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

, an eminent French painter, was born at Andely, a little town in Normandy, in 1594. His family, however, were originally of Soissons in which city there were some of his relations officers in the Presidial court. John Poussin, his father, was of noble extraction, but born to a very small estate. His son, seeing the narrowness of his circumstances, determined to support himself as soon as possible, and chose painting for his profession, having naturally a strong inclination to that art. At eighteen, he went to Paris, to learn the rudiments of it. A Poictevin lord, who had taken a liking to him, placed him with Ferdinand, a portrait-painter, whom Poussin left in three months to place himself with Lalleraant, with whom he staid but a month he saw he should never learn any thing from such masters, and he resolved not to lose his time with them; believing he should profit more by studying the works of great masters, than by the discipline of ordinary painters. He worked a while in distemper, and performed it with extraordinary facility. The Italian poet Marino being at that time in Paris, and perceiving Poussin’s genius to be superior to the small performances on which he was employed, persuaded him to go with him into Italy Poussin had before made two vain attempts to undertake that journey, yet by some means or other was hindered from accepting this opportunity. He promised, however, to follow in a short time; which he did, though not till he had painted several other pictures in Paris, among which was the Death of the Virgin, for the church of Ndtre-Dame. Having finished his business, he set out for Rome in his thirtieth year.

The late celebrated poet, Mr. Mason, in his life of Whitehead, takes occasion to pay a high compliment to Dr. Powell on that part of his literary character concerning which he may be thought the least liable to be mistaken, and pronounces Dr. Powell’s taste in works of imagination to have been as correct as his judgment was in matters of more abstruse speculation. “Yet this taste,” adds Mr. Mason, “always appeared to be native and his own he did not seem to have brought it with him from a great school, nor to have been taught it by a celebrated master. He never dealt in the indiscriminate exclamations of excellent and sublime: but if he felt a beauty in an author, was ready with a reason why he felt it to be such a circumstance which those persons, who, with myself, attended his lectures on the Poetics of Aristotle, will both acknowledge and reflect upon with pleasure.”

, a poet and miscellaneous writer, is said to have been born of a good family, at St. Ives, in Huntingdonshire, Dec. 25, 1749. He was ed located at Felstead, in Essex, and was originally brought up to the church. This, however, he appears to have quitted for the stage, which he attempted in London, in 1774, with very little success. After his failure in this attempt, he subsisted chiefly by writing. He also was for some time a bookseller at Bath, where, and at other places, he occasionally delivered lectures on the English language. For many years after his appearance on the stage, he assumed the name of Courtney Melmoth, which likewise is prefixed to most of his publications. As. an author, he was very prolific. The first of his productions which attracted the notice of the public, was “The Tears of Genius, occasioned by the Death of Dr. Goldsmith, 1774,” whose poetical works he endeavoured, and not always unsuccessfully, to make the model of his own. His poem of “Sympathy” was perhaps his best, and has passed through many editions, and is characterized by feeling, energy, and beauty. His first novel, entitled “Liberal Opinions upon Animals, Man, and Providence,” 1775, &c was published in detached volumes, which were eagerly perused as they successively appeared. His “Shenstone Green,” “Emma Corbett,” “The Pupil of Pleasure, or the New System (Lord Chesterfield’s) illustrated,” had likewise a temporary popularity. His other novel of any note was entitled “Family Secrets,” 1797, 5 vols. 12mo, but had not the success of the former. His dramatic productions were, a tragedy, “The Fair Circassian,” taken from Hawkesworth’s “Almoran and Harriet,” which required all the support of himself and friends, in the newspapers, to render it palatable for a few nights. His other dramatic pieces, enumerated in the Biog. Dram, were so little successful as to be soon forgot.

Other works by Mr. Pratt, not noticed in the above account, are “The Sublime and Beautiful of Scripture. Being Essays on select Passages of Sacred Compositions,” 1777. “An Apology for the Life and Writings of David Hume,” 1777. “Travels of the Heart, written in France,” 17 78,. 2 vols. “Observations on Young’s Night Thoughts,” 8vo. “Landscapes in Verse, taken in Spring,” 1785. “Miscellanies,” 1786, 4 vols. which included the most popular of the preceding pieces. “Triumph of Benevolence,” a poem, occasioned by the design of erecting a Monument to Mr. Howard. “Humanity, or the Rights of Nature,” a poem, 1788. “An Ode on his Majesty’s Recovery.” “A Letter to the Tars of Old England,” and “A Letter to the British Soldiers,” 1797. “John and Dame or, The Loyal Cottagers,” a poem, 1803. “Harvest Home, consisting of Supplementary Gleanings, Original Dramas and Poems, Contributions of Literary Friends, and Select Republications, including Sympathy, a poem, revised, corrected, and enlarged, from the eighth edition,” 1805, 3 vols. 8vo. “The Cabinet of Poetry, containing the best entire pieces which are to be found in the Works of the British Poets, from Milton to Beattie. The Works of each Poet prefaced by an Account of his Life and Character, by Mr. Pratt;” 6 vols. 1808. “The Contrast, a Poem, including Comparative Views of Britain, Spain, and France,” 1808. “The Lower World, a poem, in four books, with notes,” 1810. “A Description of Leamington Spa,” a retreat of Mr. Pratt’s, &c. To these we may add his “Gleanings,” or Travels Abroad and in England, in which there is some amusement, but so much mixture of fiction, that very little reliance can be placed on them for matters of fact. Mr. Pratt died Oct. 4, 1814, at his apartments in Colmore-row, Birmingham. He was unquestionably a man of genius, and a selection might be made from his works which would establish his reputation as a poet but his necessities seldom gave him time to polish and correct, and his vanity prompted him so often to become his own reviewer and his own panegyrist, that for some years before his death he sunk in respect with the public. There are no marks of learning in any of his performances and from the time he devoted himself to represent fiction on the stage, his general conduct was that of a man playing a part, or led through the adventures of a novel. It was to his praise, however, that in his latter days his works contained a more pure morality than some he had published at an earlier period of his life.

Re died of a fever at Bredon in Worcestershire, at the house of his son-in-law, Dr. Henry Sutton, July the 20th, 1650, leaving to his children no legacy but “pious poverty, God’s blessing, and a father’s prayers,” as appears from his last will and testament. His body was attended to the grave by persons of all ranks and degrees, and was interred in the chancel of the church of Bredon. He was a man of very extensive learning; and Nath. Carpenter, in his “Geography delineated,” tells us, that “in him the heroical wits of Jewel, Rainolds, and Hooker, as united into one, seemed to triumph anew, and to have threatened a fatal blow to the Babylonish hierarchy.” He was extremely humble, and kept part of the ragged clothes in which he came to Oxford, in the same wardrobe where he lodged his rochet, in which he left that university. He was exemplary in his charity, and very agreeable in conversation. By his first wife, Mary, daughter of Dr. Taylor, burnt for the Protestant religion in the reign of queen Mary, he had several children; viz. William, a colonel in the service of king Charles I. and slain at the battle of Marston-moor in 1644; Matthias, a captain in the army of that king, who died at London 1646; and three other sons, who died in their infancy, and were buried in Exeteivcollege; and two daughters, viz. Sarah, married to William Hodges, archdeacon of Worcester, and rector of Ripple in Worcestershire; and Elizabeth, married to Dr. Henry Sutton, rector of Bredon in Worcestershire. Our author had for his second wife, Mary, daughter of sir Thomas Reynel of West Ogwell in Devonshire, knt. Cleveland the poet wrote an elegy upon his death.

, an English poet of considerable eminence, was born July 21, 1664, but there is some difficulty in settling his birth-place. In the register of his college he is called, at his admission by the president, Matthew Prior, of Winburn in Middlesex; by himself, next day, Matthew Prior of Dorsetshire; in which county, not in Middlesex, Winborn, or Winborne as it stands in the Villare, is found. When he stood candidate for his fellowship, five years afterwards, he was registered again by himself as of Middlesex. The last record (says Dr. Johnson) ought to be preferred, because it was made upon oath yet there is much reason for thinking that he was actually of Wimborn in Dorsetshire, and that his county was concealed, in order to entitle him to a fellowship. (See Gent. Mag. LXII. p. 02.)

In his private character Prior was licentious, and descended to keep low company. In his “Tales” we find much indecency, and his works, collectively, are not a suitable present from a decent giver. Whatever his opinions, there seems no evidence to contradict the charge brought against him, that his life was irregular, negligent, and sensual. For the merit of his poems we may refer to Dr. Johnson’s criticism, which some have thought rather severe. As it becomes more attentively considered, however, it seems to harmonize with more recent opinions. Ease and humour are the principal characteristics of Prior’s poetry. Invention he had very little; but, although his stories, and even his points may be traced, he certainly had the happy art of telling an old story so as to convey new delight. He appears to have rested his reputation on his “Solomon,” which he wrote with great labour. Johnson, who objects to it chiefly its tediousness, allows that the reader will be able to mark many passages to which he may recur for instruction and delight, many from which the poet may learn to write, and the philosopher to reason: and Cowper says, that in his opinion, Solomon is the best poem, whether we consider the subject of it, or the execution, that Prior ever wrote.

, an ancient Roman poet, was born at Mevania, a town in Urnbria, as we learn from his own writings, and probably about the year of Rome 700. Some say, his father was a knight, and a man of considerable authority; who, becoming a partizan with Antony, on the capture of Perusia, was made prisoner, and killed by Augustus’s order, at the altar erected to Caesar when his estate was forfeited of course. This which happened when the poet was very young, he alludes to in one of his elegies, and laments the ruin of his family in that early season of his life. His wit and learning soon recommended him to the patronage of Maecenas and Gallus; and among the poets of his time, he was very intimate with Ovid and Tibullus. We have no particular account of his life, or the manner of his death; only he mentions his taking a journey to Athens, probably in company with his patron Maecenas, who attended Augustus in his progress through Greece. Those that make him live the longest carry his age no higher than forty-one. His death is usually placed B. C. 10. The great object of his imitation was Callimachus Mimnermus and Philetas were two others, whom he likewise admired and followed in his elegies. Quintilian tells us, that Propertius disputed the prize with Tibullus, among the critics of his time and the younger Pliny, speaking of Passienus, an eminent and learned elegiac poet of his acquaintance, says, that this talent was hereditary and natural for that he was a descendant and countryman of Propertius. Propertius however was inferior to Tibullus in tenderness, and to Ovid in variety of fancy, and facility of expression still it must be granted that he was equal in harmony of numbers, and certainly gave the first specimen of the poetical epistle, which Ovid afterwards claimed as his invention.

The works of this poet are printed with almost all the editions of Tibullus and Catullus and separately by Brouckhusius at Amsterdam, in 1702, in 4to again in 1724, 4to; by Vulpius in 1755, with select notes from Brouckhusius andPasserat, and a learned commentary of his own, in 2 vols. 4to, and in a form to accompany his Catullus and Tibullus by Frid. Gottl. Barthius, at Leipsic, in 1777; by Burman (posthumous) 1780, 4to, by far the best edition and lastly by Kuinoelus, at Leipsic, 1805, 8vo.

, an ancient Christian poet, was born in Spain in the year 348 but in what part is uncertain. He was brought up a lawyer and, being called to the bar, was afterwards made a judge in two considerable towns. He was then promoted by the emperor Honorius to a very high office; but not to the consulate, as some have imagined. He was fifty-seven before he employed his mind on religion, and then wrote his poems on pious subjects, which are neither deficient in the true poetic spirit, nor much imbued with it. He often uses harsh expressions, not reconcileable to pure Latinity, and is even jjuilty of false quantity. These effusions, to which he chiefly gave Greek titles, are, “Psychoniachia, or The Combat of the Soul” “Cathemerinon, or Poems concerning each day’s duty” “Tlegi rspavuv, or Hymns in Praise of Martyrs” “Apotheosis, or Treatises upon divine subjects, against Jews, Infidels, and Heretics;” “Hamartigena, or concerning Original Sin, against Marcion” “Two Books against Symmachus” “Diptichon, or some Histories of the Old and New Testament in distichs.” In the two books against Symmachus, he shews the original of false deities, gives an account of the conversion of the city of Rome and answers the petition, which Symmachns presented to the emperors, to obtain the reestablishment of the Altar of Victory, and other ceremonies of the pagan religion. These books were written before the victory gained over Radagaisus in the year 405, and after that which Stilicho won over Alaric near Pollentia in the year 402 for he mentions the latter, and say* nothing of the former, though his subject required it.

, one of the most famous Italian poets, was born at Florence, Decembers, 1431. He was of a noble family, and was the most poetical of three brothers who all assiduously courted the Muses. His two elder brothers, Bernardo and Luca, appeared as poets earlier than himself. The first production of the family is probably the Elegy of Bernardo addressed to Lorenzo de' Jiedici, on the death of his grandfather Cosmo. He also wrote an elegy on the untimely death of the beautiful Simonetta, mistress of Giuliano de' Medici, the brother of Lorenzo, which was published at Florence in 1494, though written much earlier. He produced the first Italian translation of the Eclogues of Virgil, which appears to have been finished about 1470 and was published in 1481 and a poem on the Passion of Christ. Luca wrote a celebrated poem on a tournament held at Florence in which Lorenzo was victor, in 1468, entitled “Giostra di Lorenzo de' Medici” as Politian celebrated the success of Giuliano, in his “Giostra di. Giuliano de' Medici.” It is confessed, however, that the poem of Luca Pulci derives its merit rather from the minute information it gives respecting the exhibition, than from its poetical excellence. He produced also “II Ciriffo Calvaneo,” an epic romance, probably the first that appeared in Italy, being certainly prior to the Morgante of his brother, and the Orlando Innamorato of Bojardo and the “Driadeo d'Amore,” a pastoral romance in ottava rima. There are also eighteen heroic epistles by him in terza rima, the first from LucretiaDonati to Lorenzo de Medici, the rest on Greek and Roman subjects. These were printed in 1481, and do credit to their author. Luigi appeaps, from many circumstances, to have lived on terms of the utmost friendship with Lorenzo de Medici, who, in his poem entitled “La Caccia col Falcone,” mentions him with great freedom and jocularity. His principal work is the “Morgante maggiore,” an epic romance. Whether this or the Orlando Innamorato of Bojardo was first written, has been a subject of doubt. Certain it is that the Morgante had the priority in publication, having been printed at Venice in 1488, after a Florentine edition of uncertain date whereas Bojardo' s poem did not appear till 1496, and, from some of the concluding lines, appears not to have been finished in 1494. The Morgante may therefore be justly, as it is generally, regarded as the prototype of the Orlando Furioso of Ariosto. It has been said without foundation that Ficinus and Politian had a share in this composition. It was first written at the particular request of Lucretia, mother of Lorenzo de Medici, but it was not finished till after her death, which happened in 1482. It is said by Crescimbeni that Pulci was accustomed to recite this poem at the table of Lorenzo, in the manner of the ancient rhapsodists. This singular offspring of the wayward genius of Pulci has been as immoderately commended by its admirers, as it has been unreasonably condemned and degraded by its opponents: and while some have not scrupled to prefer it to the productions of Ariosto and Tasso, others have decried it as vulgar, absurd, and profane. From the solemnity and devotion with which every canto is introduced, some have judged that the author meant to give a serious narrative, but the improbability of the relation, and the burlesque nature of the incidents, destroy all ideas of this kind. M. de la Monnoye says that the author, whom he conceives to have been ignorant of rules, has confounded the comic and serious styles, and made the giant, his hero, die a burlesque death, by the bite of a sea-crab in his heel, in the twentieth book, so that in the eight which remain he is not mentioned. The native simplicity of the narration, he adds, covers all faults: and the lovers of the Florentine dialect still read it with delight, especially when they can procure the edition of Venice, in 1546 or 1550, with the explanations of his nephew John Pulci. These, however, are no more than a glossary of a few words subjoined to each canto. There are also sonnets by Luigi Pulci, published with those of Matteo Franco, in which the two authors satirize each other without mercy or delicacy yet it is supposed that they were very good friends, and only took these liberties with each other for the sake of amusing the public. They were published about the fifteenth century, entitled “Sonetti di Misere Mattheo Franco et di Luigi Pulci jocosi et faceti, cioe da ridere.” No other poem of this author is mentioned by Mr. Roscoe, who has given the best account of him, except “La Beca di Dicomano,” written in imitatation and emulation of “La Nencio da Barberino,” by Lorenzo de Medici, ajid published with it. It is a poem in the rustic style and language, but instead of the more chastised and delicate humour of Lorenzo, the poem of Pulci, says Mr. Roscoe, partakes of the character of his Morgante, and wanders into the burlesque and extravagant. It has been supposed that this poet died about 1-487, but it was probably something later. The exact time id not known.

In this manner he continued inflexibly severe, attacking the measures of the minister with a degree of eloquence and sarcasm that worsted every antagonist; and sir Robert was often heard to say, that he dreaded his tongue more than another man’s sword. In 1738, when opposition ran so high, that several members openly left the House, as finding that party, and not reason, carried it in every motion, Pulteney thought proper to vindicate the extraordinary step which they had taken; and, when a motion was made for removing sir Robert Walpole, he warmly supported it. What a single session could not effect, was at length brought about by time; and, in 1741, when sir Robert found his place of prime minister no longer tenable, he wisely resigned all his employments, and was created earl of Orford. His opposers also were assured of being provided for; and, among other promotions, Pulteney himself was sworn of the privy-council, and soon afterwards created earl of Bath. He had long lived in the very focus of popularity, and was respected as the chief bulwark against the encroachments of the crown; but, from, the moment he accepted a title, all his favour with the people was at an end, and the rest of his life was spent in contemning that applause which he no longer could secure. What can be said in his favour has been candidly stated by the biographer of his great antagonist. Dying without issue, June 8, 1764, his title became extinct; and his only son, having died some time before in Portugal, the paternal estate devolved to his brother, the late lieutenantgeneral Pulteney. Besides the great part he bore in “The Craftsman,” he was the author of many political pamphlets; in the drawing up and composing of which no man of his time was supposed to exceed him. Lord Orford, who has introduced him among his Royal and Noble Authors, says, that his writings will be better known bv his name, than his name will be by his writings, though his prose had much effect, and his verses (for he was a poet) were easy and graceful. " Both were occasional, and not dedicated to the love of fame. Good-humour, and the spirit of society, dictated his poetry ambition and acrimony his political writings. The latter made Pope say,

, an English poet and poetical critic, flourished in the reign of queen Elizabeth. Very little is known of his life, and for that little- we are indebted to Mr. Haslewood, whose researches, equally accurate and judicious, have so frequently contributed to illustrate the history of old English poetry. By Ames, Puttenham was called Webster, but his late editor has brought sufficient proof that his name was George. He appears to have been born some time between 1529 and 1535. As his education was liberal, it may be presumed that his parents were not of the lowest class. He was educated at Oxford, but in what college, how long he resided, or whether he took a degree, remain unascertained. Wood had made none of these discoveries when he wrote his “Athense.” His career at court might commence at the age of eighteen, when he sought to gain the attention of the youthful king Edward VI. by an P^clogue, entitled “Elpine.” He made one or two tours on the continent, and proved himself neither an idle nor inattentive observer. He visited successively the courts of France, Spain, and Italy, and was at the Spa nearly about the year 1570. It is not improbable that he had a diplomatic appointment under Henry earl of Arundel, an old courtier, who, with the queen’s licence, visited Italy as he describes himself a beholder of the feast given by the duchess of Parma, to this nobleman, at the court of Brussels. His return was probably early after the above period, but nothing can be stated with certainty. It may however be inferred from his numerous adulatory verses addressed to queen Elizabeth, before the time of publishing his “Art of Poesie,” that he must have been a courtier of long standing, and was then one of her gentlemen pensioners.

, a late English poet, was descended from a very ancient and respectable family, who are stated to have come into England with the Conqueror, and settled at a place called the Meerd in Herefordshire. His greatgreat-grandfather was auditor of the exchequer to James I. His son, sir Robert Pye, a knight also, married Anne, the eldest daughter of John Hampden, the patriot, of whom the subject of this article was consequently the representative by the female line. The last male heir left the estate in Herefordshire, and the name, to the Trevors, descended from the second daughter; but sir Robert Pye purchased Faringdon in Berkshire, which county he twice represented in Parliament. Our author’s father, Henry Pye, esq. who occasionally resided there, was elected no less than five times, without opposition, for the same county.

Henry James Pye was born in London in 1745, and educated at home under a private tutor until he had attained the age of seventeen. He then entered a gentleman, commoner of Magdalen college, Oxford, under the care of Dr. Richard Scroup, where he continued four years, and had the honorary degree of M. A. conferred on him July 3, 1766. In 1772, at the installation of Lord North, he was also created Doctor of Laws. Within ten days after he came of age his father died (March 2, 1766), at Faringdon; and Mr. Pye married, in the same year, the sister of Lieut.­col. Hooke, and lived chiefly in the country, making only occasional visits for a few weeks to London, dividing his time between his studies, the duties of a magistrate, and the diversions of the field, to which he was remarkably attached. He was for some time in the Berkshire militia. In 1784 he was chosen member of parliament for Berkshire but the numberless expences attending such a situation, and the contest to obtain it, reduced him to the harsh, yet necessary measure, of selling his paternal estate. In 179O Mr. Pye was appointed to succeed his ingenious and worthy friend Mr. Warton* as poet-laureat and in 1792 he was nominated one of the magistrates for Westminster, tinder the Police Act in both of which situations he conducted himself with honour and ability.

, an English poet, was born in the year 1592, at Stewards, near Romford in Essex, and baptized on May 8 of that year. His family was of some consideration in the county of Essex, and possessed of several estates in Romford, Hornchurch, Dagenham, &c. In Romford church are registered the deaths of his grandfather, sir Robert Quarles, and his two wives and daughters, and James Quarles, his father, who died Nov. 16, 1642. He was clerk of the green cloth, and purveyor of the navy, to queen Elizabeth. Our poet was educated at Christ’s cbllege, Cambridge, and Lincoln’s-inn, London. His destination seems to have been to public life, for we are told he was preferred to the place of cup-bearer to Elizabeth, daughter of James 1. electress palatine and queen of Bohemia; but quitted her service, very probably upon the ruin of the elector’s affairs, and went over to Ireland, where he became secretary to archbishop Usher. Upon the breaking out of the rebellion in that kingdom, in 1641, he suffered greatly in his fortune, and was obliged to fly for safety to England. But here he did not meet with the quiet he expected; for a piece of his, styled “The Royal Convert,” having given offence to the prevailing powers, they took occasion from that, and from his repairing to Charles I. at Oxford, to hurt him as much as possible in his estates. But we are told, that what he took most to heart was, being plundered of his books, and some manuscripts which he had prepared for the press. The loss of these is supposed to have hastened his death, which happened Sept. 8, 1644, when he was buried in the church of St. Vedast, Foster-lane, London. Quarles was also chronologer to the city of London. What the duties of this place were, which is now abolished, we know not but his wife Ursula, who prefixed a short life of him to one of his pieces, says that “he held this place till his death, and would have given that city (and the world) a testimony that he was their faithful servant therein, if it had pleased God to blesse him with life to perfect what he had begun.” Mr. Headley observes, that Mr. Walpole and Mr. Granger have asserted, that he had a pension from Charles I. though they produce no authority and he thinks this not improbable, as the king had taste to discover merit, and generosity to reward it. Pope, however, asserted the same thing, and probably had authority for it, although he did not think it necessary to quote it:

Wood, in mentioning a publication of Dr. Burgess, which was abused by an anonymous author, and defended by Quarles, styles the latter “an old puritanical poet, the sometimes darling of our plebeian judgments;” and Phillips says of his works, that “they have been ever, and still are, in wonderful veneration among the vulgar.” And this certainly has been the case until within the last thirty years several critics of acknowledged taste studied Quarles’s various works with - attention, and have advanced proofs that some of them deserve a better fate. Of these, Mr. Head ley, and Mr. Jackson of Exeter, appear to have pleaded the cause of this neglected poet with best effect and although they do not convince us that reprinting the whole of any of his pieces would be an acceptable labour, there can be no doubt that a judicious selection would prove Quarles a man of real genius and true poetical spirit. Quarles (says Mr. Headley) has been branded with more than common abuse, and seems often to have been censured merely from the want of being read. “If his poetry,” adds this amiable critic, “failed to gain him friends and readers, his piety should at least have secured him peace and good-will. He too often, no doubt, mistook the enthusiasm of devotion for the inspiration of fancy. To mix the waters of Jordan and Helicon in the same case was reserved for the hand of Milton; and for him, and him only, to find the bays of Mount Olivet equally verdant with those of Parnassus. Yet, as the effusions of a real poetical mind, however thwarted by untowardness of subject, will be seldom rendered totally abortive, we find in Quarles original imagery, striking sentiment, fertility of expression, and happy combinations together with a compression of style, that merits the observation of the writers of verse. Gross deficiencies of judgment, and the infelicities of his subjects, concurred in ruining him.”

By his wife he had eighteen children, one of whom, named John, a poet also, was born in Essex in 1624 admitted into Exeter college, Oxford, in 1642; bore arms for Charles I. within the garrison at Oxford and was afterWards a captain in one of the royal armies. Upon the ruin of the king’s affairs, he retired to London in a mean condition, where he wrote several things purely for a maintenance, and afterwards travelled on the continent. He returned, and died of the plague at London, in 1665. Some have esteemed him also a good poet; and perhaps he was not entirely destitute of genius, which would have appeared to more advantage, if it had been duly and properly cultivated. His principal merit, however, with his admirers, was certainly his being a very great royalist.

, a poet of Italy, who wrote both in his own language and in Latin, was born at Padua in 1546, and manifested a very early genius. By means of a ready conception and vast memory, he soon made himself master of several languages, and of no small store of other knowledge. He was confidentially employed bjr several popes, and was secretary of the sacred college under no less than five. Clement VIII. made him a canon of Padua; but Paul V. recalled him to Rome, where he loaded him with honourable offices. Querenghi continued to hold his employments under the succeeding popes, till he died at Rome, Sept. 1, 1633, at the age of eightyseven. There is a volume of his Latin poems, which was printed at Rome in 1629; and Italian poetry, published also at Rome in 1616.

, an Italian poet, was born at Monopolis in the kingdom of Naples; and acquired in his early years a great facility in extempore verses. He went to Rome about 1514, with a poem of twenty thousand lines, called Alexias. Some young gentlemen of that city professed great friendship to him they treated him in the country, and at a feast crowned him arch-poet so that he was not known afterwards by any other name. Leo X. who, upon certain occasions, was not averse to buffoonery, delighted in his company, and caused him to be served with meat from his own table and Querno, being an excellent parasite, humoured him very exactly. He was obliged to make a distich extempore, upon whatever subject was given him even though he was at the time ill of the gout, with which he was extremely troubled. Once, when the fit was on him, he made this verse, “Archipoeta facit versus pro mille poetis,” and, as he hesitated in composing the second, the pope readily and wittily added, “Et pro mille aliis Archipoeta bibit.” Querno, hastening to repair his fault, cried, “Porrige, quod faciat mihi carmina docta, Falernum,” to which the pope instantly replied, “Hoc vinum enervat, debilitatque pedes,” alluding either to the gout in his feet, or to the feet of his verses. After the taking of Rome, he retired to Naples, where he suffered much during the wars in 1528, and died there in the hospital. He used to say, “He had found a thousand wolves, after he had lost one lion.”

During Quin’s connection with Mr. Rich, he was employed, or at least consulted, in the conduct of the theatre by his principal, as a kind of deputy-manager. While he was in this situation, a circumstance took place which has been frequently and variously noticed, and which it may not be improper to relate in the words of the writer last quoted. “When Mr. James Quin was a managing-actor under Mr. Rich, at LincolnVInn-fields, he had a whole heap of plays brought him, which he put in a drawer in his bureau. An author had given him a play behind the scenes, which I suppose he might lose or mislay, not troubling his head about it. Two or three days after, Mr. Bayes waited on him, to know how he liked his play Quin told him some excuse for its not being received, and the author desired to have it returned. ‘ There,’ says Quin, `there it lies on the table.‘ The author took up a play that was lying on the table, but on opening, found it was a comedy, and his was a tragedy, and told Quin of his mistake. ’ Faith, then, sir,‘ said he, ’ I have lost your play.‘ ` Lost my play’ cries the bard. `Yes, I have,‘ answered the tragedian but here is a drawer full of both comedies and tragedies: take any two you will in the room of it.’ The poet left him in high dudgeon, and the hero stalked across the room to his Spa water and Rhenish, with a negligent felicity.”

, a celebrated French poet, was born in 1636, and was one of a family that had produced some dramatic performers. He had but little education, and is said to have been servant to Tristan D'Hermile, from whom he imbibed some taste for poetry. The lessons of Tristan were probably of some use to him, as that author had had long experience in theatrical matters but Quiuault owed still more to nature. Before he was twenty years old, he had distinguished himself by several pieces for the stage, which had considerable success: and before he was thirty, he produced sixteen dramas, some of which were well received, but not all equally. It is supposed that some of these early pieces prejudiced Boileau against Quinault early in his career. There was neither regularity in the plan, nor force in the style: romantic lovers and common-place gallantry, in scenes which required a nervous pencil and vigorous colouring. These were defects not likely to escape the lash of the French Juvenal. He covered the young poet with ridicule; reproached him with the affectedly soft and languishing dialogue of his lovers, by whom even / hate you was said tenderly. Quinault, born with great sensibility, was so wounded by his seventy, that he applied to the magistrates, not only to silence Boileau, but oblige him to remove his name from his satires but the attempt was vain and it was not till after Quinault was inlisted by Lulli to write for the opera, that he silenced all his enemies, except Boileau and his party, who envied him his success. The French nation knew no better music than that of Lulli, and thought it divine. Quinault’s was thought of secondary merit, till after his decease and then, in proportion as the glory of Lulli faded, that of Quinault increased. After this his writings began to be examined and felt; and of late years, his name is never mentioned by his countrymen without commendation. His operas, however, though admirable to read, are ill-calculated for modern music; and are obliged to be new written, ere they can be new set, even in France. Marmontel, who had modernized several of them for Piccini to set in 1788, gave M. Laborde a dissertation on the dramatic writings of Quinault for music which is published in the fourth volume of his “Essai sur la Musique.” He begins by asserting that Quinault was the creator of the French opera upon the most beautiful idea that could be conceived; an idea which he had realized with a superiority of talent, which no writer has since approached. His design was to form an exhibition, composed of the prodigies of all the arts; to unite on the same stage all that can interest the mind, the imagination, and the senses. For this purpose a species of tragedy is necessary, that shall be sufficiently touching to move, but not so austere as to refuse the enchantments of the arts that are n-ecessary to embellish it. Historical tragedy, in its majestic and gloomy simplicity, cannot b.e sung with any degree of probability, nor mixed with festivals and dances, or be rendered susceptible of that variety, magnificence, show, and decoration, where the painter and the machinist ought to exhibit their enchantments.

, or rather Quintus Smyrneus, was a Greek poet, who wrote a supplement to Homer’s Iliad, in 14 books, in which a relation is given of the Trojan war from the death of Hector to the destruction of Troy. He is supposed, from the style of his work, to have lived in the fifth century, but nothing certain can be collected concerning his person and country; but some say he was a native of Smyrna, and hence the name of Smyrneus. His poem was first made known by cardinal Bessarion, who discovered it in St. Nicholas’ church, near Otranto in Calabria, from which circumstance the author was named Quintus Calaber. It was published at Venice, by Aldus, but there is no date attached to the title-page; it is supposed to be 1521. The other editions are those of Freigius, Basil, 1569; of Rhodomannus, Hanover, 1604; of De Pauw, Leyden, 1734; and of Bandinius, Gr. Lat. et Ital. Florence, 1765.

, a French poet, was born at Roche-Racan in Touraine in 1.589. At sixteen, he was made one of the pages to Henry IV. and, as he began to amuse himself with writing verses, he became acquainted with Malherbe, who, amidst his advices, reproached him with being too negligent and incorrect in his versification but Boileau, who has passed the same censure on him, affirms that he had more genius than his master; and was as capable of writing in the Epic as in the Lyric style, in which last he was allowed to excel. Menage has also spoken highly of Racan, in his additions and alterations to his " Remarques sur les Poesies de Malherbe. >T Racan had little or no education, and no learning. On quitting the office of page, he entered into the army but this, more to obligee his father, the marquis of Racan, than out of any inclination of his own and therefore, after two or three campaigns, he returned to Paris, where he married, and devoted himself to poetry. His works, the best edition of which is that of Paris, 1724, 2 vols. 8vo, consist of sacred odes, pastorals, letters, and memoirs of the life of Malherbe, prefixed to many editions of the works of that poet. He was chosen one of the members of the French academy, at the time of its foundation; and died in 1670, aged eighty-one.

, an illustrious French poet, was born at La Ferte-Milon in 1639, and educated at Port Royal, where he gave the greatest proofs of uncommon abilities and genius. During three years’ continuance there, he made a most rapid progress in the Greek and Latin languages, and every species of polite literature. He was an early reader of Sophocles and Euripides and so fond of these authors, as to have committed their plays to memory, and delighted to repeat their striking beauties. While thus studying the models of antiquity, we are told that he accidentally met with the Greek romance of Heliodorus, “of the Loves of Theagenes and Chariclea,” and was reading it when his director, surprising him, took the book and threw it into the fire. Racine found means to get another copy, which underwent the same fate; and after that a third, which, having a prodigious memory, he got by heart; and then, carrying it to his director, said, “You may now burn this, as you have burned the two former.”

Racine’s dramatic character embroiled him at this time with the gentlemen of Port Royal. Mr. Nicole, the Jeremy Collier of France, in his “Visionaires & Imagifiaires,” had thrown out occasionally soine poignant strokes against the writers of romance and poets of the theatre, whom he called the public poisoners, not of bodies, but of souls “des empoisonneurs publics, non des corps, mais desames.” Racine, considering himself as included in this censure, addressed a very animated letter to Nicole; in which, without entering deeply into a defence of his brethren, he endeavoured to turn into ridicule the solitaires and religious of the Port Royal. M. du Bois and Barbier Daucour having each of them replied to this letter, Racine opposed them in a second, all which, originally published in 1666, are to be found in the edition of Racine’s works 1728, and also in the last editions of the works of Boileau. In 1668, he published“Les Plaideurs,” a comedy, and a close imitation of Aristophanes and “Andromache,” a tragedy, which was much applauded and much criticised. Some however think it his first good tragedy. He continued to exhibit from time to time several excellent tragedies “Britannicus,” in 1670; “Berenice,” in 1671; “Bajazet,” in 1672 “Mithridates,” in 1673 “Iphigenia,” in 1675; “Phaedra,” in 1677. During this time, he met with all that opposition which envy and cabal are ever ready to set up against a superior genius; and one Pradon, a poet whose name is not otherwise worth remembering, was then employed by persons of the first distinction to have a “Phaedra” ready for the theatre against the time that Racine’s should appear.

Offended at the bad reception of “Athaliah,” he was more disgusted than' ever with poetry, and now renounced it totally. He spent the latter years of his life in composing a History of the house of Port Royal, the place of his education which is well drawn up, in an elegant style, and was published in 1767, in two vols. 12mo. Too great sensibility, say his friends, but more properly an impotence of spirit, shortened the days of this poet. Though he had conversed much with the court, he had not learned to disguise his real sentiments. Having drawn up a well-reasoned and well-written memorial upon the miseries of the people, and the means of relieving them, he one day lent it to Madam de Maintenon to read when the king coming in, and demanding what and whose it was, commended the zeal of Racine, but disapproved of his meddling with things that did not concern him; and said, with an angry tone, “Because he knows how to make good verses, does he think he knows every thing and would he be a minister of state, because he is a great poet” These words hurt Racine greatly he conceived dreadful ideas of the king’s displeasure, and this brought on a fever, which surpassed the power of medicine; for he died of it, after being grievously afflicted with pains, in 1699. The king, who was sensible of his great merit, and always loved him, sent often to him in his illness; an-d finding, after his death, that he had died poor, settled a handsome pension upon his family. He was interred at Port Royal, according to his will and, upon the destruction of that monastery in 1708, his remains were carried to St. Stephen du Mont, at Paris. He was middle-sized, and of an agreeable and open countenance; was a great jester, but was restrained by piety, in the latter years of his life, from indulging this talent; and, when warmed in conversation, had so lively and persuasive an eloquence, that he himself often lamented his not having been an advocate in parliament. Of his works his countrymen have reason to be proud no modern stage has been honoured, in such quick succession, by two such writers as Corneille and Racine. Fonteneiie’s parallel between them we have already given (see Corneille, vol. X. p. 269.), but it is thought too partial to Corneille. We shall content ourselves with saying, after Perrault, that “If Corneille surpassed Racine in heroic sentiments and the grand character of his personages, he was inferior to him in moving the passions, and in purity of language.”

, son of the preceding, was born at Paris in 1692. He was also a distinguished poet, but adopted the ecclesiastical habit, and in 1720 published his poem “On Grace.” From his retirement, D'Aguesseau brought him again into the world, and cardinal Fleury afterwards gave him a place in the finances; on which he married, and lived happily, till the loss of an only son threw him into a deep melancholy. He died in 1763, at the age of 71. His poetical writings are, “Poems on Religion and Grace;” “Odes,” of which the diction is splendid, and the sentiments elevated; “Epistles,” and a “Translation of Milton’s Paradise Lost.” In prose he wrote “Reflexions sur la Poesie” “Memoires sur la Vie de Jean Racine” “Remarques sur les Tragedies de J. Racine.” Besides these, he contributed several dissertations to the Memoires of the Academy of Inscriptions, of which he was a member. His works were collected and published in 6 vols. 12mo.

, or Raleigh, or'Rawlegh, an illustrious Englishman, was the fourth son, and the second by a third wife, of Walter Ralegh, esq. of Fardel, near Plymouth. His father was of an ancient knightly family, and his mother was Catharine, daughter of sir Philip Champernoun, of Modbury in Devonshire, relict of Otho Gilbert, of Compton, the father, by her, of sir Humphrey Gilbert, the celebrated navigator. Mr. Ralegh, upon his marriage with this lady, had retired to a farm called Hayes, in the parish of Budiey, where sir Walter was born in 1552. After a proper education at school, he was sent to Oriel college, Oxford, about 1568, where he soon distinguished himself by great force of natural parts, and an uncommon progress in academical learning but Wood is certainly mistaken in saying he stayed here three years for in 1569, when only seventeen, he formed one of the select troop of an hundred gentlemen whom queen Elizabeth permitted Henry Champernoun to transport to France, to assist the persecuted Protestants. Sir Walter appears to have been engaged for some years in military affairs, of which, however, we do not know the particulars. In 1575 or 1576, he was in London, exercising his poetical talents; for there is a commendatory poem by him prefixed, among others, to a satire called “The Steel Glass,” published by George Gascoigne, a poet of that age. This is dated from the Middle Temple, at which he then resided, but with no view of studying the law for he declared expressly, at his trial, that he had never studied it. On the contrary, his mind was still bent on military glory; and accordingly, in 1578, he went to the Netherlands, with the forces which were sent against the Spaniards, commanded by sir John Norris, and it is supposed he was at the battle of Rimenant, fought on Aug. 1. The following year, 1579, when sir Humphrey Gilbert, who was his brother by his mother’s side, had obtained a patent of the queen to plant and inhabit some Northern parts of America, he engaged in that adventure; but returned soon after, the attempt proving unsuccessful. In 1580, the pope having incited the Irish to rebellion, he had a captain’s commission under the lord deputy of Ireland, Arthur Grey, lord Grey de Wilton. Here he distinguished himself by his skill and bravery. In 1581, the earl of Ormond departing for England, his government of Munster was given to captain Ralegh, in commission with sir * William Morgan and captain Piers Ralegh resided chiefly at Lismore, and spent all this summer in the woods and country adjacent, in continual action with the rebels. At his return home, he was introduced to court, and, as Fuller relates, upon the following occasion. Her majesty, taking the air in a walk, stopped at a splashy place, in doubt whether to go on when Ralegh, dressed in a gay and genteel habit of those tirhes, immediately cast off and spread his new plush cloak on the ground n which her majesty gently treading, was conducted 6ver clean and dry. The truth is, Ralegh always made a very elegant appearance, as well in the splendor of attire, as the politeness of address; having a commanding figure, and a handsome and well-compacted person a strong natural wit, and a better judgment and that kind of courtly address which pleased Elizabeth, and led to herfaTOur. Such encouragement, however, did not reconcile hirn to an indolent life. In 1583 he set out with his brother sir H. Gilbert, in his expedition to Newfoundland but within a few days was obliged to return to Plymouth, his ship’s company -being seized with an infectious distemper and sir H. Gilbert was drowned in coming home, after he had taken possession of that country. These expeditions, however, being much to Ralegh’s taste, he still felt no discouragement; but in 1584 obtaining letters patent for discovering unknown countries, he set sail to America, and took possession of a place, to which queen Elizabeth gave the name of Virginia.

In April 1589, he accompanied don Antonio, the expelled king of Portugal, then in London, to his dominions, when an armament was sent to restore him and for his conduct on this occasion, was honoured by the queen with a gold chain. On his return to England, the same year, he touched upon Ireland, where he visited Spenser the poet, whom he brought to England, introduced into the queen’s favour, and encouraged by his own patronage, himself being no inconsiderable poet. Spenser has described the circumstances of sir Walter’s visit to him in a pastoral, which about two years after he dedicated to him, and entitled <: Colin Clout’s come home again.“In 1592 he was appointed general of an expedition against the Spaniards at Panama. Soon after this we find him again in the House of Commons, where he made a distinguished figure, as appears from several of his printed speeches. In the mean time, he was no great favourite with the people, and somewhat obnoxious to the clergy, not only on account of his principles, which were not thought very orthodox, but because he possessed some lands which had been taken from the church. His enemies, knowing this, ventured to attack him; and, in 1593, he was aspersed with atheism, in a libel agairfst several ministers of state, printed at Lyons with this title:” Elizabeths Reginse Angliae Edictum, promulgatum Londini, Nov. 29, 1591; et Andr. Philopatris ad idem responsio.“In this piece the writer, who was the Jesuit Parsons, inveighs against sir Walter Ralegh’s” School of Atheism“insinuating, that he was not content with being a disciple, but had set up for a doctor in his faculty. Osborn accounts for this aspersion thus:” Ralegh,“says he,” was the first, as I have heard, who ventured to tack about, and sail aloof from the beaten track of the schools; and who, upon the discovery of so apparent an error as a: torrid zone, intended to proceed in an inquisition after more solid truths till the mediation of some, whose livelihood lay in hammering shrines for this superannuated study, possessed queen Elizabeth, that such a doctrine was against God no less than her father’s honour, whose faith, if he owned any, was grounded upon school-divinity. Whereupon she chid him, who was, by his own confession, ever after branded with the title of Atheist, though a known asserter of God and providence." That he was such an assert er, has been universally allowed yet Wood not only adopts the unfavourable opinion of his principles, but pretends to tell us from whom he imbibed them.

, a German poet of great celebrity in his own country, but little known here, was born in 1725, at Kolberg, and became professor of belles lettres in a military academy at Berlin. In concert with Leasing, he there edited two ancient poets of the Germans, Logau and Wernike. His Lyrical Antholpgy contributed much to improve the taste of his countrymen, by those changes of diction which almost every poem received from his pen. Sixteen odes of Horace he translated with great felicity, and composed many original imitations of them. His oratorios, which Graun set to music, would have been warmly admired, but in the country of Klopstock. In 1774, he translated the critical works of Batteux, which he accompanied with considerable additions.

, a statesman in queen Elizabeth’s reign, the son of Avery Randolph of Badlesmere in Kent, was born in that county in 1523. He was, according to his own account, a pupil of George Buchanan, but had his academical education at Christ Church, Oxford, then newly founded; where he took the degree of bachelor of law in 1547, about which time he was made a public notary. In Nov. 1549, he became principal of Broadgatehall (now Pembroke college), and continued in that office until 1553, when the persecution of the protestants under queen Mary, obliged him to retire to France. On the accession of queen Elizabeth, he came into high favour, and his talents recommended him to be employed in various embassies, particularly in Scotland during the commotions there: he was sent thrice to queen Mary, and afterwards seven times to her son and successor James VI. We find him also several times supporting the same character at the courts of Russia and France. Eiis first mission to Scotland, in 1561, had for its professed object to promote a mutual friendship between the two nations, and to endeavour that queen Mary, who hadj ust lost her husband, Francis II. king of France, should not again marry a foreigner; but according to Sir James Melvil and others, his real business was to intrigue between the two parties which then divided Scotland, and rather to increase than allay their animosities. In this plan secretary Cecil was supposed to be the director, and Randolph the executor. By a letter published by Mr. Lodge, who says that Randolph was a man of “a dark intriguing spirit, full of cunning, and void of conscience,” we learn that at one time he was confined in prison at Edinburgh; but probably for a short time, as the circumstance is not mentioned in any history. In Russia, to which he was sent in 1560, his conduct merits greater approbation, as in the following year, he brought to conclusion a commercial treaty highly advantageous to the English merchants, who were then enabled to establish the “Russia Company.” His secretary on this embassy was George Turberville the poet, who has described the manners and customs of the Moscovites in some epistles to his friends, which are inserted in Hakluyt’s voyages. In 1571, during one of his embassies to Scotland, he had the spirit to challenge Virac, the French ambassador in that kingdom, who had taken some liberties with queen Elizabeth’s character and with his own. For all these services the queen is accused of having rewarded Mr. Randolph rather niggardly, having bestowed on him only the order of knighthood, the office of chamberlain of the exchequer, and that of postmaster, to neither of which last was much profit annexed, and a few small estates. Yet with these he is said to have been content, although he had a large family. He died at his house on St. Peter’s hill, near Thames-street, London, June 8, 1590, in the sixty-seventh year of his age, and was buried in the church of St. Peter, Paul’s wharf. In his latter days he appears to have lived retired, “setting his mind,” as he expresses it, “upon the heavenly country, and reconciling himself to the divine mercy by a timely repentance.” Such likewise is the advice he gave to sir Francis Walsingham, whose sister he had married. He tells him, “how worthy. yea, how necessary a thing it was, that they should at length bid farewell to the tricks, he of a secretary, and himself of an ambassador.” Several of his letters and dispatches are in the Cotton collection in the British Museum, and among bishop More’s books in the public library at Cambridge. Two of his letters were published by James Oliphant, among Buchanan’s Letters, 1711, 8vo, and have been inserted since in the Leyden and Edinburgh edition of Buchanan’s works, one to Buchanan himself, and the ether to Peter Yonge, school- master to James VI. There are also some of his letters, instructions, and dispatches, printed in Strype’s “Annals,” Goodall’s “Examination of the Letters said to be written by Mary queen of Scots,” and in Robertson’s History of Scotland," &C.

, an English poet, was the son of a steward to Edward lord Zouch, and born in Northamptonshire (Wood says, at Newnham, nearDaintry; Langbaine,atHoughton) June 15, 1605. He was educated at Westminster-school, whence, being a king’s scholar, he was elected to Trinity college,Cambridge, in 1623. Here he obtained a fellowship, and afterwards commenced master of arts, in which degree he was incorporated at Oxford. Very early in life he gave proofs of good talents, and was not only esteemed and admired by the learned at the university, but grew in equal favour with the wits and poets of the metropolis. His learning, gaiety of humour, and readiness of repartee, gained him admirers, procured him admission in all companies, and especially recommended him to the intimacy and friendship of Ben Jonson, who admitted him as one of his adopted sons in the Muses, and held him in equal esteem with Cartwright.

, a French poet, was born at Fontenai-le-comte, in Poitou, in 1535. He was vice-seneschal of his native province, and went afterwards to Paris, where Henry III. made him provost of the high-constable’sjurisdiction, which office he held till 1598. In his old age he determined to retire to Fontenai-le-Comte, and died at Poitiers, February 15, 1609, aged seventy-four, leaving a family. His biographers differ very much in their character of this author, as may be seen by comparing our authorities. A considerable part of his Latin poems may be found in torn. III. of “Les Devices des Poetes Latins Francois;” and his Epigrams are particularly admired: the best among his French ones are, “Les Plaisirsdu Gentilhomme Champetre,” printed in 1583; and those which he wrote on mademoiselle de Roche’s Flea, which are inserted in the collection of poems on that foolish subject, printed at Paris, in 1582, 4to. Rapin also attempted to write French blank verse, in the manner of Greek and Latin verse; but succeeded no better than Ba'if, who had made the same trial before him. He was one of those concerned in the famous Satire " Menippee. All his works were printed at Paris, 1610, 4to.

, an active English musician and publisher, who flourished from the beginning of the 17th century to 1635, was the editor and composer of the best collection of psalm tunes in four parts, which had till then appeared in England. He was a bachelor of music, and a professor not only well acquainted with the practice of the art, but seems to have bestowed much time in the perusal of the best authors, and in meditation on the theory. This book published in small octavo, 1621 and 1633, contains a melody for every one of the hundred and fifty psalms, many of them by the editor himself, of which a considerable number is still in use; as Windsor, St. David’s, Southwell, and Canterbury. There are others, likewise, which are sung by the German, Netherlandish, and French Protestants. To these the base, tenor, and counter-tenor parts have been composed by twenty-one English musicians: among whom we find the names of Tallis, Dowlajid, Morley, Bennet, Stubbs, Farnaby, and John Milton, the father of our great poet. The tunes which are peculiar to the measure of the lOOdth psalm, the 113th, and 119th, were originally Lutheran, or perhaps of still higher antiquity. And though Ravenscroft has affixed the name of Dr. John Dowland to the parts which have been st to the lOOdth psalm, yet, in the index, he has ranked the melody itself with the French tunes; perhaps from having seen it among the melodies that were set to the French version of Clement Marot and Theodore Beza’s Psalms, by Goudimel and Claude le Jeune. Ravenscroft, in imitation of these harmonists, always gives the principal melody, or, as he calls it, the playn-song, to the tenor. His publication is, in some measure, historical: for he tells us not only who composed the parts to old melodies, but who increased the common stock, by the addition of new tunes; as well as which of them were originally English, Welch, Scots, German, Dutch, Italian, French, and imitations of these.

, an ancient Italian scholar and physician, was born of a noble family at Arezzo, in 1626. He studied at Padua, where he took the degree of doctor in philosophy and physic: and very soon afterwards rendered himself so conspicuous by his talents and acquirements in these sciences, that he was appointed first physician to the grand dukes Ferdinand II. and Cosmo III. At this time the academy del Cimento was occupied in a series of philosophical experiments which gave full scope and employment to Redi’s genius; and at the desire of his noble patron, he undertook the investigation of the salts which are obtainable from different vegetables. With what success these experiments were conducted, may be seen by referring to his works. His principal attention, however, was directed to two more important subjects: viz. the prison of the viper, and the generation and properties of insects. In the first of these inquiries he shewed the surprising difference there is between swallowing the viperine poison, and having it applied to the surface of the body by a wound. He also proved that, contrary to the assertion of Charas, the virulence of the poison does not depend upon the rage or exasperation of the animal, since the poison collected from a viper killed without being previously irritated, and dropped into a wound produces the same fatal effects, as that which is infused into a wound made by the animal when purposely teazed until it bites. On the subject of insects, he refuted the doctrine, maintained by all the ancients and by many moderns, of putrefaction being the cause of their generation; a doctrine which had, indeed, been attacked some years before by an Italian author named Aromatari, but not with that weight of facts and force of argument which are so conspicuous in this treatise and the rest of Redi’s writings. His observations on various natural productions brought from the Indies, and on animals that live within other living animals, “osservazioni intorno agli animali viventi che si trovano negli animali viventi,” exhibit many curious experiments and discoveries. But while he was thus engaged in philosophical pursuits, he did not neglect the duties of his profession, as a physician. His letters contain numerous histories of diseases and of their treatment; for he kept a register of all remarkable cases and consultations. He was particularly diligent in noticing the operation of remedies, and in many disorders enjoined a very abstemious diet. Kedi’s merits, however, were not confined to philosophy and medicine. He was also an excellent philologist and an elegant poet. His “Bacco in Toscana” has lately been edited by Mr. Mathias. All his writings possess the attraction of a pure and polished style; and the Academy della Crusca justly regarded him as one of the best authorities, in the composition of their celebrated Dictionary. This indefatigable philosopher and amiable man died at Pisa in 1698, having previously suffered much from epileptic attacks. After his death, a medal was struck in honour of his name, by order of Cosmo III. His works have gone through various editions; but that which was printed at Naples in 7 vols. 4to, is esteemed the best.

Urban then returned to his studies, and became so distinguished, that the emperor Maximilian, passing through Ingoldstadt, made him his poet-laureat and orator; and he was afterwards made professor of poetry and oratory in that university. But, having applied to the study of divinity, he engaged with warmth and assiduity in the controversies of the times, particularly in that between Luther and Eckius, in which he inclined to Luther; but unwilling to give personal offence to his preceptor and good friend Eckius, he left Ingoldstadt and went to Augsburgh, where, at the importunity of the magistrates and citizens, he undertook the government of the church. Here he departed farther and farther from the errors of Popery, and soon joined with Luther in preaching against them. In his opinions, however, concerning the sacrament and original sin, he sided, fora time, with Zuinglius, -in consequence of a correspondence in which that reformer explained to him the grounds of his belief. In his preaching against errors so general as those of popery then were, he met with much opposition, but appears to have been supported by some of the principal citizens, one of whom bestowed on him his daughter, by whom he had thirteen children. Eckius, both by letters and by the intervention of friends, endeavoured to gain him back to the church, but his principles were fixed, and he resisted both flatteries and promises.

, a satirical French poet, was the son of a citizen of Chartres, by a sister of the abbe Desportes, a famous poet also, and was born there in 1573. He was brought up to the church, and no man more unfit or unworthy, for such were his debaucheries, that as we learn from himself, he had at thirty all the infirmities of old age. Yet this did not prevent his obtaining the patronage of cardinal Joyeuse, and the ambassador Philip de Bethune, with whom he was twice at Rome, in 1593 and 1601. In 1604, by their influence, he obtained a canonry in the church of Chartres; and had other benefices, and also a pension of 2000 livres, which Henry IV. settled on him in 1606, all which he spent on his licentious pleasures. He died at Rouen in 1613, at the age of forty, completely debilitated and worn out.

, or Des-Marais (Francis Seraphin), a French writer, was born at Paris in 1632 and, at fifteen, distinguished himself by translating the “Batrachomyomachia” into burlesque verse. At thirty, he went to Rome as secretary to an embassy. An Italian ode of his writing procured him a place in the academy de la Crusca in 1667; and, in 1670, he was elected a member of the French academy. In 1684, he was made perpetual secretary, after the death of Mezeray; and it was he who drew up all those papers, in the name of the academy, against Furetiere. In 1668, the king gave him the priory of Grammont, which determined him to the ecclesiastical function: and, in 1675, he had an abbey. His works are, an Italian translation of Anacreon’s odes, which he dedicated to the academy de la Crusca in 1692; a French grammar and two volumes of poems, in French, Latin, Italian, and Spanish. He translated, into French, Tully “De Divinatione, & de Finibus” and Rodrigue’s “Treatise of Christian perfection,” from the Spanish. He died in 17 Is, aged 82. “He has done great service to language,” says Voltaire, “and is the author of some poetry in French and Italian. He contrived to make one of his Italian pieces pass for Petrarch’s but he could not have made his French verses pass for those of any great French poet.”

, or, as Wood says, commonly called Rhanger, a learned divine and Latin poet, was born in Hampshire, in 1529, and educated at Magdalen college, Oxford. Here he took his bachelor’s degree, in March 1545; was chosen fellow in 1547, and afterwards completed his master’s degree. In king Edward’s reign, he was much esteemed as a pious preacher, and learned man; but as he had embraced the reformed religion, he was obliged to leave the kingdom on the accession of queen Mary, and lived mostly with some other English exiles at Strasburgh. When queen Elizabeth came to the throne, he was made one of her chaplains, and proved a zealous champion for the reformation. Wood says he refused several preferments, accepting only a prebend in the church of Winchester, and about the same time the rectory of Crawley near that city. In 1567 he was installed precentor and prebendary of Empingham in the church of Lincoln. In 1573, he took his degrees in divinity, and in 1575 was made archdeacon of Winchester. In 1583, he had the prebend of Reculverland, in the church of St. Paul, London, bestowed on him. He died Aug. 26, 1609, aged eighty-nine, and was buried in the church of Crawley, under the communion table.

In 1619 the king recalled Richelieu, and sent him into Angouleme, where he persuaded the queen to a reconciliation, which was concluded in 1620; and in consequence of this treaty, the duke de Luynes obtained a cardinal’s hat for him from pope Gregory XV. Richelieu, continuing his services after the duke’s decease, was admitted, in 1624, into the council, through the interest of the queen, and almost against the will of the king, who, devout and scrupulous, considered him as a knave, because he had been informed of his gallantries. It is even said that he was insolent enough to aspire to queen Anne of Austria, and that the railleries to which this subjected him were the cause of his subsequent aversion to her. Cardinal Richelieu was afterwards appointed prime minister, head of the councils, high steward, chief, and superintendant-generai of the French trade and navigation. He preserved the Isle of Rhe in 1627, and undertook the siege of Rochelle against the protestants the same year. He completed the conquest of Rochelle in October 1628, in spite of the king of Spain, who had withdrawn his forces, of the king of England, who could not relieve it, and of the French king, who grew daily more weary of the undertaking, by means of that famous mole, executed by his orders, but planned by Lewis Metezeau and John Tiriot. The capture of Rochelle proved a mortal blow to the protestants, but in France was reckoned the most glorious and beneficial circumstance of cardinal Richelieu’s administration. He also attended his majesty to the relief of the duke of Mantua in 1629, raised the siege of Casal, and, at his return, compelled the protestants to accept the treaty of peace which had been concluded at Alais, and completed the ruin of their party. Six months after this, cardinal Richelieu, having procured himself to be appointed lieutenant-general of the army beyond the mountains, took Pignerol, relieved Casal a second time, which was besieged by the marquis Spinola, defeated general Doria, by means of the duke de Monttnorenci at Vegliana, July 10, 1630, and made himself master of all Savoy. Louis XIII. having returned to Lyons, in consequence of sickness, the queenmother, and most of the nobility, took advantage of this circumstance to form plots against Richelieu, and speak ill of his conduct to the king, which they did with so much success, that Louis promised the queen to discard him. The cardinal’s ruin now seemed inevitable, and he was actually preparing to set out for Havre-de Grace, which he had chosen for his retreat, when cardinal de la Valette, knowing that the queen had not followed her son to Versailles, advised him first to see his majesty. In this interview, he immediately cleared himself from all the accusations of his enemies, justified his conduct, displayed the advantages and necessity of his administration, and wrought so forcibly upon the king’s mind by his reasoning, that, instead of being discarded, he became from that moment more powerful than ever. He inflicted the same punishments upon his enemies which they had advised for him; and this day, so fortunate for Richelieu, was called “The Day of Dupes.” Those who had the misfortune to incur his displeasure, certainly did not all deserve the penalties to which he doomed them; but he knew how to make himself master of their fate, by appointing such judges to try them as were at his disposal. That abominable method of taking the accused from their lawful judges, had, in the preceding century, served as a means for the families of condemned persons to get their characters restored; after which the French had no reason to fear its revival; but Richelieu hesitated not to adopt it, though at the risque of general odium, as being favourable to his designs. By thus making himself master of the lives and fortunes of the mal-contents, he imposed silence even on their murmurs. This artful minister, being now secure of his lasting ascendancy over the king, and having already accomplished one of the two great objects which he had proposed to himself from the beginning of his administration, which were, the destruction of the protestants, and the humbling the too great power of the house of Austria, began now to contrive means for executing this second undertaking. The principal and most efficacious method employed by the cardinal with that view, was a treaty he concluded, January 23, 1631, with Gustavus Adolphus, king of Sweden, for currying the war into the heart of Germany. He also formed a league with the duke of Bavaria, secured to himself Lorrain, raised part of the German princes against the emperor, treated with Holland to continue the war wirh Spain, favoured the Catalonians and Portuguese when they shook off the Spanish yoke, and, in short, made use of so many measures and stratagems, that he completely accomplished his design. Cardinal Richelieu was carrying on the war with success, and meditating on that glorious peace, which was not concluded till 1648, when h died in his palace at Paris, worn out by his long toils, December 4,“1642, aged fifty-eight. He was buried at the Sorbonne, where his mausoleum (the celebrated Girardon’s master-piece) may be seen. He is considered as one of the most complete statesmen, and ablest politicians, that France ever had. Amidst all the anxieties which the fear of his enemies must necessarily occasion, he formed the most extensive and complicated plans, and executed them with great superiority of genius. It was cardinal Richelieu who established the throne, while yet shaken by the protestant factions, and the power of the House of Austria, and made the royal authority completely absolute, and independent, by the extinction of the petty tyrants who wasted the kingdom. In the mean time he omitted nothing which could contribute to the glory of France. He promoted arts and sciences; founded the botanical garden at Paris called the king’s garden; also the French academy, and the royal printing-office; built the palace since called the Palais Royal, and gave it to his majesty; rebuilt the Sorbonne (of which he was provisor) in a style of kingly magnificence; and prepared for all the splendour of Louis the Fourteenth’s reign. His enemies, says the abbe L'Atocat, unable to deny his great talents, have reproached him with great faults; irregularity of conduct, unbounded ambition, universal despotism, from which even the king, his master, did not escape; for he left him, as they express it, only the power of curing the evil; a vanity and ostentation which exceeded the dignity of the throne itself, where all was simplicity and negligence, while the cardinal’s court exhibited nothing but pomp and splendour; unexampled ingratitude to his benefactress, queen Mary de Medicis, whom he inhumanly compelled to end her da*ys in Germany, in obscurity and indigence; and, finally, his revengeful temper, which occasioned so many cruel executions; as those of Chalais, Grandier, the marechal de Marillac, M. de Montmorenci, Cinqmars, M. de Thou, &c. Even the queen, for having written to the duchess de Chevreuse, Richelieu’s enemy, and a fugitive, saw all her papers seized, and was examined before the chancellor Sequier. Mad. de la Fayette, mad. de Hautefort, and father Caussin, the king’s confessors, were all disgraced in consequence of having offended this despotic minister. But, says his apologist, there are many points to be considered with respect to these accusations: it appears certain, from a thousand passages in the life of this celebrated cardinal, that he was naturally very grateful, and never proceeded to punishment but when he thought state affairs required it; for which reason, when in his last sickness, his confessor asked” if he forgave his enemies?“he replied,” I never had any but those of the state.“At the head of his” Political Testament“may be seen his justification of himself on the subject of these bloody executions, with which he has been so much reproached. It is equally certain, that he never oppressed the people by taxes or exorbitant subsidies, notwithstanding the long wars he had to carry on; and that, if he was severe in punishing crimes, he knew how to distinguish merit, and reward it generously. He bestowed the highest ecclesiastical dignities on such bishops and doctors as he knew to be men of virtue and learning; placed able and experienced generals at the head of the armies, and entrusted public business with wise, punctual, and intelligent men. It was this minister who established a navy. His vigilance extended through every part of the government; and, notwithstanding the cabals, plots, and factions, which were incessantly forming against him during the whole course of his administration (and which must have employed great part of his time) he left sufficient sums behind him to carry on the war with glory; and France was in a more powerful and flourishing state at the time of his decease than when Louis XIV. died. After stating these facts, Richelieu’s enemies areinvited to determine whether France would have derived more advantage from being governed by Mary de Medicis, Gaston of Orleans, &c. than by this cardinal The estate of Richelieu was made a dukedom in his favour, in 1631, and he received other honours and preferments. Besides the” Method of Controversy“he wrote, 2.” The principal points of the Catholic Faith defended, against the writing addressed to the king by the ministers of Charenton.“3.” The most easy and certain Method of converting those who are separated from the Church.“These pieces are written with force and vivacity. He wrote also,” A Catechism,“in which he lays down the doctrine of the church, in a clear and concise manner and a treatise of piety, called,” The Perfection of a Christian.“These are his theological works; and they have been often printed: but that which is most read, and most worthy of being read, is his” Political Testament," the authenticity of which has been doubted by some French writers, particularly Voltaire. The cardinal also had the ambition to be thought a dramatic poet; and, says lord Chesterfield, while he absolutely governed both his king and country, and was, in a great degree, the arbiter of the fate of all Europe, he was more jealous of the great reputation of Corneille, than of the power of Spain; and more flattered with being thought (what he was not) the best poet, than with being thought (what he certainly was) the greatest statesman in Europe; and affairs stood still, while he was concerting the criticism upon the Cid.

, a learned divine, descended collaterally from the preceding bishop Ridley, was born at sea, in 1702, on-board the Gloucester East Indiaman, to which circumstance he was indebted for his Christian name. He received his education at Winchester-school, and thence was elected to a fellowship at New college, Oxford, where he proceeded B. C. L. April 29, 1729. In those two seminaries he cultivated an early acquaintance with the Muses, and laid the foundation of those elegant and solid acquirements for which he was afterwards so eminently distinguished as a poet, an historian, and a divine. During a vacancy in 1728, he joined with four friends, viz. Mr. Thomas Fletcher (afterwards bishop of Kildare), Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Eyre, Mr. Morrison, and Mr. Jennens, in writing a tragedy, called “The Fruitless Redress,” each Undertaking an act, on a plan previously concerted. When they delivered in their several proportions, at their meeting in the winter, few readers, it is said, would have known that the whole was not the production of a single hand. This tragedy, which was offered to Mr. Wilks, but never acted, is still in ms. with another called “Jugurtha.” - Dr. Ridley in his youth was much addicted to theatrical performances. Midhurst, in Sussex, was the place where they were exhibited; and the company of gentlemen actors to which he belonged, consisted chiefly of his coadjutors in the tragedy already mentioned. He is said to have performed the characters of Marc Antony, Jaffier, Horatio, and Moneses, with distinguished applause. Young Gibber, being likewise a Wykehamist, called on Dr. Ridley soon after he had been appointed chaplain to the East India Company at Poplar, and would have persuaded him to quit the church for the stage, observing that “it usually paid the larger salaries of the two,” an advice which he had too much sense to follow. For great part of his life, he had no other preferment than the small college living of Weston, in Norfolk, and the donative of Poplar, in Middlesex, where he resided. To these his college added, some years after, the donative of Romfbrd, in Essex. “Between these two places the curricle of his life had,” as he expressed it, “rolled for some time almost perpetually upon post-chaise wheels, and left him not time for even the proper studies of ceconomy, or the necessary ones of his profession.” Yet in this obscure situation he remained in possession of, and content with, domestic happiness; and was honoured with the intimate friendship of some who were not less distinguished for learning than for worth: among these, it maybe sufficient to mention Dr. Lowth, Mr. Christopher Pitt, Mr. Spence, and Dr. Berriman. To the last of these he was curate and executor, and preached his funeral sermon. In 1740 and 1741, he preached “Eight Sermons at Lady Moyer’s lecture,” which were published in 1742, 8vo, and at different times, several occasional sermons. In 1756, he declined an offer of going to Ireland as first chaplain to the duke of Bedford; in return for which he was to have had the choice of promotion, either at Christ-church, Canterbury, Westminster, or Windsor. His modesty inducing him to leave the choice of these to hispatron, the consequence was, that he obtained none of them. In 1761 he published, in 4to, “De Syriacarum novi fcederis versionum indole atque usu, dissertatio,” occasioned by a Syriac version, which, with two others, were sent to him nearly thirty years before, by one Mr. Samuel Palmer from Amida, in Mesopotamia. His age and growing infirmities, the great expence of printing, and the want of a patron, prevented him from availing himself of these Mss.; yet at intervals he employed himself on a transcript, which being put into the hands of professor White, was published a few years ago, with a literal Latin translation, in 2 vols. 4to, at the expence of the delegates of the Clarendon press. In 1763 he published the “Life of bishop Ridley,” in quarto, by subscription, and cleared by it as much as brought him 800l. in the public funds. In this, which is the most useful of all his works, he proved himself worthy of the name he bore, a thorough master of the popish controversy, and an able advocate for the reformation. In 1765 he published his “Review of Philips’ s Life of Cardinal Pole” (see Philips); and in 17 6S, in reward for his labours in this controversy, and in another which “The Confessional” produced, he was presented by archbishop Seeker to a golden prebend in the cathedral church of Salisbury (an option), but it is probably a mistake that Seeker honoured him with the degree of D. D. that honour having been conferred upon him by the university of Oxford in 1767, by diploma, the highest mark of distinction they can confer. At length, worn out with infirmities, he departed this life in Nov. 1774, leaving a widow and four daughters. An elegant epitaph, written by Dr. Lowth, bishop of London, is inscribed upon his monument. Two poems by Dr. Ridley, one styled “Jovi Eleutherio, or an Offering to Liberty,” the other called “Psyche,” are in the third volume of Dodsley’s Collection. The sequel of the latter poem, entitled, “Melampus,” with “Psyche,” its natural introduction, was printed in 1782, by subscription, for the benefit of his widow. Many others are in the 8th volume of Nichols’s “Collection.” The Mss. Codex Heraclensis, Codex Barsalibaei, &c. (of which a particular account may be seen in his Dissertation “De Syriacarum Novi Fcederis versionum indole atque usu, 1761,”) were bequeathed by Dr. Ridley to the library of New college, Oxford. Of these ancient Mss. a fac-simile specimen was published in his Dissertation above mentioned. A copy of “The Confessional,” with ms notes by Dr. Ridley," was in the library of the- late Dr. Winchester.

, an Italian poet of Florence, who went into France in the suite of Mary of Medicis, queen to Henry IV. is the reputed inventor of the musical drama or opera, that is, of the manner of writing, or representing comedies or tragedies in music, to which the first recitative was applied. Others give this invention to a Roman gentleman of the name of Emilio del Cavaliere, who was more properly the inventor of the sacred drama or oratorio, in a similar species of music or recitative, so nearly at the same time that it is difficult to determine which was first: both had their beginning in 1600. Rinucciui was author of three lyric pieces, “Daphne,” “Euridice,” and “Ariadne,” which all Italy applauded. Euridice, written for the nuptials of Mary of Medicis, was first performed with great splendor and magnificence at Florence, at the court and expence of the grand duke. The poetry is truly lyrical, smooth, polished, and mellifluous. He died in 1621, at Florence; and a collection, or rather selection, of his works were published in 1622, in the same city, in 4*o, by his son, Pietro Francesco Rinuccini, and another entitled “Drammi Musicale,” in 1802, 8vo, at Leghorn. The family is noble, and was subsisting in 1770. More of Ottavio may be seen in the appendix to Walker’s “Life of Tassoni,” just published, 1816.

, a chemist and poet in the time of Henry VII. was a canon of Bricllington, and accomplished in many branches of erudition; and still maintains his reputation as a learned chemist of the lower ages. He was a great traveller, and studied both in France and Italy. At his return from abroad, pope Innocent VIII. absolved him from the observance of the rules of his order, that he might prosecute his studies with more convenience and freedom. But his convent not concurring with this very liberal indulgence, he turned Carmelite at St. Botolph’s in Lincolnshire, and died in that fraternity in 1490. His chemical poems are nothing more than the doctrines of alchemy cloathed in plain language, and a very rugged versification. His capital performance is the “Compound of Alchemic,” written in 1471, in the octave metre, and dedicated to Edward IV. He has left a few other compositions on his favourite science, printed by Ashmole, who was an enthusiast in this abused species of philosophy; and some lives of saints in ms.

From the time of his admission into the Custom-house, he employed his leisure hours in the cultivation of his mind, and in forming the valuable collection of prints and drawings which he left behind him. In the course of these pursuits, he became acquainted with several persons of similar taste, and among the rest Mr. Pond, a well-known and judicious collector. By him he was introduced to the society of Antiquaries, Feb. 23, 1752, of which he became a very useful member, and was several times chosen of the council. In 1757, he was chosen a fellow of the Royal Society. After Mr. Rogers had begun to form his collections, and had made some progress, he conceived the idea of communicating, to the public, specimens of the manners of the several different masters, a work requiring great industry and perseverance, and likely to be attended with great expence. The former he knew he could command, and the latter, as he was a bachelor, gave him little concern. The execution of this undertaking may be considered as the principal object of his life. It appeared in 1777, 2 volumes, folio, under the title of “Description of a Collection of Prints in imitation of drawings, to which are annexed, Lives of their authors, with explanatory and critical notes.” The selection consists of 112 prints, engraved by Bartolozzi, Ryland, Basire, and other artists of reputation, from original drawings in the collections of his majesty, the duke of Marlborough, earls of Bute, Cholmondely, Spencer, lord Frederick Campbell, sir Joshua Reynolds, and his own. The, heads of the different painters, and a variety of fanciful decorations, are also given, in a peculiar style of engraving on wood, by Mr. Simon Watts. The whole performance at once reflects honour on the country, as well as on the liberality of the undertaker, who neither was, nor, it is supposed, ever expected to be reimbursed the great expence he had incurred. Besides this work, Mr. Rogers printed an anonymous <; Translation of Dante’s Inferno,“1782, 4to, in the performance of which he chiefly attended to giving the sense of his author with fidelity, the character of a poet not seeming to have been the object of Ins ambition. He also published in the” Archseologia," vol. III. a paper on the antiquity of horseshoes and in vol. VI. an account of certain masks from the Musquito shore. A curious letter of his, to Mr. Astle, on some ancient blocks used in printing, may be seen in Gent. Mag. vol. LI. p. 169; and another paper, which was read at the Society of Antiquaries, Feb. 18, 1779, is preserved in vol. L1V. p. 265. Mr. Rogers died Jan. 2, 1784, and was buried in the family-vault in St. Lawrence Pountney burying-ground.

Wood adds, that he was “a very good man, excellently well learned, a good Latin poet, and one that was especially beloved by the famous antiquary and historian William Camden, for whose sake he had laid the foundation of ‘ A Discourse concerning the acts of the Britains, the form of their Commonwealth, and the order and laws by which they lived’.” This was intended for Camden’s “Britannia,” but he did not live to finish it. He wrote, 1. “Odae, Epigrammata, Kpitaphia,” &c. in laudem et mortem Johannis Juelli Episc. Sarisbur, at the end of Humphrey’s Life of Jewell. 2. “A memorial or oration of Dr. Dan. Rogers on the death of Frederic II. and the accession of Christian IV.” (probably addressed to the senate of Denmark, Copenhagen, July 19, 1588). 3. “Dr. Rogers” Search,“being a repertory of various transactions relating to Commerce the two preceding are among the Cotton Mss. 4.” Dan, Rogersii Albimontii Angli, ad Stephani Malescoti Catechesin ^oo-pawicnf, carmine Latino,“Basil, 1567, 8vo. 5.” Elegia ad Gulielmum Cecilium baronem Burleigh,“among the” lllust. et clar. virorum Epist. select.“Leyden, 1617, 8vo. 6.” Epistolae tres ad Buchananum,“among the” Epist. Buchanani,“Lond. 1711, 8vo. 7.” Epistola Adriano Vander Mylen,“among the above Leydeu epistles. Among the Harleian Mss. is his” Letter to Abraham Ortelius at Antwerp,“complimenting him on the glory he will reap from posterity by his geographical works, and concluding with the mention of his own commentary upon the laws and manners of the ancient Britons. Wood also mentions an epigram of his printed with Ralph Aggas’s description of Oxford in 1578. Wood notices another Daniel Rogers, and his works,” David’s Cost“” A practical Catechism“” Lectures upon the history of Naaman," &c. This, however, was a puritan divine born in 1573, and educated at Cambridge. He was son to Richard Rogers, and brother to Ezekiel Rogers, both puritan divines, and men of note in their day, but we do not find in their memoirs much to recommend a distinct article on either. It remains to be noticed, that Strype, in his Life of Whitgift, conjectures the above Daniel Rogers, the ambassador, to be son to John Rogers the proto-martyr; but this is inconsistent with the above account, and seems founded on no authority, as the martyr Rogers never left the kingdom on the accession of queen Mary, but remained to be the first sacrifice to her infernal bigotry.

This excellent person died Sept. 14, 1741. He had been named by the king a member of the academy of inscriptions and belles lettres in 1701: but, as he had not then brought the college of Beauvais into repute, and found he had more business upon his hands than was consistent with a decent attendance upon the functions of an academician, he begged the privileges of a veteran, which were honourably granted him. Yet he maintained his connexions with the academy, attended their assemblies as often as he could, laid the plan of his “Ancient History” before them, and demanded an academician for his censor. He was a man of many excellent qualities, very ingenious, consummate in polite learning, of rigid morals, and great piety; which last has given some of his countrymen, and their imitators here, an opportunity to remark that he wanted nothing but a mixture of the philosophic in his nature to make him a very complete person. When he was discharged from the rectorship in 1720, the words of the lettre de cachet were, as we have seen, that the university should choose a rector of more moderation: but that was hardly possible; for, nothing could be more benign, more pacific, or more moderate, than Rollings temper. He shewed, it must be owned, some zeal for the cause of Jansenism: he had a very great veneration for the memory of abbe Paris, and had been seen with others to visit his tomb in the church-yard of St. Medard, at Paris, and to pay his devotions to him as a saint: he revised and retouched the life of this abbe, which was printed in 1730: he translated into Latin, at the request of father Quesnel, the protestation of this saint, and was assisting in other works designed to support Jansenism; and, oh these accounts, he became obnoxious to the Jesuits and the court. It is related, that, when he was one day introduced to cardinal Fleury, in order to present him with a volume of his “Roman History,” the minister, very uncivilly, said to a head-officer of the guards, “Sir, you should endeavour to convert this man:” to whom Rollin very well, and yet not disrespectfully, replied, “Oh, my lord, the gentleman would lose his time; I am an unconvertible man.” Rollin was, however, a very estimable character. We find in his works generous and exalted sentiments, a zeal for the good of society, a love of virtue, a veneration for Providence, and in short every thing, though on profane subjects, sanctified with a spirit truly religious. So says even Voltaire, and we may add the similar testimony of the poet Rousseau, who conceived such a veneration for Rollin that he came out of banishment incognito to Paris, on purpose to visit and pay his respects to him. He looked upon his histories, not only as the best models of the historic kind, but as a complete system of politics ana 1 morals, and a most instrucfive school for princes as well as subjects to learn all their duties in.

, an English historical and miscella* neous writer, was born in 1724 or 1725, it is thought at Shrewsbury, but descended from a family of that name in Bedfordshire. He was first placed under an officer of the excise in the North of England, but having, in 1745, joined the rebel army, he was dismissed from his situation. He then went over to Dublin to visit Ambrose Philips the poet, who was his relation, but, owing to Philips’s death soon after, failed of procuring any establishment in that country. While in Ireland he is said to have published Akenside’s “Pleasures of the Imagination,” as his own, but his biographer has refuted this story. He probably, by more honourable means, recommended himself to persons of distinction, as his poem, entitled “Cambria” was, when first written, intended to have been patronized by sir Watkin Williams Wynne, and when corrected and prepared for the press, as it now stands, was shewn to Frederic prince of Wales, by general Oglethorpe and lord Middlesex; by whose interest he had permission to dedicate it to prince George, his present majesty, when it was printed, in 1749, in 4to. On the 25th of September of the same year, sir Watkin Williams Wynne was killed by a fall from his horse; and in the following month Roft published a poem to his memory, which was highly admired, and very popular among his countrymen.

On his return in July 1775, he took a house in Cavendish-square, where he resided, until he retired in 1798, from public practice, to Hampstead, for the sake of purer air. During the preceding twenty years, he enjoyed uninterrupted success in his profession, to which he was so ardently attached, that his whole delight was in it. His talents, in return, were highly esteemed, and encouraged by an immense influx of employment. In one year only (1785), he painted portraits to the value of 3635l. His prices now were, for a whole-length, eighty guineas half whole-length, sixty; half-length, forty a kit-cat, thirty; and for a head, twenty guineas. It is very remarkable, however, that he never became a member of the Royal Academy, nor ever exhibited in its rooms. When the Boydeli Shakspeare was projected, Romney contributed his aid. He had a quick and keen relish for the beauties of that poet, although his own fancy was so volatile, and his mode of reading so desultory, that it may be questioned if he ever read, without interruption, two acts of the dramas that he most cordially admired. After he had finished his fine picture for “The Tempest,” he was induced in. 1790 to visit Paris again, with his biographer Mr. Hayley and another friend; but on his return in 1791 resumed his labours for the Shakspeare gallery, and painted some pictures for the prince of Wales. In 179? he felt a slight paralytic stroke, which affected his eye and his hand, and prevented him from continuing his professional labours. It was then he retired to Hampstead, but, finding his health still decline, he, in 1799, revisited his native country, where he died Nov. 15, 1802.

, a French poet, of a noble family, was born in Vendomois, the same year that Francis I. was taken prisoner before Pavia that is, in 1524. This circumstance is what he himself affixes to the time of his birth; though from other passages in his works it might be concluded that he was not born till 1526. He was brought up at Paris, in the college of Navarre; but, taking some disgust to his studies, became a page of the duke of Orleans. This duke resigned him to the king of Scotland, James V. whom he attended from Paris into Scotland in 1537, and continued there two years, after which he resided about half a year in England. But the duke of Orleans took him again, and employed him in several negotiations. Ronsard accompanied Lazarus de Baif to the diet of Spire; and, in his conversations with that learned man, conceived a passion for letters. He learned Greek under Dorat with Antony de Baif, the son of Lazarus; and afterwards devoted himself entirely to poetry, in which he acquired great reputation. The kings Henry II. Francis

, a French poet, was born in 1672, at Marseilles, and employed twenty years as editor of the Mercure de France, in which he acquired considerable reputation. He died October 3, 1744, at Paris. He wrote the words of the operas, viz. “Medée et Jason,” and “Theonoe,” though they pass for the abbe Pellegrin’s, and made a very valuable collection of prints, &c. a curious catalogue of which was given by the late M. Gersaint. M. de la Roque was created knight of the military order of St. Louis after the battle of Malplaquet, where he was wounded, having taken the post, which one of the king’s guards had just quitted, from a presentiment that he should be killed in it. His brother John de la Roque assisted him in the “Mercury,” from 1722, wheM he first undertook it, and died at Paris, December 28, 1745, aged eighty-four. He had travelled into the East, and left the following works “Vo'iage de la Palestine,” 12mo; “Voyage de Syrie, et du Mont Liban, avec un Abrege de la Vie de M. du Chasteuil,” 2 vols. 12mo. He had aiso promised to publish his “Voyage Litteraire de Normandie,” but it has not appeared.

, a learned barrister, and a very amiable man, was born June 20, 1767, at Chiswick in Middlesex, where his father Dr. William Rose, a native of Scotland, conducted an academy during many years, with considerable emolument and unblemished reputation. Dr. Rose was known in the literary world as one of the earliest writers in the Monthly Review, and as the author of a very elegant translation of Sallust. He had originally been an assistant to Dr. Doddridge at Northampton, and married a daughter of Dr. Samuel Clark, of St. Alban’s, a divine of talents and eminence among the dissenters. She bore him many children; but Samuel was his only surviving son, and after a successful education under his father, was sent in 1784 to the university of Glasgow. There he resided in the house of the late professor Richardson, a philosopher and poet, between whom and his pupil, a friendship and correspondence commenced which terminated only with the life of the latter. Mr. Rose also gained the esteem of several other learned men in Scotland, with whom he afterwards maintained a correspondence. Nor was this wonderful, for his manners were uncommonly amiable and attractive, and his studies amply justified the respect paid to him. He gained every prize, except one, for which he. contended as a student of the university.

After passing three winters at Glasgow, he attended thecourts of law in Edinburgh, and here obtained an introduction to the celebrated Dr. Adam Smith, who was so highly pleased with him, that as long as he resided in Edinburgh,, Mr. Rose was constantly invited to the literary circle of that eminent philosopher. His subsequent intimacy with Cowper appears in Mr. Hayley’s interesting volumes, and perhaps Cowper’s visit to Mr. Rose in Chancery-lane is one of the most affecting incidents in the eventful history of that poet. Mr. Rose had the misfortune to lose his ex* cellent father, while he was pursuing his studies in the North; but a loss so unseasonable did not induce him to shrink from the first irksome labours of an arduous profes^ sion. Having entered his name at LincolnVInn, Nov. 6, 3786, he devoted himself to the law, for which he seemed equally prepared by nature and education. With a mind acute and powerful, with a fund of classical learning, and of general knowledge, with an early command of language, and with manners, as we have already noticed, peculiarly conciliating, he had every thing to hope. Though his spirit was naturally ardent, he submitted to the most tire-r some process of early discipline in his profession, placing himself under a special pleader in 1787, and attending him three years. Being called to the bar in 1796, he attached himself to the home circuit, and to the sessions of Sussex. His first opportunity of displaying professional ability occurred in Chichester, where, having a clergyman for his client, he conciliated the esteem of his audience byexpatiating with propriety, eloquence, and success, on the character of a divine. He was still more admired for the rare talent of examining a witness with a becoming ture of acuteness and humanity; and upon the whole his friends were persuaded, from this first display of his talents^ that he was destined to rise l>y sure, though slow degrees, to the highest honours of his profession.

, a learned Dane, was born Aug. 30, 1671, at Kraagerop, a country seat belonging to his lather, whose heir he became in 1684. Great care was taken of his education by his guardians, and after studying, some time at the university of Copenhagen, it was recommended to him to visit other universities, where eminent professors were to be found. He accordingly set out in 1690, and spt-nt ten years in extending hi* knowledge of the belles lettres, civil law, &c. and had for his masters Morliof, Gr&vius, Gronovius, &c. While at Leyden in 169.'5, he published “Delicise quorundam poetarnm Danorum,” 2 vols. 12mo. He passed a considerable time in England, particularly at Oxford, for the s;>ke of the ms treasures in the Bodleian library, and employed himself much in reading and copying Greek Mss. He afterwards continued the same researches among the libraries of Paris, where he resided for four years, and applied with ardour to the study of the oriental languages. Among the Mss. which he copied in Paris, were the letters of the celebrated sophist Libanius, a good number of which he had also found in England, and communicated these for Wolf’s edition of that author, published at Amsterdam in 1739. Both in France and Italy, which he next visited, he made Jprge purchases of valuable Mss. On his return home in 1700, the king made him counsellor of justice, and keeper of the private archives. In 1710 he was made counsellor of state, and, some years after, justiciary of the supreme tribunal. In 1721 he was appointed first secretary of the Danish chancery, but lost this office in 1725 by the machinations of some enemies who were jealous of his high favour at court. Being now obliged to leave Copenhagen, he sold his fine library, reserving only a few useful books which might divert his time during his retirement. This library contained about 5000 printed books, and 1068 manuscripts, as appears by the sale catalogue published at Copenhagen in 1726. His disgrace, however, did not last long. Having effectually cleared up his character, the king, Frederick IV. made him, in 1727, baillie of Anderskow, which post he retained until 1730, He then retired to his estate at Kraagerop, and employed his time in study. He was about to put the finishing hand to his “Lexicon Jinguae Danicae,” when he died suddenly April 26, 1745. He was editor of the works of Andrew Bordingius, a much esteemed Danish poet, which were published in 1735, 4to, and had the principal hand in the “Enchiridion studiosi, Arabice conscriptum a Borhaneddino Alzernouchi, &c.” published by Adrian Reland at Utrecht in 1710. He assisted in other learned works, particularly Duker’s Thucydides.

, a very celebrated Dutch poet, was born Oct. 1645, of a distinguished family at Amsterdam. He went into the army during the Dutch war in 1673; but having served two years, retired to a beautiful country house he had on the Vecht, and devoted himself wholly tq study and poetry. He afterwards took a journey to Paris, and on his return home married Ann Adrianna de Salingre, who left him a widower with two daughters in 1689. He died of the small-pox Nov. 3, 17 10, aged sixty-six. His works are, “The Life of William III.” king of England; an epic poem in eight books, much admired by his countrymen; and several other poems in Dutch, Lewarden, 1715, 4to. Rotgans, Vondel, and Antonides, are the three most celebrated Dutch poets.

, a celebrated French poet, was born August 21, 1609, at Dreux. The merit of his come-; dies and tragedies gained the favour of cardinal de Richelieu, who gave him a pension and what was a higher ho-? nour, the famous Peter Corneille called him his father in tragedy, and highly valued his works. It is said that Rotrou lived at a great expence, and when he was distressed for money, could compose a piece in two months. He purchased a civil office, in the bailiwic of Dreux, and held it till his death, which happened at Drenx? June 28, 1650. This author left thirty-seven dramatic pieces, among which “Antigone,” and “Venceslas,” are the most esteemed. The best of them may be found in the “Theatre Francois,” Paris, 1737, 12 vols. 12mo; but it is very difficult to procure a complete set of his works. -When all the poets combined against the “Cid,” Rotrou alone refused to humour cardinal Richelieu’s jealousy, though he received a pension of 600 livres from him, and continued always the admirer and zealous partizan of Corneille. When settled at Dreux, he gained the esteem of the whole province by his integrity, prudent conduct, and piety. That city being visited by an epidemical disorder, his friends at Paris pressed him in the most earnest maruier to quit so dangerous a situation, and save his life; but he replied, that be could not answer it to his conscience to follow their advice, because he was the only person who could keep things in. any order at that time, ending his letter with the following words: “Not but that the hazard I run is very great, for while I write the bells are tolling for the twenty-second person who has died this day. They will toll for me when It pleases God.” 'He was attacked himself some days after, and died, as the French biographers express themselves, witht&e most fervent sentiments of religion and piety.

, a celebrated French poet, was born at Paris in 1669: he was the son of a shoe-maker, who, however, being a man of substance, gave him a good education; and Rousseau soon shewed himself worthy of it. He discovered early a turn for poetry; and, at twenty, was distinguished for some little productions, full of elegance, taste, and spirit. In 1688 he attended M. de Bonrepos as page in his embassy to the court of Denmark; and passed thence to England with marshal Tallard in quality of secretary. Yet, he had so little of avarice and ambition in his nature, that he never conceived the notion of n^aking a fortune; and actually refused some places which his friends had procured for him. In 1701 he was admitted into the academy of inscriptions and belles lettres. He had now obtained the reputation of a poet of the first rank, expected a place in the French academy, and was in hopes of obtaining Boileau’s pension, which was about to ba vacant, when an affair broke out which obliged him to quit his country, and embittered his whole life afterwards. Some verses full of reflections, and of a very exceptionable nature, were produced as Rousseau’s. Rousseau denied that they were his, and maintained them to be forgeries, contrived for his ruin by those who envied and hated him. He was tried in form; and, by an arrest of parliament in 1712, banished the kingdom for ever. Voltaire, who certainly has not shewn himself well affected to this poet, yet expresses himself thus upon the affair of his banishment “Those couplets, which were the cause of his banishment, and are like several which he owned, must either be imputed to him, or the two tribunals, which pronounced sentence upon him, must be dishonoured. Not that two tribunals, and even more numerous bodies, may not unanimously commit very great acts of injustice when a spirit of party prevails. There was a violent party against Rousseau.” The truth, however, is, that Rousseau was the author, although he denied it, and the probability is, that the tribunal before which he was tried had proof of this; such at least seems to be the opinion of most French writers. He now withdrew to Switzerland, where he found a lector in the count de Luc, the French ambassador to the* Helvetic body; who carried him to Baden, and introduced him to prince Eugene, who was there. He continued with the prince till the conclusion of the peace at Baden; and then accompanying him to Vienna, was introduced by hiril to the emperor’s court. He continued here three years, at the end of which he might have returned to his own country, some powerful friends offering to procure letters of grace for recalling him; but he answered, “that it did not become a man, unjustly oppressed, to seal an ignominious sentence by accepting such terms; and that letters of gracd might do well enough for those that wanted them, but certainly not for him who only desired justice.” He was afterwards at Brussels, and in 1721 went over to London, where he printed, in a very elegant manner, a collection of his poems, in 2 vols. 4to. The profits hence arising put his finances into good condition; but, placing his money with the emperor’s company at Ostend, which failed soon after, he was reduced to the necessity of relying upon private benefactions. The duke of Aremberg gave him the privilege of his table at Brussels; and, when this nobleman was obliged to go to the army in Germany in 1733, he settled on him a handsome pension, and assigned him an. apartment in his castle of Euguien near Brussels. Rousseau, losing afterwards the good graces of the duke of Aremberg, as he had before lost those of prince Eugene, for he does not seem to have been happily formed for dependence, listened at length to proposals of returning to France, and for that purpose went incognito to Paris in 1739. He stayed there some little time; but, finding his affairs in no promising train, set out for Brussels. He continued some time at the Hague, where he was seized with an apoplexy; but recovered so far as to be removed to Brussels, where he finished his unfortunate life, March 17, 1741. He now declared upon his death-bed, as he had declared to Rollin at Paris a little before, that he was not the author of the verses which occasioned his banishment.

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

, an eccentric genius of our own times, has enabled us to give an account of him by a publication which himself left behind him, under the title of “Les Confessions de J. J. Rousseau, suivies des Reveries du Promeneur Solitaire,” Geneve, 1783, 2 volumes, 8vo. He was born at Geneva in 1711; his parents were, Isaac Rousseau, an ingenious watch-maker, and Susannah Bernard, the daughter of a clergyman, who was more rich than her husband (he having fifteen brothers and sisters). She had also wisdom and beauty, so that she was no easy prize; but a love, which commenced in their childhood, at length, after many difficulties, produced a happy marriage. And at the same time his mother’s brother, Gabriel, an engineer, married one of his father’s sisters. After the birth of one son, his father went to Constantinople, and was watch-maker to the seraglio; and ten months after his return our author was born, infirm and sickly, and cost his mother her life. The sensibility which was all that his parents left him, constituted (he says) their happiness, but occasioned all his misfortunes. He was “born almost dying,” but was preserved and reared by the tenderness of an aunt (his father’s sister). He remembers not how he learned to read, but only recollects that his first studies were some romances left by his mother, which engaged his father, as well as himself, whole nights, and gave him a very early knowledge of the passions, and also wild and romantic notions of human life. The romances ended with the summer of 1719. Better books succeeded, furnished by the library of his mother’s father, viz. “Le Sueur’s History of the Church and the Empire;” “Bossuet’s Discourses on Universal History;” “Plutarch’s Lives;” ' Nani’s History of Venice;“”Ovid’s Metamorphoses;“”La Bruyere;“ ”Fontenelle’s Worlds, and Dialogues of the Dead“and some volumes of” Moliere.“Of these” Plutarch“were his favourite; and he soon preferred Agesilaus, Brutus, and Aristides, to Oroondates, Artamenes, aud Juba; and to these lives, and the conversations that they occasioned with his father, he imputes that free and republican spirit, that fierce and intractable character, which ever after was his torment. His brother, who was seven years older, and followed his father’s business, being neglected in his education, behaved so ill, and was so incorrigible, that he fled into Germany, and was never heard of afterwards. On the contrary, the utmost attention was bestowed on John James, and he was almost idolized by all. Yet he had (he owns) all the faults of his age he was a prater, a glutton, and sometimes a liar; he stole fruit, sweetmeats, and victuals but he never delighted in being mischievous or wasteful, hi accusing others, or in tormenting poor animals. He re^ Jates, however, an indelicate trick he played one Madame Clot while she was at prayers, which still, he says, diverts him, because” she was the most fretful old woman he ever knew.“His” taste, or rather passion, for music“he owed to his aunt Susan, who sang most sweetly; and he paints her in most pleasing colours. A dispute, which his father had with a French captain obliging him to quit Geneva, our author was left under the care of his uncle Bernard, then employed on the fortifications, who having a son of the same age, these cousins were boarded together at Bossey, at M. Lambercier’s, a clergyman, to learn Latin, and other branches of education. In this village he passed two happy years, and formed an affectionate friendship with his cousin Bernard. A slight offence, the breaking the teeth of a comb, with which he was charged, but denied it, and of which now, fifty years after, he avows his innocence, bub for which he was severely punished, and a like chastisement, which, for a like offence, was also unjustly inflicted on his cousin, gave both at last a distaste for this paradise, and great pleasure in being removed from it. This incident made a deep and lasting impression upon him, as did another about planting a willow and a walnut tree, for which we must refer to his own account. At his return to Geneva he continued two or three years wiih his uncle, losing his time, it not being determined whether he should be a watch-maker, an attorney, or a minister. To the last he was most inclined, but that the small remains of his mother’s fortune would not admit. In the mean time he learned to draw, for which he had a taste, and read” Euclid’s Elements“withes Cousin. Thus they led an idle, but not a vicious life, making cages, flutes, shuttle-cocks, drums, houses, cross-bows, and puppets, imitating Punch, acting plays, and at last makiog sermons. He often visited his father, wlxo was then settled at Nion, a small town in the country of Vaud, and there he recounts two amours (as he calls them) that he had, at the age of eleven, with two grown misses, whom he archly describes. At last he was placed with M. Massiron, register of the city, to learn his business; but, being by him soon dismissed for his stupidity, he was bound apprentice, not, however, to a watch-maker, but to an engraver, a brutal wretch, who not only treated him most inhumanly, but taught him to lie, to be idle, and to steal. Of the latter he gives some instances. In his sixteenth year, having twice on a Sunday been locked out of the city-gates, and being severely threatened by his master if he stayed out a third time, by an unlucky circumstance this event happening, he swore never to return again, sending word privately to his cousin Bernard of what he proposed, and where he might once more see him; which he did, not to dissuade him, but to make him some presents. They then parted with tears, but never met or corresponded more,” which was a pity, as they were made to love each other.“After making some reflections on what would have been his fate if he had fallen into the hands of a better master, he informs us that at Consignon, in Savoy, two leagues from Geneva, he had the curiosity to see the rector, M. de Pontverre, a name famous in their history, and accordingly went to visit him, and was well received, and regaled with such a good dinner as prevented hisreplyingto his host’s arguments in favour of holy mother Church, and against the heresy of Geneva. Instead of sending him back to his family, this devout priest endeavoured to convert him, and recommended him to mad. de Warens, a good charitable lady, lately converted, at Annecy, who had quitted her husband, her family, her country, and her religion, for a pension of 1500 Piedmontese livres, allowed her by the King of Sardinia. He arrived at Annecy on Palm- Sunday, 1728 and saw madam de Warens. This epoch of his life determined his character. He was then in the middle of his 16th year; though not handsome, he was well made, had black hair, and small sparkling eyes, &c. charms, of which, unluckily, he was not unconscious. The lady too, who was then 28, he describes as being highly agreeable and engaging, and having many personal charms, although her size was small, and her stature short. Being told she was just gone to the Cordeliers church, he overtook her at the door, was struck with her appearance, so different from that of the old crabbed devotee which he had imagined, and was instantly proselyted to her religion. He gave her a letter from M. de Pontverre, to which he added one of his own. She glanced at the former, but read the latter, and would have read it again, if her servant had not reminded her of its being church-time. She then bade John James go to her house, ask for some breakfast, and wait her return from mass. Her accomplishments he paints in brilliant colours; considers her as a good Catholic; and, in short, at first sight, was inspired by her with the strongest attachment, and the utmost confidence. She kept him to dinner, and then inquiring his circumstances, urged him to go to Turin, where, in a seminary for the instruction of catechumens, he might be maintained till his conversion was accomplished; and engaged also to prevail on M. de Bernet, the titular bishop of Geneva, to contribute largely to the expence of his journey. This promise she performed. He gave his consent, being desirous of seeing the capital, and of climbing the Alps. She also reinforced his purse, gave him privately ample instructions; and, entrusting him to the care of a countryman and his wife, they parted on AshWednesday. The day after, his father” came in quest of him, accompanied by his friend M. Rixal, a watch-maker, like himself, and a good poet. They visited madam de Warens, but only lamented with her, instead of pursuing and overtaking him, which they might, they being on horseback, and he on foot. His brother had been lost by a like negligence. Having some independent fortune from their mother, it seemed as if their father connived at their flight in order to secure it to himself, an idea which gave our author great uneasiness. After a pleasantjourney with his two companions, he arrived at Turin, but without money, cloaths, or linen. His letters of recommendation admitted him into the seminary; a course of life, and a mode of instruction, with which he was soon disgusted. In two months, however, he made his abjuration, was baptized Ht the cathedral, absolved of h f eresy by the inquisitor^ and then dismissed, with about 20 livres in his pocket; thus, at once, made an apostate and a dupe, with all his hopes in an instant annulled. After traversing the streets, and viewing the buildings, he took at night a mean lodging, where he continued some days. To the king’s chapel, in particular, he was frequently allured by his taste for music, which then began to discover itself. His purse, at last, being almost exhausted, he looked out for employment, and at last found it, as an engraver of plate, by means of a young woman, madame Basile, whose husband, a goldsmith, was abroad, and had left her under the care of a clerk, or an jEgisthus, as Rousseau styles him. Nothing, he declares, but what was innocent, passed betwixt him and this lady, though her charms made great impression on him; and soon after, her husband returning, and finding him at dinner with her confessor, the clerk, &c. immediately dismissed him the house. His landlady, a soldier’s wife, after this procured him the place of footman to the countess dowager of Vercullis, whose livery he wore; but his business was to write the letters which she dictated, a cancer in her breast preventing her writing them herself; letters, he says, equal to those of madam de Sevigne. This service terminated, in three months, with his lady’s death, who left him nothing, though she had great curiosity to know his history, and to read his letters to madam de Warens. He saw her expire with many tears her life having been that of a woman of wit and sense, her death being that of a sage. Her heir and nephew, the count de la Roque, gave him 30 livres and his new cloaths; but, on leaving this service, he committed, he owns, a diabolical action, by falsely accusing Marion, the cook, of giving him a rosecoloured silver ribbon belonging to one of the chambermaids, which was found upon him, and which he himself had stolen. This crime, which was an insupportable load on his conscience, he says, all his life after, and which he never avowed before, not even to Madam de Warens, was one principal inducement to his writing his “Confessions,” and he hopes, “has been expiated by his subsequent misfortunes, and by forty years of rectitude and honour in the most difficult situations.” On leaving this service, he returned to his lodgings, and, among other acquaintances that he had made, often visited M. Gaime, a Savoyard abbé, the original of the “Savoyard Vicar,” to whose virtuous and religious instructions, he professes the highest obligations. The count de la Roque, though he neglected to call upon him, procured him, however, a place with the count de Gouvon, an equerry to the queen, where he lived much at his ease, and out of livery. Though happy in this family, being favoured by all, frequently waiting on the count’s beautiful grand -daughter, honoured with lessons by the abbe“, his younger son, and having reason to expect an establishment in the train of his eldest son, ambassador to Venice, he absurdly relinquished all this by obliging the count to dismiss him for his attachment to one of his countrymen, named Bacle, who inveigled him to accompany him in his way back to Geneva; and an artificial fountain, which the abbe* de Gouvon had given him, helped, as their purse was light, to maintain them till it broke. At Annecy he parted with his companion, and hastened to madam de Warens, who, instead of reproaching, lodged him in her best chamber, and” Little One“(Petit) was his name, and” Mama“hers. There he lived most happily and innocently, he declares, till a relation of” Mama,“a M. d'Aubonne, suggested that John-James was fit for nothing but the priesthood, but first advised his completing his education by learning Latin. To this the bishop not only consented, but gave him a pension. Reluctantly he obeyed, carrying to the seminary of St. Lazarus no book but Clerambault’s cantatas, learning nothing there but one of his airs, and therefore being soon dismissed for his insufficiency. Yet madam de Warens did not abandon him. His taste for music then made them think of his being a musician, and boarding for that purpose with M. le Maitre, the organist of the cathedral, who lived near” Mama,“and presided at her weekly concerts. There he continued for a year, but his passion for her prevented his learning even music. Le Maitre, disgusted with the Chapter, and determined to leave them, was accompanied in his flight, as far as Lyons, by John-James; but, being subject to fits, and attacked by one of them in the streets, he was deserted in distress by his faithless friend, who turned the corner, and left him. This is his third painful” Confession.“He instantly returned to Annecy and” Mama; but she, alas! was gone to Paris. After this, he informs us of the many girls that were enamoured of him: of his journey with one of them, on foot, to Fribourg; of his visiting his father, in his way, at Nion; and of his great distress at Lausanne, which reduced him to the expedient of teaching music, which he knew not, saying he was of Paris, where he had never been, and changing his name to Voussore, the anagram of Rousseau. But here his ignorance and his imprudence exposed him to public shame, by his attempting what he could not execute. Being thus discomfited, and unable to subsist at Lausanne, he removed to Neufchatel, where he passed the winter. There he succeeded better, and, at length, by teaching music, insensibly learned it.

She understood the French and Italian tongues well; for which, however, she had no other tutor than the hon. Mr. Thynne, son to lord Weymouth, who kindly took upon him the task of teaching her. Her uncommon merit, and the charms of her person and conversation, procured her many admirers; and, among others, it is said that Prior the poet made his addresses to her. There was certainly much of friendship, if not of love, between them; and Prior’s answer to Mrs, Roue’s, then Mrs. Singer’s, pastoral on those subjects, gives room to suspect that there was something more than friendship on his side. In the mean time, Mr. Thomas Rowe, the son of a dissenting clergyman, a gentleman of uncommon parts and learning, and also of some talents for poetry, was the successful suitor. She was advanced to the age of thirty-six, before their interview at Bath in 1709, and he was ten or twelve years younger. It appears, however, to have been a match of affection on both sides. Some considerable time after his marriage, he wrote to her under the name of Delia a very tender ode, full of the warmest sentiments of connubial friendship and affection: five years constituted the short period of their happiness. Mr. Rowe died of a consumption in May 1715, aged twenty-eight years, and was unfeignedly lamented by his amiable partner. The elegy she composed upon his death is one of her best poems. It was only out of a regard to Mr. Rowe, that she had hitherto endured London in the winter-season, and therefore, on his decease, she retired to Frome, where her property chiefly lay, and where she wrote the greatest part of her works, Her “Friendship in Death, in twenty letters from the dead to the living,” was published in 1728; and her “Letters Moral and Entertaining” were printed, the first part in 1729, the second in 1731, and the third in 1733, 8vo, both written with the pious intention of exciting the careless and dissipated part of the world to an attention to their best interests, and written in a style considerably elegant, and perhaps at that time new, striking, copious, and luxuriant. In 1736, she published “The History of Joseph,” a poem, which she had written in her younger years. She did not long survive this publication; for she died of an apoplexy, as was supposed, Feb. 20, 1736-7, in the sixty-third year of her age. In her cabinet were found letters to several of her friends, which she had ordered to be delivered immediately after her decease, that the advice they contained might be the more impressive. The rev. Dr. Isaac Watts, agreeably to her request, revised and published her devotions in 1737, under the title of “Devout Exercises of the heart in Meditation and Soliloquy, Praise, and Prayer;” and, in 1739, her “Miscellaneous Works in prose and verse” were published in 2 vols. 8vo, with an account of her life and writings prefixed. These have often been reprinted, and still retain a considerable share of popularity. Her person is thus described: Although she was not a regular beauty, she possessed a large share of the charms of her sex. She was of a moderate stature, her hair of a fine colour, her eyes of a darkish grey inclining to blue, and full of fire. Her complexion was very fair, and a natural blush glowed in her cheeks. She spoke gracefully, her voice was exceedingly sweet and harmonious; and she had a softness in her aspect, which inspired love, yet not without some mixture of that awe and veneration which distinguished sense and virtue, apparent in the countenance, are wont to create.

, an eminent dramatic poet, was the son of John Rowe, esq. serjeant at law, and born at Little Berkford in Bedfordshire in 1673. His family had long possessed a considerable estate, with a good house, at Lambertoun in Devonshire. His ancestor from whom he descended in a direct line, received the arms borne by his descendants for his bravery in the holy war. His father, John Rowe, who was the first that quitted his paternal acres to practise any part of profit, professed the law, and published Benlow’s and Dallison’s Reports in the reign of James the Second, when, in opposition to the notions then diligently propagated, of dispensing power, he ventured to remark how low his authors rated the prerogative. He was made a serjeant, and died April 30, 1692. He was buried in the Temple church.

Rowe is chiefly to be considered (Dr. Johnson observes) in the light of a tragic writer and a translator. In his attempt at comedy he failed so much, that he wisely gave up the pursuit of the comic muse, and his “Biter” is not inserted in his works; and his occasional poems and short compositions are rarely worthy of either praise or censure; for they seem the casual sports of a mind seeking rather to amuse its leisure than to exercise its powers. In the construction of his dramas there is not much art; he is not a nice observer of the unities. He extends time, and varies place, as his convenience requires. To vary the place is not (in the opinion of the learned critic from whom these observations are borrowed) any violation of nature, if the change be made between the acts for it is no less easy for the spectator to suppose himself at Athens in the second act, than at Thebes in the first but to change the scene as is done by Rowe in the middle of an act, is to add more acts to the play, since an act is so much of the business as is transacted without interruption. Rowe, by this licence, easily extricates himself from difficulties; as in “Lady Jane Gray,” when we have been terrified with all the dreadful pomp of public execution, and are wondering how the heroine or poet will proceed, no sooner has Jane pronounced some prophetic rhimes, than pass and be gone the scene closes, and Pembroke and Gardiner are turned out upon the stage. “I know not,” says Dr. Johnson, “that there can be found in his plays any deep search into nature, any accurate discriminations of kindred qualities, or nice display of passion in its progress all is general and undefined. Nor does he much interest or affect the auditor, except in” Jane Shore,“who is always seen and heard with pity. Alicia is a character of empty noise, with no resemblance to real sorrow or to natural madness.” It is concluded, therefore, that Rowe’s reputation arises principally from the reasonableness and propriety of some of his scenes, from the elegance of his diction, and the suavity of his verse. He seldom moves either pity or terror, but he often elevates the sentiments; he seldom pierces the breast, but he always delights the ear, and often improves the understanding. Being a great admirer of Shakspeare, he gave the public an edition of his plays; to which he prefixed an account of that great man’s life. But the most considerable of Mr. Rowe’s performances was a translation of “Lucan’s Pharsalia,” which he just lived to finish, but not to publish; for it did not appear in print till 1728, ten years after his death. It is said he had another talent, not usual with dramatic authors. Mrs. Oldfield affirmed, that the best school she had ever known was, hearing Rowe read her part in his tragedies.

In the mean time, the love of poetry and books did not make him unfit for business; for nobody applied closer to it when occasion required. The duke of Queensbernf, when secretary of state, made him secretary of public affairs. After the duke’s death, all avenues were stopped to his preferment; and, during the rest of queen Anne’s reign, he passed his time in study. A story, indeed, is told, rather an improbable one, which shews that he had some acquaintance with ministers. It is suid, that he went one day to pay his court to the lord treasurer Oxford, who asked him, “if he understood Spanish well?” He answered, “No:” but, thinking that his lordship might intend to send him into Spain on some honourable commission, he presently added, “that he did not doubt but he could shortly be able both to understand and to speak it.” The earl approving what he said, Rowe took his leave; and, retiring a few weeks to learn the language, waited again on the earl to acquaint him with it. His lordship asking him, “if he was sure he understood it thoroughly,” and Rowe affirming that he did, “How happy are you, Mr. Rowe,” said the earl, “that you can have the pleasure of reading and understanding the history of Don Quixote in the original!” On the accession of George I. he was made poet laureat, and one of the land-surveyors of the customs in the port of London. The prince of Wales conferred on him the clerkship of his council; and the lord chancellor Parker made him his secretary for the presentations. He did not enjoy these promotions long, for he died Dec. 6, 1718, in his 45th year.

Mr. Rowe was twice married, had a son by his first wife, and a daughter by his second. He was a handsome, genteel man; and his mind was as amiable as his person. He lived beloved, and at his death had the honour to be lamented by Mr. Pope, in an epitaph which is printed in Pope’s works, although it was not affixed on Mr. Rowe’s monument, in Westminster-abbey, where he was interred in the Poet’s corner.

Ruccellai’s principal work “De Urbe Roma,” contains an accurate account of what the ancient writers have handed down respecting the magnificent edifices of that city, and Was in all respects the best work of the kind that had then appeared. It was first published in the collection entitled “Rerum Ital. Scriptores Florentini.” He left also a history of the war of Pisa, and another of the descent of Charles VIII. into Italy, “De Bello Pisano,” and “De Jtello Jtajico;” the latter of which is said to have been first printed at London by Brindley in 1724, and both by Bowyer in 1733; but this last edition we do not find mention.ed in Mr. Nichols’s very accurate and elaborate list of the productions of Bowyer’s press. In 1752 was published at JLeipsic a treatise on the Roman magistracy, “De magistratibus Romanis,” written by Ruccellai, and sent to the editor by the learned antiquary Gori, who discovered it at Florence. Ruccellai was also a poet, and appears in the “Canti Carnascialeschi” as the author of the “Trionfo della calunnia.” In poetry, however, he was eclipsed by his son, the subject of our next article.

, a French orator and poet, was born at Paris in 1643, and educated in the Jesuits’ college, where he afterwards became professor of humanity and rhetoric. In 1667, when only twenty-four, he wrote a Latin poem, upon the conquests of Lewis XIV. which was thought so excellent, that Peter Corneille translated it into French, and presented it to the king; apologizing, at the same time, for not being able to convey to his majesty the beauties of the original. No introduction could be more favourable, and the king shewed him singular respect ever after. He was one of those who had the care of the Delphine editions of the classics; and Virgil was allotted to him, which he published with good notes, and a,correct life of the author, in 1675, 4to. He published also panegyrics, funeral orations, and sermons, which shew him to have been a very great orator: but his master-piece is a funeral oration for the prince of Luxembourg. There are also tragedies of his writing in Latin and French, which had the approbation of Corneille, and therefore cannot be without merit; but he would not suffer them to be performed. A collection of his Latin poems was published at Paris, in 1680, in 12mo, and at Antwerp in 1693. He died at Paris May 27, 1725, in his eighty-second year.

Having a taste for polite literature, he studied to acquire a familiar knowledge of the French and Italian languages; but particularly of the Greek and Latin poets, historians, and orators. Among the Italian writers, the productions of John Baptist Porta, were his favourites. This author’s comedies, in our account of him, are erroneously said not to be extant, instead of esteemed. An edition of them was published in 1726, 4to, but there were old editions of them all in Ruggle’s time, and he evidently caught their spirit. Hjy “Ignoramus?' owes much to Porta’s” Trappolana.“In the mean time, Ruggle’s reputation for learning became an inducement with many parents and guardians to place their sons at Clare-hall, uiider his tuition. In 1604, he was appointed one of the two taxers in the university. This seems the only distinction he obtained, except that in the following year, when king James visited Oxford, he was admitted M. A. It is said to have been in consequence of a litigious dispute carried on, in 1611, between the university, and the mayor and corporation of Cambridge, that he conceived an unfavourable opinion of the gentlemen of the law, and thought some of their practices a fair subject for ridicule. With this view he completed his comedy called” Ignoramus,“which was acted at the university before James I. both in March and May 1614, and is said to have highly delighted his majesty; the pleasure, indeed, which it gave him is rather oddly expressed.” Spectando et ridendo rex tantum non cacatus!“The lawyers are said to have felt the force of the ridicule, and to have expressed the warmest resentment against the poet and his performance. A very correct edition of this comedy, with a life of the author, was published in 1787, by Mr. John Sidney Hawkins, 8vo. Two other plays are ascribed to Ruggle,” Club Law,“and” Revera, or Verity,“but neither have been printed. Mr. lluggle resigned his fellowship in 1620, probably on succeeding to an estate, and died between Sept. 6, 1621, and Nov. 3, 1622, the former being the date of his will, the latter the day when it was proved. Mr. Hawkins’s opinion of the famed” Ignoramus" is, we are afraid higher than modern taste and humour can allow.

, a man of learning and ingenuity, the son of Christopher Russel, esq. of Minorca, was born in 1728. He was bred at Westminster-school, and in 1746 was admitted a member of St. Mary’s hall, Oxford. He commenced a poet in 1744, or before; for in his collection are verses on seeing lady Elizabeth Boyle dance at Marston on her father’s birth-day in that year. In April 1750 he was admitted bachelor of arts, but. did not determine or complete his decree until 1752. About 1753 he obtained the rectory of Skull, in the diocese of Cork, in Ireland, by r the patronage of John, fifth earl of Oork and Orrery. With that nobleman he appears to have lived in intimacy, as well as with his second son, Hamilton Boyle, and frequently visited Marston. He died in 1767; and two years after, were published, in 2 vols. 8vo, “The Works^of the late Rev. George Russel, Rector of Skull, in the diocese of Cork.” From the few specimens Mr. Malone has given, he seems justified in saying that these work?, though little known, owing probably to their having been published only in Ireland, have very considerable merit.

, an able critic and negociator, was born of an ancient family at Dordrecht or Dort, Aug. 28, 1589. He received a part of his early education at home, and was afterwards placed under the instructions of Gerard Vossius. In 1605 he was sent to Leyden, where he studied under Baud-ins, with whom he also resided, Scaliger, and Heinsius. After remaining here six years, he travelled in 1611 into France, resided two years at Paris, and took the degree of licentiate in law at Orleans; less from inclination than to please his parents. He returned to Dort, September 13, 1613, the day after his mother died, and soon after went to the Hague, where he was admitted to the bar; but remaining averse to this profession, and uncertain what to adopt in its place, the Swedish ambassador, who had been desired by his royal master to send him a person from Holland qualified for the post of counsellor, proposed it to Rutgers, and he having accepted the offer, they departed for Stockholm in May 1614. Finding, on their arrival, that the king was in Livonia, on account of the war with Muscovy, they took that route, and when they arrived at Nerva, the king received Rutgers with so great kindness, that the latter, although he had taken this journey without any determined purpose, or the hopes of a fixed settlement, now resolved ta attach himself to his majesty’s service. He was after this employed three times as envoy from that prince to Holland upon very important affairs, in which he acquitted himself to the entire satisfaction of his majesty, who ennobled him in 1619. He visited Bohemia, Denmark, and several German courts, in the same quality; and lastly he resided at the Hague, as minister from Gustavus to that republic, where he died Oct. 26, 1625, at the early age of thirty-six. His works are, 1. “Notae in Horatium,” added to an edition of that poet by Robert Stephens, in 1613, and reprinted in 1699 and 1713. 2. “Variarum lectionum libri tres, quibus utriusque linguae scriptores, qua emendantur, qua illustrantur,” Leyden, 1618. This is justly esteemed as a very learned work, and, what was not so common then, a very judicious Specimen of criticism. 3. “Notse in Martialem,” added to Scriverius’s excellent and scarce edition of 1619, 12mo. 4. “Spicilegium in Apuleiurrt,” printed in Elmenhorst’s edition of 1621, 8vo. 5. “Emendationes in Q. Curtium,” given in the Leyden edition of 1625, 12mo. 6. “Poemata,” printed with Nicolas Heinsius’ s poems, Leyden, 1653, and Amst. 1669, 8vo. This Heinsius, the son of Daniel Heinsius, was Rutgers’s nephew. 7. “Lectiones Venusinae,” added to Peter Bui-man’s Horace, 1699, 12mo. 8. “VitaJani Rutgersii,” &c. written by himself, and published by another nephew, William Goes, Leyden, 1646, 4to, of 14 pages, but republished with his poems, and elsewhere. Rutgers bequeathed his library to Daniel Heinsius, his brother-in-law, who printed a catalogue of it in 1630.

, a Latin poet, who was advanced to high employments at the Roman court, was a military tribune, and about 414- A. D. was prefect of Rome> and in order to succour his native country, then over-run by the Visigoths, took a journey to Gaul, of which he wrote a description in elegiac verse. It consisted of two books, of which the latter is lost. The work gives a favourable impression of the writer, as a Pagan, though it has been greatly censured by Christian writers, on account of some remarks he makes on the conduct and manners of the Christians. This “Itinerarium” was discovered in 1494 at a monastery, and has been several times printed. The best editions are those of 1582 and 1687. It is inserted in Burmann’s “Poetac Minores,” and in Matlaire’s " Corpus Poetarn m.' 12

, an antiquary and critic, was born in the North of England, and educated at the grammar-school of Northallerton, whence he was admitted a scholar at Sidney college, Cambridge. On quitting the university, he became a member of Gray’s-inn; and in 1692 succeeded Mr. Shadwell as historiographer to king William III. He rendered himself known first as a writer for the stage, by his production of “Edgar,” a tragedy, in 1673, which excited little approbation or inquiry until he became the author of “A View of the Tragedies of the last age,” which occasioned those admirable remarks by Dryden, preserved in the preface to Mr. Colman’s edition of “Beaumont and Fletcher,” and since by Dr. Johnson in his “Life of Dryden.” Rymer was a man of considerable learning, and a lover of poetry; but had few requisites for the character of a critic; and was indeed almost totally disqualified for it, by want of candour and the liberties he took with Shakspeare, in his “View of the Tragedies of the last age,” drew upon him the severity of every admirer of that poet. His own talents for dramatic poetry were extremely inferior to those of the persons whose writings he has with so much rigour attacked, as appears very evidently by his tragedy of “Edgar.” But, although we cannot subscribe either to his fame or his judgment as a poet or critic, it cannot be denied that he was a very useful compiler of records, and his “Fœdera” will ever entitle his memory to respect. While collecting this great work, he employed himself, like a royal historiographer, as one of his biographers says, in detecting the falsehood, and ascertaining the truth of history. In 1702, he published his first letter to bishop Nicolson, in which he endeavours to free king Robert III. of Scotland, beyond all dispute, from the imputation of bastardy. He soon after published his second letter to bishop Nicolson, “containing an historical deduction of the alliances between France and Scotland; whereby the pretended old league with Charlemagne is disproved, and the true old league is ascertained.”

, an Italian poet, but better known as a writer of novels, was born at Florence about 1335, of an ancient family, some branches of which had held employments of great trust and dignity in the republic. While young he composed some amatory verses, in imitation of Petrarch, but with a turn of thought and style peculiar to himself, and he was frequently employed in drawing up poetical inscriptions for public monuments, &c. in which sentiments of morality and a love of liberty were expected to be introduced. Some of these are still extant, but are perhaps more to be praised for the subject than the style. Sacchetti, when more advanced in life, filled several offices of the magistracy both at Florence and different parts of Tuscany, and formed an acquaintance with the most eminent men of his time, by whom he was highly respected. He suffered much, however, during the civil contests of his country. He is supposed to have died about the beginning of the fifteenth century. Very little of his poetry has been published. He is principally known by his “Novels,” an excellent edition of which was published at Florence in 1724, 2 vols. 8vo, by Bottari, who has prefixed an account of his life. These tales are in the manner of Boccaccio, but shorter, more lively, and in general more decent.

All Sacchini’s operas are replete with elegant airs, beautiful accompanied recitatives, and orchestral effects, without the least appearance of labour or study. It was seemingly by small means that he produced the greatest effects. He interested the audience more by a happy, graceful, and touching melody, than by a laboured and extraneous modulation. His accompaniments always brilliant and ingenious, without being loaded and confused, assist the expression of the vocal part, and are often picturesque. Each of the dramas he composed in this country was so entire, so masterly, yet so new and natural, that there was nothing left for criticism to censure, though innumerable beauties to point out and admire. He had a taste so exquisite, and so totally free from pedantry, that he was frequently new without effort; never thinking of himself or his fame for any particular excellence, but totally occupied with the ideas of the poet, and the propriety, consistency, and effect of the whole drama. His accompaniments, though always rich and ingenious, never call off attention from the voice, but by a constant transparency, the principal melody is rendered distinguishable through all the contrivance of imitative and picturesque design in the instruments.

, lord Buckhurst and earl of Dorset, an eminent statesman and poet, was born at Withyam in Sussex, in 1527. He was the son of sir Richard Sackville, who died in 1566, by Winifred Brydges (afterwards marchioness of Winchester), and grandson of John Sackville, esq. who died in 1557, by Anne Boleyne, sister of sir Thomas Boleyne, earl of Wiltshire and great grandson of Richard Sackviiie, esq. who died in 1524, by Isabel, daughter of John Digges, of Digues 1 s place in Barham, Kent, of a family which for many succeeding generations produced men of learning and genius. He was first of the university of Oxford, and, as it is supposed, of Hart-hall, now Hertford-college; but taking no degree there, he removed to Cambridge, where he commenced master of arts, and afterwards was a student of the Inner Temple. At both universities he became celebrated both as a Latin and English poet, and carried the same taste and talents to the Temple, where he wrote his tragedy of “Gorboduc,” which was exhibited in the great hall by the students of that society, as part of a Christmas entertainment, and afterwards before queen Elizabeth at Whitehall^ Jan. 18, 1561. It was surreptitiously printed in 1563, under the title of “The Tragedy of Gorboduc,” 4to; but a correct edition under the inspection of the authors (for he was assisted by Thomas Norton), appeared in 1571, entitled “The Tragedie of Ferrex and Porrex.” Another edition appeared in 1569, notwithstanding which, for many years it had so feompletely disappeared, that Dryden and Oldham, in the reign of Charles II. do not appear to have seen it, though they pretended to criticise it; and even Wood knew just as little of it, as is plain from his telling us that it was written in old English rhyme. Pope took a fancy to retrieve this play from oblivion, and Spence being employed to set it off with all possible advantage, it was printed pompously in 1736, 8vo, with a preface by the editor. Spence, speaking of his lordship as a poet, declares, that “the dawn of our English poetry was in Chaucer’s time, but that it shone out in him too bright all at once to last long. The succeeding age was dark and overcast. There was indeed some glimmerings of genius again in Henry VIII's time but our poetry had never what could be called a fair settled day-light till towards the end of queen Elizabeth’s reign. It was between these two periods, that lord Buckhurst wrote; after the earl of Surrey, and before Spenser.” Warton’s opinion of this tragedy is not very favourable. He thinks it never was a favourite with our ancestors, and fell into oblivion on account of the nakedness anil uninteresting nature of the plot, the tedious length of the speeches, the want of discrimination of character, and almost a total absence of pathetic or critical situations. Yet he allows that the language of “Gorboduc” has great merit and perspicuity, and that it is entirely free from the tumid phraseology of a subsequent age of play-writing.

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

, sixth earl of Dorset and Middlesex, a celebrated wit and poet, was descended in a direct line from Thomas lord Buckhurst, and born Jan. 24, 1637. He had his education under a private tutor; after which, making the tour of Italy, he returned to England a little before the Restoration. He was chosen in the first parliament that was called after that event for East Grinstead in Sussex, made a great figure as a speaker, and was caressed by Charles II.; but, having as yet no turn to business, declined all public employment. He was, in truth, like Villiers, Rochester, Sedley, &c. one of the wits or libertines of Charles’s court; and thought of nothing so much as feats of gallantry, which sometimes carried him to inexcusable excesses . He went a volunteer in the first Dutch war in 1665; and, the night before the engagement, composed the celebrated song “To all you Ladies now at land,” which is generally esteemed the happiest of his productions; but there is reason to think it was not originally composed, but only revised on this occasion. Soon after he was made a gentleman of the bed-chamber; and, on account of his distinguished politeness, sent by the king upon several short embassies of compliment into France. Upon the death of his uncle James Cranfield, earl of Middlesex, in 1674, that estate devolved on him; and he succeeded likewise to the title by creation in 1675. His father dying two years after, he succeeded him in his estate and honours. He utterly disliked, and openly discountenanced, the violent measures of James II's reign; and early engaged for the prince of Orange, by whom he was made lord chamberlain of the household, and taken into the privy-council. In 1692, he attended king William to the congress at the Hague, and was near losing his life in the passage. They went on board Jan. 10, in a very severe season; and, when they were a few leagues off Goree, having by bad weather been four days at sea, the king was so impatient to go on shore, that he took a boat; when, a thick fog arising soon after, they were so closely surrounded with ice, as not to be able either to make the shore, or get back to the ship. In this condition they remained twenty-two hours, almost despairing of life; and the cold was so bitter, that they could hardly speak or stand at their landing; and lord Dorset contracted a lameness, which continued for some time. In 1698, his health insensibly declining, he retired from public affairs; only now and then appearing at the council-board. He died at Bun Jan. 19, 1705-6, after having married two wives; by the latter of whom be had a daughter, and an only son, Lionel CranfieKl Sackvilie, who was created a duke in 1720, and died Oct. 9, 1765.

, or Sadee, a celebrated Persian poet and moralist, was born in 1175, at Sheeraz, or Schiraz, the capiai of Persia, and was educated at Damascus, but quitted his country when it was desolated by the Turks, and commenced his travels. He was afterwards taken prisoner, and condemned to work at the fortifications of Tripoli. While in this deplorable state, he was redeemed by a merchant of Aleppo, who had so much regard for him as to give him his daughter in marriage, with a dowry of one hundred sequins. This lady, however, being an intolerable scold, proved the plague of his life, and gave him that unfavourable opinion of the sex which appears occasionally in his works. During one of their altercations she reproached him with the favours her family had conferred: “Are not you the man my father bought for \en pieces of gold?” “Yes,” answered Sadi, “and he sold me again for an hundred sequins?”

We find few other particulars of his life, during which he appears to have been admired for his wise sayings and his wit. He is said to have lived an hundred and twenty years, that is, to the year 1295, but different dates are assigned, some making him born in 1193, and die in 1312. He composed such a variety of works in prose and verse, Arabic and Persian, as to fill two large folio volumes, which were printed at Calcutta, in 1795. It was not, however, merely as a poet, that he acquired fame, but as a philosopher and a moralist. His works are quoted by the Persians on the daily and hourly occurrences of life; and his tomb, adjoining the city where he was born, is still visited with veneration. “Yet,” says sir William Ouseley, speaking of this author’s works, “I shall not here suppress that there is attributed to Sadi a short collection of poetical compositions, inculcating lessons of the grossest sensuality;” and even his most moral work, called “Gulistan,” or “Garden of Flowers,” is by no means immaculate. Mr. Gladwin also, to whom we owe an excellent translation of it, published at Calcutta, 1806, in 4to, with the original Persian, has been obliged to omit or disguise a few passages, which, he says, “although not offensive to the coarse ideas of native readers, could not possibly be translated without transgressing the bounds of decency.”

, a French poet, was born at Roan in Normandy in 1594. In the epistle dedicatory to the third part of his works, he tells us, that his father commanded a squadron of ships in the service of Elizabeth queen of England for twenty-two years, and that he was for three years prisoner in the Black Tower at Constantinople. He mentions also, that two brothers of his had been killed in an engagement against the Turks. His own life was spent in a continual succession of travels, which were of no advantage to his fortune. There are miscellaneous poems of this author, the greatest part of which are of the comic or burlesque, and the amatory kind. The first volume was printed at Paris in 1627, the second in 1643, and the third in 1649, and they have been reprinted several times. “Solitude, an ode,” which is one of the first of them, is his best piece in the opinion of Mr. Boileau. In 1650 he published “Stances sur la grossesse de la reine de Pologne et de Suede.” In 1654 he printed his “Moise sauve”, idylle heroique,“Leyden which had at first many admirers: Chapelain called it a speaking picture but it has not preserved its reputation. St. A main wrote also a very devout piece, entitled” Stances a M. Corneille, sur son imitation de Jesus Christ," Paris, 1656. Mr. Brossette says that he wrote also a poem upon the moon, in which he introduced a compliment to Lewis XIV. upon his skill in swimming, an amusement he often took when young in the river Seine; but the king’s dislike to this poem is said to have affected the author to such a degree, that he did not survive it long. He died in 1661, aged sixty-seven. He was admitted a member of the French academy, when first founded by cardinal Richelieu, in 1633; and Mr. Pelisson informs us, that, in 1637, at his own desire, he was excused from the obligation of making a speech in his turn, on condition that he would compile the comic part of the dictionary which the academy had undertaken, and collect the burlesque terms. This was a task well suited to him; for it appears by his writings that he was extremely conversant in these terms, of which he seems to have made a complete collection from the markets and other places where the lower people resort.

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

, a French poet of the seventeenth century, was born at Paris, and studied with a view to the ecclesiastical profession, but his private attachment was wholly to the belles lettres and poetry, which he diligently cultivated. He spent the greatest part of his life at Livri, of which he was abbot, though no credit to the order, for he lived in a voluptuous, indolent style, circulating and practising the pernicious maxims he had learnt from his master, the poet Theophile, and to which he was so strongly attached, that Boileau in his first satire places St. Pavin’s conversion among things morally impossible. The story of his having been converted by hearing a terrible voice at the time Theophile died, in 1625, is entirely without foundation, for his conversion preceded his own death but a very short time. He died in 1670, leaving several poems not inelegantly written, which form part of vol. IV. of Barbin’s collection; and a collection of his works was published in 1759, 12mo, with Charleval, Lalane, and MontplaUir. He was related to Claudius Sanguin, steward of the household to the king and the duke of Orleans, who published “Les He-ires” in French verse, Paris, 1660, 4to, in which the whole Psalter is translated.

Sandys distinguished himself also as a poet; and his productions in that way were greatly admired in the times they were written. In 1632 he published “Ovid’s Metamorphoses Englished, mythologized, and represented in figures,” Oxford, in folio. Francis Cleyn was the inventor of the figures, and Solomon Savary the engraver. He had before published part of this translation; and, in the preface to this second edition, he tells us, that he has attempted to collect out of sundry authors the philosophical sense of the fables of Ovid. To this work, which is dedicated to Charles I. is subjoined “An Essay to the translation of the jEneis.” It was reprinted in 1640. In 1636, he published, in 8vo, “A Paraphrase on the Psalms of David, and upon the Hymns dispersed throughout the Old and New Testament,” 1636, 8vo, reprinted in 1638, folio; with a title somewhat varied, This was a book which, Wood tells us, Charles I. delighted to read, when a prisoner in Carisbrooke castle. There was an edition of J 640, with the Psalms set to music, by Lawes. In this last year he published, in 12rno, a sacred drama, written originally by Grotius, under the title of “Christus Patiens,” and which Mr. Sandys, in his translation, has called “Christ’s Passion,” on which, and “Adamus Exul,” and Masenius, is founded Lauder’s impudent charge of plagiarism against Milton. This translation was reprinted, with cuts, in 1688, $vo. The subject of it was treated before in Greek by Apollinarius bishop of Hierapolis, and after him by Gregory Nazianzen; but, according to Sandys, Grotius excelled all others. Langbaine tells us, with regard to Sandys’ translation, that “he will be allowed an excellent artist in it by learned judges; and he has followed Horace’s advice of avoiding a servile translation, * nee verbum verbo curabis reddere fidus interpres’ so he comes so near the sense of his author, that nothing is lost; no spirits evaporate in the decanting of it into English; and, if there be any sediment, it is left behind.” He published also a metrical paraphrase of “The Song of Solomon,” London, 1641, 4to, dedicated to the King, and reprinted in 1648 with his “Psalms.” There are but few incidents known concerning our author. All who mention him agree in bestowing on him the character, not only of a man of genius, but of singular worth and piety. For the most part of his latter days he lived with sir Francis Wenman, of Caswell, near Witney in Oxfordshire, to whom his sister was married; probably chusing that situation in some measure on account of its proximity to Burford, the retirement of his intimate acquaintance and valuable friend Lucius lord viscount Falkland, who addressed some elegant poems to him, preserved in Nichols’s “Select Collection,” with several by Mr. Sandys, who diejl at the house of his nephew, sir Francis Wyat, at Boxley in Kent, in 1643; and was interred in the* chancel of that parish-church, without any inscription but in the parish register is this entry “Georgius Sandys poetarum Anglorum sui sseculi facile princeps, sepultus fuit Martii 7, Stilo Angliae, ann. Dom. 164$.” His memory has also been handed down by various writers, with the respect thought due to his great worth and abilities. Mr. Dryden pronounced him the best versifier of the age, but objects to his “Ovid,” as too close and literal; and Mr. Pope declared, in his notes to the Iliad, that English poetry owed much of its present beauty to his translations. Dr. Warton thinks that Sandys did more to polish and tune the English versification than Den ham or Waller, who are usually applauded on this subject; yet his poems are not now much read. The late biographer of his father observes, that “the expressive energy of his prose will entitle him to a place among English classics, when his verses, some of which arebeautiful, shall be forgotten. Of the excellence of his style, the dedication of his travels to prince Henry, will afford a short and very conspicuous example.”

, vernacularly Giacomo Sannazaro, a celebrated Italian and Latin poet, was born at Naples, July 28, 1458. His family is said to have been originally of Spanish extraction, but settled at an Dearly period at Santo Nazaro, a flourishing town situated between' the Tessino and the Poj where it was long conspicuous for nobility and opulence. Reduced at length by the calamities of war, the more immediate progenitors of our poet removed to Naples. His father dying while this son was very young, his mother, unable from her poverty, to keep up her former rank, retired with her family to Nocera di Pagani, in Umbria, where Sannazarius passed a considerable portion of his youth. He had previously to his removal from Naples acquired the elements of the Greek and Latin languages, under the tuition of Junianus Maius, who conceiving a high opinion of his talents, prevailed on his mother to return again to Naples, where he might continue his education. Here he was admitted a member of the Academia Pontana, and took the name of Actius Sync-ems. He had formed an early attachment of the most tender kind to Carmosina Bonifacia, a young Neapolitan lady, but not being a favoured lover, uttered his disappointment in many of those querulous sonnets and canzoni which are still extant. In compositions of this kind Sannazarius is considered as having surpassed every other poet from the days of Petrarch. To dissipate his uneasiness, he tried the effect of travelling; but on his return, his grief was heightened by the report of the death of his mistress. She is understood to be the lamented Phyllis of his Italian and Latin poems.

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

In 1503, he again returned to Naples, was replaced in his favourite villa, once more frequented the court, and obtained the favour of the reigning queen. Here he found another mistress in Cassandra Marchesia, one of the ladies of honour, whom he describes as very beautiful and very learned, but as he was now too far advanced in years for a passion such as he formerly felt, Cassandra is to be considered merely as his poetical mistress, and the chaste object of his Platonic attachment. The attachment, it is said, was mutual, and a confidential intercourse continued to subsist between them till the poet’s decease, nor does it appear that Cassandra ever formed any matrimonial connection. Sannazarius, however, has been numbered by some among the votaries of pleasure, and they tell us he affected the levity and gallantry of youth when in his old age. In his friendships he is said to have been uniformly ardent and sincere. In gratitude to the memory of Pontanus, who had given a powerful impulse to his youthful studies, he became the editor of his works. He is also commended for his probity, his love of justice, and abhorrence of litigation.

, an Italian poet and historian, was born in 1521 at Rome, and was the son of James Sansovino, an eminent sculptor and celebrated architect, whose eulogy Vasari has left us. He studied the belies lettres at Venice, and took his degrees in law at Padua; but that science not suiting his taste, he devoted himself wholly to poetry, history, and polite literature, and died in 1586, at Venice, aged sixty-five, leaving more than fifty works, all written in Italian. They consist of “Poems;” notes on Boccaccio’s “Decameron, on Ariosto, Dante, &c.” translations of ancient historians and some histories written by himself, as his “Venezia descritta,” of which the best edition is that of 1663, 4to; “Istoria Universale dell' origine, guerre, ed imperio deTurchi,” 1654, 2 vols. 4to, reckoned a capital work. His “Satires” are in a collection with those of Ariosto, and others, Venice, 1560, 8vo his “Capitoli” with those of Aretino, and different writers, 1540, and 1583, 8vo to which we may add his “Cento novelle Scelte,” Venice, 1566, 4to.

, in Latin Santolius, a celebrated modern Latin poet, was born at Paris May 12, 1630, of a good family. He studied the belles lettres at the college of St. Barbe, and in that of Louis le Grand, under the learned Pere Cossart, and entering soon after among the regular canons of St. Victor, devoted himself wholly to poetry, commencing his caree/ by celebrating some great men of that time. He also was employed to write many of those inscriptions which may be seen on the public fountains and monuments of Paris, and this he did in a style at once clear, easy, and dignified. When some new hymns were wanted for the Paris breviary, he was requested by his brother Claude, Pelisson, and Bossuet, to compose them, which he accomplished with the greatest success and applause, in an elevated, perspicuous, and majestic style, suited to the dignity of the subject. The reputation which he gained by these'induced the order of Clugny to request some for their breviary. With this he complied, and in return they granted him letters of filiation, and a pension. Santeul was much esteemed by the literati of his time, and by many persons of rank, among whom were the two princes of Coiide 1 father and son, whose bounty he frequently experienced 44ud Louis XIV. who settled a pension upon him. He greatly offended the Jesuits, however, by his epitaph in praise of their enemy Arnauld. While SanteuPs Latin poems were always much admired by his countrymen, he seems to have enjoyed fully as much reputation, during his life-time, for his wit, and odditjes of character. La Bruyere, under the name of T/ieodes, has described him as, in one moment, good-humoured, tractable, easy, and complaisant, in another, harsh, violent, choleric, and capricious; as at once simple, ingenuous, credulous, sportive, and volatile; in short, a child with grey hairs, and as speaking like a fool, and thinking like a sage. He utters, adds La Bruyere, truths in a ridiculous manner, and sensible things in a siliy way; and we are surprised to find so much intellect shining through the clouds of buffoonery, contortions, and grimaces. He had great credit for his witticisms, many of which may be seen in the “Santoliana.” When the duke of Bourbon went to hold the states of Burgundy at Dijon, Santeul attended him, and died there, August 5, 1697, aged sixty-seven, as he was on the point of returning to Pans. His death was attributed to an inconsiderate trick played upon him by some one whom his oddity of character had encouraged to take liberties, and who put some Spanish snuff into his wine-glass, which brought on a complaint of the bowels that proved fatal in fourteen hours. Besides his Latin hymns, 12mo, he left a considerable number of Latin “Poems,” 1739, 3 vols. 12 mo.

, brother of the preceding, born Feb. 3, 1628, also wrote some beautiful hymns in the Paris breviary, under the name of “Santolius Maglorianus,” a name given on account of his having resided a long time in the seminary of St. Magloire at Paris, as a secular ecclesiastic. Though the brother of Santeul, and a poet like him, he was of a totally different temper and disposition; mild, calm, and moderate, he had none of that heat and impetuosity, by which his brother was incessantly agitated. 'He was esteemed not only for his poetical talents, but his deep learning and exemplary piety. He died September 29, 1684, at Paris, aged fifty-seven. Besides his hymns on the particular festivals, which are very numerous and preserved by the family in ms. 2 vols. 4to; some of his poetry has been printed with his brother’s works. There was another Claude Santeul, related to the preceding, a merchant and sheriff of Paris, who died about 1729, leaving some “Hymns,” printed at Paris in 1723, 8vo.

, a modern Latin poet, was born of illustrious parents, in 1595, in the duchy of Masovia, in Poland. He entered among the Jesuits in 1612, and was sent to continue his theological studies at Rome, where he devoted himself to the pursuit of antiquities, and indulged his taste for poetry. Some Latin “Odes,” which he presented to Urban Vijl gained him that pontiff’s esteem, and the honour of being chosen to correct the bymns, intended for a new breviary, then composing by Urban‘ s orders. When Sarbiewski returned to Poland, he taught etb’ics, philosophy, and divinity, successively at Wilna. Such was the esteem in which he was held, that when admitted to a doctor’s degree there, Ladislaus V. king of Poland, who was present, drew the ring from his finger, and put it on that of Sarbiewski; and this ring is still preserved in the university at Wilna, and made use of in the inauguration of doctors. Ladislaus also chose him for his preacher, an office in which he gained great applause; and he was frequently his majesty’s companion in his journeys, especially when he went to the baths of Baden. Sarbiewski was so enthusiastic in his admiration of the Latin poets, that he is said to have read Virgil over sixty times, and other poetical classics more than thirty times. He died April 2, 1640, aged forty-five. His Latin poems contain great beauties, mingled with some defects. An enlarged and very elegant edition of them was published at Paris, by Barbou, 1759, 12 mo. They consist of Latin odes, in four books a book of epodes one of dithyrambic verses another of miscellaneous poems and a fourth of epigrams. His lyric verses are the most admired their style is elevated, but they are sometimes deficient in elegance and perspicuity.

Saurin’s mathematical and philosophical papers printed in the Memoirs of the Academy of Sciences, which are numerous, are to be found in the volumes for the years following; viz. 1709, 1710, 1713, 1716, 1718, 1720, 1722, 1723, 1725, 1727. He left a son, who acquired some reputation as a dramatic writer and lyric poet.

Some time after this, Savage formed a resolution of applying to the queen: she had given him his life, and he hoped her goodness might enable him to support it. He published a poem on her birth-day, which he entitled “The Volunteer Laureat.” She graciously sent him fifty pounds, with an intimation that he might annually expect the same bounty. His conduct with regard to this pension was very characteristic; as soon as he had received it, he immediately disappeared, and lay for some time out of the reach of his most intimate friends. At length he was seen again, pennyless as before, but never informed any person where he had been, nor was his retreat ever discovered. His perpetual indigence, politeness, and wit, still raised him new friends, as fast as his misbehaviour lost him his old ones; and sir Robert Walpole, the prime minister, was warmly solicited in his favour. Promises were given, but ended in disappointment; upon which he published a poem in the “Gentleman’s Magazine,” entitled, “The Poet’s Dependence on a Statesman.”

, a dissenting minister of considerable talents, was born in 1675, and was the second son of the Rev. Giles Say, who had been ejected from the vicarage of St. Michael’s in Southampton by the Bartholomew-act in 1662; and, after king James the second’s liberty of conscience, was chosen pastor of a dissenting congregation at Guestwick in Norfolk, where he continued till his death, April 7, 1692. Some years after, the subject of this article being at Southwark, where he had been at school, and conversing with some of the dissenters of that place, met with a woman of great reputation for piety, who told him, with joy, that a sermon on Ps. cxix. 130, preached by his father thirty years before, was the means of her conversion. Being strongly inclined to the ministry, Mr. Say entered as a pupil in the academy of the Rev. Mr. Thomas Rowe at London about 1G92, where he had for his fellow-students Mr (afterwards Dr.) Isaac Watts, Hughes the poet, and Mr. Josiah Hort, afterwards archbishop of Tuam. When he had finished his studies, he became chaplain to Thomas Scott, esq. of Lyrninge in Kent, in whose family he continued three years. Thence he removed to Andover in Hampshire, then to Yarmouth in Norfolk, and soon after to Lowestoffin Suffolk, where he continued labouring in word and doctrine eighteen years. He was afterwards copastor with the Rev. Mr. Samuel Baxter at Ipswich nine years; and lastly was called, in 1734, to succeed Dr. Edmund Caiamy in Westminster, where he died at his house in James-street, April 12, 1743, of a mortification in his bowels, in the sixty-eighth year of his age.

Julius Caesar Scaliger was certainly a man of extraordinary capacity, and of great talents both natural and acquired; but those who were his contemporaries, or who lived nearest to his times, have spoken of him in language' too nearly approaching to extravagance. Colerus does not scruple to say, that he was the greatest philosopher since Aristotle, the greatest poet since Virgil, and the greatest physician since Hippocrates. Lipsius goes a little farther, and not only gives us Homer, Hippocrates, Aristotle, and Scaliger, as the four greatest men that ever appeared, but adds, that he prefers Scaliger to the three others. The elder Vossius ascribes to him a sort of human divinity; and Huet thinks he was expressly formed by nature as a consolation for our degeneracy in these latter days. From these, and other encomiums, which might be multiplied by a reference to the works of his contemporaries and im> mediate successors, it is evident that his reputation was great and extensive; and if he began to study and to write so late in life as has been reported, it is easy to believe that his endowments and application must have been of the most extraordinary kind. A list of his principal works, therefore, seems necessary to illustrate his character. 1. “Exotericarum exercitationum liber quintus decimus de subtilitate ad Hieronymum Cardanum,” Paris, 1557, 4to, often reprinted in 8vo. He calls this attack on Cardan the fifteenth book, because he had written fourteen others under the same title of “Exercitationes,” which had no relation to Cardan. These, however, never were published. 2. “In Theophrasti libros sex de causis plantarum commentarii,” Geneva, 1566, folio. 3. “Commentarii in Aristoteli adscriptos libros duos de plantis,” ibid. 1566, folio. 4. “Aristotelis Hist. Animalium liber decimus, ac versione et commentario,” Lyons, 1584, 8vo. This was a prelude to the entire work published by Maussac at Toulouse, in 1619, fol. “Aristotelis Hist. Animalium, Gr. & Lat. ex versione et cum commentaries J. C. Scaligeri.” 5. “Animadversiones in Theophrasti historias plantarum,” Lyons, 1584, 8vo. 6. “Commentarii in Hippocratis librum de Insomniis,” Gr. & Lat. Lyons, 1538, 8vo, reprinted several times after. 7. “De causis lingua? Latinos libri XIII.” Lyons, 1540, 4to, &c. This is esteemed one of his most valuable works. 8. “J. C. Scaligeri adversus Desiderium Erasmum orationes duae eioquentiae Romance vindices, cum ejusdem epistolis opusculis,” Toulouse, 1621, 4to. The first of these orations, which we have already noticed, was printed at Paris in 1531, 8vo, and seems, therefore, to have been the first of our author’s publications, an earnest of what the world might expect both from his genius and temper. 9. “Epistolse,” Leyden, 1600, 8vo. 10. “Epistolce nonnullee ex manuscripto Bibliothecre Z. C. ab Uffenbach,” printed in the sixth and eighth volumes of the “Arncenitates Litterarise,” by Schelhorn. They all relate to his orations against Erasmus. 11. “De Analogia sermonis Latini,” subjoined to Henry Stephen’s “Appendix ad Terentii Varronis assertiones analogies sermonis Latini,” 1591, 8vo. 12. “Poetices Libri Septem,” 1561, fol. and several times reprinted; this is his greatest critical work, in which, however, many mistakes and many untenable opinions have been discovered by more recent critics, 13, “Heroes,” or epigrams on various personages of antiquity, Lyons, 1539, 4to. 14. “Epidorpides, seu carmen de sapientia et beatitudine,” ibid, 1573, 8vo. 15. “Poemata in duas partes divisa,” 1.574 and 1600, 8vo. 16. “De comicis dimensionibus,” prefixed to an edition of Terence printed at Paris, 1552, fol.

Her father, who had settled at Utrecht while she was an infant, and afterwards removed to Franeker for the more convenient education of his children, died there in 1623. His widow then returned to Utrecht, where Anna Maria continued her studies very intensely; which probably prevented her from marrying, as she might have done advantageously v.ith Mr. Cats, pensionary of Holland, and a celebrated poet, who wrote verses in her praise when she was only fourteen. Her modesty, which was as great as her knowledge, would have kept her in obscurity, if Rivetus, Spanheim, and Vossius, had not made her merit known. Salmasius also, Beverovicius, and Huygens, maintained a literary correspondence with her; and, by shewing her letters, spread her fame into foreign countries. This procured her a correspondence with Balzac, Gassendi, Mersennus, Bo chart, Conrart, and other eminent men; persons of the first rank paid her visits, and cardinal Richelieu likewise shewed her marks of his esteem. About 1650, a great alteration took place in her religious system. She performed her devotions in private, without frequenting any church, upon which it was reported that she was inclined to popery; but she attached herself to the famous mystic Labadie, and embracing his principles and practice, lived some time with him at Altena, in Holstein, and attended him at his death there in 1674. She afterwards retired to Wiewart, in Friseland, where the famous Penn, the Quaker, visited her in 1677; she died at this place in 1678. She took for her device these words of St. Ignatius: “Amor meus crucifixus est.”

, a poet of considerable genius, and a very amiable man, was the youngest son of Samuel and Martha Scott, and was born January 9, 1730, in the GrangeWalk, in the parish of St. Mary Magdalen, Bermondsey. His father was a draper and citizen of London, a man of plain and irreproachable manners, and one of the society of the people called quakers, in which persuasion our poet was educated, and continued during the whole of his life, although not with the strictest attention to all the peculiarities of that sect. In the seventh year of his age he was put under the tuition of one John Clarke, a native of Scotland, who kept a school in Bermondsey-street, attended young Scott at his father’s house, and instructed him in the rudiments of the Latin tongue. In his tenth year his father retired with his family, consisting of Mrs. Scott and two sons, to the village of Amwell in Hertfordshire, where, for some time, he carried on the malting trade. Here our poet was sent to a private day-school, in which he is said to have had few opportunities of polite literature, and those few were declined by his father from a dread of the smallpox, which neither he nor his son had yet caught* This terror, perpetually recurring as the disorder made its appearance in one quarter or another, occasioned such frequent removals as prevented his son from the advantages of regular education. The youth, however, did not neglect to cultivate his mind by such means as were in his power. About the age of seventeen he discovered an inclination to the study of poetry, with which he combined a delight in viewing the appearances of rural nature. At this time he derived much assistance from the conversation and opinions of one Charles Frogley, a person in the humble station of a bricklayer, but who had improved a natural taste for poetry, and arrived at a considerable degree of critical discernment. This Mr. Scott thankfully acknowledged when he had himself attained a rank among the writers of his age, and could return with interest the praise by which Frogley had cheered his youthful attempts. The only other adviser of his studies, in this sequestered spot, was a Mr. John Turner, afterwards a dissenting preacher. To him he was introduced in 1753 or 1754, and, on the removal of Mr. Turner to London, and afterwards to Colleton in Devonshire, they carried on a friendly correspondence on matters of general taste.

Although we have hitherto contemplated our author as a student and occasional poet, he rendered himself more conspicuous as one of those reflectors on public affairs who employ much of their time in endeavouring to be useful. Among other subjects, his attention had often been called to that glaring defect in human polity, the state of the poor; and having revolved the subject in his mind, with the assistance of many personal inquiries, he published in 1773 “Observations on the present state of the parochial and vagrant Poor.” It is needless to add, that his advice in this matter was rather approved than followed. Some of his propositions, indeed, were incorporated in Mr. Gilbert’s Bill, in 1782; but the whole was lost for want of parliamentary support.

His “Critical Essays” were published in 1785 by Mr, Hoole, who prefixed a life written with much affection, yet with impartiality. As a poet, Mr. Scott seems to rank among those who possess genius in a moderate degree, who please by short efforts and limited inspirations, but whose talents are better displayed in moral reflection and pathetic sentiment than flights of fancy. His “Elegies,” as they were the first, are among the best of his performances. Simplicity appears to have been his general aim, and he was of opinion that it was too little studied by modern writers. In the “Mexican prophecy,” however, and in “Serim,” there is a fire and spirit worthy of the highest school. His “Amwell” will ever deserve a distinguished place among descriptive poems, but it is liable to all the objections attached to descriptive poetry. His feeblest effort is the “Essay on Painting,” a hasty sketch, in which he professed himself, and that not in very humble terms, to be the rival of Hayley. Upon the whole, however, the vein of pious and moral reflection, and the benevolence and philanthropy which pervade all his poems, will continue to make them acceptable to those who read to be improved, and are of opinion that pleasure is not the sole end of poetry.

, a considerable philologer and poet, was born at Harlem in 1576. He was educated at Harlem and at Leyden, where he read law in his early days, but devoted himself afterwards to a private and studious life, which ended April 30, 1660, in the eighty-fourth year of his age. His works are: “ Batavia illustrata.” “Batavise comitumq. omnium Historia.” “Miscellanea Philologica.” “Carmina Latina & Belgica.” “Populare Hollandise Chronicon.” “Collectanea Veterum Tragicorum.” He likewise corrected the copyof “Vegetius,” and enlarged and wrote notes upon Aquilius’s <c Chronicon Geldricum" and was the author or editor of various other works, classical and historical.

, a French writer of eminence in his day, was descended from an ancient and noble family of Apt in Provence, and born at Havre-de-Grace in 1603. He spent part of his youth at Apt, and afterwards came and settled at Paris, where at first he subsisted by the efforts of his pen, particularly in poetry, and dramatic pieces, none of which are now in any estimation, and we may, therefore, be spared the trouble of giving their titles. In 1627 he published observations upon the “Cid” of Corneille, with a view of making his court to cardinal Richelieu, who was absurdly envious of that great poet, and did every thing he could to oppose the vast reputation and success of the “Cid:” and by his influence alone enabled even such a man as Scuderi “to balance,” as Voltaire says, “for some time, the reputation of Corneille.” Scuderi was received a member of the academy in 1650. He had before been made governor of the castle of Notre-Dame de la Garde, in Provence; and although this was a situation of very little profit, Scuderi, who was still more vain than indigent, gave a pompous description of it in a poem, which drew upon him the raillery of Chapelle and Bachaumont. Scuderi died at Paris, May 14, 1667, leaving a name now better known than his works.

, a dramatic and miscellaneous writer, was the son of sir John Sedley, of Aylesford in Kent, by a daughter of sir Henry Savile, and was born about 1639. At seventeen, he became a fellowcommoner of Wadham college in Oxford; but, taking no degree, retired to his own country, without either traveling, or going to the inns of court. At the restoration he came to London, and commenced wit, courtier, poet, and man of gallantry. As a critic, he was so much admired, tfiat he became a kind of oracle among the poets; and no performance was approved or condemned, till sir Charles Sedley had given judgment. This made king Charles jestingly say to him, that Nature had given him a patent to be Apollo’s viceroy; and lord Rochester placed him in the first rank of poetical critics. With these accomplishments, he impaired his estate by profligate pleasures, and was one of that party of debauchees whom we have already mentioned in our account of Sackville lord Buckhurst, who having insulted public decency, were indicted for a riot, and all severely fined; sir Charles in 500l. The day for payment being appointed, sir Charles desired Mr. Henry Killigrew and another gentleman, both his friends, to apply to the king to get it remitted; which they undertook to do; but at the same time varied the application so far as to beg it for themselves, and they made Sedley pay the full sum.

, a priest and poet, either Irish or Scotch, of the fifth century, is recorded as the writer of an heroic poem, called “Carmen Paschale,” divided into five books. The first begins with the creation of the world, and comprehends the more remarkable passages of the Old Testament. The next three describe the life of Jesus Christ. This performance has been highly commended by Cassiodorus, Gregorius Turrinensis, and others. Sedulius afterwards wrote a piece on the same subjects in prose. The poem was printed by Aldus in the collection of sacred poets, in 1502. It is also in Maittaire’s “Corp. Poet.” and has since been published by itself, with learned notes, by Arntzenius, 1761, 8vo, and by Arevale at Rome, 1794, 4-to.

, a French poet, was born at Caen in 1624, and first studied in the college of the Jesuits there. As he grew up, he applied himself to French poetry, and was so successful as to be enabled to rescue himself, four brothers, and two sisters, from the unhappy circumstances in which the extravagance of a father had left them. In his twentieth year he met with a patron who introduced him to Mad. de Montpensier, and this lady appointed him her gentleman in ordinary, in which station he remained many years, until obliged to quit her service, for opposing her marriage with count de Lauzun. He immediately found a new patroness in Mad. de la Fayette, who admitted him into her house, and assigned him apartments. Her he assisted in her two romances, “The princess of Cleves” and “Zaida.” After seven years, he retired to his own country, with a resolution to spend the rest of his days in solitude; and there married his cousin, a rich heiress, about 1679. Mad. de Maintenon invited him to court, as tutor to the duke of Maine: buthedid notchooseto exchange theindependenceof a retired life for the precarious favours of a court, and therefore continued where he was. He was admitted of the French academy in 1662; and was the means of re-establishing that of Caen. He died at this place, of a dropsy, in 1701. He was very deaf in the last years of his life, bufe was much courted for the sake of his conversation, which was replete with such anecdotes as the polite world had furnished him with. A great number of these are to be found in the “Segraisiana;” which was published many years after his death, with a preface by Mr. de la Monnoye; the best edition of it is that of Amsterdam, 1723, 12mo.

, an eminent Stoic philosopher, was born at Corduba in Spain, the year before the beginning of the Christian sera, of an equestrian family, which had probably been transplanted thither in a colony from Rome. He was the second son of Marcus Annseus Seneca, commonly called the rhetorician, whose remains are printed under the title of “Stiasorise & Controversise, cum Declainationum Excerptis;” and his youngest brother Annæus Mela (for there were three of them) was memorable for being the father of the poet Lucan. He was re* jnoved to Rome, while he was yet in his infancy, by his aunt, who accompanied him on account of the delicacy of his health. There he was educated in the most liberal manner, and under the best masters. He learned his eloquence from his father; but preferring philosophy to the declamations of the rhetoricians, he put himself under the stoics Attalus, Sotion, and Papirius Fabianus, of whom he has made honourable mention in his writings. It is probable too, that he travelled when he was young, since we find in several parts of his works, particularly in hij “Quæstiones Naturales,” some correct and curious observations on Egypt and the Nile. But these pursuits did not at all correspond with that scheme of life which his father designed; and to please him, Seneca engaged in the business of the courts, with considerable success, although he was rather an argumentative than an eloquent pleader. As soon as he arrived at manhood, he aspired to the honours of the state, and became questor, praetor, and, as Lipsius will have it, even consul, but the particulars of his public life are not preserved.

, an Italian biographer, was born at Bergamo in 1721, and at the age of twenty had so distinguished himself as to be elected a member of the academy of Transforrnati at Milan, and on his return to Bergamo, was appointed professor of the belles lettres. In 1742, he published his “Opinion concerning the country of Bernardo and of Torquato Tasso,” a tract in which he vindicated, to the district of Bergamo, the honour of being the native country of these poets, which had been denied by Seghezzi, the author of a very elegant life of Bernardo; but Seghezzi now candidly confessed that his opponent was right, and that he should treat the subject differently, were he again to write on it. In the succeeding years, Serassi published editions of several of the best Italian writers, with their lives, particularly Maffei, Molza, Politian, Capelia, Dante, Petrarch, &c. The most distinguished of his biographical productions, however, was his life of Tasso, 17b5, 2 vols. 4to, on which he had been employed during twenty years. Mr. Black, in his life of that eminent poet, has availed himself of Serassi' s work, but not without discovering its delects. Serassi also published a life of “Jacopo Mazzoni, patrician of Cessena,” 3. personage little known, but whose history he has rendered interesting. Serassi was employed in some offices under the papal government, and in the college of Propaganda. he died Feb. 19, 1791, at Rome, in the seventieth year of his age. A monument was erected to his memory in the church of St. Maria, in Via lata, where he-was interred; and the city of Bergamo ordered a medal to be struck to his honour, with the inscription “Propagatori pcitriae laudis.”

, a celebrated grammarian and critic of antiquity, flourished in the fifth century. He is known now chiefly by his commentaries upon Virgil, which Barthius and others have supposed to be nothing more than a collection of ancient criticisms and remarks upon that poet, made by Servius. They were first published by Valdarfer in 1471, and reprinted several times in that century, afterwards in an edition of Virgil, at Paris, by Robert Stephens, 1532, in folio, and by Fulvius Ursinus, in 1569, 8vo. A better edition was given by Peter Daniel at Paris, in 1600; but the best is that printed with the edition of Virgil, by Masvicius, in 1717, 4to. Burman, in his edition of 1746, has so blended these notes with those of Heinsius, as to render it difficult to determine how he reconciles their opposite authorities. There is also extant, and printed in several editions of the ancient grammarians, a piece of Servius upon the feet of verses and the quantity of syllables, called “Centiaietrum.” This was first printed in 1476. Macrobius has spoken highly of Servius, and makes him one of the speakers in his “Saturnalia.”

, was an ancient Latin poet of the Augustan age, whose “Ætna” was published with notes and a prose interpretation by Le Clerc, at Amsterdam, 1703, in 12mo, but some copies have the date 1715. It is annexed to “Petri Bembi jEtna,” and is also in Maittaire’s “Corpus Poet.” It had been before inserted among the “Catalecta Virgilii,” published by Scaliger; whose notes, as well as those of Lindebrogius and Nicolas Heinsius, Le Clerc has mixed -.nth his own. Quintilian calls Severus “a versificator,” rather than a poet; yet adds, that “if he had finished the Sicilian war,” probably, between Augustus and Sextus Pompeius, “in the manner he had written the first book, he might have claimed a much higher rank. But though an immature death prevented him from doing this, yet his juvenile works shew the greatest genius.” Ovid addresses him, not only as his friend, but as a court favourite and a great poet.

Mr. Seward was himself a poet, and a contributor to Dodsley’s collection; he was also an admirer of our ancient drama, and in 1750 published an edition of Beaumont and Fletcher’s plays. Thus accomplished himself, the talents of his daughter did not long escape his observation, and tinder his instructions she laid the foundation of a taste for poetry. The authors he recommended to her were those of queen Anne’s reign. She wasea.ly familiar with Pope, Young, Prior, and their predecessor Dry den, and in later life, used to make little allowance for poetry of an uider date, excepting only that of Sbakspeare and Milton. The desire of imitating the compositions which gave her pleasure, very early displayed itself. She attempted metrical versions of the Psalms, and even exercised herself in original composition, before she was ten years old. An “Address to the first fine day of a backward spring,” which has been preserved, intimates considerable command of numbers and language, though the ideas cannot be called original.

, an English poet and physician, was born at Windsor, where his father was treasurer and chapter-clerk of the college; received his education at Eton-school, and Peter-house, Cambridge; where having taken the degree of B. M. he went to Leyden, to study under Boerhaave, and on his return practised physic in the metropolis with reputation. In the latter part of his life he retired to Hampstead, where he pursued his profession with some degree of success, till three other physicians came to settle at the same place, when his practice so far declined as to yield him very little advantage. He kept no house, but was a boarder. He was much esteemed, and so frequently invited to the tables of gentlemen in the neighbourhood., that he had seldom occasion to dine at home. He died Feb. 8, 1726; and was supposed to be very indigent at the time of his death, as he was interred on the 12th of the same month in the meanest manner, his coffin being little better than those allotted by the parish to the poor who are buried from the workhouse; neither did a single friend or relation attend him to the grave. No memorial was placed over his remains; but they lie just under a hollow tree which formed a part of a hedge-row that was once the boundary of the church-yard. He was greatly esteemed for his amiable disposition; and is represented by some writers as a Tory in his political principles, but of this there is no other proof given than his writing some pamphlets against bishop Burnet. It is certain, that a true spirit of liberty breathes in many of his works; and he expresses, on many occasions, a warm attachment to the Hanover succession. Besides seven controversial pamphlets, he wrote, 1. “The Life of John Philips.” 2, “A vindication of the English Stage, exemplified in the Cato of Mr. Addison, 1716;” 3. “Sir Walter Raleigh, a tragedy, acted at Lincoln’s-inn-fields, 1719;” and part of another play, intended to be called “Richard the First,” the fragments of which were published in 1718, with “Two moral Essays on the Government of the Thoughts, and on Death,” and a collection of “Several poems published in his life-time^” Dr. Sewell was an occasional assistant to Harrison in the fifth volume of “The Tatler; was a, principal writer in the ninth volume of” The Spectator; and published a translation of “Ovid’s Metamorphoses, in opposition to the edition of Garth and an edition of Shakspeare’s Poems. Jacob and Gibber have enumerated a considerable number of his single poems; and in Mr. Nichols’s” Collection" are some valuable ones, unnoticed by these writers.

, an English dramatic poet, was descended of a good family in the county of Stafford, but born at Stanton-hail, in Norfolk, a seat of his father’s, about 1640. He was educated at Cains college in Cambridge, and afterwards placed in the Middle Temple; where he studied the law some time, and then went abroad. Upon his return from his travels he applied himself to the drama, and wrote seventeen plays, with a success which introduced him to the notice of several persons of wit and rank, by whom he was highly esteemed. At the Revolution he was, by his interest with the earl of Dorset, made historiographer and poet-laureat; and when some persons urged that there were authors who had better pretensions to the laurel, his lordship is said to have replied, " that he did not pretend to determine how great a poet Shadwell might be, but was sure that he was an honest man.' 7 He succeeded Dryden as poet-laureat; for Dryden had so warmly espoused the opposite interest, that at the Revolution he was dispossessed of his place. This, however, Dryden considered as an indignity, and resented it very warmly. He had once been on friendly terms with Shadwell, but some critical differences appear to have first separated them, and now Dryden introduced Shadwell in his Mac-Fleckno, in these lines:

which certainly was unjust, for though as a poet Shadwell is not to be mentioned with Dryden, as a writer of comedy he had no superior in that age. His comedies abound in original characters, strongly marked and well sustained, and the manners of the time are more faithfully and minutely delineated than in any author we are acquainted with. Shadwell is said to have written rapidly, and in the preface to his “Psyche” he tells us that that tragedy, by no means, however, his best performance, was written by him in five weeks.

Lord Rochester had such an opinion of his conversation that he said “if Shadwell had burnt all he wrote, and printed all he spoke, he would have had more wit and humour than any other poet.” Considering Rochester’s cha-“racter, this, we are afraid, confirms the account of some contemporary writers, that Shadwell, in conversation, was often grossly indecent and profane. Shadwell was a great favourite with Otway, and lived in intimacy with him; which might, perhaps, be the occasion of Dryden’s expressing so much contempt for Otway, which was surely less excusable than his hostility towards our author. Shadwell died Dec. 6, 16U2; and his death was occasioned, as some say, by a too large dose of opium, given him by mistake. A white marble monument with his bust is erected in Westminster abbey by his son sir John Shadwell, and his funeral sermon was preached by Dr. Nicolas Brady, the translator of the Psalms, who tells us that” he was a man of great honesty and integrity, and had a real love of truth and sincerity, an inviolable fidelity and strictness to his word, an unalterable friendship wheresoever he professed it, and (however the world may be deceived in him) a much deeper sense of religion than many others have, who pretend to it more openly."

There was a Charles Shadwell, a dramatic writer, who, Jacob tells us, was nephew to the poet-laureat, but Chetwood, in his “British Theatre,” says he was his younger son. He had served in Portugal, and enjoyed a post in the revenue in Dublin, in which city he died August 12, 1726. He wrote seven dramatic pieces, all which, excepting the “Fair Quaker of Deal,” and the “Humours of the Army,” made their appearance on the Irish stage only, and are printed together in one volume, 1720, 12m.

, was a considerable dealer in wool, and had been an officer and bailiff (probably high-bailiff or mayor) of the body corporate of Stratford. He held also the office of justice of the peace, and at one time, it is said, possessed lands and tenements to the amount of 500l. the reward of his grandfather’s faithful and approved services to king Henry VII. This, however, has been asserted upon very doubtful authority. Mr. Malone thinks ft it is highly probable that he distinguished himself in Bosworth field on the side of king Henry, and that he was rewarded for his military services by the bounty of that parsimonious prince, though not with a grant of lands. No such grant appears in the chapel of the Rolls, from the beginning to the end of Henry’s reign.“But whatever may have been his former wealth, it appears to have been” greatly reduced in the latter part of his life, as we find, from the books of the corporation, that in 1579 he was excused the trifling weekly tax of four-pence levied on all the aldermen; and that in 1586 another alderman was appointed in his room, in consequence of his declining to attend on the business of that office. It is even said by Aubrey, a man sufficiently accurate in facts, although credulous in superstitious narratives and traditions, that he followed for some time the occupation of a butcher, which Mr. Malone thinks not inconsistent with probability. It must have been, however, at this time, no inconsiderable addition to his difficulties that he had a family of ten children. His wife was the daughter and heiress of Robert Arden, of Wellingcote, in the county of Warwick, who is styled “a gentleman of worship.” The family of Arden is very ancient, Robert Arden of Bromich, esq. being in the list of the gentry of this county returned by the commissioners in the twelfth year of king Henry VI. A. D. 1433. Edward Arden was sheriff of the county in 1568. The woodland part of this county was anciently called Ardern, afterwards softened to Arden; and hence the name. Our illustrious poet was the eldest son, and received his early education, whether narrow or liberal, at a free school, probably that founded at Stratford; but from this he appears to have been soon removed, and placed, according to Mr. Malone’s opinion, in the office of some country attorney, or the seneschal of some manor court, where it is highly probable he picked up those technical law phrases that so frequently occur in his plays, and could not have been in common use unless among professional men. Mr. Capell conjectures that his early marriage prevented his being sent to some university. It appears, however, as Dr. Farmer observes, that his early life was incompatible with a course of education, and it is certain that “his contemporaries, friends and foes, nay, and himself likewise, agree in his want of what is usually termed literature.” It is, indeed, a strong argument in favour of Shakspeare’s illiterature, that it was maintained by all his contemporaries, many of whom have left upon record every merit they could bestow on him and by his successors, who lived nearest to his time, when “his memory was green” and that it has been denied only by Gildon, Sewell, and others down to Upton, who could have no means of ascertaining the truth.

These lines, it must be confessed, do no great honour to our poet, and probably were unjust, for although some of his admirers have recorded sir Thomas as a “vain, weak, and vindictive magistrate,” he was certainly exerting no very violent act of oppression, in protecting his property against a man who was degrading the commonest rank of life, and had at this time bespoke no indulgence by superior talents. The ballad, however, must have made some noise at sir Thomas’s expence, as the author took care it should be affixed to his park-gates, and liberally circulated among his neighbours.

On his arrival in London, which was probably in 1586, when he was twenty -two years old, he is said to have made his first acquaintance in the play-house, to which idleness or taste may have directed him, and where his necessities, if tradition may be credited, obliged him to accept the office of call-boy, or prompter’s attendant. This is a menial, whose employment it is to give the performers notice to be ready to enter, as often as the business of the play requires their appearance on the stage. Pope, however, relates a story, communicated to him by Rowe, but which Rowe did not think deserving of a place in the life he wrote, that must a little retard the advancement of our poet to the office just mentioned. According to this story, Shakspeare’s first employment was to wait at the door of the play-house, and hold the horses of those who had no servants, that they might be ready after the performance. But “I cannot,” says his acute commentator, Mr. Steevens, “dismiss this anecdote without observing, that it seems to want every mark of probability. Though Shakspeare quitted Stratford on account of a juvenile irregularity, we have no reason to suppose that he had forfeited the protection of his father, who was engaged in a lucrative business 3 or the love of his wife, who had already brought him two children, and was herself the daughter of a substantial yeoman. It is unlikely, therefore, when he was beyond the reach of his prosecutor, that he should conceal his plan of life, or place of residence, from those who, if he found himself distressed, could not fail to afford him such supplies as would have set him above the necessity of holding horses for subsistence. Mr. Malone has remarked in his ‘Attempt to ascertain the order in which the plays of Shakspeare were written,’ that he might have found an easy introduction to the stage; for Thomas Green, a celebrated comedian of that period, was his townsman, and perhaps his relation. The genius of our author prompted him to write poetry; his connexion with a player might have given his productions a dramatic turn; or his own sagacity might have taught him that fame was not incompatible with profit, and that the theatre was an avenue to both. That it was once the general custom to ride on horse-back to the play, I am likewise yet to learn. The most popular of the theatres were on the Bank-side; and we are told by the satirical pamphleteers of that time, that the usual mode of conveyance to these places of amusement was by water, but not a single writer so much as hints at the custom of riding to them, or at the practice of having horses held during the hours of exhibition. Some allusion to this usage (if it had existed) must, I think, have been discovered in the course of our researches after contemporary fashions. Let it be remembered too, that we receive this tale on no higher authority than that of Gibber’s Lives of the Poets, vol. I. p. 130. Sir Win. Davenant told it to Mr. Betterton, who communicated it to Mr. Howe, who, according to Dr. Johnson, related it to Mr. Pope.” Mr. Malone concurs in opinion that this story stands on a very slender foundation, while he differs from Mr. Steevens as to the fact of gentlemen going to the theatre on horseback. With respect likewise to Shakspeare’s father being “engaged in a lucrative business,” we may remark, that this could not have been the case at the time our author came to London, if the preceding dates be correct. He is said to have arrived in London in 1586, the year in which his father resigned the office of alderman, unless, indeed, we are permitted to conjecture that his resignation was not the consequence of his necessities.

How long he acted has not been discovered, but he continued to write till the year 1614. During his dramatic career he acquired a property in the theatre , which he must have disposed of when he retired, as no mention of it occurs in his will. His connexion with Ben Jonson has been variously related. It is said, that when Jonson was unknown to the world, he offered a play to the theatre, which was rejected after a very careless perusal; but that Shakspeare having accidentally cast his eye on it, conceived a favourable opinion of it, and afterwards recommended Jonson and his writings to the public. For this candour he was repaid by Jonson, when the latter became a poet of note, with an envious disrespect. Jonson acquired reputation by the variety of his pieces, and endeavoured to arrogate the supremacy in dramatic genius. Like a French critic, he insinuated Shakspeare’s incorrectness, his careless manner of writing, and his want of judgment; and as he was a remarkably slow writer himself, he could not endure the praise frequently bestowed on Shakspeare, of seldom altering or blotting out what he had written. Mr. Malone says, that “not long after the year 1600, a coolness arose between Shakspeare and him, which, however he may talk of his almost idolatrous affection, produced on his part, from that time to the death of our author, and for many years afterwards, much clumsy sarcasm, and many malevolent reflections.” But from these, which are the commonly received opinions on this subject, Dr. Farmer is inclined to depart, and to think Jonson’s hostility to Shakspeare absolutely groundless; so uncertain is every circumstance we attempt to recover of our great poet’s life . Jonson had only one advantage over Shakspeare, that of superior learning, which might in certain situations be of some importance, but could never promote his rivalship with a man who attained the highest excellence without it. Nor will Shakspeare suffer by its being known that all the dramatic poets before he appeared were scholars. Greene, Lodge, Peele, Marlowe, Nashe, Lily, and Kyd, had all, says Mr. Malone, a regular university education, and, as scholars in our universities, frequently composed and acted plays on historical subjects .

He retired, some years before his death, to a house in Stratford, of which it has been thought important to give the history. It was built by sir Hugh Clopton, a younger bro her of an ancient family in that neighbourhood. Sir Hugh was sheriff of London in the reign of Richard III. and lord mayor in the reign of Henry VII. By his will he bequeathed to his elder brother’s son his manor of Clopton, &c, and his house, by the name of the Great House) in Stratford. A good part of the estate was in possession of Edward Clopton, esq. and sir Hugh Clopton, knight, in 1733. The principal estate had been sold out of the Clopton family for above a century, at the time when Shakspeare became the purchaser, who having repaired and modelled it to his own mind, changed the name to New Place y which the mansion-house afterwards erected, in the room of the poet’s house, retained for many years. The house and lands belonging to it continued in the possession of Shakspeare’s descendants to the time of the Restoration, when they were re-purchased by the Clopton family. Here, in May 1742, when Mr. Garrick, Mr. Macklin, and Mr. Delane, visited Stratford, they were hospitably entertained under Shakspeare’s mulberry-tree, by sir Hugh Clopton. He was a barrister at law, was knighted by king George I. and died in the eightieth year of his age, in December 1751. His executor, about 1752, sold New Place to the Rev. Mr. Gastrell, a man of large fortune, who resided in it but a few years, in consequence of a disagreement with the inhabitants of Stratford. As he resided part of the year at Lichfield, he thought he was assessed too highly in the monthly rate towards the maintenance of the poor; but, being very properly compelled by the magistrates of Stratford to pay the whole of what was levied on him, on the principle that his house was occupied by his servants in his absence, he peevishly declared, that that house should never be assessed again: and soon afterwards pulled it down, sold the materials, and left the town. He had some time before cut down Shakspeare’s mulberry-tree , to save himself the trouble of showing it to those whose admiration of our great poet led them to visit the classic ground on which it stood. That Shakspeare planted this tree appears to be sufficiently authenticated. Where New Place stood is now a garden. Before concluding this history, it may be necessary to mention, that the poet’s house was once honoured by the temporary residence of Henrietta Maria, queen to Charles I. Theobald has given an inaccurate account of this, as if she had been obliged to take refuge in Stratford from the rebels, which was not the case. She marched from Newark, June 16, 1643, and entered Stratford triumphantly, about the 22nd of the same month, at the head of 3000 foot and 1500 horse, with 15o waggons, and a train of artillery. Here she was met by prince Rupert, accompanied by a large body of troops. She rested about three weeks at our poet’s house, which was then possessed by his grand-daughter Mrs. Nash, and her husband.

During Shakspeare’s abode in this house, his pleasureable wit and good-nature, says Mr. Rowe, engaged him the acquaintance, and entitled him to the friend hip of the gentlemen of the neighbourhood. Among these Mr. Rowe tells a traditional story of a miser, or usurer, named Combe, who, in conversation with Shakspeare, said he fancied the poet intended to write his epitaph if he should survive him, and desired to know what he meant to say. On this Shakspeare gave him the following, probably extempore

‘ Oh ho’ quoth the devil, ‘tis my John-a-CombeY’ The sharpness of the satire is said to have stung the man so severely that he never forgave it. These lines, however, or some which nearly resemble them, appeared in various collections both before and after the time they were said to have been composed; and the inquiries of Mr. Steevens and Mr. Malone satisfactorily prove that the whole story is a fabrication. Betterton is said to have heard it when he visited Warwickshire, on purpose to collect anecdotes of our poet, and probably thought it of too much importance to be nicely examined. We know not whether it be worth adding of a story which we have rejected, that a usurer in Shakspeare’s time did not mean one who took exorbitant, but any interest or usance for money, and that ten in the hundred, or ten per cent, was then the ordinary interest of money. It is of more consequence, however, to record the opinion of Mr. Malone, that Shakspeare, during his retirement, wrote the play of “Twelfth Night.”

In the year 1741, a monument was erected to our poet in Westminster Abbey, by the direction of the earl of Burlington, Dr. Mead, Mr. Pope, and Mr. Martyn. It was the work of Scheemaker (who received 300l. for it), after a design of Kent, and was opened in January of that year. The performers of each of the London theatres gave a benefit to defray the expences, and the Dean and Chapter of Westminster took nothing for the ground. The money received by the performers at Drury-Iane theatre amounted to above 200l. but the receipts at Covent-garden did not exceed 100l. From these imperfect notices, which are all we have been able to collect from the labours of his biographers* and commentators, our readers will perceive that less is known of Shakspeare than of almost any writer who has been considered as an object of laudable curiosity. Nothing could be more highly gratifying than an account of the early studies of this wonderful man, the progress of his pen, his moral and social qualities, his friendships, his failings, and whatever else constitutes personal history. But on all these topics his contemporaries and his immediate successors have been equally silent, and if aught can hereafter be discovered, it must be by exploring sources which have hitherto escaped the anxious researches of those who have devoted their whole lives, and their most vigorous talents, to revive his memory and illustrate his writings. In the sketch. we have given, if the dates of his birth and death be excepted, what is there on which the reader can depend, or for which, if he contend eagerly, he may not be involved in controversy, and perplexed with contradictory opinions and authorities

The elegant preface of Dr. Johnson gives an account of the attempts made in the early part of the last century, to revive the memory and reputation of our poet, by Rowe, Pope, Theobald, Hanmer, and Warburton, whose respective merits he has characterized with candour, and with singular felicity of expression. Shakspeare’s works may be overloaded with criticism, for what writer has excited so much curiosity, and so many opinions but Johnson’s preface is an accompaniment worthy of the genius it celebrates. His own edition followed in 1765, and a second, in conjunction with Mr. Steevens, in 1773. The third edition of the joint editors appeared in 1785, the fourth in 1793, the fifth in 1803, in 21 volumes octavo, which has since been reprinted. Mr. Malone’s edition was published in 1790 in 10 volumes, crown octavo, and is now become exceedingly scarce. His original notes and improvements, however, are incorporated in the editions of 1793 and 1803 by Mr. Steevens. Mr. Malone says, that from 1716 to the date of his edition in 1790, that is, in seventy-four years, “above 3-0,000 copies of Shakspeare have been dispersed through England.” To this we may add with confidence, that since 1790 that number has been more than doubled. During 1803 no fewer than nine editions were in the press, belonging to the booksellers of London; and if we add the editions printed by others, and those published in Scotland, Ireland, and America, we may surely fix the present as the highest aera of Shakspeare’s popularity. Nor among the honours paid to his genius, ought we to forget the very magnificent edition undertaken by Messrs. Boydell. Still less ought it to be forgotten how much the reputation of Shakspeare was revived by the unrivalled excellence of Garrick’s performance. His share in directing the public taste towards the study of Shakspeare was perhaps greater than that of any individual in his time; and such was his zeal, and such hrs success in this laudable attempt, that he may readily be forgiven the foolish mummery of the Stratford Jubilee.

, an ingenious poet, was born at Ravensworth, near Richmond in Yorkshire, about the year 1738 or 1739. His father was a person in low circumstances, and followed the occupation of a shoemaker. Our author was first put to school at Kirkbyhill, in his father’s neighbourhood; but he was soon removed to Scorton, five miles from Richmond, where, after having gone through a common course of education, he was appointed usher. Some lime after he became usher to the grammar-school at Darlington under Mr. Metcalf, and while there published his first poem, in 1756, called “Liberty. Humbly inscribed to the Right Hon. the Earl of Darlington,” 4to. During his residence at this place he began to shew that negligence of the dictates of prudence, and the rules of economy, which marked his future life, insomuch that he was obliged to quit his post and the country; and with nothing but his talents came in quest of fortune to the metropolis.

, the historian of Staffordshire, was son of the rev. Stebbing Shaw, rector of Hartshorn, on the borders of Derbyshire, near Ashby de la Zouch. He was born in 1762, at or near Stone, in Staffordshire; in the neighbourhood of which town, his mother inherited a small landed estate, which descended to this her only child. He was educated at the school of Repton, near Harishorn, first under the rev. Dr. Prior, and afterwards under his successor, the rev. William Bagshaw Stevens, an ingenious poet and scholar, who died in 1800. From this accomplished man, for whom he retained an unabated friendship till death, he early imbibed a warm love of literature. At the close of the month of October, 1780, he became a resident member of Qu.en’s-college, in Cambridge. At this period, his first literary predilections were fixed on English poetry, of which he had caught an enthu iastic fondness from his last master. But even this partiality yielded to his propensity for music; in which his performance on the violin occupied a large portion of his time, and he had already attained considerable excellence. In due time he took his degree of B. A. was elected to a fellowship, and went into orders. Not long afterwards, the intimacy which, for almost half a century, had subsisted between his father and his neighhour, sir Robert Burdett, of Foremark, in which hospitable mansion the son had passed many of his early days, induced him to undertake the superintending care of the present sir Francis, then lately released from Westminster school, at his father’s villa at Ealing. With this pupil, he made a tour to the Highlands of Scotland in the autumn of 1787, of which he kept a diary. This diary, originally composed merely for private amusement, he afterwards inconsiderately published; and thus, it must be confessed, made his first appearance as an author with some disadvantage; luckily, however, the publication was anonymous. In the following year, he made a tour to the West of England, of which he published a more laboured account, with his name. The book was well received; and, though the style is not simple and easy (an attainment which indeed the author never reached), yet it discovered a dawning attention to the history of families and property, to which his industrious researches were afterwards directed with considerable success. In 1789, about the time of the publication of his tour, he obtained admission to the reading-room of the British Museum. His account of the vast stores of topographical and genealogical materials deposited there, fired the imagination of one of his learned friends, who resided in London, and with whom he passed much of his time. To this connection may be ascribed the origin of a periodical publication, entitled “The Topographer,” which commenced in the spring of 1789, and was carried on for more than two years, during which many useful materials towards the Topographical History of the Kingdom were communicated. Amongst other researches, Mr. Shaw spent part of the summer of 1790 in Sussex, and visited very many parishes, and collected a large store of church notes, of which only a small number was exhausted when the work closed. In these perambulations, his own faithful and constantly exercised pencil, enabled him to be doubly useful.

, duke of Buckinghamshire, a poet and wit of the seventeenth century, was born in 1649, and Was the son of Edmund^ earl of Mulgrave. At nine years of age he lost his father, and his mother marrying again soon after, the care of his education was left entirely to the conduct of a tutor, who, though himself a mau of learning, had not that happy manner of communicating his knowledge by which his pupil could reap any great improvement under him. In consequence of which, when he came to part from his governor, after having travelled with him into France, he quickly discovered, in the course of his conversation with men of genius, that though he had acquired the politer accomplishments of a gentleman, yet that he was still greatly deficient in every part of literature, and those higher excellencies, without which it is impossible to rise to any considerable degree of eminence. He therefore resolved to educate himself, and dedicate for some time a certain number of hours every day to study. Such a purpose, 'says Dr. Johnson, formed at such an age, and successfully prosecuted, delights as it is strange, and instructs as it is real. By this means he very soon acquired a degree of learning which entitled him to the character of a scholar; and his literary acquisitions are the more wonderful, as those years in which they are commonly made were spent by him in the tumult of a military life, or the gaiety of a court. When war was declared against the Dutch, he went at the age of seventeen on board the ship in which princ Rupert and the duke of Albemarle sailed, with the command of the fleet; but by contrariety of winds they were restrained from action. His zeal, however^ for the king’s service was recompensed by the command of one of the independent troops of horse, then raised to protect the coast,

As a poet, if we credit the testimony of his contemporaries, he was one of no vulgar rank; but modern criticism represents him as a writer that sometimes glimmers, but rarely shines, feebly laborious, and at best but pretty. His songs are upon common topics; he hopes, and grieves, and repents, and despairs, and rejoices, like any other maker of little stanzas; to be great, he hardly tries; to be gay, is hardly in his power.

Yet Dryden extolled this essay highly, and it may be justly said that the precepts are judicious, sometimes new, and often happily expressed. Sheffield’s memoirs also are lively and agreeable; he had the perspicuity and elegance of an historian, but not the fire and fancy oi a poet.

, a celebrated Latin poet and linguist, was born at Sugworth, in the parish of Radley, near Abington in Berks, about 1509. He was educated in Corpus Christ! college, Oxford, of which he was admitted probationer fellow in 1528, and completed his degrees in arts in 1533. At that time he was Greek reader in his college, and succeeded Robert Wakefield in the Hebrew professorship of the university of Oxford about 1538. Three years afterwards, by leave from the heads of the university, he began to expound in the public schools the book of Genesis in Hebrew, and would have proceeded through the other books of the Pentateuch, had he not been prevented by death. He died at Agmondesham in Buckinghamshire, in 1542. He was thought to have surpassed Origen for memory, and Ovid for expedition in versifying; it having been but an ordinary matter with him to compose one hundred good verses every day, at vacant hours. Leland cejebrates him in his “Encomia,” and in his “Cygnea Cantio,” in which he calls him “clecus utriusque linguae.” He is praised likewise in White’s “Diacosiomartyrion,” and by Pits. His works are, 1. Summa et synopsis Novi Test, distichis ducentis sexaginta comprehensa,“Strasb. 1556, 8vo, reprinted at London and Oxford. 2.” Hippolytus Ovidianae Phaedrae respondens.“Oxon. 1584. 3.” Vita et epicedion Joannis Claymundi,“a ms. in Corpus college library. He wrote also some translations from the Greek, and some poems and orations which remain in ms. He had a nephew William, who in the beginning of queen Elizabeth’s reign left England on account of his adherence to popery, and died at Rome in 1598. He was educated also at Corpus, and had the reputation of a man of learning. He left some Mss. on catholic subjects, and one 4to printed at Rome in 1596, entitled” The literal connexion of the Psalms of our lady’s office, and their confirmation, from the Greek, Hebrew, Syriac, Chaldaic, Arabic, Æthiopic, &c." If acquainted with all these languages, he could have been no common scholar in the sixteenth century.

, an English poet, was descended from an antient family of the same name at Stanyhurst, in Lancashire. His grandfather, Henry, appears to have belonged, but in what capacity is not known, to Corpus Christi college, Oxford, and settled in that city, where Edward the father of our poet was born. This Edward went afterwards to London, and became secretary to the first East India company, established by queen Elizabeth’s charter, and in 1613, obtained a reversionary grant of the office of clerk of the ordnance. He was afterwards knighted by Charles I. He married Frances, the second daughter pf John Stanley of Roydon Hall, in Essex, esq. and resided in Goldsmith’s Rents, near Redcross-street, Cripplegate. Mis son, the poet, was born here Sept 18, 1618, and educated by the celebrated Thomas Farnaby, who then taught a school in Goldsmith’s rents. On his removal to Sevenoaks in Kent, in 1636, young Sherburne was educated privately, under the care of Mr. Charles Aleyn, the poetical historian of the battles of Cressy and Poictiers, who had been one of Farnaby’s ushers. On the death of Aleyn in 1640, his pupil being intended for the army, was sent to complete his education abroad, and had travelled in France and part of Italy, when his father’s illness obliged him to return. After his father’s death in 1641, he succeeded to the clerkship of his majesty’s ordnance, the reversion of which had been procured for him in 1638,- but the rebellion prevented his retaining it long. Being a Roman catholic, and firmly attached to the king, he was ejected by a warrant of the house of Lords in April or May 1642, and harassed by a long and expensive confinement in the custody of the usher of the black rod.

To these scanty notices, may be added his acquaintance with Dr. Bent ley, which was occasioned by that learned critic’s announcing an intention of publishing a new edition of Manilius. Sir Edward, who had formerly translated the first book of that poet into English verse, took this opportunity of sending to Bentley his collection of editions and papers belonging to Caspar Gevanius, who had also intended an edition of Manilius, but was prevented by death.

, an English dramatic writer and poet, was of an antient family, and born about 1594, in the parish of St. Mar) Wool-church, London. He was educated at Merchant-Taylors school, and thence removed to St. John’s college in Oxford; where Laud, then president of that college, had a good opinion of his talents, yet would often tell him, as Wood relates, that “he was an unfit person to take the sacred function upon him, and should never have his consent;” 'because Shirley had then a large mole upon his left cheek, which appeared a great deformity. Afterwards, leaving Oxford without a degree, he went to Katherine-hall, Cambridge, where he formed a close attachment with Bancroft, the epigrammatist, who has recorded their friendship in one of his epigrams. At Cambridge, Wood supposes he took the degree in arts, as he soon after entered into orders, and took a cure at or near St. Alban’s, in Hertfordshire; but, becoming unsettled in his principles, changed his religion for that of Rome, left his living, and taught a grammar school in the town of St. Alban’s. This employment being after some time uneasy to him, he retired to London, lived in Gray’s-inn, and commenced dramatic writer, which recommended him to the patronage of various persons of rank, especially Henrietta Maria, Charles the First’s queen, who made him her servant. His first comedy is dated 1629, after which he wrote nine or ten, between that year and 1637, when he went to Ireland, under the patronage of George earl of Kildare, to whom he dedicated his tragi-comedy of the “Royal Master,” and by whose influence that comedy was acted in the castle at Dublin, before the lord deputy. From Ireland he returned to England in 1638; but Wood says, that when the rebellion broke out, he was obliged to leave London and his family (for he had a wife and children), and, being invited by his patron, William earl of Newcastle, to accompany him in the wars, he attended his lordship. Upon the decline of the king’s cause, he retired to London; where, among other of his friends, he found Thomas Stanley, esq. author of the “Lives of Philosophers,” who supported him for the present. The acting of plays being now prohibited, he returned to his old occupation of teaching school, which he carried on in White Friars; and educated many youths, who afterwards proved eminent men. At the Restoration, several of his plays were brought upon the theatre again; and it is probable he subsisted very well, though it does not appear how. In 1666 he was forced, with his second wife Frances, by the great fire in September, from his house near Fleet-street, in the parish of St. Giles’s in the fields, where, being extremely affected with the loss and terror that fire occasioned, they both died within the space of twentv-four hours, and were both interred in the same grave, Oct. the 29th.

Besides thirty-seven plays, tragedies and comedies, printed at different times, he published a volume of poems in 1646, some beautiful specimens of which Mr. Ellis has recommended in his judicious selection. He was also the author of three tracts relating to grammar. He assisted his patron the earl, afterwards duke of Newcastle, in composing several plays, which the duke published; and wrote notes for Ogilby’s translations of Homer and Virgil. Wood tells us, that “he was the most noted dramatic poet of his time;” and Langbaine calls him “one of such incomparable parts, that he was the chief of the second-rate poets, and by some even equal to Fletcher himself,” and modern critics tell us that his comedies possess many features of the genuine drama, and deserve republication.

, a Roman poet, and author of a poetical history of the second Punic war, which decided the empire of the world in favour of the Romans, was born in the reign of Tiberius, about A. D. 15, and is supposed to have derived the name of Italicus from the place of his birth; but whether he was born at Italica in Spain, or atCorsinium in Italy, which, according to Strabo, had the name of Italica given it during the social war, is a point which cannot be known: though, if his birth had happened at either of these places, the grammarians tell us, that he should have been called Italicensis, and not Italicus. When he came to Rome, he applied himself to the bar; and, by a close imitation of Cicero, succeeded so well, that he became a celebrated advocate and most accomplished orator. His merit and character recommended him to the highest offices in the republic, even to the consulship, of which he was possessed when Nero difed. He is said to have been aiding in the accusation of persons of high rank and fortune, whom that tyrant had devoted to destruction: but he retrieved his character afterwards by a long and uniform course of virtuous behaviour, and held a principal office under the emperor Vitellius, which he executed so well as to preserve his credit with the public. Vespasian sent him as proconsul into Asia, where he behaved with integrity and unblemished reputation. After having thus spent the best part of his life in the service of his country, he bade adieu to public affairs, resolving to consecrate the remainder of his days to retirement and the Muses. He had several fine villas in the country one at Tusculum, celebrated for having been Cicero’s and a farm near Naples, said to have been Virgil’s, and at which was his tomb, which Silius often visited. Martial compliments him on both these accounts. In his retirement he applied himself to poetry, not so much from the impulse of genius, which would have appeared earlier, but from his enthusiastic regard for Virgil, to whose memory he paid the highest veneration, and whose birth-day he is said to have celebrated annually with more solemnity than his own. He has endeavoured to imitate him in his poem; and, though he falls greatly short, yet there are some splendid passages and strains of imagination which enliven a historical detail that otherwise may be read with more pleasure in Livy’s prose. After spending a considerable time in this retirement, and reaching his seventy- fifth year, he was seized with an incurable ulcer, which afflicted him with unsupportable pains, and drove him to put an end to his life by refraining from sustenance. The best and almost the only account we have of Silius Italicus is in one of Pliny’s letters, from which most of the above particulars are taken.

, a Grecian poet, wit, and somewhat of a philosopher, uas born in the 35th olympiad, or 558 B.C. and is said to have died in his ninetieth year. He was a native of Ceos, one of the Cyclades, in the neighbourhood of Attica, and became the preceptor of Pindar. Both Plato and Cicero speak of him, not only as a good poet ana musician, but also as a man of wisdom and virtue. His lengthened life gave him an opportunity of knowing a great number of the first characters in antiquity, with whom he was in some measure connected. Fabncius informs us that he was contemporary, and in friendship with Pittacus of Mitylene, Hipparchus, tyrant of Athens, Pausanias, king of Sparta; Hiero, tyrant of Syracuse also with Themistocles, and with Alcuudes, king of Thessaly. X uophon, in his dialogue upon tyranny, makes him one of the interlocutors. His famous answer to Hiero. as recorded by Cicero, has been often quoted as a proof, not only of his wisdom, hut his piety. When Hiero asked of him a definition of God, he requested a day to consider of it; when this was expired, he doubled the time, and thus he did repeatedly, till the monarch desired to know his reason for this proceeding “It is,” said he,“because the longer I reflect on the question, the more difficult it appears to be.”

He obtained the prize in poetry at the public games when he was eighty years old. According to Suidas, he added four letters to the Greek alphabet: and Pliny assigns to him the eighth string of the lyre; but these claims are disputed by the learned. Among the numerous poetical productions, of which, according to Fabricius, antiquity has made him the author, were his many songs of victory and triumph, for athletic conquerors at the public games. He is likewise said to have gained there, himself, the prize in elegiac poetry, when ^schylus was his competitor. His poetry was so tender and plaintive, that he acquired the cognomen of Meliceutes, i. e. sweet as honey, and the tearful eye of his muse was proverbial. Dr. Warton, who has an elegant paper in the Adventurer (No. 89) partly on the merits of this poet, remarks that he was celebrated by the ancients for the sweetness, correctness, and purity of his style, and his irresistible skill in moving the passions. Dionysius places him among those polished writers, who excel in a smooth volubility, and flow on, like plenteous and perennial rivers, in a course of even and uninterrupted harmony. Addison has an ingenious paper on Simonides’ “Characters of Women,” in the Spectator (No. 209). This considerable fragment of Simonides, preserved by Stobaius, was published in Greek by Kohler, at Gottingen, 1781, 8vo, and he also published the Latin only, in 1789, to which professor Heyne prefixed a letter on the condition of women in ancient Greece. Simonides’s fragments of poetry are in Stephens’s Pindar, 1560, and other editions of the ancient lyric poets.

, an old English poet, descended from an ancient family in Cumberland, was born towards the latter part of the fifteenth century, and appears to have studied in both universities. Wood claims him for Oxford, although without conceiving that he was a very honourable addition to his list of worthies. The late Mr. Cole, in his collections for the Athenae Cantabrigienses, is of opinion, that he belongs to Cambridge, partly because he alludes to his being curate of Trompington in 1507, and mentions Svvaffam and Soham, two towns in Cambridgeshire, and partly because there occurs the name of one Skelton, M. A. of Cambridge, in the year 1484. On the other hand, Wood reckons him of Oxford, from the authority of Bale in a manuscript in the Bodleian library and in the preface of Caxton’s Translation of the Æneids he is said to have been “lately created Poet Laureate in the Unyversite of Oxenforde,” and to have been the translator of some of the Latin classics.

This honour appears to have been conferred on him about 1489, and if our author was the Schelton discovered by Mr. Cole, he had now left Cambridge for Oxford; but Mr. Malone says that, a few years after this, he was permitted to wear the laurel publicly at Cambridge, and had been previously honoured by Henry VII. with a grant to wear either some peculiar dress, or some additional ornament in his ordinary apparel. In addition to this, it may be inferred from the titles of some of his works, that he was poet laureate to king Henry VIII.; but Mr. Malone has not been able to discover whether he received any salary in consequence of this office. The origin of the royal laureat is somewhat obscure. According to Mr. Warton, he was only a graduated rhetorician employed in the service of the king, and all his productions were in Latin, until the time of the reformation, which, among other advantages, opened the way to the cultivation of the English tongue.

“J. Sceltonus Vates Pierius hie situs est.” Skelton appears to have been a more considerable personage, at one time at least, than his contemporaries would have us to believe. It is certain that he was esteemed a scholar, and that his classical learning recommended him to the office of tutor to prince Henry, afterwards king Henry VIII., who, at his accession, made him royal orator, an office so called by himself, the nature of which is doubtful, unless it was blended with that of laureat. As to his general reputation, Erasmus, in a letter to Henry VIII. styles him “Britannicarum literarum decus et lumen,” a character which must have either been inferred from common opinion, or derived from personal knowledge. Whatever provocation he gave to the clergy, he was not without patrons who overlooked his errors and extravagancies for the sake of his genius, and during the reign of Henry VII. he had the enviable distinction of being almost the only professed poet of the age. Henry Algernon Percy, fifth earl of Northumberland, one of the very few patrons of learned men and artists at that time, appears to have entertained a high regard for our author. In a collection of poems magnificently engrossed on vellum for the use of this nobleman, is an elegy on the death of the earl’s father, written by Skelton. This volume is now in the Bullish Museum, but the elegy may be seen in Skelton’s works, and in Dr. Percy’s Relics.

Skelton, however, is very unequal, although his natural bias, and what he seems most anxious to revert to, is comic buffoonery. That the author of the “Prayers to the Trinity,” and the lines on the death of Lord Percie, could have written the “Tunning of Elinour Humming,” is almost incredible. His multiplied repetition of rhymes, arbitrary abbreviations -of the verse, cant expressions, hard and sounding words newly coined, and patches of Latin and French, Warton supposes to be peculiar, though not exclusively to our author; but his new-coined words, and Latin and French phrases, occur so often, that other critics appear to have been too hasty in asserting that he wrote only for the mob. There is occasionally much sound sense, and, it is to be feared, much just satire on the conduct of the clergy, which we know was such as to justify the plunder of the church by Henry VIII. in the eyes of the people at large. As a poet, however, Skeltou contributed very little to the improvement of the poetical style, and seems more disposed to render versification ridiculous. His vein of humour is often copious and original, and had it been directed to subjects of legitimate satire, and regulated by some degree of taste, more credit would have been given to what he insinuates, that he was disliked and reviled for having honestly, though bluntly, exposed the reigning follies of his day. Mrs. Cooper calls him, with some degree of truth, “the restorer of invention in English poetry;” and by Bradshavv, a very indifferent poet of the fifteenth century, he is complimented as the inventive Skelton.

, a learned divine and poet, was born in Somersetshire in 1587, and was admitted a member of St. Mary hall, Oxford, in 1600, whence he removed to Brasenose college in 1607. In the following year he took his degree of B. A. and was chosen to a fellowship. He took his master’s degree in 1611, entered into holy orders, and was beneficed. In 1623 he took his degrees in divinity, and bad by this time acquired very considerable reputation for his poetical talent, and his knowledge in English history. He died at Otterden in Kent, where he was beneficed, in Oct. or Nov. 1647. His works are, 1. “Threnodia, sive Pandioniuni,” &c. being elegies and epitaphs on the queen Anne of Denmark, to whom he had been chaplain. It is a quarto of four sheets, printed in 1619. The elegies and epitaphs are in Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and English verses, and some of them in the fantastical shape of pillars, circles, &c. 2. “PaltcAlbion, or the History of Great Britain from the first peopling of this island to the reign of king James,” Lond. 1621, fol. in Latin and English verse, with historical notes, which Granger, who calls this Slater’s “capital work,” thinks the most valuable part. 3. “Genethliacon, sive stemma regis Jacobi,” Lond. 1630, a thin folio in Lat. and English, with a foolish genealogy of king James from Adam. He published also “The Psalms of David, in fowre languages, Hebrew, Greeke, Latin, and English, and in 4 parts, set to the tunes of our church, with corrections,” 1652, 16mo. There appears to have been an edition before this, which was posthumous, but the date is not known. Dr, Burney says this is the most curious and beautiful production of the kind, during the seventeenth century, that has come to his knowledge. Both words and music are very neatly engraved on near sixty copper- plates. The English version is that of Sternhold, retouched, not always for the better, and the music is selected from Ravenscroft.

, a poet of some, though not the highest celebrity, was born at Shipbourne, in Kent, April 11, 1722. His father was possessed of about three hundred pounds a year in that neighbourhood, and was originally intended for holy orders. Why he did not enter into holy orders, or what occupation he pursued, we are not told, except that at one time he had acted as steward of the Kentish estates of lord Barnard, afterwards earl of Darlington. His mother was a Miss Gilpin, of the family of the celebrated reformer, Bernard Gilpin; an ancestor, by the father’s side. Mr. Peter Smart had been a prebendary of Durham in the reign of Charles the First, and was accounted by the puritan party as the proto-martyr in their cause, having been degraded and deprived of all his ecclesiastical preferments, fined five hundred pounds, and imprisoned eleven years. When restored to liberty by the parliament, he appeared as a witness against archbishop Laud. The particular libel for which he suffered is written in Latin verse, and was published in 1643. This is probably what the author of the life prefixed to Smart’s poems (edit. 1791) calls “an interesting narrative in a pamphlet.” When our poet was at school his father died, and so much in debt, that his widow was obliged to sell the family estate at a considerable loss. As he had, however, received a liberal education, he is said to have communicated to his son a taste for literature, and probably that turn for pious reflection, which appears in many of hispoetical pieces, and was not interrupted with impunity by the irregularities of his life.

In 1747, Smart took the degree of master of arts, and became a candidate for the Seatonian prize, which was adjudged to himfor five years, four of them in succession. The Mibjects of his poems were, “The Eternity,” March 5, 1750. “The Immensity,” April 20, 1751. “The Omniscience,” Nov. 1, 1752. “The Power,” Dec. 5, 1753. and “The Goodness of the Supreme Being,” Oct. 28, 1755. It is probable he might have succeeded in the year 1754, but his thoughts were for some time diverted by an important change in his situation. In 1753 he quitted college. on his marriage with Miss Ann-Maria Carnan, the daughter by a former husband of Mary wife of the hue worthy Mr. John Newbery. He had been introduced to this gentleman’s family by Dr. Burney, the celebrated author of the History of Music, who composed several of Smart’s songs, and enriched the coilection of his works published in 1791 with some original compositions not generally known tobelong to our poet. Before this time, Smart had occasionally visited London, and had relinquished the prospects of any regular profession. In 1751 he published his Seatonian poem on the “Immensity of the Supreme Being:” and about the same time appears to have been engaged with Newbery in a general scheme of authorship. He had a ready turn for original composition, both in prose and verse, and as Newbery projected many works in the form of periodical miscellanies, must have been an useful coadjutor. During the years 1750 and 1751 he was a frequent contributor to the “Student, or Oxford and Cambridge Miscellany,” and carried on at the same time “The Midwife, or the Old Woman’s Magazine,” a small periodical pamphlet, which was published in three-penny numbers, and was afterwards collected into three volumes, 12mo. Smart and Newbery were almost the sole writers in this last work, which consists of short pieces in prose and verse, mostly of the humorous kind, and generally in a style of humour which in our more polished days would be reckoned somewhat coarse.

The truth was, that Hill pretended to take the part of our poet in the “Inspector,” which he was known to write, while he abused him in the “Impertinent,” the author of which, he flattered himself, was not known. But it was among the misfortunes of this arch-quack, although advantageous to the public, that whatever disguise he put on was always too thin to elude the penetration of his contemporaries. This trick in particular had been discovered by the reviewer of books in the Gentleman’s Magazine five months before the “Inspector” appeared in which he accused Smart of ingratitude. We are not therefore to wonder that the discovery of such malignant hypocrisy stimulated Smart to write “The Hilliad,” which, it appears, he first read or circulated in manuscript among his friends. But whatever praise they bestowed on the genius displayed in this satire, they were not pleased that he had involved himself in a war of obloquy with one whom to conquer was to exceed in the worst part of his character; and Smart probably listened to their opinions, for he published no more of the Hilliad. Hill had the credit of writing a Smartiad, which served no other purpose than to set off the merit of the other.

The publication alluded to, was the “Universal Visitor and Memorialist,” published by Gardner, a bookseller in the Strand. Smart, and Holt, a political writer, are said to have entered into an engagement to write for this magazine, and for no other work whatever; for this they were to have a third of the profits, and the contract was to be binding for ninety-nine years. In Boswt-Il’s Life of Johnson, we find this contract discussed with more gravity than it seems to deserve. It was probably a contrivance of Gardner’s to secure the services of two irregular men for a certain period. Johnson, however, wrote a few papers for our poet, “not then,” he added, “knowing the terms on which Smart was engaged to write, and thinking I was doing him good. I hoped his wits would soon return to him. Mine returned to me, and I wrote in the Universal Visitor no longer.” The publication ceased in about two years from its commencement.

In what manner he lived for some time after this, we are not told. It was in 1759 thatGarrick gave him the profits of a benefit before mentioned, when it appears that he was again involved in pecuniary distresses. In 1763, he published “A Soug to David,” in which there are some passages of more majestic animation than in any of his former pieces, and others in which the expression is mean, and the sentiments unworthy of the poet or the subject. These inequalities will not, however, surprize the reader when he is told that this piece was composed by him during his confinement, when he was debarred the use of pen, ink, and paper, and was obliged to indent his lines with the end of a key, upon the wainscot. This poem was not admitted into the edition of his works published in 1791, but a fragment has been printed in the late edition of the English Poets.

In the same year he published a small miscellany of “Poems on several occasions,” at the conclusion of which he complains again of the reviewers, and betrays that irritability of self-conceit which is frequently observed to precede, and sometimes to accompany derangement of mind. In other respects these poems added little to his fame, and, except one or two, have not been reprinted. In 1764, he published “Hannah,” an oratorio, the music of which was composed by Worgan, and -soon after in the same year, “An Ode to tht Earl of Northumberland,” on his bein<r appointed lord lieutenant of Ireland, with some other pieces. In all these his imagination, although occasionally fine, went often into wild excesses, and evinced that his iniiui had never recovered its sober tone. In his intervals of health and regularity, he still continued to write, and although he perhaps formed too high an opinion of his effusions, he spared no labour when employed by the booksellers, and formed, in conjunction with them, many schemes of literary industry which he did not live to accomplish. In 1765, he published “A Poetical Translation of the Fables of PliEedrus,” with the appendix of Gudius, and an accurate original text on the opposite page. This translation appears to be executed with neatness and fidelity, but has never become popular. His “Translation of the Psalms,” which followed in the same year, affords a melancholy proof of want of judgment and decay of powers. Many of his psalms scarcely rise above the level of Sternhold and Hopkins, and they had the additional disadvantage of appearing at the same time with Merrick’s more correct and chaste translation. In 1767, our poet republished his Horace, with a metrical translation, in which, although we find abundance of inaccuracies, irregular rhymes and redundancies, there are some passages conceived in the true spirit of the original.

As a poet, Smart exhibits indubitable proofs of genius, but few of a correct taste, and appears to have seldom exercised much labour, or employed cool judgment in preparing his works for the public. Upon the whole, therelore, he is most successful in his lighter pieces, his Odes, Songs, and Fables. His Fables are entitled to high praise, for ease of versification and delicacy of humour, and although he may have departed from the laws which some critics have imposed on this species of composition, by giving reason to inanimate objects, it will be difficult by any laws to convince the reader that he ought not to be delighted with the “Tea-pot and the Scrubbing Brush,” the “Bag-wig, and the Tobacco-pipe,” or the “Brocaded gown and the Linen rag.”

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

, a historian, novelist, and poet of considerable reputation, was the grandson of sir James Smollett of Bonhill, a member of the Scotch parliament, and one of the commissioners for framing the treaty of union. He married Jane, daughter of sir Aulay Macauley, bart. of Ardincaple, by whom he had four sons and two daughters. The fourth son, Archibald, married without asking his father’s consent, Barbara Cunningham, daughter of Mr. Cunningham of Gilbertfield s in the 7ieighbourhood of Glasgow. His father, however, allowed him an income of about 300l. a-year. He unfortunately died, after the birth of two sons and a daughter, who, with their mother, were left dependent on the grandfather, and we do not find that he neglected them. Tobias, the subject of this memoir, and the youngest of those children, was born in the house of Dalquhnrn, near Renton in the parish of Cardross, in 1721, and christened Tobias George; but this latter name he does not appear to have used.

From his medical studies, which he cultivated with assiduity, he was occasionally seduced by a general love of polite literature, and seemed unconsciously to store his mind with that fund of extensive, though perhaps not profound knowledge, which enabled him afterwards to execute so many works in various branches. His satirical disposition also followed him to Glasgow, by which he made a few admirers, and many enemies. Dr. Moore has related, with suitable gravity, that he once threw a snowball with such dexterity that it g;ive both a blow and a repartee. But such frolics were probably not frequent, and his time was in general more profitably or at least more seriously employed. Before he had reached his eighteenth year, he began to feel the ambition of a dramatic poet, and wrote the tragedy of the “Regicide,” which was considered as an extraordinary production for a person of his years; but we do not read it as it was originally composed, nor was it made public until nearly ten vears after.

In the mean time, in 1741, he procured the situation of surgeon’s-mate on board a ship of the line, and sailed on the unfortunate expedition to Carthagena, which he described in his “Roderic Random,” and afterwards more historically in a “Compendium of Voyages,” published in 1756, in 7 vols. 12mo. The issue of that expedition could not be more humiliating to Smollett than his own situation, so averse to the disposition of a young man of his taste and vivacity. He accordingly quitted the service while his ship was in the West-Indies, and resided for some time in Jamaica, but in what capacity or how supported, his biographer has not informed us. Here, however, he first became acquainted with the lady whom he afterwards married. In 1746, he returned to London, and having heard many exaggerated accounts of the severities practised in suppressing the rebellion in Scotland, he gave vent to his feelings, and love for his country, in a beautiful and spirited poem, entitled “The Tears of Scotland.” The subject was doubtless attractive as a poet, but as he had been bred a Whig, he was rather inconsistent in his principles, and certainly very unfortunate in his predictions. His friends wished him to suppress this piece, as having a tendency to offend the Whigs, on whose patronage he had some reliance; and although his enthusiasm was at present rather too warm for advice, and he had from this time declared war against the whig-ministers under George II. yet it does not appear that it was published with his name for many years after.

Among others whom he provoked to retaliate, was the noted political quack, Dr. Shebbeare, Churchill, the poet, and Grainger. But the contest in which he vras involved with admiral Knowles terminated in a more honourable manner. That officer thought proper to prosecute the printer of the “Critical Review,” (the late Mr. Hamilton) for a paragraph in the Review reflecting on his character, declaring at the same time, that his only object was to discover the author, and if he proved to be a gentleman, to obtain the satisfaction of a gentleman from him. Smollett, by applying to persons acquainted with Knowles, endeavoured to avert the prosecution; but, finding that impossible, the moment sentence was about to be pronounced against the printer, he stept forth in open court, and avowed himself the author. After this spirited action, which yet, in Knowles’ s opinion, did not constitute him a. gentleman, he was prosecuted, and sentenced to pay 100l. and be imprisoned for three months.

As a poet, although Smollett’s pieces are few, they must be allowed to confer a very high rank. It is, indeed, greatly to be lamented that he did not cultivate his poetical talents more frequently and more extensively. The “Tears of Scotland” and the “Ode to Independence,” particularly the latter, are equal to the highest efforts in the pathetic and sublime. In the “Ode to Independence” there is evidently the inspiration of real genius, free from all artificial aid, or meretricious ornament. It may be questioned whether there are many compositions in our language which more forcibly charm by all the enchantments of taste, expression, and sentiment. Some observations on this ode, and usually printed with it, are the production oi professor Richardson. It may be necessary to add, that this ode was left in manuscript by Smollett, and published at Glasgow and London in 1773. “Advice and Reproof” have already been noticed, and are more remarkable for their satirical aim, than for poetical beauties. His songs and other small pieces were introduced principally in his novels and in the “Reprisal.”

to him, a daemon or divinity. This attribute to birds the power which beexplanation of the matter is favoured longs to the gods.“The altercations that Socrates had with the Sophists therefore gained him respect, and made him popular with the Athenians; hut he had a private quarrel with one Anytus, which, after many years continuance, was the occasion of his death. Anytus was an orator by profession, a sordid and avaricious man, who was privately maintained and enriched by leather-sellers. He had placed two of his sons under Socrates, to be taught; but, because they had not acquired such knowledge from him as to enable them to get their living by pleading, he took them away, and put them to the trade of leather-selling. Socrates, displeased with this illiberal treatment of the young men, whose ruin he presaged at the same time, reproached, and exposed Anytus in his discourses to his scholars. Anytus, hurt by this, studied all means of revenge but feared the Athenians, who highly reverenced Socrates, as well on account of his great wisdom and virtue, as for the particular opposition which he had made to those vain babblers the Sophists. He therefore advised with Melitus, a young orator; from whose counsel he began, by making trial in smaller things, to sound how the Athenians would entertain a charge against his life. He suborned the comic poet Aristophanes, to ridicule him and his doctrines in his celebrated comedy called” The Clouds.“Socrates, who seldom went to the theatre, except when Euripides, whom he admired, contested with any new tragedian, was present at the acting of” The Clouds;“and stood up all the while in the most conspicuous part of the theatre. One that was present asked him if he was not vexed at seeing himself brought upon the stage?” Not at all,“answered he:” I am only a host at a public festival, where I provide a large company with entertainment."

, an ingenious Spanish writer, was of an ancient and illustrious family, and born at Placenza in Old Castile, July 18, 1610. He was sent to Salamanca to study law; but, having a natural turn for poetry, gave it the preference, and cultivated it with a success which did him great honour. He was but seventeen, when he wrote an ingenious comedy, called “Amor y Obligacion:” and he afterwards composed others, which were received with the highest applause. Antonio affirms him to have been the best comic poet Spain has ever seen. At six and twenty, he applied himself to ethics and politics. His great merit procured him a patron in the count d'Oropesa, viceroy then of Navarre, and afterwards of the kingdom of Valence, who appointed him his secretary. In 1642, when he wrote his comedy of “Orpheus and Eurydice,” for representation at Pampeluna, upon the birth of the count’s son, Philip IV. of Spain made him one of his secretaries; and, after Philip’s death, the queen regent made him first historiographer of the Indies, a place of great profit as well as honour. His “History of the Conquest of Mexico” was thought to justify this honour, and was much praised. But it is evident that his object was to celebrate the glories of Ferdinand Cortez, his hero, to whom he has imputed many strokes of policy, many reflections, and many actions, of which he was not capable; and he has very wisely closed his account with the conquest of Mexico, that he might not have occasion to introduce the cruelties afterwards committed. Nevertheless, the history is reckoned upon the whole very interesting, and has been translated into several languages; and he is better known for it, out of his own country, than for his poetry and dramatic writings, although they are said to be excellent. After living many years in the busy and gay world, he resolved to dedicate himself to the service of God, by embracing the ecclesiastical state; and accordingly was ordained a priest at fifty- seven. He now renounced all profane compositions, and wrote nothing but some dramatic pieces upon subjects of devotion, which are represented in Spain on certain festivals. He died April 19, 1686. His comedies were printed at Madrid in 1681, 4to; his sacred and profane poems, at the same place, 1716, 4to; his “History of Mexico” often, but particularly at Brussels in 1704, folio; with his life prefixed by D. Juan de Goyeneche. There is also a collection of his “Letters” published at Madrid in 1737.

The other works attributed to lord Somers, with more or less authority, are, 1. “Dryden’s Satire to his Muse;” but this has been disputed. Mr. Malone says, the author of this severe attack on Dryden has never been discovered. Pope assures us that lord Somers “was wholly ignorant of it;” but, says Mr. Maione, “if Somers had written any part of this libel (we cannot suppose him to have written the scandalous part of it) thirty years before he was acquainted with Pope, is it probable that he would have made a young author of four-and-twenty the depositary of his secret? Two years before this satire was published, he had appeared as a poet; and near two hundred lines of it, that is, nearly two parts out of three, are a political encomium and vindication of the whigs, without any offensive personality, couched in such moderate poetry as is found in Somers’s acknowledged poetical productions.” Lord Somers’s other and acknowledged poems were, 2. “Translation of the Epistle of Dido to Æneas.” 3. “Translation of Ariadne to Theseus.” Of the prose kind were, 4. “Translation of Plutarch’s life of Alcibiades.” 5. “A just and modest Vindication of the proceedings of the two last Parliaments,” 1681, 4to, first written by Algernon Sidney, but ncic-draivn by Somers, published in Baldwin’s collection of pamphlets in the reign of Charles II. The two following are doubtful: 6. “The Security of Englishmen’s Lives, or the trust, power, and duty of the Grand Juries of England explained according to the fundamentals of the English government, &c.”1682, and 1700. 7. “Lord Somers’s Judgment of whole kingdoms in the power, &c. of Kings,” 1710, 8vo, but bearing no resemblance to his style or manner. With more certainty we may add, 8. “A Speech at the conference on the word Abdicated,'” in the General Dictionary, and probably published separately. 9. “Another on the same occasion.” 10. “Speeches at the trial of lord Preston.” 11. “His letter to king William on the Partition-treaty.” 12. “His answer to his Impeachment.” 13. “Extracts from two of his Letters to lord Wharton.” 14. “Addresses of the Lords in answer to Addresses of the Commons.” 15. “The Argument of the lord keeper Somers on his giving judgment in the Banker’s Case, delivered in the exchequer chamber, July 23, 1696.” He is supposed likewise to have written “The preface to Dr. Tindal’s Rights of the Christian Church,” a “Brief History of the Succession, collected out of the records, written for the satisfaction of the E. of H.” This was in favour of the attempt to exclude the duke of York, and was re-printed in 1714. The Mss. of this able statesman and lawyer filled above sixty folio volumes, which were destroyed by fire in Lincoln’s Inn, in 1752. Some remains, which the fire had spared, were published by lord Hardwicke in 1778, 4to, entitled “State Papers, from 1501 to 1726.” This noble editor informs us that the treatise on Grand Jurors, the Vindication of the last Parliament of Charles II. above-mentioned, and the famous last Speech of king William, were all found in the hand-writing of lord Somers. The “Somers Tracts,” so frequently referred to, are a collection of scarce pieces in four sets of four volumes each, 4to, published by Cogan from pamphlets chiefly collected by lord Somers. His lordship left a large and well-chosen library of books, and many curious Mss. Of this collection Whiston, the bookseller, gives the following account " Sir Joseph Jekyll, master of the rolls, married one of his sisters the other was married to

, an English poet, was descended from a very ancient family in the county of Warwick. His ancestors had large possessions at Kingston, in Worcestershire, so early as the reign of Edward I. He was the son of Robert Somervile, of Edston, in Warwickshire, and, as he says himself, was born near Avon’s banks. He was born at Edston, in Warwickshire, in 1692, bred at Winchester school, and chosen from thence fellow of New college, Oxford, as was his brother Dr. Somervile, rector of Adderbury, in Oxfordshire. Dr. Johnson says, he “never heard of him but as a poet, a country gentter man, and a useful justice of the peace;” and indeed very little is known of his history.

His distresses, says Dr. Johnson, need not be much pitied: his estate is?aid to have been fifteen hundred a year, which by his death devolved to lord Somervile, of Scotland. His mother, indeed, who lived till ninety, had a jointure of six hundred. Dr. Johnson regrets his not being better enabled to exhibit memorials of a writer, who at least must be allowed to have set a good example to men of his own class, by devoting part of his time to elegant knowledge; and who has shewn by the subjects which his poetry has adorned, thn it is practicable to be at once a skilful sportsman and a man of letters. He tried many modes of poetry; and though perhaps he has not in any reached such excellence as to raise much envy, it may commonly be said at least, that “he writes very well for a gentleman.” His serious pieces are sometimes elevated, and his trifles are sometimes elegant. His subjects are commonly such as require no great depth of thought or energy of expression. His fables are generally stale, and therefore excite no curiosity. Of his favourite, The Two Springs, the fiction is unnatural, and the moral inconsequential. In his Tales there is too much coarseness, with too little care of language, and not sufficient rapidity of narration. As a poet, however, he is chiefly known by his “Chace,” which is entitled to great praise as a descriptive poem.

, an ancient Greek tragic poet, was born at Athens in the 71st olympiad, about 500 B. C. His father Sopbilus, of whose condition nothing certain can be collected, educated him in all the politer accomplishments: he learned music and dancing of Lamprus, as Athenaeus says; and had jEschylus for his master in poetry. He was about sixteen at the time of Xerxes’s expedition into Greece: and being at Salamis, where the Grecians were employed in fixing the monuments of the victory, after the flight of that prince, and the entire rout of;11 his generals, he is reported to have appeared at the head of a choir of youths.; and while they sung a pa,>an, to have guided the measures with his harp.

This opinion of his extraordinary worth opened him a free passage to the highest offices in the state. We find him, in Strabo, going in joint commission with Pericles, to reduce the rebellious Samians. Cicero, in his book “De Senectute,” produces Sophocles as an example, to shew, that the weakness of the memory and parts is not a necessary attendant of old age. He observes, that this great man continued the profession of his art, even to his latest years; but his sons resented this severe application to writing, as a neglect of his family and estate. On this account, they at last brought the business into court before the judges; and petitioned the guardianship of their father, as one that was grown a dotard, and therefore incapable of managing his concerns. The aged poet, being acquainted with the motion, in order to his defence, came presently into court, and recited his “CEdipusof Colonoaj” a tragedy he had just before finished; and then desired to know, whether that piece looked like the work of a dotard? There needed no other plea in his favour; for the judges, admiring and applauding his wit, not only acquitte'd him of the charge, but, as Lucian adds, voted his sons madmen for accusing him. The general story of his death is, that, having exhibited his last play, and obtained the prize, he fell into such a transport of joy, as carried him off; though Lucian differs from the common report, and affirms him to have been choaked by a grape-stone, like Anacreon. He died at Athens in his 90th year, as some say; in his 95th, according toothers, B. C. 405.

If JEschylus be styled, as he usually has been, the father, Sophocles will certainly demand the title of the master of tragedy; since what the former brought into the world, the other reduced to a more regular form. Diogenes Laertius, when he would give us the highest idea of the advances Plato made in philosophy, compares them to the improvements of Sophocles in tragedy. The chief reason of Aristotle’s giving him the preference to Euripides was, his allowing the chorus an interest in the main action, so as to make every thing to conduce regularly to the main design; whereas we often meet in Euripides with a rambling song of the chorus, entirely independent of the main business of the play. Aristotle, indeed, has given Euripides the epithet of T^ayixuralog, but it is easy to discover, that he can mean only the most pathetic; whereas, on the whole, he gives Sophocles the precedency, at least in the most noble perfections of ceconomy, manners, and style. Dionysius Halicarnassensis, in his “Art of Rhetoric,” commends Sophocles for preserving the dignity of his persons and characters; whereas Euripides, says he, did not so much consult the truth of his manners, as their conformity to common life. He gives the preference to Sophocles on two other accounts: first, because Sophocles chose the noblest and most generous affections and manners to represent; while Euripides employed himself in expressing the more dishonest, abject, and effeminate passions; and, secondly, because the former never says anything but what is necessary, whereas the latter frequently amuses the reader with oratorical deductions. Cicero had so high an opinion of Sophocles, that he called him the divine poet; and, Virgil, by his “Sophocleo cothurno,” has left a mark of distinction, which seems to denote a preference of Sophocles to all other writers of tragedy. Sophocles is certainly the most masterly of the three Greek tragedians, the most correct in the conduct of his subjects, and the most just and sublime in his sentiments; and is eminent for his descriptive talent.

The reputation which Dryden gained by the many prologues he wrote, made the players always solicitous to have one of his, as being sure to be well received by the public. Dryden’s price for a prologue had usually been four guineas, with which sum Southern once presentee; him when Dryden, returning the money, said, “Young man, this is too little, I must have six guineas.” Southern answered, that four had been his usual price: “Yes,” says Dryden, “it has been so, but the players have hitherto had my labours too cheap; for the future I must have six guineas.” Southern also was industrious to draw all imaginable profits from his poetical labours. Dryden once took occasion to ask him, how much he got by one of his plays? Southern said, after owning himself ashamed to tell him, 7OO/.; which astonished Dryden, as it was more by 6OO/, than he himself had ever got by his most successful plays. But it appears that Southern was not beneath the arts of solicitation, and often sold his tickets at a very high price, by making applications to persons of quality and distinction; a degree of servility, which Dryden might justly think below the dignity of a poet, and more in the character of an under-player. Dryden entertained a high opinion of Southern’s abilities; and prefixed a copy of verses to a comedy of his, called “The Wife’s Excuse,” acted in 1692. The night that Southern’s “Innocent Adultery” was first acted, which has been esteemed by some the most adocting play in any language, a gentlemnu took occasion to ask Dryden, “what was his opinion of Southern’s genius?” who replied, “that he thought him such another poet as Otway.” Such indeed was Dry den’s opinion of his talents, that being unable to finish his “Cieomenes,” he consigned it to the care of Southern, who wrote one half of the fifth act of that tragedy, and was with reason highly flattered by this mark of the author’s confidence and esteem. Of all Southern’s plays, ten in number, the most finished is “Oroonoko, or the Royal Slave:” which is built upon a real fact, related by Mrs. Beha in a novel. Besides the tender and delicate strokes of passion in this play, there are many shining and manly sentiments; and some have gone so far beyond the truth as to say, that the most celebrated even of Shakspeare’s plays cannot furnish so many striking thoughts, and such a glow of animated poetry. Southern died May 26, 1746, aged eighty-five. He lived the last ten years of his life in Tothill street, Westminster, and attended the abbey service very constantly; being particularly fond of church music. He is said to have died the oldest and the richest of his dramatic brethren. Oldys, in his ms additions to Gildon’s continuation of Langbaine, says, that he remembered Mr. Southern “a grave and venerable old gentleman. He lived near Covent-garden, and used often to frequent the evening prayers there, always neat and decently dressed, commonly in black, with his silver sword and silver locks; but latterly it seems he resided at Westminster.” The late poet Gray, in a letter to Mr. Walpole, dated from Burnham in Buckinghamshire, in Sept. 1737, has also the following observation concerning this author: “We have old Mr. Southern at a gentleman’s house a little way off, who often comes to see us; he is now seventy-seven years old, and has almost wholly lost his memory; but is as agreeable an old man as can be; at least I persuade myself so when I look at him, and think of Isabella and Oroonoko.” Mr. Mason adds in a note on this passage, that “Mr. Gray always thought highly of his pathetic powers, at the same time that he blamed his ill taste for mixing them so injudiciously with farce, in order to produce that monstrous species of composition called Tragi-comedy.” Mr. Southern, however, in the latter part of his life, was sensible of the impropriety of blending tragedy and comedy, and used to declare to lord Corke his regret at complying with the licentious taste of the time. His dramatic writings were for the first time completely published by T. Evans, in 3 vols. 12mo.

, an English Jesuit and poet, was born in 1560, and is said to have descended from an ancient family, either in Norfolk or Suffolk. Being sent abroad for education, he became a Jesuit at Rome, Oct. 1578. In 1585, he was appointed prefect of studies in the English college there, and not long after was sent as a missionary into England. His chief residence was with Anne countess of Arundel, who died in the Tower of London. After carrying on his mission for some time, he was, in July 1592, apprehended and examined with the strictest rigour, but having evaded the questions put to him, was imprisoned for three years, and as he affirmed, underwent the torture several times. He owned that he was a priest and a Jesuit, that he came into England to preach the truths of the catholic religion, and was prepared to lay down his life for it. In Feb. 1595, he was tried at the bar of the King’s Bench, Westminster, and executed the next day at Tyburn. He was a man of singular parts, says Dodd, and happy in a peculiar talent of expressing himself in the English language, both in prose and verse. Edmund Bolton, whom Warton calls a sensible critic, speaks of Southwell’s works in the same strain of panegyric “Never must be forgotten St. Peter’s complaint, and those other serious poems said to be father Southwell’s: the English whereof, as it is most proper, so the sharpness and light of wit is very rare in them.” Mr. Headley seems first to have revived the memory of Southwell, as a poet, by some curious specimens, in which he has been followed by Mr. Ellis. “There is a moral charm,” says Headley, “in the little pieces of Southwell, that will prejudice most readers of feeling in their favour.” Unless, however, there were encouragement for republication, which is not very probable, Southwell’s fame must principally rest on these specimens, as his works are rarely to be met with; yet Mr. Ellis remarks that the few copies known to exist, are the remnant of at least twenty-four different editions, of which eleven were printed between 1593 and 1600.

His son John Speed was born at London in 1595, and educated at Merchant-taylors’ school, whence he was elected a scholar of St. John’s-college in Oxford, in 1612, of which he afterwards became a fellow, and took the degree of master of arts, and bachelor and doctor of physic. He wrote “Sjwaetoj utriusque sexus Toxtwsvrof,” a manuscript in Latin, dedicated to archbishop Laud, and preserved in the library of St. John-college. This piece relates to two skeletons, one of a man, another of a woman, made by Dr. Speed, and given by him to that library. He wrote likewise “Stonehenge, a Pastoral,” acted before Dr. Rich. Baylie, and the president and fellows of St. John’s-college in 1635. It is extant in manuscript. He died in May 1640, and was buried in the chapel of that college. He married a daughter of Bartholomew Warner, M. D. and had by her two sons. One of them, Samuel, was a student of Christ-church in Oxford, and was installed canon of that church May the 6th, 1674, and died at Godalmin in Surrey, of which he was vicar, January the 22d, 1681. The other, John, was born at Oxford, and elected scholar of St. John’s-coliege there about 1643, but ejected thence by the parliament-visitors in 1648, he being then bachelor of arts and fellow. At the restoration he was restored to his fellowship, and in 1666 took the degree of physic, and afterwards quitting his fellowship, he practised that faculty at Southampton, where he was living in 1694. He wrote “Batt upon Batt; a Poem upon the parts, patience, and pains of Bartholomew Kempster, clerk, poet, and cutler of Holy-rood parish in Southampton;” and also “The Vision, wherein is described Batt’s person and ingenuity, with an account of the ancient and present state and glory of Southampton.” Both these pieces were printed at London in two sheets in fol. and afterwards in 4to. The countess de Viri, wife of a late Sardinian ambassador, was lineally descended from our historian. Such was the friendship between lord Cobham and colonel Speed, her father, that upon his decease, he esteemed her as his own child, brought her up in his family, and treated her with paternal care and tenderness. Her extraordinary merit recommended her to the viscountess Cobham, who left her the bulk of her fortune. This lady, who was eminent for her wit and accomplishments, is celebrated by Gray in his “Long Story,” which indeed was written in consequence of a visit from her.

, a justly celebrated English-poet, descended from the ancient and honourable family of Spenser, was born in London, in East Smithfield by the Tower, probably about 1553 In what school he received the first part of his education, has not been ascertained. He was admitted, as a sizer, of Pembroke-hall in Cambridge, May 10, 1569, proceeded to the degree of bachelor of arts, January 16, 1572-3, and to that of master of arts June 26, 1576. Of nis proficiency during this time, a favourable opinion may be drawn from the many classical allusions itv his works, while their moral tendency, which, if not uniform, was more general than that of the writings of his contemporaries, incline us to hope, that his conduct was irreproachable. At Cambridge he formed an intimacy with Gabriel Harvey, first of Christ’s-college, afterwards of Trinity-hall, who became doctor of laws in 1585, and survived his friend more than thirty years Harvey was a scnolar, and a poet of no mean estimation in his own time. He appears also as a critic, to whose judgment Spenser frequently appeals, looking up to him with a reverence for which it is not easy to account. We are, however, much indebted to his correspondence with Spenser, for many interesting particulars; relating to the life and studies of the latter, although some of them afford little more than probable conjecture?. It is now fully disproved that Spenser was an unsuccsssful candidate for a fellowship in Pembroke-hall, in competition with Andrews, afterwards successively bishop of Chichester, Ely, and Winchester. Hie rival of Andrews was Thomas Dove, afterwards bishop of Peterborough. But from one of Harvey’s letters to Spenser it appr;,rs that some disagreement had taken place between our poet and the master or tutor of the society to which he belonged, which terminated his prospects of farther advancement in it, without lessening his veneration for the university at large, of which he always speaks with filial regard.

It is certain that in consequence of this introduction, by whatever means procured, he became a welcome guest in iir Philip’s family, and was invited to their seat at Penshurst in Kent, where it is conjectured that he wrote at least the ninth eclogue. Under such patronage, the dedication of the “Calender,” when finished, to “Maister Philip Sidney,” became a matter of course, as a mark of respectful acknowledgment for the kindness he had received. The praise, however, bestowed on this poem was but moderate, and the name of the author appears to have been for some time not generally known. Dove-, whose translation of it. into Latin is extant in the library of Caius college, Cambridge, speaks of it not only as an “unowned” poem, but as almost buried in oblivion. On the wther hand, Abraham Fraunce, a barrister as well as a poet of that time, selected from it examples to illustrate his work entitled “The Lawier’s Logike;” but Fraunce, it may be said, was the friend of sir Philip Sidney, and would naturally be math; acquainted, anil perhaps induced to admire the productions of a poet whom he favoured.

The patronage of men of genius in Spender’s age was frequently exerted in procuring for them public employments, and Spenser, we find, was very early introduced into the business of active life. In July 1580, when Arthur lord Grey of Wilton departed from England, as lord lieutenant of Ireland, Spenser was appointed his secretary, probably on the recommendation of the earl of Leicester, Although the office of secretary was not at this time of the same importance it is now, and much might not be expected in official business from a scholar and a poet, yet Spenser appears to have entered with zeal into political affairs, as far as they were connected with the character of the lord lieutenant. In his “View of the State of Ireland,” which was written long after, he takes frequent opportunities to vindicate the measures and reputation of that nobleman, and has, indeed, evidently studied the polities of Ireland with great success.

After holding this situation about two years, lord Grey returned to England, and was probably accompanied by his secretary. Their connection was certainly not dissolved, for in 1586, Spenser obtained, by his lordship’s interest, and that of Leicester and Sidney, a grant of three thousand and twenty-eight acres in the county of Cork, out of the forfeited lands of the earl of Desmond. As far as sir Philip Sidney was concerned, this was the last act of his kindness to our poet, for he died in October of the same year. Such were the terms of the royal patent, that Spenser was now obliged to return to Ireland, in order tO cultivate the land assigned him. He accordingly fixed his residence at Kilcolman, in the county of Cork, a place which topographers have represented as admirably accommodated to the taste of a poet by its romantic and diversified scenery. Here he was visited by sir Walter Raleigh, with whom he bad formed an intimacy on his first arrival in Ireland, who proved a second Sidney to his poetical ardour, and appears to have urged him to that composition which constitutes his highest fame. In 1590 he published “The Faerie Qneene disposed into Twelve Books, fashioning XII Morall Vertues.”

Such was his original design in this undertaking, and having prepared three books for the press, it is probable that he accompanied Raleigh to England, with a view to publish it. Raleigh afterwards introduced him to queen Elizabeth, whose favour is supposed by some to have extended to his being appointed poet laureate; but Elizabeth, as Mr. Malone has accurately proved, had no poet laureate. Inileed, in February 1590-1, she conferred on Spenser a pension of fifty pounds a year, the grant of which was discovered some years ago, in the chapel of the Rolls, and this pension he enjoyed till his death, but the title of laureate was not given in his patent, nor in that of his two immediate successors.

The discovery of this patent by Mr. Malone, is of farther importance, as tending to rescue the character of Lord Burleigh from the imputation of being hostile to our poet. The oldest date of this reproach is in “Fuller’s Worthies,” a book published at the distance of more than seventy years; and on this authority, which has been copied by almost all the biographers of Spenser, it has been said that Burleigh intercepted the pension, as too much to be given “to a ballad maker,” and that when the queen, upon Spenser’s presenting some poems to her, ordered him the gratuity of one hundred pounds, Burleigh asked, “What! all this for a song!” on which the queen replied, “Then give him what is reason.” The story concludes, that Spenser having long waited in vain for the fulfilment of the royal order, presented to her the following ridiculous memorial:

Spenser appears to have returned to London about the end of 1591, as his next publication, the beautiful elegy on Douglas Howard, daughter of Henry lord Howard, entitled “Daphnaida,” is dated Jan. 1, 1591-2. From this period there is a long interval in the history of our poet, which was probably passed in Ireland, but of which we have no account. It would appear, however, that he did not neglect those talents of which he hacl already given such favourable specimens. In 1595, he published the pastoral of “Colin Clout’s come home again,” the dedication to which bears date, Dec. 27, 1591, but this Mr. Todd has fully proved to be an error. The pastoral elegy of “Astrophel,” devoted entirely to the memory of sir Philip Sidney, and perhaps written on the immediate occasion of his death, was published along with this last mentioned piece.

It is conjectured that in the same year appeared his “Amoretti,” or “Sonnets,” in which the poet gives the progress of his addresses to a less obdurate lady than Rosalind, and whom he afterwards married, if the “Epithalamion,” published along with the “Sonnets,” is allowed to refer to that event. Mr. Todd deduces from various passages that his mistress’s name was Elizabeth, and that the marriage took place in Ireland, on St. Barnabas’ day, 1594. Other biographers seem to be of opinion that he had lost a first wife, and that the courtship of a second inspired “Amoretti.” Where we have no other evidence than the expression of a man’s feelings, and that man a poet of excursive imagination, the balance of probabilities may be equal. Spenser was now at the age of forty-one, somewhat too late for the ardour of youthful passion, so feelingly given in his sonnets; but on the other hand, if he had a first wife, we have no account of her, and the children he left are universally acknowledged to have been by the wife he now married.

It is necessary, however, in this place, to notice a question which has been started, and contested with much eagerness by Spenser’s biographers and critics, namely, whether any part of the “Faerie Queene” has been lost, or whether the author did not leave the work unfinished as we now have it. Sir James Ware informs us that the poet finished the latter part of the “Faerie Queene” in Ireland, “which was soone after unfortunately lost by the disorder and abuse of his servants, whom he had sent before him into England.” The authority of sir James Ware, who lived so near Spenser’s time, and gave this account in 1633, seems entitled to credit, but it has been opposed by Fenton, who thinks, with Dryden, that “upon sir Philip Sidney’s death, Spenser was deprived both of the means and spirit to accomplish his design,” and treats sir James Ware’s account as a hearsay or a fiction. Dr. Birch, on the other hand, contends that the event of sir Philip Sidney’s death was not sufficient to have prevented Spenser from finishing his poem, since he actually gave the world six books of it after his patron’s death. The author of Spenser’s life in the “Biographia Britannica,” after gaining some advantage over Dr. Birch’s inferences from incorrect dates, argues against the probability of a manuscript of the last six books, principally from the shortness of the poet’s life after the year 1596. The late Dr. Farmer is of the same opinion, but appears perhaps somewhat too hasty in asserting that the question may be effectually answered by a single quotation. The quotation is from Brown’s “Britannia’s Pastorals,” 1616, and merely amounts to this—that Spenser died

It does not appear what became of Spenser’s wife and children. Two sons are said to have survived him, Sylvanus and Peregrine. Sylvanus married Ellen Nangle, or Nagle, eldest daughter of David Nangle of Moneanymy in the county of Cork, by whom he had two sons, Edmund and William Spenser. His other son, Peregrine, also married and had a son, Hugolin, who, after the restoration of Charles II. was replaced by the court of claims in as much of the lands as could be found to have been his ancestor’s. Hugolin, however, attached himself to the cause of James II. and after the Revolution was outlawed for treason and rebellion. Some time after, his cousin William, son of Svlvanus, became a suitor for the forfeited property, and recovered it by the interest of Mr. Montague, afterwards earl of Halifax, who was then at the head of the Treasury. He had been introduced to. Mr. Montague by Congreve, who, with others, was desirous of honouring the descendant of so great a poet. Dr. Birch describes him as a man somewhat advanced in years, but unable to give any account of the works of his ancestor which are wanting. The family has been since very imperfectly traced.

It remains to be observed, almost in the words of Mr. Todd, that Spenser is the author of four Sonnets, which are admitted into the late editions of his works, of which three are prefixed to separate publications, and the fourth occurs in letters by his friend Harvey. He is conjectured to be the author of a sonnet signed E. S. addressed to Master Henry Peacham, and entitled “A Vision upon his Minerva,” and of some poor verses on Phiilis, in a publication called “Chorus Poetarum,” 1684. The verses on queen Elizabeth’s picture at Kensington have been likewise given to Spenser, hut lord Orford ascribes them to the queen herself. As “Britain’s Ida” iias been usually printed with the works of Spcenser, it is still retained, although the critics are agreed that it was not written by him. The lost pieces of Spenser are said to be, 1. His translation of Ecclesiasticus. 2. Translation of Canticum Canticorum. 3. The Dying Pelican. 4. The hours of our Lord. 5. The Sacrifice of a Sinner. 6. The Seven Psalms. 7. Dreams. 8. The English Poet. 9. Legends. 10. The Court of Cupid. 11. The Hell of Lovers. 12. His Purgatory. 13 A Se'nnight’s Slumber. 14. Pageants. 15. Nine Comedies. 16. Stemmata Dudleiana. 17. Epithalamion Thamesis. If his pen was thus prolific, there is very little reason to suppose that he might not have had leisure and industry to have nearly completed his “Faerie Queene,” before the fatal rebellion which terminated all his labours.

Of Spenser, as a poet, little can be added to the many criticisms which have been published since his importance in the history of English poetry became more justly appreciated. His lesser pieces contain many beauties. Dryden thought the “Shepheard’s Calender the most compleat work of the kind which imagination had produced since the time of Virgil.” It has not, however, risen in estimation. The language is so much more obsolete than that of the “Faerie Queene,” the groundwork of which is the language of his age, that it required a glossary at the time of publication. It is, however, the “Faerie Queene” which must be considered as constituting Spenser one of the chief fathers of Engiisn poetry. Its predominant excellencies are, imagery, feeling, taste, and melody of versification. Its defects are partly those of his model, Ariosto, and partly those of his age. His own errors ace the confusion and inconsistency admitted in the stories and allegorical personages of the ancients, and the absurd mixture of Christian and heathenish allusions. Mr. Spence has fully exemplified these in his “Polymetis.” It is, indeed, impossible to criticise “The Faerie Queeue” by any rules; but we find in it the noblest examples of all the graces of poetry, the sublime, the pathetic, and such powers of description as have never been exceeded. Bishop Hurd has therefore judiciously considered it under the idea of a gothic rather than a classical poem. It certainly strikes with all the grand effect of that species of architecture, and perhaps it is not too much to say that, like that, its reputation has suffered by the predominant taste for the more correct, lighter, and more easily practicable forms of the Grecian school.

, a learned English prelate, was born in 1636, at Tallaton in Devonshire, the son of a clergyman; and having been educated, as he tells of himself, not at Westminster or Eton, but at a little school by the church-yard side, became a commoner of Wadham college, in Oxford, in 1651; and, being chosen scholar next year, proceeded through the usual academical course, and in 1657 became M. A. He obtained a fellowship, and commenced poet. In 1659, his poem on the death of Oliver was published, with those of Dryden and Waller. In his dedication to Dr. Wilkins he appears a very willing and liberal encomiast, both of the living and the dead. He implores his patron’s excuse of his verses, both as falling so “infinitely below the full and sublime genius of that excellent poet who made this way of writing free of our nation,” and being “so little equal and proportioned to the renown of the prince on whom they were written; such great actions and lives deserving to be the subject of the noblest pens and most divine phansies.” He proceeds “Having so long experienced your care and indulgence, and been formed, as it were, by your own hands, not to entitle you to any thing which my meanness produces, would be not only injustice but sacrilege.” He published the same year a poem on the “Plague of Athens;” a subject recommended to him doubtless by the great success of Lucretius in describing the same event. To these he added afterwards a poem on Cowley’s death. After the Restoration he took orders, and by Cowley’s recommendation was made chaplain to the witty and profligate duke of Buckingham, whom he is said to have helped in writing “The Rehearsal,” and who is said to have submitted all his works to his perusal . He was likewise chaplain to the king. As he was the favourite of Wilkins, at whose house began those philosophical conferences and inquiries which in time produced the royal society, he was consequently engaged in the same studies, and became one of the fellows and when, after their incorporation, something seemed necessary to reconcile the public to the new institution, he undertook to write its history, which he published in 1667. This is one of the few books which selection of sentiment and elegance of diction have been able to preserve, though written upon a subject flux and transitory *. The “History of the Royal Society” is now read, not with the wish to know what they were then doing, but how their transactions are exhibited by Sprat. They have certainly been since exhibited far better by Dr. Birch, and more recently by Dr. Thomson. In the next year he published “Observations on Sorbiere’s Voyage into England, in a letter to Mr. Wren.” This is a work not ill performed; but was rewarded with at least its full proportion of praise. In 1668 he published Cowley’s Latin poems, and prefixed in Latin the life of the author, which he afterwards amplified, and placed before Cowley’s English works, which were by will committed to his care. Ecclesiastical dignities now fell fast upon him. In 166S he became a prebendary of Westminster, and had afterwords the church o*f St. Margaret, adjoining to the abbey. He was in 1680 made canon of Windsor, in 1683 dean of Westminster, and in 1684 bishop of Rochester. The court having thus a claim to his diligence and gratitude, he was required to write the “History of the Rye-house Plot;” and in 1685 published “A true account and declaration of the horrid Conspiracy against the late King, his present Majesty, and the present Government;” a performance which he thought convenient, after the revolution, to ex­* This work was attacked by Mr. ing betwixt H. and Dr. Merret;"

These letters appeared in two vols. 4to. in 1774. His “Miscellaneous works,” also in two vols. 4to. were published in 1777. They consist of papers supplied to Fog’s Journal, to a periodical paper entitled “Common Sense,” and “The World;” all evincing considerable vivacity and skill in writing. Some of his speeches, and other state papers, conclude the first volume. The second contains an ample collection of his Letters, digested into three books. Many of these are written in French, of which language he was, for a foreigner, a very complete master. In 1778 a third volume of “Miscellaneous works” was published, but, as the former had not been eminently successful, this, which appeared in a dubious shape, attracted very little attention, and few copies are supposed to have got abroad. Lord Chesterfield’s entrance into the world, says lord Orford, was announced by his bon-mots, and his closing lips dropped repartees that sparkled with his juvenile fire. Of these witticisms, several are currently repeated in conversation, though on what authority is now uncertain. He appears, by a few specimens, to have possessed considerable talents for the lighter kinds of poetry; some proofs of which appear in the first volume of Dodsley’s collection; but it has been said that he often assumed to himself the credit of verses not his own. As a patron he was distinguished by his steady protection of the elegant, but unfortunate, Hammond; whose poems he published after the author’s death, in 1743, with a preface, but without an avowal of himself as the editor. Encomiums upon him, as the friend of merit and letters, may be found in the writings of this poet, of Pope, and many others; but some of the most elegant compliments to him appear in the third volume of Dodsley’s collection, and proceeded from the pen of Philip Fletcher, dean of Kildare. Applause was his favourite object, and few men have enjoyed it in a greater abundance.

, an accomplished scholar and poet, connected, though in an oblique line, with the illustrious family of Derby, was the descendant of a natural son, Thomas Stanley, of Edward earl of Derby. His father was sir Thomas Stanley of Laytonstone, in Essex, and Cumberlow, in Hertfordshire, knight, by his second wife, Mary, daughter of sir William Hammond, of St. Alban’s-court in the parish of Nonington between Canterbury and Deal. He was born in 1625, and was educated in his father’s house, under the tuition of William Fairfax, son of Edward Fairfax, of Newhall, in the parish of Ottley, in Yorkshire, the celebrated translator of Tasso. From thence he was sent in 1639 as a fellow-commoner to Pembroke-hall, Cambridge, where he distinguished himself by his proficiency in polite learning; having still, as he had in more advanced years, the advantage of Mr. Fairfax’s society, as the director of his studies. In 1641, the degree of M. A. was conferred on him per gratiam, along with prince Charles, George duke of Buckingham, and others of the nobility.

Having spent some time in foreign travel, he took up his residence, during the usurpation, in the Middle Temple, where he formed a friendship and community of studies with his first cousin, E'iward Sherburne, afterwards sir Edward, the poet and translator, who dedicated his poems to Stanley. These ingenious men arrived at the Temple about the same time, from the unfortunate surrender of Oxford to the parliament forces. Stanley, as Wood says, now “became much deserving of the commonwealth of learning in general, aad particularly for the smooth and genteel spirit in poetry, which appears not only in his genuine poems, but also from those things he hath translated out of the ancient Greek and Latin, as the modern Italian, Spanish, and French poets.”

, an historian, poet, and divine of the sixteenth century, was born in Dublii^ probably about 1545 or 1546. His father James Stanyhurst was a lawyer, recorder of Dublin, and speaker of the House of Commons in several parliaments. He published; in Latin, “Piae Orationes” “Ad Corsagiensem Decanum Epistoke,” and three speeches, in English, which he delivered as speaker, at the beginning of the parliaments of the 3d and 4th Philip and Mary, and the 2d and llth of Elizabeth. He died Dec. 27, 1573, leaving two sons, Walter and Richard. Of Walter our only information is, that he translated “Innocentins de contemptu Mundi.”

Richard had some classical education at Dublin, under Peter White, a celebrated school-master, whence he was sent to Oxford in 1563, and admitted of University-college. After taking one degree in arts, he left Oxford, and undertook the study of the law with diligence, first at FurnivaPsnn, and then at Lincoln’s-inn, where he resided for some time. He then returned to Ireland, married, and turned Roman Catholic. Removing afterwards to the continent, he is said by A. Wood to have become famous for his learning in France, and the Low Countries. Losing his wife, while he was abroad, he entered into orders, and was made chaplain, at Brussels, to Albert archduke of Austria, who was then governor of the Spanish Netherlands. At this place he died in 1618, being universally esteemed as an excellent scholar in the learned languages, a good divine, philosopher, historian, and poet. He kept up a constant correspondence with Usher, afterwards the celebrated archbishop, who was his sister’s son. They were allied, says Dodd, “in their studies as well as blood; being both very curious in searching after the writings of the primitive ages. But their reading had not the same effect. The uncle became a catholic, and took no small pains to bring over the nephew.” Stanyhurst published several works, tke first of which was written when he had been only two years at Oxford, and published about five years after. Ic was a learned commentary on Porphyry, and raised the greatest expectations of his powers, being mentioned with particular praise, as the work of so young a man, by Edmund Campion, the Jesuit, then a siudent of St. John’seollege. It is entitled “Harmonia, seu catena dialectics in Porphyrium,” Lond. 1570, folio. 2. “De rebus in Hibernia gestis, lib, iv.” Antwerp, 1584, 4to. According t*v Keating, this work abounds, not only in errors, but misrepresentations, which Stanyhurst afterwards acknowledged. 3. “Descriptio Hiberniac,” inserted in Holinshed’s Chronicle. 4. “De vita S. Patricii, Hiberniae Apostoli, lib. ii.” Antw. 1587, 12mo. 5. “Hebdotnada Mariana,” Antw. 1609, 8vo. 6. “Hebdomacla Euclmristiea,” Douay, 1614, 8vo. 7. “Brevis prsemonitio pro futura concertatione cum Jacobo Usserio,” Douay, 1615, 8vo. 8. “The Principles of the Catholic Religion.” 9. “The four first books of Virgil’s Æneis, in English Hexameters,” 1583, small 8vo, black letter. To these are subjoined the four first Psalms the first in English Iambics, though he confesses, that “the lambical quantitie relisheth somwhat unsavorly in our language, being, in truth, not al togeather the toothsomest in the Latine.” The second is in elegiac verse, or English hexameter or pentameter. The third is a short specimen of the asclepiac verse; thus “Lord, my dirye foes, why do they multiply.” The fourth is in sapphics, with a prayer to the Trinity in the same measure. Then follow, “certayne poetical conceites,” in Latin and English: and after these some epitaphs. The English throughout is in Roman measures. The preface, in which he assigns his reasons for translating after Phaer, is a curious specimen of quaintness and pedantry. Mr. Warton, in his History of Poetry, seems not to have attended to these reasons, such as they are; but thus speaks of the attempt of Stanyhurst: “After the associated labours of Phaier end Twyne, it is hard to say what could induce Robert [Richard] Stanyhurst, a native of Dublin, to translate the four first books of the Æneid into English hexameters, which he printed at London, in 15S3, and dedicated to his brother Peter Plunket, the learned baron of Dusanay [Dunsanye], in Ireland. Stanyhurst was at that time living at Leyden, having left England for some time, on account of the [his] change of religion. In the choice of his measure he is more unfortunate than his predecessors, and in other respects succeeded worse. Thomas Naishe, in his Apology of Pierce Pennilesse, printed in 1593, observes, that * jltany hurst, the otherwise learned, trod a foul, lumbring, boistrcus, wallowing measure, in his translation of Virgil. He had never been praised by Gabriel Harvey for his labour, it therein he had not been so famously absurd.' Harvey, Spenser’s friend, was one of the chief patrons, if not the inventor of the English hexameter here used by Stanyhurst.” His translation, opens thus:

, a dramatic poet, was the third son of Richard Stapleton, esq. of Carleton, in Yorkshire, and uncle to sir Miles Stapleton, and Dr. Stapleton, a Benedictine monk. As his family were zealous Roman catholics, he was educated in the same religion in the college of the English Benedictines at Douay: hut, being born with a poetical turn, and too volatile to be confined within the walls of a cloister, he threw off the restraint of his education, quitted a recluse life, came over to England, and turned protestant. Having good interest, which was perhaps also promoted by the change of his religion, he was made gentleman-usher of the privy-chamber to the prince of Wales, afterwards Charles II. We find him constantly adhering to, the interest of his royal master; for when his majesty was driven out of London by the threatenings and tumults of the discontented, he followed him, and, in 1642, received the honour of knighthood. After the battle of Edgehill, when his majesty was obliged to retire to Oxford, our author then attended hi.n, and was created doctor of the civil laws. When the royal cause declined, Stapleton thought proper to retire and apply himself to study; and, as he was not amongst the most conspicuous of the royalists, he was suffered to enjoy his solitude unmolested. At the restoration he was again promoted in the service of Charles II. and held a place in that monarch’s esteem till his death, July 11, 1C69. He was interred near the vestry door in Westminster-abbey. Langbaine says that his writings have “made him not only known, but admired, throughout all England, and while Musæus and Juvenal are in esteem with the learned, sir Robert’s fame will still survive the translation of these two authors having placed his name in the temple of immortality.” “The Loves of Hero and Leander, from the Greek of Musaeus, with notes,” was published, Lond. 1647, 8vo, and such was Stapleton’s regard for Musseus, that he afterwards reduced the story into a dramatic poem. His “Juvenal” was published in 1647, 8vo, and was thought to be preferable to Holyday’s, but they are both too literal. In 1650 he published a translation of Strada’s “History of the Belgic War,” fol. His dramatic pieces are, l.“The Slighted Maid”, 1663. 2. “The Step-mother,” 1664. 3. “Hero and Leander,” 1669 and, according to the books of the stationers’ company, 4. “The Royal Choice.”

, an ancient Roman poet who flourished in the first century, was born at Naples, and descended of a good family by his father’s side. His father was a rhetorician, a man of probity and learning, and also a poet, although none of his works are now extant. Our author discovered an early inclination for poetry, which was so much improved by his father’s instructions, that he soon was introduced to the first geniuses of the age, and afterwards to the emperor himself, by his friend Paris, the player, at that time one of the chief court-favourites. His literary merit gained him so large a share of the emperor’s esteem, that he was permitted to sit at table with him among his ministers and courtiers of the highest quality, and was often crowned for his verses, which were publicly recited in the theatre. And, although he once lost the prize in the capitol, the frequent determination of the judges in his favour created him the envy of Martial; who piqued himself much on his extempore productions, and has therefore never mentioned Statius in his account of the poets, his contemporaries. The “Thebaid,” finished at Naples, and dedicated to Domitian, was received at Rome with the greatest applause, as Juvenal has told us in a celebrated passage, which, however, is thought bv some to have been nothing more than a sneer. In this passage, which begins

“Curritur ad vocem jucundatn et carmen amicie, c.” Dr. Warton thinks it cannot be doubted that Juvenal meant to be satirical, and to insinuate obliquely that Statius was the favourite poet with the vulgar, who are easily captivated with a wild and inartificial tale, and an empty magnificence of numbers. Statius had, however, no sooner finished his “Thebaid,” than he formed the plan of his “Achilleid,” a work, in which he intended to take in the whole life of Achilles, and not one single action, as Homer has done in the Iliad. This he left imperfect, dying at Naples, about A. D. 96, before he had well finished two books of it.

Statins, by the general verdict of modern critics, is ranked among those authors, who, by their forced conceits, violent metaphors, swelling epithets, and want of just decorum, have a strong tendency to dazzle, and to mislead inexperienced minds, and tastes unformed, from the true relish of possibility, propriety, simplicity, and nature. Dr. Warton, in his “Essay on Pope,” who trarislatec part of the “Thebaid,” has many just remarks on authors of this cast, but allows that Statius has passages of true sublimity, and had undoubtedly invention, ability, and spirit. We must not confound Publius Papinius Statius, as some have done, with another Statius, whose surname was Surculus; or, as Suetonius calls him, Ursulus. This latter was, indeed, a poet, as '.veil as the other; but he lived at Tolosa in Gaul, and taught rhetoric in the reign of Nero.

Such was the melancholy end of one of the most learned men of his time, and one of the greatest benefactors to literature. The unfortunate circumstances of his life prevented him from bestowing the same attention which his father had to the typographical beauty of the works which issued from his press; but he published a great many which do not yield to Robert’s in point of correctness. To all his editions he prefixed learned prefaces, illustrated them by short and judicious notes, and they have generally formed the basis of all future reprints. Some modern critics, of Germany chiefly, have attacked his fidelity as an editor, and accused him of having introduced readings not justified by the authority of manuscripts; but he has been very ably defended against this charge by Wyttembach, in the preface to his edition of Plutarch’s morals. Henry had great facility in writing Latin poetry, which he often composed almost extempore, while walking, riding, or conversing with his friends. He had a correspondence with all the learned of Europe; but had seme little alloy in his character. He was rather impatient of contradiction, and too frequently indulged his epigrammatic turn at the expence of those who could not accede to his opinions. Among the ancient authors which he published, with notes, we may mention the “Poet. Gracci, principes heroici carminis,” 1566, fol. a magnificent collection, which is every day rising in price; “Pindari et casterorum octo Grfficorum carmina,” 1560, 1566, 1586, 24mo: to these we may add Maximus Tyrius, Diodorus, Xenophon, Thucydides, Hefodotus, Sophocles, ^schylus, Diogenes Laertius, Plutarch, Apollonius Rhotlius, Callimachus, Plato, Herodian, and Appian; Horace, Virgil, the younger Pliny, Aulus Gellius, Macrobius, and a collection of the Latin historians; but his taste most inclined to Greek literature, and from that language he has furnished us with Latin translations of Anacreon, Theocritus, Bion and Moschus, Pindar, Sextus Empiricus; Æschylus, Sophocles, &c. &e. and all his translations, extensive as they are, are allowed to be excellent.

, the third of that name, was the son of the preceding Robert the second, and was educated by the celebrated Desportes, who inspired him with a taste for poetry. He began printing in 1572, and in 1574 was honoured with the title of king’s printer. He translated from Greek into French the first two books of Aristotle’s Rhetoric, and printed them himself in 1629, 8vo. In the title-page he calls himself poet and interpreter to the king for the Greek and Latin languages. He was a man of spirit and wit, and was much celebrated for his choice of devices and mottoes for eminent personages. He died in 1629, but left no family. Besides his translation of Aristotle and some Greek poets, he was the author of, 1. “Vers Chretiens au comte du Bouchage,” 1587, 4to. 2. “Discours en vers au connetable de Montmorency,” 1595, 4to. 3, “Epitre de Gregoire de Nysse touchant ceux qui vont a Jerusalem,” with a preface on the superstitious abuse of pilgrimages, which gave rise to the opinion that he was not far from embracing the protestant religion.

We shall now briefly mention the remaining branches of this justly celebrated family. Henry Stephens, the third of that name, and son to Robert, the second, was treasurer of the royal palaces. Prosper March and thinks he was a printer in 1615, but no work is known to have issued from his press. He had two sons, Henry and Robert, and a daughter married to Fougerole, a notary. His son Henry, sieur des Fossés, was the author of “L' Art de faire les devices, avec un Traité des rencontres ou mots plaisants,” Paris, 1645, 8vo. His “Art of making devices” was translated into English by our countryman Thomas Blount (See vol. V. p. 430) and published in 1646, 4to. Henry assumed the title of interpreter of the Greek and Latin languages, and was reckoned a good poet. We also are indebted to him for a character of Louis XIII. and eloges of the princes and generals who served under that monarch, which he published in a work entitled “Les Triomphes de Louis-le-Juste,” Paris, 1649, fol. Robert, his brother, was an advocate of parliament, and completed the translation of Aristotle’s Rhetoric begun by his uncle, Robert the third of the name, and published at Paris in 1630, 8vo. He left off printing about 1640, and was bailli of St. Marcel.

, an English poet and statesman, was descended from a family at Pendigrast in Pembrokeshire, but born at London in 1663. It has been conjectured that he was either son or grandson of Charles third son of sir John Stepney, the first baronet of that family: Mr. Cole says his father was a grocer. He received his education at Westminster-school, and was removed thence to Trinity-college, Cambridge, in 1682; where he took his degree of A.B. in 1685, and that of M.A. in 1689. Being of the same standing with Charles Montague, esq. afterwards earl of Halifax, a strict friendship grew up between them, and they came to London together, and are said to have been introduced into public life by the duke of Dorset. To this fortunate incident was owing all the preferment Stepney afterwards enjoyed, who is supposed not to have had parts sufficient to have risen to any distinction, without such patronage. When Stepney first set out in life, he seems to have been attached to the tory interest; for one of the first poems he wrote was an address to James II. upon his accession to the throne. Soon after, when Monmouth’s rebellion broke out, the Cambridge men, to shew their zeal for the king, thought proper to burn the picture of that prince, who had formerly been chancellor of the university, and on this occasion Stepney wrote some good verses in his praise. Upon the Revolution, he embraced another interest, and procured himself to be nominated to several foreign embassies. In 1692 he went to the elector of Brandenburg’s court, in quality of envoy; in 1693, to the Imperial court, in the same character; in 1694, to the elector of Saxony; and, two years after, to the electors of Mentz, Cologn, and the congress at Francfort; in 1698, a second time to Brandenburg; in 1699, to the king of Poland; in 1701, again to the emperor; and in 1706, to the States General; and in all his negotiations, is said to have been successful. In 1697 he was made one of the commissioners of trade. He died at Chelsea in 1707, and was buried in Westminster-abbey; where a fine monument was erected over him, with a pompous inscription. At his leisure hours he composed poetical pieces, which are republished in the general collection of English poets. He likewise wrote some political pieces in prose, particularly, “An Essay on the present interest of England, in 1701: to which are added, the proceedings of the House of Commons in 1677, upon the French king’s progress in Flanders.” This is reprinted in the collection of tracts, called “Lord Somers’s collection.”

“He apparently professed himself a poet, and added his name to those of the other wits in the version of Juvenal but he is a very licentious translator, and does not recompense his neglect of the author by beauties of” his own. lu his original poems, now and then, a happy line may perhaps be found, and now and then a short composition nun give pleasure. But there is in the whole little either of the grace of wit, or the vigour of nature."

, an English poet and psalmodist, was born, according to Wood’s conjecture, in Hampshire, and, as Hoi imbed says, at Southampton; but Atkins, in his History of Gloucestershire, expressly affirms, that he was born at Awre, a parish about twelve miles from Gloucester; and adds, that his posterity turned papists, and left the place. He studied for some time at Oxford, but not long enough to take any degree. By some interest that he had at court, he was preferred to the office of groom of the robes to Henry VIII. which he discharged so well that he became a personal favourite of the king, who by his will left him a legacy of an hundred marks. Upon the decease of king Henry, he was continued in the same employment by Edward VI. and having leisure to pursue his studies, he acquired some degree of esteem about the court for his poetical talents. He wa> a man of great piety, in his morals consequently irreproachable, and was a stedfast adherent to the principles of the Reformation. Being offended with the immodest Soul'S, which were then the usual entertainment of persons about the court, he undertook to translate the Psalms into English metre, hoping the courtiers might find in them a proper antidote and substitute for their licentious songs: but he died in 1549, without completing the work. His will was proved Sept. 12th of that year, and in it he is styled groom of his majesty’s robes; and it appears that he died seized of lands to a considerable value in Hampshire and Cornwall.

Sternhold’s principal successor in carrying on the translation of the Psalms was John Hopkins, who was admitted A. B. at Oxford in 1544, and is supposed to have been afterwards a clergyman of Suffolk. He was living in 1556. Warton pronounces him a raiher better poet than Sternhold. He versified fifty-eight of the Psaims, which are distinguished by his initials. Bishop Tanner styles him “poeta, ut ea ferebant tempora, eximius” ajid Bale, “Britanuicorum poetarum sui temporis non infimus;” and, at the end of the Latin commendatory verses prefixed ix’s “Acts and Monuments,” are some stanzas of his h seem to justify this character. Five other Psalms were translated by William Whitting-ham, the puritan dean of Durham, and he also versified the decalogue, the prayer immediately after it, and very probably the Lord’s prayer, the creed, and the hymn “Veni Creator;” all which follow the singing-psalms in our version. Thomas Norton (See Norton) translated twenty-seven more of the psalms; Robert Wisdome the twenty-fifth, and also wrote that once very popular prayer at the end of the version, “Preserve us, Lord, by thy dear word,” &.c. which is a literal translation of Luther’s hymn upon the same occasion. Eight psalms, which complete the whole series, have the initials W. K. and T. C. but we have no account of either of these authors.

, an ancient Greek poet, was born at Himera, a city of Sicily, in the seventh century B. C. His name was originally Tysias, but changed to Stesichorus, on account of his being the first who taught the chorus to dance to the lyre. He appears to have been a man of first rank for wisdom and authority among his fellow citizens and to have had a great hand in the transact; between that state and the tyrant Phalaris. He died at Catana in Sicily at above eighty, in the year 556 B. C. the people were so sensible of the honour his relics did the city, that they resolved to keep them against the claims of the Himerians. Much of this poet’s history depends upoit the authority of Phalaris’s epistles; and if the genuineness of these should be given up, which is now the general opinion, yet we may perhaps collect from them the esteem and character Stesichorus bore with antiquity. We have no character of ins works on record: Suidas only tells us, in general, that he composed a book of lyrics in the Dorian dialect; of which a few scraps, not amounting to threescore lines, are inserted in the collection of Fnlvius Ursinus, at Antwerp, 1568, 8vo. Majesty and greatness make the common character of his style: and Horace speaks of his “Graves Camoenae.” Hence Alexander, in Dion Chrysostom, reckons him among the poets whom a prince ought to read: and Synesius puts him and Homer together, as the noble celebrators of the heroic race. Quintilian’s judgment on his works will justify all this: “the force of Stesichorus’s wit appears,” says he, “from the subjects he has treated of; while he sings the greatest wars and the greatest commanders, and sustains with his lyre all the weight and grandeur of an epic poem. For he makes his heroes speak and act agreeably to their characters: and had he but observed moderation, he would have appeared the fairest rival of Homer. But he is too exuberant, and does not know how to contain himself: which, though really a fault;, yet is one of those faults which arises from an abundance and excess of genius.”

, grandson to the preceding, and an eminent naturalist and poet, was the son of Edward Stillingfleet, who was first a physician, but afterwards entered into holy orders. He died in 1708. Hia only son, Benjamin, was born in 1702, and educated at Norwich school, where he made a considerable proficiency in classical literature. In 1720 he entered as a subsizar at Trinity-college, Cambridge, where, while he improved his classical knowledge, he attached himself with success to mathematical studies. On May 3, 1723, he was admitted a scholar, and the same year took the degree of B. A. Soon after this he left the university, and in 1724 lived in the family of Ashe Windham, esq. of Felbrig, as preceptor to William, his only son, then about seven years old. In the beginning of 1726, he returned to Cambridge, in hopes of succeeding to a fellowship, there being then four vacancies. But in this he was disappointed, “by the influence, it is said, of Dr. Bentley, who has been accused of repaying with this instance of ingratitude the obligations he had received from the father of the unprotected candidate.” Although we are unwilling to credit so serious a charge, it appears that Mr. Stillingfleet considered it as just, and “seldom afterwards omitted an opportunity of testifying his resentment against Bentley,” a circumstance which we are sorry to hear, even if the charge had been proved.

Soon after this disappointment, in 1737, he accompanied his pupil, Mr. Windham, to the Continent. The events of this tour, and the connexions to which it gave rise, fixed the future course, and formed the happiness of his life. Mr. Coxe’s account of it is highly amusing, and introduces us to the acquaintance of many persons, now, or lately, distinguished in the political or literary world. One of the results of this tour was, “A Letter from an English Gentleman to Mr. Arlaud, a celebrated painter at Geneva, giving an account of the Glacieres, or Ice Alps of Savoy, written in the year 1741.” This was written chiefly by Mr. Windham and Mr. Price (of Foxley in Herefordshire), with the assistance of Mr. Siillingfieet, and illustrated with the drawings of Mr. Price. They are said to have been the first travellers who penetrated into these Alpine recesses. In 1743 Mr. Stillingfleet returned with his pupil to England. His pupil’s father gave Mr. Stillingfleet an annuity of 100l. which for some time was his principal support. He now resided partly in London and partly with some friends in the country; and his leisure hours were dedicated to literary pursuits, some of which Mr. Coxe has specified, particularly an edition of Milton, illustrated by notes, in which he had made considerable progress when the appearance of Dr. Newton’s proposals induced him to relinquish his design. His M8S. however, which were in the possession of the late bishop Dampier, were obligingly lent to Mr. Todd, for his excellent edition of our great epic poet. About this time Mr. Stillingfleet composed some of his poems, particularly those on “Conversation,” and “Earthquakes.”

This was the last of Mr. Stillingfleet' s publications; for he died, at his lodgings in Piccadilly opposite Burlingtonhouse, Dec. 15, 1771 (the year this last-me.itioned work was published), aged sixty-nine. He was interred in St. James’s church, where his great nephew Edward Hawke Locker, esq. third son of captain Locker, has recently erected a monument to his memory. The merit most generally attributed to Mr. Stillingfleet is the service which he has rendered to our Natural History and Agriculture. In the present age it may not be deemed a merit in a gentleman, who is at the same time a man of letters, to encourage such pursuits by precept and example; as we have numerous instances of men of the first rank and abilities, who have dedicated their time and labours to the promotion of this branch of useful knowledge. But, in the time of Mr. Stillingfleet, the case was far different; for few men of respectable rank in society were farmers; and still fewer, if any, gave the result of their experience and observations to the public. On the contrary, there seems to have existed among the higher classes a strong prejudice against agricultural pursuits; which Mr. Stillingfleet took some pains to combat, and which, indeed, his example, as well as his precepts, greatly contributed to overcome. As a poet, Mr. Stillingfleet is less known, because few of his compositions were ever given to the public, and those were short, and confined to local or temporary subjects. The “Essay on Conversation” the “Poem on Earthquakes” the dramas and sonnets; will certainly entitle him to a place on the British Parnassus but, when we consider his refined and classical taste, his command of language, his rich and varied knowledge, and the flights of imagination which frequently escape from his rapid pen, we can have no hesitation in asserting, that if, instead of the haste in which he apparently prided himself, he had employed more patience and more assiduous correction, he would have attained no inconsiderable rank among our native poets. Independently of his merits as a naturalist and a poet, he possessed great versatility of genius and multifarious knowledge. His intimate acquaintance with the higher branches of the mathematics, and his skill in applying them to practice, are evident from his treatise on the principles and powers of harmony: and all his works, both printed and manuscript, display various and undoubted proofs of an extensive knowledge of modern languages, both ancient and modern, and a just and refined taste, formed on the best models of classic literature.

In his way to Berwick, where he meant to pay his duty to his mother, and determine on some future plan of life, he visited Dr. Thomas Sharp, archdeacon of Northumberland, then at Durham, who invited him to a residence in his house, and encouraged him to enter into holy orders. Accordingly he was ordained deacon, at Michaelmas 1759, by Dr. Trevor, bishop of Durham, and went immediately to London, where he was to be one of Dr. Sharp’s assistants in the curacy of Duke’s-place, Aldgate. After this, he seems to have fallen into a rambling life, and in 1767, being without any church-employment, went to Italy, and resided for two years in the town of Villa Franca, where he says he read and wrote assiduously. In 1769, after his return to London, he published a translation of Tasso’s Aminta; had afterwards some concern in the “Critical Review,” and wrote a life of Waller the poet, which was prefixed to a new edition of his works. He also translated Bos’s “Antiquities of Greece” in 1771 was editor of the “Universal Magazine” and in 1775 published three sermons, two against luxury and dissipation, and one on universal benevolence. In the same year, appeared his poem entitled “The Poet,” which had some temporary reputation; and soon after the publication of it, he obtained the office of chaplain to his majesty’s ship the Resolution of 74 guns. This he retained for three years, and published “Six Sermons to Seamen;” translated Sabbatier’s “Institutions of the Ancient Nations,” and wrote an “Essay on the writings and genius of Pope,” in answer to Dr. Warton’s work on the same subject.

In the summer of 1779, he wrote several political letters, with the signature of Agricola, in the “Public Advertiser.” At this period, when the principal booksellers of London determined to publish a new edition of the English Poets, with a previous account of the life of each poet, we are told that “Mr. Stockdale’s Life of Waller had given them so high an idea of his ability to execute their plan, that they resolved, in this meeting, to apply to him to be its biographer and editor. The agreement was accordingly made; but, by some strange misunderstanding, Mr. Stockdale was deprived of this employment, and Dr. Johnson wrote the Lives of the Poets! Owing to this circumstance, a feud arose between our injured author and some of these booksellers^ which has never subsided, and from which he may date not a few of the misfortunes and vexations of his life.” We copy this story merely to contradict it, for no such agreement was ever entered into, and whatever resentment “our injured author” might have entertained against the booksellers, they could not have hesitated a moment had their choice been between Mr. Stockdale and Dr. Johnson. He now left his ship; and, being without any regular employment, was advised by his friends to accept a situation which now presented itself, that of tutor to the late lord Craven’s eldest son, but this, it is said, he found a state of vassalage, “totally incompatible with his independent sentiments,” and therefore quitted it the following spring.

, a poet of the Elizabethan period, was the son of John Storer, a native of London, and was elected student of Christ-clmrcn, Oxford, about 1587. He took his degree of master of aits, and had the fame of excellent poetical talents, which were exhibited, not only in verses before the books of many members of the university, but in his poem entitled “The Life and De^th of Thomas Wolsey, cardinal: divided into three pans: his aspiring; triumph; and death,” Lond. 1599, 4to. He obtained also great credit for some pastoral airs and madrigals, which were published in the collection called “England’s Helicon.” He died in the parish of St. Michael Bassishaw, London, in Nov. 1604, and had his memory celebrated by many copies of verses. His poem on Wolsey is far from despicable, and contains many curious historical particulars. It is of the greatest rarity; but there is a copy in the Bodleian, and another in the British Museum.

By his skill, also, in antiquity, he was enabled to settle the true bounds and limits of many contested properties, and to throw gceat light upon some obsolete authors, toward the useful editions of which he contributed largely. We are likewise indebted to him for some of the additions and enlargements of our most ancient poet, Chaucer; whose works were first collected and published by Caxton; and again published with additions by William Thinne, esq. in the reign of Henry VIII. after which they were “corrected and twice increased (to use his own words) through Mr. Stow’s painful labours in the reign of queen Elizabeth, to wit, in the year 1561; and again beautified with notes by him collected out of divers records and monuments: which he delivered to his loving friend Thomas Speight.”