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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mariana’s history did not pass without animadversions in his own time. A secretary of the constable of Castile, who calls himself Pedro Mantuana, published “Critical Remarks” upon it at Milan, in 1611, which were answered by Thomas Tamaius de Vorgas. The latter informs us, “that Mariana would never cast his eyes upon the work of his censurer, or on that of his apologist; though this latter offered him his manuscript before he gave it to the printer, and desired him to correct it.”

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

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

, a once celebrated Italian poet, was born at Naples in 1569; and made so great a progress in his juvenile studies, that he was thought qualified for that of the civil law at thirteen. His father, who was a lawyer, intended him for that profession, as the properest means of advancing him; but Marini had already contracted a taste for poetry, and was so far from relishing the science to which he was put, that he sold his law-books, in order to purchase books of polite literature. This so much irritated his father, that he turned him out of doors, and obliged him to seek for protectors and supporters abroad. Having acquired a reputation for poetry, he happily found in Inico de Guevara, duke of Bovino, a friend who conceived an affection for him, and supported him for three years in his house. The prince of Conca, grand admiral of the kingdom of Naples, next took him into his service, in quality of secretary; and in this situation he continued five or six years; but having assisted a friend in a very delicate intrigue, he was thrown into prison, and very hardly escaped with his life. Thence he retired to Rome, where, after some time spent in suspense and poverty, he became known to Melchior Crescendo, a prelate of great distinction, who patronized him, and provided him with every thing he wanted.

In 1601, he went to Venice, to print some poems which he dedicated to Crescentio; and after making the tour of that part of Italy, returned to Rome. His reputation increased greatly, so as to engage the attention of the cardinal Peter Aldobrandini, who made him his gentleman, and settled on him a considerable pension. After the election of pope Paul V. which was in 1605, he accompanied this cardinal to Ravenna, his archbishopric, and lived with him several years. He then attended him to Turin, at which court he ingratiated himself by a panegyric upon the duke Charles Emmanuel; for which this prince recompensed him with honours, and retained him, when his patron the cardinal left Piedmont. During his residence here he had a violent dispute, both poetical and personal, with Gasper Murtola, the duke’s secretary. Murtola was, or fancied himself, as good a poet as Marini, and was jealous of Marini’s high favour with the duke, and therefore took every opportunity to speak ill of him. Marini, by way of revenge, published a sharp sonnet upon him at Venice, in 1608, under the title of “II nuovo mondo;” to which Murtola opposed a satire, containing an abridged life of Marini. Marini answered in eighty-one sonnets, named the “Murtolelde:” to which Murtola replied in a “Marineide,” consisting of thirty sonnets. But the latter, perceiving that his poems were inferior in force as well as number to those of his adversary, resolved to put an end to the quarrel, by destroying him; and accordingly fired a pistol, the ball of which luckily missed him. Murtola was cast into prison, but saved from punishment at the intercession of Marini, who, nevertheless, soon found it expedient to quit his present station.

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

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

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

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

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

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

, an English author, who lived in the reigns of James I. and Charles I. but whose private history is involved in much obscurity, was son of Robert Markham, esq. of Gotham, in the county of Nottingham. He bore a captain’s commission under Charles I. in the civil wars, and was accounted a good soldier, as well as a good scholar. One piece of dramatic poetry which he has published will shew, says Langbaine, that he sacrificed to Apollo and the muses, as well as to Mars and Pallas. This play is extant under under the title of “Herod and Antipater,” a tragedy, printed in 1622. Markham published a great many volumes upon husbandry and horsemanship: one upon the latter, printed in quarto, without date, he dedicated to prince Henry, eldest son to James I. In husbandry he published “Liebault’s La Maison rustique, or the country -farm,” in 1616. This treatise, which was at first translated by Mr. Richard Surfleit, a physician, Markham enlarged, with several additions from the French books of Serris and Vinet, the Spanish of Albiterio, and the Italian of Grilli. He published other books of husbandry, particularly “The English Husbandman, in two parts,” Lond. 1613 1635, with the “Pleasures of Princes in the Art of Angling.” Granger mentions “The whole Art of Angling,” 1656, 4to, in which he says Markham very gravely tells us that an angler should “be a general scholar, and seen in all the liberal sciences; as a grammarian, to know how to write or discourse of his art in true and fitting terms. He should have sweetness in speech to entice others to delight in an exercise so much laudable. He should have strength of argument to defend and maintai n his profession against envy and slander,” &c. Markham also wrote a tract entitled “Hunger’s prevention, or the whole Art of Fowling,” 1621, 8vo. In military discipline he published “The Soldier’s Accidence and Grammar,” in 1635. But he appears to have been earliest distinguished by his talents for poetry. In 1597 he published “Devereux Vertues tears for the loss of the most Christian king Henry, third of that name king of France, and the untimely death of the most noble and heroical Walter Devereux, who was slain before Roan, in Fraunce,” a translation from the French, 4to. He was the author also of “England’s Arcadia, alluding his beginning from sir Philip Sydney’s ending,” 1607, 4to. The extracts from Markham in “England’s Parnassus,” are more numerous than from any other minor poet. The most remarkable of his poetical attempts appears to have been entitled “The Poem of Poems, or Sion’s Muse, contaynyng the diuine Song of king Salomon, deuided into eight eclogues,” J 596, 16mo. This is dedicated to “the sacred virgin, divine mistress Elizabeth Sydney, sole daughter of the everadmired sir Philip Sydney.” Bishop Hall, who was justly dissatisfied with much of the spiritual poetry with which his age was overwhelmed, alludes to this piece in his “Satires” (B. I. Sat. VIII.); and says that in Markham’s verses Solomon assumes the character of a modern sonneteer, and celebrates the sacred spouse of Christ with the levities and in the language of a lover singing the praises of his mistress. For this censure, Marston in his “Certayne Satires” (Sat. IV.) endeavours to retort upon Hall.

Langbaine is very lavish of his praise of Markharn; but he does not appear to have known much of his poetry, or of his real characier. In the works referred to below are some conjectures, and some information respecting Markham, which place his character rather in an equivocal light. It appears, however, that his works on husbandry, agriculture, &c. were once held in great esteem, and often reprinted. On the records of the stationers’ company is a very extraordinary agreement signed by this author, which probably arose from the booksellers’ knowledge of the value of Markham’s work, and their apprehensions that a new performance on the same subject might be hurtful to the treatises then circulating. It is as follows:

“Md. That I Gervase Markham, of London, gent, do promise hereafter never to write any more book or books to be printed of the diseases or cures of any cattle, as horse, oxe, cowe, sheepe, swine, and goates, &c. In witnes whereof I have hereunto sett my hand the 24th day of Julie, 1617. Gervis Markham.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A little farther account, however, of this controversy, and its rise, may yet be interesting. In 1741, Mr. Tunstall, public orator of Cambridge, published his doubts on the authenticity of the letters between Cicero and Brutus (which Middleton, in his Life of Cicero, had considered as genuine), in a Latin dissertation. This Middleton called “a frivolous, captious, disingenuous piece of criticism,” answered it in English, and published the disputed epistles with a translation. On this, Tunstall, in 1744, published his “Observations on the Epistles, representing several evident marks of forgery in them, in answer to the late pretences of the Rev. Dr. Conyers Middleton.” Markland, the following year, published his arguments on the same side of the question, which called forth a pamphlet, written by Mr. Ross, afterwards bishop of Exeter, entitled “A Dissertation in which the defence of P. Sylla, ascribed to M. Tullius Cicero, is clearly proved to be spurious, after the manner of Mr. Markland; with some introductory Remarks on other writings of the Ancients, never before suspected.” It is written in a sarcastic style, but with a display of learning very inferior to that of the excellent scholar against whom it was directed, and in a disposition very dissimilar to the candour and fairness which accompanied the writings of Markland. It has lately been discovered that Gray, the celebrated poet, assisted Ross in his pamphlet, but at the same time does not seem to have entertained a very high opinion of Ross’s wit. In a manuscript note in the first leaf of his copy of Markland, he writes: “This book is answered in an ingenious way, but the irony is not quite transparent.” Gray’s copy of Markland is now in the possession of his late excellent biographer, the rev. John Mitford, to whom we are indebted for these particulars. Mr. Mitford adds, that the notes which Gray has written in this copy “display a familiar knowledge of the structure of the Latin language, and answer some of the objections of Markland,” who had not then learnt the caution, in verbal criticism and conjectural emendation, which he well knew how to value when an editor of Euripides.“The only other pamphlet which this controversy produced was entitled” A Dissertation in which the observations of a late pamphlet on the writings of the Ancients, after the manner of Mr. Markland, are clearly answered; those passages in Tully corrected, on which some of the objections are founded: with amendments of a few pieces of criticism in Mr. Markland’s Epistola Critica," Lond. 1746, 8vo. At length Gesner defended the genuineness of the orations in question, and they were reprinted by Ernest, and are still believed to be part of Cicero’s works.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

All air and tire, which made his verses clear

Which rightly should possess a poet’s brain." In 1557 he translated Coluthus’s “Rape of Helen” into English rhyme. He also translated the elegies of Ovid, which book was ordered to be burnt at Stationers’-hall, 1599, by command of the archbishop of Canterbury and the bishop of London. Before 1598 appeared his translation of the “Loves of Hero and Leander,” the elegant prolusion of an unknown sophist of Alexandria, but commonly ascribed to the ancient Musseus. It was. left unfinished by Marlow’s death; but what was called a second part, which is nothing more than a continuation from the Italian, appeared by one Henry Petowe, in 1598. Another edition was published, with the first book of Lucan, translated also by Marlow, and in blank verse, in 160O. At length Chapman, the translator of Homer, completed, but with a striking inequality, Marlow’s unfinished version, and printed it at London in 1606, 4to. His plays were, 1. “Tamerlane the great Scythian emperor, two parts,” ascribed by Phillips erroneously to Newton. 2. “The rich Jew of Maltha.” 3. “The Tragical History of the Life and Death of Dr. John Faustus.” 4. “Lnst’s Dominion,” Lond. 1661, 8vo, from which was stolen the greater part of Aphra Behn’s “Abdelazer, or the More’s Revenge,” Lond. 1677. 5. “The Tragedy of King Edward II.” 6. “The Tragedy of Dido, queen of Carthage,” in the composition of which he was assisted by Thomas Nash, who published it in 1594.

His tragedies, says Warton, manifest traces of a just dramatic conception, but they abound with tedious and uninteresting scenes, or with such extravagancies as proceeded from a want of judgment, and those barbarous ideas of the times, over which it was the peculiar gift of Shakspeare’s genius alone to triumph and predominate. As a poet, there is one composition preserved in the collection called “England’s Helicon,” and often reprinted, which entitles him to the highest praise. It is that entitled “The Passionate Shepherd to his Love,” beginning “Come live with me, and be my love.” We can remember the revival of this beautiful pastoral about forty years ago, with some pleasing music, which made it the fashion of every theatre, concert, and private party. Sir Walter Raleigh wrote a reply to this piece.

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

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

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

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

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

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

By Voltaire’s advice, he repaired to Paris in 1745 to try his fortune as a man of letters. His first attempts were of the dramatic kind, which had various success, but never enough to render him independent of other employment. His first tragedy, “Denys le Tiran,” indeed, succeeded so well, as to give him a name, and introduce him into the higher circles, but this led him at the same time into a course of dissipation of which he afterwards repented, and which he relinquished, upon being promoted to the place of secretary to the royal buildings, by the interest of madame Pompadour.

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

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

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

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

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

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

, a French poet, was born near Caen, in Normandy, in 1463, with a strong inclination to the belles lettres and poetry, which he happily cultivated, although his education was much neglected. He was but in low circumstances, when his abilities and good behaviour recommended him to Anne of Bretagne, afterwards queen of France; a princess who greatly encouraged and patronized letters. She shewed a particular regard to Marot, by making him her poet; and by commanding him to attend Louis XII. to Genoa and Venice, that he might draw up a relation of those travels. He was afterwards in the service of Francis I. and died in 1523. He was a tolerable poet, but infinitely exceeded by his son Clement. His poems are to be found in the later editions of the works of Clement Marot.

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

Marot, according to an expression of the sieur de Vauprivas, was the poet of the princes, and the prince of poets, during his time in France. It is agreed on all hands, not only that the French poetry had never before appeared with the charms and beauties with which he adorned it, but that, even during the sixteenth century, there appeared nothing that could be compared with the happy turn, the native graces, and the wit, that was every-where scattered through his works, and which compose what is called the Marotic style. This has had many imitators, particularly La Fontaine and Rousseau. We find, by the judgments which have been collected upon Marot, that the French poets are obliged to him for the rondeau; and that to him they likewise owe, in same measure, the modern form of the sonnet and madrigal, and of some other of the smaller forms of poetry. His works, however, are highly censureable on the score of indecency. The wonder is, that, with such libertine propensities, he should employ his genius on a translation of the Psalms. Of these he first translated thirty, which he obtained a privilege to publish, about 1540, and dedicated them to Francis I. His translation was censured by the faculty of divinity at Paris, who carried matters so far as to make remonstrances and complaints to that monarch. The king, who had a great value for Marot on account of his genius, put them off with delays, testifying how acceptable this specimen was to him, and desiring to see the whole finished. However, after several remonstrances had been made to the king, the publication of them was prohibited; which, as usually happens in such cases, made them sell faster than the printers could work them off. After he had retired to Geneva, he translated twenty more Psalms, which in 1543 were printed there with the other thirty; together with a preface written by Calvin. Marot’s works have been collected and printed several times, and in various beautiful forms. Two of the best editions are those of the Hague, 1700, 2 vols. 12mo; and 1731, 4 vols. 4to.

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

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

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

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

The few things he published were, 1. “Manuductio ad Logicam,” written by Philip tie Tricu: to which he added the Greek text of Aristotle, and some tables and schemes. With it he printed Gassendus’s small tract “De demonstratione,” and illustrated with notes, Oxon. 1678. 2. “Institutiones logicoe, in usum juventutis academicae, Dublin, 1681.” 3. “An introductory essay to the doctrine of sounds, containing some proposals for the improvement of acoustics.” Presented to the royal society in Dublin, March 12, 1683, and published in the Philosophical Transactions of the royal society of London. 4. " A Charge to his clergy of the diocese of Dublin, 1694, 41O.

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

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

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

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

It is not known that he ever published any literary works besides an “Essay on Composition,” when at Edinburgh; an “Essay on Ambition,” written also very early in life; a translation of the three first books of Simson’s “Conic Sections,” apparently undertaken at the suggestion of a bookseller; and a treatise on the “Preservation of the Health of Soldiers.” He had, indeed, meditated a variety of other publications, principally on physiology and pathology; but, having pursued a subject with great keenness till he had gained what he wanted, he could not bring himself to be at the trouble of preparing for the eye of the world what he had acquired, more especially as new objects of research presented themselves in quick succession. A paper upon Hernia, illustrated by drawings taken nearly 20 years ago, and another upon the appearances of the brain in mania, drawn up from dissections made more than 20 years ago, were left in a state fit for publication; and the latter has just been published under the title of “The Morbid Anatomy of the Brain, in Mania and Hydrophobia,” by Mr. Sawrey, formerly assistant-lecturer to Dr. Marshal. To this volume, in 8vo, is prefixed a life of Dr. Marshal, from which the above particulars are taken, but to which we may refer as containing many more of considerable interest.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

His works were first printed at Venice, as is supposed in. 1470, then at Ferrara in 1471, Rome 1473, and Venice 1475. These are the most rare and valuable editions. The more modern and useful are: that of Aldus, 1501 by Raderus, 1627, fol. by Scriverius, 1619, 12mo; the Variorum of 1670; and the Bipont edition of 1784, 2 vols. 8vo. A strange absurdity occurs in the Delphin edition, 1680, 4to, where all the indelicate epigrams are omitted in the body of the work, but carefully collected at the end! This has, however, been followed and perhaps exceeded by Smids, in the Amsterdam edition of 1701, who, having ornamented his edition with engravings, places the more indelicate ones at the end of the volume.

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

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

, seems to be one of the first French writers who practised the plan, so little approved in England, of translating the ancient classical poets into prose. He gave in this way, versions of, 1. Terence. 2. Horace. 3. Juvenal and Persius. 4-. Virgil. 5. Ovid, entire, in 9 vols. 12 mo. These translations are in general clear and exact, but want elegance, and purity of style. This laborious writer published also lives of the archbishops, &c. of Paris, of the seventeenth century, in 4to. He died in 1698, at the age of seventy.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

No history of music had been attempted in Italy since that of Bontempi appeared in 1695, till Martini, in 1757, published in 4to, the first volume of his “Storia Musica,” upon so large a scale, that though the chief part of his life seems to have been dedicated to it, only three volumes were published before his decease in 1783, a circumstance which Dr. Burney thinks is much to be regretted, as he had, with incredible pains and considerable expence, collected materials sufficient for the completion of his whole plan.

Between the publication of the second and third volumes of his “Storia Musica,” Martini published a work entitled “Essemplare o sia Saggio di Contrappunto,” Bologna, 1774, in two volumes, folio. This excellent treatise, though written in defence of a method of composing for the church upon canto-fermo, now on the decline, yet has given the learned author an opportunity of writing its history, explaining its rules, defending the practice, and of inserting such a number of venerable compositions for the church by the greatest masters of choral harmony in Italy, from the beginning of the sixteenth century to the middle of the last, that we know of no book so full of information concerning learned counterpoint, so rich in ancient and scarce compositions, nor so abundant in instructive and critical remarks, as this. In 1769 Martini drew up and gave to his disciples a very short tract, entitled “Compendio della Theoria de numeri per uso del Musico di F. Giambatista Martini. Minor Conventuale.” In this tract the good father defines the three principal calculations, ratios, and proportions necessary for a musician to know in the division of the monochord and in temperament.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

To the works already noticed, as published by Mr. Martyn, we may add a translation of Boerhaave’s treatise on the powers of medicine, 1740, 8vo, a translation and abridgment of the “Memoirs of the Royal Academy of Sciences at Paris,” in conjunction with Chambers, the author of the Dictionary of Arts and Sciences, Lond. 1742, 5 vols. 8vo; and a translation of Dr. Walter Harris’s “Treatise of the acute diseases of Infants,” ibid. 1742, 8vo. In 1743 he resumed his abridgment of the Philosophical Transactions, and published the eighth, ninth, and tenth volumes, in 1747 and 1756. He left also a great many manuscripts on various branches of science and literature. In 1770, his son published “Dissertations and critical Remarks upon the ^neids of Virgil. By the late John Martyn, &c.” 12mo, with some account of the author and his writings, from which the preceding article has been taken.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

There are some of her writings still extant, Strype has preserved three prayers or meditations of her composition the first, “Against the assaults of vice” the second, “A Meditation touching adversity;” the third, “A prayer to be read at the hour cf death.” In Fox’s “Acts and Monuments” are printed eight of her letters to king Edvvard and the lords of the council, on her nonconformity, and on the imprisonment of her chaplain Dr. Mallet. In the “Sylloge epistolarum,” are several more of her letters, extremely curious: one on the subject of her delicacy in never having written but to three men; one of affection for her sister; one after the death of Anne Boleyn; and one very remarkable of Cromwell to her. In “Haynes’s State papers,” are two in Spanish, to the emperor Charles the Fifth. There is also a French letter, printed by Strype from the “Cotton library,” in answer to a haughty mandate from Philip, when he had a mind to marry the lady Elizabeth to the duke of Savoy, against the queen and princess’s inclination: it is written in a most abject manner, and a wretched style. Bishop Tanner ascribes to her “A History of her own life and death,” and “An Account of Martyrs in her reign,” dated 1682; but this is manifestly an error.

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

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

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

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

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

Authors have always differed, and do still differ, in the judgments they pass upon the character of this queen; and notwithstanding the mass of evidence produced within the last half century by Hume, Robertson, Stuart, Whitaker, and others, a new discussion has been excited by Mr. Laing’s History of Scotland, which perpetuates the original differences of opinion as to her real character. Connected likewise as her character is with that of the church establishment in Scotland, she has acquired a new race of defenders in the episcopal clergy of that country, who will not tamely suffer historical animosities to abate. If we might, during the raging of this war, presume to offer an opinion, it would be that the prominent features of her character, and the great events of her life, cannot be defended, although many palliating circumstances may reasonably be advanced.

But however writers may differ about her moral conduct, they agree more cordially as to the variety of her accomplishments. She wrote poems on various occasions, in the Latin, Italian, French, and Scotch languages; “Royal advice to her son,” in two books, the consolation of her long imprisonment. A great number of her original letters are preserved in the king of France’s library, in the Royal, Cottonian, and Ashmolean libraries . We have in print, eleven to earl Bothwell, translated from the French by Edward Simmonds, of Christ-church, Oxford, and printed at Westminster in 1726. There are ten more, with her answers to the articles against her, in “Haynes’s StatePapers;” six more in “Anderson’s Collections;” another in the “Appendix” to her life by Dr. Jebb and some others dispersed among the works of Pius V. Buchanan, Camden, Udall, and Sanderson.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Dr. Maskelyne died February 9, 1811, in the 79th. year of his age. His health previously declined for some months and he contemplated his approaching dissolution with pious resignation, and with a lively hope of being Admitted into the presence of that Deity, whose works he had so long studied and so ardently admired. His favourite science tended the more strongly to confirm his religious principles, and he died, as he had lived, a sincere Christian.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cambridge, and are not on the foun- LXVI. p. 452, and vol. LXXf. p. 681,

six, with a stipend of 20Z. per annum affair is given, each, besides rooms and commons at to make a fortune by it,“which does not, however, appear to have been the case;” a little vain, but in so harmless and comical a way that it does not offend; a little ambitious, but withal so ignorant of the world and its ways, that this does not hurt him in one’s opinion; so sincere and undisguised, that no mind with a spark of generosity would ever think of hurting him, he lies so open to injury; but so indolent, that if he cannot overcome this habit, all his good qualities will signify nothing at all." Some of these characteristics of the poetical temperament adhered to our author throughout life; others were effaced by a closer intimacy with the world.

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

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