and he evinced even in infancy that suavity of manners and benevolence of disposition which afterwards rendered him so universally esteemed. Even his childhood was marked by acts of benevolence, and many instances of his sensibility and benevolence have been mentioned by his biographers. His occupations and amusements too were always of a nature much superior to those of other children of the same age. He employed much of his time in the cultivation of flowers, and in learning the art of gardening; and agriculture also engaged his attention, and gave him a taste for rural pleasures, to which his countrymen owe Jiis pastorals.

It is mentioned by one of his biographers, as an instance of his weakness, that he had a great desire to obtain a seat in the French academy, and we are told that the force of this ambition imperceptibly undermined his constitution, and changed the natural suavity of his temper to a restless fretfulness. It was not a sufficient gratification of this passion, that he was already a member of the academies of Madrid, Lyons, and Florence; nothing short of a seat in the academy of Paris seemed to him capable of satisfying that ambition, which was gratified on the death of cardinal de Luines. He never was present at the admission of a new member into the academy, without experiencing a most singular agitation, and a violent oppression of the heart, which he was unable to conceal from observation. It is added, however, that notwithstanding the violence of this passion, Florian never so far yielded to its influence as to sacrifice to it those principles of honour and liberality which were the constant motives of his actions.

, the Resolute, as he used to style himself, was born in London in the reign of Henry VIII. and descended from the Florii of Sienna, in Tuscany. A little before that time his father and mother, who were Waldenses, had fled from the Valtoline into England, from the persecutions of popery; but when Edward the Sixth died, and the protestant religion became oppressed under Mary, they left England, and went to some other country, where John Florio received his juvenile literature. Upon the re-establishment of protestantism by Elizabeth, they returned; and Florio for a time lived in Oxford. About 1576, Barnes bishop of Durham, sending his son to Magdalencollege, Florio was appointed to attend him as preceptor in French, and Italian; at which time he was admitted a member of that college, and became a teacher of those languages in the university. After James came to the cvown, he was appointed tutor to prince Henry in those languages; and at length made one of the privychamber, and clerk of the closet to queen Anne, to whom he was also tutor. He was a very useful man in his profession, zealous for the protestant religion, and much devoted to the English nation. Retiring to Fulham in Middlesex, to avoid the plague which was then in London, he was seized and carried off by it in 1625, aged about eighty.

, an eminent French officer and author, famous for his skill and knowledge in the military art, was born at Avignon, in 1669, of a noble but not a rich family. He discovered early a happy turn for the sciences, and a strong passion for arms; which last was so inflamed by reading Cxsar’s Commentaries, that he actifally enlisted at sixteen years of age, and although his father obtained his discharge, and shut him up in a monastery, he made his escape in about two years after, and entered himself a second time in quality of cadet. His inclination for military affairs, and the great pains he took to accomplish himself in every branch of the art, recommended him to notice; and he was admitted into the friendship of the first-rate officers. M. de Vendome, who commanded in Italy in 1720, made him his aid-de-camp, having conceived the highest regard for him; and soon after sent him with part of his forces into Lombardy. He was entirely trusted by the commander of that army; and no measures were concerted, or steps taken, without consulting him. By pursuing his plans, many places were taken, and advantages gained; and his services were remunerated by a pension of four hundred livres, and the cross of St. Lewis. He distinguished himself greatly, Aug. 15, 1705, at the battle of Cassano; where he received such a wound upon his left hand, as entirely deprived him of the use of it. M. de Vendome, to make him some amends, tried to have him made a colonel, but did not succeed. It was at this battle, that Folard conceived the first idea of that system of columns, which he afterwards prefixed to his Commentaries upon Poly bins.

The duke of Orleai6 sending de Vendome again into Italy in 1706, Folard had orders to throw himself into Modena, to defend it against prince Eugene; where he acquitted himself with his usual skill, but was very near being assassinated. The description which he has given of the conduct and character of the governor of this town, may be found in his “Treatise of the Defence of Places,” and deserves to be read. He received a dangerous wound on the thigh at the battle of Blenheim, or Malplaquet, and was some time after made prisoner by prince Eugene. Being exchanged in 1711, he was made governor of Bourbourg. In 1714, he went to Malta, to assist in defending that island against the Turks. Upon his return to France, he embarked for Sweden, having a passionate desire to see Charles XII. He acquired the esteem and confidence of that celebrated monarch, who sent him to France to negociate the reestablishment of Jarnes II. upon the throne of England; but, that project being dropped, he returned to Sweden, followed Charles XII. in his expedition to Norway, and served under him at the siege of Frederickshall, where that prince was killed, Dec. 11, 1718. Folard then returned to France, and made his last campaign in 1719, under the duke of Berwick, in quality of colonel. From that time he applied himself intensely to the study of the art military, as far as it could be studied at home; and built his theories upon the foundation of his experience and observations. He contracted an intimacy with count Saxe, who, he then declared, would one day prove a very great general. He was chosen a fellow of the royal society at London, in 1749; and in 1751, made a journey to Avignon, where he died in 1752, aged eighty-three years. He was the author of several works, the principal of which are, 1. “Commentaries upon Polybius,” in 6 vols. 4to. 2. “A Book of new Discoveries in War.” 3. “A Treatise concerning the Defence of Places, &c.” in French. Those who would know more of this eminent soldier, may consult a French work entitled, “Memoires pour servir a THistoire de M. de Chevalier de Folard. Ratisbone, 1753,” 12mo. As a man of letters, he drew his knowledge from ancient authors, which as a military man he explains with great clearness. The form of his writings is not so pleasing as the matter. The abundance of his ideas led him into too great a profusion of words. His style is negligent, his reflections detached, and his digressions either useless, or too long; but he was undoubtedly a man of genius.

, a celebrated French poet, was born at Chatteau-Thierry, July 8, 1621, a year after the birth of Moltere. He was liberally educated, and at nineteen admitted among the fathers of the oratory, but left them in a little time. His father, who was supervisor of the water-courses and forests in this dutchy, put his sou into the place as soon as he appeared capable of managing it: but Fontaine had no taste for business, his talents being formed altogether for poetry. It is very remarkable, however, that he did not make this discovery in himself till he had commenced his 22d year; when, hearing accidentally the famous ode of Malherbe, on the assassination of Henry IV. he found himself affected with surprise and transport; and the poetic fire, which had lain concealed in him, was kindled into ablaze. He immediately applied to the study of this poet, and at length imitated him. The first froits of his pen he usually communicated to a near relation, who encouraged him, and frequently read with him the best Latin poets and critics, as Horace, Virgil, Terence, Quintilian, &c. He passed from thence to such French and Italian writers as excelled in the manner and style to which his genius led him particularly Rabelais, Marot, Ariosto, Boccace, &,c. Rabelais was uniformly his favourite and idol. He had recourse also to the Greek authors, and especially to Plato and Plutarch; from whom he drew those fine moral maxims with which he has enriched his fables.

The delights of Paris, and the conversation of thess friends, did not hinder him from paying a visit to his wife every September; but that these visits might be of some use, he never failed to sell a house, or piece of land, so that, with his wife’s expences and his own, a handsome family estate was nearly consumed. His Parisian friends urged him frequently to go and live with his wife, saying, that it was a shame to separate himself from a woman of her merit and accomplishments and, accordingly, he set out with a purpose of reconciling himself to her and, arriving at the town, inquired at his house for her. The servant, not knowing him, said, “She was gone to church;” upon which he immediately returned to Paris; and, when his friends inquired about his reconciliation, answered, that “he had been to see his wife, but was told she was at church.” Upon the death of madam de la Sabliere, he was invited to England by the dutchess of Mazarine, and the celebrated St. Evremond, who promised him all the comforts and sweets of life: but the difficulty of learning the English language, together with the liberality of some great persons at home, made him lay aside all thoughts of this journey. In 1692 he was seized with a dangerous illness: and when the priest came to talk to him about religion, concerning which he had lived in an extreme carelessness, though without being actually an infidel or a libertine, Fontaine told him that ' he had lately bestowed some hours in reading the New Testament, which he thought a very good book.“Being brought to a clearer knowledge of ivligions truths, the priest represented to him, that he lia.l intelligence of a certain dramatic piece of his, which was soon to be acted; but that Ik-could not be admitted to the sacraments of the church i.nless he suppressed it. This appeared too rigid, and Font.iinc appealed to the Soi bonne; who confirming what the priest had said, Fontaine threw the piece into the fire, without keeping even a copy. The priest then laid before him the evil tendency of his Tales, which are written in a loose and wanton manner; told him, that while the French language subsisted, they would be a most dangerous sedueement to vice; and further added, that he could not administer the sacraments tu him unless he would promise to make a public acknowledgment of his fault at the time of receiving, a public acknowledgment before the academy, of which he was a member, in case he recovered, and to suppress the book to the utmost of his power. Fontaine thought these terms very hard, but at length yielded to them all. On these accounts some have compared him to Peter Aretin, who, though the most libertine of all writers, became at last a very saint, and wrote nothing but books of piety. But it is certain that Fontaine did not resemble Aretin in writing pious books; and many, among whom is Baillet in particular, doubt the truth of those stories which are related concerning his repentance. He affected, indeed, some degree of repentance, and vowed to renounce his libertine manner in a dedication to his patroness, madam de la Sabliere but, notwithstanding this, he relapsed again, writing tales with his usual gaiety and the excuse he makes” for this inconstancy, when he calls himself “Tho Butterfly of Parn-.issus,” savours more of the poet than the Christian. He did not die till April 13, 1695; when, if we believe some, he was found with that implement of superstitious mortification, an hair-shirt on.

Beside “Tales,” he was the author of “Fables;” and in both he has merited the title of an original writer, who is, and probably will ever be, single in his kind. In his subjects indeed, he has made great use of the Greek, and Larin, and French, and Italian authors; but he is truly original in his manner, which is so easy, so natural, so simple, so delicate, that it does not seem possible to exceed it. His compositions have much nature, entirely devoid of affectation: his wit seems unstudied, and so much pleasantry is hardly to be met with. He never grows languid or heavy, but is always new and surprising*. His Tales are said to have been a great while the cause of his exclusion from the French academy; but at last, upon his writing a letter to a prelate of that society, wherein he declared his dissatisfaction for the liberties he had taken, and his resolution that his pen should never relapse, he was received into that body with marks of esteem. His first Fables are more valued than his last he seems to have thrown the best of his fire and force into them and both the one and the other have more sobriety and correctness than his Tales.

, a voluminous French writer, the son of a scrivener at Paris, was born in 1625, and received at the age of twenty into the: society of the celebrated solitaries of Port Royal, in a subordinate office, but in the course of time obtained the^ chief superintendance of the young men who were sent there for education; He employed his leisure hours in severe literary labours, such as transcribing the works of several of these solitaries. He followed Nicole and Arnauld, to whom he had been a kind of secretary, into their different places of retreat; in 1664 he was shut up in the Bastille with Sacy, and came out of it with him in 16f>8. After the death of Sacy, in 1684, he frequently changed his retreat, but established himself finally at Mel un, where he died in 1709, at the age of eighty-four. His works are principally, 1. “Lives of the Saints of the Old Testament,” 4 torn. 8vo. 2. “Lives of the Saints” in general, the same number of volumes, or 1 in folio. 3. “Les figures de Bible,” or a history of tha Bible, in short chapters, which has often been printed under the title of “Bible de Royaumont,” and there is an English edition in 4to, with above 300 prints. 4. “Memoirs of the Solitaries of Port Royal,” 2 vols. 12mo. 5. “Translation of St.' ChrysostonVs Homilies on St. Paul’s Epistles,” 7 vols. 8vo. His versions are written with fidelity, but not always with vigour. He was far inferior to Arnauld and Nicole, whom he admired; but his piety was worthy of Port Royal. He was distinguished for innocence of manners, laborious, edifying simplicity of life, sincere modesty, unparalleled disinterestedness, and a steadiness of faith superior to all trials. A man of so many virtues deserves to be recorded, though not among the first class of authors. It remains to be added that his translation of Chrysostom involved him in trouble. Father Daniel, a Jesuit, accused him of Nestorianism, and denounced, him in a letter to the Sorbonne. Fontaine made a very humble and respectful retraction, and substituted several new pages in those parts which had been found reprehensible; but, as this did not prevent M. de Harlai from condemning his translation, he undertook its defence in a work where he asserts, that he has faithfully translated St. Chrysostom, and not fallen into heresies.

, a French critic, was born of a good family at Rouen, in 1685. At fifteen, he entered into the society of the Jesuits; and, at thirty, quitted it for the sake of returning to the world. He was a pnest, and had a cure in Normandy; but left it, and resided for some time in the character of a man of wit and letters, with the cardinal d'Auvergne. Having obtained some reputation at Paris by certain critical productions, the abbe“Bignon, in 1724, committed to him the editorship of the” Journal des Scavans.“He acquitted himself well in this department, and was peaceably enjoying the applauses of the public, when in 1725 the enemies whom by critical strictures in his Journal he had created, formed an accusation against him of a most abominable crime, and procured him to be imprisoned. By the credit of powerful friends, he was set at liberty in fifteen days; the magistrate of the police took himself the trouble of justifying him in a letter to the abbe Bignon; and this letter having been read amidst his fellow-labourers in the Journal, he was unanimously re-established in his former credit. But with whatever reputation he might acquit himself in his Journal, his frequent quarrels interrupted his labours, which, however, he employed on some newperiodical works, from which he derived his greatest fame. In 1731, he began one under the title of” Nouveliiste du Parnasse, ou Reflexions sur les ouvrages nouveanx,“but proceeded only to two volumes; the work having been suppressed by authority, from the incessant complaints of authors who were there ridiculed. About three years after, in 1735, he obtained a new privilege for a periodical production, entitled” Observations sur les Ecrits Modernes;“whk:h, after being continued to thirty-three volumes, was suppressed also in 1743. Yet the year following, 1744, he published another weekly paper, called” Jugemens sur les ouvrages nouveaux,“and proceeded to eleven volumes; the two last being done by other hands. Fontaines could go no farther: for, in 1745, he was attacked with a disorder in the breast, which ended in a dropsy, and this in five weeks’ time carried him oHF.” He was,“says M. Freron,” born a sentimental person; a philosopher in conduct as well as in principle; exempt from ambitton and of a noble firm spirit, which would not submit to sue for preferments or titles. In common conversation he appeared only an ordinary man, but when subjects of literature or any thing out of the common way were agitated, he discovered great force of imagination and wit."

, a French Jesuit, was born at Paris in 1683, and entered on his noviciate in the order whcn he was fifteen years of age. Having completed his initiatory studies, he was employed some time to furnish extracts and remarks on books relating to religion and ecclesiastical history in the “Journal de Trevoux.” He was engaged for some years in collecting materials for writing a history of the popes, in which, however, he made but small progress; and what he left was too imperfect for publication. Having a turn for polite literature, he published various small poems in the collections of the day. His talents and learning pointed him out as a fit person for rector of the Jesuits’ college at Orleans, win-re he continued till 1735, when he was recalled to Paris, and appointed to continue Longueval’s “History of the Gallican church,” of which he wrote the 9th, 10th, and part of the 11th volumes. He was then interrupted by a paralytic stroke, and died at the college La Fleche, in 1742, in the fifty-sixth year of his age.

This great author died in January 1757, without ever having had any violent disorder, or felt any of the maladies of age till he was turned of ninety, after which he was a little deaf, and his eyes in some degree failed. The tranquil ease Of his temper is thought to have contributed to extend his life to this unusual period. A fuller account of hi* works will doubtless be required, which we shall give in chronological order. I. Letters of “the Chav. d'Horny”[??] 1685; a work of wit and fancy. 2. “Discourses on the Plurality of Worlds,” 1686; the character of this performance has been already sketched, as well as that of his, 3. “History of Oracles,” 1687. 4. “Pastoral Poems, with a Discourse on the Eclogue, and a digression on the ancients and moderns,” 1688. It seems to he agreed, that if these are not good eclogues, they are at least elegant poems. It was in the dissertation annexed to these that he made his first attempt to depreciate the ancients, whose merit compared with that of the moderns, was then the subject of a well-known controversy. Among his papers after his death, was found a discourse on the Greek tragedians, which was given to Diderot for insertion in the Encyclopedic, but he said he could not possibly insert in that work, a treatise tending to prove that Æschylus was a madman. 5, Several volumes of “Memoirs of the Academy of Sciences,” to which society he was secretary fortytwo years, from 1699. The general preface to this work is highly excellent; it contains also his “Eloges,” or Eulogies on the academicians, which have been published separately. 6. “History of the French Theatre, to Corneille,” with the life of that great Dramatist. 7. “Reflections on theatrical poetry, particularly Tragedy:” this is reckoned one of the most profound and judicious works of Fontenelle. 8. “Elements of the Geometry of Infinites,” 1727; not much esteemed by mathematicians. 9. “A Tragedy,” in prose, and “Six Comedies,” none of them calculated for theatrical effect. Warburton, it appears by his letters to bishop Hurd, entertained a high opinion of these comedies, and of Fontenelle’s preface to them. 10. “Theory of the Cartesian Vortices.” He remained unfortunately attached to the system of Descartes to the end of his life, having imbibed it very early. 11.“Endymion,” and some other pastoral lyric dramas. 12. “Moral Discourses,” and fugitive pieces. All these, except those on geometry and natural history, were collected in 11 vols, 12mo, under the title “Œuvres Diverses.” Other editions have since been published in folio and quarto. The style of this author is in general elegant and clear, but not altogether free from defects. It is often too negligent and familiar. He betrays at some times an affectation of giving great matters in a small compass; at others he der scends to puerile details unworthy of a philosopher. Ke displays occasionally too much refinement in his ideas; and, at times, is too elaborate in his ornaments. These defects are less offensive in the writings of Fontenelle, than they would be in any others; not only because they are overpowered by many striking beauties of various kinds, but because it is easy to perceive that they are truly natural to the author.

, a very eminent Scottish lawyer, was born at Culloden, in the county of Inverness, in 1685, and educated in the university of Edinburgh, whence he removed to Utrecht, and afterwards to Paris, where he studied the civil law. He returned, in 1710, to Scotland, and was called to the bar in the court of session. His abilities as an advocate were soon noticed, and he obtained great practice. In 1717, he was appointed solicitor-general of Scotland. In 1722, he was returned member for the county of Inverness; and in 1725, was promoted to the dignity of lord-advocate. He was further advanced in 1742, to be lord-president of the court of session, in which high station he acted with such integrity, that he was esteemed and honoured by his country. During the rebellion in 1745 and 6, he used the utmost of his power to oppose the pretender, and mortgaged his estate to support the government. With great reason he applied to the ministry for a repayment of those expences which he had incurred by his loyalty, and their refusal, undoubtedly a stain on the history of the times, is said to have operated so strongly upon his mind, as to produce a fever, of which he died in 1747, at the age of 62. His writings were chiefly on theological subjects, without any reference to his profession; they are, 1. “Thoughts on Religion.” 2. “A Letter to a Bishop.” 3. “Reflections on Incredulity,” 1750, in 2 vols. 12mo. Father Houbigant translated the two former of these works into French, but they were not greatly admired in that country; the solidity of the Scottish lawyer could not be expected to suit with the vivacity of French reasoners. Duncan Forbes of Culloden, says a recent biographer, was in all respects one of the most eminent men of his time. His learning was extensive and profound, reaching even to the oriental languages; and he had that acuteness and subtlety of parts, which is peculiarly fitted for the nice discriminations of the law; but which was always regulated in him by the prevailing principles of his nature, probity, candour, and a strong sense of the beauty of virtue and moral excellence. In the eloquence of the bar, he outshone all his contemporaries; for he united to great knowledge of jurisprudence, a quickness of comprehension that discovered to him at once the strong ground of argument which he was to press, or the weakness of the doctrine he wished to assail. When raised to the presidency of the court, the vigour of his intellect, his patience in the hearing of causes, his promptitude in the dispatch of business, the dignity, of his deportment, and above all, the known probity and integrity of his mind, gave the highest weight to the decisions of that tribunal over which he presided.

, a French naval officer of great repute, was born in 1656, and bred to the sea-service under a: relation, who was a sea-captain, named Korbin-Gardane. In 1636, he was left by his commander the chevalier de Chaumont, in the service of the king of Siam, to whom he was some time chief admiral. He afterwards distinguished himself on the coast of Spain, where, in 1703, he displayed his generosity no less than he had before proved his valour, by giving up to the owner a French prize, which the governor of Barcelona had ceded to him. In 1708 he was intrusted with conveying the pretender to Scotland, but was so closely watched by admiral Byng, that he was happy in returning his charge to Dunkirk. Louis XIV. admired and esteemed his greatness of soul, and frequently discoursed with him on the subject of his engagements, the recital of which he heard with great satisfaction. Once, when the king had given him some recompence for his services, at the time of going to court to return thanks, his zeal for a brother seaman of great merit, named John Bart, whom he considered as neglected, burst forth in remonstrances for him. The king was pleased with this generous disinterestedness, and remarked to his minister Louvois, that he saw few such examples at his court. But though Forbin was favoured by the king, he was not equally in the good graces of the ministers; and, after he had distinguished himself highly in many engagements against various enemies, his infirmities and his discontent caused him to retire from the service in 1710. He died in 17:53, at the age of 77.

, an eminent political and financial writer of France, was born at Mans, Oct. 2, 1722. His father, Francis, Louis Veron Duverger, was a merchant of that city. Having finished his education at the college of Beauvais, i,Ek Paris, he left it in the sixteenth year of his age, to followthe tarn my trade, which had long been carried on by his family; his great grandfather having established at Mans a, manufactory of tammies, which, from that circumstance, in Spain were called Verones. In 1741 he was sent by his father to Spain and Italy, whence he returned to Mans in 1743. His grandfather by the mother’s side, having soon after retired from business, he was thereby enabled to trade on his own account; but declining, from motives of delicacy, to carry on at Mans the same trade as his father, he Avent to Nantes, where his uncle was established as a shipowner, to obtain a knowledge of the mercantile concerns and transactions of that city. Having spent several years at Nantes, and collected much valuable information on maritime and colonial trade, he entered in 1752 upon a speculation, which induced him to go to Paris. Confined to a small circle of friends and acquaintance, he lived there in great privacy, yet presented to government several memoirs, which experiencing a very cool reception, he resolved to write in future, not for administration, but the public. He published accordingly in 1753, his “ThtJorie et pratique du Commerce et de la Marine,” a free translation from the Spanish of Dr. Geron. de Votariz, which was soon followed by the “Considerations sur les Finances d'Espagne relativement a eel les de France,” a work in which he displayed such intimate acquaintance with the Spanish system of finance, that the Spanish ambassador at the court of Versailles proposed him to marshal cle Noailles, as consul-general of Spain; but the former being soon after recalled by his court, the appointment did not take place. About the same time he published, in 1754, his “Essai sur la partie politique du commerce de terre et de mer, de Pagriculture et des finances,” which within three weeks passed through two editions; the third edition was published in 1766, and the fourth in 1796, considerably improved and enlarged. From his profound knowledge in matters relative to money and coinage, he was appointed in 1755, to examine into the enormous abuses which had crept into the administration <yf the French mint. He immediately proposed a new coinage, but his plan was not carried into execution until 1771; he was, however, in the meanwhile, appointed inspectorgeneral of the mint, a new office expressly established for him. Having obtained free admittance to the library of the family of Noailles, rich in manuscripts relative to the administration of the finances of France, he conceived the idea of composing his “Recherches et considerations sur les finances de France depuis 1595 jusqu'a 1721,” printed at Basle, 1758, in 2 vols. 4to, and reprinted the same, year at Liege, in 6 vols. 8vo. This valuable work expeperienced the most distinguished reception both in France and other countries, and supplied Thomas with matter for his observations on the true principles of financial administration in his eulogy of Suny. The duke de Choiseuil being appointed prime minister, he endeavoured to place Forbonnois in the department for foreign affairs; but the latter declining the appointment, Choiseuil requested he would apply himself to lay down a general system of trade, and to comment on all commercial treaties concluded by France, in order that certain and uniform principles might be introduced into that important department of political economy. While he was making the necessary preparations for executing that commission, the abandoned state of the French finances in 1759, occasioned the appointment of the noted Sithonette to the office of comptroller-general or minister of finances. Without being in the least connected with that minister, Forbonnois received an offer of the place of principal clerk of the department of finance, which being declined, the minister requested he would at least privately lend him his assistance in projecting the first financial operations necessary for opening the war both by sea and land, at a time when 1,500,000 livres only were left in the treasury. Eight days after, Forbonnois brought him all the plans and draughts of edicts for the first operations. They were approved by the minister, and laid before Louis XV. who in consequence thereof appointed Forbonnois inspector of the depot of the general financial comptrol, a title which he himself suggested, in order to avoid the eclat of a more brilliant appointment. However, Forbonnois’ acknowledged superiority as a financier, which proved exceedingly offensive to the minister’s lady, soon brought on a coolness between her husband and him, which induced Forbonnois to retire into the country until Sithonette’s disgrace and dismission. He might have succeeded him as comptroller-general, had he been willing to consent to sacrifices which he could not reconcile with his honesty and candour. While he held the place of inspector of the depot of the general financial comptrol, he published his “Lettre d'un Banquier a son correspondent cle province;” chiefly intended to give a favourable account of the minister’s operation. In 1760 he pointed out to the Duke de Choiseuil the perilous situation of France, and suggested the plan of a treaty of peace, calculated to tempt the ambition of Great Britain, and at the same time to save resources for France. This plan met with so much applause, that Don de Fuentes, at that lime Spanish ambassador at Paris, who was admitted to the conferences, offered an armed neutrality on the part of his court to tacilitate its execution. Forbonnois was charged to draw up the necessary acts and plans, and to elucidate a great variety of points respecting the fisheries, the means of enlarging them, the sacrifices to be made to England, &c. nay, he was offered the appointment of plenipotentiary to conclude the treaty; but having executed his charge, and demanded a conference, he received no answer. Being entrusted with the secrets of the state, he began to entertain strong apprehensions for his personal safety, and took refuge in a glass-manufactory in the mountains of Burgundy, in which he was concerned. He returned, however, afterwards to Paris, and in order to render both the minister and the financiers perfectly easy on his account, he purchased the place of a counsellor or member of the parliament of Metz.

, a Prussian writer of various talents, originally of a French refugee family, was born at Berlin in 17 1L He was educated at the royal French college for the church, and being ordained in his twentieth year, he was chosen one of the officiating ministers of the French congregation in Berlin. In 1737 he was appointed professor of eloquence in the French college, and in 1739 succeeded to the philosophical chair of the same college. On the restoration of the royal academy of sciences and belles lettres at Berlin in 1744, M. Formey was made secretary to the philosophical class, and four years afterwards sole and perpetual secretary of -the academy. His talents and fame procured him admission into many foreign learned bodies, as those of London, Petersburg, Haarlem, Mantua, Bologna, and many others in Germany, and he was personally acquainted with several of the most eminent and illustrious characters throughout Europe. Besides his academical employments, he rttas agent or secretary to the dowager princess of Wirtemberg: he filled several offices in the French colony at Berlin, and at length became a privy counsellor in its superior directory. He was twice married, and by his second wife had many children, seven of whom survived him. He died in the month of March 1797, at the great age of eighty-five years and eight months. In Thiebault’s “Anecdotes of Frederic II.” there are some of Formey, by which it would appear that he was apt to be very unguarded, and almost licentious in conversation, but often procured his pardon by the ingenuity of his excuses. His publications were extremely numerous, but we have nowhere seen a complete list. The following, however, probably includes the principal: 1. “Articles des Pacte Conventa, dresses et conclus entre les etats de Pologne et le roi Frederic-Auguste,” 1733, 4to, translated from the Latin. About this time he was concerned in the publication of several political pieces on the affairs of Poland. 2. “Le fidele fortifie par la grace,” a sermon, Berlin, 1736. 3. “Ducatianaj ou remarques de feu M. leDuchat, &c.” Amst. 2 vols. 8vo. 4. “Bibliotheque Germanique;” in this journal he wrote from vol. XXVII. The lives of Duchat, Beausobre, Baratier, &c. are from his pen. 5. “Mercure et Minerve% ou choix de nouvelles, &c.” another periodical work, begun in Dec. 1737, and concluded in March 1738. C. “Amusemens litteraires, moraux, et politiques,” a continuation of the preceding, as far as July of the last mentioned year. 7. “Correspondence entre deux amis sur la succession de Juliers et de Bergues,” Hague, 1738. 8. “Sermons sur le mystere de la naissance de Jesus Christ,” from the German of lleinbeck, Berlin, 1738. 9. “Sermons sur divers textes de Tecriture sainte,” ibid. 1739, 8vo. 10. “Remarques historiques sur les medaille* et monnoies,” ibid. 1740, 4to, from the German of Koehler. II.“Journal de Berlin,” 1740, of which he edited the last six months of that year. 12. “La Belle Wolfienne,” 1741, 8vo. Formey had adopted the philosophy of Leibnitz, as explained by Wolf, and in this publication endeavoured, but without success, to render their principles familiar to the ladies. 13. “Memoires pour servir a Tbistoire de Pologae,” Hague, 1741, 8vo, from the Latin of Lengnich. 14. “La yie de Jean-Philippe Baratier,” Berlin, ifo. 15. ‘ Le iriomphe de i’evidence, ou refnta.­tion du Pyrrhonisme ancien et moderne,“2 vols. 8vo, an abridgment from Crousaz. 16.” Traite sur la reformation de la justice en Rrusse,“to which is added a treatise on dreams. 17.” Eloges des academicians de Berlin et de divers autres savans,“Berlin, 1757, 2 vols. 12mo. 18.” Principes du droit naturel et des gens,“Amst. 3 vols. 12mo, from Wolff’s Latin work. 19.” Conseils pour former une bibliotheque,“Francfort, 1746, of which the sixth edition appeared in 1775, 8vo. 20.” Le systeme du vrai bonheur,“1761. 21.” Melanges philosophiques,“Leyden, 1754, 2 vols. 12mo, translated afterwards into English. 22.” La comtesse Suedoise,“Berlin, 1754, 8vo, from the German of Gellert. 23.” Examen philosophique de la liaison reelle entre les sciences et les mceurs,“1755, 8vo. 24.” L'Abeille du Parnasse,“1750 1754, 10 vois. 8vo. 25.” Le Philosophe Paien, ou pensees de Pline, avec un commentaire literal et moral,“Leyden, 3 vols. 12mo. 26.” Principes elementaires des Belles Lettres,“Berlin, 1759. 27.” Diversite’s historiques,“1764, 8vo f from ^lian, with notes. 28.” Abrege de toutes les sciences a Tusage des adolescens,“Berlin, 1764—1778, 8 vols. 12mo. 9-9.” Introduction generate aux sciences, avec des conseils pour former un bibliotheque choisie,“Amst. 1764. 30.” Discours de Gellert sur la morale,“Berlin, 1766. 31.” Traduction Franchise de l'Histoire des Protestans,“by Hansen, Halle, 1767. Some of these have been published in English, particularly his small work on the belles lettres, and another not noticed above,” Histoire abrege*e de la Philosophic," which we can remember a very popular book in this country. Formey, indeed, if not one of the most profound, was one of the most pleasing of writers, and all his works were calculated by clearness and precision of style for popular reading. He deserves credit also as one of the defenders of revelation against Diderot and Rousseau; and for this reason Voltaire endeavoured to prejudice the king of Prussia against him. Besides the extensive labours we have enumerated, and the list is by no means complete, Formey wrote many articles in the French Encyclopaedia, and in that of Yverdun. His correspondence with literary men was most extensive, and almost all the booksellers on the continent occasionally engaged his services as an editor.

, an eminent naturalist, was the son of a burgomaster at Dirschaw, in Polish Prussia, where he was born Oct. 22, 1729. We learn nothing of his education until his fifteenth year, when he was admitted into the gymnasium of Joachimsthal at Berlin, where his application to the study of ancient and modern languages was incessant and successful. From 1748, when he went to the university of Halle, he studied theology, and continued his application to the learned languages, among which he comprehended the Oriental, and after three years he removed to Dantzic, and distinguished himself as a preacher, imitating the French rather than the Dutch manner; and in 1753 he obtained a settlement at Nassenhuben. In the following year he married his cousin, Elizabeth Nikolai. During his residence in this place he employed his leisure hours in the study of philosophy, geography, and the mathematics, still improving his acquaintance with the ancient and modern languages. With a small income, and increasing family, the difficulties he experienced induced him to accept the proposal of removing to Russia, in order to superintend the new colonies at Saratow, but not succeeding in this or any other scheme of a settlement in that country, he removed to London in 1766, with strong recommendations, but with very little money. After his arrival, he received from the government of Russia a present of 100 guineas; and he also made an addition to his stock by the translation of Kalm’s Travels and Osbeck’s Voyage. At this time lord Baltimore proposed to him a settlement in America, as superintendant of his extensive property in that country; but he preferred the place of teacher of the French, German, and natural history in the dissenting academy at Warrington. For the first department he was by no means well qualified, his extraordinary knowledge of languages being unaccompanied by a particle of taste, and his use of them being barbarous, though fluent; and his knowledge of natural history was of little value in his academical department. This situation, however, for these or other reasons which we never heard assigned, he soon abandoned; and returning to London, he was engaged, in 1772, to accompany captain Cook, as a naturalist, in his second voyage round the world. At this time he was forty-three years of age, and his son George, who went with him, was seventeen. Upon his return to England in 1775, the university of Oxford conferred upon him the degree of LL. D. At this time he was projecting, with the assistance of his son, a botanical work in Latin, containing the characters of many new genera of plants, which they had discovered in the course of their voyage. An account of the voyage having been published by his son in English and German, the father was supposed to have had a considerable share in it; and as he had entered into an engagement not to publish any thing separately from the authorized narrative, he thus incurred the displeasure of government, and gave offence to his friends. Independently of the violation of his engagement, he was also chargeable with having introduced into his work several reflections on the government which appointed, and some falsehoods respecting the navigators who conducted the expedition. The father and son, finding that, in consequence of these circumstances, their situation in London was become unpleasant, determined to quit EnglaiYd. Before the execution of their purpose, their condition became embarrassed and distressing; but Mr. Forster was invited, in 1780, to be professor of natural history at Halle, and inspector of the botanical garden and in the following year he obtained the degree of M. D. His health, however, began to decline and the death of his son George so deeply impressed his mind as to aggravate his other complaints. Towards the commencement of 1798, his case became desperate; and before the close of this year, viz. on the 9th of December, he died. Mr. Forster’s disposition was most unamiable, and extremely irritable and litigious; and his want of prudence involved him in perpetual difficulties. Yet these seem to have all been virtues in the eyes of the celebrated Kurt Sprengel of Halle, who thus embellishes his character, which we should not copy if it did not mention some particulars of his studies and works: “To a knowledge of books in all branches of science, seldom to be met with, he joined an uncommon fund of practical observations, of which he well knew how to avail himself. In natural history, in geography, both physical and moral, and in universal history, he was acquainted with a vast number of facts, of which he who draws his information from works only has not even a distant idea. This assertion is proved in the most striking manner by his ‘ Observations made in a Voyage round the World.’ Of this book it may be said, that no traveller ever gathered so rich a treasure on his tour. What person of any education can read and study this work, which is unparalleled in its kind, without discovering in it that species of instructive and pleasing information which most interests man, as such The uncommon pains which Forster took in his literary compositions, and his conscientious accuracy in historical disquisitions, are best evinced by his * History of Voyages and Discoveries in the North, 7 and likewise by his excellent archaeological dissertation ‘ On the Byssus of the Ancients.’ Researches such as these were his favourite employment, in which he was greatly assisted by his intimate acquaintance with the classics. Forster had a predilection for the sublime in natural history, and aimed at general views ratUer than detail. His favourite author, therefore, was Buffon, whom he used to recommend as a pattern of style, especially in his ‘ Epoques de la Nature,’ his description of the horse, camel, &c. He had enjoyed the friendship of that distinguished naturalist; and he likewise kept up an uninterrupted epistolary intercourse with Linna3us, till the death of the latter. Without being a stickler for the forms and ceremonies of any particular persuasion, he adored the eternal Author of all which exists in the great temple of nature, and venerated his wisdom and goodness with an ardour and a heart-felt conviction, that, in my opinion, alone constitute the criterion of true religion. He held in utter contempt aM those who, to gratify their passions, or imitate the prevailing fashion, made a jest of the most sacred and respectable feelings of mankind. His moral feelings were equally animated: he was attracted with irresistible force by whatever was true, good, or excellent. Great characters inspired him with an esteem which he sometimes expressed with incredible ardour.”

, son of the preceding, was born at Dantzic in 1754, and accompanied his father to England when he was about twelve years of age. At Warrington, where he studied for some time, he acquired a perfect use of the English tongue; and possessing a retentive memory and fertile imagination, he distinguished himself by his various literary and scientific attainments. We have already mentioned that he accompanied his father in the circumnavigation of the globe; and on leaving England, after their return, he wished to settle at Paris. After a temporary residence in that city, he removed, in 1779, to Cassel, and undertook the office of professor of natural history in the university of that place. But soon after, the senate of Poland having offered him a chair in the university of Wilna, Forster accepted of the invitation. But, although this office was very lucrative, he accepted of the propositions of Catherine II. empress of Russia, who, jealous of every species of glory, wished to signalize her reign, by procuring to the Russian nation the honour of undertaking, after the example of England and France, a new voyage of discovery round the world. Unfortunately for the progress of knowledge, the war with the Ottoman Porte occasioned the miscarriage of this useful project, but Forster could not long remain in obscurity. The different publications, with which he occasionally enriched natural history and literature, increased his reputation. The elector of Mentz accordingly appointed him president of the university of the same name; and he was discharging the functions of his new office when the French troops took possession of the capital. This philosophical traveller, who had studied society under all the various aspects arising from different degrees of civilization who had viewed man simple and happy at Otaheite an eater of human flesh in New Zealand corrupted by commerce in England; depraved in France by luxury and atheism; in Brabant by superstition, and in Poland by anarchy: beheld with wild enthusiasm the dawnings of the French revolution, and was the first to promulgate republicanism in Germany.

The Mayencois, who had formed themselves into a national convention, sent him to Paris, in order to solicit their re-union with the French republic. But, in the course of his mission, the city of Mentz was besieged and retaken by the Prussian troops. This event occasioned the loss of all his property; and what was still more disastrous, that of his numerous manuscripts, which fell into the hands of the prince of Prussia. One Charles Pougens, who has written his life, after conducting our hero through these scenes of public life, proceeds to give us a view of his domestic habits and private principles. He tells us, that he formed a connexion (whether a njarriage or not, the studied ambiguity of his language leaves rather uncertain) with a young woman named Theresa Hayne, who, by, the illumination of French philosophy, had divested herself of all the prejudices which, we trust, the ladies of this country still consider as their honour, as they are certainly the guardians of domestic peace. Miss Hayne was indignant at the very name of duty. With Eloisa, she had taken it into her head, that

, a learned Italian prelate and poet, was born in 1674, obtained the highest rank of episcopacy under pope Clement XI, and flattered himself that Clement XII. a friend of poetry and poets, would advance him to the dignity of cardinal. This pope continally giving him reason to hope, as constantly found excuses for disappointing him; at length one instance more of this duplicity, added to so many that had passed, completely extinguished the expectations of Fortiguerra, and this mortification so deeply affected him, that it proved fatal. When he was on his death-bed, Clement sent to him, endeavouring to comfort him once more, and revive his hopes, but the sick man turning himself about, and raising the clothes, only uttered such an explosion, as once surprised and entertained the British house of commons, and said, “that is my answer; a good journey to us both” <c Eccovi la riposta bon viaggio e per lei, e per me.“He died soon after this, which happened in 1735, being then sixty-one. His house was the general resort of wit and literature in Rome, and he wrote his ”Ricciardetto,“a burlesque poem in thirty cantos, in a very short time, to prove to a party of this kind, how easy it is for a man of imagination to write in the style of Ariosto, whom some of them had preferred to Tasso. In this poem he gave abundant liberty to his imagination, and its extravagance would be fatiguing beyond measure, were it not supported by the utmost ease of versification, and perpetual sallies of pleasantry and genius. It has been ably translated into French by a M. du Mourner, chev. of St. Louis, who died in 1768. There is also a translation of” Terence" by Fortiguerra, with the Latin text, printed at Urbino in 1736, and adorned with cuts, a very splendid book.

, a French painter, the pupil of Le Brun, who suffered him to paint for him occasionally in some of his most capital works, was the son of a goldsmith, and born at Paris in 1640. He perfected his talents in Italy, and on his return was employed to paint the dome of the hotel of invalids. Louis XIV. settled upon him a pension of 1000 crowns, and he was received into the academy of painting, where he became rector and professor. His fame extended even to England, whither he was invited by the earl of Montagu, and employed by liini in decorating his magnificent house, now the British Museum, where his paintings at that time attracted universal admiration. William III. on seeing them, offered him a handsome establishment in this country; but, at the same time, the celebrated architect Mansard, wrote to him from France, that he was wanted there to co-operate with him in finishing some public buildings, and he returned to his native country, where he died in 1716. He was reckoned inimitable in his time as a colourist, and excellent both in landscape and historical painting.

, nephew of the former, and also the son of a goldsmith, was born at Paris in 1658. He became lord of Aubigny by purchasing the lands to which that title was attached. He was successively secretary to the marquis de Crequi, and the duke d'Aumont. When the former of these noblemen was slain at the battle of Luzara, La Fosse was employed to carry his heart to Paris, and celebrated the death of the young hero in verses which are still extant. He was so much a master of Italian as to write skilfully in that language both in prose and verse, but his chief fame as a poet was atchieved in his own language, in which he wrote several tragedies, and many other poems. His ft Polixene, Manlius, and Theseus,“published in his” Theatre,“2 vols. 12mo, maintained their station in the French theatre till the revolution; and all his dramas are said to abound with passages which would not disgrace the finest tragic writers of France. His versification was highly finished, and he said that the expression cost him more than the thoughts. His” Manlius," the best of his pieces, has been pronounced in many respects worthy of Corneille; yet even in France, we are told, he is less known than he deserves. He was intimate with the poet J. Baptiste Rousseau, and lived the life of a philosopher, preferring letters to fortune, and friendship to every thing. He died Nov. 2, 1708, at the age of fifty. His modesty was equal to his genius; and when any of his pieces were less successful than others, he professed constantly that he never appealed from the judgment of the public.

, an eminent French chemist, was born at Paris June 15, 1755, where his father was an apothecary, of the same family with the subject of the succeeding article. In his ninth year he was sent to the college of Harcourt, and at fourteen he completed the studies which were at that time thought necessary. Having an early attachment to music and lively poetry, he attempted to write for the theatre, and had no higher ambition than to become a player, but the bad success of one of his friends who had encouraged this taste, cured him of it, and for two years he directed his attention to commerce. At the end of this time an intimate friend of his father persuaded him to study medicine, and accordingly he devoted his talents to anatomy, botany, chemistry, and natural history. About two years after, in. 1776, he published a translation of Ramazzini, “on the diseases of artisans,” which he enriched with notes and illustrations derived from chemical theories which were then quite new. In 1780, he received the degree of M. D. and regent of that faculty, in spite of a very considerable opposition from his brethren, and from this time his chemical opinions and discoveries rendered him universally known and respected. The fertility of his imagination, joined to a style equally easy and elegant, with great precision, attracted the attention of a numerous school. In 1784, on the death of Macquer, he obtained the professorship of chemistry in the Royal Gardens, and the year following he was admitted into the academy of sciences, of the section of anatomy, but was afterwards admitted to that of chemistry, for which he was more eminently qualified. In 1787, he in conjunction with his countrymen De Morveau, Lavoisier, and Berthollet, proposed the new chemical nomenclature, which after some opposition, effected a revolution in chemical studies. (See Lavoisier.) Although constantly occupied in scientific experiments, and in publishing various works on subjects of medicine, chemistry, and natural history, he fell into the popular delusion about the time of the revolution, and in 1792 was appointed elector of the city of Paris, and afterwards provisional deputy to the national convention, which, however, he did not enter until after the death of the king.

Fourcroy’s works rank among the most considerable which France has produced in chemistry, and must be allowed in a great measure to confirm the high encomiums which his countrymen have bestowed on him, not only as a profound, but a pleasing and elegant writer. He published, 1. “The translation of Ramazzini,” before-mentioned. 2. “Lemons elementaires d'histoire naturelle et de chimie,” 1782, 2 vols. 8vo, of which there have been many editions, the last in 1794, 5 vols. 8vo. 3. “Memoires et observations pour servir de suite aux elemens de chimie,” 1784, 8vo. 4. “Principes de chimie a l‘usage de l’ecole veterinaire,” 2 vols. 12mo. 5. “L‘art de connoitre et d’employer les medicamens dans les maladies qui attaquent le corps humain,” 1785, 2 vols. 8vo. 6. “Entomologia Parisiensis” by Geoffrey, an improved edition, 1785, 2 vols. 12mo. 7. “Methode de nomenclature chimique proposer par Morveau, &c.” with a new system of chemical characters, 1787, 8vo. 8. “Essai sur le phlogistique, et sur la constitution des acides,” from the English of Kirwan, with notes by Morveau, Lavoisier, Bertholet, and Fourcroy, 1788, 8vo. 9. “Analyse chimique de l‘eau sulphureuse d’Enghein, pour servir a l'histoire des eaux sulphureuse en general,” by Fourcroy & La Porte, 1788, 8vo. 10. “Annales de Chimie,” by Fourcroy and all the French chemists, published periodically from 1789 to 1794, 18 vols. 8vo. 11. “La eclairée par les sciences physiques,” 1791, 1792, 12 vols. 12. “Philosophic chimique,” 1792. Fourcroy wrote also in the “Magasin encyclopeclique,” and the “Journal de l'ecole polytechnique,” and drew up several reports for the national convention, which were published in the Moniteur, &c. His last publications were, 13.“Tableaux pour servir de resume aux Ie9ons de chimie faites a l'ecole de medicine de Paris pendant 1799 et 1800. 14.” Systeme des connoissances chimiques, et de leurs applications aux phenomenes de la nature et de Part," 1800, 10 vols. 8vo, and 5 vols. 4to. To these extensive labours may be added the chemical articles in the Encyclopaedia. Fourcroy left a very valuable library, which was sold by auction at Paris, in 1810, and of which Messrs. Tilliard, the booksellers, published a well-arranged catalogue. Several of his works have been translated into English.

He afterwards was employed in reading lectures: he explained the Greek fathers to some, and the Hebrew and Syriac languages to others. After. that, he undertook the education of the sons of the duke d'Antin, who were committed to his care, and studied in the college of Harcourt. He was at the same time received an advocate; but the law not being suited to his taste, he returned to his former studies. He then contracted an acquaintance with the abbé Bignon, at whose instigation he applied himself to the Chinese tongue, and succeeded beyond his expectations, for he had a prodigious memory, and a particular turn for languages. He now became very famous. He held conferences at his own house, once or twice a week, upon subjects of literature; at which foreigners, as well as French, were admitted and assisted. Hence he became known to the count de Toledo, who was infinitely pleased with his conversation, and made him great offers, if he would go into Spain; but Fourmont refused. In 1715 he succeeded M. Galland to the Arabic chair in the royal college. The same year he was admitted a member of the academy of inscriptions; of the royal society at London in 1738; and of that of Berlin in 1741. He was often consulted by the duke of Orleans, who had a particular esteem for him, and made him one of his secretaries. He died at Paris in 1743.

, a French engraver and letter-founder, was born at Paris in 1712, and excelled in his profession. His letters not only embellished the typographical art, but his genins illustrated and enlarged it He published in 1737 a table of proportions to be observed between letters, in order to determine their height and relations to each other. This ingenious artist ascended to the very origin of printing, for the sake of knowing it thoroughly. He produced at different times several historical and critical dissertations upon the rise and progress of the typographical art, which have since been collected and published in 1 vol. 8vo, divided into three parts; the last including a curious history of the engravers in wood. But the most important work of Fournier, is his “Manuel Typographique, utile aux gens de Lettres, et a ceux qui exercent les differents parties de PArt de Plmprimerie,” in 2 vols. 8vo. The author meant to have added two more, but was prevented by his death, which happened in 1768. In this “Manuel” are specimens of all the different characters he invented. He was of the most pleasing manners, and a man of virtue and piety.

The present lord Holland has said, in the preface to Mr. Fox’s historical work, that although “those who admired Mr. Fox in public, and those who loved him in private, must naturally feel desirous that some memorial should be preserved of the great and good qualities of his head and heart;” yet, “the objections to such an undertaking ai present are obvious, and after much reflection, they have appeared to those connected with him insuperable.” Such a declaration, it is hoped, may apologize for what we have admitted, and for what we have rejected, in this sketch of Mr. Fox’s life. We have touched only on a few memorable periods, convinced that the present temper of the times is unfavourable to a more minute discussion of the merits of his long parliamentary life. Yet this consideration has not had much weight with those who profess to be his admirers, and soon after his death a number of “Characters” of him appeared sufficient to fill two volumes 8vo, edited by Dr. Parr. Of one circumstance there can be no dispute. Friends and foes are equally agreed in the amiable, even, and benign features of his private character. “He was a man,” said Burke, “made to bo loved,” aud he was loved by all who knew him. Mr. Fox must now be considered as an author. While at Eton, his compositions were highly distinguished, some of which are in print; as one composed in or about 1761, beginning, “Vocat ultimus labor;” another, “I, fugias, celeri volitans per nubila cursu,” written in 1764; and his “Quid miri faciat Natura,” which was followed by a Greek dialogue in 1765. See “Musse Etonenses,” &c. He was also author of the 14th, 16th, and perhaps, says the present lord Holland, his nephew, a few other numbers of a periodical publication in 1779, called the “Englishman.” In 1793 he published “A Letter to the Electors of Westminster,” which passed through thirteen editions within a few months. This pamphlet contains a full and ample justification of his political conduct, with respect to the discussions in which he had engaged on the French revolution.

, a French writer, was born of a noble family at Paris in 1666. His first studies were under the Jesuits; and father La Baune had the forming of his taste to polite literature. He was also a v disciple of the fathers Rapin, Jouvenci, La Rue, and Commire; and the affection he had for them induced him to admit himself of their order in 1683. After his noviciate, and when he had finished his course of philosophy at Paris, he was sent to Caen to teach the belles lettres, where he contracted a friendship with Huet and Segrais, and much improved himself under their instructions. The former advised him to spend one part of the day upon the Greek authors, and another upon the Latin: by pursuing which method, he became an adept in both languages. Four years being passed here, he was recalled to Paris, where he spent other four years in the study of divinity. At the end of this course, he was shortly to take upon him the occupation of either preaching, or teaching; but finding in himself no inclination for either, he quitted his order in 1694, though he still retained his usual attachment to it. Being now at liberty to indulge his own wishes, he devoted himself solely to improve and polish his understanding. He soon after assisted the abbé Bignon, under whose direction the “Journal des Scavans” was conducted; and he had all the qualifications necessary for such a work, a profound knowledge of antiquity, a skill not only in the Greek and Latin, but also Italian, Spanish, and English tongues, a soundjudgment, an exact taste, and a very impartial and candid temper. He afterwacds formed a plan of translating the works of Plato; thinking, very justly, that the versions of Ficinus and Serranus had left room enough for correction and amendments. He had begun this work, but was obliged to discontinue it by a misfortune which befel him in 1709. He had borrowed, as we are told, of his friend father Hardouin, a manuscript commentary of his upon the New Testament, in order to make some extracts from it; and was busy at work upon it one summer evening, with the window half open, and himself inconsiderately almost undressed. The cold air had so unhappy an efiect in relaxing the muscles of his neck, that he could never afterwards hold his head in its natural situation. The winter increased his malady; and he was troubled with involuntary convulsive motions of the head, and with pains which often hindered him from sleeping; yet he lived nineteen years after; and though he could not undertake any literary work, constantly received visits from the learned, and conversed with them not without pleasure. He died suddenly of an apoplexy, 1728, in his sixty-second year. He had been made a member of the academy of inscriptions in 1705, and of the French academy in 1708. His works consist of Latin poems, and a great number of very excellent dissertations in the Memoirs of the French academy . His poems were published at Paris in 1729, in 12mo, with the poems of Huet, under the care of the abbé d'Olivet, who prefixed an eulogy of Fraguier; and at the end of them are three Latin dissertations concerning Socrates, which is all that remains of the Prolegomena he had prepared for his intended translation of Plato. These dissertations, with many others upon curious and interesting subjects, are printed in the Memoirs above-mentioned.

, a celebrated saint of the Romish church, and founder of one of the four orders of mendicant friars, called Franciscans, was born at Assisi in Umbria, in 1182. He was the son of a merchant, and was christened John, but had the name of Francis added, from his facility of talking French, which he learned to qualify him for his father’s profession. He was at first a young man of dissolute manners, but in consequence of an illness about 1206, he became so strongly affected with religious zeal, that he took a resolution of retiring from the world. He now devoted himself so much to solitude, mortified himself to such a degree, and contracted so ghastly a countenance, that the inhabitants of Assisi thought him distracted. His father, thinking to make him resume his profession., employed a very severe method for that purpose, by throwing him into prison; but finding this made no impression on him, he took him before the bishop of Assisi, in order to make him resign all claim to his paternal estate, which he not only agreed to, but stripped off all his clothes, even to his shirt. He then prevailed with great numbers to devote themselves, as he had done, to the poverty which he considered as enjoined by the gospel; and drew up an institute or rule for their use, which was approved by pope Innocent III. in 1210. The year after, he obtained of the Benedictines the church of Portiuncula, near Assisi, and his order increased so fast, that when he held a chapter in 1219, near 5000 friars of the order of Minors (so they were called) were present. Soon after he obtained also a bull in favour of his order from pope Honorius III. About this time he went into the Holy Land, and endeavoured in vain to convert the sultan Meledin. It is said, that he offered to throw himself into the flames to prove his faith in what he taught. He returned soon after to his native country, and died at Assiai in 1226, being then only fortyfive. He was canonized by pope Gregory IX. the 6th of May, 1230; and Oct. the 4th, on which his death happened, was appointed as his festival.

king of France, surnamed “the Great, and the restorer of learning,” succeeded his father-in-law Louis XII. who died without a son in 1515. Francis I. was the only son of Charles duke of Orleans, constable of AngoulSroe, and born at Cognac, September 12, 1494. Immediately after his coronation he took the title of cluke of Milan, and put himself at the head of a powerful army to assert his right to that duchy. The Swiss, who defended it, opposed his enterprize, and attacked him. near Marignana; but they were cut to pieces in a sanguinary contest, and about 15,000 left dead on the field. The famous Trivulce, who had been engaged in eighteen battles, called this “The battle of the Giants,” and the others “Children’s play.” It was on this occasion that the king desired to be knighted by the famous Bayard. That rank was originally the highest that could be aspired to: princes of the blood were not called monseigneur, nor their wives madaine, till they had been knighted; nor might any one claim that honour, unless he could trace his nobility at least three generations back, both on his father’s and mother’s side, and also bore an unblemished character, especially for military courage and valour. The creation of a knight was attended with few ceremonies, except at some festivals, inwhich case a great number were observed. This institution, which may be traced up to the first race, contributed not a little to polish the minds of the French, by restraining them within the bounds of a benevolent morality. They swore to spare neither life or fortune in defence of religion, in fighting against the infidels, and in protecting the widow, the orphan, and all who were defenceless. By this victory at Marignana, Francis I. became master of the Milanese, which was ceded to him by Maximilian Sforza, who then retired into France. Pope Leo X. alarmed by these conquests, held a conference with the king at Bologna, obtained from him the abolition of the Pragmatic Sanction, and settled the Concordate, which was confirmed the year following in the Latcran council. From that time the kings of France appointed to all consistorial benefices, and the pope received one year’s income upon every change. The treaty of N.oyon was concluded the same year between Charles V. and Francis I. one principal article or' which was the restoration of Navarre. Charles V. on the death of Maximilian I. being elected emperor, 1519, in opposition to Francis, the jealousy which subsisted between those two princes broke out immediately, and kindled a long war, which proved fatal to all Europe. The French, commanded by Andrew de Foix, conquered Navarre in 1520, and lost it again almost directly; they drove the English and Imperialists from Picardy; took Hesdin, Fontarabia, and several other places; but lost Milan and Tournay in 1521. The following year, Odet de Foix, viscount of Lautrec, was defeated at the bloody battle of Bicoque, which was followed by the loss of Cremona, Genoa, and a great part of Italy. Nor did their misfortunes end here. The constable of Bourbon, persecuted by the duchess of Angouleme, joined the emperor 1523, and, being appointed commander of his forces in 1524, defeated admiral Bonevet’s rear at the retreat of Rebec, and retook all the Milanese. He afterwards entered Provence with a powerful army, but was obliged to raise the siege of Marseilles, and retired with loss. Francis I. however, went into Italy, retook Milan, and was going to besiege Pavia; but, having imprudently detached part of his troops to send them to Nappies, he was defeated by the constable de Bpurbon in a bloody battle before Pavia, February 24, 1525, after, having two horses killed under him, and displaying prodigious valour. His greatness of mind never appeared more conspicuously than after this unfortunate engagement. In a letter to his mother he says, “Every thing is lost but honour.” He was conducted as a prisoner to Madrid, and returned the following year, after the treaty which was concluded in that city, January 14, 1526. This treaty, extorted by force, was not fulfilled; the emperor had insisted on the duchy of Burgundy being ceded to him but, when Lannoi went to demand it in his master’s name, he was introduced to anaudience given to the deputies of Burgundy, who declared to the king, that he had no power to give up any province of his kingdom. Upon this the war re-commenced immediately. Francis I. sent forces into Italy, under the command of Lautrec, who rescued Clement VII. and at first gained great adVantages, but perished afterwards, with his army, by sickness. The king, who had been some years a widower, concluded the treaty of Cambray in 1529, by which he engaged to marry Eleanor of Austria, the emperor’s sister; and his two sons, who had been given as hostages, were Ransomed at the king’s return for two millions in gold. The ambition of possessing Milan, caused peace again to be broken. Francis took Savoy in 1535, drove the emperor from Provence in 153G, entered into an alliance with 8olyman II. emperor of the Turks; took Hesdin, and seyeral other places, in 1537, and made a truce of ten years with Charles V. at Nice, 1538, which did not, however, Jast long. The emperor, going to punish the people of Ghent, who had rebelled, obtained a passage through France, by promising Francis the investiture of the duchy of Milan for which of his children he pleased; but. after being received in France with the highest honours in 1539, he was no sooner arrived in Flanders than he refused to keep his promise. This broke the truce; the war was renewed, and carried on with various success on both sides. The king’s troops entered Italy, Roussillorr, and Luxemburg. Francis of Bourbon, comte d‘Enguien, won the battle of Cerizoles in 154*, and took Montferrat. Francis I. gained over to his side Barbarossa, and Gustavus Vasa, Icing of Sweden; while, on the other hand, Henry VIII. of England espoused the interests of Charles V. and took Bologna, ’1544. A peace was at last concluded with he emperor at Cressy, September 18, 1544, and with Henry VIII. June 7, 154fi; but Francis did not long enjoy the tranquillity which this peace procured him; he died at the castle of Rambouillet the last day of March, 1547, aged fifty-three. This prince possessed the most shining qualities: he was witty, mild, magnanimous, generous, and benevolent. The revival of polite literature in Europe was chiefly owing to his care; he patronized the learned, founded the royal college at Paris, furnished a library at Fountainbleau at a great expence, and built several palaces, which he ornamented with pictures, statues, and costly furniture. When dying, he particularly requested his son to dimiuish the taxes which he had been obliged to levy for defraying the expences of the war; and put it in his power to do so, for he left 400,000 crowns of gold in his coffers, with a quarter of his revenues which was then due. It was this sovereign who ordered all public acts to "be written in French. Upon the whole he appears to have been one of the greatest ornaments of the French throne.

Some time after the publication of Horace, he appears to have come over to England, where, in 1753, he published a translation of part of the “Orations of Demosthenes,” intending to comprise the whole in two quarto volumes. It was a matter of some importance at that time to risk a large work of this kind, and the author had the precaution therefore to secure a copious list of subscribers. Unfortunately, however, it had to contend with the acknowledged merit of Leland’s translation, and, allowing their respective merits to have been nearly equal, Leland’s had at least the priority in point of time, and upon comparison, was preferred by the critics, as being more free and eloquent, and less literally exact. This, however, did not arise from any defect in our author’s skill, but was merely an error, if an error at all, in judgment; for he conceived, that as few liberties as possible ought to be taken with the style of his author, and that there was an essential difference between a literal translation, which only he considered as faithful, and an imitation, in which we can never be certain that we have the author’s words or precise meaning. Jn 1755 he completed his purpose in a second volume, which was applauded as a difficult work well executed, and acceptable to every friend of genius and literature; but its success was by no means correspondent to the wishes of the author or of his friends. The year before the first volume of his “Demosthenes” appeared, he determined to attempt the drama, and his first essay was a tragedy entitled “Eugenia.” This is profesedly an adaptation of the French “Cenie” to English feelings and habits, hut it had not much success on the stage. Lord Chesterfield, in one of his letters to his Son, observes that he did not think it would have succeeded so well, considering how long our British audiences had been accustomed to murder, racks, and poison in every tragedy; yet it affected the heart so much, that it triumphed over habit and prejudice. In a subsequent letter, he says that the boxes were crowded till the sixth night, when the pit and gallery were totally deserted, and it was dropped. Distress without death, he repeats, was not sufficient to arlect a true British audience, so long accustomed to daggers, racks, and bowls of poison; contrary to Horace’s rule, they desire to see Medea murder her children on the stage. The sentiments were too delicate to move them; and their hearts were to be taken by storm, not by parley. In 1754, Mr. Francis brought out another tragedy at Cuvent-garden theatre, entitled “Constantino,” which was equilly unsuccessful, but appears to have suffered principally by the improper distribution of the parts among the actors. This he alludes to, in the dedication to lord Chesterfield, with whom he appears to have been acquainted, and intimates at the same time that these disappointments bad induced him to take leave of the stage.

In 1753, he published a poem called “Translation,” in which he announced his intention of giving a translation of “Sophocles.” In January 1757, on the periodical paper called “The World” being finished, he engaged to publish a similar one, under the title of “The Centinel,” but after extending it to twenty-seven numbers, he was obliged to drop it for want of encouragement, The next year he published “A Fast Sermon” preached at Queen-street chapel, of which he was minister, and at St. Paul’s Coveut-garden, of which he was lecturer; and he afterwards published a few sermons on occasional topics, or for charities. In 1759 appeared his translation of “Sophocles,” 2 vols. 4to, which was allowed to be a bold and happy transfusion into the English language of the terrible simplicity of the Greek tragedian. This was followed by a “Dissertation on ancient Tragedy,” in which he mentioned Arthur Murphy by name, and in terms not the most courtly. Murphy, a man equally, or perhaps more irritable, replied in a poetical “Epistle addressed to Dr. Johnson,” who calmly permitted the combatants to settle their disputes in their own way, which, we are told, amounted to a cessation of hostilities, if not to an honourable peace. At this time Francklin is said to have been a writer in the Critical Review, which indeed is acknowledged in an article in that review, and might perhaps be deduced from, internal evidence, as, besides his intimacy with Smollet, his works are uniformly mentioned with very high praise. In 1757 he had been preferred by Trinity-college to the livings of Ware and Thundrich, in Hertfordshire, and although his mind was more intent on the stage than the pulpit, he published in 1765 a volume of “Sermons on the relative duties,” which was well received by the publick. Next year he produced at Drury-lane theatre, the tragedy of “The Earl of Warwick,” taken, without any acknowledgement, from the French of La Harpe. In Nov. 1767, he was enrolled in the list of his majesty’s chaplains. In 1768 he published apiece of humour, without his name, entitled “A Letter to a Bishop concerning Lectureships,” exposing the paltry shifts of the candidates for this office at their elections; and next year he wrote “An Ode on the Institution of the Royal Academy.” In March of the same year, he translated Voltaire’s “Orestes” for the stage. In July 1770 he took the degree of D. D. but still debased his character by producing dramatic pieces of no great fame, and chiefly translations; “Electra,” “Matilda,” and “The Contract,” a farce. About 1776 he was presented to the living of Brasted, in Surrey, which he held until his death. He had for some years employed himself on his excellent translation of the works of *' Lucian,“which he published in 1780, in 2 vols. 4to. He was also concerned with Smollet, in a translation of Voltaire’s works, but, it is said, contributed little more than his name to the title-pages. There is a tragedy of his still in ms. entitled” Mary Queen of Scots.“Dr. Francklin died at his house in Great Queen-street, March 15, 1784. He was unquestionably a man of learning and abilities, but from peculiarities of temper, and literary jealousy, seems not to have been much esteemed by his contemporaries. After his death 3 volumes of his” Sermons" were published for the benefit of his widow and family. Mrs. Francklin died in May 1796. She was the daughter of Mr. Venables, a wine-merchant.

, a French abbé and very useful writer, was born at Arinthod, in Franche-comte, Nov. 2, 1698, and for some time belonged to the chevaliers of St. Lazarus, but quitting that society, came to Paris and engaged in teaching. He afterwards wrote several works, in a style perhaps not very elegant, but which were admired either for their intrinsic usefulness, or as antidotes to the pernicious doctrines of the French philosophers and deists, who, conscious of his superiority in argument, affected to regard him as a man of weak understanding, and a bigot; reproaches that are generally thrown upon the advocates of revealed religion in other countries as well as in France. The abbé François, however, appears from his works to have been a man of learning, and an able disputant. He died at Paris, far advanced in years, Feb. 24, 1782, escaping the miseries which those against whom he wrote, were about to bring on their country. His principal works are, I. “Geographic,” 12tno, an excellent manual on that subject, often reprinted, and known by the name of “Crozat,” the lady to whom he dedicated it, and for whose use he first composed it. 2. “Prenves de la religion de Jesus Christ,” 4 vols. 12mo. 3. “Defense de la Religion,” 4 vols. 12mo. 4. “Examen du Catechisme de i'honnete homme,” 12mo. 5. “Examen des faits qui servent de fondement a la religipn Chretienne,” 1767, 3 vols. 12mo. 6. “Observation sur la philosophic de i'histoire,” 8vo. He left also some manuscripts, in refutation of the “.Philosophical Dictionary,” the “System of Nature,” and other works which emanated from the philosophists of France.

About 1728 or 1729, Franklin setup a newspaper, the second in Philadelphia, which proved very profitable, and afforded him an opportunity of making himself known as a political writer, by his inserting several attempts of that kind in it. He also set up a shop for the sale of books and articles of stationary, and in 1730 he married a lady, now a widow, whom he had courted before he went to England, when she was a virgin. He afterwards began to have some leisure, both for reading books, and writing them, of which he gave many specimens from time to time. In 1732, he began to publish “Poor Richard’s Almanack,” which was continued for many years. It was always remarkable for the numerous and valuable concise maxims which it contained, for the Œconomy of human life; all tending to industry and frugality; and which were comprized in a well-known address, entitled “The Way to Wealth.” This has been transiated into various languages, and inserted in almost every magazine and newspaper in Great Britain or America. It has also been printed on a large sheet, proper to be framed, and hung up in conspicuous places in all houses, as it very well deserves to be. Mr. Franklin became gradually more known for his political talents. In 1736, he was appointed clerk to the general assembly of Pennsylvania; and was re-elected by succeeding assemblies for several years, till he was chosen a representative for the city of Philadelphia; and in 1737 he was appointed post-master of that city. In 1738, he formed the first fire-company there, to extinguish and prevent fires and the burning of houses; an example which was soon followed by other persons, and other places. And soon after, he suggested the plan of an association for insuring houses and ships from losses by fire, which was adopted; and the association continues to this day. In 1744, during a war between France and Great Britain, some French and Indians made inroads upon the frontier inhabitants of the province, who were unprovided for such an attack; the situation of the province was at this time truly alarming, being destitute of every means of defence. At this crisis Franklin stepped forth, and proposed to a meeting of the citizens of Philadelphia, a plan, of a voluntary association for the defence of the province. This was approved of, and signed by 1200 persons immediately. Copies of it were circulated through the province; and in a short time the number of signatures amounted to 10,000. Franklin was chosen colonel of the Philadelphia regiment; but he did not think proper to accept of the honour.

In 1749 he proposed a plan of an academy to be erected in the city of Philadelphia, as a foundation for posterity to erect a seminary of learning, more extensive and suitable to future circumstances; and in the beginning of 1750, three of the schools were opened, namely, the Latin and Greek school, the mathematical, and the Eng. lish schools. This foundation soon after gave rise to another more extensive college, incorporated by charter May 27, 1755, which still subsists, and in a very flourishing condition. In 1752 he was instrumental in the establishment of the Pennsylvania hospital, for the cure and relief of indigent invalids, which has proved of the greatest use to that class of persons. Having conducted himself so well as post-master of Philadelphia, he was in 1753 appointed deputy post-master general for the whole British colonies. The colonies being much exposed to depredations in their frontier by the Indians and the French; at a meeting of commissioners from several of the provinces, Mr. Franklin proposed a plan for the general defence, to establish in the colonies a general government, to be administered by a president-general, appointed by the crown, and by a grand council, consisting of members chosen by the representatives of the different colonies; a plan which was unanimously agreed to by the commissioners present. The plan, however, had a singular fate: it was disapproved of by the ministry of Great Britain, because it gave too much power to the representatives of the people; and it was rejected by every assembly, as giving to the president general, who was to be the representative of the crown, an influence greater than appeared to them proper, in a plan of government intended for freemen. Perhaps this rejection on both sides is the strongest proof that could be adduced of the excellence of it, as suited to the situation of Great Britain and America at that time. It appears to have steered exactly in the middle, between the opposite interests of both. Whether the adoption of this plan would have prevented the separation of America from Great Britain, is a question which might afford much room for speculation.

In 1755, general Braddock, with some regiments of regular troops and provincial levies, was sent to dispossess the French of the posts upon which they had seized in the back settlements. After the men were all ready, a- difficulty occurred, which had nearly prevented the expedition this was the want of waggons. Franklin now step-: ped forward, and, with the assistance of his son, in a little time procured 150. After the defeat of Braddock, Franklin introduced into the assembly a bill for organizing a militia, and had the dexterity to get it passed. In consequence of this act, a very respectable militia was formed; and Franklin was appointed colonel of a regiment in Philadelphia, which consisted of 1200 men; in which capacity he acquitted himself with much propriety, and was of singular service, though this militia was soon after disbanded by order of the English ministry.

In 1757 he was sent to England, with a petition to the king and council, against the proprietaries, who refused to bear any share in the public expences and assessments; which he got settled to the satisfaction of the state. After the completion of this business, Franklin remained at the court of Great Britain for some time, as agent for the pn>­vince of Pennsylvania; and also for those of Massachusetts, Maryland, and Georgia. Soon after this, he published his Canada pamphlet, in which he pointed out, in a very forcible manner, the advantages that would result from the conquest of this province from the French. An expedition was accordingly planned, and the command given to general Wolfe; the success of which is well known. He now divided his time indeed between philosophy and politics, rendering many services to both. Whilst here, he invented the elegant musical instrument called the Armonica, formed of glasses played on by the fingers. In the summer of 1762 he returned to America; on the passage to which he observed the singular effect produced by the agitation of a vessel containing oil, floating on water; the upper surface of the oil remained smooth and undisturbed, whilst the water was agitated with the utmost commotion. On his return he received the thanks of the assembly of Pennsylvania; which having annually elected him a member in his absence, he again took his seat in this body, and continued a steady defender of the liberties of the people.

, sieur de Chambrai, under which name he is classed in some biographical works, was a learned architect of the seventeenth century, and a native of Chambrai. He was connected by relationship, as well as love of the art, with Sublet des Noyers, secretary of state and superintend ant of the buildings under Louis XIII. About 1640, Freart was sent, with one of his brothers, to Italy, on an important mission to the pope, and he was also ordered to collect antiquities, &c. and engage the ablest artists to reside in France. Among the latter he brought Poussin to Paris. Freart died in iv76. He published a French translation of Da Vinci on painting, Paris, 1651, fol. and another of Palladia’s Architecture, Paris, 1650. Of this a fine edition was printed by Nicolas du Bois at the Hague in 1726, with engravings by Piea*t, but he has strangely divided the translator into two persons, asserting that Freart published one edition of Palladio, and the sieur de Chambrai another. But the work by which Freart is best known is his “Parallele de l'architecture antique avec la rooderne,” Paris, 1650, fol. reprinted by Erard in 1702. Our celebrated countryman Evelyn trans-, lated this work, as already noticed in his article (vol. Xjijl p. 435). It was much admired in France, and is still in esteem with artists.

, called the scholastic, the earliest French historian except Gregory of Tours, flourished in the seventh century, and was living in 658. By order of Childebrand, brother of Charles Martel, he wrote a chronicle, which extends as far as the year 64-1. His style is barbarous, his arrangement defective, and his whole narrative too concise and rapid, but he is the only original historian of a part of that period. His chronicle is to be found in the collection of French historians, published by Duchesne and Bouquet.

In 1755, the contegt between England and France, concerning their American possessions, led those powers to eekallies. England made alliance with Prussia, and France with Austria. The boldness and decision of Frederick’s character were now remarkably displayed. Suspecting a design against him among the continental powers, and having even gained intelligence of a secret treaty, in which the king of Poland, elector of Saxony, was concerned, he published a strong manifesto, and marched at once with a powerful army into Saxony. But the states of the empire, not satisfied with the reasons he alleged, declared war against him, as a disturber of the public peace. In 1757, he found himself obliged to contend at once with Russia, the German empire, the house of Austria, Saxony, Sweden, and France. The numerous armies of his enemies overran his whole dominions; yet his activity and courage were ready in every quarter to give them battle. He was defeated by the Russians, had gained a battle against the Austrians, and had lost another in Bohemia, by the 18th of June, 1757. But on the 5th of November the same year, he met the Austrians and the French at Rosbach, on the frontiers of Saxony, and repaired his former losses by a signal victory. His genius had invented a new species of military exercise, and his enemies probably owed their defeat to their imperfect attempts to imitate what his soldiers had completely learned. Within a month he had gained another victory over the Austrians near Breslaw, in consequence of which he took that city, with 15,000 prisoners, and recovered all Silesia. Throughout the war, with an ability almost incredible, he gained so many advantages, and recovered with 'such promptitude the losses he sustained, that the prodigious force combined against him was rendered ineffectual. Peace was at length concluded, Feb. 15, 1763, when the possession of Silesia was confirmed to him, and he, on his part, promised his suffrage to the election of Joseph, son of the emperor, as king of the Romans. This was the most splendid military period of his life.

Frederic, like Cesar, united the talents of a writer with those of a warrior. He wrote in French, and was a tolerable poet; but his abilities are more displayed in history. His poem on the art of war is, however, valuable, both from his deep knowledge of the subject, ^and the traits of genius it displays. His works compose altogether nineteen volumes, 8vo. His poetical compositions, which, excepting his poem on the Art of War, consist chiefly of odes and epistles, passed through many editions under the title of “Oeuvres melees du Philosophe de Sans Souci.” But all the works published in his life, both in prose and verse, were collected in four vols. 8vo, in 1790, under the title of “Oeuvres primitives de Frederic II. Roi de Prusse, ou collection desouvragesqu'il publia pendant son regne.” Of this publication, the first volume contains his “AntiMachiuvel; military instructions for the general of his army; and his correspondence with M. de la Motte Fouquei.” TJie second, his “Memoirs of the House of Branden burgh.” In the third volume are his poems; and in the fourth, a variety of pieces in prose, philosophical, moral, historical, critical, and literary; particularly “Reflections on the military talents and character of Charles XII. king of Sweden; a discourse on war; letters on education, and on the love of our country; and a discourse on German literature.” His posthumous works hud been published stiil earlier. They appeare4 at Berlin in 1788, in 15 vols. 8vo. The two first of these contain the “History of his own Time, to the year 1745.” The third and fourth, his “History of the Seven Years’ War.” The fifth contains “Memoirs from the Peace of Hubertsbourg in 1763, to the Partition of Poland in 1775.” The sixth is filled with miscellaneous matter, particularly “Considerations on the present state of the political powers of Europe,” and “an Essay on Forms of Government, and on the duties of Sovereigns.” The seventh and eighth volumes contain poetical pieces, and some letters to Jordan and Voltaire. The remaining seven volumes continue his correspondence, including letters to and from Fontenelle, Rollin, Voltaire, D‘Argens, D’Alembert, Condorcet, and others. Of these productions many are valuable, more especially his “History of his own Times,” where, however, he is more impartial in his accounts of his campaigns, than in assigning the motives for his wars, or estimating the merits of his antagonists.

, a celebrated French painter; was born at Paris in 1567. When he was studying at Rome, the suffrages of that place were divided between Michael Angelo Caravaggio, and Joseph of Arpino, called Giuseppino; and he succeeded in imitating the excellencies of both. He was a great master of design, and of the sciences connected with his art, perspective and architecture; but there is a boldness in his manner, approaching to hardness, which is not always approved. Henry IV. however, appointed him his chief painter, and Louis XIII. honoured him with the order of St. Michael. He painted the cieling in the chapel at Fontainbleau, and died at Paris, June 18, 1619.

, an English physician, the son of John French, of Broughton, near Banbury in Oxfordshire, was born there in 1616, and entered New-Inn-hall, Oxford, in 1633, when he took his degrees in arts. He afterwards studied medicine, and acted as physician to the parliamentary army, by the patronage of the Fiennes, men of great influence at that time; he was also one of the two physicians to the whole army under general Fairfax. In 1648, when the earl of Pembroke visited the university of Oxford, he was created M. D. and was about the same time physician to the Savoy, and one of the college. He went abroad afterwards as physician to the English army at Bulloigne, and died there in Oct. or Nov. 1657. Besides translations of some medical works from Paracelsus and Glauber, he published “The An of Distillation,” Lond. 1651, 4to.; and “The Yorkshire Spaw, or a Treatise of Four famous medicinal wells: viz. the spaw, or vitrioline well; the stinking or sulphur well; the dropping or petrifying well; and St. Magnus-well, near Knaresborow in Yorkshire. Together with the causes, vertues, and use thereof,” Lond. 1652 and 1654, 12mo, republished at Halifax, 1760, 12mo.

, a celebrated French mathematician of the seventeenth century, was the contemporary and companion of Des Cartes, Fermat, and the other learned mathematicians of their time. He was admitted geometrician of the French academy in 1666; and died in 1675. He had many papers inserted in the ancient memoirs of the academy, of 1666, particularly in vol. V. of that collection, viz. 1. “A method of resolving problems by Exclusions.” 2. “Treatise of right-angled Triangles in Numbers.” 3. “Short tract on Combinations.” 4. “Tables of Magic Squares.” 5. “General method of making Tables of Magic Squares.” His brother Nicolas

, an author of profound learning and considerable abilities, grossly misapplied, was born at Paris in 1688. He was bred nominally to the law, but his inclinations and talents not being suited to that profession, he devoted himself, from an early period, to his favourite studies of chronology and history. At twenty-five he was admitted into the academy of inscriptions, where he produced at the same time “A Discourse on the Origin of the French.” This treatise, at once bold and learned, added to some indiscreet conversations, occasioned his being confined in the Bastille. In his confinement, he could obtain no book but the dictionary of Bayle, which he consequently read so earnestly as almost to learn it by heart. He imbibed, at the same time, the scepticism of Bayle, and even went beyond him in the grpssness and impudence of his infidel sentiments, as clearly appears by some of his writings. These were, 1. “Letters of Thrasybulus to Leucippe,” in which atheism is reduced to a system. 2. “Examination of the Apologists for Christianity,” a posthumous work (not published till 1767), no less obnoxious than the other. Besides these, he was the author of, 3. Several very learned memoirs in the volumes of the academy, to which his name is prefixed; and a few light publications of no consequence. He died in 1749, in his 61st year. His works were revived afterwards, and eagerly disseminated by Voltaire and his associates in their hostilities against religion and morals.

, a French journalist, generally known for having been the constant object of the satire of Voltaire, was born at Quimper, in 1719. His talents were considerable, and he cultivated them in the society of the Jesuits, under fathers Brumoy and Bougeant. In 1739, on some disgust, he quitted the Jesuits, and for a time assisted the abbé des Fontaines in his periodical publications. He then published several critical works on his own account, which were generally admired, but sometimes suppressed by authority. His “Letters on certain writings of the time” began to be published in 1749, and were extended, with some interruptions, to 13 volumes. In 1754 he began his “Anne Litie>aire,” and published in that year 7 volumes of it; and afterwards 8 volumes every year as long as he lived, which was till 1776. In this work, FreVon, who was a zealous enemy of the modern philosophy, attacked Voltaire with spirit. He represented him as a skilful plagiary; as a poet, brilliant indeed, but inferior to Corneille, Racine, and Boileau; as an elegant, but inaccurate historian; and rather the tyrant than the king of literature. A great part of this Voltaire could bear with fortitude; but a very skilful and victorious attack upon a bad comedy, “La Femme qui a raison,” drove him beyond all bounds of patience; and henceforward his pen was constantly in motion against Fre>on, whose very name at any time would put him in a rage, nor was Freron more a favourite with the encyclopedists, whose principles he exposed.

Besides his periodical publications, Freron left several works, l. “Miscellanies,” in 3 vols. comprising several poems, to which it has only been objected that they are gather over-polished. 2. “Les VraisPlaisirs,” or the loves of Venus and Adonis; elegantly translated from Marino. 3. Part of a translation of Lucretius. He also superintended and retouched Beaumelle’s critical commentary on the Henriade, and assisted in several literary works. His son, Stanislaus Freron, was one of the most active accomplices in the atrocities which disgraced the French revolution, and appears to have had no higher ambition than to rival Marat and Robespierre in cruelty. He died at St. Domingo in 1802.

, an early poet of France, father of the celebrated Iveteaux, and the first who wrote satires in French, and an Art of Poetry, was born of a noble family at Fresnaye, near Falaise, iiv 1534-. He was bred a lawyer, and became the king’s advocate for the bailliage of Caen, and afterwards lieutenantgeneral and president of that city, where he died at the age of seventy-two, in 1606. He wrote, 1. “Satires,” which though esteemed less strong than those of Regnier, and less witty than those of Boileau, have truth and nature, and contain simple narratives, the style of which has, something pleasing. 2. “The Art of Poetry.” Copious specimens of this performance may be seen in the notes of St. Marc, on Boileau’s Art of Poetry. It has considerable merit, but a merit which haa been superseded by later efforts. 3. Two books of Idyllia, and three of epigrams, epitaphs, and sonnets. 4. A poem on the monarchy. All these were collected by himself in an edition of poems, published at Caen in 1605.

, commonly called Du Cange, a learned Frenchman, was descended from a good family, and born at Amiens in 1610. After being taught polite literature in the Jesuits college there, he went to study the Jaw at Orleans, and was sworn advocate to the parliament of Paris in 1631. He practised some time at the bar, but without intending to make it the business of his life. He then returned to Amiens, where be devoted himself to study, and ran through all sorts of learning, languages and philosophy, law, physic, divinity, and history. In 1668, he went and settled at Paris; and soon after a proposal was laid before Colbert, to collect all the authors who at different times had written the history of France, and to form a body out of them. This minister liking the proposal, and believing Du Fresne the best qualified for the undertaking, furnished him with memoirs and manuscripts for this purpose. Du Fresne wrought upon these materials, and drew up a large preface, containing the names of the authors, their character and manner, the time in which they lived, and the order in which they ought to be arranged. Being informed from the minister that his plan was not approved, and that he must adopt another, and convinced that if he followed the order prescribed, the whole work would be spoiled, he frankly told his employers that since he had not been happy enough to please those in authority, his advice was, that they should look out some of the best hands in the kingdom; and at the same time he returned them all their memoirs. (See Bouquet). Being thus disengaged from a tedious and laborious undertaking, he finished his Glossary of low Latin, or “Glossarium Mediæ et infimæ Latinitatis,” which was received with general commendation; and though Hadrian Valesius, in his preface to the Valesiana, notes everal mistakes in it, it is nevertheless a very excellent and useful work. It was afterwards enlarged by the addition of more volumes; and the edition of Paris, by Carpentier, in 1733, makes no less than six in folio; to which Carpentier afterwards added four of supplement. Both have been since excellently abridged, consolidated, and improved, in 6 vols. 8vo, published at Halle, 1772 1784. His next performance was a “Greek Glossary of the middle age,” consisting of curious passages and remarks, most of which are drawn from manuscripts very little known. This work is in 2 vols. folio. He was the author and editor also of several other performances. He drew a genealogical map of the kings of France. He wrote the history of Constantinople under the French emperors, which was printed at the Louvre, and dedicated to the king. H published an historical tract concerning John Baptist’s head, some relics of which are supposed to be at Amiens. He published, lastly, editions of Cinnamus, Nicephorus, Anna Commena, Zonaras, and the Alexandrian Chronicon, with learned dissertations and notes.

, a celebrated French poet and painter, was born at Paris in 1611. His father, who was an eminent apothecary in that city, intended him for the medical profession, and during the first year which he spent at college, he made very considerable progress in his studies; but as soon as he was raised to the highest classes, and began to contract a taste for poetry, his genius for it appeared, and he carried all the prizes of it, which were proposed to excite the emulation of his fellow-students. His inclination for poetry was heightened by exercise; and his earliest performances shewed that he was capable of attaining very considerable fame in this pursuit, if his love of painting, which equally possessed him, had not divided his time and application. At last he laid aside all thoughts of the study of physic, and declared absolutely for that of painting, notwithstanding the opposition of his parents, who by all kinds of severity endeavoured to divert him from pursuing that art, the profession of which they unjustly considered in a very contemptible light. But the strength of his inclination defeating all the measures taken to suppress it, he took the first opportunity of cultivating his favourite study.

Poetry shared with painting the time and thoughts of Du Fresnoy, who, as he penetrated into the secrets of the latter art, wrote down his observations; and having at last acquired a full knowledge of the subject, formed a design of writing a poem upon it, which he did not finish till many years afterwards, when he had consulted the best writers, and examined with the utmost care the most admired pictures in Italy. While he resided there he painted several pictures, particularly the “Ruins of the Campo Vaccino,” with the city of Rome in the figure of a woman: a young woman of Athens going to see the monument of Jher lover, &c. One of his best pieces is “Mars finding Lavinia sleeping.” He had a peculiar esteem for the works of Titian, several of which he copied, imitating that xcellent painfer in his colouring, as he did Caracci in his designs. About 1653 he went to Venice, and travelled through Lombardy, after which he returned to France. He had read his poem to the best painters in all places through which he passed, and particularly to Albano and Guercino, then at Bologna, and he consulted several men famous for their skill in polite literature. He arrived at Paris in 1656, where he painted several pictures, and continued to revi&e his poem, on which he bestowed so much attention as frequently to interrupt his professional labours. But, though he was desirous to see his work published, he thought it improper to print the Latin without a French translation, which was at length made by De Piles. Du Fresrioy had just begun a commentary upon it, when he was seized with a palsy; and after languishing four or five months under it, died at the house of one of his brothers, at Villiers-le-bel, four leagues from Paris, in 1665. From the time of Mignard’s return to Paris in 1658, the two friends continued to live together uutil death separated them.

His poem was not published till three years after his death, at Paris, 12mo, with the French version, and remarks of Mons. Du Piles, and it has been justly admired for its elegance, perspicuity, and the utility of the instruction it contains. In 1694, Dryden made a prose translation of it into English, which he accompanied with his ingenious parallel between poetry and painting. It was again translated into English by Mr. Wills, a painter, who gave it in metre without rhyme. He attempted to produce the sense of his author in an equal number of lines, and thus cramped his own skill; and produced a work unequal in itself, in which, however well he appears to hare understood the original text, he fails to impress it on his reader. It is now almost totally forgotten. More ample justice has been done in our language to the talents of Du Fresnoy, by our late skilful poet, William Mason, M. A.; by whom, in 1782, he was first clothed in an English dress suited to his elevated pretensions. And still greater honour was done to him by the hand of that extraordinary genius of our isle in the art of painting, sir Joshua Reynolds, for whose more valuable remarks upon the most important points in the poem, Mr. Mason was induced to discard those of Mons. Du Piles. By the union of the talents of two men so renowned in the arts of poetry and painting, Du Fresnoy is rendered for ever dear to the English reader; and the thorough knowledge he has exhibited of the best principles of the art of painting, is become more agreeably and more extensively diffused.

, a French poet, chiefly celebrated for his dramatic writings, was born at Paris in 1648. He had a good natural taste for music, painting, sculpture, architecture, and all the fine arts. He had also a taste for laying-out gardens, and this procured him the place of overseer of gardens to the king, which he sold for a moderate sum, as a supply to his extravagance, which was unbounded. He was valet-de-chambre to Louis XIV. and highly in favour with him; but his love of expence outwent even the bounty of his master. “There are two men,” said Louis, “whom I shall never enrich, Fresny and Bontems.” These were his two valets-dechambre, who were well matched in extravagance. At length, Fresny sold all his appointments at court, and flew from the constraint of Versailles to the liberty of Paris, where he became a writer for the stage. He is the person who is humourously represented by Le Sage in his “Diable Boiteux,” as marrying his laundress by way of paying her bill. He was twice married, and both times, it is said, in a similar way. He wrote many dramatic pieces, some of which were long established on the stage. These were, “La Reconciliation Normande, Le Double Voyage, La Coquette de Village, Le Marriage rompu, L'Esprit de Contradiction, Le Dedit.” He was also the author of cantatas, which he set to music himself; several songs, some of which were famous; a little work often reprinted, called “Les Amusements serieux et comiques,” and “Nouvelles Historiques” all enlivened by a singular and gay fancy. He died, aged seventy-six, in 1724. D'Alembert has drawn a parallel between Destouches and him as comic writers. His works were collected in 6 volumes, duodecimo.

, a doctor of the Sorbonne, born in the diocese of Rheims, was penitentiary of that church, and afterwards grand -master of the college of Navarre at Paris. He died in 1651. He published in 1629 a history of the French cardinals, entitled “Gallia Purpurata,” 1638, fol. M. Baluze has pointed out a great number of faults in this work, in his “Antifrizonius,”and his “History of the Popes of Avignon.” Frizon also published an edition of the Bible of Louvain, with a method of distinguishing the Catholic French translations of the Bible from the Protestant, 121, fol.

, an eminent and ancient French historian and poet, was born in Valenciennes, about 1337. Of his parents we know only that his father, Thomas Froissart, was a painter of arms, and although our historian is titled knight, at the beginning of a manuscript in the abbey of St. Germain des Prez, it is thought that the copyist had given it to him of his own authority. His infancy announced what he would one day be: he early manifested that eager and inquisitive mind, which during the course of his life never allowed him to remain long attached to the same occupations, and in the same place; and the different games suitable to that age, of which he gives us a picture equally curious and amusing, kept up in his mind a fund of natural dissipation, which during his early studies tried the patience and exercised the severity of his masters. He loved hunting, music, assemblies, feasts, dancing, dress, good living, wine and women; these tastes, which almost all shewed themselves from twelve years of age, being confirmed by habit, were continued even to his old age, and perhaps never left him. The mind and heart of Froissart being not yet sufficiently occupied, his love for history filled up that void, which his passion for pleasure left; and became to him an inexhaustible source of amusement.

The time of the death of Froissart has not been decided by his biographers. He relates some events of the year 1400, and by some is thought to have lived considerably beyond that period, but nothing certain can be affirmed. He probably ended his days ii> his own chapter, and was interred in tlje chapel of St. Anne in the coHegiate church. Although he was the author of 30,000 verses, his poetical character is forgotten, and he is now celebrated, and most justly, as a historian. His Chronicle, which is divided into four books, comprehends the period between 1326 and 1400, and relates the events which took place not only hi France, btrt in Flanders, Scotland, and Ireland, with numerous details respecting the papal courts of Rome and Avignon, and collateral particulars of the transactions in the rest of Europe, in Turkey, and even in Africa. His reputation stands high as a faithful and diligent narrator of what he saw and heard. By the French he has been charged with gross partiality towards the English; they bring against him the crime of making Edward, and his son, the Black Prince, the heroes of his history. But it tfannot be denied that they were the heroes of the age in which they flourished, and therefore an impartial historian was obliged to represent them in their true colours, and to make them the teading characters of the day. Mr. Johnes-, to whom the public is indebted for an admirable edition of Froissart’s Chronicles, has successfully vindicated the character of the historian from the charge of partiaFrty: throughout the whole work, he says, there is an evident disposition to give praise to valour on whatever side it was employed. The historian mourns over the death of each valiant knight, exults in the success of every hardy enterprize, and seems carried away almost by his chivalrous feelings, independently of party considerations. Till the publication of Mr. Johnes’s translation, the best edition of the “Chronicles” was that of Lyons in four volumes folio, 1559; and Mr. Johnes has since gratified the public wish by an equally accurate and well illustrated edition of Froissart’s continuator, Monstrelet.