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

In this manner he was employed till his death, which happened in 1546. That year, accompanied by Melancthon, he paid a visit to his own country, which he had not seen for many years, and returned again in safety. But soon after he was called thither again by the earls of Mansfelt, to compose some differences which had arisen about their boundaries. He had not been used to such matters; but because he was born at Isleben, a town in the territory of Mansfelt, he was willing to do his country what service he could, even in this way. Preaching his last sermon, therefore, at Wittemberg, Jan. 17, he set off the 23d; and at Hall in Saxony lodged with Justus Jonas, with whom he stayed three days, because the waters were out. The 28th he passed over the river with his three sons, and Jonas and being in some danger, he said to the doctor, “Do not you think it would rejoice the deril exceedingly, if I and you, and my three sons, should be drowned” When he entered the territories of the earl of Mansfelt, he was received by 100 horsemen or more, and conducted in a very honourable manner; but was at the same time so very ill that it was feared he would die. He said that these fits of sickness often came upon him when he had any great business to undertake: of this, however, he did not recover, but died Feb. 18, in his sixty-third year. A little before he expired he admonished those that were about him to pray to God for the propagation of the gospel “because,” said he, “the council of Trent, which had sat once or twice, and the pope, will devise strange things against it.” Soon after, his body was put into a leaden coffin, and carried with funeral pomp to the church at Isleben, when Jonas preached a sermon upon the occasion. The earls of Mansfelt desired that his body should be interred in their territories; but the elector of Saxony intsted upon his being brought back to Wittemberg, which was accordingly done; and there he was buried with the greatest pomp that perhaps ever happened to any private mail. Princes, earls, nobles, aad students without number, attended the procession; and Melancthon made his funeral oration.

A thousand falsehoods were invented by the papists about his death. Some said that he died suddenly; others, that he killed himself; others, that the devil strangled him; others, that his corpse stunk so abominably that they were forced to leave it in the way as it was carried to be interred. Similar slanders were even invented about his death, while he was yet alive for a pamphlet was published at Naples, and in other places of Italy, the year before, wherein was given the following account: “Luther, being dangerously sick, desired to communicate, and died as soon as he had received the viaticum. As he was dying, he desired his body might be laid upon the altar, to be adored; but that request being neglected, he was buried. When, lo! at his interment there arose a furious tempest, as if the world was at an end; and the terror was universal. Some, in lifting their hands up to heaven, perceived that the host, which the deceased had presumed to take, was suspended in the air; upon which it was gathered up with great veneration, and laid in a sacred place, and the tempest ceased for the present; but it arose the night following with greater fury, and filled the whole town with consternation; and the next day Luther’s sepulchre was found open and empty, and a sulphureous stench proceeded from it, which nobody could bear. The assistants fell sick of it, and many of them repented, and returned to the catholic church.” We have related this as a specimen of the innumerable falsehoods that the papists have invented about Luther; in which, as Bayle observes very truly, they have shewn no regard either to probability, or to the rules of the art of slandering, but have assumed all the confidence of those who fully believe that the public will blindly and implicitly receive their stories, be they ever so absurd and incredible. Luther, however, to give the most effectual refutation of this account of his death, published an advertisement of his being alive; and wrote a book at the same time to prove that “Papacy was founded by the devil.” Amidst all this malice of the papists towards Luther, we must not forget a generous action of the emperor Charles V. which is an exception to it. While Charles’s troops quartered at Wittemberg in 1547, which was one year after Luther’s death, a soldier gave Luther’s effigies, in the church of the castle, two stabs with his dagger; and the Spaniards earnestly desired that his tomb might be pulled down, and his bones dug up and burnt: but the emperor wisely answered, “I have nothing farther to do with Luther; he has henceforth another judge, whose jurisdiction it is not lawful fur me to usurp. Know, that I make not war with the dead, but with the living, who still make war with me.” He would not therefore suffer his tomb to be demolished; and he forbad any attempt of that nature upon pain of death.

After this long, but we trust, not uninteresting account of the great founder of the Reformation, we shall select only, on the part of the Roman catholics, the opinion of father Simon, respecting his talents as an interpreter of scripture, for this is a part of his character which must appear very important, as he was the first who boldly undertook to reform an overgrown system of idolatry and superstition by the pure word of God. “Luther,” says this critical author, “was the first protestant who ventured to translate the dible into the vulgar tongue from the Hebrewtext, although he understood Hebrew but very indifferently. As he was of a free and bold spirit, he accuses St. Jerom of ignorance in the Hebrew tongue; but he had more reason to accuse himself of this fault, and for having so precipitately undertaken a work of this nature, which required more time than he employed about it. Thus we find that he was obliged to review his translation, and make a second edition; but, notwithstanding this review, the most learned protestants of that time could not approve of either the one or the other, and several of them took the liberty to mark the faults, which were very numerous.” In another place he speaks of him not as a translator, but as a commentator, in the following manner: “Luther, the German protestant’s patriarch, was not satisfied with making a translation of the whole Bible, both from the Hebrew and Greek, into his mother tongue, but thought he ought to explain the word of God according to his own method, for the better fixing of their minds whom he had drawn to his party. But this patriarch could succeed no better in his commentaries upon the Bible than in his translation. He made both the one and the other with too little consideration; and he very often consults only his own prejudices. That he might be thought a learned man, he spends time to no purpose in confuting of other people’s opinions, which he fancies ridiculous. He mixes very improperly theological questions and several other things with his commentaries, so that they may rather be called lectures, and disputes in divinity, than real commentaries. This may be seen in his exposition on Genesis, where there are many idle digressions. He thought, that by reading of morality, and bawling against those who were not of nis opinion, he might very much illustrate the word of God; yet one may easily see by his own books, that he was a turbulent and passionate man, who had only a little flashy wit and quickness of invention. There is nothing great or learned in his commentaries upon the Bible; every thing low and mean: and as he had studied divinity, he has rather composed a rhapsody of theological questions, than a commentary upon the scripture text: to which we may add, that he wanted understanding, and usually followed his senses instead of his reason.”

This is the language of those in the church of Rome who speak of Luther with any degree of moderation; for the generality allow him neither parts nor learning, nor any attainment intellectual or moral. They tell you that he was not only no divine, but even an outrageous enemy and calumniator of all kinds of science; and that he committed gross, stupid, and abominable errors against the principles of divinity and philosophy. They accuse him of having confessed, that after struggling for ten years together with his conscience, he at last became a perfect master of it, and fell into Atheism; and add, that he frequently said he would renounce his portion in heaven, provided God would allow him a pleasant life for 100 years upon earth. And, lest we should wonder that so monstrous and much unheard-of impiety should be found in a mere human creature, they make no scruple to say that an Incubus begat him. These, and many more such scandalous imputations, Bayle has been at the pains to collect, and has treated them with all the contempt and just indignation they deserve.

On the protestant side, the character given of Luther by Dr. Robertson, seems, on the whole, the most just and impartial that has yet appeared. “As he was raised by Providence,” says this excellent historian, " to be the author of one of the greatest and most interesting revolutions recorded in history, there is not any person, perhaps, whose character has been drawn with such opposite colours. In his own age, one party, struck with horror aud inflamed with rage, when they saw with what a daring hand he overturned everything which they held to be sacred, or valued as beneficial, imputed to him not only the defects and vices of a man, but the qualities of a demon. The other, warmed with the admiration and gratitude which they thought he merited, as the restorer of light and liberty to the Christian church, ascribed to hiui perfections above the condition of humanity, and viewed all his actions with a veneration bordering on that which should be paid only to those who are guided by the immediate inspiration of heaven. It is his own conduct, not the undistinguishing censure or the extravagant praise of his contemporaries, that ought to regulate the opinions of the present age concerning him. Zeal for what he regarded as truth; undaunted intrepidity to maintain his own system; abilities, both natural and acquired, to defend his principles; and unwearied industry in propagating them; are virtues which shine so conspicuously in every part of his behaviour, that even his enemies must allow him to have possessed them in an eminent degree. To these may be added, with equal justice, such purity and even austerity of manners, as became one who assumed the character of a reformer; such sanctity of life as suited the doctrine which he delivered; and such perfect disinterestedness, as affords no slight presumption of his sincerity. Superior to all selfish considerations, a stranger to the elegancies of life, and despising its pleasures, he left the honours and emoluments of the church to his disciples, remaining satisfied himself in his original state of professor in the university, and pastor of the town of Wittemberg, with the moderate appointments annexed to these offices. His extraordinary qualities were allayed by no inconsiderable mixture of human frailties and human passions. These, however, were of such a nature, that they cannot be imputed to malevolence or corruption of heart, but seem to have taken their rise from the same source with many of his virtues. His mind, forcible and vehement in all its operations, roused by great objects, or agitated by violent passions, broke out, on many occasions, with an impetuosity which astonishes men of feebler spirits, or such as are placed in a more tranquil situation. By carrying some praise-worthy dispositions to excess, he bordered sometimes on what was culpable, and was often betrayed into actions which exposed him to censure. His confidence that his own opinions were well-founded, appreached to arrogance; his courage in asserting them, to rashness; his firmness in adhering to them, to obstinacy; and his zeal in confuting his adversaries, to rage and scurrility. Accustomed himself to consider every thing as subordinate to truth, he expected the same deference for it from other men; and, without making any allowances for their timidity or prejudices, he poured forth against such as disappointed him in this particular, a torrent of invective mingled with contempt. Regardless of any distinction of rank or character when his doctrines were attacked, he chastised all his adversaries indiscriminately, with the same rough hand: neither the royal dignity of Henry VIII, nor the eminent learning and abilities of Erasmus, screened them from the same gross abuse with which he treated Tetzel or Eckius.

"But these indecencies of which Luther was guilty, must not be imputed wholly to the violence of his temper. They ought to be charged in part on the manners of the age. Among a rude people, unacquainted with those maxims, which, by putting constraint on the passions of individuals, have polished society, and rendered it agreeable, disputes of every kind were managed with heat, and strong emotions were uttered in their natural language without reserve or delicacy. At the same time, the works of learned men were all composed in Latin; and they were not only authorized, by the example of eminent writers in that language, to use their antagonists with the most illiberal scurrility; but, in a dead tongue, indecencies of every kind appear less shocking than in a living language, whose idioms and phrases seem gross, because they are familiar.

“In passing judgment upou the characters of men, we ought to try them by the principles and maxims of their own age, not by those of another. For, although virtue and vice are at all times the same, manners and customs vary continually. Some parts of Luther’s behaviour which to us appear most culpable, gave no disgust to his contemporaries. It was even by some of those qualities which we are now apt to blame, that he was fitted for accomplishing the great work he undertook. To rouse mankind, when sunk in ignorance or superstition, and to encounter the rage of bigotry armed with power, required the utmost vehemence of zeal, as well as a temper daring to excess. A gentle call would neither have reached, nor have excited those to whom it was addressed. A spirit more amiable, but less vigorous than Luther’s, would have shrunk back from the dangers which he braved and surmounted. Toward the close of Luther’s life, though without any perceptible diminution of his zeal or abilities, the infirmities of his temper increased upon him, so that he grew daily more peevish, more irascible, and more impatient of contradiction. Having lived to be a witness of his own amazing success; to see a great part of Europe embrace his doctrines; and to shake the foundation of the papal throne, before which the mightiest monarchs had trembled, he discovered, on some occasions, symptoms of vanity and self- applause. He must have been, indeed, more than man, if, upon contemplating all that he actually accomplished, he had never felt any sentiments of this kind rising in his breast.”

His works were collected after his death, and printed at Wittemberg in seven volumes folio. Catherine de Bore survived her husband a few years, and continued the first year of her widowhood at Wittemberg, though Luther had advised her to seek another place of residence. She went from thence in 1.547, when the town was surrendered to the emperor Charles V. Before her departure, she had received a present of fifty crowns from Christian III. king of Denmark; and the elector of Saxony, and the counts of Mansfelt, gave her good tokens of their liberality. Wich these additions to what Luther had left her, she was enabled to maintain herself and her family handsomely. She returned to Wittemberg, when the town was restored to the elector, where she lived a very devout and pious life, till the plague obliged her to leave it again in 1552. She sold what she had at Wittemberg, and retired to Torgau, with a resolution to end her life there. An unfortunate mischance betel her in her journey thither, which proved fatal to her. The horses growing unruly, and attempting to run away, she leaped out of the vehicle, and had a fall, of which she died about a quarter of a year after, at Torgau, Dec. 20, 1552. She was buried there in the great church, where her tomb and epitaph are still to be seen; and the university of Wittemberg, which was then at Torgau because the plague raged at Wittemberg, made a public programma concerning the funeral pomp.

Lutheiamsi has undergone some alteration since the time of its founder. Luther rejected the epistle of St. James, as inconsistent with the doctrine of St. Paul, in relation to justification; he also set aside the Apocalypse; both which are now received as canonical in the Lutheran church. Luther reduced the numher of sacraments to two, viz. baptism, and the eucharist; but he believed the impanation, or consubstantiation: that is, that the matter of the bread and wine remain with the body and blood of Christ; and it is in this article, that the main difference between the Lutheran and English churches consists. Luther maintained the mass to be no sacrifice; he exploded the adoration of the host, auricular confession, meritorious works, indulgences, purgatories, the worship of images, &c. which had been introduced in the corrupt times of the Romish church. He also opposed the doctrine of free-will; maintained predestination; asserted that we are necessitated in all we do; that all our actions done in a state of sin, and even the virtues themselves of heathens, are crimes; that we are justified only by the merits and satisfaction of Christ. He also opposed the fastings in the Roman church, monastical vows, the celibacy of the clergy, &c.

, an Italian artist, was born at Florence, in 1666. He was the disciple of Dominico Gabbiani, and at twenty-four his merit was judged equal to that of his master. He afterwards studied at Rome, under the patronage of the grand duke, and hoped to have profited by the instructions of Giro Ferri; but on his arrival he had to regret the death of that master. He now, however, pursued his studies with such success, that his works became much valued in England, France, and Germany. The emperor knighted him, and the elector of Mentz sent with his patent of knighthood, a cross set with diamonds Lutti was never satisfied with his own performances, and though he often retouched his pictures, yet they never appeared laboured; he always changed for the better, and his last thought was the best. There were three much-admired public works of his at Rome, viz. a Magdalene in the church of St. Catharine of Siena, at Monte Magna Napoli; the prophet Isaiah, in an oval, St. John de Lateran; and St. Anthony of Padua, in the church of the Holy Apostles; and at the palace Albani was a miracle of St. Pio, which some reckon his master-piece. Fuseli speaks of his “Cain, flying from his murdered brother,” he says has something of the sublimity and the pati it strike in the Pietro Martyre of Titian and his “Psyche” in the gallery of the capitol, breathes refinement of taste and elegance. His death is said to have been hastened by a fit of chagrin, owing to his not having been able to finish a picture of St. Eusebius, bishop of Vercelli, designed for Turin, for which he had received a large earnest, and promised to get it ready at a set time. But several disputes happening between him and those who bespoke the picture, brought on a fit of sickness, of which he died at Rome, in 1724, aged fifty-eight, and the picture was afterwards finished by Pietro Bianchi, one of his disciples. Lutti is blamed for not having placed his figures advantageously, but in such a manner as to throw a part of the arms and legs out of the cloth. This fault he possesses in common with Paul Veronese and Rubens, who, to give more dignity and grandeur to the subject they treated, have introduced into the fore-ground of their pictures, groups of persons on horseback, tops of heads, and arms and legs, of which no other part of the body appears.

Lutti was lively in conversation; he had a politeness in his behaviour, which, as it prompted him to treat every body with proper civility, so it also procured him a return of esteem and respect. He spoke well in general of all his contemporary painters, but contracted no particular acquaintance with any, though he was principal of the academy of St. Luke nor did he court the protection of the great, whom he never visited, and who very seldom visited him convinced that the true protection of a painter is his own merit.

, a very celebrated general and mareschal of France, was a posthumous son of the famous Bouteville, who was beheaded under Louis XIII. for fighting a duel. He was born in 1628, and in 1643 was present at the battle of Rocroi, under the great Conde, whose pupil he was, and whom he followed in all his fortunes. He also resembled that great man in many of his eminent qualities, in acuteness of perception, thirst for knowledge, promptness in action, and ardour of genius. These qualities he displayed in the conquest of Franche-Comte in 1668, where he served as lieutenant-general. He served also in the Dutch campaign of 1672, took many towns, and gained some trophies in the field. He closed this expedition by a retreat more famous than his victories, which he accomplished with an awny of 20,000 men, against the opposition, of 70,000. After distinguishing himself in another expedition in Franche-Comte, he was advanced in 1675, to the dignity of mareschal of France. He fought, during the remainder of that war, with various success. In the second war of Louis XIV. against the allied powers in 1690, he gained the battle of Fleurus, and it was generally allowed that he prevailed in it chiefly by the superiority of his genius to that of his antagonist the prince of Waldeck. In the ensuing year, 1691,“he gained the battles of Leufen and Steinkirk; and, continuing to be opposed to king William of England, he was again successful, in the bloody battle of Nerwinde, where there fell on the two sides near 20,000 men. It was said in France that on this occasion they should not sing Te Deum, but De profundis, the mass for the dead. The duke of Luxembourg is said to have had an ordinary countenance and a deformed figure, in consequence of which William III. whose constant antagonist he was, is reported to have said once with some impatience,” What! shall I never beat this hump-backed fellow?“This speech being repeated to the duke,” How should he know,“said he,” the shape of my back? I am sure he never saw me turn it to him.“The last great action of the duke’s life was a second famous retreat, in the presence of superior forces, through a considerable extent of country, to Tournay. This was in 1694, and he died the following year, Jan. 4, at the age of sixty-seven. Notwithstanding the disadvantages of his person, Luxembourg is said to have been much involved in intrigues of gallantry. He had some powerful enemies, particularly the minister Louvois, who once had him confined very unjustly in the Bastille. Among other frivolous calumnies on which he was then interrogated, he was asked whether he had not made a league with the devil, to marry His son to the daughter of the marquis de Louvois. His answer was replete with the high spirit of French nobility.” When Matthew of Montmorenci,“said he,” married a queen of France, he addressed himself, not to the devil, but to the states-general; and the declaration of the states was, that in order to gain the support of the house of Montmorenci for the young king in his minority, it would be right to conclude that marriage." Idle as the accusations against him were, they cost him a confinement of fourteen months, and he had no subsequent redress.

, a Greek poet and grammarian, was a native of Chalcis, in Eubcea, and according to Ovid, was killed by a shot with an arrow. He flourished about 304 years before Christ, and wrote a poem entitled “Alexandra,” or Cassandra, containing a long course of predictions, which he supposes to be made by Cassandra, daughter of Priam, king of Troy. This poem has created a great deal of trouble to the learned, on account of its obscurity, which procured him the title of “the tenebrous poet.” Suidas has preserved the titles of twenty tragedies of his composing; and he is reckoned in the number of the poets who were called the Pleiades, and who flourished under Ptolemy Philadelphus, king of Egypt. The best edition of “Lycophron,” is that at Oxford, 1697, by Dr. (afterwards archbishop) Potter; re-printed therein 1701, folio. A few years ago, the rev. Henry Meen, B. D. published “Remarks” on the “Cassandra,” which are highly judicious, and his conjectures in illustration of the obscurities of Lycophron, plausible and happy.

, the celebrated lawgiver of Sparta, flourished, according to the most judicious modern chronologers, about 898 years before the Christian aera. Plutarch seems to think that he was the fifth in descent from Procles, and the tenth from Hercules. When the sceptre devolved to him by the death of his brother Polydectes, the widow of that prince was pregnant. He was no sooner assured of this, than he determined to hold the sovereign power in trust only, in case the child should prove a son, and took the title of Prodicus or Protector, instead of that of king. It is added, that he had the virtue to resist the offers of the queen, who would have married him, with the dreadful promise that no son should be born to intercept his views. A son at length was born, and publicly presented by him to the people, from whose joy on the occasion he named the infant Charilaus, i. e. the people’s joy. Lycurgus was at this time a young man, and the state of Sparta was too turbulent and licentious for him to introduce any system of regulation, without being armed with some more express authority. How long he continued to administer the government is uncertain; probably till his nephew was of age to take it into his own hands. After resigning it, howeyer, he did not long remain in Sparta, but went as a traveller to visit other countries and study their laws, particularly those of Crete, which were highly renowned for their excellence, and had been instituted by Rhadamanthus and Minos, two illustrious legislators, who pretended to have received their laws from Jupiter. Lycurgus passed some years in this useful employment, but he had left behind him such a reputation for wisdom and justice, that when the corruption and confusion of the state became intolerable, he was recalled by a public invitation to assume the quality of legislator, and to new model the government.

Lycurgus willingly returned to undertake the task thus devolved upon him, and, having obtained, after various difficulties, the co-operation of the kings, and of the various orders of the people, he formed that extraordinary system of government which has been the wonder of all subsequent ages, but which has been too much detailed by various authors, for us to enter into the particulars. When with invincible courage, unwearied perseverance, and a judgment and penetration still more extraordinary, he had formed and executed the most singular plan that ever was devised, he waited for a time to see his great machine in motion; and finding it proceed to his wish, he had now no other object but to secure its duration. For this purpose he convened the kings, senate, and people, told them that he wished to visit Delphi, to consult the oracle on the constitution he had formed, and engaged them all to bind themselves by a most solemn oath, that nothing should be altered before his return. The approbation of the oracle he received, but he returned no more, being determined to bind his countrymen indissolubly to the observance of his laws, and thinking his life, according to the enthusiastic patriotism of those times, a small sacrifice to secure the welfare of his country. Different accounts are given of the place and manner of his death. According to some authors, he died by voluntary abstinence. One tradition says, that he lived to a good old age in Crete, and dying a natural death, his body was burned, according to the practice of the age, and his relics, pursuant to his own request, scattered in the sea; lest if his bones or ashes had ever been carried to Sparta, the Lacedemonians might have thought themselves free from the obligation of their oath, to preserve his laws unaltered. He is supposed to have died after the year 873 B. C. His laws were abrogated by Philopaemen in the year 188 B. C.; but the Romans very soon re-established them.

, an Athenian orator, contemporary with Demosthenes, was born about 408 years before the Christian acra, and died about or after 328. He was an Athenian, and the son of a person named Lycophron. He studied philosophy under Plato, and rhetoric under Isocrates. He was of the most exalted character for integrity, in which he was severely scrupulous; a strenuous defender of liberty, a perpetual opposer of Philip and Alexander, and a firm friend of Demosthenes. As a magistrate, he proceeded with severity against criminals, but kept a register of all his proceedings, which, on quitting his office, he submitted to public inspection. When he was about to die, he publicly offered his actions to examination, and refuted the only accuser who appeared against him. He was one of the thirty orators whom the Athenians refused to give up to Alexander. One oration of his, against Leocrates, is still extant, and has been published in the collections of Aldus, Taylor, and Reiske. His eloquence partook of the manly severity and truth of his character.

, an ancient English poet, is recorded as one of the immediate successors of Chaucer. The few dates that have been recovered of his history are, that he was ordained a sub-deacon in 1339; a deacon in 1393, and a priest in 1397; from these it has been surmised that he was born about 1375, that is, twenty-five years before the death of Chaucer. There is a note of Wanley’s in the Harleian Catalogue (2251. 3.) which insinuates as if Lydgate did not die till 1482. This Dr. Percy thinks too long a date; he was, however, living in 1446, since in his “Philomela” he mentions the death of Henry duke of Warwick, who died that year. Some authorities place his death in 1461, and this date Mr. Ellis thinks is not improbable.

He was, says Warton, who of all our modern critics has considered him with most attention, a monk of the Benedictine abbey of Bury in Suffolk. After a short education at Oxford, he travelled into France and Italy; and returned a complete master of the language and the literature of both countries. He chiefly studied the Italian and French poets, particularly Dante, Boccaccio, and Alain Chartier; and became so distinguished a proficient in polite learning, that he opened a school in his monastery, for teaching the sons of the nobility the arts of versification, and the elegancies of composition. Yet, although philology was his object, he was not unfamiliar with the fashionable philosophy: he was not only a poet and a rhetorician, but a geometrician, an astronomer, a theologist, and a disputant. Mr. Warton is of opinion that he made considerable additions to those amplifications of our language, in which Chaucer, Gower, and Hoccleve, led the way; and that be is the first of our writers whose style is clothed wjth that perspicuity in which the English phraseology appears at this day to an English reader.

Lydgate’s pieces are very numerous. Ritson has given a list of two hundred and fifty-one, some of which he admits may not be Lydgate’s, but he supposes, on the other hand, that he may be the author of many others that are anonymous. His most esteemed works are his “Story of Thebes,” his “Fall of Princes,” and his “History, Siege, and Destruction of Troy.” The first is printed by Speght in his edition of Ghaucer; the second, the “Fall of Princes,” or “Boke of Johan Bochas,” (first printed by Pinson in 1494, and several times since,) is a translation from Boccaccio, or rather from a French paraphrase of his work “De casibus Virorum et Feminarum illustrium.” The “History, &c. of Troy” was first printed by Pinson in 1513, but more correctly by Marshe in 1555. This was once the most popular of his works, and the inquisitive reader will find much curious information in it, although he may not be able to discover such poetical beauties as can justify its original popularity. That popularity was, indeed, says Mr. Ellis, excessive and unbounded; and it continued without much diminution during, at least, two centuries. To this the praises of succeeding writers bear ample testimony: but it is confirmed by a most direct and singular evidence. An anonymous writer has taken the pains to modernize the entire poem, consisting of about 28,000 verses, to change the ancient context, and almost every rhyme, and to throw the whole into six-line stanzas; and after all he published it with the name of Lydgate, tinder the title of “The Life and Death of Hector,” 1614, folio, printed by Thomas Purfoot. Of the general merits of Lydgate, Warton has spoken very favourably; Percy, Ritson, and Pinkerton, with contempt; and Mr. Ellis with the caution of a man of correct taste and judgment.

, an eminent English scholar, was born at Alkrington or Okerton, near Banbury in Oxfordshire, in 1572. His father, observing his natural talents, sent him to Winchester school, where he was admitted a scholar on the foundation, at thirteen; and, being elected thence to New-college in Oxford, was put under the tuition of Dr. (afterwards sir) Henry Martin, who became so well known during the rebellion. Mr. Lydiat was made probationer fellow in 1591, and two years after, actual fellow. Then taking his degree in arts, he applied himself to astronomy, mathematics, and divinity, in the last of which studies he was very desirous of continuing; but, finding a great defect in his memory and utterance, he chose rather to resign his fellowship, which he could not hold without entering the church, and live upon his small patrimony. This was in 1603; and he spent seven years after in finishing and printing such books as he had begun when in college. He first appeared as an author in 1605, by publishing his “Tractatus de variis annorum formis.” Of this he published a defence in 1607, against the censures of Joseph Scaliger, whom he more directly attacked in his “Emendatio Temporum ab initio mundi hue usque compendio facta, contra Scaligerum et alios,” 1609. This he dedicated to prince Henry, eldest son of James I. He was chronographer and cosmographer to that prince, who had a great respect for him, and, had he lived, would certainly have made a provision for him. In 1609, he became acquainted with Dr. Usher, afterwards archbishop of Armagh, who took him into Ireland, and placed him in the college at Dublin, where he continued two years; and then purposing to return to England, the lord-deputy and chancellor of Ireland made him, at his request, a joint promise of a competent support, upon his coming back thither. This appears to have been the mastership of the school at Armagh, endowed with 50l. per annum in laud.

When he came to England, which appears to have been in 1611, he is supposed to have been married, and to Usher’s sister; but for either supposition there seems very little foundation. Soon after his return, however, the rectory of Okerton becoming void, was offered to him; and though while he was fellow of New-college, he had refused the offer of it by his father, who was the patron, yet he now accepted it, and was instituted in 1612. Here he seems to have lived happily for many years: but being imprudently security for the debts of a near relation, which he was unable to pay, he was successively imprisoned at Oxford, the King’s-bench, and elsewhere, in 1629, or 1630, and remained a prisoner till sir William Boswell, a great patron of learned men, joining with Dr. Pink, warden of New-college, and Dr. Usher, paid the debt, and released him; and archbishop Laud also, at the request of sir Henry Martin, gave his assistance on this occasion . He had no sooner got his liberty, than, out of an ardent zeal to promote literature and the honour of his country, he petitioned Charles I for his protection and encouragement to travel into Turkey, Ethiopia, and the Abyssinian empire, in searcli of manuscripts relating to civil or ecclesiastical history, or any other branch of learning, and to print them in England. For the farther advancement of this design, he also requested the king would apply, by his ambassadors and ministers, to such princes as were in alliance with him, for a similar privilege to be granted to Lydiat and his assigns: this was a spirited design, but it was impossible for the king at that unhappy period to pay attention to it.

This disappointment, however, did not diminish his loyalty, and on that account he was a great sufferer during the rebellion. He was a man of undaunted mind, and talked frequently and warmly in behalf both of the king and the bishops, refused to comply with the demands of money made upon him by the parliament army, and with great personal courage defended his books and papers against their attempts to seize them. For these offences he was four times plundered by some troops of the parliament, at Compton-house in Warwickshire, to the value of at least 70l.; was twice carried away from his house at Okerton; once to Warwick, and another time to Bunbury; he was treated infamously by the soldiers, and so much debarred from decent necessaries, that he could have no change of linen for a considerable time, without borrowing from some charitable person. At length, after he had lived at his parsonage several years, in indigence and obscurity, he died April 3, 1646, and was interred the next day in the chancel of Okerton church, which had been rebuilt by him. A stone was laid over his grave in 1669, by the society of New-college, who also erecied an honorary monument, with an inscription to his memory, in the cloister of their college.

In his person he was low in stature, and of mean appearance. In the matter of church discipline and ceremonies he is said to have thought with the non-conformists, but not enough, it would appear, to gain their protection. He was, however, highly esteemed by his learned contemporaries, particularly primate Usher, sir Adam Newton, secretary, and sir Thomas Challoner, chamberlain to prince Henry, Dr. J. Bainbridge, Mr. Henry Briggs, Dr. Peter Turner, and others: and some foreigners did not scruple to rank him with Mr. Joseph Mede, and even with, lord Bacon. Yet the memory of this learned man was not of long duration, for when his misfortunes were alluded to by Dr. Johnson in his “Vanity of Human Wishes,” in these lines,

Hear Lydiat’s life, and Galileo’s end"

, a learned linguist and antiquary, the author of an excellent dictionary of the Saxon and Gothic languages, was born at Totnes in Devonshire, in 1704. He was educated partly at home, under his father, who kept a school at Totnes, partly under other preceptors, but chiefly (being obliged to return home from consumptive complaints) by his own private care and application. At the age of nineteen, he was admitted at Hart hall (now Hertford college) in Oxford, took his bachelor’s degree in 1716, was ordained deacon in 1717, and priest in 1719, soon after which he was presented to the living of Houghton-parva in Northamptonshire. In this retreat he laid the foundation of his great proficiency in the Anglo-Saxon language. He became master of arts in 1722.

Having now qualified himself completely for a work of that nature, he undertook the arduous task of publishing the “Etymologicum Anglicanum” of Francis Junius, from the manuscript of the author in the Bodleian Library. To this undertaking he was led, as he tells us in his preface, by the commendations which Hickes and other learned antiquaries had given to that unpublished work. In the seventh year from the commencement of his design, he published the work, with many additions, and particularly that of an Anglo-Saxon Grammar prefixed. The work was received with the utmost approbation of the learned. In 1750, Mr. Lye became a member of the society of antiquaries, and about the same time was presented by the earl of Northampton to the vicarage of Yardley Hastings, on which accession he resigned his former living of Houghton; giving an illustrious example of primitive moderation, especially as he had hitherto supported his mother, and had still two sisters dependent upon him. The next publication which he issued, was that of the Gothic Gospels, undertaken at the desire of Eric Benzelius, bishop of Upsal, who had collated and corrected them. This, which he had been long preparing, appeared from the Oxford press in the same year, with a Gothic Grammar prefixed. His last years were employed chiefly in finishing for the press his own great work, the Anglo-Saxon and Gothic Dictionary, which was destined to owe that to another editor, which he had performed for Junius. His manuscript was just completed, and given to the printer, when he died at Yardley Hastings, in 1767; and was there buried, with a commendatory but just and elegant epitaph. His Dictionary was published in 1772, in two volumes folio, by the rev. Owen Manning, with a grammar of the two languages united, and some memoirs of the author, from which this account is taken. It appears by some original correspondence between Mr. Lye and Dr. Ducarel (for the perusal of which we are indebted to Mr. Nichols), that Mr. Lye had been employed on his dictionary a long time before 1765, and that he had almost relinquished the design from a dread of the labour and expence. In the labour he had none to share with him, but at the time above mentioned archbishop Seeker offered him a subscription of 50l. to forward the work, and he appears to have hoped for similar instances of liberality.

, a pious clergyman of the seventeenth century, was born about 1598, at Peysmere, near Newbury in Berkshire, of which place his father was rector. In 16 14 he became a commoner of Magdalen hall, Oxford, and a demy of Magdalen college in 1617. In 1622 he took his degree of M. A. and was then chosen a fellow. In 1631 he was admitted to the reading of the sentences, and, having taken orders, was presented to the living of Shirburne, in Dorsetshire, by John Earl of Bristol. Here, says Wood, “he was very much resorted to for his edifying and practical way of preaching;” and appears indeed to have deserved the affections of his flock, by the most constant diligence in discharging the duties of his office. He divided his day into the following portions: nine hours for study, three for visits and conferences with his parishioners, three for prayers and devotion, two for his affairs, and the rest for his refreshment. He divided likewise his estate into three parts, one for the use of his family, one for a reserve in case of future wants, and one for pious uses. His parish he divided into twentyeight parts, to be visited in twenty-eight days every month, “leaving,” says one of his biographers, “knowledge where he found ignorance, justice where he found oppression, peace where he found contention, and order where he found irregularity.”

A man of this disposition was not likely to add to the turbulence of the times; and although he is said to have inclined to the presbyterian party, and was chosen one of the assembly of divines, he never sat among them, but remained on his living, employed in preaching, catechizing, &c. until his death, Oct. 3, 1653. Fuller and Wood unite in their praises of Mr, Lyford’s character, and in their opinion of his writings, which, says Wood, “savour much of piety, zeal, and sincerity, but shew him to have been a zealous Calvinist.” Dr. Walker informs us that “he sufferred much from the faction, both in his name and ministry, and they wondered that so holy a man as he was, should doat so much on kings, bishops, the common prayer, and ceremonies.” He bequeathed the sum of 120l. to Magdalen college “in gratitude for the advantages which he had there enjoyed, and in restitution for a sum of money, which, according to the corrupt custom of those times, he had received for the resignation of his fellowship.”

Although he took no active part in the disputes of the nation, he gave his opinion on some subjects arising out of them, respecting toleration, in a work entitled “Cases of conscience propounded in the time of Rebellion,” which bishop Kennet in his “Chronicle” says is written, with plainness, modesty, and impartiality. His other works are, 1. “Principles of Faith and of a good Conscience,” Lond. 1642; Oxford, 1652, 8vo. 2. “An Apology for our public Ministry and infant Baptism,” ibid. 1652, 1653, 4 to. 3. “The plain man’s senses exercised to discern both good and evil; or a discovery of the errors, heresies, and blasphemies of these times,” ibid. 1655, 4to, with some other pious tracts.

, a Danish statesman and scholar, was descended from an ancient family, a branch of the counts of Guerini, in the dukedom of Tuscany, which had settled in Germany. He was born in 1703, at the castle of Lubbenau, and educated at Jena and Halle, at both which places he applied with the utmost assiduity to the Greek and Latin languages, and even to theology. After travelling in various parts of Europe, and visiting England in 1732, he obtained an appointment at the court of Denmark; but, being ambitious of a more public station, he volunteered his services in the home and foreign department, and displayed so much activity that he was dispatched by Christian VI. to East Friezland, to settle the affairs of the dowager princess, Sophia Caroline, sister to the queen. This mission he discharged to the satisfaction of his sovereign; and was appointed in 1735 ambassador extraordinary to the court of Stockholm, where he resided until 1740. On his return to Denmark the king conferred on him an office in Holstein, and a few years after he was sent as ambassador extraordinary to Petersburgh. On his return in 1752 he was appointed governor of the counties of Oldenburg and Delmanhorsr, to which he retired with his family, and where he spent his time in the composition of literary works, the first of which, a translation of “Seneca de Beneficiis,” with excellent notes, was printed in 1753. Having renewed the study of the Greek language while at Oldenburgh, he made so much progress, that by comparing the best commentators he was enabled to write a good paraphrase on “The Epistles of St. Paul,” &c. which was afterwards published. He wrote also several moral essays.

In 1757 he had an opportunity again of rendering himself conspicuous in a political capacity, by the part which he took in the famous convention of Closter-seven, entered into between the duke of Richelieu, commander of the French forces, and the duke of Cumberland, who was then at the head of the allied army. In this, however, he met with many difficulties, as the history of that convention shows; and the king of France and his Britannic majesty at last refused their ratification. In March 1763 he was invested with the order of the elephant by Frederic V. the highest honour his sovereign could bestow; but some complaints being made against him on account of his administration, which were not altogether groundless, he resigned in Oct. 1765. The remainder of his life he passed in retirement at Lubennau, where he died of a dropsy of the breast, Nov. 1781, in the seventy-third year of his age. He was a man of considerable learning, elegant address, and various accomplishments. His works are, I. A translation of “Seneca de Beneficiis,” Hamburgh, 1753, 8vo. 2. A translation of Seneca on “The Shortness of Life,” 1754. 3. “Der Sonderling,” or “The Singular Man,” Hanover, 1761, 8vo, and in French, Copenhagen, 1777, 8vo, a work which, according to his biographer Busching, is well worth a perusal. 4. “Historical, Political, and Moral Miscellanies,” in four parts, 1775 1777, 8vo. 5 Paraphrases on “The Epistles,” printed at various times, 1754 1770. 6. “The real state of Europe in the year 1737,” and several other articles in Busching’s Magazine for History and Geography.

, a learned English gentleman, was descended from a family in Dorsetshire, and born in 1579. Being sent to Westminster school, he was admitted scholar upon the foundation, and thence elected student of Christ Church, Oxford, in 1596. Four years afterwards he commenced B. A. about which time he became heir to a considerable estate, was made a justice of peace, and knighted by king James in 1613. He obtained a seat in the House of Commons in several parliaments; but he is entitled to a place in this work as a man of learning, and author of several books, which had considerable reputation in their day. He died June 14, 1636, and was interred in the chancel of the church at Cobham in Surrey. The night before he died, being exhorted by a friend to give some testimony of his constancy in the reformed religion, because it was not unlikely that his adversaries might say of him, as they did of Beza, Reynolds, King bishop of London, and bishop Andrews, that they recanted the protestant religion, and were reconciled to the church of Rome before their death; he professed, that if he had a thousand souls, he would pawn them all upon the truth of that religion established by law in the church of England, and which he had declared and maintained in his “Via tuta.” Accordingly, in his funeral sermon by Dr. Daniel Featly, he is not only styled “a general scholar, an accomplished gentleman, a gracious Christian, a zealous patriot, and an able champion for truth; but” one that stood always as well for the discipline, as the doctrine of the church of England; and whose actions, as well as writings, were conformable both to the laws of God and canons and constitutions of that church."

His works are, 1. “Ancient characters of the visible Church, 1625.” 2. “Via tuta, the safe way, &c.” reprinted several times, and translated into Latin, Dutch, and French, printed at Paris, 1647, from the sixth edition published in 1636, 12mo, under the title of “Popery confuted by Papists,” &c. 3. “Via devia, the by-way,” &c. 1630 and 1632, 8vo. 4. “A Case for the Spectacles; or, a Defence of the Via tuta,” in answer to a book written by J. R. called “A pair of Spectacles,” &c. with a supplement in Vindication of sir Humphrey, by the publisher, Dr. Daniel Featly. A book entitled “A pair of Spectacles for sir Humphrey Lynde,” was printed at Roan, 1631, in 8vo, by Robert Jenison, or Frevil, a Jesuit. 5. “An account of Bertram, with observations concerning the censures upon his Tract De corpore et sanguine Christi,” prefixed to an edition of it at London, 1623, 8vo, and reprinted there in 1686, 8vo, by Dr. Matthew Brian.

, an eminent naturalist, was born at Maestricht July 22, 1707. He was of a French family, originally of Lorraine, whence they were obliged to take refuge in Switzerland, on account of their religion. His father, Benjamin Lyonet, was a protestant minister at Heufdon. In his early years he displayed uncommon activity both of body and mind, with a memory so prompt, that he acquired an exact knowledge of nine languages, ancient and modern, and in the farther pursuit of his academical studies at Leyden, made great progress in logic, philosophy, geometry, and algebra. It was his father’s wish that he should study divinity, with a view to the church, and it appears that he might have passed by an easy transition to any of the learned professions. The law, however, was his ultimate destination; and he applied himself to this with so much zeal, that he was promoted the first year, when he delivered a thesis “on the use of the torture,” which was published, and gained him considerable reputation. At what time he settled at the Hague we are not told, but there he was made decypherer, translator of the Latin and French languages, and patent-master to the States General. It was now that he turned his attention to natural history, especially entomology, and undertook an historical description of such insects as are found about the Hague; and as, among his other accomplishments, he understood drawing, he enriched his work with a great number of plates, which were much admired by the connoisseurs. In 1741 a French translation of Lesser’s “Theology of Insects” was printed at the Hague, which induced Mr. Lyonet to defer the publication of his own work, and make some observations on Lesser’s, to which he added two beautiful plates designed by himself. His observations were thought of so much importance that Reaumur caused the above translation to be reprinted at Paris, merely on account of them. Lyonet afterwards executed drawings of the fresh water polypes for Mr. Trembley’s beautiful work, in 1744. Wandelaar had engraved the first five plates of this work, and being rather dilatory in producing the rest, Lyonet took a single lesson in engraving, and executed the others himself in a manner which astonished not only amateurs, but experienced artists. In 1748 his reputation procured him the honour of being elected a member of the royal society of London, as he xvas afterwards of other learned societies in Europe. In 1764- appeared his magnificent work on. the caterpillar, “Traite anatomique de la Chenille qui ronge le bois de Saule.” In order to enable such as might be desirous of following him in his intricate and astonishing discoveries respecting the structure of this animal, he published, in the Transactions of the Dutch society of sciences, at Haerlem, a description and plate of the instrument and tools he had invented for the purpose of dissection, and likewise of the method he used to ascertain the degree of strength of his magnifying glasses. Mr. Lyonet died at the Hague, Jan. 10, 1789, leaving some other works on entomology unfinished, one of the most extensive collections of shells in Europe, and a very fine cabinet of pictures. In his early years, Mr. Lyonet practised sculpture and portrait-painting. Of the former, his Apollo and the Muses, a basso relievo cut in palm wood, is mentioned by Van Gool, in his “Review of the Dutch Painters,” as a masterpiece. To these many accomplishments Mr. Lyonet added a personal character which rendered him admired during his long life, and deeply regretted when his friends and his country were deprived of his services.

, son of a Polish Jew, who was a silversmith, and teacher of Hebrew at Cambridge, was born there, in 1739. He displayed wonderful talents as a young man; and shewed very early a great inclination to learning, particularly mathematics; but though Dr. Smith, then master of Trinity-college, offered to put him to school at his own expence, he would go only for a day or two, saying, “he could learn more by himself in an hour than in a day with his master.” He began the study of botany in. 1755, which he continued to his death; and could remember, not only the Linniean names of almost all the English plants, but even the synonyma of the old botanists, which form a strange and barbarous farrago of great bulk; and had collected large materials for a “Flora Cantabrigiensis,” describing fully every part of each plant from the life, without being obliged to consult, or being liable to be misled by, former authors. In 1758 he obtained much celebrity by publishing a treatise “on Fluxions,” dedicated to his patron, Dr. Smith; and in 1763 a work entitled “Fasciculus plantaruui circa Cantabrigiam nascentium, quae post Raium observatae fuere,” 8vo. Mr. Banks (now sir Joseph Banks, bart. and president of the royal society), whom he first instructed in this science, sent for him to Oxford, about 1762 or 1763, to read lectures; which he did with great applause, to at least sixty pupils; but could not be induced to make a long absence from Cambridge. He had a salary of a hundred pounds per annum for calculating the “Nautical Almanack,” and frequently received presents from the board of longitude for his inventions. He could read Latin and French with ease; but wrote the former ill; had studied the English history, and could quote whole passages from the Monkish writers verbatim. He was appointed by the board of longitude to go with captain Phipps (afterwards lord Mulgrave) to the North pote in 1773, and made the astronomical and other mathematical calculations, printed in the account of that voyage. After his return he married and settled in London, where, on May 1, 1775, he died of the measles. He was then engaged in publishing a complete edition of all the works of Dr. Halley. His “Calculations in Spherical Trigonometry abridged,” were printed in “Philosophical Transactions,*' vol. LXI. art. 46. After his death his name appeWed in the title-page of” A Geographical Dictionary,“of which the astronomical parts were said to be” taken from the papers of the late Mr. Israel Lyons, of Cambridge, author of several valuable mathematical productions, and astronomer in lord Mnlgrave’s voyage to the Northern hemisphere.“It remains to be noticed, that a work entitled” The Scholar’s Instructor, or Hebrew Grammar, by Israel Lyons, Teacher of the Hebrew Tongue in the University of Cambridge: the second edition, with many Additions and Emendations which the Author has found necessary in his long course of teaching Hebrew,“Cambridge, 1757, 8vo, was the production of his father; as was a treatise printed at the Cambridge press, under the title of” Observations and Enquiries relating to various parts of Scripture History, 1761," published by subscription at two shillings and six-pence. He died in August 1770, and was buried, agreeably to his own desire, although contrary to the Jewish principles, in Great St. Mary’s Church-yard, Cambridge. He was on this occasion carried through the church, and his daughter Judith read some form of interment-service over his grave. He had resided near forty years at Cambridge.

, or Lyranus, a celebrated Franciscan, in the 14th century, and one of the most learned men of his time, was born of Jewish parents at Lyre, a town in Normandy, in the diocese of Evreux. After having been instructed in rabbinical learning, he embraced Christianity, entered among the Franciscans at Verneuil, 1291, and taught afterwards at Paris with great credit. He rose by his merit to the highest offices in his order, and also gained the esteem of the great; queen Jane, countess of Burgundy, and wife of Philip the Long, appointed him one of her executors in 1325. He died at a very advanced age, October 23, 1340, leaving some “Postils,” or short Commentaries on the whole Bible, which were formerly in considerable reputation the most scarce edition of them is that of Rome, 1472, seven vols, folio; and the best that of Antwerp, 1634, six vols. folio. These commentaries are incorporated in the “Biblia Maxima,” Paris, 1660, nineteen vols. folio; and there is a French translation of them, Paris, 1511, and 1512, five vols. folio. He published also “A Disputation against the Jews,” in 8vo, a treatise against a particular rabbi, who made use of the New Testament to combat Christianity. These, and his other works not printed, show the author to have had a much more perfect knowledge of the Holy Scriptures than was common at that time.

, a learned Protestant theologian, was born at Winendeen in the territory of Wittemberg, in the year 1552. He was educated at Tubingen, at the expence of the duke of Saxony, and became a minister of the church of Wittemberg in 1577. He was one of the first to sign the “Concord,” and was deputed, with James Andreas, to procure the signature of the divines and ministers in the electorate of Saxony. He died at Dresden, where he was then minister, February 14, 1601, aged 50, leaving a great number of works, both in German and Latin. The principal are, 1. “Explanations of Genesis,” in six parts, or six volumes, 4to, each of which bears the name of the patriarch whose history it explains. 2. “Comraentaries on the two first chapters of Daniel,” 2 vols. 4to. 3. “A Paraphrase on the History of the Passion,” 4to, or 12mo. 4. “Explanation of Psalm CI,” 8vo. 5. “Commentaries on the Minor Prophets,” 4to, published at Leipsic, 1609, by Poly carp Lyserus, his great-grandson, who has added some remarks on Haggai, according to his ancestor’s method. 6. “Commentaries on the Epistle to the Hebrews.” 7. “Centuria qutestionum de articulis libri Christiana; Concordia?,” 4to. 8. “Christianismus, Papismus, Calvinismus,” 8vo. 9. “Harmonia Calvinianorum et Photinianorum in Doctrina de Sacra Cena,” 4to. 10. “Vindiciae Lyserianse, an sincretismus in rebus fidei cum Calvinianis coli prodest,” 4to. II. “Disputationes IX. Anti Steiniance quibus examinatur defensio concionis Irenicse Pauli Steinii,” 4to. 12. “Harmonia Evangelistarum continuata ad Christianam Harmoniam et ejusdem Epitome,” 8vo. 13. “Disput. de Deo patre Creatore coeli et terrae,” 4to. 14. “De seternitate Filii Dei,” 4to. 15. “De sacramentis decades duae,” 4to. He published also the “History of the Jesuits,” written by Elias Hasenmuller, who having quitted that society, and turned Lutheran, retired to Wittemberg, and died there before his work was printed. Father Gretser attacked this history, and Lyserus answered him by “Strena ad Gretserum pro honorario ejus,” 8vo.

, another learned protestant, of the same family as the preceding, but of opposite character, may be introduced here as the precursor of the celebrated Martin Madan, in supporting the doctrine of polygamy. Lyserus is said to have been so infatuated with the ambition of founding a sect of polygamists, that he sacrificed his life and fortune to prove that polygamy is not only permitted, but even commanded in certain cases; and travelled about Europe, endeavouring to find some countries that would adopt his opinion. At length, after many fruitless journeys, Lyserus took the singular resolution of visiting France, with a view to repair his fortune by chess, a game he was perfectly master of, and accordingly settled at Versailles. Here, however, he likewise failed, and having, when sick, set out to walk from Versailles to Paris, he encreased his disorder so much, that he died at a house on the road, in 1684. He left numerous pieces, under fictitious names, in favour of polygamy, the most considerable of which is entitled “Polygamia triumphatrix,” 1682, 4to. Brunsmanus, a minister of Copenhagen, has refuted this in a book entitled “Polygamia triumphata,” 1689, 8vo; and again in another work, “Monogamia victrix,” 1689, 8vo. This poor man’s attachment to a plurality of wives appears the more wonderful, Bayle observes, because he had been much embarrassed by one. Id less than a century he was succeeded in his opinions by the rev. M. Madan, of whom hereafter.

, an eminent Greek orator, was born at Syracuse, about the year 459 B. C. He was educated at Athens, and became a teacher of rhetoric, and composed orations for others, but does not appear to have been a pleader. Of his orations, which are said to have amounted to three or four hundred, only thirty-four remain. He died in the eighty-first year of his age, and in the 378th year B.C. Cicero and Quintilian give him a very high character, and suppose that there is nothing of their kind more perfect than his orations. Lysias lived at a somewhat earlier period than Isocrates; and exhibits a model of that manner which the ancients call the “tenuis vel subtilis.” He has none of the pomp of Isocrates. He is every where pure and attic in the highest degree; simple and unaffected; but wants force, and is sometimes frigid in his compositions. In the judicious comparison which Dionysius of Halicarnassus makes of the merits of Lysias and Isocrates, he ascribes to Lysias, as the distinguishing character of his manner, a certain grace or elegance arising from simplicity: “the style of Lysias has gracefulness for its nature; that of Isocrates seems to have it.” In the art of narration, as distinct, probable, and persuasive, he holdsf Lysias to be superior to all orators; at the same time he admits, that his composition is more adapted to private litigation than to great subjects. He convinces, but he does not elevate nor animate. The magnificence and splendour of Isocrates are more suited to great occasions. He is more agreeable than Lysias; and in dignity of sentiment far excels him. The first edition of Lysias is that by Aldus, folio, 1513, in the first part of the “Rhetorum Gnecorum orationes.” The best modern editions are that of Taylor, beautifully and correctly printed by Bowyer, in 1739, 4to; of Reiske, at Leipsic, 1772, 8vo and of Auger at Paris, 1782. Auger also published an excellent French translation of Lysias in 1783.

, a celebrated statuary among the ancients, was a native of Sicyon, and flourished in the time of Alexander the Great. He was bred a locksmith, and followed that business for a while; but, by the advice of Eupompus, a painter, he applied himself to painting, which, however, he soon quitted for sculpture, and being thought to execute his works with more ease than the ancients, he became more employed than any other artist. The statue of a man wiping and anointing himself after bathing was particularly excellent: Agrippa placed it before his baths at Rome. Tiberius, who was charmed with it, and not able to resist the desire of being master of it, when he came to the empire, took it into his own apartment, and placed another very fine one in its place. But the Roman people demanding, in a full theatre, that he would replace the first statue, he found it necessary, notwithstanding his power, to comply with their solicitations, in order to appease the tumult. Another of Lysippus’s capital pieces was a statue of the sun, represented in a car drawn by four horses; this statue was worshipped at Rhodes. He made also several statues of Alexander and his favourites, which were brought to Rome by Metellus, after he had reduced the Macedonian empire. He particularly excelled in the representation of the hair, which he more happily expressed than any of his predecessors in the art. He also made his figures less than the life, that they might be seen such as statues appear when placed, as usual, at some height; and when he was charged with this fault, he answered, "That other artists had indeed represented men such as nature had made them, but, for his part, he chose to represent them such as they appeared to be to the eye/' He had three sons, who were all his disciples, and ac quired great reputation in the art,

, an elegant English writer, was the eldest son of sir Thomas Lyttelton, of Hagley, in Worcestershire, bart. and was born in 1709. He came into the world two months before the usual time, and was imagined by the nurse to be dead, but upon closer inspiection was found alive, and with some difficulty reared. At Eton school, where he was educated, he was so much distinguished that his exercises were recommended as models to his school-fellows. From Eton he went to Christ Church, where he retained the same reputation of superiority, and displayed his abilities to the public in a poem on Blenheim. He was a very early writer, both in verse and prose; his “Progress of Love,” and his “Persian Letters,” having both been written when he was very young. After a short residence at Oxford, he began his travels in 1728, and visited France and Italy. From Rome he sent those elegant verses which are prefixed to the works of Pope, whom he consulted in 1730 respecting his four pastorals. Pope made some alterations in them, which may be seen in Bowles’s late edition of that poet’s works (vol. IV. p. 139). We find Pope, a few years afterwards, in a letter to Swift, speak thus of him: He is “one of those whom his own merit has forced me to contract an intimacy with, after I had sworn never to love a man more, since the sorrow it cost me to have loved so many now dead, banished, or unfortunate, I mean Mr. Lyttelton, one of the worthiest of the rising generation,” &c. In another letter Mr. Lyttelton is mentioned in a manner with which Dr. Warton says he was displeased .

When he returned from his continental tour, he was (May 4, 1729) made page of honour to the princess royal. He also obtained a seat in parliament, and soon distinguished himself among the most eager opponents of sir Robert Walpole, though his father, who was one of the lords of the admiralty, always voted with the court. For many years the name of George Lyttelton was seen in every account of every debate in the house of commons. Among the great leading questions, he opposed the standing army, and the excise, and supported the motion for petitioning the king to remove Walpole. The prince of Wales having, in consequence of a quarrel with the king, been obliged to leave St. James’s in 1737, kept a separate court, and opened his arms to the opponents of the ministry. Mr. Lyttelton was made his secretary, and was supposed to have great influence in the direction of his conduct. His name consequently occurs, although not very often, in Doddington’s Diary. He persuaded the prince, whose business it was now to be popular, tbat he would advance his character by patronage. Mallet was made under-secretary, with 2001. a year; and Thomson had a pension of 100l. The disposition of the two men must account for the difference in the sums. Mallet could do more political service than the honest-hearted Thomson. For Thomson, however, Mr. Lyttelton always retained his kindness, and was able at last to place him at ease. Moore courted his favour by an apologetical poem called “The Trial of Selim,” and was paid with kind words, which, as is common, says Dr. Johnson, raised great hopes, that at last were disappointed. This matter, however, is differently stated in our account of Moore.

Mr. Lyttelton now stood in the first rank of opposition; and Pope, who was incited, it is not easy to say how, to increase the clamour against the ministry, commended him among the other patriots. This drew upon him the reproaches of Mr. Henry Fox, who, in the House of Commons, was weak enough to impute to him as a crime his intimacy with a lampooner so unjust and licentious. Lyttelton supported his friend, and replied, “that he thought it an honour to be received into the familiarity of so great a poet.” While he was thus conspicuous, he married (1741) Miss Lucy Fortescue, sister to Matthew lord Fortescue, of Devonshire, by whom he had a son, Thomas, and two daughters, and with whom he appears to have lived in the highest degree of connubial felicity: but human pleasures are short; she died in childbed about six years afterwards (1747); and he solaced his grief by writing a “Monody” to her memory, without, however, condamning himself to perpetual solitude and sorrow; for soon after he sought to find the same happiness again in a second marriage with the daughter of sir Robert Rich (1749); but the experiment was unsuccessful, and he was for some years before his death separated from this lady. “She was,” says Gilbert West in a letter to Dr. Doddridge, “an intimate and dear friend of his former wife, which is some kind of proof of her merit; I mean of the goodness of her heart, for that is the chief merit which Mr. Lyttelton esteems; and I hope she will not in this disappoint his expectations; in all other points she is well suited to him; being extremely well accomplished in languages, music, painting, &c. very sensible, and well bred.” This lady died Sept. 17, 1795.

When, after a long struggle, Wai pole gave way, and honour and profit were distributed among his conquerors, Lyttelton was made in (1744) one of the lords of the treasury; and from that time was engaged in supporting the schemes of ministry. Politics did not, however, so much engage him as to withhold his thoughts from things of more importance. He had, in the pride of juvenile confidence, with the help of corrupt conversation, entertained doubts of the truth of Christianity; but he thought the time now come when it was no longer fit to doubt or believe by chance, and applied hiniself seriously to the great question. His studies being honest, ended in conviction. He found that Religion was true, and what he had learned he endeavoured to teach, by “Observations on the Conversion and Apostleship of St. Paul,” printed in 1747; a treatise to which infidelity has never been able to fabricate a specious answer. This book his father had the happiness of seeing, and expressed his pleasure in a letter which deserves to be inserted, and must have given to such a son a pleasure more easily conceived than described: “I have read your religious treatise with infinite pleasure and satisfaction. The style is fine and clear, the arguments close, cogent, and irresistible. May the King of kings, whose glorious cause you have so well defended, reward your pious labours, and grant that I may be found worthy, through the merits of Jesus Christ, to be an eye-witness of that happiness which I don't doubt He will bountifully bestow upon you! In the mean time, I shall never cease glorifying God, for having endowed you with such useful talents, and given me so good a son. Your affectionate father, Thomas Lyttelton.” When the university of Oxford conferred the degree of LL. D. on Mr. West for his excellent work on the “Resurrection,” the same honour is said to have been offered to our author for the above piece, but he declined it in a handsome manner, by saying that he chose not to be under any particular attachments, that, if he should happen to write any thing of the like kind for the future, it might not appear to proceed from any other motive whatsoever, but a pure desire of doing good.

A few years afterwards, in 1751, by the death of his father, he inherited the title of baronet, with a large estate, which, though perhaps he did not augment, he was careful to adorn, by a house of great elegance and expence, and by much attention to the decoration of his park at Hagley. As he continued his exertions in parliament, he was gradually advancing his claim to profit and preferment; and accordingly was made in 1754 cofferer and privy-counsellor. This place he exchanged next year for that of chancellor of the exchequer, an office, however, that required some qualifications which he soon perceived himself to want. It is an anecdote no less remarkable than true, that he never could comprehend the commonest rules of arithmetic. The year after, his curiosity led him into Wales; of which he has given an account, perhaps rather with too much affectation of delight, to Archibald Bower, a man of whom he had conceived an opinion more favourable than he seems to have deserved, and whom, having once espoused his interest and fame, he never was persuaded to disown. It must indeed have proceeded from a strong conviction of Bower’s innocence, however acquired, that such a man as Lyttelton adhered to him to the very last. About 1758, he prevented Garrick from bringing Bower on the stage in the character of a mock convert, to be shewn in various attitudes, in which the profligacy of his conduct was to be exposed: and a very few years before his own death, he declared to the celebrated Dr. Lardner his opinion of Bower in these words, “I have no more doubt of his having continued a firm protestant to the last hour of his life, than I have of my not being a papist myself.” About this time he published his “Dialogues of the Dead,” which were very eagerly read, though the production rather, as it seems, of leisure than of study, rather effusions than compositions. When, in the latter part of the last reign, the inauspicious commencement of the war made the dissolution of the ministry unavoidable, sir George Lyttelton, losing his employment with the rest, was raised to the peerage, Nov. 19, 1157, by the title of lord Lyttelton, baron of Frankley, in the county of Worcester. His last literary production was, “The History of Henry the Second,” 1764, elaborated by the researches and deliberations of twenty years, and published with the greatest anxiety, which Dr. Johnson, surely very improperly, ascribes to vanity. The story of the publication, however, we allow to be remarkable. The whole work was printed twice over, greatest part of it three times, and many sheets four or five times. The booksellers paid for the first impression; but the charges and repeated alterations of the press were at the expence of the author, whose ambitious accuracy is known to have cost him at least a thousand pounds. He began to print in 1755. Three volumes appeared in 1764; a second edition of them in 1767; a third edition in 1768 and the conclusion in 1771. Andrew Reid, a man not without considerable abilities, and not unacquainted with letters or with life, undertook to persuade the noble author, as he had persuaded himself, that he was master of the secret of punctuation; and, as fear begets credulity, he was employed, we know not at what price, to point the pages of “Henry the Second,” as if, said Johnson once in conversation, “another man could point his sense better than himself.” The book, however, was at last pointed and printed, and sent into the world. His lordship took money for his copy, of which, when he had paid the pointer, he probably gave the rest away; for he was very liberal to the indigent. When time brought the history to a third edition, Reid was either dead or discarded; and the superintendence of typography and punctuation was committed to a man originally a comb -maker, but then known by the style of Dr. Saunders. Something uncommon was probably expected, and something uncommon was at last done; for to the edition of Dr. Saunders is appended, what the world had hardly seen before, a list of errors of nineteen pages.

Lord Lyttelton had never the appearance of a strong or a healthy man; he had a slender uncompacted frame, and a meagre face: he lived, however, above sixty years, and then was seized with his last illness. Of his death this very affecting and instructive account has been given by his physician, Dr. Johnstone of Kidderminster. “On Sunday evening the symptoms of his lordship’s disorder, which for a week past had alarmed us, put on a fatal appearance, and his lordship believed himself to be a dying man. From this time he suffered by restlessness rather than pain; and though his nerves were apparently much fluttered, his mental faculties never seemed stronger, when he was thoroughly awake. His lordship’s bilious and hepatic complaints seemed alone not equal to the expected mournful event; his Iqng want of sleep, whether the consequence of the irritatton in the bowels, or, which is more probable, of causes of a different kind, accounts for his loss of strength, and for his death, very sufficiently. Though his lordship wished his approaching dissolution not to be lingering, he waited for it with resignation. He said, ‘ It is a folly, a keeping me in misery, now to attempt to prolong life;’ yet he was easily persuaded, for the satisfaction of others, to do or take any thing thought proper for him. On Saturday he had been remarkably better, and we were not without some hopes of his recovery. On Sunday, about eleven in the forenoon, his lordship sent for me, and said he felt a great hurry, and wished to have a little conversartion with me in order to divert it. He then proceeded to open the fountain of that heart, from whence goodness had so long flowed as from a copious spring. `Doctor,‘ said he, `you shall be my confessor: When I first set out in the world, I had friends who endeavoured to shake my belief in the Christian religion. I saw difficulties which staggered me; but I kept my mind open to conviction. The evidences and doctrines of Christianity, studied with attention, made me a most firm and persuaded believer of the Christian religion. I have made it the rule of my life, and it is the ground of my future hopes. I have erred and sinned; but have repented, and never indulged any vicious habit. In politics, and public life, I have made the public good the rule of my conduct. I never gave counsels which I did not at the time think the best. I have seen that I was sometimes in the wrong, but I did not err designedly. I have endeavoured, in private life, to do all the good in my power, and never for a moment could indulge malicious or unjust designs upon any person whatsoever.’ At another time he said, `I must leave my soul in the same state it was in before this illness; I find this a very inconvenient time for solicitude about any thing.‘ On the evening when the symptoms of death came on him, he said, `I shall die; but it will not be your fault.’ When lord and lady Valentia came to see his lordship, he gave them this solemn benediction, and said, `Be good, be virtuous, my lord. You must come to this.‘ Thus he continued giving his dying benediction to all arourvd him. On Monday morning a lucid interval gave some small hopes, but these vanished in the evening; and he continued dying, but with very little uneasiness, till Tuesday morning, August 22, when between seven and eight o’clock he expired, almost without a groan.” His lordship was buried at Hagley; with an inscription cut on the side of his lady’s monument.

He was succeeded by his son Thomas, second lord Lyttelton, of whom the following too just character is on record: “With great abilities generally very ill applied; with a strong sense of religion, which he never suffered to influence his conduct, his days were mostly passed in splendid misery; and in the painful change of the most extravagant gaiety, and the deepest despair. The delight, when he pleased, of the first and most select societies, he chose to pass his time, for the nio,st part, with the most profligate and abandoned of both iexes. Solitude was to fiim the most insupportable torment; and to banish refleo tion, he flew to Company whom he despised and ridiculed. His conduct was a subject of bitter regret both to his father and all his friends.” He closed this unhappy life, Nov. 27, 1779. Two volumes of “Letters” published in 1780 and 1782, though attributed to him, are known to have been the production of an ingenious writer yet living; and a quarto volume of “Poems,” published in 1780, was, as well as the “Letters,” publicly disowned by his executors, but as to the “Poems,” they added, “great part whereof are undoubtedly spurious.”

We have more pleasure, however, in returning to the character of George lord Lyttelton, which has been uniformly delineated by those who knew him best, in favourable colours. Of the various sketches which we have seen, we are inclined to give a place to the following, which, although somewhat long, is less known than those to be found in the accounts of his biographers, and appears to have been written by a near observer “Few chapters,” says the writer, “recorded in the annals of this country, ever united so many rare, valuable, and amiable qualities, as that of the late lord Lyttelton. Whether we consider this great man in public or private life, we are justified in affirming, that he abounded in virtues not barely sufficient to create reverence and esteem, but to insure him the love and admiration of all who knew him. Look upon him as a statesman, and a public man; where shall we find another, who always thought right and meant well, and who so seldom acted wrong, or was misled or mistaken in his ministerial, or senatorial conduct? Look upon his lordship in the humbler scene of private and domestic life; and if thou hadst the pleasure of knowing him, gentle reader, point out the breast warm or cold, that so copiously abounded with every gift and acquirement which indulgent nature could bestow, or the tutored mind improve and refine, to win and captivate mankind.

“His personal accomplishments, and the sweetness and pliability of his temper, which accompanied and swayed them, always recalled to my memory, that line of his own, only varying the sex his * Wit was Nature by the Graces drest.' His affability and condescension to those below him, was not the effect of art, or constrained politeness, dictated by the hackneyed sterile rules of decorum and good breeding: no, the benevolence of his heart pervaded the whole man; it illuminated his countenance, it softened his accents, it mixed itself with his demeanour, and gave evidence at once of the goodness of his heart, and the soundness of his understanding.

“To such as were honoured with his friendship and his intimacy, his kindness was beyond example he shared at once his affections and his interests among his friends, and towards the latter part of his life, when his ability to serve them ceased, he felt only for those who depended on him for their future advancement in life. The unbounded authority he possessed over them was established in parental dominion, not in the cold, haughty, supercilious superiority of a mere patron. Among this latter description, the author of the present rude outline is proud of ranking himself, and is happy in recollecting, that he obeyed, or rather anticipated, the wishes of his noble friend, as far as lay in his power, with more chearfulness and alacrity than he would in executing even the confidential mandates of the greatest monarch or minister in Christendom.

“His lordship’s acquaintance with men and books was accurate and extensive. His studies in the early part of his life must have been well directed, and his taste remarkably judicious, for no person ever lived who was less tinctured with the vulgar moroseness, and self-conceited air of a pedant, nor with the affectation and frivolity of that rank in life, which his birth, fortune, and situation, rendered customary and familiar to him.

“He was perfectly and intimately acquainted with the works of the most celebrated writers of antiquity in verse and prose. His memory was stocked with the most striking passages contained in them; but he never indulged nor gave way to the strong impressions they had stamped on his mind, but to gratify his confidential friends. Whenever he consented to their entreaties, his allusions were judiciously selected, and applied with the most consummate propriety. His language was manly, nervous, and technical. It was suited to the personal rank, knowledge, and disposition, of those he conversed with; by which means he rendered himself agreeable and intelligible to every person, whom chance, amusement, or business, threw in his way.

“His discernment of spirits, the term which the late lord Bolingbroke substitutes for the familiar phrase of knowing mankind, was no less conspicuous, when he thought proper to exert it with steadiness and vigour; but unfortunately for his own domestic peace, it was extremely difficult to rouse him. He trusted too much to the representations of others, and was always ready to leave the labour of discriminating characters, to those who too often found an interest in deceiving him. Though his steadiness of principle, penetration, and justness of reflection, might be well ranked in the first class, those talents were in a great measure effectually lost, because his employments and pursuits as a public man, his amusements as a man of taste and science, and, in the latter part of his life, his avocations as a writer, so totally engrossed his attention, that he entirely neglected his private affairs, and in a Variety of instances fell a prey to private rapine and literary imposition. This was the joint effect of native indolence, and a certain incurable absence of mind. To show that his want of discrimination was not native, but that the power of knowing those he communicated with, was rendered to some purpose useless, because it was not employed, a stronger proof need not be given, than his thorough knowledge of the court, as exhibited in parties, and the several individuals who composed them. He could tell the political value of almost every veteran courtier, or candidate for power. He could develope their latent views, he could foretell their change of conduct. He foresaw the effect of such and such combinations, the motives which formed them, the principles which held them together, and the probable date of their dissolutioe. Whenever he was imposed on, it was through the want of attention, not of parts; or from a kind of settled opinion, that men of common plain understandings, and good reputation, would hardly risque solid advantages in pursuit of unlawful gain, which last might eventually be accompanied with loss of character, as well as the object proposed to be attained. Whatever plausibility there may appear in this mode of reasoning, experience frequently informed his lordship, that it was not to be depended on. He was plundered by his servants, deceived by his humble companions, misled by his confidents, and imposed on by several of those whom he patronized. He felt the effects of all this, in his family, in his finances, and even in the rank he should have preserved. Those who were not acquainted with the solidity of his judgment, the acuteness of his wit, the brilliancy and justness of his thoughts, the depth of his penetration, and with the amazing extent of his genius, were apt to confound the consequences of his conduct, with the powers and resources of his mind. If his lordship remained out of place, on principle, the ignorant inclined to ascribe this seeming court proscription to simplicity or want of talents. If he did not support his rank with that ostentatious splendour now become so fashionable, the world was ready to impute it to a want of oeconotny, or a want of spirit; but in all those conjectures and conclusions, the world were much mistaken and misled. He had frequent offers, some of them the most flattering, to take a part in administration; but he uniformly rejected them. His manner of living at his seat at Hagley was founded on the truest principles of hospitality, politeness, and society; and as to money, he knew no other use of it but to answer his own immediate calls, or to enable him to promote the happiness of others.”

Much of this character corresponds with the accounts which might be extracted from the correspondence of his friends, who were so numerous as perhaps to include all the eminent literary persons of his time. With such he delighted to associate, was often a useful patron of rising genius, and to the last was ambitious of a personal acquaintance with men whose works he admired. We have a remarkable instance of this in his visiting (in 1767) old Dr. Lardner, and introducing himself as one who had read his volumes with pleasure and profit. Lardner was at this time so deaf that his visitors were obliged to carry on conversation with him by writing, to which tiresome condition lord Lyttelton gladly submitted.

Lord Lyttelton’s literary character has been so long established that it is unnecessary to add much on the subject. His Miscellaneous Works have been often reprinted, and, although in some of them rigid criticism may find objections, cannot be read without pleasure and advantage. His “History of Henry II.” is also now a standard work, valuable both for matter and style. His “^Persian Letters,” written when a very young man, are included among his miscellaneous works, but Dr. Warton informs us that he had intended to discard them, as there were principles and remarks in them that he wished to retract and alter. The reader finds them, however, as originally published, and they contain many shrewd remarks and just ridicule on the manners of the times. His juvenile pieces were not always his worst. Dr. Warton remarks that his Observations on the life of Cicero contain perhaps a more dispassionate and impartial character of that great orator than is exhibited in the panegyrical volumes of Middleton. It may here be noticed that some of his letters to Warton Occur in Wooll’s Life, by which we learn that lord Lyttelton made him his chaplain in 1756. As a poet, we do not find among critics any wide departure from Dr. Johnson’s opinion. Lord Lyttelton’s poems are to be praised chiefly for correctness and elegance of versification and style. His “Advice to Belinda,” though for the most part written when he was very young, contains, Dr. Johnson says, “much truth and much prudence, very elegantly and vigorously expressed, and shows a mind attentive to life, and a power of poetry which cultivation might have raised to excellence.” As far, however, as this implies that lord Lyttelton did not cultivate his powers, we are inclined to think our great critic in error. Lord Lyttelton was very early a poet, and appears to have not only valued his talent, but acquired his first reputation from the exercise of it. He was very early a critic too, as appears by his account of Glover’s “Leonidas,” printed in 1737, and few men were oftener consulted by young poets in the subsequent part of his life. Mickle may be instanced as one whose first pieces were carefully perused and corrected by him, and although Mickle was disappointed in the hopes he entertained from him as a patron, he often owned his obligations to him as a critic. Lord Lyttelton’s was the patronage of kindness rather than of bounty. He courted the acquaintance and loved the company of mn of genius and learning, with whom his correspondence also was extensive, but he had little of his own to give away, and was so long of the party in opposition to ministers, as to have very little state interest.

His collected works, first printed in 4to, in 1774, and since in 8vo, consist of, 1. “Observations on the Life of Cicero.” 2. “Observations on the Roman History.” 3. “Observations on the present state of our affairs at home and abroad,” &c. 4. “Letters from a Persian in England to his friend at Ispahan.” 5. “Observations on the conversion and apostleship of St. Paul” 6. “Dialogues of the Dead.” 7. “Four Speeches in parliament.” 8. “Poems.” 9. “Letters to Sir Thomas Lyttelton.” 10. “Account of a Journey into Wales.” Some other lesser pieces, which appeared in the periodical journals, have been attributed to him, and some anonymous political pamphlets. Lord Orford mentions him as a writer in the paper called “Common Sense,” but has not discovered his share. In that, however, he certainly wrote the criticism on “Leonidas,” which occurs in p. 72, of the first volume. In vol. II. p. 31, is a paper from the pen of lord Chesterfield, dated March 4, 1738, in defence of lord (then Mr.) Lyttelton against the attacks of the writers in the Daily Gazetteer. From his connection with the party in opposition to sir Robert Walpole, it seems not unreasonable to conjecture that he wrote in the “Craftsman;” but for this we have no positive authority.

, third son of sir Thomas, and brother to George lord Lyttelton, was born at Hagley, in 1714. He was educated at Eton-school, and went thence first to University-college, Oxford, and then to the InnerTemple, where he became a barrister at law; but entering into orders, was collated by bishop Hough to the rectory of Alvechurch, in Worcestershire, Aug. 13, 1742. He took the degree of LL. B. March 28, 1745; LL. D. June 18 the same year; was appointed king’s chaplain in Dec. 1747, dean of Exeter in May 1748, and was consecrated bishop of Carlisle, March 21, 1762. In 1754 he caused the cieling and cornices of the chancel of Hagley church to be ornamented with shields of arms in their proper colours, representing the paternal coats of his ancient and respectable family. In 1765, on the death of Hugh lord Willoughby of Parham, he was unanimously elected president of the society of antiquaries; a station in which his distinguished abilities were eminently displayed. He died unmarried, Dec. 22, 1768. His merits and good qualities are universally acknowledged; and those parts of his character which more particularly endeared him to the learned society over which he so worthily presided, shall be pointed out in the words of his learned successor dean Milles: “The study of antiquity, especially that part of it which relates to the history and constitution of these kingdoms, was one of his earliest and most favourable pursuits; and he acquired g cat knowledge in it by constant study and application, to which he was led, not only by his natural disposition, but also by his state and situation in life. He took frequent opportunities of improving and enriching this knowledge by judicious observations in the course of several journies which he made through every country of England, and through many parts of Scotland and Wales. The society has reaped the fruits of these observations in the most valuable papers, which his lordship from time to time has communicated to us; which are more in number, and not inferior either in merit or importance, to those conveyed to us by other hands. Blest with a retentive memory, and happy both in the disposition and facility of communicating his knowledge, he was enabled also to act the part of a judicious commentator and candid critic, explaining, illustrating, and correcting from his own observations many of the papers which have been read at this society. His station and connections in the world, which necessarily engaged a very considerable part of his time, did not lessen his attention to the business and interests of the society. His doors were always open to his friends, amongst whom none were more welcome to him than the friends of literature, which he endeavoured to promote in all its various branches, especially in those which are the more immediate objects of our attention. Even this circumstance proved beneficial to the society, for, if I may be allowed the expression, he was the centre in which the various informations -on points of antiquity from the different parts of the kingdom united, and the medium through which they were conveyed to us. His literary merit with the society received an additional lustre from the affability of his temper, the gentleness of his manners, and the benevolence of his heart, which united every member of the society in esteem to their head, and in harmony and friendship with each other. A principle so essentially necessary to the prosperity and even to the existence of all communities, especially those which have arts and literature for their object, that its beneficial effects are visibly to be discerned in the present flourishing state of our society, which I flatter myself will be long continued under the influence of the same agreeable principles. I shall conclude this imperfect sketch of a most worthy character, by observing that the warmth of his affection to the society continued to his latest breath; and he has given a signal proof of it in the last great act which a wise man does with resp'ect to his worldly affairs; for, amongst the many charitable and generous donations contained in his will, he has made a very useful and valuable bequest of manuscripts and printed books to the society, as a token of his affection for them, and of his earnest desire to promote those laudable purposes for which they were instituted.” The society expressed their gratitude and respect to his memory by a portrait of him engraved at their expence in 1770.

Besides his contributions to the papers of the society of antiquaries, published in the “Archaeologia,” there is in Gutch’s “Collectanea Curiosa,” vol. II. p. 354, “Dean Lyttelton’s Memoir concerning the authenticity of his copy of Magna Charta,” from the minutes of the antiquarian society, and an answer by judge Blackstone.

, a very learned French writer, was born Nov. 23, 1632, at Pierre-mont, on the frontiers of Champagne. He was educated in the university of Rheims, and afterwards entered into the abbey of the Benedictines of St. Remy; where he took the habit in 1653, and made the profession the year following. He was looked upon at first as a person that would do honour to his order; but a perpetual head-acb, with which he was afflicted, almost destroyed all the expectations which were conceived of him. He was ordained priest at Amiens in 1660; and afterwards, lest too much solitude should injure his health, which was not yet re-established, was sent by his superiors to St. Denis, where he was appointed, during the whole year 1663, to shew the treasure and monuments of the kings of France. But having there unfortunately broken a looking-glass, which was pretended to have belonged to Virgil, he obtained leave to quit an employment, which, as he said, frequently obliged him to relate things he did not believe. As the indisposition of his head gradually abated, he began to shew himself more and more to the world. Father d'Acheri, who was then compiling his “Spicilegium,” desiring to have some young monk, who could assist him in that work, Mabillon was chosen for the purpose, and accordingly went to Paris in 1664, where he was very serviceable to d'Acheri. This began to place his talents in a conspicuous light, and to shew what might be expected from him. A fresh occasion soon offered itself to him. The congregation of St. Maur had formed a design of publishing new editions of the fathers, revised from the manuscripts, with which the libraries of the order of the Benedictines, as one of the most ancient, are furnished. Mabillon was ordered to undertake the edition of St. Bernard, which he had prepared with great judgment and learning, and published at Paris, in 1667, in two volumes folio, and nine octavo. In 1690 he published a second edition, augmented with almost fifty letters, new preliminary dissertations, and new notes; and just before his death was preparing to publish a third. He had no sooner published the first edition of St. Bernard, than the congregation appointed him to undertake an edition of the “Acts of the Saints of the order of Benedictines;” the first volume of which, he published in 1668, and continued it to nine volumes in folio, the last of which was published in 1701. The writers of the “Journal de Trevoux” speak not improperly of this work when they say that “it ought to be considered, not as a simple collection of memoirs relating to monastic history, but as a valuable compilation of ancient monuments; which, being illustrated by learned notes, give a great light to the most obscure part of ecclesiastical history.” The prefaces alone,“say they,” would secure to the author an immortal reputation. The manners and usages of those dark ages are examined with great care; and an hundred important questions are ably discussed.“Le Clerc, in the place referred to above, from which we have chiefly drawn our account of Mahillon, has given us one example of a question occasionally discussed by him in the course of his work, concerning the use of unleavened bread, in the celebration of the sacrament. Mabillon shews, in the preface to the third age of his” Acta Sanctorum,“t'hat the use of it is more ancient than is generally believed; and, in 1674, maintained it in a particular dissertation, addressed to cardinal Bona, who was before of a contrary opinion. But the work which is supposed to have done him the most honour is his” De re diplomatica libri sex, in quibus quicquid ad veterum instrumentorum antiquitatem, materiam, scripturam et stilutn; quicqnid ad sigilla, monogrammata, subscriptiones, ac notas chronologicas; quicquid inde ad antiquariam, historicam, forensemque disciplinam pertinet, explicatur, et illustratur. Accedunt commentarius de antiquis regum Francorum palatiis, veterum scripturarum varia specimina tabulis LX. comprehensa, nova ducentorum et amplius monumentoruoi collectio," Paris, 1631, folio. The examination of almost an infinite number of charters and ancient titles, which had passed through his hands, led him to form the design of reducing to certain rules and principles an art, of which before there had been only very confused ideas. It was a bold attempt; but he executed it with such success, that he was thought tp have carried it at once to perfection.

In 1682 he took a journey into Burgundy, in which M. Colbert employed him to examine some ancient titles relating to the royal family. That minister received all the satisfaction he could desire; and, being fully convinced of Mabillon’s experience and abilities in these points, sent him the year following into Germany, in order to search there, among the archives and libraries of the ancient abbeys for materials to illustrate the history of the church in general, and that of France in particular. He spent five months in this journey, and published an account of it. He took another journey into Italy in 1685, by order of the king of France; and returned the year following with a very noble collection of above three thousand volumes of rare books, both printed and manuscript, which he added to the king’s library; and, in 1687, composed two volumes of the pieces he had discovered in that country, under the title of “Museum Italicum.” After this he employed himself in publishing other works, which are strong evidences of his vast abilities and application. In 1698 he published a Latin letter concerning the worship of the unknown saints, which he called “Eusehii Romani ad Theophilum Gallum epistola.” The history of this piece does credit to his love of truth, and freedom from traditional prejudices. While at Rome he had endeavoured to inform himself particularly of those rules and precautions, wh:ch were necessary to be observed with regard to the bodies of saints taken out of the catacombs, in order to be exposed to the veneration of the public. He had himself visited those places, and consulted all persons who could give him light upon the subject; but five or six years elapsed after his return to France, without his having ever thought of making use of these observations. In 1692, however, he drew up the treatise above-mentioned; in which he gave it as his opinion, that the bodies found in the catacombs were too hastily, and without sufficient foundation, concluded to be the bodies of martyrs. Still, aware this was a subject of a very delicate nature, and thai such an opinion might possibly give offence, he kept it by him five years, without communicating it to above one person; and then sent it, under the seal of secresy, to cardinal Colloredo at Rome, whose opinion was, that it should not be published in the form it was then in. Nevertheless, in 1698 it was published; and, as might easily be foreseen, very ill received at Rome; and after many complaints, murmurs, and criticisms, it was in 1701 brought before the Congregation of the Index, and Mabillon fou.id it necessary to employ all his interest to prevent the censure of that body. Nor, perhaps, could he have averted this misfortune if he had not agreed to publish a new edition of it; in which, by softening some passages, and throwing upon inferior officers whatever abuses might be committed with regard to the bodies taken out of the catacombs, he easily satisfied his judges; who, to do them justice, had a great esteem for his learning and virtues, and were not very desirous of condemning him.

This eminent man died of a suppression of urine, at the abbey of St. Germain-des-Pres, in Dec. 1707. His great merit had procured him, in 1701, the place of honorary member of the academy of inscriptions. Du Pin tells us thac “it would be difficult to give Mabillon the praises he deserves: the voice of the public, and the general esteem of all the learned, are a much better commendation of him than any thing we can say. His profound learning appears from his works: his modesty, humility, meekness, and piety, are no less known to those who have had the least conversation with him. His style is masculine, pure, clear, and methodical, without affectation or superfluous ornaments, and suitable to the subjects of which he has treated.” Few men were more honoured by the notice of the great than Mabillon, and to this he was entitled both by his virtues and his extensive learning. Pope Clement XI. paid him the compliment to write to father Iluinart, expressing his hopes that the remains of such a man had been interred with the honours due to him. “Every man of learning who goes to Paris,” said cardinal Colloredo, “will ask where you have placed him”.

, a celebrated French political and miscellaneous writer, and brother to the abbé Condillac, was born at Grenoble in March 1709, and was educated in the Jesuits’ college at Lyons. In his youth he attached himself to his relation the cardinal de Tencin, but never took any higher order in the church than that of sub-deacon. On his coming into life, as it is called, he had the honour to be admitted, both as a relation and a man of letters, into the parties of madame de Tencin, so well known for her intrigues and her sprightly talents, who at that time gave dinners not only to wits, but to politicians. Here madame de Tencin was so much pleased with the figure Mably made in conversation with Montesquieu and other philosophical politicians at hertable, that she thought he might prove useful to her brother, then entering on his ministerial career. The first service he rendered to the cardinal was to draw out an abridgment of all the treaties from the peace of Westphalia to that time (about 1740): the second service he rendered his patron, was of a more singular kind. The cardinal soon becoming sensible that he had not the talent xof conveying his ideas in council, Mably suggested to him the lucky expedient of an application to the king, that he might be permitted to express his thoughts in writing, and there can be little doubt that m this also he profited by the assistance of his relative, who soon began himself to meddle in matters of state. In 1743 he was entrusted to negoeiate privately at Paris with the Prussian ambassador, and drew up a treaty, which Voltaire was appointed to carry to Berlin. Frederick, to whom* this was no secret, conceived from this time a very high opinion of the abbe, and, as Mably’s biographer remarks, it was somewhat singular that tvro men of letters, who had no political character, should be employed on a negociation which made such an important change in the state of affairs in Europe. The abbe" also drew up the papers which were to serve as the basis of the negociation carried on in the congress at Breda in the month of April 1746.

His success in these affairs had nearly fixed him in political life, when a dispute with the cardinal changed his destination, and the circumstance does credit to his liberality. The cardinal was not only minister of state, but archbishop of Lyons, when the question was agitated respecting the marriages of protestants. The abbe wished him to view this question with the eyes of a statesman only, but the cardinal would consider it only as a prince of the Romish church, and as he persisted in this opinion, the abbe saw him no more. From this time he gave himself up to study, without making any advances to fortune, or to literary men. He always said he was more anxious to merit general esteem than to obtain it. He lived a long time on a small income of a thousand crowns, and an annuity; which last, on the death of his brother, he gave up to his relations. The court, however, struck with this disinterested act, gave him a pension of 2800 Jivres, without the solicitation or knowledge of any of his friends. Mably not only inveighed against luxury and riches, but showed by his example that he was sincere; and to these moderate desires, he joined an ardent love of independence, which he took every opportunity to evince. One day when a friend brought him an invitation to dine with a minister of state, he could not prevail on him to accept it, but at length the abbe said he would visit the gentleman with pleasure as soon as he heard that he was “out of office.” He had an equal repugnance to become a member of any of the learned societies. The marshal Richelieu pressed him much to become a candidate for the academy, and with such arguments that he could not refuse to accept the offer; but he had fio sooner quitted the marshal than he ran to his brother the abbe Condillac, and begged he would get him released, cost what it would. “Why all this obstinacy?” said his brother. “Why!” rejoined the abbe“Mably,” because, if I accept it 1 shall be obliged to praise the cardinal de Uichelieu, which is contrary to my principles, or, it I do not praise him, as I owe every thing to his nephew, I shall be accused of ingratitude.“In the same spirit, he acquired a bluntness of manner that was not very agreeable in the higher circles, where he never tailed to take the part of men of genius who were poor, against the insults of the rich and proud. His works, by which the booksellers acquired large sums of money, contributed very little to his own finances, for he demanded no return but a lew copies to give as presents to his friends. He appeared always dissatisfied with the state of public affairs, and had the credit of predicting the French revolution. Political sagacity, indeed, was that on which he chiefly rested his fame, andhaving formed his theory from certain systems which he thought might be traced to the Greeks and Romans, and even the ancient Gauls, he went as far as must of his contemporaries in undervaluing the prerogatives of the crown, and introducing a representative government. In his latter works his own mind appears to have undergone a revolution, and he pro\ed that if he was before sincere in his notions of freedom, he was now equally illiberal. After enjoying considerable reputation, and bein^ considered as one of the most popular French writers on the subjects of politics, morals, and history, he died at Paris, April 23, 1785. The abbe Barruel ranks him among the class of philosophers, who wished to be styled the Moderates, but whom Rousseau calls the Inconsistents. He adds, that” without being impious like a Voltaire or a Condorcet, even though averse to their impiety, his own tenets were extremely equivocal. At times his morality was so very disgusting, that it was necessary to suppose his language was ambiguous, and that he had been misunderstood, lest one should be obliged to throw off all esteem for his character." Such at least was the defence which Barruel heard him make, to justify himself from the censures of the Sorbonne.

His works are, 1. “Parallele des Romains et des Franc.ais,” Paris, 1740, 2 vols. 12mo. 2. “Le Droit public de l'Enrope,” 1747, 3 vols. 12mo. 3. “Observations sur les Romains,” 2 vols. 12mo. 4. “Observations sur les Grecs,” 1751, 12mo, reprinted in 1766, with the title of “Observations sur Thistoire cle la Grece.” 5. “Des principes des negotiations,” 1757, 12mo. 6. ft Entretiens de Phocion sur le rapport de la morale avec la politiqoe,“Amst. (Piins), 1763, 12mo, reprinted in 1783, 3 vols. 12mo, and by Didot in 1795, 4to. Of this an English translation was published by Mr. Macbeau in 1770. It was once a very popular work in America, where his name was held in the highest honour, until he published his work on the constitution of the United States after the peace of 1783, when the Americans hung him in effigy as an enemy to toleration and liberty. 7.” Observations sur l'histoire de France,“1765, 2 vols. 12mo. 8.” Entretiens sur i'Histoire,“12 mo. This is the work by which he has been most known in England, but in it, as well as his other works, he gives too great preference to the ancients over the moderns. 9.” De la inaniere d'ecrire Phistoire,“Kehl, 1784, 2 vols. 12mo. The whole of his works were collected, with an eloge by the abbe Bnzard, in 15 vols. 8vo, 17i'4. In this are many pieces not enumerated above, particularly his work on” Morals,“and his” Observations on the Government and Laws of America," which last,as we have noticed, destroyed his popularity in America. In both are symptoms of decayed intellect, and that confusion of thought which is peculiar to men who have been theorizing all their lives.

, a Hungarian artist, was born at Maubeuge, a village in Hainault, in 1499, though in the Chronological Tables his birth is supposed to have been in 1492. It is not known from whom he derived his knowledge of the art of painting but, in his youth, he was laborious in his practice, and his principal studies were after nature, by which he acquired a great deal of truth in his compositions. To improve himself in his profession, he travelled to Italy, and became an artist of great repute. He had a good pencil, and finished his pictures highly, with great care; yet, notwithstanding his studies in Italy, and the correctness of his design, he never could arrive at the elegance of the Roman school. His manner was dry, stiff, and laboured; but he was exceedingly industrious to give a polished smoothness to his colouring. By king Henry VIII. of England he was employed to paint the portraits of some of his children, which gained him great reputation, as he finished them delicately, and gave them spirit and liveliness and he painted several others for the nobility who attended the court at London. His paintings are consequently not unfrequent in this country.

Many excellent works of Mabuse are at Middleburg; one of the most capital is the altar-piece of the great church, representing the descent from the cross. That picture had been so highly commended, that it raised the curiosity of Albert Durer; and he took a journey to Middleburg, merely to be an eye-witness of the merit of that performance. He viewed it with singular attention, and expressed the pleasure it afforded him, by the praise he bestowed upon it. But the picture which is accounted to excel all his other productions, is the Virgin with the infant Jesus, which he finished while he was retained in the service of the marquis ofVeren; and in that subject he contrived to pay an extraordinary compliment to his patron, by making the heads of his lady and son the models for the heads of his figures.

He is censured by all writers for his immoderate love of drinking; and it is confidently said, that having received, by order of the marquis, a piece of brocade for a dress, to appear in before the emperor* Charles V. he sold it at a tavern, and painted a paper suit so exceedingly like it, that the emperor could not be convinced of the deception till he felt the paper, and examined every part with his own hands. He died in 1562.

, the elder, a celebrated hermit of the fourth century, said to be a disciple of St. Antony, was born at Alexandria, in the year 301, of poor parents. He was bred a baker, which trade he pursued to the age of thirty; then, being baptized, he retired and took up a solitary life. He passed sixty years in a monastery in mount Sceta, dividing his time between prayer and manual labour. He died about the year 391. Fifty homilies in Greek have been attributed to him, which were printed at Paris in 1526, with Gregory Thaumaturgus, in folio; and in 2 vols. 8vo, at Leipsic, in 1698.

, the younger, another famous monk, a friend of the former, and a native also of Alexandria, had near 5000 monks under his direction. He was persecuted by the Arians, and banished into an island where there was not a single Christian, but where he converted almost all the inhabitants by his preaching, and as some say, by his miracles. He died in the year 394 or 395. “The Rules of Monks,” in 30 chapters, are attributed to him, and a discourse by him on the “Death of the Just,” was published by Tollius, in his “Insignia Itinerarii Italici.”

, or Graham, the name of her second husband, was born in 1733, at Ollantigh, in Kent, the seat of her father, John Sawbridge, esq. She appears to have had none of the regular education given to young ladies of her ranl$, but had an early taste for promiscuous reading, which at length terminated in a fondness for history. That of the Romans is supposed to have inspired her with the republican notions which she professed throughout life, and in which she was probably encouraged by her brother the late alderman Sawbridge, whose politics were of the same cast. In 1760 she married Dr. George Macaulay, a physician of London. Soon after this, she commenced her career in literature, and in 1763 published the first volume, in 4to, of her “History of England, from the accession of James I. to that of the Brunswick Line.” This work was completed in 8 vols. in 1783; it was read with some avidity at the period of its publication, as the production of a female pen, but has since fallen into so much disrepute, as scarcely ever to be inquired after. It was written in the true spirit of rancorous republicanism, and was greatly deficient in that impartiality which ought to be the characteristic of true history. While in the height of her fame, Mrs. Macaulay excited the admiration of Dr. Wilson, rector of St. Stephen’s, Walbrook, who in his dotage placed her statue, while living, in the chancel of his church. This disgraceful appendage, however, his successor thought himself justified in removing. Having been left a widow, Mrs. Macaulay in 1778 married Mr. Graham, a step which, from the disparity of years, exposed her to much ridicule. In the year 1785 she went to America, for the purpose of visiting the illustrious Washington, with whom she had before maintained a correspondence. She died at Bin field, in Berkshire, June 22, 1791. Her works, besides the history already referred to, which may be regarded as the principal, are, “Remarks on Hobbes’s Rudiments of Government and Society;” “Loose Remarks on some of Mr. Hobbes’s Positions;” the. latter being an enlarged edition of the former: the object of these is to shew the superiority of a republican to a monarchical form of government. In 1770, Mrs. Macaulay wrote a reply to Mr. Burke’s celebrated pamphlet entitled “Thoughts on the Causes of the Present Discontents;” and in 1775 she pub.­lished “An Address to the People of England, Scotland, and Ireland, on the present important Crisis of Affairs.” She wrote also “A Treatise on the Immutability of Moral Truth;” which she afterwards re-published, with much other original matter, under the title of “Letters on Education,” 1790. Her last publication was “Observations on the Reflections of the Right Hon. Edmund Burke, oo the Revolution in France, in a letter to the Right Hon. the Earl of Stanhope,” 1790, 8vo. Many curious particulars of this lady may be found in our authorities.

, a distinguished physician, was born at Ballymony, co. Antrim, on the 26th of April, 1726. He was descended from an ancient family of his name in the shire of Galloway, in Scotland; but his grandfather, who was bred to the church, was called to officiate at Belfast to a congregation of Presbyterians, and his father became the minister of Ballymony, where David was born. Having received the first elements of his education at the public school of this place, and served his apprenticeship to a surgeon, he went into the navy, first in the capacity of mate to an hospital-ship, and subsequently in the rank of surgeon, in which station he remained for some years preceding the peace of Aix-laChapelle. At this period he was led from the frequent opportunities of witnessing the attacks of scurvy which a sea-faring life afforded him, to investigate the best method of cure for that disease, upon which he afterwards published a treatise. After the peace of Aix, Mr. Macbride went to Edinburgh and London, where he studied anatomy under those celebrated teachers doctors Monro and Hunter, and midwifery under Smellie. About the end of 1749, he settled in Dublin as a surgeon and accoucheur; but his youth and remarkable bashfulness occasioned him to remain a number of years in obscurity, little employed; although he was endeared to a small circle of friends by his great abilities, amiable dispositions, and his general knowledge in all the branches of polite literature and the arts. In 1764, he published his “Experimental Essays,” which were received with great applause, and were soon translated into different languages; and the singular merit of this performance induced the university of Glasgow to confer the degree of doctor of physic on its author. The improvement introduced by Dr. Macbride in the art of tanning, by substituting lime-water for common water in preparing ooze, procured him the honour of a silver medal from the Dublin Society, in 1768, and of a gold medal of considerable value from the society of arts and commerce in London.

For several years after Dr. Macbride obtained his de*­gree, he employed part of his time in the duties of a medical teacher, and delivered at his own house a course of lectures on the theory and practice of physic. These lectures were published in 1772, in 1 vol. 4to, under the title of“An Introduction to the Theory and Practice of Medicine,” and a second edition appeared in 1777. It was translated into Latin, and published at Utrecht, in 2 vols. 8vo, in 1774. This work displayed great acuteness of observation, and very philosophical views of pathology, and contained a new arrangement of diseases, which was deemed of so much merit by Dr. Cullen, that an outline of it was given by that celebrated professor in his Compendium of Nosology. Of the five classes, however, into which Dr. Macbride distributed diseases, the genera and species of the first only were detailed.

The talents of Dr. Macbride were now universally known, his character was duly appreciated, and his professional emoluments increased rapidly; for the public, as if to make amends for former neglect, threw more occupation into his hands than he couid accomplish either with ease or safety. Although much harassed both in body and mind, so as to have suffered for some time an almost total incapacity for sleep, he continued in activity and good spirits until the end of December, 1778, when an accidental cold brought on a fever and delirium, which terminated his life on the 13th of that month, in the fifty-third year of his age; his death was sincerely lamented by persons of all ranks.

, who in his Latin works called himself Cavellus, was titular primate of Armagh, and a learned writer in defence of Duns Scotus, whose opinions were generally embraced by his countrymen. He was born in the county of Down, in Ireland, in 1571, and became a Franciscan friar. He studied at Salamanca, in Spain, and afterwards for many years governed the Irish Franciscan college at Louvain, dedicated to St. Anthony, in the founding of which he had been instrumental. In this college he was also professor of divinity, which office he filled afterwards in the convent of Ara Cceli at Rome, was definitor-general of his order, and at length advanced by the pope to the see of Armagh; but died at Rome, as he was preparing for his journey to Ireland, Sept. 22, 1626, in the fifty -fifth year of his age. He was buried in the church of St. Isidore, under a monumental stone, and inscription, placed there by the earl of Tyrone. He was reckoned a man of great learning, and one of the best schoolmen of his time. His works, which consist chiefly of commentaries on and a defence of Scotus, were in substance incorporated in Wading' s edition of Scotus’s works, printed at Lyons, 1639, in 12 vols. folio.

, an ingenious young writer, was the son of the rev. Mr. Macdiarmid, minister of Weem in the northern part of Perthshire, and was bern in 1779. He studied at the universities of Edinburgh and St. Andrews, and was for some years tutor in a gentleman’s family. Such a situation is generally desired in Scotland with the view of provision in the church, but as this was not Mr. Macdiarmid’s object, he became desirous of visiting the metropolis, and trying his fortune in the career of literary competition. He accordingly came to London in 1801, and was soon in the receipt of a competent income from periodical writing. His principal occupations of this kind were, as editor of the St. James’s Chronicle (a paper in which some of the first scholars and wits of the last half century have employed their pens), and as a reviewer in a critical publication. On the commencement or rather the renewal of the late war in 1802-3, his attention was directed to our military establishment, and he relinquished his periodical engagements to become the author of a very elaborate work, entitled “An Inquiry into the System of Military Defence of Great Britain,” 1803, 2 vols. 8vo. This exposed the defects of the volunteer systeui, as well as of all temporary expedients, and asserted the superiority of a regular army; and had he lived, he would have doubtless been highly gratified to contemplate the army formed by the illustrious Wellington. His next work was, an “Inquiry into the Nature of Civil and Military Subordination,” 1804, 8vo, perhaps the fullest disquisition which the subject has received. He now determined to suspend his theoretic labours, and to turn his attention to works of narrative. He accordingly wrote the “Lives of British Statesmen,” 4to, beginning with the life of sir Thomas More. This work has strong claims on public attention. The style is perspicuous and unaffected; authorities are quoted for every statement of consequence, and a variety of curious information is extracted from voluminous records, and brought for the first time before the public view. His political speculations were always temperate and liberal. He was indeed in all respects qualified for a work of this description, by great powers of research and equal impartiality. But unfortunately he was destined to enjoy, for a short time only, the approbation with which his work was received. His health, at all times delicate, received in November 1807, an irreparable blow by a paralytic stroke; and in February 1808 a second attack proved fatal, April 7. Mr. D'Israeli has paid a just and pathetic tribute to his memory and talents in the work referred to below.

, another young writer of considerable talents, was the son of George Donald, a gardener at Leith. The Mac he appended. to his name when he came to London. He was born in 1757 at Leith, where he was educated, chiefly by the assistance of bishop f Forbes. For some time he had the charge of a chapel at Glasgow, in which city he published a novel, -entitled *' The Independent.“He afterwards came to London, and wrote for the newspapers. His works were lively, satirical, and humorous, and were published under the signature of Matthew Bramble. He naturally possessed a fine genius, and had improved his understanding with classical and scientific knowledge; but for want of connections in this southern part of the united kingdom, and A proper opportunity to bring his talents into notice, he was ajways embarrassed, and had occasionally to struggle with great and accumulated distress. He died in the 33d year of his age, at Kentish Town, in Aug. 1790, leaving a wife and infant daughter in a state of extreme indigence. A volume of his” Miscellaneous Works“was published in 1791, in which were comprised,” The fair Apostate,“a tragedy;” Love and Loyalty,“an opera;” Princess of Tarento,“a comedy; and” Vimonda," a tragedy.

, a learned French priest, was born at Paris about 1640, and pursued his divinity studies at the university of his native city, where he took his degrees. About this time he was appointed secretary to the council for managing the domains and finances of the queen, consort to Lewis XIV.; and when he took holy orders, in 1685, he was immediately appointed canon and rector of the church of St. Opportune, at Paris. He was a very diligent student as well in profane as in sacred literature, and was celebrated for his popular talents as a preacher. He died in 1721, leaving behind him a great number of works that do honour to his memory, of which we shall mention “A chronological, historical, and moral abridgment of the Old and New Testament,” in 2 vols. 4to “Scriptural Knowledge, reduced into four tables;” a French version of the apocryphal “Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs;” of which Grosseteste, bishop of Lincoln, gave the first Latin translation, Grabe the first Greek edition, from Mss. in the English universities, and Whiston an English version (S The History of the Four Ciceros,“in which he attempts to prove, that the sons of Cicero were as illustrious as their father. Mace (Thomas), a practitioner on the lute, but more distinguished among lovers of music by a work entitled” Music’s Monument, or a Remembrancer of the best practical Music, both divine and civil, that has ever been known to have been in the world," 1676, folio, was born in 1613, and became one of the clerks of Trinity-college, Cambridge. He does not appear to have held any considerable rank among musicians, nor is he celebrated either as a composer or practitioner on the lute: yet his book is a proof that he was an excellent judge of the instrument; and contains such variety of directions for the ordering and management of it, and for performing on it, as renders it a work of great utility. It contains also many particulars respecting himself, many traits of an original and singular character; and a vein of humour which, far from being disgusting, exhibits a lively portraiture of a good-natured gossiping old man. Dr. Burney recommends its perusal to all who have taste for excessive simplicity and quaintness, and can extract pleasure from the sincere and undissembled happiness of an author, who, with exalted notions of his subject and abilities, discloses to his reader every inward working of self-approbation in as undisguised a manner, as if he were communing with himself in all the plenitude of mental comfort and privacy. There is a print of him prefixed to his book, from an engraving of Faithorne, the inscription under which shews him to have been sixty-three in 1676: how long he lived afterwards, is not known. He had a wife and children.

, a Portuguese Jesuit, and most indefatigable writer, born at Coimbra, in 1596, quitted that order after a time to take the habit of a cordelier. He was strongly in the interest of the duke of Braganza when he seized the crown of Portugal. Being sent to Rome, he acquired for a time the favour of pope Alexander the Vllth, and was preferred by him to several important offices. The violence of his temper however soon embroiled him with this patron, and he went to Venice, where he disputed de omni scibili; and gaining great reputation, obtained the professorship of moral philosophy at Padua. Afterwards, having ventured to interfere in some state matter at Venice, where he had been held very high, he was imprisoned, and died in confinement, in 1681, at the age of 85. He is said, in the “Bibliotheque Portugaise,” to have published 109 different works: and in one of his own books he boasts that he had pronounced 53 public panegyrics, 60 Latin discourses, and 32 funeral orations; that he had written 48 epic poems, 123 elegies, 115 epitaphs, 212 dedications, 700 familiar letters, 2600 poems in heroic verse, 3000 epigrams, 4 Latin comedies, and had written or pronounced 150,000 verses extemporaucously. Yet the man who could declare all this, is hardly known by name in the greater part of Europe; and of the enormous list of his printed works, not more than five are thought worthy of mention by the writers of his life- To write much, is far easier than to write well. The works specified by his biographers are, 1. “Clavis Augustiniana liberi arbitrii,” a book written against father, afterwards cardinal Noris. The disputants were both silenced by authority; but Macedo, not to seem vanquished, sent his antagonist a regular challenge to a verbal controversy, which by some biographers has been mistaken for a challenge to fight. The challenge may be found in the “Journal Etranger” for June 1757. 2. “Schema Sanctae Congregationis,” 1676, 4to a dissertation on the inquisition, full of learning and absurdity. 3. “Encyclopaedia in agonem literatorum,” 1677, folio. 4. “Praise of the French,” in Latin, 1641, 4to; a book on the Jansenian controversy. 5. “Myrothecium Morale,” 4to. This is the book in which he gives the preceding account of what he had written and spoken, &c. He possessed a prodigious memory, and a ready command of language; but his judgment and taste were by no means equal to his learning and fecundity.

, was an ancient heretic of the church of Constantinople, whom the Arians made bishop of that see in the year 342, at the same time that the orthodox contended for Paul. This occasioned a contest, which rose at length to such a height, that arms were taken up, and many lives lost. The emperor Constantius, however, put an end to the dispute, by banishing Paul, and ratifying the nomination of Macedonius; who, after much opposition, which ended at the death of Paul, became peaceably and quietly settled in his see, and might have remained so had he been of a temper to be long peaceable and quiet in any situation: he soon fell into disgrace with Constantius, for acting the part of a tyrant, rather than a bishop. What made him still more disliked by the emperor, was his causing the body of Constantine to be translated from the temple of the Apostles to that of Acacius the martyr. This also raised great tumults and confusion among the people, some highly approving, others loudly condemning, the procedure of Macedonius and the parties again taking up arms, a great number on both sides were slain. Macedonius, however, notwithstanding the emperor’s displeasure, which he had incurred by his seditious and turbulent practices, contrived to support himself by his party, which he had lately increased by taking in the Semi-Arians; till at length, imprudently offending two of his bishops, they procured his deposition by the council of Constantinople, in the year 359. He was so enraged at this, as to resolve to revenge the insult by broaching a new heresy. He began to teach, therefore, that the Holy Spirit had no resemblance to either the Father or the Son, but was only a mere creature, one of God’s ministers, and somewhat more excellent than the angels. The disaffected bishops subscribed at once to this opinion; and to the Arians it could not be unacceptable. According to St. Jerome, even the Donatists of Africa joined with them: for he says, that Douatus of Carthage wrote a treatise upon the Holy Ghost, agreeable to the doctrine of the Arians; and the outward shew of piety, which the Macedonians observed, drew over to their party many others. One Maratorus, who had been formerly a treasurer, having amassed vast riches, forsook his secular life, devoted himself entirely to the service of the poor and sick, became a monk; and at last adopted the Macedonian heresy, which he disseminated very extensively. In this he succeeded in most cases by his riches; which, being freely and properly distributed, were found of more force in effecting conversions than all his arguments: and from this man, as Socrates relates, the Macedonians were called Maratorians. They were also called Pneumatomachi, or persons who were enemies of the Holy Ghost. The report of the Macedonian heresy being spread over Egypt, the bishop Serapion advertised Athanasius of it, who then was leading a monastic life, and lay hid in the desert and this celebrated saint was the hrst who confuted it.

, an ancient Latin poet, was born at Verona, and flourished about the year 24 B. C. Eusebius relates, that he died a few years after Virgil. Ovid speaks of a poem by him, on the nature and quality of birds, serpents, and herbs; which, he says, Macer, being then very old, had often read to him, and he is said also to have written a supplement to Homer; but the work by which his name is chiefly known, first printed at Naples in 1477, 4to, and often since under the title “De virtutibus Herbarum,” is unquestionably spurious, and the production of a much later writer. By some it is ascribed to Odo or Odobonus, a French physician of the ninth century. This barbarous poem is in Leonine verse, and various manuscripts of it are in our public libraries of Oxford, Cambridge, the British Museum, &c. It was, according to Dr. Pulteney, in common use in Enprland before the sera of printing, and was translated into English by John Lelamar, master of Hereford-school, who lived about 1473. Even Linacre did not disdain to employ himself on this work, as in “Macer’s Herbal practysed by Dr. Lin aero, translated out of Latin into English.” Lond. 1542, 12mo. This jejune performance, adds Dr. Pulteney, which is writ-r ten wholly on Galenical principles, treats on the virtues of not more than eighty eight simples.

, a political and miscellaneous writer, was born in Scotland in 1734, and educated in the university of Edinburgh. He came to London at an early period of life, and for many years keptan academy of considerable reputation at Walthamstow. He was also much engaged in the political disputes at the beginning of the reign of his present majesty, and concentrated his sentiments on them, in a “History of the Reign of George III.” an octavo volume, which was published in 1770. A dispute occurring between him and his bookseller, the late Mr. Thomas Evans of Paternoster-row, the latter employed another person to continue the history, of which vol. II appeared in 1782, and vol. III. about 1794. Mr. Macfarlane being then reconciled to his employer, published a fourth volume. The whole is com-r piled from the journals of the day, and cannot, either in point of style or matter, entitle Mr. Macfarlane, or the other writers, to the character of historians. In early life, also, he was editor of the Morning Chronicle and London Packet, in which he gave the debates with great accuracy and at considerable length, and wrote many letters and papers under fictitious names, in favour of the politics of the opposition. Being an enthusiastic admirer of Ossian, and an assistant, as has been said, to Mr. Macpherson in the arranging and publishing of these poems, he conceived the very preposterous design of translating them into Latin verse. Accordingly, in 176.9, he published “Temora,” as a specimen, and issued, at the same time, proposals for publishing the whole by subscription, in one volume, 4to: but few subscribers appearing, he desisted from his plan. During the latter years of his life, he resumed it, and was employed in it at the time of his death. Curiosity led him one evening to witness the triumphs of an electionmob coming from Brentford, when he fell under a carnage, and was so much hurt as to survive only half an hour. This happened on August 8. 1804. He had at this time in the press, an “Essay on the authenticity of Ossian and his Poems.”

In 1797, Mr. Macfarlane published “An Address to the people of the British Empire, on the present posture and future prospect of public affairs,” by which it appears that he had got rid of most of his former political prejudices. He likewise formally disclaims the second and third volumes of the “History of George III.” and says, that even the first uas been so disfigured in a third edition, that he will no longer claim it as his own. In 1801, he published “George Buchanan’s Dialogue, concerning the rights of the crown of Scotland. Translated into English with two dissertations prefixed one archaeological, inquiring into the pretended identity of the Getes and Scythians, of the Getes and Goths, and of the Goths and Scots: and the other historical, vindicating the character of Buchanan as a historian: and containing some specimens of his poetry in English verse,” 8vo. In this work there is much curious discussion.

, a Jesuit, was born at Paris in 1651, and was professor of rhetoric in his society, doctor of divinity, and rector of the Jesuits college at Rouen, then of the college de Clermont at Paris. He died March 15, 1619, aged 58. He published under the name of Callus, or Le Cocq, which was his mother’s name, “Jo. Galii jurisconsult! notationes in Historiam Thuani,” Ingoldstadt, 1614, 4to, a scarce volume, because suppressed in that year, as pernicious, seditious, and full of falsehoods and calumnies against the magistrates and officers of the king. Machault also translated from the Italian, a, “History of transactions in China and Japan, taken from letters written 1621 and 1622,” Paris, 1627, 8vo. John Baptist de Machault, another Parisian Jesuit, who died May 22, 1640, aged 29, after having been rector of the colleges at Nevers and Rouen, left “Gesta a Soc. Jes. in Regno Sinensi, ^thiopico, et Tibetano;” and some other works of the historical kind, but of little reputation. James de

, a Jesuit also, born 1600, at Paris, taught ethics and philosophy, and was afterwards rector at Alencon, Orleans, and Caen. He died 1680, at Paris. His works are, “De Missionibus Paraguariae et aliis in America meridional!” “De rebus Japonicis” “De Provinces Goana, Malabarica, et aliis” “De Regno Cochineinensi” “De Missione Religiosorum Societatis J. in Perside” “De Regno Madurensi, Tangorensi,” &C.

, a celebrated political writer and historian, was born of a good family, at Florence, in 1469. He first distinguished himself as a dramatic writer, but his comedies are not formed on the purest morals, nor are the verses by which he gained some reputation about the same time, entitled to much praise. Soon after he had entered public life, either from the love of liberty, or a spirit of faction, he displayed a restless and turbulent disposition, which not only diminished the respect due to his abilities, but frequently endangered his personal safety. He involved himself in the conspiracy of Capponi and Boscoli, in consequence of which he was put to the torture, but endured it without uttering any confession, and was set at liberty by Leo X. against whose house that conspiracy had been formed. Immediately after the death of Leo, he entered into another plot to expel the cardinal de Medici from Florence. Afterwards, however, he was raised to hitjh honours in the state, and became secretary to the republic of Florence, the 'duties of which office he performed with great fidelity. He was likewise employed in embassies to king Lewis XII. of France; to the emperor Maximilian; to the college of cardinals; to the pope, Julius II., and to other Italian princes. Notwithstanding the revenues which must have accrued to him in these important situations, it would appear that the love of money had no influence on his mind, as he died in extreme poverty in June 1527. Besides his plays, his chief works are, 1. “The Golden Ass,” in imitation of Lucian and Apuleius 2. “Discourses on the first Decade of Livy” 3. “A History of Florence” 4. “The Life of Castruccio Castracani;” 5. “A Treatise on the Military Art;” 6. “A Treatise on the Emigration of the Northern Nations;” 7. Another entitled “Del Principe,” the Prince. This famous treatise, which was first published in 1515, and intended as a sequel to his discourses on the first decade of Livy, has created very discordant opinions between critics of apparently equal skill and judgment, some having considered him as the friend of truth, liberty, and virtue, and others as the advocate of fraud and tyranny. Most generally “the Prince” has been viewed in the latter light, all its maxims and counsels being directed to the maintenance of power, however acquired, and by any means; and one reason for this opinion is perhaps natural enough, namely, its being dedicated to a nephew of pope Leo X. printed at Rome, re*published in other Italian cities, and long read with attention, and even applause, without censure or reply. On the other hand it has been thought impossible that Machiavel, who was born under a republic, who was employed as one of its secretaries, who performed so many important embassies, and who in his conversation always dwelt on the glorious actions of Brutus and Cassius, should have formed such a system against the liberty and happiness of mankind. Hence it has frequently been urged on his behalf, that it was not his intention to suggest wise and faithlul counsels, but to represent in the darkest colours the schemes of a tyrant, and thereby excite odium against him. Even lord Bacon seems to be of this opinion. The historian of Leo considers his conduct in a different point of view; and indeed all idea of his being ironical in this work is dissipated by the fact, mentioned by Mr. Roscoe, that “many of the most exceptionable doctrines in” The Prince,“are also to be found in his” Discourses,“where it cannot be pretended that he had any indirect purpose in view; and in the latter he has in some instances referred to the former for the further elucidation of his opinions. In popular opinion” The Prince“has affixed to his name a lasting stigma; and Machiavelism has long been a received appellation for perfidious and infamous politics. Of the historical writings of Machiavel, the” Life of Castruccio Castracani“is considered as partaking too much of the character of a romance; but his” History of Florence," comprising the events of that republic, between 1205 and 1494, which was written while the author sustained the office of historiographer of the republic, although not always accurate in point of fact, may upon the whole be read with both pleasure and advantage. It has been of late years discovered tnat the diary of the most important events in Italy from 1492 to 1512, published by the Giunti in 1568, under the name of Biagio Buonaccorsi, is in fact a part of the notes of Machiavel, which he had intended for a continuation of his history; but which, after his death, remained in the hands of his friend Buonaccorsi. - This is a circumstance of which we were not aware when we drew up the account of this author under the name Esperiente.

In English we have a translation of the whole of Machiavel’s works by Farneworth, and editions of them are common in almost every language.

, an ingenious and learned writer, and eminent lawyer of Scotland, was descended from an ancient and noble family, his father Simon Mackenzie being brother to the earl of Seaforth. He was born at Dundee, in the county of Angus, in 1636, and gave early proofs of an extraorJinary genius, having gone through the usual classic authors, at ten years of age. He was then sent to the universities of Aberdeen and St. Andrew’s, where he finished his studies in logic and philosophy before he had attained his sixteenth year. After this, he turned his thoughts to the civil law, and to increase his knowledge of it, travelled into France, and became a close student in the university of Bourges, for about three years. On his return home, he was called to the bar, became an advocate in 1656, and gained the character of an eminent pleader in a few years.

While he made the law his profession and chief study, he cultivated a taste for polite literature; and produced some works which added not a little to his reputation. In 1660, came out his “Aretino, or serious Romance,” in which he shewed a gay and exuberant fancy. In 1663, he published his “Religio Stoici;” or a short discourse upon several divine and moral subjects, with a friendly address to the fanatics of all sects and sorts. This was followed, in 1665, by “A Moral Essay,” preferring solitude to pubHe employment, and all its advantages; such as fame, command, riches, pleasures, conversation, &c. This was answered by John Evelyn, esq. in another essay, in which the preference was given to public employment. In 1667, he printed his “Moral gallantry;” a discourse, in which he endeavours to prove, that the point of honour, setting aside all other ties, obliges men to be virtuous; and that there is nothing so mean and unworthy of a gentleman, as vice: to which is added, a consolation against calumnies, shewing how to bear them with chearfulness and patience. Afterwards he published “The moral history of frugality,” with its opposite vices, covetousness, niggardliness, prodigality, and luxury, dedicated to the university of Oxford; and “Reason,” an essay, dedicated to the hon. Robert Boyle, esq. All these works, except “Aretino,” were collected and printed together at London, in 1713, 8vo, under the title of “Essays upon several moral subjects:” and have been regarded as abounding in good sense and wit, although upon the whole the reasoning is rather superficial. Besides these essays, which were the production of such hours as could be spared from his profession, he was the author of a play and a poem. The poem is entitled “Caelia’s country-house and closet;” and in it are the following lines upon the earl of Montrose:

"Montrose, his country’s glory, and its shame,

The glory of the priesthood, and the shame, &c."

Soon after Mr. Mackenzie had been employed as counsel for the marquis of Argyle, he was promoted to the office of a judge in the criminal court; which he discharged with so much credit and reputation, that he was made king’s advocate in 1674, and one of the lords of the privycouncil in Scotland. He was also knighted by his majesty. In these offices he met with a great deal of trouble on account of the rebellions which happened in his time; and his office of advocate requiring him to act with severity, he did not escape being censured for having, in the deaths of some particular persons who were executed, stretched the laws too far. This alludes to the noted trials of Baillie of Jerviswood, that of the earl of Argyle, and the prosecutions against Mitchel and Learmonth, events which make a great figure in the history of that unhappy period; but in the opinion of the late lord Woodhcusc lee, “his own defence will fully justify his conduct in the breast of every man whose judgment is not perverted by the same prejudices, hostile to all good government, which led those infatuated offenders to the doom they merited.” (See Mackenzie’s Works, Vindication of the government of Charles II.)

Upon the abrogation of the penal laws by James II. sir George, though he had always been remarkable for his loyalty, and censured for his zeal, thought himself obliged to resign his post; being convinced that he could not discharge the duties of it at that crisis with a good conscience. He was succeeded by sir John Dalrymple, who, however, did not long continue in it; for that unfortunate prince being convinced of his error, restored sir George to his post, in which he continued until the revolution, and then resigned it. He could not agree to the measures and terms of the revolution; he hoped that the prince of Orange would have returned to his own country, when matters were adjusted between the king and his subjects; but finding that the event proved otherwise, he quitted all his employments in Scotland, and retired to England, resolving to spend the remainder of his days in the university of Oxford. He accordingly arrived there in September 1689, and prosecuted his studies in the Bodleian library, being admitted a student there by a grace passed in the congregation June 2, 1690. In the spring following he went to London, where he contracted a disorder, of which he died May 2, 1691. His body was conveyed by land to Scotland, and interred with great pomp and solemnity at Edinburgh, his funeral being attended by all the council, nobility, college of justice, college of physicians, university, clergy, gentry, and a greater concourse of people than ever was seen on any similar occasion.

Besides the moral pieces mentioned above, he wrote several works to illustrate the laws and customs of his country, to vindicate the monarchy from the restless contrivances and attacks of those whom he esteemed its enemies, and to maintain the honour and glory of Scotland. To illustrate the laws and customs of his country, he published “A Discourse upon the laws and customs of Scotland in matters criminal,” 1674, 4to. “Idea eloquentiae tbrensis hodiernae, una cum actione forensi ex unaquaque juris parte,” 1681, 8vo. “Institutions of the laws of Scotland,” 1684, 8vo. “Observations upon the acts of parliament,” 1686, folio. Besides these, several other treatises of law are inserted in his works, printed at Edinburgh, 1716, in 2 vols. folio. In vindication of monarchy, he wrote his “Jus regium; or the just and solid foundations of monarchy in general, and more especially of the monarchy of Scotland; maintained against Buchanan, Naphthali, Doleman, Milton, &c.” Lond. 16S4, 8vo. This book being dedicated and presented by the author to the university of Oxford, he received a letter of thanks from the convocation. With the same view he published his * Discovery of the fanatic plot,“printed at Edinburgh, in 1684, folio; and his” Vindication of the government of Scotland during the reign of Charles II.“Also the” Method of Proceeding against Criminals and Fanatical Covenanters,“1691, 4to. The pieces which he published in honour of his nation, were as follow:” Observations on the Laws and Customs of Nations as to Precedency, with the science of heraldry, treated as a part of the civil law of nations; wherein reasons are given for its principles, and etymologies for its harder terms,“1680, folio.” A Defence of the Antiquity of the Royal Line of Scotland; with a true account when the Scots were governed by the kings in the Isle of Britain,“1685, 8vo. This was written in answer to” An historical Account of Church-Government as it was in Great Britain and Ireland, when they first received the Christian religion,“by Lloyd, bishop of St. Asaph. Sir George’s defence was published in June 1685; but before it came out it was animadverted upon by Dr. Stillingfleet, who had seen it in manuscript in the preface to his” Origines Britannicae.“Sir George replied the year following, in a piece entitled” The Antiquity of the Royal Line of Scotland farther cleared and defended against the exceptions lately offered by Dr. Stillingfleet, in his Vindication of the Bishop of St. Asaph;" and here the controversy appears to have ended. It is remarkable, however, that sir George’s books were translated into Latin, printed at Utrecht in 1689, and then presented to William-Henry prince of Orange, who wrote two very polite letters of thanks to him for his performance. Among the instances of this author’s zeal for his country, it is necessary to mention his founding of the lawyer’s library at Edinburgh, in 1689. This, which is now known by the name of the advocate’s library, was afterwards stored with variety of manuscripts, relating particularly to the antiquities of Scotland, and with a fine collection of books, in all sciences, classed in that excellent order, which he prescribed in an elegant Latin oration, pronounced upon the opening of it, and printed among his works.

Judging, says a late elegant and judicious writer, from the writings of sir George Mackenzie, his talents appear to have been rather splendid than solid. He certainly possessed uncommon assiduity and activity of mind, as the number and variety of his compositions testify; and perhaps the superficial manner in which he has treated many of those subjects foreign to his profession, is the less to be wondered at, in a man whose time was so occupied in professional duties. The obscurity and confusion that are discernible in some of his juridical discussions, may have arisen in a great measure from the rude, unmethodized, and almost chaotic state of the law of Scotland, both civil and criminal, in his days. On one account alone, although every other merit were forgotten, sir George Mackenzie is entitled to respect as a lawyer. He was the first who exploded from the practice of the criminal courts of Scotland that most absurd and iniquitous doctrine, that no defence was to be admitted in exculpation from a criminal indictment which was contrary to the libel (indictment); as, if John were accused of having murdered James, by giving him a mortal wound with a sword, it was not allowable for John to prove in his defence, that the wound was not given in any vital part, and that James died of a fever caught afterwards by contagion.

As an elegant scholar, lord Woodhouselee ranks sir George among the ornaments of his country. His Latin compositions are correct and ornate in no common degree. His style is evidently formed on the writings of Cicero, and the young Pliny; and though a little tinctured with the more 'florid eloquence of Quinctilian, is entirely free from the false embellishments and barbarisms of the writers of the lower ages. His “Idea Eloquentiae forensis,” is a masterly tractate, which enumerates and eloquently describes all the important requisites of a pleader, and gives the most judicious precepts for the cultivation of the various excellencies, and the avoiding of the ordinary defects of forensic eloquence. His “Characteres quorundam apud Scotos Advocatorum,” evince a happy talent of painting, not only the great and prominent differences of manner in the pleaders of his age, but of discriminating, with singular nicety, and in the most appropriate terms, the more minute and delicate shades of distinction, which a critical judgment alone could perceive, and which could be delineated only by a master’s hand. It is, adds lord Woodhouselee, highly to the honour of this eminent man, that he appears to have possessed a true sense of the dignity of his profession; and that he perpetually endeavoured, as much by his example as by his precepts, to mark the contrast between the prosecution of the law, as a liberal and ingenuous occupation, and its exercise (too common) as a mercenary trust.

, viscount Tarbat, and first earl of Cromerty, a person eminent for his learning and for his abilities as a statesman, was descended from a branch of the family of Seaforth. He succeeded to the family estate on the death of his father sir John Mackenzie, and also to his unshaken fealty for Charles II. during whose exile he had a commission to levy what forces he could procure, to promote the restoration. After that event, he was made one of the senators of the college of justice, clerk register of the pri% 7 y council, and justice-general, an office which had been hereditary in the family of Argyle, till it was surrendered in the preceding reign. James II. made him a baron and viscount, but on the abdication of that monarch, whom it woukl appear he had favoured too much, he lost his office of lord-register for some time, until king William III. was pleased to restore it in 1692, being no stranger to his abilities. In queen Anne’s reign, 1702, he was constituted secretary of state, and the following year was advanced to the dignity of earl of Cromerty. He died in 1714, at the age of eighty-three, or, according to another account, eighty-eight.

Douglas describes him as a man of singular endowments, great learning, well versed in the laws and antiquities of his country, and an able statesman. Macky, or rather Davis, adds, that “he had a great deal of wit, and was the pleasantest companion in the world; had been very handsome in his person; was tall and fair complexioned; much esteemed by the royal society, a great master in philosophy, and well received as a writer by men of letters.” Bishop Nicolson notices a copy of the continuation of Fordun’s “Scotichronicon” in the hand-writing of this nobleman, whom he terms “a judicious preserver of the antiquities of his country.” He wrote, 1. “A Vindication of Robert, the third king of Scotland, from the imputation of bastardy, &c.” Edin. 1695, 4to. 2. “Synopsis Apocalyptica; or a short and plain Explication and Application of Daniel’s Prophecy, and St. John’s Revelation, in consent with it, and consequential to it; by G. E. of C. tracing in the steps of the admirable lord Napier of Merchiston,” Edin. 1708. 3. “An historical Account of the Conspiracies, by the earls of Gourie, and Robert Logan of Restalrig, against king James VI. of glorious memory, &c.” Edin. 1713, 8vo. Mr. Gough has pointed out three papers on natural curiosities, by lord Cromerty, in the “Philosophical Transactions” and “A Vindication,” by him, of the reformation of the church of Scotland, with some account of the Records, was printed in the Scots’ Magazine, for August 1802, from a ms. in the possession of Mr. Constable, bookseller, of Edinburgh.

, the oldest actor, and perhapsthe oldest man of his time, is entitled to some notice in this work, although his fame seems to have been derived principally from his longevity. He is said to have been born in the county of West Meath in Ireland, May I, 1690. His family name was Mac-Laughlin, which, on his coming to London, he changed to Macklin. He was employed in early life, as badgeman in Trinity college, Dublin, until his twenty-first year, when he came to England, and associated with some strolling comedians, after which he went back to his situation in Trinity college. In 1716 he again came to England, and appeared as an actor in the theatre, Lincoln’s-inn-fields, where, in Feb. 1741, he established his fame by his performance of Shylock in the “Merchant of Venice,” in which he followed nature, truth, and propriety, with such effect, as to distance all other performers through the whole course of his long life. It was, however, the only character in which he was pre-eminent, and all his subsequent attempts in characters of importance, particularly in tragedy, were unsuccessful, or, at least, displayed no exclusive merit. The remainder of his life consists of a series of tragi-comic adventures, involving the history of the stage for a considerable period, of which it would be impossible to give a satisfactory abridgment. We therefore refer to our authorities, where his life is detailed with great minuteness, and in a manner highly interesting to those to whom the vicissitudes of the theatres, and the wit of the green-room, are matters of importance. He continued on the stage until 1789, when a decay of memory obliged him to take a last leave of it. In 1791, a sum of money was collected by public subscription for the purchase of an annuity, which rendered his circumstances easy. During the last years of his life, his understanding became more and more impaired, and in this state he died July 11, 1797, at the very great age of 107, if the date usually given of his birth be correct. As a dramatic writer, he appears to much advantage in his “Man of the World” and “Love Alamode,” which still retain their popularity. He was a man of good understanding, which he had improved by a course of reading, perhaps desultory, but sufficient to enable him to bear his part in conversation very satisfactorily. While his memory remained, his fund of anecdote was immense, and rendered his company highly agreeable. His age, however, had in his opinion, conferred a dictatorial ppwer, and it was not easy to argue with him, without exciting his irascible temper, which shewed itself in much coarseness of expression. He is said to have been in his better days, a tender husband, a good father, and a steady friend. By his firmness and resolution in supporting the rights of his theatrical brethren, they were long relieved from a species of oppression to which they had been ignominiouslv subjected for many years, whenever the caprice or malice of their enemies chose to exert itself. We allude, says one of his biographers, “to the prosecution which he commenced and carried on against a certain set of insignificant beings, who, calling themselves The Town, used frequently to disturb the entertainments of the theatre, to the terror of the actors, as well as to the annoyance and disgrace of the publick.” It is almost needless to add that this advantage has been again lost to his brethren, by the toleration recently granted to scenes of brntality in the theatres both of London and Dublin, and which has placed them at the mercy of the lowest and most unprincipled of the populace.

, a learned Scotch clergyman, was born at Irvine, in Argyleshire, in 1721, educated at the university of Glasgow, and afterwards, as was the custom at that time, heard a course of lectures at Leyden. After his return he was admitted into the church, and in May 1753, was ordained minister of Maybole, on which living he continued during sixteen years. Here he composed his two celebrated works, the “Harmony of the Gospels,” and his “New Translation of the Epistles,” both which were very favourably received, and greatly advanced his reputation in the theological world. In 1763 he published a second edition of the “Harmony,” with the addition of six discourses on Jewish antiquities; and a third appeared in 1804, in 2 vols. 8vo. In 1763 also he published another work of great merit, entitled “The Truth of the Gospel History.” On account of these publications, the university of Edinburgh conferred upon him the degree of D. D. In 1769 he was translated to the living of Jedburgh, and after three years, became one of the ministers of Edinburgh, which situation he retained during the remainder of his useful life. He was particularly active and zealous in promoting charitable institutions, especially the fund established by act of parliament, for a provision to the widows and fatherless children of ministers in the church of Scotland. As an author, Dr. Mackhight occupied a considerable portion of his time in the execution of his last and greatest work on the apostolical epistles. This was the result of an almost unremitting labour during thirty years: he is said to have studied eleven hours in each day, and before the work was sent to the press, the whole ms. had been written five times with his own hand. A specimen was published in 1787, containing his version of the epistles to the Thessalonians; and in 1795 the whole appeared in four vols. 4to, under the title of “A New Literal Translation from the original Greek of all the Apostolical Epistles; with a commentary, and notes, philosophical, critical, explanatory, and practical,” with essays on several important subjects, and a life of the apostle Paul, which includes a compendium of the apostolical history. Having finished this great work, he was desirous of enjoying the remainder of his days free from laborious pursuits, and refused, though earnestly solicited, to undertake a similar work with regard to the Acts of the apostles. In a very short time after, the decline of his faculties became manifest, and about the close of 1799 he caught a violent cold, the forerunner of other complaints that put an end to his life in January 1800. Having early acquired a taste for classical literature, he studied the writers of antiquity with critical skill, and was well acquainted with metaphysical, moral, and mathematical science. As a preacher, without possessing the graces of elocution, he was much admired for his earnestness of manner, which rendered his discourses highly interesting and useful.

, a pious and learned clergyman, and for fifty years minister of the English church at the Hague, was born at Monachan in Ireland, in 1722, and educated at Glasgow under the celebrated Mr. Hutcheson, for the presbyterian ministry. His youth was spent in Belfast, where he was long remembered with delight by a numerous circle of friends, now nearly extinct. About the time of the rebellion in 1745, when in his twentysecond year, he was invited to Holland, and succeeded his venerable uncle Dr. Milling, as pastor of the English church at the Hague, and remained in that situation until the invasion of the country by the French, in 1794, compelled him to take refuge in England. He had not been here long when an only sister, whom he had not seen for fifty years, joined him in consequence of the rebellion in Ireland. During his residence at the Hague he was known and highly respected by all English travellers, and not unfrequently consulted, on account of his extensive erudition and knowledge of political history, by official men of the highest rank. On his arrival in England he fixed his residence at Bath, as affording the best opportunities of union with many of those numerous friends he had known on the continent, and here he died, Nov. 25, 1804, aged eighty-two.

During this long course, Dr. Maclaine’s superior endowments of mind and heart, his genius, learning, and industry, constantly directed by a love of virtue and truth, by piety and charity, diffused a beneficial influence over the whole of his professional and domestic sphere. As a scholar, a gentleman, and a divine, uniformly displaying a judicious taste, an amiable deportment, and instructive example, he was admired and loved by all who courted and enjoyed his society; especially those of whom he was a distinguished archetype the man of education, the polished companion, the benevolent friend, and pious Christian.

Dr. Maclaine published in 1752 a sermon on the death of the prince of Orange. In 1765 his masterly translation of Mosheim’s Ecclesiastical History made its first appearance, in 2 vols. 4to, dedicated to William Prince of Orange. It experienced a most favourable reception, and was reprinted, 1758, in six vols. 8vo, in which form it has had several subsequent editions, particularly one published in 1811, withvaluable additions by Dr. Coote, the editor, and the Rev. Dr. Gleig, of Stirling. Few publications, on their first appearance, having been more generally read than Mr. Soame Jenyns’s “View of the internal Evidence of the Christian Religion,” Dr. Maclaine addressed to that gentleman a series of letters, 1777, in 12 mo, written to serve the best purposes of Christianity, on a due consideration of the distinguished eminence of Mr. Jenyns as a writer, of the singular mixture of piety, wit, error, wisdom, and paradox, exhibited in his publication, and of his defence of Christianity on principles which would lead men to enthusiasm or to scepticism, according to their different dispositions. His only publications since were two fast sermons, 1793 and 1797, and a volume of sermons preached at the Hague. He was interred in the abbey church of Bath, where a monument has been since erected to his memory by his friend Henry Hope, esq.

, an eminent mathematician and philosopher, was the son of a clergyman, and born at Kilmodan, near Inverary, in Scotland, Feb. 1698. His family was originally from Tirey, one of the western islands. He was sent to the university of Glasgow in 1709, where he continued five years, and applied himself to study in a most intense manner, particularly to the mathematics. His great genius for this science discovered itself so early as at twelve years of age; when, having accidentally met with a copy of Euclid’s Elements in a friend’s chamber, he became in a few days master of the first six books without any assistance: and it is certain, that in his sixteenth year he had invented many of the propositions, which were afterwards published as part of his work entitled “Geometria Organica.” In his fifteenth year, he took the degree of master of arts; on which occasion he composed and publicly defended a thesis “On the power of gravity,” with great applause. After this he quitted the university, and retired to a country-seat of his uncle, who had the care of his education, his parents being dead some time. Here he spent two or three years in pursuing his favourite studies; and such was his acknowledged merit, that having in 1717 offered himself a candidate for the professorship of mathematics in the Marischal college of Aberdeen, he obtained it after a ten days trial against a very able competitor. In 1719 he went to London, where he left his “Geometria Organica” in the press, and where he became acquainted with Dr. Hoadly, bishop of Bangor, Dr. Clarke, sir Isaac Newton, and other eminent men. At the same time he was admitted a member of the royal society; and in another journey in 1721, he contracted an intimacy with Martin Folkes, esq. the president of it, which lasted to his death.

In 1722, lord Polwarth, plenipotentiary of the king of Great Britain at the congress of Cambray, engaged him to go as tutor and companion to his eldest son, who was then to set out on his travels. After a short stay at Paris,“and visiting other cities in France, they fixed in Lorrain; where Maclaurin wrote his treatise” On the percussion of Bodies,“which gained the prize of the royal academy of sciences, for 1724; but his pupil dying soon after at Montpelier, he returned immediately to his professorship at Aberdeen. He was hardly settled here when he received an invitation to Edinburgh; the patrons of that university being desirous that he should supply the place of Mr. James Gregory, whose great age and infirmities had rendered him incapable of teaching. On this occasion he had some difficulties to encounter, arising from competitors, who had great interest with the patrons of the university, and also from the want of an additional fund for the new professor; all which, however, at length were surmounted, in consequence of two letters from sir Isaac Newton. In one, addressed to himself, with allowance to shew it to the patrons of the university, sir Isaac expresses himself thus:” I am very glad to hear that you have a prospect of being joined to Mr. James Gregory, in the professorship of the mathematics at Edinburgh, not only because you are my friend, but principally because of your abilities; you being acquainted as well with the new improvements of mathematics, as with the former state of those sciences. I heartily wish*you good success, and shall be very glad to hear of your being elected.“In a second letter to the lord provost of Edinburgh, he writes thus:” I am glad to understand that Mr. Maclaurin is in good repute amongst you for his skill in mathematics, for I think he deserves it very well; and to satisfy you that I do not flatter him, and also to encourage him to accept the place of assisting Mr. Gregory, in order to succeed him, I am ready, if you please to give me leave, to contribute 20l. per annum towards a provision for him, till Mr Gregory’s place becomes void, if I live so long, and I will pay it to his order in London."

In Nov. 1725, he was introduced into the university at the same time with his learned colleague and intimate friend, Dr. Alexander Monro, professor of anatomy. After this, the mathematical classes soon became very numerous, there being generally upwards of 100 students attending his lectures every year. These being of different standing and proficiency, he was obliged to divide them into four or five classes, in each of which he employed a full hour every day, from the first of Nov. to the first of June. In the first class he taught the first six books of “Euclid’s Elements,” plain trigonometry, practical geometry, the elements of fortification, and an introduction to algebra. The second studied algebra, the llth and 12th books of Euclid, spherical trigonometry, conic sections, and the general principles of astronomy. The third went on in astronomy and perspective, read a part of sir Isaac Newton’s “Priricipia,” and saw a course of experiments for illustrating them performed: he afterwards read and demonstrated the elements of fluxions. Those in the fourth class read a system of fluxions, the doctrine of chances, and the rest of Newton’s “Principia.” Besides these labours belonging to his professorship, he had frequently other employments and avocations. If an uncommon experiment was said to have been made any where, the feurious were desirous of having it repeated by him; and if an eclipse or comet was to be observed, his telescopes were always in readiness.

He lived a bachelor to the year 1733; but being formed for society, as well as contemplation, he then married Anne, the daughter of Mr. Walter Stewart, solicitor-general to his late majesty for Scotland. By this lady he had seven children, of which, two sons and three daughters, together with his wife, survived him. In 1734, Berkeley, bishop of Cloyne, published a piece called “The Analyst;” in which he took occasion, from some disputes that had arisen concerning the grounds of the fluxionary method, to explode the method itself, and also to charge mathematicians in general with infidelity in religion. Maclaurin thought himself included in this charge, and began an answer to Berkeley’s book: but, as he proceeded, so many discoveries, so many new theories and problems occurred to him, that, instead of a vindicatory pamphlet, it increased to “A complete system of Fluxions, with their application to the most considerable problems in geometry and natural philosophy.” This work, which was published at Edinburgh in 1742, 2 vols. 4to, cost him infinite pains, and will do him immortal honour, being indeed the most complete treatise on that science that has yet appeared . In the mean time, he was continually gratifying the public with some performance or observation of his own, many of which were published in the fifth and sixth volumes of the “Medical Essays,” at Edinburgh. Some of them appeared likewise in “The Philosophical Transactions” as the following: 1. “Of the construction and measure of Curves.” 2. “A new method of describing all kinds of Curves.” 3. “A letter to Martin Folkes, esq. on Equations with impossible Roots, May 1726.” 4. “Coiir tinuation of the same, March 1729.” 5. “December the 21st, 1732, On the description of Curves; with an account of farther improvements, and a paper dated at Nancy, Nov. 27, 1722.” 6. “An account of the treatise of Fluxions, Jan. 27, 1742.” 7. “The same continued, March 10, 1742” 8. “A Rule for finding the meridional parts of a Spheroid with the same exactness as of a Sphere, Aug. 1741.” 9. “Of the Basis of the Cells wherein the Bees deposit their honey, Nov. 3, 1734.”

In the midst of these studies he was always ready to promote any scheme xvhich might contribute to the service of his country. When the earl of Morton set out, in 1739, for Orkney and Shetland, to visit his estates there, he desired Mr. Maclaurjn to assist him in settling the geography of those countries, which is very erroneous in all our maps, to examine their natural history, to survey the coasts, and to take the measure of a degree of the meridian. Maclaurin’s family affairs, and other connections, however, not allowing of his absence, he drew up a memorial of what he thought necessary to be observed, furnished the proper instruments, and recommended Mr. Short, the famous optician, as a fit operator for the management of them. He had still another scheme for the improvement of geography and navigation, of a more extensive nature; which was, the opening a passage from Greenland to the South Sea by the North pole. That such a passage might be found, he was so fully persuaded, that he has been heard to say, if his situation could admit of such adventures, he would undertake the voyage, even at his own charge. But when schemes for finding it were laid before the parliament in 1744, and himself consulted by several persons of high rank concerning them, before he could finish the memorials he proposed to send, the premium was limited to the discovery of a North-West passage and he used to regret, that the word West was inserted, because he thought that passage, if at all to be found, must lie not far from the pole.

In 1745, having been very active in fortifying the city of Edinburgh against the rebel army, he was obliged to fly to the north of England; where he was invited by Herring, then archbishop of York, to reside with him during his stay in this country. “Here,” says he, in a letter to one of his friends, “I live as happy as a man can do, who is ignorant of the state of his family, and who sees the ruin of his country.” We regret to add, that in this expedition being exposed to cold and hardships, and naturally of a weak and tender constitution, he laid the foundation of a dropsical disorder, which put an end to his life June 14, 1746, aged 48. There is a circumstance recorded of him during his last moments, which shows that he was the inquiring philosopher to the last: He desired his friend Dr. Monro to account for a phenomenon he then observed in himself, viz. flashes of fire seeming to dart from his eyes, while in the mean time his sight was failing, so that he could scarcely distinguish one object from another."

Mr. Maclaurin is said to have been a very good, as well as a ver^y great man, and worthy of affection as well as admiration. His peculiar merit as a philosopher was, that all his studies were accommodated to general utility; and we find, in many places of his works, an application even of the most abstruse theories, to the perfection of mechanical arts. He had resolved, for the same purpose, to compose a course of practical mathematics, and to rescue several useful branches of the science from the bad treatment they often meet with in less skilful hands. But all this his death prevented; unless we should reckon, as a part of his intended work, the translation of Dr. David Gregory’s “Practical Geometry,” which he revised, and published with additions, 1745. He had, however, frequent opportunities of serving his friends and his country by his great skill. Whatever difficulty occurred concerning the constructing or perfecting of machines, the working of mines, the improving of manufactures, the conveying of water, or the execution of any other public work, he was at hand to resolve it. He was likewise employed to terminate some disputes of consequence that had arisen at Glasgow concerning the gauging of vessels; and for that purpose presented to the commissioners of excise two elaborate memorials, with their demonstrations, containing rules by which the officers now act. He made also calculations relating to the provision, now established by law, for the children and widows of the Scotch clergy, and of the professors in the universities, entitling them to certain annuities and sums, upon the voluntary annual payment of a certain sum by the incumbent. In contriving and adjusting this wise and useful scheme, he bestowed a great deal of labour, and contributed, not a little, towards bringing it to perfection.

Among his works, we have mentioned his “Geometria Organica,” in which he treats of the description of curve lines by continued motion: and that which gained the prize of the royal academy of sciences in 1724. In 1740, he likewise shared the prize of the same academy, with the celebrated Bernouilli and Euler, for resolving the motion of the tides from the theory of gravity; a question which had been given out the former year, without receiving any solution. He had only ten days for composing this paper, and could not find leisure to transcribe a fair copy; so that the Paris edition of it is incorrect. He afterwards revised the whole, and inserted it in his “Treatise of Fluxions,” as he did also the substance of the former piece. These, with the “Treatise of Fluxions,” and the pieces printed in the “Philosophical Transactions,” of which we have given a list, are all the writings which he lived to publish. Since his death, two volumes more have appeared his “Algebra,” and his “Account of sir Isaac Newton’s Philosophical discoveries.” His “Algebra,” though not finished by himself, is yet allowed to be excellent in its kind; containing, in no large volume, a complete elementary treatise of that science, as far as it has hitherto been carried; besides some neat analytical papers on curve lines. His “Account of sir Isaac Newton’s Philosophy” was occasioned by the following circumstances: sir Isaac dying in the beginning of 1728, his nephew, Mr, Conduitt, proposed to publish an account of his life, and desired Mr. Maclaurin’s assistance. The latter, out of gratitude to his great benefactor, chearfully undertook, and soon finished, the history of the progress which philosophy had made before sir Isaac’s time: and this was the first draught of the work in hand, which not going forward, on account of Mr. Conduitt’s death, was returned to Mr. Maclaurin. To this he afterwards made great additions, and left it in the state in which it now appears. His main design seems to have been, to explain only those parts of sir Isaac’s philosophy which have been, and still are, controverted: and this is supposed to be the reason, why his grand discoveries concerning light and colours are but transiently and generally touched. For it is known, that ever since the experiments on which his doctrine of light and colours is founded, have been repeated with due care, this doctrine had not been contested; whereas his theory of celestial phaenomena, founded on gravitation, had been misunderstood, and even ridiculed. The weak charge of introducing occult qualities has been frequently repeated; foreign professors still amuse themselves with imaginary triumphs; and even the polite and ingenious cardinal de Polignac has been seduced to lend them the harmony of his numbers.

To the last mentioned of his works is prefixed “An Account of the Life and Writings of Mr. Maclaurin:” from which we have taken the substance of the present memoir.

, son of the preceding, was born at Edinburgh in December 1734, and educated at the grammar-school and university of Edinburgh. Having applied to the study of the law, he was admitted a member of the faculty of advocates at Edinburgh in 1756. In 1782, a royal aociety was established in Edinburgh, of which Mr. Maclaurin was one of the original constituent members, and at an early period of the institution he read an essay to prove that Troy was not taken by the Greeks. In 1787 he was raised from the Scottish bar, at which he had practised long and successfully, to the bench, by the title of lord Dreghorn. He died in 1796. As an author we have “An Essay on Literary Property;” “A Collection of Criminal Cases;” “An Essay on Patronage;” and some poetical pieces, with three dramas, entitled “Hampden,” “The Public,” and “The Philosopher’s Opera.” During the years 1792, 3, 4, and 5, lord Dreghorn kept a journal, or diary, in which he recorded the various events that happened in Europe during those years. From this journal he made a selection for publication: and in 1799 a selection of his lordship’s works was printed in two vols. 8vo, containing most of the pieces mentioned above. It has, however, been generally thought that these added very little to his reputation, the character of his poetry being that of mediocrity, and his prose neither very lively not profound, though he occasionally exhibits learning and acuteness, and always an ardent love of liberty."

, an author whose fame rests chiefly on his being the editor of Ossian’s poems, was descended from one of the most ancient families in the North of Scotland, being cousin-german to the chief of the clan of the Macphersons, who deduce their origin from the ancient Catti of Germany. His father, however, was a farmer of no great affluence. He was born in the parish of Kingcusie, Inverness-shire, in the latter end of 1738, and received the first rudiments of his education at one of the parish schools in the district, called Badenoch, from which, in 1752, he entered King’s college, Aberdeen, where he displayed more genius than learning, entertaining the society of which he was a member, and diverting the younger part of it from their studies by his humorous and doggrel rhimes. About two months after his admission into the university, the King’s college added two months to the length of its annual session or term, which induced Macpherson, with many other young men, to remove to Marischal college, where the session continued short: and this circumstance has led the biographer, from whom we borrow it, to suppose that his father was not opulent. Soon after he left college, or perhaps before, he was schoolmaster of Ruthven or Riven, of Badenocb, and afterwards is said to have delighted as little as his antagonist Johnson, in the recollection of that period, when he was compelled, by the narrowness of his fortune, to teach boys in an obscure school.

It was here, however, about 1758, that he published the “Highlander,” an heroic poem in six cantos, 12mo. Of this poem, which has not fallen in our way, we have seen two opinions, the one, that it indicated considerable genius in so young an author; the other that it is a tissue of fustian and absurdity, feeble, and in some parts ridiculous, and shews little or no talent in the art of versification. This last we take to be the opinion of the late Isaac Reed, who had a copy of the poem, which was purchased at his sale by George Chalmers, esq. Mr. Reed adds, that in a short time the author became sensible of its faults, and endeavoured to suppress it. About the same time he wrote an “Ode on the arrival of the Earl Marischal in Scotland,” which he called an attempt in the manner of Pindar, how justly, the reader may determine, as it was published in the European Magazine for 1796.

It was intended that he should enter into the service of the church, but whether he ever took orders is uncertain. Mr. Gray speaks of him as a young clergyman; but David Hume probably more truly describes him as “a modest sensible young man, not settled in any living, but employed as a private tutor in Mr. Graham of Balgowan’s family, a way of life which he is not fond of.” This was in 1760, when he surprized the world by the publication of “Fragments of Ancient Poetry, collected in the Highlands of Scotland, and translated from the Galic or Erse language,” 8vo. These fragments, which were declared to be genuine remains of ancient Scottish poetry, at their first appearance delighted every reader; and some very good judges, and amongst the rest Mr. Gray, were extremely warm in their praises. Macpherson had intended to bury them in a Scotch magazine, but was prevented from so injudicious a step by the advice of his friend, Mr. Home, the auther of “Douglas.” As other specimens were said to be recoverable, a subscription was set on foot to enable our author to quit the family he was then in, and undertake a mission into the Highlands, to secure them. He engaged in the undertaking, and soon after produced the works whose authenticity has since occasioned so much controversy.

In 1762 he published “Fingal, an ancient epic poem, in six books,” together with several other poems, composed by Ossian, the son of Fingal, translated from the Gaiic language, 4to. The subject of this epic poem is an invasion of Ireland by Swaran, king of Lochliu. Cuchullin, general of the Irish tribes during the minority of Cormac king of Ireland, upon intelligence of the invasion, assembled his forces near Tura, a castle on the coast of Ulster. The poem opens with the landing of Swaran; councils are held, battles fought, and Cuchullin is at last totally defeated. In the mean time Fingal, king of the Highlands of Scotland, whose aid had been solicited before the enemy landed, arrived, and expelled them from the country. This war, which continued but six days and as many nights, is, including the episodes, the story of the poem: the scene, the heath of Lena, near a mountain called Cromleach in Ulster. This poem also was received with equal applause as the preceding fragments.

The next year he produced “Temora,” an ancient epic poem, in eight books: together with several other poems composed by Ossian, son. of Fingal, 4to, which, though well received, found the public somewhat less disposed to bestow the same measure of applause. Though these poems had been examined by Dr. Blair and others, and their authenticity asserted, there were not wanting some of equal reputation for critical abilities, who either doubted or declared their disbelief of the genuineness of them. After their publication, by which he is said to have gained twelve hundred pounds, Mr, Macpherson was called to an employment which withdrew him for some time from the muses and his country. In 1764, governor Johnstone was appointed chief of Pensacola, and Mr. Macpherson accompanied him as his secretary; but some difference having arisen between them, they parted before their return to England. Having contributed his aid to the settlement of the civil government of that colony, he visited several of the West-India islands, and some of the provinces of North America, and returned to England in 1766. He now resumed his studies, and in 1771 produced “An Introduction to the History of Great Britain and Ireland,” 4to, a work which, he says, “without any of th ordinary incitements to literary labour, he was induced to proceed in by the sole motive of private amusement.” This work is not inelegantly written, but his hypotheses on Celtic origin brought upon him the resentment of some critics, who preserved very little decency on a subject that might certainly have been discussed in an amicable manner. His next performance was more justly entitled to contempt, as it showed him to be utterly destitute of taste, and consequently produced him neither reputation nor profit. This was “The Iliad of Homer” translated, in two volumes 4to, 1773, a work fraught with vanity and selfconsequence, and which met with the most mortifying reception from the public. It was condemned by the critics, ridiculed by the wits, and neglected by the world. Some of his friends, and particularly sir John Elliott, endeavoured to rescue it from contempt, and force it into notice, but their success was not equal to their efforts. After a very acute, learned, and witty critique, inserted in the Critical Review, the new translation was confessed to possess no merit, and ever since has been consigned to oblivion.

About this time seems to be the period of Mr. Macpherson’s literary mortifications. In 1773, Dr. Johnson and Mr. Boswell made the tour to the Hebrides; and in the course of it, the former took some pains to examine into the proofs of the authenticity of Ossian. The result of his inquiries he gave to the public in 1775, in his narrative of the tour, ai^d his opinion was unfavourable. “I believe they (i. e. the poems, says he) never existed in any other form than that which we have seen. The editor or author never could shew the original; nor can it be shewn by any other. To revenge reasonable incredulity by refusing evidence is a degree of insolence with which the world is not yet acquainted; and stubborn audacity is the last refuge of guilt. It would be easy to shew it if he had it; but whence could it be had? It is too long to be remembered, and the language had formerly nothing written. He has doubtless inserted names that circulate in popular stories, and may have translated some wandering ballads, if any can be found; and the names and some of the images being recollected, make an inaccurate auditor imagine, by the help of Caledonian bigotry, that he has formerly heard the whole.” Again, “I have yet supposed no imposture but in the publisher, yet 1 am far from certainty, that some translations have not been lately made, that may now be obtruded as parts of the original work. Credulity on one part is a strong temptation to deceit on the other, especially to deceit of which no personal injury is the consequence, and which flatters the author with his own ingenuity. The Scots have something to plead for their easy reception of an improbable fiction: they are seduced by their fondness for their supposed ancestors. A Scotchman must be a sturdy moralist who does not love Scotland better than truth; he will always love it better than inquiry, and, if falsehood flatters his vanity, will not be very diligent to detect it. Neither ought the English to be much influenced by Scotch authority; for of the past and present state of the whole Erse nation, the Lowlanders are at least as ignorant as ourselves. To be ignorant is painful; but it is dangerous to quiet our uneasiness by the delusive opiate of hasty persuasion.”

The opinions above declared by Dr. Johnson incensed our author so much, that he was prompted by his evil genius to send a menacing letter to his antagonist, which produced the most severe, spirited, and sarcastic reply ever written. Whether his warmth abated, or whether he had been made sensible of his folly by the interposition of friends, we know not; but certain it is, we hear no more afterwards of this ridiculous affair, except that our author is supposed to have assisted Mr. Mac Nicol in an Answer to Dr. Johnson’s Tour, printed in 1779. This supposition, says one of his biographers, we are inclined to consider as well founded, because we have been told by a gentleman of veracity, that Mr. Mac Nicol affirms, that the scurrility of his book, which constitutes a great part of it, was inserted, unknown to him, after the manuscript was sent for publication to London.

In 1775 Mr. Macpherson published “The History of Great Britain, from the restoration to the accession of the House of Hanover,” in 2 vols. 4to, a work which has been decried with much clamour, but without much argument or proof. The author may perhaps have been influenced by his prejudices in favour of the tory party; but he certainly acted with great fairness, as along with it he published the proofs upon which his facts were founded, in two quarto volumes, entitled “Original Papers, containing the secret History of Great Britain, from the restoration to the accession of the House of Hanover. To which are prefixed, extracts from the life of James II. as written by himself.” These papers were chiefly collected by Mr. Carte, but are not of equal authority. They, however, clear up many obscurities, and set the characters of many persons in past times in a different light from that in which they have been usually viewed.

Soon after this period, the tide of fortune flowed very rapidly in Mr. Macpherson’s favour, and his talents and industry were amply sufficient to avail himself of every favourable circumstance whieh arose. The resistance of the Colonies called for the aid of a ready writer to combat the arguments of the Americans, and to give force to the reasons which influenced the conduct of government, and he was selected for the purpose. Among other things he wrote a pamphlet, which was circulated with much industry, entitled “The Rights of Great Britain asserted against the Claims of the Colonies; being an answer to the declaration of the general congress,” 1776, 8vo, and of which many editions were published. He also was the author of “A short History of the Opposition during the last session of parliament,” 1779, 8vo, a pamphlet, which, on account of its merit, was by many ascribed to Mr. Gibbon.

But a more lucrative employment was conferred on him about this time. He was appointed agent to the nabob of Arcot, and in that capacity exerted his talents in several appeals to the public in behalf of his client. Among others he published “Letters from Mahommed Ali Chan, nabob of Arcot, to the Court of Directors. To which is annexed, a state of facts relative to Tanjore, with an appendix of original papers,” 1777, 4to; and he was supposed to be the author of “The History and Management of the East India Company, from its origin in 1600 to the present times, vol. I. containing the affairs of the Carnatic; in which the rights of the nabob are explained, and the injustice of the company proved,” 1779, 4to.

In his capacity of agent to the nabob, it was probably thought requisite that he should have a seat in the British parliament. He was accordingly in 1780 chosen member for Camelford, but we do not recollect that he ever attempted to speak in the house. He was also re-chosen in 1784 and 1790. He had purchased, before this last mentioned year, an estate in the parish in which he was born: and changing its name from Retz to Belville, built on it a large and elegant mansion, commanding a very romantic and picturesque view; and thither he retired when his health began to fail, in expectation of receiving benefit from the change of air. He continued, however, to decline; and after lingering some time, died at his seat at Belville, in Inverness, Feb. 17, 1796.

In Mrs. Grant’s “Letters from the Mountains” we “have some affecting particulars of his death.” Finding some inward symptoms of his approaching dissolution, he sent for a consultation, the result of which arrived the day after his confinement. He was perfectly sensible and collected, yet refused to take any thing prescribed to him to the last, and that on this principle, that his time was come, and it did not avail. He felt the approaches of death, and hoped no relief from medicine, though his life was not such as one should like to look back on at that awful period. Indeed, whose is? It pleased the Almighty to render his last scene most affecting and exemplary. He died last Tuesday evening; and from the minute he was confined till, a very little before he expired, never ceased imploring the divine mercy in the most earnest and pathetic manner. People about him were overawed and melted by the fervour and bitterness of his penitence. He frequently and earnestly entreated the prayers of good serious people of the lower class who were admitted. He was a very goodnatured mart; and now that he had got all his schemes of interest and ambition fulfilled, he seemed to reflect and grow domestic, and shewed of late a great inclination to be an indulgent landlord, and very liberal to the poor, of which I could relate various instances, more tender and interesting than flashy or ostentatious. His heart and temper were originally good. His religious principles were, I fear, unfixed and fluctuating; but the primary cause that so much genius, taste, benevolence, and prosperity, did not produce or diffuse more happiness, was his living a stranger to the comforts of domestic life, from which unhappy connexions excluded him, &c."

He appears to have died in very opulent circumstances, and by his will, dated June 1193, gave various annuities and legacies to several persons to a great amount. He also bequeathed lOOOl. to Mr. John Mackensie, of Figtree court, in the Temple, to defray the expence of printing and publishing Ossian in the original. -He directed 300l. to be laid out in erecting a monument to his memory, in some conspicuous situation at Belville, and ordered that his body should be carried from Scotland, and interred in the Abbey-church of Westminster, the city in which he had passed the greatest and best part of his life. He was accordingly brought from the place where he died, and buried in the Poets-corner of the church.

On the subject of that dispute to which Mr. Macpherson gave rise, and which is not yet, and probably never will be, finally adjusted, it is not our purpose to enter. The general opinion, however, we may just mention, is unfavourable to his veracity; but Mr. Laing’s dissertation, which has greatly contributed to this effect, when compared with the “Report of the Highland Society,” will afford the reader as much light as has yet been thrown upon the question.

, a French lawyer, chiefly celebrated for his chronological abridgments after the manner of Henault, was born at Paris, Feb. 15, 1720, and educated at the university of that city. Here he gave the most promising hopes of success in any of the learned professions, and had in particular attached himself to the law; but weak lungs preventing him from entering into the active occupations of a pleader, he devoted himself to general literature, and produced the following works 1. “Abrege Chronologique de l'Histoire Ecclesiastique,” a chronological abridgment of Ecclesiastical History, in three volumes, octavo, written more drily and less elegantly than that of Henault, whom the author followed. 2. “Les Annales Romaines,” 1756, one volume octavo, in which the author has taken advantage of the most valuable remarks of St. Evremond, the abbe St. Real, Montesquieu, Mably, and several others, respecting the Romans; and the work is consequently not so dry as the former. In style, however, he is still inferior to his model. Of this we have an English translation by Nugent, 1759, 8vo. 3. “Abreg6 Chronologique de l‘Histoire d’Espagne et de Portugal,” 2 vols. 8vo, 1759 1765. This work, which was actually begun by Henault, is worthy of him in point of exactness; but neither affords such striking portraits, nor such profound remarks. Lacombe, another author celebrated for this kind of compilation, assisted also in this. Macquer had some share in writing the “Dictionaire des Arts et Metiers,” 2 vols. 8vo. He was industrious, gentle, modest, sincere, and a decided enemy to all quackery and ostentation. He had little imagination, but a sound judgment; and had collected a great abundance and variety of useful knowledge. He died the 27th of January, 1770.

, brother to the preceding, an eminent physician and chemist, was born at Paris, Oct. 9, 171S, and became a doctor of the' faculty of medicine in the university of that metropolis, professor of pharmacy, and censor-royal. He was, likewise, a member of the academies of sciences of Turin, Stockholm, and Paris, and conducted the medical and chemical departments of the Journal des Sgavans. He had the merit of pursuing chemistry as a department of natural philosophy, and was one of the most successful cultivators of the science, upon rational principles, previous to the new modelling which it has received within the last twenty-five years. He died Feb. 15, 1784, after having suffered much by an internal complaint, which appeared beyond the reach of skill. On this account he desired that his body might be opened, when it was discovered that his disorder was an ossification of the aorta, with strong concretions formed in the cavity of the heart. Mr. Macquer’s private character appears to have been truly amiable in every relation, and few men were more respected by his contemporaries. He published, 1. “Elemens de Chymie Theorique,” 1749 1753, 12mo. 2. “Elemens de Chymie Pratique,” 2 vols. 12mo. 3. “Plan d'un Cours de Chymie experimentale et raisonnee,” 1757, 12mo. This was composed in conjunction with M. Baume“, who was associated with him in his lectures. 4.” Dictionnaire de Chymie,“1766, 2 vols. 8vo. These works have all been translated into English and German; the Dictionary particularly, by Mr. Keir, with great additions and improvements. 5.” Formulae Medicamentorum Magistralium,“1763 and he had also a share in the compoposition of the” Pharmacopeia Parisiensis," of 1758.

, was a name assumed by a modern poet, whose true name was John Salmon; or, as some say, given to him on account of his excessive thinness, from the Latin adjective macer. It became, however, the current appellation of himself and Charles, his brother, who was also a writer of some celebrity, preceptor to Catherine of Navarre, sister of Henry IV, and who perished in the massacre of St. Bartholomew. Some have called Macrinus the French Horace, on account of his talents for poetry, particularly the lyric kind. He was born at Loudon, where he died in 1557, at an advanced age. He wrote hymns, naeniae, and other works, which appeared from 1522 to 1550: and was one of those who principally contributed to restore the taste for Latin poetry. Varillas relates a story of his drowning himself in a well, in despair, on being suspected of Lutheranism. But this, like most anecdotes of the same writer, is a matter of invention rather than fact.

, was an ancient Latin writer, who flourished towards the latter part of the fourth century. What countryman he was, is not clear Erasmus, in his Ciceronianus, seems to think he was a Greek and he himself tells us, in the preface to his “Saturnalia,” that he was not a Roman, but laboured under the inconveniences of writing in a language which was not native to him. Of what religion he was, Christian or pagan, is also uncertain. Barthius ranks him among the Christians; but Spanheira and Fabiicius suppose him to have been a heathen. It seems, however, agreed that he was a man of consular. dignity, and one of the chamberlains, or masters of the wardrobe to Theodosius; as appears from a rescript directed to Florentius, concerning those who were to obtain that office. He wrote “A Commentary upon Cicero’s Somnium Scipiouis,” full of Platonic notions, and seven books of “Saturnalia;” which resemble in plan the “Noctes Atticae” of Aulus Gellius. He termed them “Saturnalia,” because, during the vacation observed on these feasts of Saturn, he collected the principal literati of Rome, in his house, and conversed with them on all kinds of subjects, and afterwards set down what appeared to him, most interesting in their discourses. His Latinity is far from being pure, but as a collector of facts, opinions, and criticism, his works are valuable. The “Somnium Sci r pionis,” and “Saturnalia,” have been often printed; to which has been added, in the later editions, a piece entitled “De difterentiis & societatibus Graeci Latinique verbi.” The best editions are those of the Variorum; of Gronovius in 1670, and Leipsic in 1777. There is a specimen of an English translation of the “Saturnalia” in the Gent. Mag. for 1760, but it does not appear to have been completed.

, a celebrated preacher and writer, was the son of Martin Madan, esq. of Hertingfordbury near Hertford, member of parliament for Wootton Basset, and groom of the bedchamber to Frederick prince of Wales. His mother was daughter of Spencer Cowper, esq. and niece of the lord chancellor Cowper, an accomplished lady, and author of several poems of considerable merit. He was born in 1726, and was bred originally to the law, and had been called to the bar; but being fond of the study of theology, well versed in Hebrew, and becoming intimate with Mr. Jones and Mr. Romaine, two clergymen of great popularity at that time, by their advice he left the law for the pulpit, and was admitted into orders. His first sermon is said to have been preached in the church of Allhallows, Lombard -street, and to have attracted immediate attention and applause. Being appointed chaplain to the Lock-hospital, his zeal led him to attend diligently, and to preach to the unfortunate patients assembled in the parlour: his fame also brought many others thither, till the rooms and avenues were crowded. This led to a proposal for a chapel, which was finished in 176.1, and opened with a sermon from the chaplain. He subjected himself to much obloquy, about the year 1767, by the advice he gave to his friend Mr. Havveis, to retain the rectory of Aldwincle, and several pamphlets were written on the subject; but lord Apsley (afterwards Bathurst) did not seem to consider the affair in an unfavourable light, as he afterwards appointed him his chaplain. Mr. Madan became an author in 1761, when he published, 1. “A sermon on Justification by Works.” 2. “A small treatise on the Christian Faith,” 1761, 12mo. 3. “Sermon at the opening of the Lock Hospital, 1762.” 4. “Answer to the capital errors of W. Law,” 1763, 8vo. 5. “Answer to the narrative of facts respecting the rectory of Aldwinckle,” 1767, 8vo. 6. “A comment on the Thirty-nine Articles,” 1772, 8vo. 7.“Thelyphthora,” 1780, 2 vols. -&vo. In this book the author justifies polygamy, upon the notion that the first cohabitation with a woman is a virtual marriage; and supports his doctrine by many acute arguments. The intention of the work was to lessen or remove the causes of seduction; but it met with much opposition, many very severe animadversions, and cost the author his reputation among the religious world. He, however, was not discouraged; and in 1781, published a third volume, after which the work sunk into oblivion, a fate to which the masterly criticism on it in the Monthly Review, by the rev. Mr. Badcock, very greatly contributed. It is somewhat remarkable that Mrs. Manley in the “Atalantis” speaks of lord chancellor Cowper, as maintaining the same tenets on polygamy. Mr. Madan next produced, 8. “Letters to Dr. Priestley,” 1787, 12mo. 9. A literal version of “Juvenal and Persius,” with notes, 1789, 2 vols. 8vo: and some controversial tracts on the subject of his Thelyphthora. Mr. Madan died at Epsom in May, 1790, at the age of 64, after a short illness, and was buried at Kensington. The late Dr. Spencer Madan, bishop of Peterborough, was brother to our author.

, D. D. (“a name,” says Dr. Johnson, “which Ireland ought to honour,”) was born in 1687, and received his education at Dublin. He appears, however, to have been in England in 1729; and having written a tragedy called “Themistocles, or the Lover of his country,” was, as he himself says, tempted to let it appear, by the offer of a noble study of books from the profits of it. In 1731, he projected a scheme for promoting learning in the college of Dublin by premiums, at the quarterly examinations, which has proved highly beneficial. In 1732, he published his “Memoirs of the Twentieth Century; being original Letters of State under George the Sixth, relating to the most important events in Great-Britain, and Europe, as to church and state, arts and sciences, trade, taxes, and treaties, peace and war, and characters of the greatest persons of those times, from the middle of the eighteenth to the end of the twentieth century, and the world. Received and revealed in the year 1728; and now published, for the instruction of all eminent statesmen, churchmen, patriots, politicians, projectors, papists, and protestants.” In 6 vols. Lond. 1733, 8vo. In 1740, we find him in his native country, and in that year setting apart the annual sum of one hundred pounds to be distributed, by way of premium, to the inhabitants of Ireland only; namely, 50l. to the author of the best invention for improving any useful art or manufacture; 25l. to the per-> son who should execute the best statue or piece of sculpture; and 25l. to the person who should finish the best piece of painting, either in history or landscape the premiums to be decided by the Dublin society, of which Dr. Madden was the institutor. The good effects of these well applied benefactions have not only been felt to advantage in the kingdom where they were given, but have even extended their influence to its sister country, having giren rise to the society for the encouragement of arts and sciences in London. In 1743 or 4, he published a long poem, called “Boulter’s Monument;” which was corrected for the press by Dr. Johnson; and an epistle of about 200 lines by him is prefixed to the second edition of Leland’s “Life of Philip of Macedon.” In an oration spoken at Dublin, Dec. 6, 1757, by Mr. Sheridan, that gentleman took occasion to mention Dr. Madden’s bounty, and intended to have proceeded in the following manner, but was prevented by observing the doctor to be then present. Speaking of the admirable institutions of premiums, he went on, “Whose author, had he never contributed any thing farther to the good of his country, would have deserved immortal honour, and must have been held in reverence by the latest posterity. But the unwearied and disinterested endeavours, during a long course of years, of this truly good man, in a variety of branches, to promote industry, and consequently the welfare of this kingdom, and the mighty benefits which have thence resulted to the community, have made many of the good people of Ireland sorry, that a long-talked of scheme has not hitherto been put in execution: that we might not appear inferior in point of gratitude to the citizens of London, with respect to a fellow-citizen [sir John Barnard], (surely not with more reason,) and that like them we might be able to address our patriot, Praesenti tibi matures largimur honores.”

Dr. Madden had some good church preferment in Ireland, particularly a deanery, we know not which, and the living of Drummully, worth about 400l. a year, the right of presentation to which was divided between his own family, and another. As his family had presented on the last vacancy, the other of course had a right to present now; but the Maddens offering to give up all right of presentation in future, if allowed to present on the present occasion, this was agreed to, and thus the Doctor got the living. At what time this occurred we are not told, but he was then a colonel of militia, and was in Dublin dressed in scarlet. Besides this living, he had a very good estate; but as he was almost entirely devoted to books, or acts of charity and public good, he left the management of his income, both ecclesiastical and temporal, to his wife, a lady of a somewhat different turn of mind. They lived at Manor-water-house, three miles from Newtown-Botler; and the celebrated rev. Philip Skelton lived with them for some time, as tutor to the children. Dr. Madden also gave him the curacy of Newtown-Butler.

Dr Madden died Dec. 30, 1765. There is a fine mezzotinto of him, a whole length by J. Brooks, and a later, by Richard Purcell, from a painting by Robert Hunter.

Mons. Grosley, a lively French traveller, speaking of a city in the centre of France, “which at the beginning of the fifteenth century served as a theatre to the grandest scene that England ever acted in that kingdom,” mentions several English families as lately extinct, or still subsisting there. “This city,” he adds, “in return, has given the British dominions an illustrious personage, to whom they are indebted for the first prizes which have been there distributed for the encouragement of agriculture and arts. His name was Madain: being thrown upon the coast of Ireland by events of which I could never hear any satisfactory account, he settled in Dublin by the name of Madden, there made a fortune, dedicated part of his estate, which amounted to four or five thousand pounds a year, to the prizes which I have spoken of, and left a rich succession part of this succession went over to France to the Madains his relations, who commenced a law-suit for the recovery of it, and caused ecclesiastical censures to be published against a merchant, to whom they had sent a letter of attorney to act for them, and whom they accused of having appropriated to himself a share of their inheritance.”

, a famous English prelate, born at London, July 27, 1697, of obscure parents, whom he lost while he was young, was taken care of by an aunt, who placed him in a charity-school, and afterwards put him on trial to a pastry-cook; but, before he was bound apprentice, the master told her that the boy was not fit for trade; that he was continually reading books of learning above his (the master’s) comprehension, and therefore advised that she should take him away, and send him back to school, to follow the bent of his inclination. He was on this sent, by an exhibition of some dissenting friends, to one of the universities of Scotland, Cole says, that of Aberdeen; but, not caring to take orders in that church, was afterwards, through the patronage of bishop Gibson, admitted to Queen’s-college, Cambridge, and was favoured with a doctor’s degree at Lambeth. After entering into orders, he first was curate of St. Bride’s, then domestic chaplain to Dr. Waddington, bishop of Chichester, whose niece he married, and was afterwards promoted to the rectory of St. Vedast, in Foster-lane, London. In 1729, he was appointed clerk of the closet to queen Caroline. In 1733, he became dean of Wells, and was consecrated bishop of St. Asaph, in 1736. He was translated to the see of Worcester, in 1743. In 1733 he published the first part of the “Review of Neal’s History of the Puritans,” under the title of, “A Vindication of the Government, Doctrine, and Worship of the Church of England, established in the reign of queen Elizabeth:” of which the late bishop Hallifax said, “a better vindication of the reformed church of England, I never read.” He was a great benefactor to the London hospitals, and the first promoter of the Worcester Infirmary in 1745, which has proved of singular benefit to the poor, and a great advantage to medical and surgical knowledge in that neighbourhood. He was also a great encourager of trade, engaging in the British fishery, by which he lost some money. He likewise was a strong advocate for the act against vending spirituous liquors. He married Elizabeth daughter of Richard Price, esq. of Hayes in Middlesex, in 1731; and had two daughters and a son, of whom only one daughter survived him, and was afterwards married to the hon. James Yorke, bishop of Gloucester, and late bishop of Ely. He died Sept. 27, 1739. Bishop Madox published fourteen occasional sermons preached between the years 1734 and 1752. Among other instances of his benevolence, we may mention his assigning 200l.perann. during his life, for the augmentation of the smaller benefices of his diocese. He corresponded with Dr. Doddridge with affectionate familiarity, and visited him when at Bristol, offering in the most obliging manner to convey him to the Wells in his chariot, at the stated times of drinking. He used to anticipate any hints respecting his origin by a joke which he was fond of repeating. When tarts wera on his table, he pressed the company to partake, saying “that he believed they were very good, but that they were not of his own making” This he varied, when John Whiston dined with him, into, “some people reckon me a good judge of that article!” Upon the whole he appears to have been an amiable and benevolent man, and to have employed his wealth as well as his talents to the best purposes. His widow survived him thirty years, dying Feb. 19, 1789.

, the learned exchequer antiquary, and historiographer royal, of whose personal history we have no information, is well known among antiquaries and lawyers for his valuable collection of records relating to the ancient laws and constitution of this country; the knowledge of which tends greatly to the illustration of English history. In 1702, under the patronage of the learned lord Somers, he published the first fruits of his researches, under the title of “A Collection of antique Charters and Instruments of divers kinds taken from the originals, placed under several heads, and deduced (in a series according to the order of time) from the Norman conquest, to the end of the reign of king Henry VIII.” This is known by the name of the “Formulare AngJicanum.” To it is prefixed a dissertation concerning “Ancient Charters and Instruments,” replete with useful learning upon that subject. He was prompted to this work, by considering that there was no methodical history or system of ancient charters and instruments of this nation then extant; and that it would be acceptable to curious persons, and useful to the public, if something were done for supplying that defect. Having entertained such a design, and being furnished with proper materials from the archives of the late court of augmentations, he was encouraged to proceed in it, especially by lord Somers and prosecuted it with so much application, that out of an immense heap of original charters and writings, remaining in that repository, he selected and digested the chief substance of this volume. In 1711, he proceeded to a work of still greater importance than the foregoing, “The History and Antiquities of the Exchequer of the Kings of England, in two periods, viz. from the Norman conquest, to the end of the reign of king John; and from the end of the reign of king John, to the end of the reign of king Edward II. Taken from records. Together with a correct copy of the ancient dialogue concerning the Exchequer, generally ascribed to Gervasius Tilburiensis and a Dissertation concernlag the most ancient great roll of the exchequer, commonly styled the roll of Quinto Regis Stephani,” folio; reprinted in 1769, in 4to. This was dedicated to queen Anne; but there is likewise prefixed to it a long prefatory epistle to the lord Somers, in which he gives that illustrious patron some account of this unprecedented undertaking. He observes, that though some treatises had been written concerning the exchequer, yet no history [of it had been yet attempted by any man; that he had pursued his subject to those ancient times, to which, he thinks, the original of the exchequer in England may properly be assigned; and thence had drawn down an orderly account of it through a long course of years; and, having consulted, as well the books necessary to be perused upon this occasion, as a very great number of records and manuscripts, he had endeavoured all along x to confirm what he offered by proper vouchers, which are subjoined column-wise in each page, except where their extraordinary length made it impracticable. The records. which he here attests were, as he adds, taken by his own pen from the authentic parchments, unless where it appears by his references to be otherwise. He has contrived throughout the whole (as far as the subject-matter would permit) to make use of such memorials as serve either to make known or to explain the ancient laws and usages of this kingdom. For which reason, as he notes“, this work may be deemed, not merely a history of the exchequer, but likewise a promptuary towards a history of the ancient law of England. He afterwards acquaints” his lordship in what method he began and proceeded in compiling this work. First, he made as full a collection from records as he could, of materials relating to the subject. Those materials being regularly arranged in several books of collectanea, he reviewed them, and, weighing what they imported, and how they might be applied, he drew from thence a general scheme of his design. When he had pitched upon the heads of his discourse, he took materials for them out of the aforesaid fund, and digested them into their proper rank and order. In do ng this, it was his practice for the most part to write down, in the draught of his book, the respective records or testimonies first of all; i. e. before he wrote his own text or composition; and from them formed his history or accouit of things; connecting and applying them afterwards, as the case would admit. At the end of this history (as we have expressed it in the title) Mr. Maddox has publisteti a copy of the treatise concerning the exchequer, written in the way of dialogue, and generally ascribed to Gervasius Tilburiensis. This treatise is certainly very ancient, and intrinsically valuable. Our author introduces it by an epistolary dissertation, in Latin, to the then lord Halifax. The dialogue is followed by another epistolary dissertation, in the same language, addressed to the lord Somers, relating to the great roll of the exchequer, commonly styled the “Roll of Quinto Regis Stephani.” No historical account has been given, in this volume, of the records reposited in the exchequer. Mr. Madox thought that it might be more properly done if there was occasion for it, hereafter, in a continuation of this work; which he seems to have had some intention of performing himself when he published this part; or hoped some other hand would supply, if he did not. The concluding chapter of the history is a list of the barons of this court from the first year of William the Conqueror to the 20th of Edward II. The last work this laborious historiographer published himself, was the “Firma Burgi, or historical essay concerning the cities, towns, and boroughs of England. Taken from records.” This treatise was inscribed to king George I. The author warns his readers against expecting to find any curious or refined learning in it; in regard the matter of it is low. It is only one part of a subject, which, however, is extensive and difficult, concerning which, be tells us, much has been said by English writers to very little purpose, serving rather to entangle than to clear it. When he first entered upon the discussion of it, he found himself encompassed with doubts, which it hath been his endeavour, as he says, to remove or lessen as he went along. He has throughout mixed history and dissertation together, making these two strengthen and diversify each other. However modestly Mr. Madox might express himself concerning the learning of this work, it is in reality both curious and profound, and his inquiries very useful. The civil antiquities of this country would, in all probability, have been further obliged than they are to this industrious person, if his life had been of a somewhat longer continuance; for it may be presumed, from two or three passages in the prefaces of those books he published himself, that he meditated and intended some others to follow them, different from this posthumous History of Baronies, which his advertisement of it apparently suggests to be the only manuscript left finished by the author. This is compiled much in the manner of his other writings. In the first book he discourses largely of land baronies; in the second book he treats briefly of titular baronies and in the third of feudal tenure in capite.

Mr. Madox’s large and valuable collection of transcripts, in ninety-four volumes in folio and quarto, consisting chiefly of extracts from records in the exchequer, the patent and clause rolls in the Tower, the Cotton library, the archives of Canterbury and Westminster, the collections of Christ’s College, Cambridge, &c. made by him, and intended as materials for a feudal history of England from the earliest times, were presented by his widow to the British museum, where they are now preserved. They were the labour of thirty years; and Mr. Madox frequently declared, that when young he would have given 1500 guineas for them. Fifty-nine volumes of Rymer’s Collection of Public Acts relating to the history and government of England from 1115 to 1698 (not printed in his Fosdera, but of which there is a catalogue in vol. XVII.) are also deposited in the Museum by an order of the House of Lords.

, the great friend and counsellor of Augustus Caesar, was himself a polite scholar, but is chiefly memorable for having been the patron and protector of men of letters. He was descended from a most ancient and illustrious origin, even from the kings of Hetruria, as Horace often tells us; but his immediate forefathers were only of the equestrian order. He is supposed to have been born at Rome, because his family lived there; but in what year antiquity does not tell us. His education is supposed to have been of the most liberal kind, and agreeable to the dignity and splendour of his birth, as he excelled in every thing that related to arms, politics, and letters. How he spent his younger years is also unknown, there being no mention made of him, by any writer, before the death of Julius Caesar, which happened in the year of Rome 709. Then Octavius Caesar, who was afterwards called Augustus, went to Rome to take possession of his uncle’s inheritance; and, at the same time, Mæcenas became first publicly known; though he appears to have been Augustus’s friend, and, as it should seem, guardian, from his childhood. From that time he accompanied him through all his fortunes, and was his counsellor and adviser upon all occasions; so that Pedo Albinovanus, or rather the unknown author whose elegy has been ascribed to him, justly calls him “Caesaris dextram,” Caesar’s right hand.

A. U. C. 710, the year that Cicero was killed, and Ovid born, Mæcenas distinguished himself by his courage and military skill at the battle of Modena, where the consuls Hirtius and Pansa were killed in fighting against Antony; as he did afterwards at Philippi. After this last battle, began the memorable friendship between him and Horace. Horace, as Suetonius relates, was a tribune in the army of Brutus and Cassius, and, upon the defeat of those generals, made a prisoner of war. Mæcenas, finding him an accomplished man, became immediately his friend and protector, and afterwards recommended him to Augustus, who restored him to his estate, with no small additions. In the mean time, though Mæcenas behaved himself well as a soldier in these and other battles, yet his principal province was that of a minister and counsellor. He was the adviser, the manager, the negotiator, in every thing that related to civil affairs. When the league was made at Brundusium betwen Antony and Augustus, he was sent to act on the part of Augustus, and afterwards, when this league was about to be broken, through the suspicions of each party, he was sent to Antony to ratify it anew.

U. C. 717, when Augustus and Agrippa went to Sicily, to fight Sextus Pompeius by sea, Mæcenas went with them but soon after returned, to appease some commotions which were rising at Rome for though he usually attended Augustus in all his military expeditions, yet whenever there was any thing to be done at Rome, either with the senate or people, he was also dispatched thither for that purpose. He was indeed invested with the government while Augustus and Agrippa were employed in the wars. Thus Dion Cassius, speaking of the year 718, says that Mæcenas “had then, and some time after, the administration of civil affairs, not only at Rome, but throughout all Italy,” and V. Paterculus relates, that after the battle of Actium, which happened in the year 724, “the government of the city was committed to Mæcenas, a man of equestrian rank, but of an illustrious family.” Upon the total defeat of Antony at Actium, he returned to Rome, to take the government into his hands, till Augustus could settle some necessary affairs in Greece and Asia. Agrippa soon followed Mæcenas and, when Augustus arrived, he placed these two great men and faithful adherents, the one over his civil, the other over his military concerns. While Augustus was extinguishing the remains of the civil war in Asia and Kgypt, young Lepidus, the son of the triumvir, was forming a scheme to assassinate him at his return to Rome. This conspiracy was discovered at once by the extraordinary vigilance of Mæcenas who, as Paterculus says, “observing the rash councils of the headstrong youth, with the same tranquillity and calmness as if nothing at all had been doing, instantly put him to death, without the least noise and tumult, and by that means extinguished another civil war in its very beginning.”

The civil wars being now at an end, Augustus returned to Rome; and after he had triumphed according to custom, he began to talk of restoring the commonwealth. Whether he was in earnest, or did it only to try the judgment of his friends, we do not presume to determine however he consulted Mæcenas and Agrippa about it. Agrippa advised him to it but Mæcenas dissuaded him, saying, that it was not only impossible for him to live in safety as a private man, after what had passed, but that the government would be better administered, and flourish more in his hands than if he was to deliver it up to the senate and people. The author of the “Life of Virgil” says that Augustus, “wavering what he should do, consulted that poet upon the occasion.” But this life is not of sufficient authority; for, though it has usually been ascribed to Servius or Donatus, yet the critics agree, that it was not written by either of them. Augustus, in the mean time, followed Mæcenas’s advice, and retained the government and from this time Mæcenas indulged himself, at vacant hours, in literary amusements, and the conversation of the men of letters. In the year 734 Virgil died, and left Augustus and Mæcenas heirs to his possessions. Mæcenas was excessively fond of this poet, who, of all the wits of the Augustan age, stood highest in his esteem; and, if the “Georgics” and the “Æneid” be owing to the good taste and encouragement of this patron, as there is some reason to think, posterity cannot commemorate him with too much gratitude. The author of the “Life of Virgil” tells us that the poet “published the Georgics in honour of Mæcenas, to whom they are addressed” and adds, that “they were recited to Augustus four days together at Atella, where he rested himself for some time, in his return from Actium, Mæcenas taking upon him the office of reciting, as oft as Virgil’s voice failed him.” Horace may be ranked next to Virgil in Mæcenas’s good graces we have already mentioned how and what time their friendship commenced. Propertius also acknowledges Mæcenas for his favourer and protector nor must Varius be forgot, though we have nothing of his remaining; since we find him highly praised by both Virgil and Horace. He was a writer of tragedies: and Quintilian thinks he may be compared with any of the ancieats. In a word, Mæcenas’s house was a place of refuge and welcome to all the learned of his time-, not only to Virgil, Horace, Propertius, and Varius, but to Fundanius, whom Horace extols as an admirable writer of comedies: to Fuscus Aristius, a noble grammarian, and Horace’s intimate friend to Plotius Tucca, who assisted Varius in correcting the “Æneid” after the death of Virgil to Valgius, a poet and very learned man, who, as Pliny tells us, dedicated a book to Augustus “De usu Herbarum;” to Asinius Pollio, an excellent tragic writer, and to several others, whom it would be tedious to mention. All these dedicated their works, or some part of them at least, to Mæcenas, and repeatedly celebrated his praises in them; and we may observe further, what Plutarch tells us, that even Augustus himself inscribed his “Commentaries” to him and to Agrippa.

Mæcenas continued in Augustus’s favour to the end of his life, but not uninterruptedly. Augustus had an intrigue with Mæcenas’s wife and though the minister bore this liberty of his master’s very patiently, yet there was once a coldness on the part of Augustus, although not of long continuance. Mæcenas died in the year 745, as is supposed, at an advanced age. He must have been older than Augustus, because he was a kind of tutor to him in his youth. Horace did not probably long survive him, as there is no elegy of his upon Mæcenas extant, nor any account of one having ever been written, which would probably have been the case, had Horace survived him any time. Sanadon, the French editor of Horace, insists that ths poet died before his patron and that the recomme,ndation of him to Augustus was found only in Mæcenas’s will, which had not been altered.

Mæcenas is said never to have enjoyed a good state of health in any part of his life; and many singularities are related of his bodily constitution. Thus Pliny tells us, that he was always in a, fever; and that, for three years before his death, he had not a moment’s sleep. Though he was certainly an extraordinary man, and possessed many admirable virtues and qualities, yet it is agreed on all hands that he was very luxurious and effeminate. Seneca has allowed him to have been a great man, yet censures him very severely on this head, and thinks that his effeminacy has infected even his style. “Every body knows,” says he, “how Mæcenas lived, nor is there any occasion for me to describe it the effeminacy of his walk, the delicacy of his manner, and the pride he took in shewing himself publicly, are things too notorious for me to insist on. But what! Is not his style as effeminate as himself? Are not his words as soft and affected as his dress, his equipage, the furniture of his house, and his wife?” Then, after quoting some of his poetry, “who does not perceive,” says he, “that the author of these verses must have been the man, who was perpetually walking about the city with his tunic loose, and all the other symptoms of the most effeminate mind?” V. Paterculus does not represent him as less effeminate than Seneca, but dwells more on his good qualities. “Mascenas,” says he, “was of the equestrian order, but sprung from a most illustrious origin. He was a man, who, when business required, was able to undergo any fatigue and watching; who consulted properly upon all occasions, and knew as well how to execute what he had consulted; yet a man, who in seasons of leisure was luxurious, soft, and effeminate, almost beyond a woman. He was no less dear to Caesar than to Agrippa, but distinguished by him with fewer honours; for he always continued of the equestrian rank, in which he was born; not that he could not have been advanced upon the least intimation, but he never solicited it.” His patronage of men of letters is, after all, the foundation of his fame; and having by general consent given a name to the patrons of literature, his own can never be forgotten.

, a celebrated astronomer of Germany, whose name deserves to be preserved, was born about 1542, in the dutchy of Wirtemberg, and spent his youth in Italy, where he made a public speech in favour of Copernicus, which served to wean Galileo from Aristotle and Ptolemy, to whom he had been hitherto entirely devoted. He returned afterwards to Germany, and became professor of mathematics at Tubingen; where he had among his scholars the great Kepler. Tycho Brahe, though he did not assent to Maestlin, has yet allowed him to be an extraordinary person, and well acquainted with the science of astronomy. Kepler has praised several ingenious inventions of Mæstlin’s, in his “Astronomia Optica.” He died in 1590, after having published many works in mathematics and astronomy, among which were his treatises “De Stella nova Cassiopeia;” “Ephemerides,” according to the Prutenic Tables, which were first published by Erasmus Reinoldus in 1551. He published Iikew4se “Thesis de Eclipsibus” and an “Epitome of Astronomy,” &c.

, a celebrated Italian writer, and a marquis, was born of an illustrious family at Verona, in 1675, and was very early associated to the academy of the Arcadi at Home. At the age of twenty -seven, he distinguished himself at Verona, by supporting publicly a thesis on love, in which the ladies were the judges and assessors; and displayed at once his talents for gallantry, eloquence, and poetry. Anxious for glory of all kinds, he made his next effort in the army, and served as a volunteer at the battle of Donawert, in 1704; but the love of letters prevailed, and he returned into Italy. There his first literary enterprise, occasioned by an affair of honour, in which his elder brother was involved, was an earnest attack upon the practise of duelling. He brought against it all the arguments to which it is so evidently exposed; the opposite practice of the ancients, the suggestions of good sense, the interests of social life, and the injunctions of religion. He proceeded then to the drama, and produced his “Merope,” which was acted with the most brilliant success. Having thus purified tragedy, he proceeded to render the same service to comedy, and wrote one entitled “La Ceremonia,” which was much applauded. Jn 1732, he visited France, where he passed four years, caressed in the greatest degree for his talents and learning; and then went into England, where he was much esteemed, to Holland, and finally to Vienna, and was most honourably received hy the emperor Charles VI. After several years thus employed, he returned into Italy, and in literary activity, extended his attention to almost every subject of human knowledge. He died in 1755, at the age of eighty. He was gifted with a comprehensive genius, a lively wit, and a penetrating mind, eager for discoveries, and well calculated for making them. His disposition was cheerful, sincere, and disinterested, full of zeal for religion, and faithful in performing its duties. The people of Verona almost idolized him. During his last illness they offered public prayers for his recovery, and the council of state decreed solemn obsequies after his death, with the ceremony of a funeral oration in the cathedral of Verona.

Lady Mary Wortley Montague, in her letters lately published, has given a very lively description of Maffei’s employments: “After having made the tour of Europe in search of antiquities, he fixed his residence in his native town of Verona, where he erected himself a little empire, from the general esteem, and a conversation (so they call an assembly) which he established in his palace, one of the largest in that place, and so luckily situated, that it is between the theatre and the ancient amphitheatre. He made piazzas leading to each of them, filled with shops, where were sold coffee, tea, chocolate, all sorts of sweetmeats, and in the midst, a court well kept, and sanded, for the use of those young gentlemen who would exercise their managed horses, or show their mistresses their skill in riding. His gallery was open every evening at five o'clock, where he had a fine collection of antiquities, and two large cabinets of medals, intaglios, and cameos, arranged in exact order. His library joined to it: and on the other side a suite of five rooms, the first of which was destined to dancing, the second to cards (but all games of hazard excluded), and the others (where he himself presided in an easy chair), sacred to conversation, which always turned upon some point of learning, either historical or poetical. Controversy and politics being utterly prohibited, he generally proposed the subject, and took great delight in instructing the young people, who were obliged to seek the medal, or explain the inscription that illustrated any fact they discoursed of. Those who chose the diversion of the public walks, or theatre, went thither, but never failed returning to give an account of the drama, which produced a critical dissertation on that subject, the marquis having given shining proofs of his skill in that art. His tragedy of” Merope,“which is much injured by Voltaire’s translation, being esteemed a master-piece and his comedy of the” Ceremonies,“being a just ridicule of those formal fopperies, it has gone a great way in helping to banish them out of Italy. The walkers contributed to the entertainment by an account of some herb, or flower, which led the way to a botanical conversation; or, if they were such inaccurate observers as to have nothing of that kind to offer, they repeated some pastoral description. One day in the week was set apart for music, vocal and instrumental, but no mercenaries were admitted to the concert. Thus, at a very little expence (his fortune not permitting a large one), he had the happiness of giving his countrymen a taste of polite pleasure, and shewing the youth how to pass their time agreeably without debauchery.”

The complete catalogue of his works would resemble that of a library; the chief of them are these: I. “Rime e prose,” Venice, 1719, 4to. 2. “La scienza Cavalleresca,” Rome, 1710, 4to. This is against duelling, and has passed through six editions. 3. “Merope,” of which there have been many more editions, and several foreign versions. 4. “Traduttori Italiani,” &c. Venice, 1720, 8vo, contains an account of the Italian translations from the classics. 3. “Theatre Italiano,” a selection of Italian tragedies, in 3 vols. 8vo. 6. “Cassiodori complexiones, in Epistola et Acta Apostolorum,” &c. Flor. 1721. 7. “Istoria Diplomatica,” or a critical introduction to diplomatic knowledge. 8. “Degli Anfiteatri,” on amphitheatres, particularly that of Verona, 1728. 9. “Supplementum Acaciarum,” Venice, 1728. 10. “Museum Veronense,” 1729, folio. 11. “Verona Illustrata,” 1732, folio. 12. An Italian translation of the first book of Homer, in blank verse, printed at London, in 1737. 13. “La Religione di Gentili tiel morire,” 1736, 4to. 14. “Osservationi Letterarie,” intended to serve as a continuation of the Giornale de‘ Leterati d’ Italia. He published also a work on grace, some editions of the fathers, and other matters. A complete edition of his works was published at Venice in 1790, in 18 vols. 8vo.

, a learned Jesuit, was born at Bergamo in 1536, and was instructed by his uncles Basil and Chrysostom Zanchi, canons regular of that city, in Greek, Latin, philosophy and theology. His studies being finished he went to Rome, where his talents became so well known that several princes invited him to settle in their dominions, but he gave the preference to Genoa, where in 1563 he was appointed professor of eloquence, with an ample salary. He continued in that office two years, and was chosen to the office of secretary of state; but in 1565, he returned to Rome, where he entered into the society of Jesuits. He spent six years as professor of eloquence in the Roman college, during which he translated, into the Latin language, the history of the Indies by Acosta, which was published in 1570. He then went to Lisbon at the request of cardinal Henry, and compiled from papers and other documents with which he was to be furnished, a complete history of the Portuguese conquests in the Indies, and of the progress of the Christian religion in that quarter. He returned to Italy in 1581, and some years after was placed, by Clement VIII. in the Vatican, for the purpose of continuing, in the Latin language, the annals of Gregory XIII. begun by him in the Italian of this he had finished three books at the time of his death, which happened at Tivoli Oct. 20, 1603. Soon after he entered among the Jesuits he wrote the life of Ignatius Loyola; but his principal work is entitled “Historiarum Indicarum,” lib. XVI. written in a very pure style, which has been frequently reprinted. The best edition is in two volumes 4to, printed at Bergamo in 1747. The purity of his style was the effect of great labour. Few men ever wrote so slowly; nothing seemed to please him, and he used to pass whole hours in polishing his periods; but we cannot readily credit all that has been reported on this subject, as that he never could finish above twelve or fifteen lines in a clay; that he was twelve years in writing his history of the Indies, and that, to prevent his mind being tainted with bad Latin, he read his breviary in Greek. There are, however, some other particulars of his personal history which correspond a little with all this. He disliked the ordinary commons of the Jesuits’ college, aftid had always something very nice and delicate provided for him, considering more substantial and gross food as incompatible with elegant writing; yet with all this care, he was of such an irascible temper as to be perpetually giving offence, and perpetually asking pardon.

, better known by the name of Magellan, an eminent navigator, was by birth a Portuguese. He served with much reputation during five years under Albuquerque, in the East Indies, particularly at the conquest of Malacca in 1510, but as his services were not well repaid, he accepted from Charles V. king of Spain, the command of a fleet, with which, in 1519, he discovered the straits called after himself at the extremity of South America. Soon after this he took possession of the Ladrone and Philippine islands in the name of Charles V.; and had he acted with prudence, might have had the honour of being accounted the first circumnavigator of the globe. His severities, however, towards the natives of Matan, compelled them to resist; and in the contest Magalhaens received a wound from an arrow in the leg, and being ill supported by his men, he was killed by a lance, in 1521.

, said to be a lineal descendant (Mr. Nichols says great-grandson) of the preceding, was born in 1723, and became an Augustine monk at Lisbon, but, having renounced the Roman Catholic religion, came to reside in England, about 1764. He was an able linguist, and well versed in chemistry and other branches of natural philosophy. He published several treatises in that science, particularly a work on mineralogy, taken principally from Crons’tadt; an account of various philosophical instruments; and a narrative of the last days of* Rousseau, to which his name is not affixed. He was elected a fellow of the Royal Society in 1774, and was a member of several foreign academies. He died at his lodgings at Islington, Feb. 7, 1790.

, a celebrated philosopher and mathematician, was born at Rome Octqber 23, 1637. After studying jurisprudence, in which he made a great and very rapid progress at Pisa, he began to devote his main attention to mathematics and natural philosophy, which he cultivated at Florence, during three years, under the celebrated Vincent Viviani, and was made secretary to the academy del Cimento, the duties of which office he discharged with the utmost assiduity and care. Being directed by the prince to draw up an account of the experiments made there, he published it in 1666, when it was received with universal applause by men of science. While engaged on this work, he obtained leave from Leopold to pay a visit to his father at Rome, and with a view to obtain some ecclesiastical promotion. Having failed in this object, he returned to Florence, and obtained a place at the court of the grand duke Ferdinand II.; and shortly after a pension was given him by pope Alexander VII. About 1666 he drew up and published a small volume relative to the history of China, which was received with great applause; and at the same time he published a small, but elegant compendium of the Moral Doctrine of Confucius. Having considerable poetical talents, he was the first person who published a good translation of the Odes of Anacreon in Italian verse. He was very conversant in many of the modern languages, and could write and speak French, Spanish, and English, with the correctness and ease of the natives of those countries. When in England he became the intimate friend of the illustrious Mr. Robert Boyle, whom he vainly attempted to convert from the errors of the protestant faith. After being employed in several missions to foreign princes, he was in 1674 appointed ambassador to the imperial court, where he acquired the particular favour of the emperor, and formed connections with the men most eminent for science and literature; but, finding a very inconvenient delay of the necessary pecuniary remittances from his court, he determined to return to Florence without waiting the permission of the duke. Shortly after, that prince recalled him, and gave him apartments in his palace, with a considerable pension, but Magalotti preferred retirement, and the quiet prosecution of his studies. In 1684 he composed fifteen Italian odes, in which he has drawn the picture of a woman of noble birth and exquisite beauty, distinguished not only by every personal, but by every mental charm, and yet rendering herself chiefly the object of admiration and delight by her manners and conduct, whom, with no great gallantry, he entitled “The Imaginary Lady.” His next work consisted of Letters against Atheists, in which his learning and philosophy appear to great advantage. In 169 he was appointed a counsellor of state to the grand duke, who sent him his ambassador into Spain to negotiate a marriage between one of his daughters and king Charles II.; but soon after he had accomplished the object of this mission, he sunk into a temporary melancholy. After recovering in about a year, he resumed his literary labours, and published works upon various subjects, and left others which were given to the world after his decease, which happened in 1712, when he had attained the age of 75. Magalotti was as eminent for his piety as he was for his literary talents; unimpeachable in his morals, liberal, beneficent, friendly, polite, and a lively and cheerful, as well as very instructive companion. His house was the constant resort of men of letters from all countries, whom he treated with elegant hospitality. He was deeply conversant with the writings of the ancient philosophers, and was a follower of the Platonic doctrine in his poems. In his natural and philosophical investigations he discarded all authority, and submitted to no other guide but experiment. Among the moderns he was particularly attached to Galileo. After his death a medal was struck in honour of his memory, with the figure of Apollo raised on the reverse, and the inscription Omnia Lustrat.

, an ingenious and learned man of the sixteenth century, was born at Anghiari in Tuscany. He was educated in the Italian universities, where his genius and application carried him almost through the whole circle of sciences; for, besides the belles lettres and law, he applied to the study of war, and even wrote books upon the subject. In this also he afterwards distinguished himself: for he was sent by the Venetians to the isle of Cyprus, with the commission of judge-martial and when the Turks besieged Famagosta, he performed all the services to the place that could have been expected from a skilful engineer. He contrived a kind of mine and fire-engines, by which he laid the labours of the Turks in ruins: and he destroyed in a moment works which had cost them no small time and pains. But they had too good an opportunity of revenging themselves on him; for the city falling at last into their hands, in 1571, Magius became their slave, and was used very barbarously. His comfort lay altogether in the stock of learning with which he was provided; and so prodigious was his memory, that he did not think himself unqualified, though deprived entirely of books, to compose treatises full of quotations. As, he was obliged all the day to do the drudgery of the meanest slave, he spent a great part of the night in writirjg. He wrote in prison a treatise upon bells, “De tintinnabulis,” and another upon the wooden horse, “De equuleo.” He was determined to the first of these subjects by observing, that the Turks had no bells; and to the second, by ruminating upon the various kinds of torture to which his dismal situation exposed him, which brought to his reflection, that the equuleus had never been thoroughly explained. He dedicated the first of these treatises to the emperor’s ambassador at Constantinople, and the other to the French ambassador at the same place. He conjured these ambassadors to use their interest for his liberty; which while they attempted to procure him, they only hastened his death: for the bashaw Mahomet, who had not forgot the mischief which Magius had done the Turks at the siege of Famagosta, being informed that he had been at the Imperial ambassador’s house, whither they had indiscreetly carried him, caused him to be seized again, and strangled that night in prison. This happened in 1572, or 1573, it is not certain which.

The books which he published before he went to Cyprus, are, 1. “De mundi exitio per exustionem libri quinque,” Basil, 1562, folio. 2. “Vitoe illustrium virorum, auctore Æmilio Probo, cum commentariis,” Basil, folio. 3. “Commentaria in quatuor institutionum civilium libros,” Lugd. 8vo. 4. “Miscellanea, sive variae lectiones,” Venet. 1564, 8vo. He also published some books in Italian; the most celebrated of which is his “Delia fortificatione delle citta,” which contains an account of his machines and instruments.

There were other men of considerable eminence in Italy of the same name, among whom we may enumerate, a brother of the preceding, Bartholomew Maggi, a physician at Bologna, who wrote a treatise in Latin, “On the Cure of Gun-shot Wounds,” Bologna, 1552, 4to; VlN­Cent Maggi, a native of Brescia, and celebrated professor of ethics at Ferrara and Padua, author of several works Francis Maria Maggi, who published “Syntagmata linguarum Georgia,” Romae, 1670, folio; and lastly, Charles Maria Maggi, an Italian poet of the seventeenth century, and one of the restorers of good taste in Italy, after the barbarous ravages of the school of Marini. He was born at Milan in 1630, and was secretary to the senate of that city. He died in 1690, and his works were published in the following year by Muratori, at Milan, in 4 vols. 12mo. This poet is mentioned with very high encomiums in the letters between Mrs. Carter and Miss Talbot. The dowager lady Spencer also, when resident at Pisa, published a “Scelta” of his works; and in 1811, “The Beauties” of C. M. Maggi, “paraphrased,” were published by Mariane Starke.

, or Maginus, professor of mathematics in the university of Bologna, was born at Padua in 1536. He was remarkable for his great assiduity in acquiring and improving the knowledge of the mathematical sciences, with several new inventions for these purposes, and for the extraordinary favour he obtained from most princes of his time. This doubtless arose partly from the celebrity he had in matters of astrology, to which he was greatly addicted, making horoscopes, and foretelling events both relating to persons and things. He was invited by the emperor Rodolphus to come to Vienna, where he promised him a professor’s chair, about 1597; but not being able to prevail on him to settle there, he nevertheless gave him a handsome pension. It is said, he was so much addicted to astrological predictions, that he not only foretold many good and evil events relative to others with success, bat even foretold his own death, which came to pass the same year: all which he represented as under the influence of the stars. Tomasini says, that Magini, being advanced to his 61st year, was struck with an apoplexy, which ended his days; and that a long while before, he had told him and others, that he was afraid of that year. And Roffeni, his pupil, says, that Magini died under an aspect of the planets, which, according to his own prediction, would prove fatal to him; and he mentious Riccioli as affirming that he said, the figure of his nativity, and his climacteric year, doomed him to die abouf that time; which happened in 1618, in the 62d year of his age.

His writings do honour to his memory, as they were very considerable, and upon learned subjects. The principal were the following: 1. His Ephemeris, in 3 volumes, from the year 1580 to 1630. 2. Tables of Secondary Motions. 3. Astronomical, Gnomonical, and Geographical Problems. 4. Theory of the Planets, according to Copernicus. 5. A Confutation of Scaliger’s Dissertation concerning the Precession of the Equinox. 6. A Primum Mobile, in 12 books. 7. A Treatise of Plane and Spherical Trigonometry. 8. A Commentary on Ptolomy’s Geography. 9. A Chorographical Description of the Regions and Cities of Italy, illustrated with 60 maps; with some other papers on astrological subjects.

, one of the most celebrated, and certainly one of the most extraordinary men of his time, was born at Florence, Oct. 28 or 29, 1633. His parents, who were of low rank, are said to have been satisfied when they got him into the service of a man who sold fruit and herbs. He had never learned to read, and yet was perpetually poring over the leaves of old books, that were used as waste paper in his master’s shop. A bookseller who lived in the neighbourhood, and who had often observed this, and knew the boy could not read, asked him one day, “what he meant by staring so much on printed paper?” He said, “that he did not know how it was, but that he loved it; that he was very uneasy in the business he was in, and should be the happiest creature in the world, if he could live with him, who had always so many books about him.” The bookseller, pleased with his answer, consented to take him, if his master was willing to part with him. Young Magliabechi thanked him with tears in his eyes, and having obtained his master’s leave, went directly to his new employment, which he had not followed long before he could find any book that was asked for, as ready as the bookseller himself. This account of his early life, which Mr. Spence received from a gentleman of Florence, who was well acquainted with Magliabechi and his family, differs considerably from that given by Niceron, Tiraboschi, and Fabroni. From the latter, indeed, we learn that he was placed as an apprentice to a goldsmith, after he had been taught the principles of drawing, and he had a brother that was educated to the law, and made a considerable figure in that profession. His father died while he was an infant, but Fabroni makes no mention of his poverty. It seems agreed, however, that after he had learned to read, that became his sole employment, but he never applied himself to any particular study. He read every book almost indifferently, as they happened to come into his hands, with a surprizing quickness; and yet such was his prodigious memory, that he not only retained the sense of what he read, but often all the words, and the very manner of spelling them, if there was any thing peculiar of that kind in any author.

This extraordinary application, and talents, soon recommended him to Ermini, librarian to the cardinal de Medicis, and to Marmi, the grand duke’s librarian, who introduced him into the company of the literati, and made him known at court. Every where he began to be looked upon as a prodigy, particularly for his vast and unbounded memory, of which many remarkable anecdotes have been given. A gentleman at Florence, who had written a piece that was to be printed, lent the manuscript to Magliabechi; and some time after it had been returned with thanks, came to him again with the story of a pretended accident by which he had lost his manuscript. The author seemed inconsolable, and intreated Magliabechi, whose character for remembering what he read was already very great, to try to recollect as much of it as he possibly could, and write it down for him against his next visit. Magliabechi assured him he would, and wrote down the whole ms. without missing a word, or even varying any where from the spelling. Whatever our readers may think of this trial of his memory, it is certain that by treasuring up at least the subject and the principal parts of all the books he ran over, his head became at last, as one of his acquaintances expressed it to Mr. Spence, “An universal index both of titles and matter.”

By this time Magliabechi was become so famous for the vast extent of his reading, and his amazing retention of what he had read, that he was frequently consulted by the learned, when meditating a work on any subject. For example, and a curious example it is, if a priest was going to compose a panegyric on any saint, and came to consult Magliabechi, he would immediately tell him, who had said any thing of that saint, and in what part of their works, and that sometimes to the number of above an hundred authors. He would tell not only who had treated of the subject designedly, but point out such as had touched upon it only incidentally; both which he did with the greatest exactness, naming the author, the book, the words, and often the very number of the page in which they were inserted. All this he did so often, so readily, and so exactly, that he came at last to be looked upon as an oracle, on account of the ready and full answers that he gave to all questions, that were proposed to him in any faculty or science whatever. The same talent induced the grand duke Cosmo III. to appoint him his librarian, and no man perhaps was ever better qualified for the situation, or more happy to accept it, He was also very conversant with the books in the Laurentian library, and the keeping of those of Leopold and Francis Maria, the two cardinals of Tuscany. Yet all this, it is said, did not appease his voracious appetite; he was thought to have read all the books printed before his time, and all in it. Doubtless this range, although very extensive, must be understood of Italian literature only or principally. Crescembini paid him the highest compliment on this. Speaking of a dispute whether a certain poem had ever been printed or not, he concluded it had not, “because Magliabechi had never seen it.” We learn farther that it was a general custom for authors and printers to present him with a copy of whatever they printed, which must have been a considerable help towards the very large collection of books which he himself made. His mode of reading in his latter days is said to have been this. When a book first came into his hands, he would look over the title-page, then dip here and there in the preface, dedication and advertisements, if there were any; and then cast his eyes on each of the divisions, the different sections, or chapters, and then he would be able to retain the contents of that volume in his memory, and produce them if wanted. Soon after he had adopted this method of what Mr. Spence calls “fore-shortening his reading,” a priest who had composed a panegyric on one of his favourite saints, brought it to Magliabechi as a present. He read it over in his new way, the title-page and heads of the chapters, &c. and then thanked the priest very kindly “for his excellent treatise.” The author, in some pain, asked him, “whether that was all that he intended to read of his book?” Magliabechi coolly answered, “Yes, for I know very well every thing that is in it.” This anecdote, however, may be explained otherwise than upon the principles of memory. Magliabechi knew all that the writers before had said of this saint, and he knew this priest’s turn and character, and thence judged what he would chuse out of them and what he would omit. Magliabechi had even a local memory of the place where every book stood, as in his master’s shop at first, and in the Pitti, and several other libraries afterwards; and seems to have carried this farther than only in relation to the collections of books with which he was personally acquainted. One day the grand duke sent for him after he was his librarian, to ask him whether he could get him a book that was particularly scarce. “No, sir,” answered Magliabechi; “for there is but one in the world; that is in the grand signior’s library at Constantinople, and is the seventh book on the second shelf on the right hand as you go in.” Though this extraordinary man must have lived a sedentary life, with the most intense and almost perpetual application to books, yet he arrived to a good old age. He died in his eighty-first year, July 14, 1714. By his will he left a very fine library of his own collectionfor the use of the public, with a fund to maintain it and whatever should remain over to the poor. By the funds which he left, by the addition of several other collections, and the bounty of some of the grand dukes, his library was so much augmented as to vie with some of the most considerable in Europe. Of this collection, a catalogue and description of the works printed in the fifteenth century was published by Fossi, under the tide “Catalogus codicum sseculo XV impressorum in Bibliotheca Magliabechiana, Florentiae adservantur,” Florence, 3 vols. fol. 1793—1795.

Of the domestic habits of Magliabechi, we have many accounts that represent him as an incorrigible sloven. His attention was so entirely absorbed by his books and studies, that he totally neglected all the decencies of form and ceremony, and often forgot the most urgent wants of human nature. His employment under the grand duke did not at all change his manner of life: the philosopher still continued negligent in his dress, and simple in his manners. An old cloak served him for a gown in the day, and for bed-clothes at night. He had one straw chair for his table, and another for his bed; in which he generally continued fixed among his books till he was overpowered by sleep. The duke provided a commodious apartment for him in his palace; of which Magliabechi was with much difficulty persuaded to take possession; and which he quitted in four months, returning to his house on various pretences, against all the remonstrances of his friends. He was, however, characterized by an extraordinary modesty, and by a sincere and beneficent disposition, which his friends often experienced in their wants. He was a great patron of men of learning, and ha4 the highest pleasure in assisting them with his advice and information, in furnishing them with all necessary books and manuscripts. Cardinal Nods used to call him his Maecenas; and, writing to him one day, he told him he thought himself more obliged to him for direction in his studies, than to the pope for raising him to the purple. He had the utmost aversion to any thing that looked like constraint. The grand duke knew his disposition, and therefore always dispensed with his personal attendance upon him; and, when he had any orders to give him, sent him them in writing. The pope and the emperor would gladly have drawn him into their service, but he constantly refused their most honourable and advantageous offers. The regimen he observed contributed not a little to preserve his health to old age. He always kept his head warmly covered, and took at certain times treacle, which he esteemed an excellent preservative against noxious vapours. He loved strong wine, but drank it in small quantities. He lived upon the plainest and most ordinary food. Three hard eggs and a draught of water was his usual repast. He took tobacco, to which he was a slave, to excess; but was absolute master of himself in every other article.

He died in the midst of the public applause, after enjoying, during all the latter part of his life, such an affluence as very few persons have ever procured by their knowledge or learning, and which, as he had acquired honourably, he bestowed liberally.

Though he never composed any work himself, yet the commonwealth of learning are greatly obliged to him for several, the publication of which was owing to him; such as the Latin poems of Henry de Settimello, the “Hodseporicon” of Ambrose Camaldula, the “Dialogue” of Benedict Aretin, and many others. A collection of letters addressed to him by literary men was printed at Florence, in 1745, but is said to be incomplete.

, a celebrated Capuchin, born at Milan in 1586, descended from the earls of Magni, acquired great reputation in the seventeenth century by his controversial writings against the protestants, and philosophical ones in favour of Descartes against Aristotle. He passed through the highest offices in his order, and was apostolical missionary to the northern kingdoms. It was by his advice that pope Urban VIII. abolished the Jesuitesses in 1631. Uladislaus king of Poland, solicited a cardinal’s hat for Magni; but the Jesuits are said to have opposed it. They certainly informed against him as a heretic, because he had said that the pope’s primacy and infallibility were not founded on scripture, and he was imprisoned at Vienna; but regained his liberty by favour of the emperor Ferdinand III. after having written very warmly against the Jesuits in his defence. He retired at last to Saltzburg, and died there, 1661, aged seventyfive. Mention is made of Magni in the sixteenth Provincial Letter and one of his Apologetical Letters may be found in the collection entitled “Tuba magna,” tom. II.

, a celebrated botanist of Montpellier, was born in 1638. He was bred to physic, but, being a protestant, could not take his degree there. He appears, however, afterwards to have obtained it elsewhere, and practised physic at Montpellier for a long course of years, and at the same time very assiduously cultivated botany, with the most enlarged views to its advancement as a science. He was beloved for his urbanity, and esteemed for his knowledge. Numerous botanists flocked at this time to Montpellier, that neighbourhood being famous for its vegetable riches; and these were all eager to enjoy the society, and to benefit by the guidance and instructions of so able a man. Among the pupils of Magnol were Fagon and the illustrious Tournefort, who regularly studied under tym, and on many subsequent occasions gratefully acknowledged their obligations to him. He was not chosen public professor till 1694, when he assumed the guise at least of Catholicism.

In 1676 our author published at Lyons his first work, the “Botanicum Monspeliense/' republished at Montpellier in 1688, with a new tide-page and appendix. In this book all the plants enumerated are found wild about Montpellier, and almost entirely gathered there by the author himself. It is, in fact, one of the most original and authentic works of its kind, being to the Montpellier botanists what Ray’s Synopsis is to those of Britain, the basis of all their knowledge. In 1689 Magnol published an octavo volume entitled” Prodromus Historic Generalis Plantarum,“in which he undertook a scheme of natural arrangement, according to the method of Ray, deduced from all the parts of a plant; and the vegetable kingdom, is disposed into 76 families, subdivided into genera. In 1697 appeared the” Hortus Regius Monspeliensis," 8vo,. an alphabetical catalogue of the garden, in which several new or rare species are described as well as figured. In their generic distribution the author conforms to Tournefort principally, and his preface shews how much he had contemplated this subject and its difficulties. When we consider that Magnol had had the care of the garden only three years previous to the publication of this rich catalogue, and that he found the collection in a very poor state, the book is an honourable monument of his industry as well as knowledge.

In 1708 Magnol was admitted a member of the 'academic des sciences of Paris, in the place of his distinguished friend Tournefort, and contributed some papers to their memoirs. He died in 1715, at the age of seventy-seven. He left a son, named Anthony, who wa professor of physic at Montpellier, but not of Botany. To this son we are indebted for the publication of the “Novus Character Plantarum,” on which the fame of Magnol as a systematic botanist chiefly rests. This posthumous work appeared in 1720, making a quarto volume of 341 pages. The system therein taught is much celebrated by Linnæus, who in his Classes Plautarutn, 375 403, gives a general view of it, expressing his wonder that so new and singular a system had not made more proselytes. That noble genus of trees or shrubs, called the Magnolia, received that name from Plumier, in honour of our author.

, a French poet of the seventeenth century, was bred up as an advocate, and for some time followed that profession at Lyons. He then became a dramatic writer, and produced several pieces, of which the least bad is a tragedy called Artaxerxes; this has some plot, good sentiments, and characters tolerably supported. He then conceived the extraordinary project of writing an encyclopaedia in verse, which was to consist of ten volumes, each containing twenty thousand verses. Being asked, after some time, when this work would be finished “Very soon,” said he, “I have now only a hundred thousand verses to write.” His project, however, was cut off, notwithstanding this near approach to its conclusion, as he was murdered by thieves at Paris, in 1662. His verses were bad enough to account for his facility in producing them, yet he was a friend of Moliere. A part of his great work appeared in folio in 1663, with the magnificent title of “Science Universelle.” The preface was still more pompous: “Libraries,” says he, “will hereafter be for ornament only, not use.” Yet how few contain this wonderful work!

, archbishop of Upsal, in Sweden, was born at Lincoping in 1488; was a violent opposer of the protestant religion, and laboured much, though in vain, to prevent the king, Gustavus, from introducing it into his kingdom. Magnus, being persecuted on this account, retired to Rome, where he was received with great marks of regard, and died therein 1544. He was author of, 1. “A History of Sweden,” in twenty-four books, published in 1554, in folio. 2.“A History of the Archbishops of Upsal,” which he carried down as low as 1544. This was also in folio, and appeared in 1657 and 1560.

, brother of the former, and his successor in the archbishopric of Upsal, distinguished himself at the council of Trent, and suffered in Sweden, as his brother also had done, many vexations from his attachment to the Roman catholic persuasion. His work, by which he is very generally known, is “A History of the manners, customs, and wars of the People bf the North.” This contains many curious particulars, but many also that are minute, and several that are doubtful; nor does the author ever fail to display his animosity against the protestants. He died at Home in 1555.

, or Mohammed, founder of the system of religious imposture called Mahometanism, was born in the year 569, at Mecca, a city of Arabia, of the tribe of the Korashites, which was reckoned the noblest in all that country; and was descended in a direct line from Pher Koraish, the founder of it. Yet in the beginning of his life he was in a very poor condition; for his father dying before he was two years old, and while his grandfather was still living, all the power and wealth of his family devolved to his uncles, especially Abu Taleb. Abu Taleb, after the death of his father, bore the chief sway in Mecca during the whole of a very long life; and it was under his protection chiefly, that Mahomet, when he first began topropagate his imposture, was sufficiently supported against all opposers, so as to be able, after his death, to establish it through all Arabia by his own power.

After his father’s death he continued under the tuition of his mother till the eighth year of his age; when she also dying, he was taken home to his grandfather, who at his death, which happened the year after, committed him to the care of his uncle Abu Taleb, to be educated by him. Abu Taleb, being a merchant, taught him his business, and, as soon as he was of sufficient age, sent him with his camels into Syria; in which employment he continued under his uncle till the 25th year of his age. One of the chief men of the city then dying, and his widow, whose name was Cadiga, wanting a factor to manage her stock? she invited Mahomet into her service. He accepted her terms, traded three years for her at Damascus and other places, and acquitted himself in this charge so much to her satisfaction, that, about the twenty-eighth year of his age, she gave herself to him in marriage, although she was twelve years older. From being her servant he was now advanced to be master of both her person and fortune; and, finding himself equal in wealth to the best men of the city, he began to entertain ambitious thoughts of possessing the sovereignty over it.

Among the various means to effect this, none seemed to him more eligible than that imposture which he afterwards published with so much success, and so much mischief to the world. The extensive trade which he carried on in Egypt, Palestine, and Syria, having made him well acquainted with both Christians and Jews, and given him an opportunity of observing with what eagerness they and the several sects into which the Christians of the Eastwerd then miserably divided, engaged against each other, he concluded that nothing would be more likely to gain a party firm to him for the attaining the ends at which he aimed, than the invention of a new religion. In this, however, he proceeded leisurely; for it was not till his thirty-eighth year that he began to prepare his design. He then withdrew himself from his former way of living, which is said to have been very licentious and wicked; and, affecting an hermit’s life, used every morning to retire into a solitary cave near Mecca, called the Cave of Hira; and there continued all day, exercising himself, as he pretended, in prayers, fastings, and holy meditations. Thus he went on for two years, during which time he gained over his wife Cadiga, who was his first proselyte, by pretending visions which he had seen, and voices which he had heard, in his retirement. It is to be observed, says Dr. Prideaux, that Mahomet began this imposture about the same time that the bishop of Rome, by virtue of a grant from the tyrant Phocas, first assumed the title of universal pastor. Phocas made this grant in the year 606, and Mahomet in the same year retired to his cave to contrive that deception which he began in the year 608 to propagate at Mecca.

In his fortieth year, Mahomet began to take upon him the style of the Apostle of God, and under that character to carry on the plan which he had now contrived; but for four years he confined his doctrines to such as he either had most confidence in, or thought himself most likely to gain. When he had gained a few disciples, some of whom, however, were the principal men of the city, he began to publish it to the people at Mecca, in his forty-fourth year, and openly to declare himself a prophet sent by God, to convert them from the error of paganism, and to teach them the true religion. On his first appearance, he was treated with derision and contempt, and called by the people a sorcerer, magician, liar, impostor, and teller of fables, of which he frequently complains in the Koran; so that for the first year he made little or no progress. But persevering in his design, which he managed with great address, he afterwards gained so many proselytes, that in the fifth year of his pretended mission, he had increased his party to the number of thirty-nine, himself making the fortieth. People now began to be alarmed at the progress he made. Those who were addicted to the idolatry of their forefathers, stood up to oppose him as an enemy of their gods, and a dangerous innovator in their religion. Others, who saw further into his designs, thought it time to put a stop to them, for the sake of preserving the government, at which they thought he aimed: and therefore they combined together against him, and intended to have cut him off with the sword. But Abu Taleb, his uncle, defeated their design; and by his power, as being chief of the tribe, preserved him from many other attempts of the same nature; for though Abu Taleb himself persisted in the paganism of his ancestors, yet he had so much affection for the impostor, as being his kinsman, and one that was bred up in his house, and under his care, that he extended his full protection to Mahomet as long as he lived. The principal arguments, which Mahomet employed to delude men into a belief of this imposture, were promises and threats, both well calculated to influence the affections of the vulgar. His promises were chiefly of Paradise, which with great art he framed agreeably to the taste of the Arabians: for they, lying within the torrid zone, were, through the nature of their climate, as well as the corruption of their manners, exceedingly given to the love of women; and the scorching heat and dryness of the country, making rivers of water, cooling drinks, shaded gardens, and pleasant fruits, most refreshing and delightful unto them, they were from hence apt to place their highest enjoyment in things of this nature. For this reason, he made the joys of his Paradise to consist totally in these particulars; which he promises them abundantly in many places of the Koran. On the contrary, he described the punishments of hell, which he threatened to all who would not believe in him, to consist of such torments as would appear to them the most afflicting and grievous to be borne; as, “that they should drink nothing but boiling and stinking water, nor breathe any thing but exceeding hot winds, things most terrible in Arabia; that they should dwell for ever in continual fire, excessively burning, and be surrounded with a black hot salt smoke, as with a coverlid, &c.” and, that he might omit nothing which could work on their fears, he terrified them with the threats of grievous punishments in this life. To which purpose he expatiated, upon all occasions, on the terrible calamities which had befallen such as would not be instructed by the prophets who, were sent before him; how the old world was destroyed by water, for not being reformed at the preaching of Noah; how Sodom was consumed by fire from heaven, for not hearkening to Lot when sent unto them; and how the Egyptians were plagued for despising Moses: for he allowed the divinity of both the Old and New Testament, and that Moses and Jesus Christ were prophets sent from God; but alledged that the Jews and Christians had corrupted those sacred books, and that he was sent to purge them from those corruptions, and to restore the law of Cod to that original purity in which it was first delivered. And this is the reason, that most of the passages which he takes out of the Old and New Testaments, appear different in the Koran from what we find them in those sacred books.

Mahomet pretended to receive all his revelations from the angel Gabriel, who, he said, was sent from God, on purpose to deliver them unto him. He was subject, it is said, to the falling-sickness, and whenever the fit was upon him, he pretended it to be a trance, and that then the angel Gabriel was come from God with some new revelations. These revelations he arranged in several chapters; which make up the Koran, the Bib!e of the Mahometans. The original of this book was laid up, as he taught his followers, in the archives of heaven; and the angel Gabriel brought him the copy of it, chapter by chapter, as occasion required that they should be published to the people; that is, as often as any new measure was to be pursued, any objection against him or his religion to be answered, any difficulty to be solved, any discontent among his people to be quieted, any offence to be removed, or any thing else done for the furtherance of his grand scheme, his constant recourse was to the angel Gabriel for a new revelation; and then appeared some addition to the Koran, to serve his purpose. But what perplexed him most was, that his opposers demanded to see a miracle from him; “for,” said they, “Moses, and Jesus, and the rest of the prophets, according to thy own doctrine, worked miracles to prove their mission from God; and therefore, if thou be a prophet, and greater than any that were sent before thee, as thou boastest thyself to be, do thou work the like miracles to manifest it unto us.” This objection he endeavoured to evade by several answers; all oi which amount omy to this, “that God had sent Moses and Jesus with miracles, and yet men would not be obedient to their word; and therefore he had now sent him in the last place without miracles, to force them by the power of the sword to do his will.” Hence it has become the universal doctrine of the Mahometans, that their religion is to be propagated by the sword, and that all true mussulmen are bound to fight for it. It has even been said to be a custom among them for their preachers, while they deliver their sermons, to have a drawn sword placed by them, to denote, that the doctrines they teach are to be defended and propagated by the sword Some miracles, at the same time, Mahomet is said to have wrought; as, “That he clave the moon in two; that trees went forth to meet him, &c. &c.” but those who relate them are only such as are ranked among their fabulous and legendary writers: their learned doctors renounce them all; and when they are questioned, how without miracles they can prove his mission, their common answer is, that the Koran itself is the greatest of all miracles; for that Mahomet, who was an illiterate person, who could neither write nor read, or that any man else, by human wisdom alone, should be able to compose such a book, is, they think, impossible. On this Mahomet himself also frequently insists, challenging in several places of the Koran, both men and devils, by their united skill, to compose any thing equal to it, or to any part of it. From all which they conclude, and as they think, infallibly, that this book could come from none other but God himself; and that Mahomet, from whom they received it, was his messenger to bring it unto them. That the Koran, as to style and language, is the standard of elegance in the Arabian tongue, and Uiat Mahomet was in truth what they aifirm him to have been, a rude and illiterate man, ate points agreed on all sides. A question therefore will arise among those who are not so sure that this book was brought by the angel Gabriel from heaven, by whose help it was compiled, and the imposture framed? There is the more reason to ask this, because this book itself contains so many particulars of the Jewish and Christian religions, as necessarily suppose the authors of it to have been well skilled in both; which Mahomet, who was bred an idolater, and lived so for the first forty years of his life, among a people totally illiterate, for such his tribe was by principle and profession, cannot be supposed to have been: but this is a question not so easily to be answered, because the nature of the thing required it to have been transacted very secretly. Besides this, the scene of this imposture being at least six hundred miles within the country of Arabia, amidst those barbarous nations, who all immediately embraced it, and would not permit any of another religion to live among them, it could not at that distance be so well investigated by those who were most concerned to discover the fraud. That Mahomet composed the Koran by the help of others, was a thing well known at Metca, when he first published his imposture there; and he was often reproached on that account by his opposers, as he himself more than once complains. In the twenty-fifth chapter of the Koran, has words are “They say, that the Koran is nothing but a lie of thy own invention, and others have been assisting to thee herein.” A passage in the sixteenth chapter also, particularly points at one of those who was then looked upon to have had a principal hand in this matter: “I know they will say, that a man hath taught him the Koran; but he whom they presume to have taught him is a Persian by nation, and speaketh the Persian language. But the Koran is in the Arabic tongue, full of instruction and eloquence.” The person here pointed at, was one Abdia Ben Salon, a Persian Jew, whose name he afterwards changed into Abdollah Ebn Salem, to make it correspond with the Arabic dialect; and almost all who have written of this imposture have mentioned him as the chief architect used by Mahomet in the framing of it: for he was an artful man, thoroughly skilled in all the learning of the Jews; and therefore Mahomet seems to have received from him whatsoever of the rites and customs of the Jews he has ingrafted into his religion. Besides this Jew, the impostor derived some aid from a Christian monk: and the many particulars in the Koran, relating to the Christian religion, plainly prove him to have had such an helper. He was a monk of Syria, of the sect of the Nestorians. The name which he had in his monastery, and which he has since retained among the western writers, is Sergius, though Bahira was that which he afterwards assumed in Arabia, and by which he has ever since been mentioned in the East, by all that write or speak of him. Mahomet, as it is related, became acquainted with this Bahira, in one of his journeys into Syria, either at Bostra or at Jerusalem: and receiving great satisfaction from him in many of those points in which he had desired to be informed, contracted a particular friendship with him; so that Bahira being not long after excommunicated for some great crime, and expelled his monastery, fled to Mecca to him, was entertained in his house, and became his assistant in the framing of his imposture, and continued with him ever after; till Mahomet having, as it is reported, no farther occasion for him, to secure the secret, put him to death.

Many other particulars are recorded by some ancient writers, both as to the composition of the Koran, and also as to the manner of its first propagation; as, that the impostor taught a bull to bring it him on his horns in a public assembly, as if it had been this way sent to him from God; that he bred up pigeons to come to his ears, to make it appear as if the Holy Ghost conversed with him; stories which have no foundation at all in truth, although they have been credited by great and learned men. Grotius in particular, in that part of his book “De veritate, &c.” which contains a refutation of Mahometanism, relates the story of the pigeon; on which our celebrated orientalist Pococke, who undertook an Arabic version of that performance, asked Grotius, “Where he had picked up this story, whether among the Arabians, or the Christians?” To which Grotius replied, that “he had not indeed met with it in any Arabian author, but depended entirely upon the authority of the Christian writers for the truth of it.” Pococke thought fit, therefore, to omit it in his version, lest we should expose ourselves to the contempt of the Arabians, by not being able to distinguish the religion ofc Mahomet from the tales and fictions which its enemies have invented concerning it; and by pretending to confute the Koran, without knowing the foundation on which its authority stands.

Jn the eighth year of his pretended mission, his party growing formidable at Mecca, the city passed a decree, by which they forbade any more to join themselves with him. This, however, did not much affect him, while his uncle Abu Taieb lived to protect him: but he dying two years after, and the government of the city then falling into the hands of his enemies, the opposition was renewed against him, and a stop soon put to the further progress of his designs at Mecca. Mahomet, therefore, seeing all his hopes crushed here, began to think of settling elsewhere; and as his uncle Abbas lived for the most part at Tayif, a town sixty miles distant from Mecca towards the East, and was a man of power and interest, he took a journey thither, under his protection, in order to propagate his imposture there. But, after a month’s stay, finding himself unable to gain even one proselyte, he returned to Mecca, with a resolution to wait for such further advantages as time and opportunity might offer. His wife Cadiga being now dead, after living with him twenty-two years, he took two other wives in her stead, Ayesha the daughter of Abubeker, and Lewda the daughter of Zama; adding a while after to them a third, named Haphsa the daughter of Omar; and by thus making himself son-in-law to three of the principal men of his party, he strengthened his interest considerably.

In the twelfth year of his pretended mission is placed the mesra, that is, his famous night-journey from Mecca to Jerusalem, and thence to heaven; of which he tells us in the seventeenth chapter of the Koran; for the people calling on him for miracles to prove his mission, and finding himself unable to feign any, to solve the matter, he invented this story of his journey to heaven. The story, as related in the Koran, and believed by the Mahometans, is this. At night, as he lay in his bed with iris best beloved wife Ayesha, he heard a knocking at his door; upon which, arising, he found there the angel Gabriel, with seventy pair of wings expanded from his sides, whiter than snow, and clearer than crystal, and the beast Alborak standing by him; which, they say, is the beast on which the prophets used to ride when they were carried from one place to another, upon the execution of any divine command. Mahomet describes it to be a beast as white as milk, and of a mixt nature, between an ass and a mule, and of a size between both, but of such extraordinary swiftness as to equal even lightning itself.

As soon as Mahomet appeared at the door, the angel Gabriel kindly embraced him, saluted him in the name of God, and told him that he was sent to bring him unto God into heaven; where he should see strange mysteries, which were not lawful to be seen by any other man. He prayed him then to get upon Alborak; but the beast having lain idle and unemployed from the time of Christ to Mahomet, was grown so mettlesome and skittish, that he would not stand still for Mahomet to mount him, till at length he was forced to bribe him to it, by promising him a place in Paradise. When he was firmly seated on him, the angel Gabriel led the way, with the bridle of the beast in his hand, and carried the prophet from Mecca to Jerusalem, in the twinkling of an eye. On his coming thither, all the departed prophets and saints appeared at the gate of the temple, to salute him; and thence, attending him into the chief oratory, desired him to pray for them, and then withdrew. After this, Mahomet went out of the temple with the angel Gabriel, and found a ladder of light ready fixed for them, which they immediately ascended, leaving Alborak tied to a rock till their return.

On their arrival at the first heaven, the angel knocked at the gate; and informing the porter who he was, and that he had brought Mahomet the friend of God, he was immediately admitted. This first heaven, he tells us, was all of pure silver; from whence he saw the stars hanging from it by chains of gold, each as big as mount Noho, near Mecca, in Arabia. On his entrance, he met a decrepid old man, who, it seems, was our first father, Adam; and as he advanced, he saw a multitude of angels in all manner of shapes; in the shape of birds, beasts, and men. We must not forget to observe, that Adam had the piety immediately to embrace the prophet, giving God thanks for so great a son; and then recommended himself to his prayers. From this first heaven, the impostor tells us, he ascended into the second, which was at the distance of five hundred years journey above it; and this he makes to be the distance of every one of the seven heavens, each above the other. Here the gates being opened to him as before, at his entrance he met Noah, who, rejoicing much at the sight of him, recommended himself to his prayers. This heaven was all of pure gold, and there were twice as many angels in it as in the former; for he tells us that' the number of angels in every heaven increased as he advanced. From this second heaven he ascended into the third, which was made of precious stones, where he met Abraham, who also recommended himself to his prayers; Joseph the son of Jacob, did the same in the fourth heaven, which was all of emerald; Moses in the fifth, which was all of adamant; and John the Baptist in the sixth, which was all of carbuncle: xvhence he ascended into the seventh, which was all of divine light, and here he found Jesus Christ. However, it is observed, that here he alters his style; for he does not say that Jesus Christ recommended himself to his prayers, but that he recommended himself to the prayers of Jesus Christ.

The angel Gabriel having brought him thus far, told him that he was not permitted to attend him any further; and therefore directed him to ascend the rest of the way to the throne of God by himself. This he performed with great difficulty, passing through rough and dangerous places, till he came where he heard a voice, saying unto him, “O Mahornet, salute thy Creator;” whence, ascending higher, he came into a place where he saw a vast expansion of light, so exceedingly bright, that his eyes could not bear it. This, it seems, was the habitation of the Almighty, where his throne was placed; on the right side of which, he says, God’s name and his own were written in these Arabic words: “La ellah ellallah Mohammed resul ollah;” that is, “There is no God but God, and Mahomer is his prophet,” which is at this day the creed of the Mahometans. Being approached to the divine presence, he teils us that God entered into a familiar converse with him, revealed to him many hidden mysteries, made him understand the whole of his law, gave him many things in charge concerning his instructing men in the knowledge of it; and in conclusion, bestowed on him several privileges above the rest of mankind. He then returned, and found the angel Gabriel waiting for him in the place where he left him. The angel led him back along the seven heavens, through which he had brought him, and set him again upon the beast Alborak, which stood tied at the rock near Jerusalem. Then he conducted him back to Mecca, in the same manner as he brought him thence; and all this within the space of the tenth part of one night.

On his relating this extravagant fiction to the people the next morning after he pretended the thing to have happened, it was received by them, as it deserved, with a general outcry; and the imposture was never in greater danger of being totally blasted, than by this ridiculous fable. But, how ridiculous soever the story may appear, Mahomet had a further design in it than barely telling such a miraculous adventure of himself to the people. Hitherto he had only given them the Koran, which was his written law; and had pretended to be nothing more than barely the messenger of God in publishing it, as it was delivered to him by the angel Gabriel. But now, learning from his friend Abdalla, that the Jews, besides the written law dictated by God himself, had also another law, called the oral law, given with it, as they pretend, to Moses himself while in the mount; and understanding that this law, which had its whole foundation in the sayings and dictates of Moses, was in as great veneration with them as the other; he had a mind for the future to advance his authority to the same pitch, and to make all his sayings and dictates pass for oracles among the mussulmen, as those which were pretended to proceed from Moses did among the Jews; and for this end chiefly it was, that he invented this story of his journey to heaven.

The story, however, whatever advantages he might gain by it when the imposture became more firmly established, was deemed at present so grossly ridiculous, that it occasioned the revolt of many of his disciples, and made his stay at Mecca no longer practicable. But what he lost at Mecca he gained at Medina, then called Yathreb, a city lying 270 miles north-west from Mecca; which was inhabited, the one part by Jews, and the other by heretical Christians. These two parties not agreeing, feuds and factions rose at length so high among them, that one party, exasperated against the other, went over to Mahomet. Thus we are told, that in the thirteenth year of his pretended mission, there came to him from thence seventy-three men and two women. Twelve of these he retained awhile with him at, Mecca, to instruct them in his new religion; then sent, them buck to Yathreb, as his twelve apostles, to propagate it in that town. In this they laboured abundantly, and with such success, that in a short time they drew over the greatest part of the inhabitants; of which Mahomet receiving an account, resolved to go thither immediately, finding it unsafe to continue any longer at Mecca.

On the 12th day of the month, which the Arabs call the Former Rabia, that is, on the 24th of our September, he came to Yathreb, and was received with great acclamations by the party which called him thither. This party is supposed to have been the Christians, and this supposition is confirmed by what he says of each of them in the fifth chapter of the Koran, which is one of the first he published after his coming to Yathreb. His words are these: “Thou shalt find the Jews to be very great enemies to the true believers, and the Christians to have great inclination and amity towards them.” By which we may see into what a deplorable decay the many divisions and distractions which then reigned in the eastern church had brought the Christian religion, when its professors could so easily desert it for that gross imposture which an illiterate barbarian proposed to them. On his first coming to Yathreb, he lodged in the house of Chalid Abu Job, one of the chief men of the party that called him thither, till he had built a house for himself. This he immediately undertook, and erected a mosque at the same time, for the exercise of his new-invented religion; and having thus settled himself in, this town, he continued there to the time of his death. From this flight of Mahomet, the Hegira, which is the sera of the Mahometans, begins its computation: Hegira, in. the Arabic language, signifying flight. It was first appointed by Omar, the third emperor of the Saracens, and takes its beginning from the 16th of July, in the year 622. Indeed the day that Mahomet left Mecca was on the first of the Former Rabia; and he came to Medina on the 12th of the same month, that is on the 24th of our September; but the Hegira begins two months before, from the first of Moharram: for, that being the first month of the Arabian year, Omar would make no alteration as to that, but anticipated the computation fifty-niue days, that he might commence his sera from the beginning of that year, in which the flight of the impostor happened, from which it topk its name.

The first thing that Mahomet did after he had settled himself at Medina, was to marry his daughter Fatima* to his cousin Ali. She was the only child then living of six which were born to him of Cadiga his first wife; and indeed the only one which he had, notwithstanding the mcltifnde of his wives who survived him. Having now obtained the end at which he had long been aiming, that is, that of having a town at his command, he entered upon a scheme entirely new. Hitherto he had been only preaching his religion for thirteen years together; for the remaining ten years of his life he took the sword, and fought for it. He had long been teazed and perplexed at Mecca with questions, and objectiows, and disputes about what he had preached, by which he/v as often put to silence-; but iKjnceforth he forbad all manner of disputing, telling his disciples that his religion was to be propagated not by disputing, but by fighting. He commanded them therefore to arm themselves, and slay with the sword all that. would not embrace it, unless they submitted to pay a yearly tribute for the redemption of their lives: and according to this injunction, even to this day, all who live under any Mahometan government, and are not of their religion, pay an annual tax for a mulct of their infidelity; and are punished with death if they contradict or oppose any doctrine taught by Mahomet. After he had sufficiently infused this doctrine into his disciples, he next proceeded to put it in practice; and having erected his standard, called them all to come armed to it. His first expeditious were against the trading caravans, in their journeys between Mecca and Syria, which he attacked with various success; and-if we except the establishing and adjusting a few particulars relating to his grand scheme, as occasion required, his time, for the two first years after his flight, was wholly spent in predatory excursions upon his neighbours, in robbing, plundering, and destroying all those that lived near Medina, who would not embrace his religion.

In the third year of the Hegira, A. D. 624, he made war upon those tribes of the Arabs which were of the Jewish religion near him; and having taken their castles, and reduced them under his power, he sold them all for slaves, and divided their goods among his followers. But the battle of Ohud, which happened towards the end of this year, had like to have proved fatal to him; for his uncle Hamza, who bore the standard, was killed, himself grievously wounded, and escaped only by one of his companions comincr to his assistance. This defeat gave rise to many objections against him, some asked, How a prophet of God could be overthrown in a battle by the infidels and others murmured as much for the loss of their friends and relations who were slain. To satisfy the former, he Jakt the cause of the overthrow on the sins of some that followed him; and said, that for this reason God suffered them to he overthrown, that so the good might be distinguished from the bad, and that those who were true believers might on this occasion be discerned from those who were not. Tq quiet the complaints of the latter, he invented his doctrine of fate and predestination; telling them that those who were slain in the battle, though they had tarried at home in their houses, must nevertheless have died at that moment, the time of every man’s life being predetermined by God; but-as they died fighting for the faith, they gained the advantage of the crown of martyrdon), and the rewards which were due to it in Paradise; both which doctrines served his purpose so well, that he proj>a-jated them afterwards on all occasions. They have also been the favourite notions of the Mahometans ever since, and enforced especially in their wars; where, it musk be owned, nothing can be more conducive to make them fight valiantly, than a settled opinion, that to whatever dangers they expose themselves, they cannot die either sooner or later than is predestinated by God; and that, in case this predestined time be come, they shall, by dying martyrs for their religion, immediately enter into Paradise as the reward of it.

In the fourth year of the Hegira, A. D. 625, he waged war with the Nadirites, a tribe of the Jewish Arabs in the neighbourhood; and the same year fought the battle of Beder, and had many other skirmishes with those who refused to submit: in all which he had sometimes prosperous and sometimes dubious success. But while his army was abroad on these expeditions, some of his principal men engaging in play and drinking, quarrelled, and raised such a disturbance among the rest, that they had like to have endangered his whole scheme; and, therefore, to prevent any mischief cf this kind for the future, he forbade the use of wine, and all games of chance. In the fifth and sixth years, he was engaged in various wars, and subdued, several tribes of the Arabs. After so many advantages obtained, being much increased in strength, he marched his army against Mecca, and fought a battle near it the consequence of which was, that, neither side gaining any victory, they agreed on a truce for ten years. The conditions of it were, that all within Mecca, who were for Mahomet, might have liberty to join themselves to him; and on the other side, those with Mahomet, who had a mind to leave him, might have the liberty to return to Mecca. By this truce, Mahomet, being very much confirmed in his power, took on him thenceforth the authority of a king, and was inaugurated as such by the chief men of his army.

Having thus made a truce with the men of Mecca, and thereby obtained free access for any of his party to go into that city, he ordained them to make pilgrimages thither, which have ever since been observed, with much superstition, by all his followers, once every year: and now being thus established in the sovereignty, at which he had long been aiming, he assumed all the insignia belonging to it; still retaining the sacred character of chief pontiff of his religion, as well as the royal, with which he was invested. He transmitted both to his successors, who, by the title of Caliphs, reigned after him: so that, like the Jewish princes of the race of Maccabees, they were kings and chief-priests of their people at the same time. Their pontifical authority consisted chiefly in giving the interpretation of the Mahometan law, in ordering all matters of religion, and in praying and preaching in their public mosques: and this at length was all the authority the caliphs had left; as they were totally stripped of the rest, first by the governors. of the provinces, who, about the 325th year of the Hegira, assumed the regal authority to themselves, and afterwards by others, who gradually usurped upon them; till at length, after a succession of ages, the Tartars came in, and, in that deluge of destruction with which they over-ran all the East, put a total end not only to their authority, but to their very name and being. Ever since that time, most Mahometan princes have a particular officer appointed in their respective dominions, who sustains this sacred authority, formerly invested in their caliphs; who in Turkey is called the Mufti, and in Persia the Sadre. But they, being under the power of the princes that appoint them, are in reality the mere creatures of state, who make the law of Mahomet speak just such language as is necessary to support the measures of the government, however unjust or tyrannical.

In the seventh year of the Hegira, A. D. 628, the impostor led forth his army against Caibar, a city inhabited by Arabs of the Jewish religion and, after routing them irt battle, he besieged their city, and took it by storm. Having entered the town, he took up his quarters in the house of Hareth, one of the principal inhabitants of the place, whose daughter Zainoh, preparing a shoulder of mutton for his supper, poisoned it. Here those who would ascribe miracles to Mahomet, tell us, that the shoulder of mutton spake to him, and discovered that it was poisoned; but, if it did so, it was, it seems, too late to do him any good; for Basher, one of his companions, beginning too greedily to eat of it, fell down dead on the place; and although Mahomet had not immediately the same fate, because, not liking the taste, he spit out again what he had taken into his mouth, yet he took enough to have a fatal effect; for he never recovered, and, at the end of three years, died of this meal. The maid being asked why she did this, answered, that “she had a mind to make trial, whether he were a prophet or not: for, were he a prophet,” said she, “he would certainly know that the meat was poisoned, and therefore would receive no harm from it; but, if he were not a prophet, she thought she should do the world good service in ridding it of so wicked a tyrant.”

After this, he reduced under his subjection other towns belonging to the Jewish Arabs, and having increased his strength by these acquisitions to an army of 10,000 men, he resolved to make himself master of Mecca. For this plurpose, pretending that the people of Mecca had broken the truce, he marched suddenly upon them, before they were aware of his design: when, being utterly incapable of putting themselves into any posture of defence against him, they found themselves necessitated to surrender immediately. As soon as it was heard among the neighbouring Arabs, that Mahomet had made himself master of Mecca, several other tribes made head against him, and in the first encounter routed his army, though greatly superior to theirs in number: but the impostor, having gathered up his scattered forces, and rallied them again into a body, acted more cautiously in the second conflict, and gave his enemies a total defeat, and took from them their baggage, with their wives and children, and all their substance. After this, his power being much increased, the fame of it so terrified the rest of the Arabs, who had not yet felt his arms, that they all submitted to him. So that in this year, which is the tenth of the Hegira, and the 631st of our Lord, his empire and his religion became established together through all Arabia.

He spent the remainder of the year in sending lieutenants into all his provinces, to govern in his name, to destroy the heathen temples, and all the other remains of the Arabian idolatry, and establish his religion in its stead. Towards the end of it, he took a journey in pilgrimage to Mecca, where a great concourse of people resorted to him from all parts of Arabia, whom he instructed in his law, and then returned to Medina. This pilgrimage is called, by his followers, the pilgrimage of valediction, because it was the last he made: for, after his return to Medina, Jhe began daily ta decline, through the force of that poison which he had taken three years before at Caibar. It had never been removed from his constitution, and at length brought him so low, that he was forced, on the 28th day of Saphar, the second month of their year, to take to his bed; and, on, the 12th day of the following month, he died, after a sickness of thirteen days. During his sickness he much complained of the mea.t which he had taken at Caibar; telling those who came to visit hirp, that he had felt the torments of it in his body ever since: so that, notwithstanding the intimacy he pretended with the angel Gabriel, and the continual revelations he received from him, he could not be preserved from perishing by the snares of a girl.

He was buried in the place where he died, which was in the chamber of his best-beloved wife, at Medina. The story that Mahomet’s tomb, being of iron, is suspended in the air, under a vault of loadstones, is a mere fable; and the Mahometans laugh, when they know that the Christians relate it, as they do other stories of him, for a certain matter of fact. A king of Egypt, indeed, formerly attempted to do this, when he had a mind to procure the same advantage to a statue of his wife. “Dinocrates the architect,” says Pliny, “had begun to roof the temple of Arsinoe, at Alexandria, with loadstone, that her image, made of iron, might seem to hang there in the air.” But no such Attempt was ever made in regard to Mahomet; whose body continued in the place where he was buried, without having been moved or disturbed. They have, it is said, built over it a small chapel, joining to one of the corners of the chief mosque of that city; the first mosque which was erected to that impious superstition, Mahomet himself being, as hath been related above, the founder of it.

Thus ended the life of this famous impostor, who was sixty-three years old on the day he died, according to the Arabian calculation, which makes only sixty-one of our years. For twenty-three years he had taken upon him to be a prophet of which he lived thirteen at Mecca, and ten at Medina, during which time, by his great address and management, he rose from the meanest beginnings to such a height of power as to be able to make one of the greatest revolutions that ever happened in the world. This revolution immediately gave birth to an empire, which, in eighty years, extended its dominion over more kingdoms and countries than the Roman empire could subdue m eight hundred: and, although it continued in its flourishing condition not much above three hundred years, yet out of its ashes have sprung up many other kingdoms and empires, of which there are three at this day, the largest, if not the most potent upon the face of the earth; namely, the empire of Turkey, the empire of Persia, and the empire of the Mogul in India. Mahomet was a man of a good stature and a comely aspect, and affected much to be thought like Abraham. He had a piercing and sagacious wit, and was extremely well versed in all those arts which are necessary to lead mankind. In the first part of his life, he was wicked and licentious, much delighted in rapine, plunder, and bloodshed, according to the usage olf the Arabs, who have generally followed this kind of life. The Mahometans, however, would persuade us, that he was a saint from the fourth year of his age: for then, they say, the angel Gabriel separated him from his fellows, while he was at play with them; and, carrying him aside, cut open his breast, took out his heart, and wrung out of it that black dropof blood, in which they imagined was contained thefomes peccati; so that he had none of it ever after. This is contradicted, however, by two predominant passions, ambition and lust. The course which he took to gain empire abundantly shews the former; and the multitude of women with whom he was connected, proves the latter. While Cadiga lived, which was till his fiftieth year, it does not appear that he had any other wife: for, she being the origin and foundation of all his fortunes and grandeur, it is probable he durst not displease her, by bringing in another wife. But she was no sooner dead, than he multiplied them to a great number, besides which he had several concubines. They that reckon the fewest, allow him to have married fifteen; but others reckon them to have been one and twenty, of which five died before him, six he divorced, and ten were alive at his death.

But of all his wives, Ayesha, the daughter of that Abubeker who succeeded him, was by far his best beloved. He married her very young, and took care to have her bred up in all the learning of Arabia, especially in the elegance of their language, and the knowledge of their antiquities; so that she became at length one of the most accomplished ladies of her time. She was a bitter enemy to Ali, he being the person who discovered her incontinence to Mahomet, and therefore employed all her interest, upon every vacancy, to hinder him from being chosen Caliph, althougn, as son-in-law to the impostor, he had the fairest pretence to it; and when at last, after having been thrice put by, he attained that dignity, she appeared in arms against him; and although she did not prevail, caused such a defection from him, as ended in his ruin. She lived forty. eight years after the death of Mahomet, and was in great reputation with her sect, being called by them the Prophetess, and the mother of the faithful. One of the principal arguments which the followers of Mahomet used, to excuse his having so many wives, is, that he might beget young prophets: he left, however, neither prophet nor prophetess long behind him of all his wives. The six children which he had by Cadiga, his first wife, all died before him, except Fatima, the wife of Ali, who only survived him sixty days; and be had no child by any of the rest.

As the impostor allowed the divinity of the Old and New Testament, it is natural to suppose that he would attempt to prove his own mission from both; and the texts used for this purpose by those who defend his cause, are these following. In Deuteronomy it is said, “The Lord came down from Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto them: he shined forth from mount Pharan^ and he came with ten thousand of saints: from his right-hand went a fiery law for them.” By these words, according to the Mahometans, are meant the delivery of the law to Mosea, on mount Sinai; of the gospel to Jesus, at Jerusalem; and of the Koran to Mahomet, at Mecca: for, say they, Seir are the mountains of Jerusalem, where Jesus appeared; and Pha-. ran the mountains of Mecca, where Mahomet appeared. But they are here mistaken in their geography; for Pharan is a city of Arabia Petraea, near the Red Sea, towards the bottom of the gulph, not far from the confines of Egypt and Palestine, and above 500 miles distant from Mecca. It was formerly an episcopal see, under the patriarchs of Jerusalem, and famous for Theodorus, once bishop of it, who was the first that published to the world the opinion of the Monothelites. It is at this day called Fara: and hence the deserts, lying from this city to the borders of Palestine, are called the deserts or wilderness of Pharan, and the mountains lying in it, the mountains of Pharan, in holy scripture; near which Moses first began to repeat, and more clearly to explain the law to the children of Israel, before his death: and it is to that, to which the text above mentioned refers.

The Psalmist has written, “Out of Sion, the perfec-­tion of beauty, God hath shined;” which the Syriac version reads thus, “Out of Sion God hath shewed a glorious crown.” From this some Arabic translation having expressed the two last words by “eclilan mahmudan,” that is, “an honourable crown,” the Mahometans have understood the name Mahomet; and so read the word thus, “Out of Sion hath God shewed the crown of Mahomet.” In Isaiah we read, “And he saw a chariot, with a couple of horsemen, a chariot of asses and a chariot of camels.” But the old Latin version hath it, “Et vidit currum duorum equitum, ascensorera asini, & ascensorem cameli” that is, “And he saw a chariot of two horsemen, a rider upon an ass, and a rider upon a camel.” Here, by the rider upon an ass, they understand Jesus Christ, because he so rode to Jerusalem; and by the rider upon a camel Mahomet, because he was of the Arabians, who used to ride upon camels. Our Saviour, in St. John, tells his disciples, “If I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you: but if I depart, I will send him unto you.” By the Comforter, the Mahometans will have their prophet Mahomet to be meant: and therefore, among other titles, they gave him that of Paraclet, which is the Greek word used in this text for the Comforter, made Arabic. They also say, that the very name of Mahomet, both here and in other places of the gospel, was expressly mentioned; but that the Christians have, through malice, blotted it out, and shamefully corrupted those holy writings; nay, they insist, that at Paris there is a copy of the Gospels without those corruptions, in which the coming of Mahomet is foretold in several places, with his name expressly mentioned in them: Such a copy, it must be owned, would be highly convenient, and to the purpose: for ttien it would be no easy matter to refute this text in the 61st chapter of the Koran: “Remember, that Jesus, the son of Mary, said to the children of Israel, I am the messenger of God: he bath sent me to confirm the Old Testament, and to declare unto yon, that there shall come a prophet after me, whose name *hall be Mahomet.”

It is not our business to confute these glosses; and if it was, the absurdity of them is sufficiently exposed by barely relating them. Upon the whole, since the Mahometans can find nothing else in all the books of the Old and New Testament to wrest to their purpose, but the texts abovementioned, it appears to us, that their religion, as well as its founder, is likely to receive but little sanction from the Bible.

Mahomet was succeeded by Abubeker, agreeably to the wishes of the deceased prophet; who, after a reign of two years, was followed by Omar; and in the twelfth year of his government he received a mortal wound from the hand of an assassin, and made way for the succession of Othman, the secretary of Mahomet After the third caliph, twenty-four years after the death of the prophet, Ali was invested, by the popular choice, with the regal and sacerdotal office. Among the numerous biographers of Mahomet, we may reckon Abulfeda, Maracci, Savary, Sale, Prideaux, Boulainvilliers, D'Herbelot, Gagnier, Gibbon, and the author of the article in the Modern Universal History.

, the eleventh sultan of the Turks, born at Adrianople, the 24th of March, 1430, is to be remembered chiefly by us, for taking Constantinople in 1453, and thereby driving many learned Greeks into the West, which was a great cause of the restoration of learning in Europe, as the Greek literature was then introduced here. He was one of the greatest men upon record, with regard to the qualities necessary to a conqueror: and he conquered two empires, twelve kingdoms, and two hundred considerable cities. He was very ambitious of the title of Great, which the Turks cave him, and even the Christians have not disputed it with him; for he was the first of the Ottoman emperors, whom tue Western nations dignified with the title of Grand Seignior, or Great Turk, which posterity has preserved to his descendants. Italy had suffered greater calamities, but she had never felt a terror equal to that which this sultan’s victories imprinted. The inhabitants seemed already condemned to wear the turban; it is certain that pope Sixtus IV. represented to himself Rome as already involved in the dreadful fate of Constantinople; and thought of nothing but escaping into Provence, and once more transferring the holy see to Avignon. Accordingly, the news of Mahomet’s death, which happened the ad of Mav, 1481, was received at Rome with the greitest joy that ever was beheld there. Sixtus caused all the churches to be thrown open, made the trades-peopld leave off their work, ordered a feast of three days, with. public prayers and processions, commanded a discharge of the whole artillery of the castle of St. Angelo all that time, and put a stop to his journey to Avignon. Some authors have written that tbis sultan was an atheist, and derided all religions, without excepting that of his prophet, whom he treated as no better than a leader of banditti. This is possible enough; and there are many circumstances which make it credible It is certain he engaged in war, not to promote Mahometism, but to gratify his own ambition: he preferred his own interest to that of the faith he professed; and to this it was owing that he tolerated the Greek church, and even shewed wonderful civility to the patriarch of Constantinople. His epitaph deserves to be noted; the inscription consisted only of nine or ten Turkish words, thus translated: “I proposed to myself the conquest of Rhodes and proud Italy.”

He appears to be the first sultan who was a lover of arts and sciences; and even cultivated polite letters. He often read the History of Augustus, and the other Caesars; and he perused those of Alexander, Constantine, and Theodosius, with more than ordinary pleasure, because these bad reigned in the same country with himself. He was fond of painting, music, and sculpture; and he applied himself to the study of agriculture. He was much addicted to astrology, and used to encourage his troops by giving out that the motion and influence of the heavenly bodies promised him the empire of the world. Contrary to the genius of his country, he delighted so much in the knowledge of foreign languages, that he not only spoke the Arabian, to which the Turkish laws, and the religion of their legislator Mahomet are appropriated, but also the Persian, the Greek, and the French, that is, the corrupted Italian. Landin, a knight of Rhodes, collected several letters which this sultan wrote in the Syriac, Greek, and Turkish languages, and translated them into Latin. Where the originals are is not known; but the translation has been published several times; as at Lyons, 1520, in 4to; at Basil, 1554, 12mo, in a collection published by Oporinus; at Marpurgh, 1604, in 8vo, and at Leipsic, 1690, in 12mo. Melchior Junius, professor of eloquence at Strasburg, published at Montbeliard, 1595, a collection of letters, in which there are three written by Mahomet II. to Scanderbeg. One cannot discover the least air of Turkish ferocity in these letters: they are written in as civil terms as the most polite prince in Christendom could have used.