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

Father Tarquinio Galucci made his funeral oration, or panegyric; the sum of which is, that he united the most exact probity with the most consummate policy, and therefore was universally esteemed. He was a man, says Perrault, of an incredible penetration and he laid his measures with such true discernment, and executed them with such diligence, that it is scarce possible to mark a single false step in the numerous affairs which he negociated. Wicquefort, speaking of his abilities, observes, that he had given proofs of his skill in negociations in that which he transacted, with the grand duke of Tuscany, for the restitution of the island of If; in that with pope Clement VIII. in order to reconcile Henty IV. to the church of Rome; in that of the invalidity of the said king’s marriage with queen Margaret of Valois, which had been valid near thirty years; in that of the dispensation with regard to the marriage between Catharine of Bourbon, sister to Henry, with the duke of Bar, a papist, then a protestant; and in several other very important and delicate affairs. His dispatches, continues this writer, are as useful to an ambassador, who hopes to succeed in his employment, as the Bible and the “Corpus Juris” to such lawyers and divines as would succeed in their respective professions. These letters of our minister were first published under the title of “Lettres du Cardinal D'Ossat,” at Paris, 1624, folio, and have been enlarged and published at several times and places since. They were published at Paris in 1697, 4to, with his life, and notes by Amelot de la Houssaye ; and, lastly, in 1708, at Amsterdam, 12mo, five volumes. This is the best and most ample edition. Several of his original letters were formerly in Colbert’s library. In 1771, a life of him was published at Paris, in 2 vols. 12mo, which is said to be extremely partial to the character of the cardinal, but to contain much valuable information as to the history of the events in which he was concerned. 1

, one of the first names in the English drama, was born at Trottin in Sussex, March 3, 1651— 2, the son of the rev. Humphrey Otway, rector of Woolbeding. From Winchester-school, where he was educated, he was entered, in 1669, a commoner of Christ-church, but left the university without a degree, whether for want of money, or from impatience of academical restraint, or mere eagerness to mingle with the world, is not known. The anonymous writer of his life in one of the editions of His works, reports that he removed from Oxford to St. John’s-college, Cambridge, the probability of which rests only on a copy of verses sent to him by Duke the poet, who was his intimate friend. At Cambridge, however, he could not have remained long, if ever he paid more than a visit to it, for he appeared in London in 1672 in the character of the king in Mrs. Behn’s “Forced Marriage,” and found himself unable to gain any reputation on the stage. If he ever went to Cambridge, it must have been after this period, for Duke himself was not entered of Trinity-college until 1675.

Notwithstanding all Oughtred’s mathematical merit, he was, in 1646, in danger of a sequestration by the committee for plundering ministers; in order to which, several articles were deposed and sworn against him; but, upon his day of hearing, William Lilly, the famous astrologer, applied to sir Bulstrode Whitelocke and all his old friends, who appeared so numerous in his behalf, that though the chairman and many other presbyterian members were active against him, yet he was cleared by the majority. This Lilly tells us himself, in the “History of his own Life,” where he styles Oughtred the most famous mathematician then of Europe. “The truth is,” continues this writer, “he had a considerable parsonage and that alone was enough to sequester any moderate judgment besides, he was also well known to affect his majesty.” His merit, however, appeared so much neglected, and his situation was made so uneasy at home, that his friends procured several invitations to him from abroad, to live either in Italy, France, or Holland, but he chose to encounter all his difficulties at Albury. Aubrey informs us that the grand duke invited him to Florence, and offered him 500l. a year, but he would not accept it because of his religion. From the same author we learn that he was thought a very indifferent preacher, so bent were his thoughts on mathematics; but, when he found himself in danger of being sequestered for a royalist, " he fell to the study of divinity, and preached (they sayd) admirably well, even in his old age.

, a learned professor of divinity of the university of Francfort on the Oder, was born at Dantzic, Oct.7, 1671. He was descended from the ancient and noble family of Oisel or Loisel, which made a great figure in Norman history; and one of his ancestors having come to England with William the Conqueror, his descendants were not extinct in the time of queen Elizabeth. Of this descent, however, our learned professor seldom was heard to boast. He had more pleasure in relating that his immediate ancestors were pious protestants, who, having escaped the massacre of St. Bartholomew’s day in France, took refuge in Flanders; and that his great grandfather, who had lost his all on that occasion, began trade and acquired great property, of which he was again stript during the persecution under the duke of Alva, and obliged to fly to Leyden with three hundred families, who established the cloth manufactory there under his direction. One of his uncles was James Ousel or Loisel, already mentioned (see Oisel*), the editor of an excellent edition of the “Octavius” of Minutius Felix, with notes, printed at Leyden in 1652, 4to and 8vo, and reprinted in 1672. His father Michael Ousel was a merchant, who died when this his sou was very young, leaving him to the care of a step-mother, who paid every possible attention to his education.

On the death of the rev. Joseph Caryl, in 1673, Dr. Owen was invited to succeed him in the charge of a very numerous congregation in Leadenhall- street, and as he had already a charge of the sme kind, the congregations agreed to unite. In the following year he published “A Discourse concerning the Holy Spirit;” in 1677, his “Doctrine of Justification by Faith;” and in 1679, his “Glorious Mystery of the Person of Christ;” all which, at least the genuine editions of them, are still in considerable request. Dr. Owen was in most of his works rather prolix, which has given rise to abridgments of some of them, but as these are executed sometimes by men not exactly according in his principles, little reliance can be placed on their accuracy. In his own days, we are told that his works procured him. the admiration and friendship of many persons of rank, who took great delight in his conversation. Among these are enumerated the earl of Orrery, the earl ofAnglesea, lord Willoughby of Parham, lord Wharton, lord Berkley, sir John Trevor, one of the principal secretaries of state, &c. Even Charles II. and the duke of York paid particular respect to him. It is said that when he was at Tunbridge, drinking the waters, the duke sent for him to his tent, and entered into a long conversation on the subject of nonconformity. The king went yet farther; for, after his return to London, his majesty conversed with him for the space of two hours together, and after assuring him of his favour and respect, told him he might have access to his person as often as he pleased; said that he was sensible of the wrong he had done to the dissenters; declared himself a friend to liberty of conscience, and concluded all by giving Dr. Owen a thousand guineas to distribute among those who had suffered most by the late severities. Whether the professions of the king and the duke were sincere or not, or whether this was an act of policy, or an involuntary respect paid to the talents and amiable private character of Dr. Owen, it appears that he was not afterwards molested in the exercise of his ministry.

It was at this time, however, that Pace fell under cardinal Wolsey’s displeasure; the effects of which are said to have been very serious. The cardinal is thought to have been enraged against him, first, because he had shewn a readiness to assist Charles duke of Bourbon with money, for whom the cardinal had no great affection: and, secondly, because he had not forwarded the cardinal’s design of obtaining the papal chair with so much zeal as Wblsey expected. Such are the reasons assigned by some historians for Wolsey’s displeasure, who is said to have ordered matters in such a manner, that for nearly the space of two years, Pace received no instructions from his court as to his proceedings at Venice; his allowance for expences was also withdrawn, and no answer returned to his letters. On one occasion, when the Venetian ambassador residing in London asked Wolsey whether he had any commands for the English ambassador at Venice, he answered Paceus decipit Begem: and this singular treatment, we are told, so affected Pace that he became insane. As soon as the king was informed of this, Pace was ordered home; and, being carefully attended by physicians at the king’s command, was restored in a short time to his senses, and amused himself by studying the Hebrew language, with the assistance of Robert Wakefield. In the interval, he was introduced to the king at Richmond, who expressed much satisfaction at his recovery; and admitted him to a private audience, in which he remonstrated against the cardinal’s cruelty to him. But the cardinal was too powerful at this time, and when urged by the king to answer the charge against him, he summoned Pace before him, and sat in judgment, with the duke of Norfolk and others, who condemned Pace, and sent him to the Tower of London; where he was confined for two years, till discharged at length by the king’s command. Pace, thus degraded, and depressed in body and mind, resigned his deanries of St. Paul and Exeter, a little before his death; and, retiring to Stepney for his health, died there, in 1532, when not quite fifty years of age.

, antiquary and librarian to the duke of Parma, and historiographer of the order of Malta, was born at Turin, Nov. 13, 1710. After studying in the university of Turin, he took the religious habit in the order of the Theatins, at Venice, and then went to Bologna to study mathematics and natural philosophy under the celebrated Beccari. It appears that he began his subsequent literary career with the last-mentioned pursuit; and that as soon as he had attained the higher orders, he was appointed professor of philosophy in the college of Genoa; and was one of those who first dared, to explode, from the schools of Italy, the old rooted prejudices of fantastic systems, and to substitute for them the eternal truths discovered by Newton. He did not, however, long remain in the professorship of philosophy, at Genoa, but quitted philosophy for divinity, and devoted ten years to preaching and the composition of sermons, by neither of which he acquired much reputation; but within this period he published some orations, his “Treatise on the Antiquities of Hipa Transone,” the ancient Cupra; and three years after, his “Explanation of an ancient engraved Stone.”

, an English poetical and miscellaneous writer, the son of John Pack, of Stoke- Ash, in Suffolk, who, in 1697 was high sheriff of that county, was born about 1680. He was educated at Merchant Taylors’ school, whence, at the age of sixteen, he removed to St. John’s college, Oxford, and remained there two years, at the end of which his father entered him of the Middle Temple, intending him for the profession of the law. His proficiency, as a law student, must have appeared in a very favourable light to the benchers of this honourable society, as he was at eight terms standing admitted barrister, when he was not much above twenty years of age. But habits of study and application to business not agreeing either with his health or inclination, he went into the army, and his first command, which he obtained in March 1705, was that of a company of foot. He served afterwards abroad under general Stanhope, and the duke of Argyle, who for his distinguished bravery promoted him to the rank of major, and ever after honoured him with his patronage and friendship. Some of the best of major Pack’s effusions were in celebration of his grace’s character, at a time when there was a jealousy between him and the du.ke of Marlborough. The major died at Aberdeen in Sept. 1728, where his regiment happened then to be quartered. He published first a miscellany of poems in 1718, dedicated to colonel Stanhope, which sold rapidly, and when it came to a second edition was enlarged by some prose pieces. In 1719 he published the “Life of Pomponius Atticus,” with remarks addressed to the duke of Aygyle; in 1720, “Religion and Philosophy, a Tale;” and in 1725, a “New Collection” of poetical miscellanies, to which he prefixed the “Lives of Miltiades and Cymon,” from Cornelius Nepos. His “Whole Works” were afterwards collected and published in one vol. 8vo, 1729. In all he discovers considerable taste, vivacity, and learning. His connections, as well as his principles, appear to have been of the superior cast.

, an eminent French mathematician, was born at Avignon, in Provence, March 3, 1604, and entered the army at fourteen, for which he had been educated with extraordinary care. Ir> 1620 he was engaged at the siege of Caen, in the battle of the bridge of Ce, and other exploits, in which he signalized himself, and acquired a reputation above his years. He was present, in 1G21, at the siege of St. John d'Angeli, as also at that of Clerac and Montauban, where he lost his left eye by a musket-shot. At this siege he had another loss, which he felt with no less sensibility, viz. that of the constable of Luynes, who died there of a scarlet fever. The constable was a near relation to him, and had been his patron at court. He did not, however, sink under his misfortune, but on the contrary seemed to acquire fresh energy from the reflection that he must now trust solely to himself. Accordingly, there was after this time, no siege, battle, or any other occasion, in which he did not signalize himself by some effort of courage and conduct. At the passage of the Alps, and the barricade of Suza, he put himself at the head of the forlorn hope, consisting of the bravest youths among the guards; and undertook to arrive the first at the attack by a private way which was extremely dangerous; but, having gained the top of a very steep mountain, he cried out to his followers, “See the way to glory!” and sliding down the mountain, his companions followed him, and coming first to the attack, as they wished to do, immediately began a furious assault; and when the army came up to their support, forced the barricades. He had afterwards the pleasure of standing on the left hand of the king when his majesty related this heroic action to the duke of Savoy, with extraordinary commendations, in the presence of a very full court. When the king laid siege to Nancy in 1633, our hero had the honour to attend his sovereign in drawing the lines and forts of circumvallation. In 1642 his majesty sent him to the service in Portugal, in the post of field-marshal; but that year he had the misfortune to lose his eye-sight.

, an Italian poet, who flourished in the sixteenth century, was born at Stellada, in Ferrara, upon the bank of the Po. We are told by some, that his true name was Pietro Angelo Manzolli, of which “Marcello Palingenio” is the anaigram . He is chiefly known by his “Zodiacus Vitae,” a poem in twelve books, dedicated to Hercules II. of Este, duke of Ferrara. Some say he was physician to that prince, but this will admit of a doubt; at least it is certain he was not so when he wrote the dedication to his “Zodiac.” This poem, on which he had employed several years, brought him into trouble, as it contained many sarcastic attacks on monks and church-abuses and his name therefore appears in the “Index librorum prohibitorum,” as a Lutheran heretic of the Brst class, and as an impious author. It is thought, he carries too far the objections of libertines and scoffers at religion; otherwise his work is interspersed with judicious maxims, and some have considered it as a truly philosophical satire against immorality and prejudice. In the close of the dedication, he declares himself a good catholic, so far as to submit all his opinions to the censure of the church; and this declaration might perhaps have secured him against the inquisition, had the affair related only to some particular tenet; but it could not acquit him of that impiety, which Palingenius was, not without reason, suspected to teach. In his third book, for instance, he inculcates the doctrine of Epicurus without the least reserve. He published this book in 1536, and again at Basil, in1537 ; and seems not to have lived long after that date. Gyraldus, who wrote about 1543, relates, that, after his burial, his body was ordered to be dug up, in order to be burnt; which execution was prevented by the duchess of Ferrara, who, it is thought, had received him at her court among the Lutherans.

, one of the wits of Italy, the son of Jerome Pallavicino, was born at Placentia about 1615, or from that to 1620. Less from inclination, than from some family reasons, he entered the congregation of the regular canons of Latran, and took the habit, with the name of Mark Anthony, in their house at Milan. After commencing his studies here with much success, he went to Padua for further proficiency. He then settled at Venice, where he was chosen a member of the academy of the Incogniti. Here he became captivated by a courtezan, whoso charms proved irresistible; and, in order to have the lull enjoyment of them without restraint, he obtained leave from his general to make the tour of France, but in fact continued privately at Venice, while he had the art to impose upon his friends, by sending them frequently, in letters, feigned accounts of his travels through France. He afterwards went to Germany, about 1639, with duke Amalfi in the character of his chaplain. During this residence in Germany, which lasted about sixteen months, he addicted himself to every species of debauchery; and having a turn for satire, employed his pen in repeated attacks on the court of Rome in general, and on the Barbarini family in particular. The chief vehicle of his satire was a publication called “The Courier robbed of his mail,” and this as well as his other works contained so many just censures of the abuses of the court of Rome, that he might have been ranked among those honourable men who had contributed to enlighten his countrymen, had he not been as remarkable for his indecencies, which were so gross that many of his works were obliged to be published under concealed names. His personal attacks on the pope, and the Barbarini family, naturally roused their indignation; and after much search for him, one Charles Morfu, a Frenchman of a vile character, engaged to ensnare him, and having insinuated himself into his friendship, at length exhorted him to go with him to France. He flattered him with the extraordinary encouragement which was given to men of letters by cardinal Richelieu; and, to deceive him the more, even produced feigned letters from the cardinal, inviting our author to France, and expressing a desire he had to establish in Paris an academy for the Italian tongue, under the direction of Pallavicino. Pallavicino, young, thoughtless, and desperate, and now fascinated by the prospect of gain, left Venice much against the advice of his friends, and went first to Bergamo, where he spent a few days with some of his relations, who entertained his betrayer. They then set out for Geneva, to the great satisfaction of our author, who proposed to get some of his works printed there, which he had not been able to do in Italy. But Morfu, instead of conducting him to Paris, took the road to Avignon; where, crossing the bridge of Soraces, in the county of Venaissin (in the pope’s territories), they were seized by officers on pretence of carrying contraband goods, and confined. Morfu was soon discharged, and liberally rewarded; but Pallavicini, being carried to Avignon, was thrown into prison; and, after being kept there for some months, was brought to trial, and was beheaded in 1643 or 1644. Those who are desirous of farther information respecting this young man’s unfortunate history, may be amply gratified in the prolix: articles drawn up by Bayle, and particularly Marclmnd. His works were first published collectively at Venice, in 1655, 4 vols. 12mo. This edition, according to Marchand, contains only such of his works as had been permitted to beprinted in his life-time. Those which had been prohibited were afterwards printed in 2 vols. 12 mo, at Villafranca, a fictitious name for Geneva, 1660. Among these is a piece called “II divortio Celeste,” which some deny to be his. It is a very coarse satire on the abuses of the Romish church, and was translated and published in English in 1679, under the title of “Ciirist divorced from the church of Rome because of their lewdness,” Lond. 8vo.

, the Young, so called in contradistinction of the preceding Jacob, his great-uncle,^ may be considered as the last master of the good, and the first of the bad period of art at Venice. Born in 1544, he left the scanty rudiments of his father Antonio, a weak painter, to study the works of Titian, and particularly those of Tintoretto, whose spirit and slender disengaged forms were congenial to his own taste. At the age of fifteen he was taken under the protection of the duke of Urbino, carried to that capital, and for eight years maintained at Rome, where, by copying the antique, Michael Angelo, Raphael, and more than all, Polidoro, he acquired ideas of correctness, style, and effect: these he endeavoured to embody in the first works which he produced after his return to Venice, and there are who have discovered in them an union of the best maxims of the Roman and Venetian schools: they are all executed with a certain facility which is the great talent of this master, but a talent as dangerous in painting as in poetry. He was not, however, successful in his endeavours to procure adequate employment: the posts of honour and emolument were occupied by Tintoretto and Paul Veronese, and he owed his consideration as the third in rank to the patronage of Vittoria, a fashionable architect, sculptor, and at that time supreme umpire of commissions: he, piqued at the slights of Paul and Robusti, took it into his head to favour Palma, to assist him with his advice, and to establish his name. Bernini is said to have done the same at Rome, in favour of Pietro da Cortona and others, against Sacchi, to the destruction of the art; and, adds Mr. Fuseli, as men and passions resemble each other in all ages, the same will probably be related of some fashionable architect of our times. Palma, overwhelmed by commissions, soon relaxed frdnl his womed diligence; and his carelessness increased when, at the death of his former competitors, and of Leonardo Corona, his new rival, he found himself alone and in possession of the field. His pictures, as Cesare d'Arpino told him, were seldom more than sketches; sometimes, indeed, when time and price were left to his own discretion, in which he did not abound, he produced some work worthy of his former fame; such as the altar-piece at S. Cosmo and Datniano; the celebrated Naval Battle of Francesco Bembo in the public palace; the S. Apolloniaat Cremona; St. Ubaldo and the Nunziata at Pesaro; the Finding of the Cross at Urbino: works partly unknown to Ridolfi, but of rich composition, full of beauties, variety, and expression. His tints fresh, sweet, and transparent, less gay than those of Paul, but livelier than those of Tintoretto, though slightly laid on, still preserve their bloom. In vivacity of expression he is not much inferior to either of those masters; and his Plague of the Serpents at St. Bartolomeo may vie for features, gestures, and hues of horror, with the same subject by Tintoretto in the school of St. Rocco: but none of his pictures are without some commendable part; and it surprises that a man, from whom the depravation of style may be dated in Venice, as from Vasari at Florence, and Zuccari at Rome, should still preserve so many charms of nature and art to attract the eye and interest the heart. He died in 1628, in the eighty-fourth year of his age.

, a polite scholar, who flourished in the reigns of Henry VII. and VIII. was a native of London, and educated there in grammar. He afterwards studied logic and philosophy at Cambridge, at which university he resided till he had attained the degree of bachelor of arts; after which he went to Paris, where he spent several years in the study of philosophical and other learning, took the degree of master of arts, and acquired such excellence in the French tongue, that, in 1514, when a treaty of marriage was negotiated between Louis XII. kinpr of France, and the princess Mary, sister of king Henry VIII. of England, Mr. Palsgrave was chosen to be her tutor in that language. But Louis XII. dying almost immediately after his marriage, Palsgrave attended his fair pupil back to England, where he taught the French language to many of the young nobility, and was appointed by the king one of his chaplains in ordinary. He is said also to have obtained some church preferments, but we know only of the prebend of Portpoole, in the church of St. Paul’s, which was bestowed upon him in April 1514, and the living of St. Dunstan’s in the East, given to him by archbishop Cranmer in 1553. In 1531, he settled at Oxford for some time, and the next year was incorporated master of arts in that university, as he had before been in that of Paris; and a few days after was admitted to the degree of bachelor of divinity. At this time he was highly esteemed for his learning; and was the first author who reduced the French tongue under grammatical rules, or that had attempted to fix it to any kind of standard. This he executed with great ingenuity and success, in a large work which he published in that language at London, entitled “L'Eclaircissement de la Language Fran9ois,” containing three books, in a thick folio, 1530, to which he has prefixed a large introduction in English. This work is now extremely scarce. In the dedication he says that he had written two books on the subject before; one dedicated to his pupil Mary, the other to Charles Brandon duke of Suffolk. He made a literal translation into English of a Latin comedy called “Acolastus,” written by Fullonius, and published it in 1540. He is said also to have written some “Epistles.”

, the son of Albert Pancirolus, a famous lawyer in his time, and descended from an illustrious family at Reggio, was born there April 17, 1523. He learned Latin and Greek under Sebastian Corrado and Bassiano Lando, and made so speedy a proficiency in them, that his father, thinking him fit for the study of the law at fourteen, taught him the first elements of that faculty himself; and Guy studied them incessantly under his father for three years, but without neglecting the belles lettres. He was afterwards sent into Italy, in order to complete his law-studies under the professors of that country. He went first to Ferrara; and, having there heard the lectures of Pasceto and Hyppolitus Riminaldi, passed thence to Pavia, where he had for his master the famous Alciat, and to Bologna and Padua, where he completed a course of seven years study, during which he had distinguished himself in public disputations on several occasions: and the fame of his abilities having drawn the attention of the republic of Venice, he was nominated by them in 1547, while only a student, second professor of the Institutes in the university of Padua. This nomination obliged him to take a doctor’s degree, which he received from the hands of Marcus Mantua. After he had filled this chair for seven years, he was advanced to the first of the Institutes in 1554; and two years after, on the retirement of Matthew Gribaldi, who was second professor of the Roman law, Pancirolus succeeded him, and held this post for fifteen years. At length, having some reason to be dissatisfied with his situation, he resigned it in 1571, when Emanuel Philibert duke of Savoy offered him the professorship of civil law, with a salary of a thousand pieces of gold. Here his patron the prince shewed him all imaginable respect, as did also his son Charles Emanuel, who augmented his appointments with a hundred pieces. The republic of Venice soon became sensible of the loss sustained by his departure, and were desirous of recalling him to a vacant professorship in 1580. This Pancirolus at first refused, and would indeed have been content to remain at Turin, but the air of the place proved so noxious to him, that he lost one eye almost entirely, and was in danger of losing the other; the dread of which induced him to hearken to proposals that were made afresh to him in 1582; and having a salary of a thousand ducats offered to him, with the chair he had so much wished for, he returned to Padua. The city of Turin, willing to give him some marks of their esteem, at his departure, presented him with his freedom, accompanied with some pieces of silver plate. He then remained at Padua, where his stipend was raised to the sum of twelve hundred ducats. Here he died in June 1599, and was interred in the church of St. Justin, after funeral service had been performed for him in the church of St. Anthony; where Francis Vidua of that university pronounced his funeral oration. He was author of a number of learned works, of which the principal are: 1. “Commentarii in Notitiam utriusque Imperii et de Magistratibus,” Venice, 1593, fol. often reprinted, and inserted in the Roman Antiquities of Gracvius; 2. “De Numismatibus antiquis;” 3. “De quatuordecim Regionibus Urbis Romae,” printed in the Leyden edition of the Notitia, 1608; 4. “Rerum Memorabiliuui jam olim deperditarum, et contra recens atque ingeniose inventarum,” 1599, 2 vols. 8vo, often reprinted and translated. He wrote also a valuable treatise, which was not published till 1637, entitled “De Claris Legum Interpretibus.”!

, a very distinguished character in modern times, born at Rostino, in the island of Corsica, in 1726, was the son of Hiacente Paoli, a Corsican patriot, who, despairing of the freedom of his country, had retired with his family to Naples. Pascal was educated among the Jesuits, and at their college he made a rapid progress in his studies, and displayed an understanding equally solid and capacious. He appeared in so favourable a light to his countrymen, that he was unanimously chosen generalissimo, in a full assembly of the people, when he had attained but to the 29th year of his age. He began with new-modelling the laws of Corsica, and established the appearance, if not the reality, of subordination: he also instituted schools, and laid the foundation of a maritime power. In 1761 the government of Genoa, perceiving the change lately effected among the natives, sent a deputation to a general council, convoked at Vescovato, for the express purpose of proposing terms of accommodation; but it was unanimously resolved never to make peace with them, unless upon the express condition of Corsica being guaranteed in the full enjoyment of its independence. A memorial to the same effect was also addressed, at tfie same time, to all the sovereigns of Europe. But nothing was gained by this step; and in 1768, the Genoese, despairing of rendering the Corsicans subservient to their will, transferred the sovereignty of their island to France, on condition of receiving in lieu of it 40,000,000 of livres. Notwithstanding this, Paoli remained firm to his cause: and a vigorous war commenced, in which, for some time, the French were beaten, and in one instance their general was obliged to capitulate, with all his infantry, artillery, and ammunition; but an immense force bing now sent from France, overwhelmed the Corsican patriots; they were defeated with great slaughter, and Paoli, left with only about 500 men, was surrounded by the French, who were anxious to get possession of his 'person: he, however, cut his way through the enemy, and escaped to England with his friends, where they were received with every degree of sympathy and respect. Paoli was introduced at court, and the duke of Grafton, then prime minister, obtained for him a pension of 1200l. a-year, which he liberally shared with his companions in exile. From this time he lived a retired life, devoting himself chiefly to the cultivation of literature. During his retirement, which lasted more than twenty years, he was introduced to Dr. Johnson by Mr. Boswell, and lived in habits of intimacy with that eminent scholar. Much of their conversation is recorded by Mr. Boswell.

, a French surgeon of eminence, was born at Laval, in the district of the Maine, in 1509. He commenced the study of his profession early in life, and practised it with great zeal both in hospitals and in the army; and when his reputation was at its height, he was appointed surgeon in ordinary to king Henry II. in 1552; and he held the same office under the succeeding kings, Francis II. Charles IX. and Henry III. To Charles IX. especially he is said to have on one occasion conferred great professional benefits, when some formidable symptoms had been produced by the accidental wound of a tendon in venesection, which he speedily removed. His services appear to have been amply acknowledged by the king; who spared him in the horrible massacre of St. Bartholomew’s, although a protestant. “Of all those,”' says the duke of Sully, <c who were about the person of this prince (Charles IX.) none possessed so great a share of his confidence as Ambrose Pare“, his surgeon. This man, though a Huguenot, lived with him in so great a degree of familiarity, that, on the day of the massacre, Charles telling him, the time was now come when the whole kingdom would be catholics; he replied, without being alarmed, * By the light of God, sire, I cannot believe that you have forgot your promise never to command me to do four things namely, to enter into my mother’s womb, to be present in the day of battie, to quit your service, or to go to mass.‘ The king soon after took him aside, and disclosed to him freely the trouble of his soul: * Ambrose,’ said he, * I know not what has happened to me these two or three days past, but I feel my mind and body as much at enmity with each other, as if I was seized with a fever; sleeping or waking, the murdered Huguenots seem ever present to my eyes, with ghastly faces, and weltering in blood. I wish the innocent and helpless had been spared!' The order which was published the following day, forbidding the continuance of the massacre, was in consequence of this conversation.” Pare", after having been long esteemed as the first surgeon of his time, and beloved for his private virtues, died Dec. 20, 1590, at the age of eighty-one; and as he was buried in the church of St. Andrew, Eloy would from that circumstance infer that he died a Roman catholic, of which we have no proof.

In July 1535 he proceeded B. D. and in the same year was preferred by the queen to the deanry of the college of Stoke-Clare in Suffolk, which was the more acceptable, as affording him an agreeable retirement for the pursuit of his studies. His friend Dr. Walter Haddon used to call it Parker’s Tusculanum. Meeting here with many superstitious practices and abuses that stood in need of correction, he immediately composed a new body of statutes, and erected a school for the instruction of youth in grammar and the study of humanity, which by his prudent care and management soon produced the happiest effects. These regulations were so generally approved, that when the duke of Norfolk was about to convert the monastery at Thetford, of his own foundation, into a college of secular priests, he requested a sight of them for his direction. Mr. Parker now continued to be an assiduous preacher, often preaching at Stoke, and at Cambridge, and places adjacent, and sometimes at London, at St. Paul’s-cross. At what time he imbibed the principles of the reformers we are not told, but it appears that in these sermons he attacked certain Romish superstitions with such boldness, that articles were exhibited against him by some zealous papists, against whom he vindicated himself with great ability before the lord Chancellor Audley, who encouraged him to go on without fear. On the death of queen Anne in 1537, the king took him under his more immediate protection, appointed him one of his chaplains, and, upon new-modelling the church of Ely, nominated him to one of the prebends in the charter of erection.

His works have not much connexion with his profession, all, except his letters, being Latin poetry on sundry occasions. He was indeed one of the translators of the Bishops’ Bible, of which his share was the Apocrypha from the book of Wisdom to the end; but he is best known to the curious by his “Ludicra, sive Epigrammata juvenilia.” In T572 he sent a copy of these to his old and dear friend Dr. Wilson, master of St. Catherine’s, as a new-year’s gift, and styled them his “good, godly, and pleasant epigrams;” and they were in the following year printed by Day, in a small 4to volume. Why Anthony Wood should give the report that these epigrams were as indecent as Martial’s, when he adds at the same time that “he cannot perceive it,” seems unaccountable; but even Blomefield has adopted this false accusation. Many of them appear to have been first printed at Zurich in 1558, where they were written, and republished now. Among the commendatory verses is a copy by dean Nowell, to whom two of the epigrams are addressed, and who was not likely to have commended indecencies, if we could suppose our pious prelate capable of publishing such. “His epigrams,” says archdeacon Churton, “affording notices of persons and things not elsewhere easily found, are on the Grecian rather than the Roman model, not sparkling with wit, but grave and didactic.” The other works attributed to bishop Parkhurst are, 1. “Epigrammata in mortem duorum fratrum Suffolciensium, Caroli et Henrici Brandon,” Lond. 1552, 4to. These were the sons of Charles Brandon, duke of Suffolk, and died of the sweating-sickness. 2. “Epigrammata seria,” ibid. 1560, which seem to be a part of his larger collection; and some of them had been long before published at Strasburgh, along with Shepreve’s “Summa et synopsis Nov. Test, distichis ducentis sexaginta comprehensa.” 3. “Vita Christi, carm. Lat. in lib. precum privat.” ibid. 1578. He also addressed Henry VIII. and queen Catherine in some complimentary verses, when they were about to visit Oxford in 1543; and there is an epitaph of his on queen Catherine in the chapel of Sudley-castle. Several of his letters have been published by Strype, and more in ms. are in the British Museum.

Thus, for instance, as Mr. Gee remarks in his introduction to the Jesuit’s memorial, Parsons treated with the duke of Guise to erect a seminary for such a purpose in Normandy; and he now prevailed with Philip II. to extend these foundations in Spain: so that in a short time they could boast not only of their seminaries at Rome and Rheims, but of those at Valladolid, Seville, and St. Lucar in Spain, at Lisbon in Portugal, and at Douay and St. Omers in Flanders. In all these, their youth were educated with the strongest prejudices against their country, and their minds formed to all the purposes that Parsons had in his head. Among other favourite objects, he obliged them to subscribe to the right of the Infanta of Spain to the crown of England, and defended this position in his “Conference about the next succession to that crown,” which went so far as to assert the lawfulness of deposing queen Elizabeth. The secular priests likewise inform us, that, after the defeat of his designs to dethrone that queen, while he stayed in England, he consulted with the duke of Guise in France upon the same subject; and endeavoured to make a list of catholics, who, under the conduct of the duke, were to change the state of England, upon pretence of supporting the title of Mary queen of Scots.

After the defeat of the armada in 1588, he used every means in his power to persuade the Spanish monarch to a second invasion; and when he failed in this, he endeavoured to raise a rebellion in England, urging the earl of Derby to appear at the head of it, who is said to have been poisoned, at his instigation, for refusing to acquiesce. Nor did he stop here. We find sir Ralph Winwood informing secretary Cecil from Paris, in 1602, of an attempt to assassinate the queen that year by another English Jesuit, at the instigation of father Parsons; and when all these plans proved abortive, he endeavoured to prevent the succession of king James by several means; one of which was, exciting the people to set up a democratic form of government, for which he had furnished them with principles in several of his books. Another was, to persuade the pope to make his kinsman the duke of Parma king of England, by joining with the lady Arabella, and marrying her to the duke’s brother, cardinal Farnese. Cardinal d'Ossat gives the king of France a large account of both these projects in one of his letters; and in another mentions a third contrivance which Parsons had communicated to him, and whose object was, that the pope, the king of France, and the king of Spain, should first appoint by common consent a successor for England, who should be a catholic; and then should form an armed confederacy to establish him on the throne.

, the son of George Pasor, a learned professor of divinity and Hebrew in the academy of Herborne, by Apollonia his wife, daughter of Peter Hendschius, senator of that place, was born there April 12, 1599. Discovering a very docile disposition, he was carefully educated in the elements of Greek and Latin in his native place, until the appearance of the plague obliged him to be removed to Marpurg in 1614; but the following year he returned to Herborne, and again applied himself closely to his studies. In 1616, he was sent to Heidelberg; and, meeting there with skilful professors, he made such improvement, that he was employed as a tutor, and taught in private both mathematics and Hebrew. He was honoured also with the degree of M. A. by the university in Feb. 1617, and then studied divinity under David Pareus, Abraham Scultetus, and Henry Alting. In April 1620, he was appointed mathematical professor; which office he retained until Heidelberg was invested by the duke of Bavaria’s troops, in September 1622, when he lost his books and Mss. and narrowly escaped with his life to Herborne, where he found a comfortable employment in the academy till 1623. Proceeding thence to Ley den, he constantly attended the lectures of the most eminent Dutch divines, particularly those of Erpenius upon the Arabic tongue, and of Snellius upon divinity.

, an Italian cardinal, famous rather as a patron of letters, than as a writer, and employed by the see of Rome in many important negociations, was born at Fossombrone in the dutchy of Urbino, in 1682. He studied in the Clementine college at Rome, where he afterwards formed that vast library and curious collection of manuscripts, from which the learned world has derived so much advantage. In 1706 he attended the nuncio Gualterio, his relation, to Paris, where he formed an intimacy with the most learned men of the time, and examined every thing that deserved attention. He was particularly intimate with Mabillon, and Montfaucon. In 1708 ha went into Holland, at first for the sake of literary inquiries, but afterwards as a kind of secret agent for the pope at the Hague, where he resided four years, and attended the congress at Utrecht in 1712. On his return to Rome., he passed through Paris, where he was most graciously and honourably received by Louis XIV. who gave him his portrait set with diamonds. He then proceeded to Turin to accommodate some differences between the pope and the duke of Savoy; and upon his return to Rome was declared president of the apostolic chamber. In the two congresses at Bale in 1714, and at Soleure in 1715, he was again employed, and strongly evinced his zeal, talents, activity, prudence, and other qualities of a great negotiator. His account of this embassy was published in 1738, in folio, under the title of “Acta Legationis Helvetica,” which may be considered as a model of conduct for persons employed in such services. Upon the accession of Clement XII. he was sent as nuncio to the court of Vienna, where he pronounced the funeral oration of prince Eugene. In the pontificate of Innocent XIII. which lasted from 1721 to 1724, Passionei had been made archbishop of Ephesus; ie continued in favour with the successors of that pope, Benedict XIII. and Clement XII. the latter of whom, in 1738, raised him to the dignity of cardinal, having at the same time made him secretary of the briefs. Benedict XIV. in 1755 made him librarian of the Vatican, which he enriched by many important accessions; and in the same year he was admitted into the French academy, under the peculiar title of associ6 etranger. He died on the 15th of July, 1761, at the age of seventy-nine.

, a French minor poet, was born at Caen in 1585, and being the son of a lawyer, was designed by his father for the same profession. This destination, which seldom suits a poetical imagination, was accordingly rejected by Patrix, who addicted himself entirely to poetry. About the age of forty, he attached himself to the court of Gaston, duke of Orleans, 'to whom, and to his widow, Margaret ofLorraine, he faithfully devoted his services. A Norman accent, and a certain affectation of rustic simplicity, did not prevent him from being in high favour at that little court: his wit, liveliness, and social talent, making amends for such imperfections. Towards the latter end of life, he became strongly touched with sentiments of religion, and suppressed, as far as he could, the licentious poems which he had written in his youth. He lived to the great age of eighty-eight, and died at Paris in 1672. At eighty, he had a violent illness, and when he recovered from it, his friends advised him to leave his bed; “Alas!” said he, “at my time of life, it is hardly worth while to take the trouble of dressing myself again.” He proved however mistaken, as to the shortness of his subsequent life. Of his works there are extant, 1. A collection of verses entitled “La miv-ricorde de Dieu sur un pecheur pénitent,” Blois, 1660, 4to. These were written in his age, yet possess some fire. 2. “Plaints des Consonnes qui n‘ont pas Thonneur d’entrer dans le noiu de Neufgermain,” preserved in the works of Voiture 3. Miscellaneous poems, in the collection of Barbin. The greater part of them are feeble, with the exception of a few original passages. The poem most known was made a few days before his death. It is called the Dream; and, though it is of a serious cast, a translation of it, oddly enough, possesses a place in all our English jest bokks, beginning, “I dreamt that buried in my fellow-clay,” &c. It asserts a moral and religious axiom, which is undeniable, that death levels all conditions. The original is little known; it is this:

, a platonic philosopher and man of letters, was born, in 1529, at Clissa in Illyricum, and was educated at Padua. In 1553 he began to appear as an author by some miscellaneous Italian tracts. In 1557, with the view of obtaining the patronage of the duke of Ferrara, he published a panegyrical poem on the house of Este, entitled “L'Eridano,” in a novel kind of heroic verse of thirteen syllables. After this, for several years, he passed an unsettled kind of life, in which he twice visited the isle of Cyprus, where he took up his abode for seven years, and which he finally quitted on its reduction by the Turks in 1571. He also travelled into France and Spain, and spent three years in the latter country, collecting a treasure of ancient Greek Mss. which he lost on his return to Italy. In 1578 he was invited to Ferrara by duke Alphonso II. to teach philosophy in the university of that city. Afterwards, upon the accession of Clement VIII. to the popedom, he was appointed public professor of the Platonic philosophy at Rome, an office which he held with high reputation till his death, hi 1597. He professed to unite the doctrines of Aristotle and Plato, but in reality undermined the authority of the former. He wholly deserted the obscurity of the Jewish Cabbala, and in teaching philosophy closely followed the ancient Greek writers. During his lecturing at Rome, he more openly discovered his aversion to the Aristotelian philosophy, and advised the pope to prohibit the teaching pf it in the schools, and to introduce the doctrine of Plato, as more consonant to the Christian faith. His “Discussiones Peripatetics,” a learned, perspicuous, and elegant work, fully explains the reason on which his disapprobation of the Peripatetic philosophy was founded. He was one of the first of the moderns who attentively observed the phenomena of nature, and he made use of every opportunity, that his travels afforded him, for collecting remarks concerning various points of astronomy, meteorology, and natural history. In one of his “Dialogues on Rhetoric,” he advanced, under the fiction of an Ethiopic tradition, a theory of the earth which some have thought similar to that afterwards proposed by Dr. Thomas Burnet. His other principal works were, “Nova Geometria,” 1587; “Parallels Militari,” 1594, both of which are full of whimsical theories and an elaborate edition of “Oracula Zoroastris, Hermetis Trismegisti, et aliorum ex scriptis Platonicorum collecta, Graece et Latine, prefixa Dissertation^ Historica,” 1591.

, sieur of Villeneuve, a French poet, born at Nantes in 1636, was for a considerable time comptroller-general of the imposts in Dauphine* and Provence; yet he mingled the flowers of poetry with the thorns of that occupation, and became celebrated at court by a miscellaneous publication of prose and verse, entitled “Amities, Amours, et Amourettes,” published in 1685. This publication gained him particularly the favour of the ladies; and the duke of Savoy honoured him with the title of chevalier of St. Maurice, and he was made a member of the academy of Aries. The latter part of his life was embittered by a law-suit, which obliged him to pay for the dishonesty of one of his associates in office. He died April 30, 1690, at the age of fifty-four. His remaining works are, 1. “Zelotide,” a novel of gallantry, which was admired in the country, but despised at Paris. 2. A collection of poetry, containing eclogues, sonnets, stanzas, &c. published at Paris in 1672, in 2 vols. 12mo, under the title of “Nouvelles Oeuvres.” These contain rather the fancies of a minor wit, than the efforts of real genius.

, bishop of St. Asaph, and Chichester, in the reign of Henry Vj. is supposed to have been born in Wales about 1390. He was educated in Oriel college, Oxford, of which he was chosen fellow in October 1417, in the room of Richard Garsdale, S. T. P. who was then elected provost of the college. Having studied with a view to the church, he was ordained deacon and priest in 1420 by Fleming, bishop of Lincoln. In 1425 he took his degree of bachelor of divinity, and about this time is supposed to have left the university. Humphrey, duke of Gloucester, was now protector of the kingdom, and being a great patron of learned men, invited Mr. Peacock to court, where he was enabled to make a very considerable figure by his talents. In 1431, he was elected master of the college of St. Spirit and St. Mary, founded by sir Richard Whittington; and with it was appointed to the rectory of St. Michael in Riola, now St. Michael Royal, situated in the street called Tower Royal in Viutry ward. This situation he resigned in 1444, on being promoted to the bishopric of St. Asaph. To whom he owed this preferment seems uncertain, as his patron the duke of Gloucester was now declining in court interest, but perhaps the estimation he was held in at court may account for it. He now was honoured with the degree of D. D. at Oxford, in his absence, and without performing any exercises, an omission for which he was reproached afterwards by his enemies, although it was not then uncommon. In 1447 he preached a sermon at Paul’s cross, in which he maintained that bishops were not under obligation to preach or to take the cure of souls, and that their duties consist entirely in the various acts of church government. This doctrine was not very palatable even then, and he was under the necessity of explaining himself to the archbishop of Canterbury; but it showed, what appeared more clearly afterwards, that he was accustomed to think for himself, and to pay little deference to authority or custom.

"About a fortnight after this, the dean went up to his parish in Westminster; but in his way thither, lay one night at his father’s house, in Little Ealing, near Brentford; where, the next morning early, a letter was brought to him from the duke of Newcastle by one of his grace’s servants, signifying that his grace had his majesty’s order to make the dean of Winchester an offer of the bishopric of Bangor, and desiring to see him at the cockpit the next day at 12 o'clock. Accordingly he waited upon him, when, with many kind expressions to the dean, the duke signified the gracious offer of his majesty, which he had the order to make him. The dean asked his grace, whether he might be permitted to hold his deanry of Winchester in commendam with Bangor, to which the answer was, No; but that he might hold the vicarage of St. Martin’s with it. The dean said, that he was desirous to quit the living, which was troublesome to him, and would be more so as he was growing in years; but if that could not be indulged him, he rather chose to continue in his present situation. The duke used some arguments to persuade the dean to accept of the offer with a commendam to hold the living. He could not, however, prevail with the dean any farther, than that he would take three days’ time to consider of it. During that time, the dean had brought his father and lord Bath to consent, that he might decline to accept of that bishopric without their displeasure; but before the dean saw the duke a second time, lord Hardwicke, then chancellor, sent for him, and desired him to be, without fail, at his house, that evening. He went, and lord Hardwicke told him. that he found, by the duke of Newcastle, that he made difficulties about accepting the bishopric which was so graciously offered him. The dean gave his lordship an account of all that had passed between the duke and him; upon which his lordship used many arguments with the dean to induce him to accept the ofter, as intended. Among other things, he said, * If clergymen of learning and merit will not accept of the bishoprics, how can the ministers of state be blamed, if they are forced to fill them with others less deserving?‘ The dean was struck with that question, and had nothing ready in his thoughts to reply to it. He therefore promised lord Hardwicke to consent, the next day, when he was to see the duke of Newcastle. ’ Well then,‘ said lord Hardwicke, * when you consent, do it with a good grace.’ The dean promised to do that too; and accordingly he declared to the duke, the next day, his ready acceptance of his majesty’s offer, with such acknowledgments of the royal goodness as are proper on the occasion; and on Feb. 21, 1748, he was consecrated bishop of Bangor.

“Sometime after, in the same year (the bishop of Rochester declining very fast), the duke of Newcastle sent to the bishop of Bangor, and desired to see him the n x ext day. He went to him, and the duke informed him, that he was told, -that the chancellorship of Bangor was then vacant, and he pressed the bishop so much to bestow it upon one! whom he had to recommend, that the bishop consented to comply with his request. ‘ Well, my lord,’ said the duke, * now I have another favour to ask of you.‘ * Pray, my lord duke,’ said the bishop, e what is that?‘ c Why,’ said the duke, ‘ it is, that you will accept of the bishopric of Rochester, and deanry of Westminster, in exchange for Bangor, in case the present bishop of Rochester should die.’ * My lord,‘ said the bishop, ’ if I had thoughts of exchanging my bishopric, I should prefer what you mention before any other dignities.‘ ’ That is not,‘ said the duke, * an answer to my question: will you accept them in exchange, if they are offered to you?’ ‘ Your grace offers them to me,’ said the bishop, ‘ in so generous and friendly a manner, that 1 promise you to accept them.’ Here the Conversation ended; and Dr. Wilcocks dying in the beginning of the year 1756, the bishop of Bangor was promoted to the bishopric of Rochester and deanry of Westminster.” On the death of Dr. Sherlock, bishop of London, lord Bath spoke to the bishop of Rochester, and offered to use his endeavours with his majesty for appointing him to succeed that eminent prelate; but Dr. Fearce told him, that from the earliest time that he could remember himself to have considered about bishoprics, he had determined nevefc to accept the bishopric of London, or the archbishopric of Canterbury, and he begged his lordship not to make any application in his behalf for the vacant see of London. Lord Bath repeated his offer on the death of Dr. Osbaldiston in 1763, but Dr. Pearce again declined the proposal, and was indeed so far from desiring a higher bishopric, that he now meditated the resignation of what he possessed. This is one of the most remarkable circumstances in the Jife of Dr. Pearce. Being now (1763) seventy-three years old, and finding himself less fit for the duties of bishop and dean, he informed his friend lord Bath of his intention to resign both, and to live in a retired manner upon his own private fortune; and after much discourse upon, the subject at different times, he prevailed upon his lordship at last to acquaint his majesty with his intention, and to desire, in the bishop’s name, the honour of a private audience from his majesty for that purpose. This being granted, Dr. Pearce stated his motives as he had done to lord Bath, adding that he was desirous to retire for the opportunity of spending more time in his devotions and studies; and that he was of the same way of thinking with a general officer of the emperor Charles V. who, when he desired a dismission from that monarch’s service, told him, ‘.’ Sir, every wise man would, at the latter end of life, wish to have an interval between the fatigues of business and eternity.“The bishop then shewed the king, in a written paper, instances of its having been done several times, and concluded with telling his majesty, that he did not expect or desire an immediate answer to his request, but rather that his majesty would first consult some pf his ministers as to the propriety and legality of it. This the king consented to do; and about two months after, he sent for the bishop and told him, that he had consulted with two of his lawyers, lord Mansfield and lord Northington, who saw no objection to the proposed resignation, and in consequence of their opinion, his majesty signified his own consent. The interference, however, of lord Bath, in requesting that his majesty would give the bishopric and deanry to Dr. Newton, then bishop of Bristol, alarmed the ministry, who thought that no dignities in the church should be obtained from the crown, but through their hands. Lord Northington suggested to his majesty some doubts on the subject, and represented that the bishops in general disliked the design; and at length Dr. Pearce was told by his majesty, that he must think 110 more about resigning Vtae bishopric but” that he would have all the merit of having done it." In 1768, however, he was permitted to resign his deanry, which was nearly double in. point of income to the bishopric which he was obliged to retain.

The first work discovered of his writing is “Το ὕϕος ἄγιον; or an Exercise on the Creation, and an Hymn to the Creator of the World; written in the express words of the Sacred Text; as an attempt to shew the Beauty and Sublimity of Holy Scripture,” 1716, 8vo. This was followed by a poem, entitled “Sighs on the Death of Queen Anne,” published in 1719; subjoined to which are three poems, viz, 1. “Paraphrase on part of the cxxxixth Psalm.” 2. “The Choice.” 3. “Verses to Lady Elizabeth Cecil, on her Birth-day, Nov. 23, 1717.” At the end of this work he mentions, as preparing for the press, “The History of the two last Months of King Charles I.” and solicits assistance; but this never was published. He also mentions a poem on Saul and Jonathan, not then published. During his residence at the university, and perhaps in the early part of it, he wrote a comedy called the “Humours of the University; or the Merry Wives of Cambridge.” The ms. of this comedy is now in the possession of Octavius Gilchrist, esq. of Stamford, who has obliged the editor with a transcript of the preface . In August 1719, he occurs curate of King’s Cliff, in Northamptonshire, and in 1721 he offered to the world proposals for printing the history and antiquities of his native town. In 1723, he obtained the rectory of Godeby Maureward, by purchase, from Samuel Lowe, esq. who at that time was lord of the manor, and patron of the advowson. In 1727, he drew up a poetical description of Belvoir and its neighbourhood, which is printed in Mr. Nichols’s History of Leicestershire; and in that year his first considerable work appeared, under the title of “Academia Tertia Anglicana; or, The Antiquarian Annals of Stanford, in Lincoln, Rutland, and Northampton Shires; containing the History of the University, Monasteries, Gilds, Churches, Chapels, Hospitals, and Schools there,” &c. ornamented with XLI plates; and inscribed to John duke of Rutland, in an elaborate dedication, which contains a tolerably complete history of the principal events of that illustrious family, from the founder of it at the Conquest. This publication was evidently hastened by “An Essay on the ancient and present State of Stamford, 1726,” 4to, by Francis Hargrave, who, in the preface to his pamphlet, mentions a difference which had arisen between him and Mr. Peck, because his publication forestalled that intended by the latter. Mr. Peck is also rather roughly treated, on account of a small work he had formerly printed, entitled “The History of the Stamford Bull-running.” In 1729, Jie printed a single sheet, containing, “Queries concerning the Natural History and Antiquities of Leicestershire and Rutland,” which were afterwards reprinted in 174O. He was elected a Fellow of the Society of Antiquaries, March 9, 1732, and in that year he published the first volume of “Desiderata Curiosa; or, A Collection of divers scarce and curious Pieces, relating chiefly to matters of English History 5 consisting of choice Tracts, Memoirs, Letters, Wills, Epitaphs, &c. Transcribed, many of them, from the originals themselves, and the rest from divers ancient ms Copies, or the ms Collations of sundry famous Antiquaries, and other eminent Persons, both of the last and present age: the whole, as nearly as possible, digested into order of time, and illustrated with ample Notes, Contents, additional Discourses, and a complete Index.” This volume was dedicated to lord William Manners; and was followed, in 1735, by a second volume, dedicated to Dr. Reynolds, bishop of Lincoln. There being only 250 copies of these volumes printed, they soon became scarce and high-priced, and were reprinted in one volume, 4to, by subscription, by the late Mr. Thomas Evans, in 1779, without, however, any improvements, or any attempt, which might perhaps have been dangerous by an unskilful hand, at a better arrangement. In 1735, Mr. Peck printed, in a quarto pamphlet, “A complete Catalogue of all the Discourses written both for and against Popery, in the time of King James the Second; containing in the whole an account of four hundred and fifty-seven Books and Pamphlets, a great number of them not mentioned in the three former Catalogues; with references after each title, for the more speedy finding a further Account of the said Discourses and their Authors in sundry Writers, and an Alphabetical List of the Writers on each side.” In 1736, he obtained, by the favour of bishop Reynolds, the prebendal stall of Marston St. Lawrence, in the cathedral church of Lincoln. In 1739, he was the editor of “Nineteen Letters of the truly reverend and learned Henry Hammond, D. D. (author of the Annotations on the New Testament, &c.) written to Mi*. Peter Stainnough and Dr. Nathaniel Angelo, many of them on curious subjects,” &c. These were printed from the originals, communicated by Mr. Robert Marsden, archdeacon of Nottingham, and Mr. John Worthington. The next year, 1740, produced two volumes in quarto; one of them entitled “Memoirs of the life and actions of Oliver Cromwell, as delivered in three Panegyrics of him written in Latin; the first, as said, by Don Juan Roderiguez de Saa Meneses, Conde de Penguiao, the Portugal Ambassador; the second, as affirmed by a certain Jesuit, the lord ambassador’s Chaplain; yet both, it is thought, composed by Mr. John Milton (Latin Secretary to Oliver Cromwell), as was the third with an English version of each. The whole illustrated with a large Historical Preface many similar passages from the Paradise Lost, and other works of Mr. John Milton, and Notes from the best historians. To all which is added, a Collection of divers curious Historical Pieces relating to Cromwell, and a great number of other remarkable persons (after the manner of Desiderata Curiosa, vol. I. and II.)” The other, “New Memoirs of the Life and Poetical Works of Mr. John Milton; with, first, an Examination of Milton’s Style; and, secondly, Explanatory and Critical Notes on divers passages in Milton and Shakspeare, by the Editor. Thirdly, Baptistes; a sacred Dramatic Poem in Defence of Liberty, as written in Latin by Mr. George Buchanan, translated into English by Mr. John Milton, and first published in 1641, by order of the House of Commons. Fourthly, The Parallel) or archbishop Laud and cardinal Wolsey compared, a vision, by Milton. Fifthly, The Legend of sir Nicholas Throckmorton, knt. Chief Butler of England, who died of poison, anno 1570, an Historical Poem, by his nephew sir Thomas Throckmorton, knt. Sixth, Herod the Great, by the Editor. Seventh, The Resurrection, a Poem, in imitation of Milton, by a Friend. And eighth, a Discourse on the Harmony of the Spheres, by Milton; with Prefaces and Notes.” Of these his “Explanatory and Critical Notes on divers passages of Shakspeare” seem to prove that the mode of illustrating Shakspeare by extracts from contemporary writers, was not entirely reserved for the modern commentators on our illustrious bard, but had occurred to Mr. Peck. The worst circumstance respecting this volume is the portrait of Milton, engraved from a painting which Peck got from sir John Meres of KirkbyBeler in Leicestershire. He was not a little proud to possess this painting, which is certainly not genuine and what is worse, he appears to have known that it was not genuine. Having asked Vertue whether he thought it a picture of Milton, and Vertue peremptorily answering in the negative, Peck replied, “I'll have a scraping from it, however: and let posterity settle the difference.”

, a learned antiquary, was born of a noble family at Mantua, in 1646. He entered himself among the Jesuits, and became distinguished for his deep knowledge of history and antiquities. His private character too was such as made him beloved by every person who knew him. He was chosen by Hannuncio, duke of Parma, to arrange his rich and curious cabinet of medals, of which, in 1694, he began to publish an account under the title of “I Cassari in oro raccolti nel Farnese Musaeo o publicati colle loro congrue interpretazioni;” and be continued his labours till his death, Jan. 20, 1721. This work, in its complete form, consists of ten vols. folio, and bears the title of “Museo Farnese” but is not held in so much estimation on the continent as to bear a high price.

Being now possessed of a living, and of some independent personal property inherited from his mother, he married, in April 1732, miss Anne Clarke, the only daughter of Benjamin Clarke, esq. of Stanley, near Wakefield, in Yorkshire. While he resided in Kent, which was for the space of twenty years, he made himself universally acceptable by his general knowledge, his agreeable conversation, and his vivacity. Having an early propensity to the study of antiquities as well as of the classics, he here laid the foundation of what in time became a considerable collection of books, and his cabinet of coins grew in proportion; by which two assemblages, so scarce among country gentlemen in general, he was qualified to pursue those collateral studies, without neglecting his parochial duties, to which he was always assiduously attentive. Here, however, the placid course of his life was interrupted by the death of Mrs. Pegge, whom he lamented with unfeigned sorrow; and now meditated on some mode of removing himself, without disadvantage, to his native country, either by obtaining a preferment tenable with his present vicarage, or by exchanging this for an equivalent. Having been induced to reside for some time at Surrenden, to superintend the education of Sir Edward Dering’s son, that baronef obtained for him the perpetual curacy of Brampton, near Chesterfield, in the gift of the dean of Lincoln; but the parishioners insisting that they had a right to the presentation, law proceedings took place, before the termination of which in favour of the dean of Lincoln, Mr. Pegge was presented by the new dean of Lincoln, Dr. George, to the rectory of Whittington, near Chesterfield. He was accordingly inducted Nov. 11, 1751, and resided here upwards of forty-four years without interruption. About a fortnight after, by the interest of his friend sir Edward Dering with the duke of Devonshire, he was inducted into the rectory of Brinhill, or Brindle, in Lancashire, on which he resigned Godmersham. Sir Edward also obtained for him in the same year a scarf from the marquis of Hartington (afterwards the fourth duke of Devonshire) who was then called up to the house of peers by the title of baron Cavendish of Hard wick. In 1758 Mr. Pegge was enabled, by the acquiescence of the duke of Devonshire, to exchange Brinhill for Heath, alias Lown, which lies within seven miles of Whittington; a very commodious measure, as it brought his parochial preferments within a smaller distance of each other. The vicarage of Heath he held till his death. His other preferments were, in 1765, the perpetual curacy ofWingerworth; the prebend of Bobenhull, in the church of Lichfield, in 1757; the living of Whittington in Staffordshire, in 1763; and the prebend of Louth, in Lincoln church, in 1772. Towards the close of his life he declined accepting a residentiaryship in the church of Lichfield, being too old to endure, with tolerable convenience, a removal from time to time. His chief patron was archbishop Cornwallis, but he had an admirer, if not a patron, in every dignitary of the church who knew him; and his protracted life, and his frequent and almost uninterrupted literary labours, made him very generally known. In 1791, when on a visit to his grandson, sir Christopher Pegge, of Oxford, he was created LL. D. by that university. He died, after a fortnight’s illness, Feb. 14, 1796, in the ninety-second year of his age, and was buried, according to his own desire, in the chancel of the church of Whittington, near Chesterfield, where his son placed a mural tablet of black marble, over the east window, with a short inscription.

His independent publications on numismatical, antiquarian, and biographical subjects were also very numerous: 1. “A Series of Dissertations on some elegant and very raluable Anglo-Saxon Remains,” 1756, 4to. 2. “Memoirs of Roger de Weseham, dean of Lincoln, afterwards bishop of Lichfield, and the principal favourite of Robert Grossetete, bishop of Lincoln,” 1761, 4to. 3. “An Essay on the Coins of Cunobelin in an epistle to the right rev. bishop of Carlisle (Dr. Lyttelton), president of the society of antiquaries,” 1766, 4to. 4. “An assemblage of coins fabricated by authority of the archbishops of Canterbury. To which are subjoined two Dissertations,” 1772, 4to. 5. “Fitz-Stephen’s Description of the city of London,” &c. 1772, 4to. 6. “The Forme of Cury. A roll of ancient English cookery, compiled about the year 1390, temp. Rich. II. with a copious index and glossary, 7 ' 1780, 8vo. The original of this curious roll was the property of the late Gustavus Brander, esq. who presented it afterwards to the British Museum. Prefixed to this publication is his portrait, engraved at the expence of Mr. Brander. 7.” Annales Eliae de Trickenham, monachi ordinis Benedictini. Ex Bibliotheca Lamethana.“To which is added,” Compendium compertorum; ex bibliotheca ducis Devoniae,“1789, in 4to. Both parts of this publication contain copious annotations by the editor. The former was communicated by Mr. Nichols, to whom it is inscribed,” ad Johannem Nicolsium, celeberrimum typographum;“and the latter was published by permission of the duke of Devonshire, to whom it is dedicated. 8.” The Life of Robert Grossetete, the celebrated bishop of Lincoln,“1793, 4to. This has very justly been considered as the chef-d'oeuvre- of the author. Seldom has research into an obscure period been more successful. It is a valuable addition to our literary history. 9.” An historical account of Beauchief Abbey, in the county of Derby, from its first foundation to its final dissolution,“1801, 4to. 10.” Anonymiana; or Ten centuries of observations on various authors and subjects," 1809, 8vo, a very entertaining assemblage of judicious remarks and anecdotes. It is needless to add that these two last publications were posthumous.

Fouquet, the celebrated superintendant of the finances, who well knew his merit and talents, made him his first clerk and confidant in 1657; and Pellisson, though much to his injury, always preserved the sincerest attachment to him. Two years after, he was made master of the accounts at Montpelier, and had scarcely returned from that place to Paris, when the disgrace of his patron Fouqnet involved him in much trouble, and in 1661 he was sent to the Bastile, and confined there above four years. Though a very strict watch was set over him, he found means to correspond with his friends, and even with Fouquet himself, from whom he also received letters. He used his utmost endeavours, and employed a thousand arts to serve this linister; and he composed in his behalf three famous pleadings, which, Voltaire says, “resemble those of the Roman orator the most of any thing in the French language. They are like many of Cicero’s orations a mixture of judicial and state affairs, treated with an art void of ostentation, and with all the ornaments of an affecting eloquence.” In the mean time, the public was so convinced of his innocence, and he was so esteemed in the midst of his misfortunes, that Tanaquil Faber dedicated his edition of Lucretius to him; and the very day that leave was given to see him, the duke de Montausier, and other persons of the first distinction, went to visit him in the Bastile. He was set at liberty in 1666; and, two years after, had the honour to attend Louis XIV. in his first expedition against the United Provinces, of which he wrote a history. In 1670 he abjured the protestant religion, for which, it is said, he was prepared, during his imprisonment, by reading books of controversy. Voltaire says, “he had the good fortune to be convinced of his errors, and to change his religion at a time when that change opened his way to fortune and preferment.” He took the ecclesiastical habit, obtained several benefices, and the place of master of the requests. The king settled on him a pension of 6000 livres; and, towards 1677, entrusted him with the revenues of some abbeys, to be employed in converting the protestants. He shewed great zeal in this work; but was averse to harsh measures. He published “Reflexions surles differens de la Religion” a new edition of which came out in 1687, augmented with an “Answer to the objections from England and Holland,' 7 in the same language. He employed also his intervals of leisure, for many years, in writing a large controversial volume upon the sacrament; but did not live to finish it, and the world has probably lost little by it. What he wrote on religious subjects does little credit to his pen. Even when he died, which was on Feb. 7, 1693, his religion was a matter of dispute; both papists and protestants claiming him for their own, while a third party thought he had no other religion than what he found necessary at court. He wrote some other works than those mentioned, both in prose and verse, but they have not been in request for many years. A selection, indeed, was published lately (in 1805), at Paris, somewhat in the manner of the compilations which appeared in this country about thirty years ago, under the name of” Beauties."

, afterwards sir William Penn, knt. admiral of England, and one of the commanders at the taking of Jamaica, was born at Bristol in 1621, of an ancient family. He was addicted from his youth to maritime affairs; and before he had reached his thirty-second year, went through the various promotions of captain; rear-admiral of Ireland; vice-admiral of Ireland; admiral to the Straits; vice-admiral of England; and general in the first Dutch war, and commander in chief under the duke of York, in the signal victory over the Dutch in 1665, on which occasion he was knighted. On his return he was elected into parliament for the town of Weymouth; in 1660, commissioner of the admiralty and navy, governor of the fort and town of Kinsale, vice-admiral of Murtster, and a member of that provincial council. He then took leave of the sea, but still continued his other employments till 1669; when, through bodily infirmities, he withdrew to Wanstead in Essex, and there died in 1670. Though he was thus engaged, both under the parliament and king, he took no part in the civil war, but adhered to the duifes of his profession. Besides the reputation of a great and patriot officer, he acquired credit for having improved the naval service in several important departments. He was the author of several little tracts on this subject, some of which are preserved in the British Museum. The monument erected to his memory by his wife in RadclifFe church, Bristol, contains a short account of his life and promotions. But in Thurloe’s State Papers there are minutes of his proceedings in America, not mentioned on his monument, which he delivered to Oliver Cromwell’s council in Sept. 1655. He arrived at Portsmouth in August, and thence wrote to Cromwell, who returned him no answer: and, upon his first appearing before the council, he was committed to the Tower, for leaving his command without leave, to the hazard of the army; but soon after discharged.

After his return from France, he was admitted of Lincoln’s Inn, with the view of studying the law, and continued there till the memorable year 1665, when the plague raged in London. In 1666, his father committed to him the care of a considerable estate in Ireland, which occasioned him, for a time, to reside in that kingdom. At Cork he was informed, by one of the people called Quakers, that Thomas Loe, whose preaching had affected him so early in life, was shortly to be at a meeting in that city. To this meeting he went. It is said that Loe, who preached in the meeting, began his declaration with these words: “There is a faith that overcomes the world, and there is a faith that is overcome by the world.” The manner in which Loe enlarged upon this exordium is not known; but the effect was the conviction of young Penn, who afterwards constantly attended the meetings of the Quakers, notwithstanding all obstacles. The year after his arrival in Ireland he was, with many others, taken from a meeting at Cork, and carried before the mayor, by whom he was committed to prison; but was soon released, on application to the earl of Orrery. This was his first imprisonment, at which time he was about twenty-three years of age; and it tended to strengthen the ties of his union with a people whom he believed to suffer innocently. His father, understanding his attachment to the Quakers, remanded him home; and though there was yet no great alteration in his dress, yet his serious deportment evincing the religious state of his mind, confirmed the fears of his father, and gave occasion to a species of conflict between them not easily described. The father felt great affection for an accomplished and dutiful son, and ardently desired the promotion of his temporal interests, which he feared would be obstructed by the way of life he had embraced. The son was sensible of the duty he owed to his parent, and afflicted in believing that he could not obey him but at the risk of his eternal welfare. At length the father would have compounded with the son, and suffered him to retain the simplicity of his manners to all others, if he would consent to be uncovered before the king, the duke (afterwards James II.), and himself. Penn desired time to consider of this requisition; and having employed it in fasting and supplication, in order, as he conceived, to know the divine will, he humbly signified to his father that he could not comply with it. After this, the father being utterly disappointed in his expectations, could no longer endure the sight of his son, and a second time drove him from his family. In this seclusion he comforted himself with the promise of Christ, to those who leave house or parents for his sake. His support, outwardly, was the charity of his friends, and some supplies privately sent him by his mother; but, by degrees, his father, becoming convinced of his integrity by his perseverance, permitted him to return to the family; and, though he did not give him open countenance, he privately used his interest to get him released, when imprisoned for his attendance at the Quakers’ meetings.

, one of the greatest theoretic musicians of modern times, was born at Berlin about 1667, and became so early a proficient on the harpsichord, that at the age of fourteen he was sent for to court, and appointed to teach the prince, father of the great Frederic king of Prussia, About 1700, he came over to England, and was retained as a performer at Drurylane, and it is supposed that he assisted in composing the operas which were performed there. In 1707 he had acquired English sufficient to adapt ]\iouea,ux’s translation of the Italian opera of “Thomyris” to airs of Scarlatti and Boiioncini, and to new-set the recitatives. In 1709 and 1710, several of his works were advertised in the first edition of the Tatlers, particularly a set of sonatas for a flute and bass, and his first book of cantatas. In 1713 he obtained, at the same time as Crofts, the degree of doctor of music at the university of Oxford. And soon after this, upon, the establishment of a choral chapel at Cannons, he was employed by the duke of Chandos as maestro di capella; in which capacity he composed anthems and morning and evening services, which are still preserved in the Academy of ancient music. In 1715 he composed the masque of “Venus and Adonis,” written by Cibber; and in 1716 “The Death of Dido,” by Booth, both for Drury-lane. These pieces, though not very successful, were more frequently performed that any of his original dramatic compositions. In 1723 he published an ode for St. Cecilia’s day, which he had set for the concert in York-buildings. In 1724 he accepted an offer from Dr. Berkeley to accompany him to the Bermudas, and to settle as professor of music in his intended college there; but, the ship in which they sailed being wrecked, he returned to London, and married Francesca Margarita de l'Epine. This person was a native of Tuscany, and a celebrated singer, who performed in some of the first of the Italian operas that were represented in England. She came hither with one reber, a German, and from this connection became distinguished by the invidious appellation of Greber’s Peg. She continued to sing on the stage till about 1718; when having, at a modest computation, acquired above ten thousand guineas, she retired from the theatre, and afterwards married Dr. Pepusch. She was remarkably tall, and remarkably swarthy; and, in general, so destitute of personal charms, that Pepusch seldom called her by any other name than Hecate, to which she is said to have answered very readily.

In this last-mentioned year, when the king thought proper to take the direction of the admiralty into his own hands, he appointed Mr. Pepys secretary to that office, who introduced an order and method that has, it is said, formed a model to his successors. Important, however, as his services were, they could not screen him from the malevolence of party-spirit; and happening, in 16S4-, to be concerned in a contested election, this opportunity was taken by his opponent to accuse him of being a Papist, which the house of commons inquired into, but without finding any proof. This we learn from the journals of the house. But Collier informs us that he was confined in the Tower for some time, and then discharged, no accuser appearing against him. After his release, the king made an alteration in the affairs of the admiralty, by putting the whole power and execution of that office into commission; and the public was thus, for some years, deprived of Mr. Pepys’s services as secretary. He was not, however, unemployed for he was commanded by his majesty to ac<­company lord Dartmouth in his expedition against Tangier: and at the same time he had an opportunity of making excursions into Spain, as, at other times, he had already done into France, Flanders, Holland, Sweden, and Denmark. He also sailed frequently with the duke of York into Scotland, and along the coast of England.

, fifth baronet of the family, and first earl of Egmont, was born at Barton, in the county of York, July 12, 1683, and received his education at Magdalen college, Oxford. On quitting the university, in June 1701, he made the tour of England, and was admitted F. R. S. at the age of nineteen. Upon the death of king William, and the calling of a new parliament in Ireland, he went over with the duke of Ormorid, and though not of age, was elected for the county of Cork, and soon after appointed a privy-counsellor. In July 1705, he began the tour of Europe, which he finished in October 1707; and returning to Ireland in May 1708, was again, representative for the county of Cork. In 1713, he erected a lasting monument of his charity, in a free-school at Burton. On the accession of George I. he was advanced to the peerage of Ireland by the title of baron Perceval, in 1715, and viscount in 1722. In the parliament of 1722 and 1727, he was member for Harwich, in Essex, and in 1728 was chosen recorder of that borough. Observing, by the decay of a beneficial commerce, that multitudes incapable of finding employment at home, mightbe rendered serviceable to their country abroad, he and a few others applied to the crown for the grant of a district of land in America, since called Georgia, which they proposed to people with emigrants from England, or persecuted Protestants from other parts of Europe, by means of private contribution and parliamentary aid. The charter being granted, in June 1732, Lord Perceval was appointed first president; and the king having long experienced his fidelity to his person and government, created him earl of Egmont in. Nov. 1733. Worn out by a paralytic decay, he died May 1, 1748. His lordship married Catherine, daughter of sir Philip Parker a Morley, by whom he had seven children, who all died before him, except his eldest son and successor, of whom we shall take some notice.

As a writer, he deserves most credit for a very able and celebrated pamphlet, long attributed to lord Bath, entitled “Faction detected by the evidence of facts containing an impartial view of Parties at home and affairs abroad.” Of this a fifth edition was published in 1743, 8vo. The following also are said to have been written by him: 1. “An Examination of the principles, and an inquiry into the conduct of the two brothers (the Duke of Newcastle and Mr. Pelham),” 1749. 2. “A second series of facts and arguments’ 1 on the same subject, 1749. 3.” An occasional Letter from a gentleman in the country to his friend in town, concerning the Treaty negociated at Hanau in the year 1743,“174k 4.” Memorial soliciting a grant of the whole island of St. John, in the gulph of St. Lawrence. This was not published, but copies were given by the author to ministers and some members of both houses. Lord Orford says, that its object was to revive the feudal system in this island. 5. “A Proposal for selling part of the Forest Land and Chaces, and disposing of the produce towards the discharge of that part of the national debt due to the Bank of England; and for the establishment of a National Bank, &c.” 1763, 41O.

, a late learned prelate, a descendant of the ancient earls of Northumberland, was born at Bridgenorth in Shropshire, in 1728, and educated at Christ church, Oxford. In July 1753 he took the degree of M.A.; and in 1756 he was presented by that college to the vicarage of Easton Mauduit, in Northamptonshire, which he held with the rectory of Wilbye, in the same county, given him by the earl of Sussex. In 1761 he began his literary career, by publishing “Han Kiou Chouan,” a translation from the Chinese; which was followed, in 1762, by a collection of “Chinese Miscellanies,” and in 1763 by “Five Pieces of Runic Poetry,” translated from the Icelandic language. In 1764 he published a new version of the “Song of Solomon,” with a commentary and annotations. The year following he published the “Reliques of Antient English Poetry,” a work which constitutes an aera in the history of English literature in the eighteenth century. Perhaps the perusal of a folio volume of ancient manuscripts given to the bishop by a friend, in early life (from which he afterwards made large extracts in the “Reliques,”) led his mind to those studies in which he so eminently distinguished himself. It appears likewise that Shenstone encouraged him in publishing the “Reliques.” The same year he published “A Key to the New Testament,” a concise manual for Students of Sacred Literature, which has been adopted in the universities, and often reprinted. After the publication of the “Reliques,” he was invited by the late duke and duchess of Northumberland to reside with them as their domestic chaplain. In 1769 he published “A Sermon preached before the Sons of the Clergy at St. Paul’s.” In 1770 he conducted “The Northumberland Household Book” through the press; the same year he published “The Hermit of Wark worth,”' and a translation of Mallet’s “Northern Antiquities,” with notes. A second edition of the “Reliques of Ancient Poetry” was published in 1775, a third in 1794, and a fourth in 1814. In 1769 he was nominated chaplain in ordinary to his majesty; in 1778 he was promoted to the deanery of Carlisle; and in 1782 to the bishopric of Dromore in Ireland, where he constantly resided, promoting the instruction and comfort of the poor with unremitting attention, and superintending the sacred and civil interests of the diocese, with vigilance and assiduity; revered and beloved for his piety, liberality, benevolence, and hospitality, by persons of every rank and religious denomination. Under the loss of sight, of which he was gradually deprived some years before his death, he steadily maintained his habitual cheerfulness; and in his last painful illness he displayed such fortitude and strength of mind, such patience and resignation to the divine will, and expressed such heartfelt thankfulness for the goodness and mercy shewn to him in the course of a long and happy life, as were truly impressive and worthy of that pure Christian spirit, in him so eminently conspicuous. His only son died in 1783. Two daughters survive him; the eldest is married to Sarruiel Isted, esq. of Ecton, in Northamptonshire; and the youngest to the hon. and reV. Pierce Meade, archdeacon of Dromore. In 1777 the rev. John Bowie addressed a printed letter to Dr. Percy, announcing a new and classical edition of “Don Quixote.” In 1780 Mr. Nichols was indebted to him for many useful communications for the “Select Collection of Miscellany Poems.” When elevated to the mitre, Mr. Nichols was also under further obligations in the “History of Hinckley,” 1782. In 1786 the edition of the Tatler, in six volumes, small 8vo, was benefited by the hints suggested by bishop Percy to the rev. Dr. Calder, the learned and industrious annotator and editor of those volumes. The subsequent editions of the Spectator and Guardian were also improved by some of his lordship’s notes. Between 1760 and 1764, Dr. Percy had proceededvery far at the press with an admirable edition of “Surrey’s Poems,” and also with a good edition of the Works of Villiers duke of Buckingham; both which, from a variety of causes, remained many years unfinished in the warehouse of Mr. Tonson in the Savoy; but were resumed in 1795, and nearly brought to a conclusion, when the whole impression of both works was unfortunately consumed by the fire in Red Lion Passage in 1808. His lordship died at his episcopal palace, Dromore, on Sept. 30, 1811, in his eighty-third year. So much of his life had passed in the literary world, strictly so called, that authentic memoirs of his life would form an interesting addition to our literary history, but nothing has yet appeared from the parties most able to contribute such information. The preceding particulars we believe to be correct, as far as they go, but we cannot offer them as satisfactory.

In 1680 he asserted the “Ancient Rights of the Commons of England, in a discourse proving by records, &c. that they were ever an essential part of parliament,” 8vo. This gave rise to a controversy, in the course of which the following pieces were published, 1. “Jani Anglorum facies nova, or several monuments of antiquity touching the great councils of this kingdom and the courts of the king’s immediate tenants and otficers,” 1680, 8vo, said to be written by Mr. Atwood. 2. “A full Answer to a book written by William Pettyt, esq. with a true account of the famous Colloquium, or Parliament 40 Hen. Ill and a glossary expounding some few words in ancient records, together with some animadversions on a book called Jani Anglorum facies nova,” 1683, 8vo. 3. “Jus Anglorum ab antique, or a confutation of an impotent libel against the government by king, lords and commons, under the pretence of answering Mr. Pettyt, and the author of * Jam Anglorum facies nova,'” 1681, 8vo. 4. “Argumentum Anunormanicum; or an argument proving from ancient histories and records, that William duke of Normandy made no absolute conquest in England,” 1682, 8vo. This is thought by Dr. Brady to be also written by Mr. Atwood; but by others it is attributed to Mr. Cooke. To this an answer afterwards appeared by the principal champion in the dispute, Dr. Robert Brady, who collected all he had written on the occasion into “An Introduction to the Old English History, in three tracts,” and by the same author the same subject was connected with “An Historical Treatise of Cities and Burghs, or Boroughs,” (See Brady) 1704, 1711,fol. 1777, 8vo.

, the son of a counsellor at Augsburg, born in 1641, was secretary of the archives to the duke of Saxe Gotha, and instructor of the princes Ernest, and John-Ernest, in history and politics. He so well fulfilled his duties in these situations, that he was promoted to a higher place, of secretary to the Ernestine branch of the family; and was so deeply learned in matters of record, that he was called the living archives of the house of Saxony. His manners were pure, but his temper inclined to melancholy, which was thought to be increased by too intense application to study. He died at Gotha in 1717. His principal works are; 1. “The History of the Peace of Westphalia,” 8vo, the best edition is 1697. 2. “The History of the Assemblies of 1652 4,” Weimar, 1694, 8vo. 3. “The Treaties of the German Princes.” 4. “The Theology of the Pagans.” 5. “A Treatise on the Principle of historic Faith.” All these are written in Latin, not so much with elegance, as with strict care and exactness.

Besides Pope, there were some other writers who have written in burlesque of Philips’s poetry, which was singular in its manner, and not difficult to imitate; particularly Mr. Henry Carey, who by some lines in Philips’s style, and which were once thought to be dean Swift’s, fixed on that author the name of Namby Pamby. Isaac Hawkins Browne also imitated him in his Pipe of Tobacco. This, however, is written with great good humour, and though intended to burlesque, is by no means designed to ridicule Philips, he having made the same trial of skill on Swift, Pope, Thomson, Young, and Gibber. As a dramatic writer, Philips has certainly considerable merit, and one of his plays long retained its popularity. This was “The Distressed Mother,” from the French of Racine, acted in 1711. The others were, “The Briton,” a tragedy, acted in 1721; and “Humfrey Duke of Gloucester,” acted also in 1721. The “Distrest Mother” was concluded with the most successful Epilogue, written by Budgell, that was spoken in tin: English theatre. It was also highly praised in the “Spectator.” Philips’s circumstances were in general, through his life, not only easy, but rather affluent, in consequence of his being connected, by his political principles, with persons of great rank and consequence. He was concerned with Dr. Hugh Boulter, afterwards archbishop of Armagh, the right honourable Richard West, lord chancellor of Ireland, the rev. Mr. Gilbert Burnet, and the rev. Mr. Henry Stevens, in writing a series of Papers, many of them very excellent, called “The Free Thinker,” which were all published together by Philips, in 3 vols. 8vo. In the latter part of queen Anne’s reign, he was secretary to the Hanover club, a set of noblemen and gentlemen who had formed an association in honour of that succession, and for the support of its interests; and who used particularly to distinguish in their toasts such of the fair sex as were most zealously attached to the illustrious house of Brunswick. Mr. Philips’s station in this club, together with the zeal shewn in his writings, recommending him to the notice and favour of the new government, he was, soon after the accession of king George I. put into the commission of the peace, and in 1717, appointed one of the commissioners of the lottery. On his friend Dr. Boulter’s being made primate of Ireland, he accompanied that prelate, and in Sept. 1734, was appointed registrar of the prerogative court at Dublin, had other considerable preferments bestowed on him, and was elected a member of the house of commons there, as representative for the county of Armagh. At length, having purchased an annuity for life, of 400l. per annum, became over to England sorne time in 1748, but did not long enjoy his fortune, being struck with a palsy, of which he died June 18, 1749, in his seventy -eighth year, at his house in Hanover-street; and was buried in Audley chapel. “Of his personal character,” says Dr. Johnson, “all I have heard is, that he was eminent for bravery and skill in the sword, and that in conversation he was somewhat solemn and pompous.” He is somewhere called Qunker Philips, for what does not appear. Paul Whitehead relates, that when Mr. Addison was secretary of state, Philips applied to him for some preferment, but was coolly answered, “that it was thought that he was already provided for, by being made a justice for Westminster.” To this observar tion our author with some indignation replied, “Though poetry was a trade he could not live by, yet he scorned to owe subsistence to another which he ought not to live by.” “Among his poems,” says Dr. Johnson, the * Letter from Denmark,‘ may be justly praised; the Pastorals,’ which by the writer of the Guardian were ranked as one of the four genuine productions of the rustic muse, cannot surely he despicable. That they exhibit a mode of life which did not exist, nor ever existed, is not to be objected; the supposition of such a state is allowed to Pastoral. In his other poems he cannot be denied the praise of lines sometimes elegant; but he has seldom much force, or much comprehension. The pieces that please best are those which, from Pope and Pope’s adherents, procured him the name of Namby Pamby, the poems of short lines, by which he paid his court to all ages and characters, from Walpole, the “steerer of the realm,” to Miss Pulteney in the nursery. The numbers are smooth and sprightly, and the diction is seldom faulty. They are not loaded with much thought, yet, if they had been written by Addison, they would have had admirers: little things are not valued but when they are done by those who can do greater. In his translations from Pindar he found the art of reaching all the obscurity of the Theban bard, however he may fall below his sublimity; he will be allowed, if he has less fire, to have more smoke. He has added nothing to English poetry, yet at least half his book deserves to be read: perhaps he valued most himself that part which the critick would reject."

From school, where he became acquainted with the poets ancient and modern, and fixed his attention particularly on Milton, he was, in 1694, removed to Christ church, Oxford, where he performed all his university exercises with applause. Following, however, the natural bent of his genius to poetry, he continued the study of his favourite Milton, so intensely, that it is said there was not an allusion in “Paradise Lost,” drawn from any hint in either Homer or Virgii, to which he could not immediately refer. Yet he was not so much in love with poetry, as to neglect other branches of learning, and, having some intention to apply to physic as a profession, he took much delight in natural history, particularly botany; but he appears to have relinquished these pursuits when he had begun to acquire poetical fame. While he was at Oxford, he was honoured with the acquaintance of the best and politest men in it; and had a particular intimacy with Mr. Edmund Smith, author of the tragedy of Phaedra and Hippolitus. The first poem which distinguished him, in 1703, was his “Splendid Shilling;” his next, entitled “Blenheim,' 1 he wrote, as a rival to Addison’s on the same subject, at the request of the earl of Oxford, and Mr. Henry St. John, afterwards lord Bolingbroke, on occasion of the victory obtained at that place by the duke of Marlborough in 1704. It was published in 1705; and the year after he finished a third poem, upon” Cyder,“the first book of which had been written at Oxford. It is founded upon the model of Virgil’s” Georgics.“All that we have more by Philips is, a Latin” Ode to Henry St. John, esq.;“which is also esteemed a master-piece. He was meditating a poem on the” Last Day," when illness obliged him to relinquish all pursuits, except the care of his health. His disorder, however, became a lingering consumption, attended with an asthma, of which he died at Hereford, Feb. 15, 1708, when he ha'd not reached his thirty-third year. He was interred in the cathedral there, with an inscription over his grave; and had a monument erected to his memory, in Westminster- abbey, by sir Simon Harcourt, afterwards lord chancellor, with an epiuipli upon it, written by Dr. Atterbury, though commonly ascribed to Dr. Freind. Philips was one of those few poets, whose Muse and manners were equally excellent and amiable; and both were so in a very eminent degree.

, was the son of Galeoti Picus, the eldest brother of John Picus, just recorded, and born fcbout 1409. He cultivated learning and the sciences, after the example of his uncle; but he had dominions and a principality to superintend, which involved him in great troubles, and at last cost him his life. Upon the death of his father, in 1499, he succeeded, as eldest son, to his estates; but was scarcely in possession, when his brothers Louis and Frederic combined against him; and, by the assistance of the emperor Maximilian I. and Hercules I. duke of Ferrara, succeeded. John Francis, driven from his principality in 1502, was forced to seek refuge in different countries for nine years; till at length pope Julius II. becoming master of Mirandula, put to flight Frances Trivulce, the widow of Louis, and re-established John Francis in 1511. But he could not long maintain his post; for the pope’s troops being beaten by the French at Ravenna, April 11, 1512, John James Trivulce, general of the French army, forced away John Francis again, and set up Frances Trivulce, who was his natural daughter. John. JFrancis now became a refugee a second time, and so continued for two years; when, the French being driven out of Italy, he was restored again in 1515. He lived from that time in the quiet possession of his dominions, till October 1533; and then Galeoti Picus, the son of his brother Louis, entered his castle by night with forty armed men, and assassinated him, with his eldest son Albert Picus. He died embracing the crucifix, and imploring pardon of God for his sins,

, an eminent engraver, who, says lord Orford, “need but be mentioned, to put the public in mind of the several beautiful and fine works for which they are indebted to him,” was born in 1690. We have no account of his education, but, independent of his art, he appears to have been a scholar. His first engravings exhibited the splendid ceremonial of the installation of the knights of the bath in 1725. These were followed by his admirable prints, ten in number, representing the tapestry hangings in the House of Lords. These were so highly approved, that the parliament passed an act to secure the emolument arising from their publication to him. Tnese, with the letter-press, form a volume, “rivalling the splendid editions of the Louvre.” The order of the battle, and other circumstances relative to the memorable Spanish armada, are most accurately executed: the portraits of the admirals and captains of the English fleet are not the least valuable part of the whole. He engraved five other plates of the same size, to accompany them, being, 1. A Plan of the House of Peers; another of the House of Commons A View of the Creation of Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk, by Henry VIII. from a drawing in the College at Arms. 2. The House of Peers, with Henry VIII. on the throne, the Commons attending, from a drawing by the then Garter King at Arms. Another View of the House of Peers, with Elizabeth on the throne, the Commons presenting their Speaker at t;he bar, from a painted print in the Cottonian Library. A copy of a beautiful Illumination of the Charter of Henry VI, to the Provost and College of Eton. 3. The House of Lords, shewing his majesty on the throne, the Lords in their proper robes and seats, the Commons at the bar, and the Speaker addressing the throne. 4. The House of Commons, shewing the Commons assembled in their House, the Speaker in his Chair, and sir Robert Walpole, the Minister, standing forth in his usual posture toward the chair. A View of the Lord High Steward, in both Houses of Parliament, Judges, &c. assembled in Westminster-hall, Lord Lovat, the crijmnal at the bar, on his trial. He also engraved the whole text of Horace, illustrating it with ancient bas reliefs and gems, and in the same manner Virgil’s Bucolics and Georgics. These are his principal works, except his “Magna Charta:” one of the copies of which he presented to the Aldermen of London, who voted him a purse with twenty guineas in it. He, with Tinney and Bowles, published a large Plan of London and Westminster, with all their buildings, on a large scale, from an actual survey taken by John Rorque. Jn 1743 he was made Blue Mantle in the Heralds’ roiltge, and his Majtsty, George II. gave him thr appointment of marker of the dice, and afterward his engraver of the signets, seals, and stamps: places which he held to his death, which happened in the college, May 4, 1756, aged sixty-six.

, was called also Venetiano, from Venice, the place of his birth, which occurred in 1485. He was renowned, in early life, as a musician, and particularly for his skill in playing upon the lute. While he was yet in his youth, he abandoned that science, and was taught the rudiments of the art of painting by Giovanni Bellini; but Giorgione da Castel Franco having just then exhibited his improved mode of colouring and effect, Sebastian became his disciple and most successful imitator. His portraits, in particular, were greatly admired for the strength of resemblance, and the sweetness and fulness of style, which made them be frequently mistaken for the work of Giorgione. His portrait of Julio Gonzaga, the favourite of cardinal Hippolito di Medici, is by many writers mentioned in the highest terms. Being induced to go to Rome, he soon attracted public notice; and in the contest respecting the comparative merits of Raphael and M. Angelo, Sebastian gave the preference to the latter, who in consequence favoured him on all occasions, and even stimulated him to the rash attempt of rivalling Raphael, by painting a picture in competition with that great man’s last great work, the Transfiguration; which had just been placed, with great form, in the church of St. Pietro a Montorio. The subject Sebastian chose was the resurrection of Lazarus; for which Michael Angelo is supposed to have furnished the design, or at least to have considered and retouched it. The picture is of the same size as Raphael’s; and, when completed, was placed in the same consistory, and was very highly applauded. The cardinal di Medici sent it to his bishopric of Narbonno, and it became the property of the Duke of Orleans. It is now in England, and in possession of J. Angerstein esq. who gave 2000 guineas for it to the proprietors of the Orleans collection. Although it is a work of profound skill, and highly preserves the reputation of its author, yet, in our opinion, it is not to be compared with the great work it was intended to rival, either in design, in expression, or effect, whatever may be said of its execution.

, an Italian by birth, but the author of many compositions in French prose and verse, was born at Venice about 1363, being the daughter of Thomas Pisan, of Bologna, much celebrated at that time as an astrologer. When she was five years old, her father settled with her in France, and her extraordinary beauty and wit procured her an excellent husband by the time she was fifteen. After ten years she lost this husband, Stephen Castel, by whom she was most tenderly beloved, and found her chief resource for comfort and subsistence in her pen; her husband’s fortune being entangled in several law-suits. Charles VI. of France, and other princes, noticed and assisted her on account of her talents, and provided for her children. When she died is uncertain. Some of her poems, which are full of tenderness, were printed at Paris in 1529, others remain in manuscript in the royal library. “The Life of Charles V.” written by desire of Philip the Good, duke of Burgundy, is considered as her best performance in prose. It is preserved in ms. in the library of the king of France, but a transcript was published by the abbé Le Beuf in the third volume of “Dissertations on the Ecclesiastical History of Paris,” where he gives a Life of Cnristina. She wrote also “An hundred Stories of Troy,” in rhyme “The Treasure of the City of Dames,” Paris, 1497 “The Long Way,” translated by John Chaperon, 1549, under the title of “Le Chemin de long etendue.” In the Harleian collection of Mss. (No. 219, 5) is a piece by Christina entitled “Epistre d'Otnea deese de Prudence a Hector, &c. Mis en vers Francois, et dedie a Charles V. de France.” Anthony WidviSle, earl Rivers, translated a work of hers, we know not whether included in any of the above, entitled “The Moral Proverbs of Christian of Pyse,” printed by Caxton. Lord Orford, who has noticed this work in his account of WidviUe, has also introduced an account of Christina, which, although written in his flippant and sarcastic manner, contains some interesting particulars of her history.

In 1563, being then twenty-four, he gave the first fruits of his studies to the public, in a work entitled “Adversaria Snbseciva;” which was highly applauded by Turnebus, Lipsius, and other learned men, and laid the foundation of that great and extensive fame which he afterwards acquired. A little time after, he was advanced by Henry III. to some considerable post; in which, as well as at the bar, he acquitted himself with high honour. Pithou was a Protestant, and was almost involved in the terrible massacre of Saint Bartholomew in 1572. His escape indeed was very narrow, for he was at Paris during the whole, and in the same lodgings with several protestants, who were all murdered. Whether from fear or conviction, he soon afterwards openly embraced the Catholic faith. Afterwards he attended the duke of Montmoiency into England; and in 1572 was honoured with the degree of LL. D. at Oxford, where he resided for some time; and upon his return, by reason of his great wisdom, amiable manners, and profound knowledge, became a kind of oracle to his countrymen, who consulted him on all important occasions. Nor was his fame less in other parts of the continent; Ferdinand the Great duke of Tuscany not only consulted him, but even submitted to his determination, in a point contrary to his interests. Henry III. and IV. were greatly obliged to him for combating the league in the most intrepid manner, and for many other services, in which he had recourse to his pen, as well as to other means.

, an English biographer, was born at Alton, in Hampshire, in 1560 and at eleven, sent to Wykeham’s school near Winchester. He was elected thence probationer fellow of New college in Oxford, at eighteen; but, in less than two years, left the kingdom as a voluntary Romish exile, and went to Douay, where he was kindly received by Dr. Thomas Stapleton, who gave him advice relating to his studies. Pursuant to this, he passed from Douay to Rheims and, after one year spent in the English college there, was sent to the English college at Rome, where he studied seven years, and was then ordained priest. Returning to Rheims about 1589, he held the office of professor of rhetoric and Greek for two years. Towards the latter end of 151*0, being appointed governor to a young nobleman, he travelled with him into Lorraine; and, at Pont-a-Mousson, he took the degree of master of arts, and soon after that of bachelor of divinity. Next, going into Upper Germany, he resided a year and a half at Triers; and afterwards removed to Ingolstadt in Bavaria, where he resided three years, and took the degree of doctor of divinity. After having travelled through Italy as well as Germany, and made himself master of the languages of both countries, he went back to Lorraine; where, being much noticed by Charles cardinal of Lorraine, he was preferred by him to a canonry of Verdun. When he had passed two years there, Antonia, daughter to the duke of Lorraine, who was married to the duke of Cleves, invited him to be her confessor; and, that he might be the more serviceable to her, he learned the French language with so much success, that he often preached in it. In her service he continued twelve years; during which time he studied the histories of England, ecclesiastical and civil, whence he made large collections and observations concerning the most illustrious personages. On the death of the duchess of Cleves he returned a third time to Lorraine, where, by the favour of John bishop of Toul, formerly his scholar, he was promoted to the deanery of Liverdun, a city of Lorraine, which was of considerable value. This, with a canonry and an officialship of the same church, he held to the day of his death, which happened at Liverdun in 1616. He published three treatises: “De Legibus,” Triers, 1592; “De Beatitudine,” Ingolst. 1595; “De Peregrinatione,” Dusseld. 1604.

The Rockingham ministry proving unable to maintain its ground, a new administration was formed, and Mr. Pitt, in 1766, was made lord privy seal. At the same time he was created a peer, by the titles of viscount Pitt, of Burton Pynsent, in the county of Somerset, and earl of Chatham, in the county of Kent. Whatever might be his motives for accepting this elevation, he certainly sunk by it in popularity, at least as much as he rose in nominal dignity. The great commoner, as he was sometimes styled, had formed a rank to himself, on the sole basis of his talents and exertions, for which the titular honours, which he was now to participate with many others, could not in the public opinion compensate. Still it must be owned that the high and hereditary distinction of the peerage is a just and honourable object of ambition to a British commoner; which, if he attains it, as Mr. Pitt appears to have done, without any improper concession or stipulation, may be considered as the fair reward of past services, and the most permanent monument of public gratitude. Lord Chatham, whatever might be the cause, did not long continue in office; he resigned the place of lord privy seal on the 2d of November, 1768, and it was the last public employment which he ever accepted. He does not indeed appear to have been desirous of returning to office. He was now sixty; and the gout, by which he had been long afflicted, had become too frequent and violent in its attacks, to allow of close or regular application to business. In the intervals of his disorder he continued occasionally to exert himself, on questions of great magnitude, and was particularly strenuous in 1775, and the ensuing years, against the measures pursued by the ministers in the contest with America. Nevertheless, in all things he maintained his native spirit. When France began to interfere in the contest, he fired with indignation at the insult; and when, in 1778, it was thought necessary, after the repeated misfortunes of the war, to acknowledge the independence of America, he summoned up all the strength that remained within him, to pour out his disapprobation of a measure so inglorious. He did so in a speech of considerable energy, and being answered in the course of the debate by the duke of Richmond, seemed agitated with a desire to reply: but when he attempted to rise, the effort proved too violent for his debilitated constitution, and he sunk, in a kind of fit, into the arms of those who were near him. This extraordinary scene of a great statesman, almost dying in the last exertion of his talents, has been perpetuated by the pencil, and will live for ever in the memory of his countrymen. He did not long survive this effort. This debate happened on the 8th of April, 1778, and he died on the 11th of May ensuing.

, D. D. who was distantly related to the preceding, but added the e to his name, was the son of Mr. Richard Pococke, sequestrator of the. church of All-saints in Southampton, and head master of the freeschool there, by the only daughter of the rev. Mr. Isaac Milles, minister of Highcleer in Hampshire, and was born at Southampton in 1704. He received his scbool-learning there, and his academical education at Corpns-Christi college, Oxford, where he took his degree of LL. B. May 5, 1731 and that of LL. D. (being then precentor of Lismore) June 28, 1733 together with Dr. Seeker, then rector of St. James’s, and afterwards archbishop of Canterbury. He began his travels into the East in 1737, and returned in 1742, and was made precentor of Waterford in 1744. In 1743, he published the first part of those travels, under the title of “A Description of the East, and of some other Countries, vol. I. Observations on Egypt.” In 1744 he was made precentor of Waterford, and in 1745 he printed the second volume under the same title, “Observations on Palestine, or the Holy Land, Syria, Mesopotamia, Cyprus, and Candia,” which he dedicated to the earl of Chesterfield, then made lord-lieutenant of Ireland attended his lordship thither as one of his domestic chaplains, and was soon after appointed by his lordship archdeacon of Dublin. In March 1756, he was promoted by the duke of Devonshire (then lord-lieutenant) to the bishopric of Ossory, vacant by the death of Dr. Edward Maurice. He was translated by the king’s letter from Ossory to Elphin, in June 1765, bishop Gore of Elphin bc'ing then promoted to Meath; but bishop Gore finding a great sum was to be paid to his predecessor’s executors for the house at Ardbracean, declined taking out his patent; and therefore bishop Pococke, in July, was translated by the duke of Northumberland directly to the see of Meath, and died in the month of September the same year, suddenly, of an apoplectic stroke, while he was in the course of his visitation. An eulogium of his Description of Egypt is given in a work entitled “Pauli Ernestt Jablonski Pantheon Ægyptiorum, Praetat. ad part, iii.” He penetrated no further up the Nile than to Philse, now Gieuret Ell Hiereff; whereas Mr. Norden, in 1737, went as far as Derri, between the two cataracts. The two travellers are supposed to have met on the Nile, in the neighbourhood of Esnay, in Jan. 1738. But the fact, as Dr. Pococke told some of his friends, was, that being on his return, not knowing that Mr. Norden was gone up, he passed by him in the night, without having the pleasure of seeing him. There was an admirable whole length of the bishop, in a Turkish dress, painted by Liotard, in the possession of the late Dr. Milles, dean of Exeter, his first cousin. He was a great traveller, and visited other places besides the East His description of a rock on the westside of Dunbar harbour in Scotland, resembling the GiantsCauseway, is in the Philos. Trans, vol. LII. art. 17; and in Archaeologia,vol. II. p. 32, his account of some antiquities found in Ireland. When travelling through Scotland (where he preached several times to crowded congregations), he stopped at Dingwal, and said he was much struck and pleased with its appearance for the situation of it brought Jerusalem to his remembrance, and he pointed out the hill which resembled Calvary. The same similitude was observed by him in regard to Dartmouth but a 4to volume of his letters, containing his travels ia England and Scotland, was lost. He preached a sermon in 1761 for the benefit of the Magdalen charity in London, and one in 1762 before the incorporated Society in Dublin.

, an eminent physician, was born at Nancy, in 1527. He studied medicine at Paris under Sylvius, together with his elder brother, Anthony Lepois, who was afterwards first physician to Charles III. duke of Lorraine, and author of a valuable work on ancient coins. Nicholas succeeded him as the duke’s physician in 1578. The result of his practice, and of his very extensive reading, was at first drawn up only for the use of his sons, Christian and Charles, whom he destined for the medical profession; but being prevailed on to publish it, it was printed at Francfort, in 1580, in folio, under the title of “De cognoscendis et curandis prsecipue interi}is humani corporis morbis, Libri tres, ex clarissimorum medicorum, turn veterum, turn recentiorum, monumentis non ita pridem collecti.” Boerhaave had so high an opinion of this author, that he edited this work, adding a preface to it, at Leyden, 1736, in two volumes, quarto; a_nd it was again reprinted at Leipsic in 1766, 2 vols. 8vo. The time of his death has not been recorded.

, son of the preceding, was born at Nancy in 1563, and educated at the college of Navarre, at Paris, where he distinguished himself by his rapid advancement in the knowledge of the languages, belles lettres, and philosophy. He received the degree of M. A, in the university of Paris in 1581, and immediately commenced his career in the schools of medicine, which he pursued at Paris, Padua, and other schools of Italy. When he returned to Paris in 1588 he took his bachelor’s degree in medicine, and became a licentiate but having already expended his little income on the previous parts of his medical progress, he was obliged to leave Paris without having taken the degree of doctor. He then returned to his native city, where duke Charles III. of Lorraine appointed him his consulting physician, and Duke Henry II. instituted a faculty of medicine at Pont-aMousson, and nominated him dean and first professor. Being now enabled to take his doctor’s degree, he went to Paris for that purpose and, on his return, commenced the duties of his professorship in November 1598, which he performed for many years with the highest reputation, and enjoyed very extensive practice until his death, which was occasioned by the plague, at Nancy, whither he had gone to administer relief to those afflicted by that disorder, in 1633. His principal publication is entitled “Selectiorum Observationum et Consiliorum de proeteritis hactenus morbis, effectibusque praeter naturam ab aqua, seu scrosa colluvie et deiuvie ortis, Liber singularis,” Pont-a-Mousson, 1618, in quarto'. This work passed through several subsequent editions, one of which, (that of Ley den 1733), was published, with a preface, by the celebrated Boerhaave. A selection from, or an abridgment of it, was also printed in 1639, with the title of “Piso enucleatus,” in 12mo. His other works were, “Physicum Cometae Speculum,” Ponte ad Montionem, 1619, in 8vo and “Discours de la Nature, Causes, et Remedes, tant curatifs que prevservatifs, des maladies populaires, accompagnees de Dysenteric et autres Flux de Ventre,” ibid. 1623, in 12mo. He translated from the. Spanish into Latin, “Ludovici Mercati Institutiones ad usum et examen eorum qui artem luxatoriam exercent,” Francfort, 1625, in folio. He likewise published the following eulogy of his first patron “Caroli III., Serenissimi, Potentissimique Ducis Lotharingiae, &c., Macarismos, seu felicitatis et virtutum egregio Principe dignarum coronse,” 1690.

, an eminent cardinal, and archbishop of Canterbury, was descended from the bloodroyal of England, being a younger son of sir Richard Pole, K.G. and cousin-german to Henry VII. by Margaret, daughter of George duke of Clarence, younger brother to king Edward IV. He was born at Stoverton, or Stourton castle, in Staffordshire, in 1500, and educated at first in the Carthusian monastery at Sheen, near Richmond, in Surrey, whence, at the early age of twelve, he was removed to Magdalen-college, Oxford, and there assisted in his studies by Linacre and William Latimer. In June 1515, he took the degree of B. A. and soon after entered into deacon’s orders. Without doubting his proficiency in his studies, it may be supposed that this rapid progress in academical honours was owing to his family interest and pretensions. Among the popish states abroad it was not uncommon to admit boys of noble families to a rank in the universities or the church, long before the statutable or canonical periods. One object for such hasty preferment was, that they might be entitled to hold lucrative benefices, and the rank of their family thus supported and accordingly, in March 1517, we find that Pole was made prebendary of Roscombe, in the church of Salisbury, to which were added, before he had reached his nineteenth year, the deaneries of Winbourne Minster, and Exeter, For all these he was doubtless indebted to his relation Henry VIII. who intended him for the highest dignities of the church.

a celebrated French cardinal, was born Oct. 11, 1661, at Puy, in Velay, and was the son of Louis Armand, viscount de Polignac, descended from one of the most ancient families in Languedoc. He was.sent early to Paris, where he distinguished himself as a student, and was soon noticed as a young man of elegant manners and accomplishments. In 1689, cardinal de Bouillon carried him to Rome, and employed him in several important negociations. It was at one of his interviews with pope Alexander VIII. that this pontiff said to him, “You seem always, sir, to be of my opinion, and yet it is your own which prevails at last.” We are likewise told that when, on his return to Paris, Louis XIV. granted him along audience, he said as he went out, <4 I have been conversing with a man, and a young man, who has contradicted me in every thing, yet pleased me in every thing.*' In 1693, he was sent as ambassador into Poland, where he procured the prince of Conti to be elected and proclaimed king in 1696; but, this election not having been supported, he was obliged to retire, and return to France, where he arrived in 1698, after losing all his equipage and furniture, which was seized by the Dantzickers. The king then banished him to his abbey at Bonport, but recalled him to court with great expressions of regard in 1702, and in 1706 appointed him auditor of the Rota. M. Polignac then set out again for Rome and cardinal de la Tremouille, who conducted the French affairs there, having the same opinion of him as cardinal de Bouillon had, employed him in several negociations. Going back to France three years after, his majesty sent him as plenipotentiary into Holland in 1710, with marechal d'Uxelles. He was also plenipotentiary at the conferences and peace of Utrecht, in 1712 and 1713. The king, satisfied with his services, obtained a cardinal’s hat for him the same year, and appointed him master of his chapel. During the regency, cardinal de Polignac was banished to his abbey of Anchin in 1718, and not recalled till 172L. In 1724, he went to Rome for the election of pope Benedict XIII. and remained there eight years, being entrusted with the affairs of France. In 1726, he was made archbishop of Auch, returned to his native country in 1732, and died at Paris, November 10, 1741, aged 80. He was a member of the French academy, the academy of sciences, and that of belles lettres. He is now chiefly remembered for his elegant Latin poem, entitled “Anti-Lucretius,” in which he refutes the system and doctrine of Epicurus, according to the principles of Descartes’ philosophy. This he left to a friend, Charles de Rothelin, who published it in 1747, 2 vols. 8vo. It has since been often reprinted, and elegantly translated by M. de Bougainville, secretary to the academy of belles lettres. His Life was published at Paris, 1777, 2 vols. 12mo, by F. Ghrysostom Faucher. The reviewer of this life very justly says, that the man who compiled the “Anti-Lucretius,” and proposed a plan for forming a new bed for the Tiber, in order to recover the statues, medals, basso-relievos, and other ancient monuments, which were buried there during the rage of civil factions, and the incursions of the barbarians, deserves an eminent place in literary biography. Few works have been more favourably received throughout Europe than the cardinal’s celebrated poem, although he was so much of a Cartesian. The first copy that appeared in England was one in the possession of the celebrated earl of Chesterfield, and such was its reputation abroad at that time, that this copy was conveyed by a trumpet from marshal Saxe to the Duke of Cumberland, directed for the earl of Chesterfield, It was sent to him both as a judge of the work, and a friend of the writer.

, marquis of, a famous Portuguese minister of state, whom the Jesuits, whose banishment he pronounced, have defamed by all possible means, and others have extolled as a most able statesman, was born in 1699, in the territory of Coimbra a robust and distinguished figure seemed to mark him for the profession of arms, for which, after a short trial, he quitted the studies of his native university. He found, however, a still readier path to fortune, by marrying, in spite of opposition from her relations, Donna Teresa de Noronha Almada, a lady of one of the first families in Spain. He lost her in 1739, and being sent on a secret expedition in 1745 to Vienna, he again was fortunate in marriage, by obtaining the countess of Daun, a relation of the marshal of that name. This wife became a favourite with the queen of Portugal, who interested herself to obtain an appointment for Carvalho, in which, however, she did not succeed, till after the death of her husband, John V. in 1750. Her son Joseph gave Carvalho the appointment of secretary for foreign affairs, in which situation he completely obtained the confidence of the king. His haughtiness, as well as some of his measures, created many enemies; and in 1758, a conspiracy headed by the duke d'Aveiro, who had been the favourite of John V. broke out in an attempt to murder the king as he returned from his castle of Belem. The plot being completely discovered, the conspirators were punished, not only severely but cruelly; and the Jesuits who had been involved in it, were banished from the kingdom. At the death of Joseph, in 1777, Pombal fell into disgrace, and many of the persons connected with the conspirators, who had been imprisoned from the time of the discovery, were released. The enemies of Pombal did not, however, succeed in exculpating the principal agents, though a decree was passed in 1781, to declare the innocence of those who had been released from prison. Carvalho was banished to one of his estate?, where he died in May 1782, in his eighty-fifth year. His character, as was mentioned above, was variously represented, but it was generally allowed that he possessed great abilities. A book entitled “Memoirs of the Marquis of Pombal,” was published at Paris in 1783, in four volumes, 12mo, but it is not esteemed altogether impartial.

, marquis of, a French nobleman, still more distinguished by his talents in poetry than by his rank, was born at Montauban in 1709. He was educated for the magistracy, and became advocategeneral, and first president of the court of aids at Montauban. His inclination for poetry, however, could not be repressed, and at the age of twenty-five he produced his tragedy of “Dido,” in which he approved himself not only one of the most successful imitators of Racine, but an able and elegant poet. After this success at Paris, he returned to his duties at Montauban, which he fulfilled in the most upright manner; but having suffered a short exile, on account of some step which displeased the court, he became digusted with the office of a magistrate. As he had now also increased his fortune by an advantageous marriage, he determined to remove to Paris, where at first he was received as his virtues and his talents deserved. His sincere attachment to Christianity brought upon him a persecution from the philosophists, which, after a time, drove him back to the country. Voltaire and his associates had nowinundated France with their deistical tracts the materialism of Helvetius in his book de TEsprit, had just been brought forward in the most triumphant manner the enemies of Christianity had filled the Encyclopedic with the poison of their opinions, and had by their intrigues formed a powerful party in the French academy, when the marquis of Pompignan was admitted as an academician, in 1760. He had the courage, at his admission, to pronounce a discourse, the object of which was to prove that the man of virtue and religion is the only true philosopher. From this moment he was the object of perpetual persecution. Voltaire and his associates were indefatigable in pouring out satires against him: his religion was called hypocrisy, and his public declaration in its favour an attempt to gain the patronage of certain leading men. These accusations, as unjust as they were illiberal, mingled with every species of sarcastic wit, had the effect of digusting the worthy marquis with Paris. He retired to his estate of Pompignan, where he passed the remainder of his<laysin the practice of a true philosophy, accompanied by sincere piety and died of an apoplexy in 1784, at the age of seventy-five, most deeply regretted by his neighbours and dependents. The shameful treatment of this excellent man, by the sect which then reigned in the academy, is a strong illustration of that conspiracy against religion, so ably detailed by M. Barruel, in the first volume of his Memoirs of Jacobinism. When once he had declared himself a zealous Christian no merit was allowed him, nor any effort spared to overwhelm him with disgrace and mortification. His compositions nevertheless were, and are, esteemed by impartial judges. His “Sacred Odes,” notwithstanding the sarcasm of Voltaire, “sacred they are, for no one touches them,” abound in poetical spirit, and lyric beauties though it is confessed also that they have their inequalities. His “Discourses imitated from the books of Solomon,” contain important moral truths, delivered with elegance, and frequently with energy. His imitation of the Georgics of Virgil, though inferior to that of the abbe De Lille (whose versification is the richest and most energetic of modern French writers), has yet considerable merit and his “Voyage de Languedoc,” though not equal, in easy and lively negligence to that of Chapelle, is superior in elegance, correctness, and variety. He wrote also some operas which were not acted and a comedy in verse, in one act, called “Les Adieux de Mars,” which was represented with success at the Italian comic theatre in Paris. The marquis of Pompignan was distinguished also as a writer in prose. His “Eulogium on the Duke of Burgundy,” is written with an affecting simplicity. His “Dissertations,” his “Letter to the younger Racine,” and his “Academical Discourses,” all prove a sound judgment, a correct taste, and a genius improved by careful study of the classic models. He produced also a “Translation of some dialogues of Lucian,” and some “Tragedies of Æschylus,” which are very generally esteemed. He was allowed to be a man of vast literature, and almost universal knowledge in the fine arts. Yet such a man was to be ill-treated, and crushed if possible, because he had the virtue to declare himself a partizan of religion. Even his enemies, and the most inflexible of them, Voltaire, were unable to deny the merit of some of his poetical compositions. The following stanza in particular, in “An- Ode on the Death of Rousseau,” obtained a triumph for him in defiance of prejudice. The intention seems to be to illustrate the vanity of those who speak against religion:

How early Pope began to write cannot be ascertained some think the “Ode to Solitude,” written at twelve years of age, was his earliest production but Dodsley, who lived in intimacy with him, had seen pieces of a still earlier date. I At fourteen, he employed himself in some of those transis lations and imitations which appear in the first volume of his works and still zealous in the prosecution of his poetical studies, he appears at this time ambitious to exhibit specimens of every kind of poetry. He wrote a comedy, a tragedy, and an epic poem, with panegyrics on all the princes of Europe; and, as he confesses, “thought himself the greatest genius that ever was.” Most, however, of these puerile productions he afterwards destroyed. At sixteen he wrote his “Pastorals,” which laid the foundation of lasting hostility between Philips and himself, but were the means of introducing him to the acquaintance and friendship of Sir William Trumbull, who had formerly been much, in public life, as a statesman, and was then retired within a short distance of Binfield. TrwnbuH, who was pleased to find in his neighbourhood a youth of such abilities and taste as young Pope, circulated his “Pastorals” among his friends, and introduced him to Wycherley and Walsh, and the wits of that time. They were not however published until 1709, and then only in Tonsori’s Miscellany. Of their poetical merit, it seems now agreed that their chief excellence lies in correctness and melody of versification, and that the discourse prefixed to them, although much of it is borrowed from Rapin and other authors, is elegantly and elaborately written. From this time the life of Pope, as an author, may be computed, and having now declared himself a candidate for fame, and entitled to mix with his brethren, he began at the age of seventeen to frequent the places where they used to assemble. This was done without much interruption to his studies, his own account of which was, that from fourteen to twenty he read only for amusement, from twenty to twenty-seven for improvement and instruction that in the first part of his time he desired only to know, and in the second he endeavoured to judge. His next performance greatly increased his reputation this was the “Essay on Criticism,” written in 1709, and published in 1711, which Dr. Johnson has characterized, as displaying “such extent of comprehension, such nicety of distinction, such acquaintance with mankind, and such knowledge both of ancient and modern learning, as are not often attained hy the maturest age and longest experience.” It found its way, however, rather slowly into the world but when the author had sent copies to Lord Lansdowne, the Duke of Buckingham, and other great men, it began to be called for. It was in this “Essay” he made his attack on Dennis, which provoked those hostilities between them that never were completely appeased. Dennis’s reply was sufficiently coarse, but he appears to have been the first who discovered that leading characteristic of Pope, his propensity to talk too frequently of his own virtues, and that sometimes when they were least visible' to others.

Having amply established his fame by so many excellent, and by two incomparable, poems, the “Rape of the J-oc]t” and the “Eloisa,” he now meditated what Warton, somewhat incautiously, calls “a higher effort,” his translation of Homer. A higher effort it certainly was not than the poems just mentioned, but we may allow it was “something that might improve and advance his fortune as well as his fame.” A clamour was raised at the time that he had uot sufficient learning for such an undertaking and Dr. Johnson says, that considering his irregular education, and course of life, it is not very likely that he overflowed with Greek but this, it is known, he supplied by the aid of his friends, or by scholars employed, of whom he had no personal knowledge, as the celebrated Dr. Jortin, who, when a soph at Cambridge, made extracts from Eustathius for his notes. This translation Pope proposed to publish by subscription, in six vols. 4to. at the price of six guineas, and his list of subscribers soon amounted to 575, who engaged for 654 copies. The greatness of the design, and popularity of the author, and the attention of the literary world, naturally raised such expectations of the future sale, that the booksellers made their, offers with great eagerness but the hi-ghest bidder was Bernard Lintot, who became proprietor, on condition of supplying, at his own expence, all the copies which were to be delivered to subseribeYs, 4or pre,­sentecl to friends, and paying 200l. for every volume, so ­that Pope obtained, on the whole, the sum of 5S20J. 4s. Thk money he partly laid out in annuities, particularly one of 200l. a year, or as some say 500l. from the Duke of Buckingham, and partly in the purchase of a house at Twickenham, to which he now removed, having persuaded his father to sell his little property at Binfield.

The “Dunciad” first appeared in 1729; and two years after, Pope produced his “Epistle to Richard Earl of Burlington, occasioned by his publishing Palladio’s designs of the Baths, Arches, Theatres, &c. of ancient Rome, &c.” Of the merit of this highly-finished poern, there is no difference of opinion but it gave rise to an attack on Pope’s private character which was not easily repelled. Dr. Warton says, “The gang of scribblers immediately rose up together, and accused him of malevolence and ingratitude, in having ridiculed the house, gardens, chapel, and dinners, of the Duke of Chandos at Canons (who had lately, as they affirmed, been his benefactor) under the name of Timon. He peremptorily and positively denied the charge, and wrote an exculpatory letter to the Duke, with the asseverations of which letter, as the last Duke of Chandos told me, his ancestor was not perfectly satisfied.” It was not therefore the “gang of scribblers” who brought this accusation, but all the family and connections of the Duke of Chandos, and no defence has yet been advanced which can induce any impartial reader to think the accusation unjust. What seems to have injured Pope most at the time was, that the excuses he offered were of the same shuffling kind which he employed in the case of Aaron Hill, and which, wherever employed, have the effect of doubling the guilt of the convict. This was one of the circumstances which induce us to think that Pope greatly injured his personal character by the indiscriminate attacks in his “Dunciad,” and by the opinion he seems to have taken up that no man was out of his reach.

, a Neapolitan of the fifteenth century, is said to have been a swineherd in his youth, from which circumstance he had the name of Porcellus. He was born about 1400, and therefore could not have lived in the time of Petrarch, as Vossius and Baillet have asserted. How he emerged from obscurity is not known, but it is certain that he calls himself secretary to the king of Naples, and was much esteemed by Frederic, duke of Urbino, a celebrated general, who died 1482. He was also in the Venetian army in 1452, which gave him occasion to write the history of count James Picinini, who fought for the Venetians at his own expence, and not only honoured Porcellus with his esteem, but lodged him in his house, and admitted him daily to hisiable. Muratori published this fragment of history, 1731, in vol. XX. of his historical collections. He had written a supplement to it which remains in ms. and some Epigrams, in a simple and natural style, which were printed with other Italian poems, Paris, 1539, 8vo. He died some time after 1452.

, known by the former name, from the village of Pordenone, about twentyfive miles from Udino, in which he was born in 1484, had a strong talent for historical painting, which he carried to a high degree of perfection, without any other aid than the careful study of the works of Giorgione. He painted at first in fresco, but afterwards in oil, and was particularly distinguished by his skill in foreshortening his figures. His invention was fertile, his taste good, his colouring not unlike that of Titian, and his designs had the merit of uniting force and ease. A strong emulation subsisted between him and Titian and it is certainly no small merit that he was able to sustain any competition with such a master. It is said, however, that they who endeavoured to support him in this rivalship, were actuated by malignity and envy towards Titian. It is related also, that when he worked in the same town with Titian, he was so afraid of the effects of his jealousy, that he never walked out without arms offensive and defensive. Pordenone painted at Genoa for prince Doria, but did not there give entire satisfaction; he then returned to Venice, and was afterwards invited to Ferrara by the duke of that state, from whom he received many signal marks of favour and esteem. He died in 1540, at the age of fifty-six, and his death has been by some authors attributed to poison given by some painters at Ferrara, jealous of the distinctions he received at court. The most considerable picture which Rome possesses of him, is that with the portraits of his family, in the palace Borghese. But perhaps his most splendid work in oil is the altar-piece at S. Maria dell' Orto, at Venice, which represents a S. Lorenzo Giustiniani, surrounded by other saints, among whom a St. John Baptist surprises no less by correctness of forms, than a St. Augustin by a boldness of foreshortening which makes his arm start from the canvas.

, a philosopher of great name among the ancients, was born A. D. 233, in the reign of Alexander Severus. He was of Tyre, and had the name of Malchus, in common with his father, who was a Syrophcenician. St. Jerome and St. Augustin' have called him Bataneotes whence Fabricius suspects, that the real place of his nativity was Batanea, a town of Syria and that he was carried thence with a colony to Tyre. His father very early introduced him to the study of literature and philosophy under the Christian preceptor Origen, probably while he was teaching at Caesarea in Palestine. He then went to Athens, where he had the famous Longinus for his master in rhetoric, who changed his Syrian name Malchus, as not very pleasing to Grecian ears, into that of Porphyrius, which answers to it in Greek. It is in a great measure owing to this able teacher, that we find so many proofs of erudition, and so much elegance of style, in the writings of PorphyFrom this time, we have little information concerning him until he proceeded to Rome, where, at thirty years of age, he heard Plo'tinus, whose life he has written, and inserted in it many particulars concerning himself*. Five years after, he went to reside at Lilybseum in Sicily, on which account he is sometimes called Siculus and here, as Eusebius and Jerome relate, he composed those famous books against the Christians, which, for the name and authority of the man, and for the acuteness and learning with, which they were written, were afterwards thought so considerable, as to be suppressed by particular edicts, under the reigns of Constantine and Theodosius. Some have surmised, that these books are still extant, and secretly preserved in the Duke of Tuscany’s library; but there is little doubt that they were destroyed by the mistaken zeal of the Christians. The circumstances of Porphyrius’s life, after his arrival in Sicily, are little known except that he died at Rome, towards the end of Dioclesiari’s reign, about the year 304. Some have imagined that he was. in the early part of his life a Christian, but afterwards, through some disgust or other, deserted that profession, and became its decided enemy; while others have hinted, that he embraced Christianity when he was old, and after he had written with great acrimony against it; but for neither of these opinions is there any good authority.

, a learnedwriter of the sixteenth century, was a native of Candia, where he was born in 1511, but was brought up at the court of Renee of France, daughter of Louis XII. and consort of Hercules II. duke of Ferrara, and afterwards taught Greek in that city. There also an acquaintance with Calvin induced him to embrace the reformed religion, for the quiet enjoyment of which he went to Geneva in 1561, and was appointed Greek professor, an office which he appears to have held until his death in 1581. He published commentaries and annotations upon Pindar, Sophocles, some of the works of Xenophon, Thucydides, Aristotle’s Rhetoric, Longinus, and some other writers, a Latin version of the Psalms, and the Hymns of Synesius, an improved edition of Constantine’s Greek Lexicon, a reply to Peter Charpentier’s defence of the massacre of St. Bartholomew, and other pieces.

Dr. Potter had a son, Charles, who was born at Oxford in 1633, and admitted a student of Christ Church in 1647, but after completing his master’s degree, he left the university, and when abroad with James Croits, afterwards created duke of Monmouth, he embraced the Roman Catholic religion. He was afterwards one of the gentlemen ushers to his great uncle, Dr. Barnabas Potter, bishop of Carlisle. The “Theses Quaclragesiiriales in scholis Oxoniensibus publice pro forma discussae,” Oxon, 1649, 12mo, was published with his name, but the real author was his college tutor, Mr. Thomas Severn.

In the beginning of 1708, he succeeded Dr. Jane as regius professor of divinity, and canon of Christ Church, who brought him back to Oxford. This promotion he owed to the interest of the celebrated duke of Marlborougb, and to the opinion held concerning him that he was a Whig; whereas Dr. Smalridge, whom the other party wished to succeed in the professorship and canonry, had distinguished himself by opposition to the whig-measures of the court. In point of qualification these divines might be equal, and Dr. Potter certainly, both as a scholar and divine, was liable to no objection. It was probably to the same interest that he owed his promotion, in April 1715, to the see of Oxford. Just before he was made bishop he published, what had occupied his attention a very considerable time, his splendid and elaborate edition of the works of Clemens Alexandrinus, 2 vols. fol. Gr. and Lat. an edition, says Harwood, “worthy of the celebrity of the place where it was published, and the erudition of the very learned prelate, who has so happily illustrated this miscellaneous writer.” In this he has given an entire new version of the “Cohortations,” and intended to have done the same for the “Stromata,” but was prevented by the duties of his professorship. In his preface he intreats the reader’s candour as to some typographical errors, he being afflicted during part of the printing by a complaint in his eyes, which obliged him to trust the correction of the press to others.

He had a vigorous and comprehensive mind which by a liberal education, and constant cultivation during along series of years, was furnished with an uncommon fund of various knowledge, both as a politician and antiquary but not, in both characters, without some singular opinions. His works were very numerous. The first, and most popular, which went through several editions, was his “Ad ministration of the Colonies.” 2. Observations on a Bread Bill, which he introduced in parliament and, 3< “Of the Laws and Commissions of Sewers” both printed, but not published. 4. An ironical pamphlet, entitled “Considerations on the indignity suffered by the Crown, and dishonour brought upon the Nation, by the Marriage of his Royal Highness the Duke of Cumberland with an English subject,” 1772, 4to. 5. A pamphlet on “The high price of Bread,” &c. 1774, 8vo. 6. “A Topographical Description of such parts of North America as are contained in the annexed map of the middle British Colonies, &c. in North America,” 1776, folio. 7. “A Letter to Adam Smith, LL.D. F. R. S.” respecting his “Wealth of Nations,” 1776, 4to. 8. “Drainage and Navigation, but one united work,” 1776, 8vo. 9. “A Treatise on the study of Antiquities,” 1782, 8vo. 10. “A Memorial addressed to the Sovereigns of America,” 1782 *. 11. “Two Memorials, with an explanatory Preface.” 12. “Memorial addressed to the Sovereigns of Europe and the Atlantic,” 1783. 13. “Proposal for founding University Professorships for Architecture, Painting, and Sculpture,” 1786. 14. “Answer to a Letter on the Jutae or Viti.” 15. “Notices and Descriptions of Antiquities of the Provincia Romana of Gaul, now Provence, Languedoc, and Dauphiny: with Dissertations on the subjects of which those are exemplars and an Appendix, describing the Roman Baths and Thermae, discovered in 1784, at Badenweiler,” 1787, 4to. 16. “An Antiquarian Romance, endeavouring to mark a line by which the most ancient people, and the processions of the earliest inhabitancy of Europe, may be investigated, 11 1795, 8vo. 17.” Descriptions and Explanations of the Remains of some Roman Antiquities dug up in the city of Bath in 1790, with an Engraving from Drawings made on the spot,“1795, 4to. 18.” Considerations on the Scarcity and high Prices of Bread Corn,“&c, 1796. He contributed also many papers to the Archaeologia of the Society of Antiquaries, of which he was chosen a fellow in 1772, He was elected F. R.S. in 1765. He is also said to have been the author of” The Right, Interest, and Duty, of Governments, as concerned in the affair of the East Indies,“1781, 8vo.” Intellectual Physics, an Essay concerning the nature of Being,“4to, 1803 and a” Treatise on Old Age."

Mr. Preston’s part in this singular disputation might have led to favour at court, if he had been desirous of it and sir Futk Greville, afterwards lord Brook, was so pleased with his performance that he settled 50l. per ann. upon him, and was his friend ever after; but he was now seriously intent on the office of a preacher of the gospel, and having studied Calvin, and adopted his religious opinions, he became suspected of puritanism, which was then much discouraged at court. In the mean time his reputation for learning induced many persons of eminence to place their sons under his tuition and Fuller tells us, he was “the greatest pupil- monger ever known in England, having sixteen fellow-commons admitted into Queen’s college in one year,” while he continued himself so assiduous in his studies as considerably to impair his health. When it came to his turn to be dean and catechistof his college, he began such a course of divinity -lectures as might direct the juniors in that study; and these being of the popular kind, were so much frequented, not only by the members of other colleges, but by the townsmen, that a complaint was at length made to the vice-chancellor, and an order given that no townsmen or scholars of other colleges should be permitted to attend. His character for puritanism seems now to have been generally established, and he was brought into trouble by preaching at St. Botolph’s church, although prohibited by Dr. Newcomb, commissary to the chancellor of Ely, who informed the bishop and the king, then at Newmarket, of this irregularity. On the part of Newcomb, this appears to have been the consequence of a private pique; but whatever might be his motive, the matter came to be heard at court, and the issue was, that Mr. Preston was desired to give his sentiments on the 1U turgy at St. Botolph’s church by way of recantation. He accordingly handled the subject in such a manner as cleared himself from any suspicion of disliking the forms of the liturgy, and soon after it came to his turn to preach before the king when at Hinchingbrook. The court that day, a Tuesday, was very thin, the prince and the duke of Buckingham being both absent. After dinner, which Mr. Preston had the honour of partaking at his majesty’s table, he was so much complimented by the king, that when he retired, the marquis of Hamilton recommended him to his majesty to be one of his chaplains, as a man “who had substance and matter in him.” The king assented to this, but remembering his late conduct at Cambridge, declined giving him the appointment.

Such, however, was Mr. Preston’s weight at this time that it was recommended to the duke of Buckingham by all means to patronize him, and thus do an act highly acceptable to the puritans who might prove his grace’s friends, in case his other friends should fail. The duke accordingly applied in his behalf to the king, who still demurred, but at last fancied that his favours to Preston might have a different effect from what the duke meditated. The duke wished to court him, as the head of a party; the king thought that by giving him preferment, he should detach him from that party. In this conflict of motives, it occurred to some of Mr. Preston’s friends that it would be preferable to appoint him chaplain to the prince (afterwards Charles I.), who now was grown up and had a household. Sir Ralph Freeman, a relation of Mr. Preston’s, suggested this to the duke, who immediately sent for the latter, and receiving him with such a serious air as he thought would be acceptable, told him that the prince and himself having the misfortune to be absent when he preached, would be obliged to him for a copy of his sermon, and entreated him to believe that he would be always ready to serve him to the best and utmost of his power. The sermon was accordingly written out in a fair hand, and presented, and the preacher having been introduced to the prince, was formally admitted one of his six chaplains in ordinary.

About the time that Mr. Preston was thus honoured, Dr. Dunn, the preacher of Lincoln’s-inn, died, and the place was offered to our author, and accepted by him, as he could now “have an opportunity of exercising his ministry to a considerable and intelligent congregation, where, he was assured, many parliament men, and others of his best acquaintance, would be his hearers, and where in term-time he should be well accommodated.” His usual popularity followed him here, yet he was not so much reconciled to the situation as he would have been to a similar one at Cambridge. There he would have students for his hearers who would propagate the gospel, which he thought the lawyers were not likely to do; and his Cambridge friends seemed to be of the same opinion, and wished him again among them. To promote this object, some of the fellows of Emanuel college endeavoured to prevail upon their master, Dr. Chaderton, who was old, and “had outlived many of those great relations which he had before,” to resign, in which case they hoped to procure Mr. Preston to succeed him, who was “a good man, and yet a courtier, the prince’s chaplain, and very gracious with the duke of Buckingham.” Two obstacles presented themselves to this design; the one Dr. Chaderton’s unwillingness to be laid aside without some provision for his old age; and the second, their dread lest some person might procure a mandate to succeed who was disagreeable to them, and might be injurious to the interests of the college that had flourished under Dr. Chaderton’s management. This last apprehension they represented to him in such a manner that, after some hesitation, he entered into their views, and desired that Mr. Preston might employ his interest with his court-friends to prevent any mandate being granted, and likewise to secure some provision for himself. Accordingly by a letter from the duke of Buckingham addressed to Dr. Chaderton, dated Sept. 20, 1622, we find that both these objects were attained, and Mr. Preston admitted master of Kmanuel before the news had transpired of his predecessor’s resignation. When his promotion became known, it affected the two parties into which the kingdom was then divided according to their different views. The puritans were glad that “honest men were not abhorred as they had been at court,” and the courtiers thought him now in a fair way of being their own. All considered him as a rising man, and respected him accordingly, and the benchers of Lincoln’sInn, whose preacher he still continued, took some credit to themselves for having been the first who expressed their good opinion of him. Such indeed was his consequence, that even the college statutes, which seemed an insuperable objection to his holding both places, were so interpreted by the fellows as to admit of his repairing to London at the usual periods. He now took his degree of D. D. The object of the courtiers, we have already observed, was to detach Dr. Preston from the puritans, of which he was considered as the head. They were therefore much alarmed on hearing that he had been offered the lectureship of Trinity-church Cambridge, which was in future to be dreaded as the head-quarters of puritanism. So much was it an object to prevent this, that the matter was seriously debated not only by the duke of Buckingham, but by the king himself; but here again their private views clashed. The duke, although he endeavoured to dissuade Dr. Preston from accepting this lectureship, and offered him the bishopric of Gloucester, then vacant, in its stead, would not otherwise exert himself against the doctor. because he would not lose him while the king, having no other object than wholly to detach him from the puritans, sent his secretary to inform him that if he would give up this lectureship, any preferment whatever was at his service. Dr. Preston, however, whose object, as his biographer says, “was to do good, and not to get good,” persisted, and: was appointed lecturer, and the king could not conceal his displeasure that Buckingham still sided with him.

Dr. Preston happened to be at Theobalds, in attendance as chaplain, when king James died, and on this melancholy occasion had many interviews both with the duke of Buckingham, and the prince; and as soon as the event was announced, went to London in the same coach with his new sovereign and the duke, and appeared to be in high favour; but the duke was ultimately disappointed in his hopes of support from Dr. Preston and his friends. In a public conference Dr. Preston disputed against the Arminian doctrines in a manner too decided to be mistaken; and when on this account he found his influence at court abate, he repaired to his college, until finding his end approaching, he removed to Preston, near Heyford in his native county, where he died in July 1628, in the forty-first year of his age. His remains were deposited in Fausley church. Fuller, who has classed him among the learned writers of Queen’s college, says, “he was all judgment and gravity, and the perfect master of his passions, an excellent preacher, a celebrated disputant, and a perfect politician.” Echard styles him “the most celebrated of the puritans,” and copies the latter part of what Fuller had said. He wrote various pious tracts, all of which, with his Sermons, were published after his death. The most noted of these works is his “Treatise on the Covenant,” 1629, 4U).

, in Latin Pricæus, a learned writer, originally of a Welsh family, was born in 1600 at London. He was brought up at Westminster-school, whence in, 1617 he was elected to Christ-church, Oxford. He made >grcat proficiency in learning, and was esteemed one of the ablest critics of his day, but espoused the Roman catholic religion which for some time he appears to have concealed. On leaving college he was entertained in the earl of Arundel’s family, with which he travelled into Italy, and there was made doctor of law?. On his return to England, he became acquainted with the earl of Strafford, who 'being pleased with his talents and learning, took him with him to Ireland, where he likewise became acquainted with archbishop Usher, and was one of his correspondents, their biblical studies forming a bond of union. When his noble patron was prosecuted, Dr. Price shared in his misfortunes, and returned to England in 1640. During the rebellion he endeavoured to support the royal cause by his pen, and wrote several pamphlets, for which he was imprisoned for a considerable time. After his release he went abroad, and took up his residence in Florence, where the grand duke made him superintendant of his museum, which was then One of the finest in Europe. By the interest of this prince, he was appointed Greek professor at Pisa, and filled that office with great reputation. Resigning it, however, probably owing to bad health, he went to Venice, with a view to publish Hesychius’s Lexicon, but not succeeding in the design, he went to Rome, and was entertained by cardinal Francis Barberini. When advanced in years, he retired to St. Augustine’s convent at Rome, where he died in 1676, aged seventy-six. His works are 1. “Notoe et observationes in apologiam L. Apuleii Madaurensis, philosophi Platonici,” Paris, 1635, 4to. These are to be found in the Gouda edition of Apuleius, 1650, 8vo, but the original is very scarce. 2. “Matthaeus, ex sacra pagina, sanctis patribus, &c. illustratus,” Paris, 1646, 8vo. 3. “Annotationes in epist. Jacobi,” Paris, 1646, 8vo. 4. “Acta Apostolorum, ex sacra pagina, sanctis patribus, &c. illustrata,” Paris, 1647, 8vo. 5. “Index Scriptorum, qui in Hesychii Graeco vocabulario laudantur, confectus et alphabetico ordine dispositus,” 1668. See Schrevelius’s Lexicon at the end. 6. “Comment, in varios Novi Test. Hbros,” inserted in the 5th vol. of the “Critici Sacri.” Dr. Price is praised by Sarravius, in his letters by archbishop Usher on St. Ignatius’s epistles by Heinsius, in an epistle to Carlo Dati by Selden more than once, in the second book “de Synedriis Ebraeorum” by Vossius, in his “Harmonia Evangelica” by Morus, in his notes on the New Testament by Redi, in his treatise on the Generation of Insects but especially by Axenius on Phaedrus.

* To read any of the invectives presses himself in terms of contempt against Mr. Burke, one would suppose in regard to the French revolution he was the only human being who and after asking rather too severely looked with an evil eye on the French what good was to be expected from a Revolution. But Dr. Price’s biogra- nation of atheists, he concludes with pher has found another among Dr. foretelling the destruction of a million Price’s intimate correspondents, and of human beings as a probable conno less a pereonage than John Adams, sequence of it. Such a letter, in our the late American ambassador. In opinion, outweighs an hundred of those a loug letter which he wrote to Dr. which Dr. Price received at this time Price at this- time, so far from congra- from his enlightened friends in France, tulating him on the occasion, he exsevere and very painful disorder, by which he had been many years threatened. This he bore with fortitude and resignation, though occasionally his spirits and strength were entirely exhausted by the agonies which he endured. He died on the nineteenth of March, 1791, in the sixtyeighth year of his age, and was interred in Bunhill-fields burying-ground, the funeral being followed by a great concourse of his friends and admirers, to whom he had long been endeared by his private as well as public character. His manners were peculiarly amiable, and whoever was admitted to his conversation, or even perused his works, could not avoid being struck by contrasting his mild and placid temper with that of some of the controversial writers with whom he generally co-operated. He was for many years one of the trustees to the estates of the late Dr. Daniel Williams, which is the most important concern belonging to the London Dissenters. During the applications of the dissenting ministers to parliament, from 1772 to 1779, for relief from subscription to the articles of the church of England, required by the act of Toleration, he was chosen one of the committee appointed to concert and pursue the necessary measures for obtaining that object; but when he found that it could not be obtained without a declaration of faith in the Holy Scriptures, which he contended the civil magistrate had no right to demand, he divided with a small minority of his brethren against the rest of the committee, refusing an enlargement of religious liberty on terms which, according to their views of things, and according to the true principles of dissent, implied submission to the authority of the civil magistrate in matters of conscience, to whom, in matters of this kind, they owed no obedience whatever. In 1783 the degree of LL. D. was conferred upon him by Yale college, in Connecticut, and he was afterwards elected a fellow of the American Philosophical Societies at Philadelphia and Boston. In 1786, when a new academical institution among the dissenters was established at Hackney, Dr. Price was appointed tutor in the higher branches of the mathematics but soon found himself incapable of attending to the duties, of this office, and therefore resigned it the second year. He approved the plan, however, and, says his biographer, “from the circumstance of his having bequeathed a small legacy towards its support, died inconscious of the ignorance and folly which were accelerating its destruction.” Among Dr. Price’s numerous correspondents were, the marquis of Lansdowne, the earls Chatham and Stanhope the bishops of Carlisle, St. Asaph, and Llandaff; Mr. Harris, the author of Philosophical Arrangements, &c. Mr. Howard, Dr. Franklin, the duke de Rochefoucault, the celebrated Turgot, and several of the most distinguished members of the first national assembly.

, baronet, president of the Royal Society, was born at Stichel-house, in the county of Roxburgh, North Britain, April 10, 1707. His father was sir John Pringle, of Stichel, bart. and his mother, whose name was Magdalen Eliott, was sister to sir Gilbert Eliott of Stobs, bart. Both the families from which he descended were very ancient and honourable in the south of Scotland, and were in great esteem for their attachment to the religion, and liberties of their country, and for their piety and virtue in private life. He was the youngest of several sons, three of whom, besides himself, arrived to years of maturity. His grammatical education be received at home, under a private tutor and after having made such a progress as qualified him for academical studies, he was removed to the university of St. Andrew’s, where he was put under the immediate care of Mr. Francis Pringle, professor of Greek in the college, and a near relation of his father. Having continued there some years, he went to Edinburgh in Oct. 1727, for the purpose of studying physic, that being the profession which he now determined to follow. At Edinburgh, however, he stayed only one year, the reason, of which was, that he was desirous of going to Leyden, at that time the most celebrated school of medicine in Europe. Boerhaave, who had brought that university into reputation, was considerably advanced in years, and Mr. Pringle was unwilling, by delay, to expose himself to the danger of losing the benefit of that great man’s lectures. For Boerhaave he had a high and just respect but it was not his disposition and character to become the implicit and systematic follower of any man, however able aod distinguished. While he studied at Leyden, be contracted an intimate friendship with Van Swieten, who afterwards became so famous at Vienna, both by his practice and writings. Van Swieten was not only Pringle’s acquaintance and fellow-student at the university, but also his physician when he happened to be seized there with a fit of sickness; yet on this occasion he did not owe his recovery to his friend’s advice; for Van Swieten having refused to give him the bark, another person prescribed it, and he was cured. When he had gone through his proper course of studies at Leyden, he was admitted, July 20, 1730, to his doctor of physic’s degree. His inaugural dissertation, “De marcore senili,” was printed. Upon quitting LeyIen, Dr. Pringle settled as a physician at Edinburgh, where he gained the esteem of the magistrates of the city, and of the professors of the college, by his abilities and good conduct and, such was his known acquaintance with ethical subjects, that, March 28, 1734, he was appointed, by the magistrates and council of the city of Edinburgh, to be joint professor of pneumatics and moral philosophy with Mr. Scott, during that gentleman’s life, and sole professor after his decease and, in consequence of this appointment, Dr. Pringle was admitted, on the same day, a member of the university. In discharging the duties of this new employment, his text-book was “Puffendorff de Officio Hominis et Civis,” agreeably to the method he pursued through life, of making fact and experiment the basis of science. Dr. Pringle continued in the practice of physic at Edinburgh, and in performing the obligations of his professorship, till 1742, when he was appointed physician to the earl of Stair, who then commanded the British army. For this appointment he was chiefly indebted to his friend Dr. Stevenson, an eminent physician at Edinburgh, who had an intimate acquaintance with lord Stair. By the interest of this nobleman, Dr. Pringle was constituted, Aug. 24, 1742, physician to the military hospital in Flanders; and it was provided in the commission, that he should receive a salary of twenty shillings a-day, and be entitled to half-pay for life. He did not, on this occasion, resign his professorship of moral philosophy; the university permitted him to retain it, and Messrs. Muirhead and Cleghorn were allowed to teach in his absence, us long as he continued to request it. The exemplary attention which Dr. Pringle paid to his duty as an army physician is apparent from every page of his “Treatise on the Diseases of the Army.” One thing, however, deserves particularly to be mentioned, as it is highly probable that it was owing to his suggestion. It had hitherto been usual, for the security of the sick, when the enemy was near, to remove them a great way from the camp the consequence of which was, that many were lost before they came under the care of the physicians. The earl of Stair, being sensible of this evil, proposed to the duke de Noailles, when the army was encamped at Aschaffenburg, in 1743, that the hospitals on both sides should be considered as sanctuaries for the sick, and mutually protected. The French general, who was distinguished for his humanity, readily agreed to the pro posal, and took the first opportunity of shewing a proper regard to his engagement. At the hattle of Dettingen, Dr. Pringle was in a coach with lord Carteret during the whole time of the engagement, and the situation they were placed in was dangerous. They had been taken unawares, and were kept betwixt the fire of the line in front, a French battery on the left, and a wood full of hussars on the right. The coach was occasionally shifted, to avoid being in the eye of the battery. Soon after this event, Dr. Pringle met with no small affliction in the retirement of his great friend, the earl of Stair, from the army. He offered to resign with his noble patron, but was not permitted. He, therefore, contented himself with testifying his respect and gratitude to his lordship, by accompanying him forty miles on his return to England; after which he took leave of him with the utmost regret.

But though Dr. Pringle was thus deprived of the immediate protection of a nobleman who knew and esteemed his worth, his conduct in the duties of his station procured him effectual support. He attended the army in Flanders, through the campaign of 1744, and so powerfully recommended himself to the duke of Cumberland, that, in the spring following, March 11, he had a commission from his royal highness, appointing him physician general to his majesty’s forces in the Low Countries, and parts beyond the seas; and on the next day he received a second commission from the duke, by which he was constituted physician to the royal hospitals in the same countries. On March 5, he resigned his professorship in consequence of these promotions. In 1745 he was with the army in Flanders, but was recalled from that country in the latter end of the year, to attend the forces which were to be sent against the rebels in Scotland. At this time he had the honour of being chosen F. R. S. Dr. Pringle, at the beginning of 1746, in his official capacity, accompanied the duke of Cumberland in his expedition against the rebels, and remained with the forces, after the battle of Culloden, till their return to England, in the middle of August. We do not find that he was in Flanders during any part of that year. In 1747 and 1748, he again attended the army abroad and in the autumn of 1748 he embarked with the forces for England, upon the conclusion of the treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle. From that time he principally resided in London, where, from his known skill and experience, and the reputation he had acquired, he might reasonably expect to succeed as a physician. In April 1749, Drt Pringle was appointed physician in ordinary to his royal highness the duke of Cumberland. In 1750 he published, in a letter to Dr. Mead, “Observations on the Gaol or Hospital Fever.” This work, which passed through two editions, and was occasioned by the gaol-distemper that broke out at that time in the city of London, was well received by the medical world, though he himself afterwards considered it as having been hastily written. After supplying some things that were omitted, and rectifying a few mistakes that were made in it, he included it in his grand work on the “Diseases of the Army,” where it constitutes the seventh chapter of the third part of that treatise. It was in the same year that Dr. Pringle began to communicate to the Royal Society his famous “Experiments upon Septic and Antiseptic substances, with remarks relating to their use in the theory of Medicine” These experiments, which comprehended several papers, were read at different meetings of the society the first in June, and the two next in the November following three more in the course of 1751 and the last in Feb. 1752. Only the three first numbers were printed in the “Philosophical Transactions,” as Dr. Pringle had subjoined the whole, by way of appendix, to his “Observations on the Diseases of the Army.” These experiments upon septic and antiseptic substances, which have accompanied every subsequent edition of the treatise just mentioned, procured for him the honour of sir Godfrey Copley’s gold medal. Besides this, they gained him a high and just reputation, as an experimental philosopher. In February 1753, he presented to the Royal Society “An Account of several Persons seized with the Gaol Fever by working in Newgate and of the manner by which the Infection was communicated to one entire family.” This is a very curious paper and was deemed of such importance by the excellent Dr. Stephen Hales, that he requested the author’s permission to have it published, for the common good of the kingdom, in the “Gentleman’s Magazine;” where it was accordingly printed, previous to its appearance in the Transactions. Dr. Pringle’s next communication was, “A remarkable Case of Fragility, Flexibility, and Dissolution of the Bones.” In the 49th volume of the “Transactions,” we meet with accounts which he had given of an earthquake felt at Brussels; of another at Glasgow and Dunbarton and of the agitation of the waters, Nov. 1, 1756, in Scotland and at Hamburgh. The 50th volume contains, Observations by him on the case of lord Walpole, of Woolterton; and a relation of the virtues of Soap in dissolving the Stone, as experienced by the reverend Mr. Matthew Simson. The next volume is enriched with two of the doctor’s articles, of considerable length, as well as value. In the first, he has collected, digested, and related the different accounts that had been given of a very extraordinary fiery meteor, which appeared on Sunday the 26th of November, 1758, between eight and nine at night; and, in the second, he has made a variety of remarks upon the whole, in which no small degree of philosophical sagacity is displayed. It would be tedious to mention the various papers, which, both before and after he became president of the Royal Society, were transmitted through his hands. Besides his communications in the Philosophical Transactions, he wrote, in the Edinburgh Medical Essays, volume the fifth, an “Account of the success of the Vitrum ceratum Antimonii.”

, in Latin Priolus, author of an History of France from the death of Louis XIII. in 1643 to 1664, was born in 1602. He was descended from the Prioli, an illustrious family, some of whom had been doges of Venice. He underwent some difficulties from losing his father and mother, when young; but these did not abate his passion for learning, which he indulged day and night. He studied first at Orthez, next at Montauban, and afterwards at Leyden in which last city he profited by the lectures of Heinsius and Vossius. He went to Paris, for the sake of seeing and consulting Grotius and afterwards to Padua, where he learned the opinions of Aristotle and other ancient philosophers, under Cremoninus and Licetus. After returning to France, he went again into Italy, in order to be recognized by the house of Prioli, as one of their relations. He devoted himself to the duke of Rohan, then in the Venetian service, and became one of his most intimate confidents; but, uncertain what his fate would be after this duke’s death, he retired to Geneva, having married, three months before, a lady of a very noble family. The duke de Longueville drew him from this retirement, upon his being appointed plenipotentiary from the court of France for the treaty of Munster, as a person whose talents might be of service to him and Priolo resided with him a year at Munster, where he contracted a very intimate friendship with Chigi the nuncio, % who was afterwards pope Alexander VII. From Munster he returned to Geneva; whence he went to France, in order to settle at Paris. He stayed six months in Lyons, and there had frequent conferences with cardinal Francis Barberini the effect of which was, that himself and his whole family abjured the Protestant religion, and immediately received the communion from the hands of the cardinal. He was not, however, long easy at Paris for, the civil war breaking out soon after, he joined with the malecontents, which proved the ruin of his fortune. He was obliged to retire to Flanders, his estate was confiscated, and his family banished. Being afterwards restored to the favour of his sovereign, he resolved to lead a private life, and to devote himself to study. It was at this time, and to divert his melancholy, that he wrote, without the least flattery or partiality, his “History of France,” in Latin. It has gone through several impressions but the best edition is that of Leipsic, 1686, 8vo. He was again employed in negociations; and set out, in 1667, upon a secret affair to Venice; but did not arrive at the end of his journey, being seized with an apoplectic fit, of which he died in the archbishop’s palace at Lyons. He left seven children; who, by virtue of his name, and their own accomplishments and merit, rose to very flourishing circumstances.

The conferences began at Utrecht Jan. 1, 1711-12, but advanced so slowly, that Bolingbroke was sent to Paris to adjust differences with less formality and Prior, who had accompanied him, had, after his departure, the appointment and authority of an ambassador, though no public character. Soon after, the duke of Shrewsbury went on a formal embassy to Paris, but refused to be associated with a man so meanly born as Prior, who therefore "continued to act without a title till the duke returned next year to England, and then he assumed the style and dignity of ambassador. Yet even while he continued in appearance a private man, he was treated with confidence by Lewis, who sent him with a letter to the queen, written in favour of the elector of Bavaria, and by M. de Torcy. His public dignity and splendour commenced in August 1713, and continued till the August following; but it was attended with some perplexities and mortifications. He had not all that is customarily given to ambassadors he hints to the queen, in an imperfect poem, that he had no service of plate; and it appeared, bv the debts which he contracted, that his remittances were not punctually made.

On the prosecution of Walpole for high breach of trust and corruption, Pulteney warmly vindicated his friend, for such he then was; and, on his commitment to the Tower, was amongst those who paid frequent visits to the prisoner, whom he, with the rest of the whigs, considered as a martyr to their cause. He also engaged with Walpole in defending the whig administration, and wrote the ironical dedication to the earl of Oxford, prefixed to Walpole' s account of the parliament. On the accession of George I. Mr. Pulteney was appointed privy-counsellor and secretary at war, in opposition to the inclination of the duke of Marlborough, who, as commander in chief, thought himself entitled to recommend to that post. He was chosen a member of the committee of secrecy, nominated, by the House of Commons, to examine and report the substance of the papers relating to the negociation for peace; and on. the suppression of the rebellion of 1715, he moved for the impeachment of lord Widrington, and opposed the motion to address the king for a proclamation, offering a general pardon to all who were in arms in Scotland, who should lay down their arms within a certain time. He was at this period so much connected with Stanhope and Walpole, that, in allusion to the triple alliance between Great Britain, France, and Holland, which was then negociating by general Stanhope, secretary of state, they were called the three “grand allies;” and a proverbial saying was current, “Are you come into the triple alliance?” But when Stanhope and Walpole took different sides, on the schism between the whigs, when Townsend was dismissed and Walpole resigned, Pulteney followed his friend’s example, and gave up his place of secretary at war. When Walpole made a reconciliation between the king and the prince of Wales, and negociated with Sunderland to form a new administration, in which he and lord Townsend bore the most conspicuous part, then were first sown those seeds of disgust and discontent which afterwards burst forth. The causes of this unfortunate misunderstanding may be traced from the authority of the parties themselves, or their particular friends. Pulteney was offended because Walpole had negociated with the prince of Wales and Sunderland, without communicating the progress to him, although he had told it to Mr. Edgcumbe, who indiscreetly gave a daily account to Pulteney. Another cause of disgust was, that Pulteney, who had hitherto invariably proved his attachment to Townsend and Walpole, expected to receive some important employment, whereas he was only offered a peerage; and, when he declined it, more than two years elapsed before any farther overtures were made; and though Pulteney, at length, solicited and obtained the office of cofferer of the household, he deemed that place far below his just expectations. Although, therefore, he continued to support the measures of administration for some time, the disdainful manner in which he conceived he had been treated by Walpole had made too deep an impression on his mind to be eradicated. Finding that he did not possess the full confidence of administration, or disapproving those measures which tended, in his opinion, to raise the power of France on the ruins of the house of Austria, and which, in his opinion, sacrificed the interests of Great Britain to those of Hanover, topics on which he afterwards expatiated with great energy and unusual eloquence in parliament, he became more and more estranged from his former friends, and expressed his disapprobation of their measures both in public and private. At length his dissontent arrived at so great a height, that he declared his resolution of attacking the minister in parliament.

As Purcell had received his education in the school of a choir, the natural bent of his studies was towards church music. Services, however, he seemed to neglect, and to addict himself to the composition of Anthems. An anthem of his, “Blessed are they that fear the Lord,” was composed on a very extraordinary occasion. Upon the pregnancy of James the Second’s queen, supposed or real, in 1687, proclamation was issued for a thanksgiving; and Purcell, being one of the organists of the Chapel Royal, was commanded to compose the anthem. The anthem, “They that go down to the sea in ships,” was likewise owing to a singular accident. It was composed at the request of Mr. Gostling, subdean of St. Paul’s, who, being often in musical parties with the king and the duke of York, was with them at sea when they were in great danger of being cast away, but providentially escaped.

In 1691, the opera of “Dioclesian” was published by Purcell, with a dedication to Charles duke of Somerset, in which he observes, that “music is yet but in its nonage, a forward child, which gives hopes of what he may be hereafter in England, when the masters of it shall find more encouragement; and that it is now learning Italian, which is its best master, and studying a little of the French air to give it somewhat more of gaiety and fashion.” The unlimited powers, says Dr. Burney, of this musician’s genius embraced every species of composition that was then known, with equal felicity. In writing for the church, whether he adhered to the elaborate and learned style of his great predecessors Tallis, Bird, and Gibbons, in which no instrument is employed but the organ, and the several parts are constantly moving in fugue, imitation, or plain counterpoint; or, giving way to feeling and imagination, adopted the new and more expressive style of which he was himself one of the principal inventors, accompanying the voice-parts with instruments, to enrich the harmony, and enforce the melody and meaning of the words, he manifested equal abilities and resources. In compositions for the theatre, though the colouring and effects of an orchestra were then but little known, yet as he employed them more than his predecessors, and gave to the voice a melody more interesting and impassioned than, during the seventeenth century, had been heard in this country, or perhaps in Italy itself, he soon became the darling and delight of the nation. And in the several pieces of chamber music which he attempted, whether sonatas for instruments, or odes, cantatas, songs, ballads, and catches, for -the voice, he so far surpassed whatever our country had produced or imported before, that all other musical productions seem to have been instantly consigned to contempt or oblivion.

, a noted republican in the time of Charles I. was descended of a good family in Somersetshire, and born in 1584. In his fifteenth year he entered as a gentleman-commoner of Broadgate’s-hall, now Pembroke-college, Oxford, where he had for his tutor Degory Wheare, but appears to have left the university without taking a degree, and, as Wood supposes, went to one of the inns of court. He appears, indeed, to have been intended for public business, as he was very early placed as a clerk in the office of the exchequer. He was likewise not far advanced when he was elected member of parliament for Tavistock, in the reign of James I. He uniformly distinguished himself by his opposition to the measures of the court, both in the reign of that king and of his successor. In 1626 he was one of the managers of the articles of impeachment against the duke of Buckingham, and in 1628 brought into the House of Commons a. charge against Dr. Main waring, who held some doctrines which he conceived to be equally injurious to the king and the kingdom. He was likewise a great opponent of Arnainianism, being himself attached to Calvinistic principles. In 1639, he, with several other cominoners and lords, held a very close correspondence with the commissioners sent to London by the Scotch covenanters; and in the parliament which met April 13, 1640, was one of the most active and leading members. On the meeting of the next, which is called the Long Parliament, he made an elaborate speech concerning the grievances of the nation, and impeached the earl of Strafford of high treason, at whose trial he was one of the managers of the House of Commons. His uncommon violence led the king to the unhappy measure of coming to the parliament in person, to seize him and four other members. Pym, however, continued firm to the interests of the parliament, but thought it necessary, some time before his death, to draw up a vindication of his conduct, which leaves it doubtful what part he would have taken, had he lived to see the serious consequences of his early violence. In Nov. 1643, he was appointed lieutenant of the ordnance, and probably would have risen to greater distinction, but he died at Derby-house, Dec. 8 following, and was interred with great solemnity in Westminster- abbey. He left several children by his lady, who died in 1620, and is said to have been a woman of rare accomplishments and learning. Many of his speeches were printed separately, and are inserted in the annals and histories of the times.

, an eminent nonconformist, was born at Plymouth, in Devonshire, in 1636, and in 1650 entered of Exeter college, Oxford, where he became servitor in 1653, under the rectorship of Dr. Conant. After taking his first degreein arts in 1657, he returned to his native county, and was ordained according to the forms then in use. He first officiated at Ermington, in Devonshire, whence he was invited to be minister of Kingsbridge and Churchstow, in the same county, but afterwards removed to Brixton, whence he was ejected in 1662. He had some valuable preferments offered to him, if he would conform, but his opinions were fixed; for besides having been educated altogether among nonconformists, he had this additional difficulty, that he was one of those whom the law required to be re-ordained before admission into the church, their previous ordination being accounted invalid; but to this few, if any, of his brethren submitted. He continued for some time after his ejection to preach to his people but, incurring a prosecution, and being frequently imprisoned, he accepted an offer made in 1679, to be pastor of the English church at Middleburgh in Zealand. Here however were some dissensions which rendered his situation uncomfortable, and induced him to return to England in 1681, where he preached privately during the remainder of king Charles II.'s reign, and afterwards, taking advantage of king James’s indulgence, formed a congregation in Bartholomew Close. He died April 29, 1706, in the seventieth year of his age. His character for piety, learning, and usefulness in his ministry, was amply praised in two funeral sermons preached on occasion of his death, the one by Dr. Daniel Williams, the other by Mr. Freke. Besides three funeral Sermons, he published two tracts, the one, “The young man’s claim to the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper,” 1691; the other, “An answer to that case of conscience, Whether it be lawful for a man to marry his deceased wife’s sister?” But his most valuable work is his “Synodicon iiS Gallia Reformata, or the Acts, Decisions, Decrees, and Laws of the famous national councils of the reformed Churches in France, &c.” London, 1692, a large folio, composed of very interesting and authentic memorials, collected, probably, while he was in Zealand. It comprises a history of the rise and progress of the reformation in France down to the revocation of the edict of Nantes in 1685, and well merits the attention of the students of ecclesiastical history at the present time. Mr. Quick left also three folio volumes of ms lives of eminent protestant divines, principally French, which he intended to publish, had he met with encouragement. The duke of Bedford is said to have been so pleased with this ms. that he meant to publish it at his own expence, but was prevented by death. What has become of it since, is not known.

Soon after he quitted Drury-lane, an unfortunate transaction took place, which threatened to interrupt, if not entirely to stop his theatrical pursuits. This was an unlucky rencounter between him and Mr. Bowen, which ended fatally to the latter. From the evidence given at the trial it appeared, that on the 17th of April, 1718, about four or five o'clock in the afternoon, Mr. Bowen and Mr. Quin met aecidentlly at the Fleece-tavern in Cornhill. They drank together in a friendly manner, and jested with each other for some time, until at length the conversation turned upon their performances on the stage. Bowen said, that Quin had acted Tamerlane in a loose sort of a manner; and Quin, in reply, observed, that his opponent had no occasion to value himself on his performance, since Mr. Johnson, who had but seldom acted it, represented Jacomo, in “The Libertine,” as well as he who had acted it often. These observations, probably, irritated them both, and the conversation changed, but to another subject not better calculated to produce good humour the honesty of each party. In the course of the altercation, Bowen asserted, that he was as honest a man as any in the world, which occasioned a story about his political tenets to be introduced by Quin and both parties being warm, a wager was laid on the subject, which was determined in favour of Quin, on his relating that Bowen sometimes drank the health of the duke of Ormond, and sometimes refused it at the same time asking the referee how he could be as honest a man as any in the world, who acted upon two different principles. The gentleman who acted as umpire then told Mr. Bowen, that if he insisted upon his claim to be as honest a man as any in the world, he must give it against him. Here the dispute seemed to have ended, nothing in the rest of the conversation indicating any remains of resentment in either party. Soon afterwards, however, Mr. Bowen arose, threw down some money for his reckoning, and left the company. In about a quarter of an hour Mr. Quin was called out by a porter sent by Bowen, and both Quin and Bowen went together, first to the Swan tavern, and then to the Pope’s-head tavern, where a rencounter took place, and Bowen received a wound, of which he died on the 20th of April following. In the course of the evidence it was sworn, that Bowen, after he had received the wound, declared that he had had justice done him, that there had been nothing but fair play, and that if he died, he freely forgave his antagonist. On this evidence Quin was, on the 10th of July, found guilty of manslaughter only, and soon after returned to his employment on the stage*.

For a year or more before this period, Lincoln’s Innfields theatre had, by the assistance of some pantomimes, as the “Necromancer,” “Harlequin Sorcerer,” “Apollo and Daphne,” &c. been more frequented than at any time since it was opened. In the year 1728, was offered to the public a piece which was so eminently successful, as since to have introduced a new species of drama, the comic opera, and therefore deserves particular notice. This was “The Beggar’s Opera,” first acted on the 29th of January, 1728. Quin, whose knowledge of the public taste cannot be questioned, was so doubtful of its success before it was acted, that he refused the part of Macheath, which was therefore given to Walker. Two years afterwards, 19th of March, 1730, Mr. Quin had the “Beggar’s Opera” for his benefit, and performed the part of Macheath himself, and received the sum of 2061. 9s. 6d. which was several pounds more than any one night at the common prices had produced at that theatre. His benefit the preceding year brought him only 102l. 185. Od. and the succeeding only 129l. 35. Od. The season of 1728 had been so occupied by “The Beggar’s Opera,” that no new piece was exhibited in which Quin performed. In that of 1728-29 he performed in Barford’s “Virgin Queen,” in Madden’s Themistocles,“and in Mrs. Heywood’s” Frederic duke of Brunswick.“In 1729-30 there was no new play in which he performed. In 1730-31 he assisted in Tracey’s” Periander,“in Frowde’s” Philotas,“in Jeffreys’” Merope,“and in Theobald’s” Orestes;“and in the next season, 1731-2, in Kelly’s” Married Philosopher."

On his second visit Quin opened with his favourite part of Cato, to as crowded an audience as the theatre could contain. Mrs. Clive next appeared in Lappet in “The Miser.” She certainly was one of the best that ever played it. And Mr. Ryan came forward in lago to Quin’s Othello. With such excellent performers, we may naturally suppose the plays were admirably sustained. Perhaps it will scarcely be credited, that so finished a comic actress as Mrs. Clive could so far mistake her abilities, as to play Lady Townly to Quin’s Lord Townly and Mr. Ryan’s Manly Cordelia to Quin’s Lear and Ryan’s Edgar, &c. However she made ample amends by her performance of Nell, the Virgin Unmasqued, the Country Wife, and Euphrosyne in “Comus,” which was got up on purpose, and acted for the first time in Ireland, Quin seems to have attended the Dublin company to Cork and Limerick and the next season 1741-42, we find him performing in Dublin, where he acted the part of Justice Balance in “The Recruiting Officer,” at the opening of the theatre in October, on a government night. He afterwards performed Jaques, Apemantus, Richard, Cato, Sir John Brute, and Falstaff, unsupported by any performer of eminence. In December, however, Mrs. Gibber arrived, and performed Indiana to his young Bevil and afterwards they were frequently in the same play, as in Chamont and Monimia, in the “Orphan” Comus and the Lady, Duke and Isabella, in “Measure for Measure” Fryar and Queen, in 1 “The Spanish Friar;” Horatio and Calista, in the “Fair Penitent,” &c. &c. with uncommon applause, and generally to crowded houses. The state of the Irish stage was then so low, that it was often found that the whole receipt of the house was not more than sufficient to discharge Quiri’s engagement and so attentive was he to his own interest, and so rigid in demanding its execution, that we are told by good authority he refused to let the curtain be drawn up till the money was regularly brought to him.

, a distinguished French officer and wit, was born April 3, 1618, at Epiry in Nivernois, descended from a family which ranks among the most noble and ancient of the duchy of Burgundy. He served in his father’s regiment from twelve years old, and distinguished himself so much by his prudent conduct in several sieges and battles, that he would certainly have risen to the rank of marechal, had he not as much distinguished himself by indiscriminate satire, and hy immoral conduct. Being left a widower, 1648, he fell violently i love with Mad. de Miramion, and carried her off, but could not prevail on her to return his passion. He was admitted into the French academy in 1665, and the same year a scandalous history in ms. was circulated under his name, which is called “The amorous History of the Gauls,” containing the amours of two ladies (d'Olonne, and de Chatillon) who had great influence at court. It has since been joined to other novels of that time, and printed in Holland, 2 vols. 12mo, and at Paris, under the title of Holland, 5 vols. 12mo. This ms. being shown to the king, his majesty was extremely angry, and to satisfy the offended parties, sent De Bussy to the Bastile, April 7, 1665. From thence he wrote several letters acknowledging that he was the author of the history, but had entrusted the original to the marchioness de la Baume, who had betrayed his confidence by taking a copy; alleging also that the characters had been changed and spoilt, for the purpose of raising up enemies to him. The king did not believe one word of this, but tired with his repeated importunities, granted his request and De Bussy obtained leave to stop a month in Paris, after which he retired to his own estate, where he remained in banishment till 1681. The king then permitted him to return to Paris, and not only recalled him to court in 1682, but even suffered him to attend his levee, at the duke de Saint- Aignan’s earnest solicitation. He soon perceived, however, that the king showed him no countenance, and he therefore retired again to his estate. In 1687, he revisited the court for his children’s interests, and returned home the year following but ceased not to offer his services to the king, from whom he obtained several favours for his family. He died April 9, 1693, at Autun, aged 75. His works are, 1. “Memoires,” 2 vols, 4to, or 12mo, concerning his adventures at court, and in the army, and what happened after his disgrace. 2. “Letters,” 7 vols. 3. A small piece, entitled “Instructions for the conduct of Life,” which he gave his sons, when he sent one to the academy, and the other to college. This is said to do credit to his principles, which appear to have been better than his practice. The only work of his now read in France is that which produced all his misfortunes, the “Histoire amoureuse des Gaules,” the last edition of which was printed at Paris in 1754, 5 vols. 12mo. He has been called very unjustly the French jetronius, for he has neither the indecency nor the elegance of that writer. The French critics are very favourable to him, in asserting that although in the above work we may discover symptoms of malignity, there are none of exaggeration or falsehood.

, an eminent English physician, was born at Wakefield in Yorkshire, where his father possessed a moderate estate, in 1650. He was taught Greek and Latin at a school in the same town and, at fifteen years of age, was sent to University college, in Oxford. In 1669, he took his first degree in arts; but no fellowship becoming vacant there, he removed to Lincoln college, where he was elected into one. He applied himself to physic, and ran through the necessary courses of botany, chemistry, and anatomy in all which, having excellent parts, he quickly made a very great progress. He took the degree of M. A. in 1672, and then proceeded in the medical faculty. It is remarkable, that he recommended himself more by ready wit and vivacity, than by any extraordinary acquisitions in learning; and, in the prosecution of physic, he rarely looked further than to the pieces of Dr. Willis, who was then practising in London with a very distinguished character. He had few books of Any kind so few, that when Dr. Bathurst, head of Trinity college, asked him once in a surprise, “where his study was” RadclifTe, pointing to a few phials, a skeleton, and an herbal, replied, <* Sir, this is Radclitfe’s library.“In 1675 he proceeded M. B. and immediately began to practise. He never paid any regard to the rules universally followed, but censured them, as often as he saw occasion, with great freedom and acrimony which drew all the old practitioners upon him, with whom he waged an everlasting war. Yet his reputation increased with his experience and before he had been two years established, his business was very extensive, and among those of the highest rank. About this time, Dr. Marshall, rector of Lincoln college, opposed his application for a faculty-place in the college, which was to serve as a dispensation from taking holy orders, which the statutes required him to do, if he kept his fellowship. This was owing to some witticisms which Raclclirle, according to his manner, had pointed at the doctor. The church, however, being inconsistent with his present situation and views, he chose to resign his fellowship, which he did in 1677. He would have kept his chambers, and resided there as a commoner; but Dr. Marshall being still irreconcilable, he quitted the college, and took lodgings elsewhere, tn 1682 he went out M.D. but continued two years longer at Oxford, increasing both in wealth and fame. In 1684 he went to London, and settled in Bow-street, Covent-garden. Dr. Lower was there the reigning physician but his interest beginning to decline on account of his whig principles, as they were called, Radcliffe had almost an open field and, in less than a year, got into high practice, to which perhaps his conversation contributed as much as his reputed skill in his profession, for few men had more pleasantry and ready wit. In 1686, the princess Anne of Denmark made him her physician. In 1687, wealth jlo wing in upon him very plentifully, he had a mind to testify his gratitude to University college, where he had received the best part of his education; and, with this intent, caused the East window, over the altar, to be put up at his own expence. It is esteemed a beautiful piece, representing the nativity of our Saviour, painted upon glass; and appears to be his gift, by the following inscription under it:” D. D. Joan. Radcliffe, M. D. hujus Collegii quondam Socius, A. D. M.DCLXXXVII.“He is called” Socius;" not that he was really a fellow, but, being senior scholar, had the same privileges, though not an equal revenue, with the fellows. In 1638, when prince George of Denmark joined the prince of Orange and the princess, his consort, retired to Nottingham, the doctor was pressed, by bishop Compton, to attend her in quality of his office, she being also pregnant of the duke of Gloucester; but, not choosing to declare himself in that critical state of public affairs, nor favouring the measures then in agitation, he excused himself on account of the multiplicity of his patients.

, an eminent English divine in the seventeenth century, was second son of sir Carew Ralegh (elder brother of the celebrated sir Walter Ralegh.) His mother was relict of sir John Thynne, of Longleate, in Wiltshire, and daughter of sir William Wroughton, viceadmiral under sir John Dudley (afterwards duke of Northumberland) in the expedition against the Scots in 1544. He was born at Downton, in Wiltshire, in 1586, and educated in Winchester-school, whence he was sent to Magdalen college, Oxford, of which he became a commoner in Michaelmas term, 1602. In June 1605, he took the degree of B. A. and in June 1608, that of master and being a noted disputant, was made junior of the public act the same year, in which he distinguished himself to great advantage. About that time he entered into holy orders, and became chaplain to William earl of Pembroke, in whose family he spent about two years, when he was collated by his lordship to the rectory of Chedzoy, near Bridgewater, in Somersetshire, in the latter end of 1620. Being settled here, he married Mary, the daughter of sir Richard Gibbs, and sister of Dr. Charles Gibbs, prebendary of Westminster. He was afterwards collated to a minor prebend in the church of Wells, and to the rectory of Streat, with the chapel of Walton in Wiltshire. About the time of the death of his patron, the earl of Pembroke, which happened in 1630, he became chaplain in ordinary to king Charles I, and by that title was created D. D. in 1636. January the 13th, 1641, he was admitted dean of Wells on the death of Dr. George Warburton. During the rebellion he was sequestered on account of his loyalty, and afterwards treated with the utmost barbarity. It being his month to wait on the king as his chaplain, the committee of Somersetshire raised the rabble, and commissioned the soldiers to plunder his parsonage-house at Chedzoy and in his absence they seized upon all his estate spiritual and temporal, drove away his cattle and horses, which they found upon his ground, and turned his family out of doors. His lady was forced to lie two nights in the corn-fields, it being a capital crime for any of the parishioners to afford them lodging. After this she went to Downton, in Wiltshire, the seat of sir Carew Ralegh, where her husband met her. The king’s party having had some success in the West, Dr. Ralegh had an opportunity to return to his family, and resettle at Chedzoy but the parliament party soon gained the ascendant by the defeat of the lord Goring, and he was obliged to take refuge at Bridgewater, then garrisoned by the king. Here he continued till that town was surrendered to Fairfax and Cromwell, when he was taken prisoner, and after much severe usage set upon a poor horse, with his legs tied under the belly of it, and so carried to his house at Chedzoy, which was then the head -quarters of Fairfax and Cromwell and being extremely sick through his former ill treatment, obtained the favour of continuing prisoner in his own house. But as soon as the generals marched, Henry Jeanes, who was solicitous for his rectory of Chedzoy, and afterwards succeeded him in it, entered violently into the house, took the doctor out of his bed, and carried him away prisoner with all his goods. His wife and children were exposed to such necessities, that they must have perished if colonel Ash. had not procured them the income of some small tenements, which the doctor had purchased at Chedzoy, After this Dr. Ralegh wa& sent prisoner to Ilchester, the county-gaol; thence to Banwell-house, and thence to the house belonging to the deanery in Wells, which was turned into a gaol and here, while endeavouring to secrete a letter which he had written to his wife, from impertinent curiosity, he was stabbed by David Barrett, a shoe-maker of that city, who was his keeper, and died of the wound October 10, 1646, and was interred on the 13th of the same month before the dean’s stall, in the choir of the cathedral of Wells. His papers, after his death, such as could be preserved, continued for above thirty years in obscurity, till at last coming into the hands of Dr. Simon Patrick (afterwards bishop of Ely) he published them at London, 1679, in 4to, under this title: “Reliquiae Raleghanae, being Discourses and Sermons on several subjects, by the reverend Dr. Walter Ralegh, dean of Wells, and chaplain in ordinary to his late majesty king Charles the First.” This editor tells us, that “besides the quickness of his wit and ready elocution, he was master of a very strong reason which won him the familiarity and friendship of those great men -who were the envy of the last age, and the wonder of this, the lord Falkland, Dr. Hammond, and Mr. Chillingvvorth the last of which was wont to say (and no man was a better judge of it than himself) that Dr. Ralegh was the best disputant that ever he met withal; and indeed there is a very great acuteness easily to be observed in his writings, which would have appeared more if he had not been led, by the common vice of those times, to imitate too far a very eminent man (meaning, perhaps, bishop Andrews) rather than follow his own excellent genius.” He is said to have been a believer in the millenium, or reign of Christ on earth for a thousand years, and to have written a book on that subject, which is lost. In 1719 the rev. Lawrence Howell published at Lond. 8vo, “Certain Queries proposed by Roman catholics, and answered by Dr. Walter Ralegh,” &c. which appears to be authentic.

, an Italian physician, was born of a citizen’s family at Carpi near Modena, Nov. 5, 1633. When he had laid a foundation in grammar and classical literature in his own country, he went to Parma to study philosophy; and, afterwards applying himself to physic, took a doctor’s degree there in 1659. Then he went to Rome, for the sake of penetrating still further into his art; and afterwards settled as a practitioner in the duchy of Castro. After some time, ill health obliged him to return to Carpi for his native air, where he married, and followed the business of his profession; but in 1671, at the advice of some friends, he removed to Modena. His brethren of the faculty there conceived at first but meanly of his learning and abilities; but, when he had undeceived them by his publications, their contempt is said to have been changed into jealousy. In 1682, he was made professor of physic in the university of Modena, which was just founded by duke Francis II.; and he filled this office for eighteen years, attending in the mean time to practice, and not neglecting polite literature, to which he was always partial, and wrote a very elegant Latin style. In 1700, he went to Padua upon invitation, to be a professor there: but the infirmities of age began now to come upon him. He lost his sight, and was forced to read and write with other people’s eyes and hands. The senate, however, of Venice made him rector of the college in 1708, and also raised him from the second professorship in physic to the first. He would have refused these honourable posts; but, being overruled, performed all the functions of them very diligently to the time of his death, He died Nov. 5, his birthday, 1714, aged eighty-one. Ramazzini was a member of several of the academies of science established in Germany, Berlin, &c., and left several works the principal of which, and one which will ever be held in estimation, is his treatise on the diseases of artists and manufacturers, entitled “De Morbis Artificum Diatriba,” first published in 1700, and frequently reprinted, and published in English. He also published some tracts relative to certain epidemics, both among men and cattle; some “Ephemerides Barometrical;” a work on the abuse of Peruvian bark; and several orations delivered in his professorial capacity. All his works have been collected and published together at Padua, Geneva, London, and Naples; the edition of London, 1716, 4to, is the most correct.

The subsequent course of his life received its direction from his friendship and connections with this prelate. Feiielon had been preceptor to the duke of Burgundy, heirapparent, after the death of his father the dauphin, to the crown of France; yet neither of them came to the possession of it, being survived by Lewis XIV. who was succeeded by his great grandson, son to the duke of Burgundy, and now Lewis XV. Ramsay, having been first governor to the duke de Charteau-Thiery and the prince de Turenne, was made knight of the order of St. Lazarus; and afterwards was invited to Rome by the chevalier de St. George, styled there James III. king of Great Britain, to take the charge of educating his children. He went accordingly to that court in 1724; but the intrigues and dissentions, which he found on his arrival there, gave him so much uneasiness, that, with the Pretender’s leave, he presently returned to Paris. Thence he returned to Scotland, and was kindly received by the duke of Argyle and Greenwich; in whose family he resided some years, and employed his leisure there in writing several of his works. In 1730 he had the degree of doctor of law conferred on him at Oxford, being admitted for this purpose of St. Mary hall in April of that year, and presented to his degree by the celebrated tory Dr. King, the principal of that house. After his return to France, he resided some time at Pontoise, a seat of the prince de Turenne, duke de Bouillon with whom he continued in the post of intendant till his death, May 6, 1743, at St. Germaiu-en-Laie, where his body was interred; but his heart was deposited in the nunnery of St. Sacrament at Paris.

, the celebrated abbe and reformer of the monastery of La Trappe, was born January 9, 1626, at Paris. He was nephew of Claudius le Bouthillier de Chavigny, secretary of state, and superintendant of the finances. In classical learning he made so rapid a progress that, with some direction from his tutor, he published, at the age of twelve or thirteen years, a new edition of “Anacreon,” in Greek, with notes, 1639, 8vo. This curious volume, which was dedicated to his godfather Cardinal Richelieu, was reprinted in 1647, and both editions are now scarce. At ten years old, according to the absurd custom then prevalent, he was appointed canon of Notre Dame in Paris, and became possessed of several benefices in a short time. He afterwards took a doctor of divinity’s degree in the Sorbonne, February 10, 1654, and appearing then in a public character, soon became distinguished not only for taste and politeness, but for those amiable qualifications which are of use in society. He was not however without his frailties, and it is said that he refused the bishopric of Leon from a motive of vanity. He was then appointed almoner to the duke of Orleans, and made a shining figure in the assembly of the clergy in 1655, as deputy from the second order. At length becoming conscious how little splendour and preeminence avail to happiness, he bad adieu to all, and devoted his days to religious exercises. It has been said, that this resolution was the consequence of a visit he paid to a favourite lady, from whom he had been absent for some time, and whom on entering her apartment he found dead in her coffin, and frightfully disfigured with the smallpox. This anecdote is taken from “Les veritables Motifs de la Conversion de l'abbé de la Trappe,” published by Daniel de la Roque, Cologn, 1685, 12mo; but some of his biographers treat it as fabulous. One of them, Marsollier, with greater appearance of probability, attributes his conversion to his having narrowly escaped being killed by the ball of a firelock, which struck his gibeciere, or pouch, on which he immediately exclaimed, “Alas! where should I have been, had not my God had compassion on me.” Whichever of these incidents was the cause, it is certain that he retired from the world, and refused even to be assistant to his uncle, who was archbishop of Tours. He then founded a monastery, the fraternity belonging to which practise the utmost self-denial. Their diet is merely vegetable. They allow not themselves wine, flesh, fish, nor eggs; they enter into no conversation with strangers, and for some days are wholly silent. They have each a separate cell, and used to pass some part of every day in digging their own graves in the garden of the convent. De Ranee placed this new establishment of the monks of La Trappe in the hands of the fathers of the strict Cistertian observance. He also sold his estate at Veret for 100,000 crowns, which sum he gave to the H6tel Dieu at Paris, and took the monastic habit in the abbey of Notre Dame de Perseigne, where he made profession, June 6,1664. He afterwards took possession of the abbey de la Trappe, and introduced those regulations above mentioned, which long made it the admiration of all travellers. In this retreat he lived devoted to his austere observances, until 1695, when he died on his straw pallet, in presence of the bishop of Seez, and the whole community, October 26, 1700, aged 74, leaving many pious works; among which the principal are, a book “de la Saintété des Devoirs de l'Etat monastique,” 1683, 2 vols. 4to “Eclaircissemens sur ce Livre,” 1685, 4to; “Explication sur la Regie de S. BenoSt,” 12mo; “lieflexions morales sur les quatre Evangiies,” 4 vols. 12mo; “Conferences sur les Evangiies,” 4 vols. 12mo “Instructions et Maximes,” 12mo; “Concluite Chretienue,” written for Mad. de Guise, 12mo; a greafnumber of “Spiritual Letters,” 2 vols. 12 mo; “Accounts of the Lives and Deaths of some Monks of la Trappe,” 4 vols. 12tno, continued to 6 vols.; lastly, “The Constitutions and Rules of the Abbe of la Trappe,” 1701, 2 vols. 12mo. His life has been written by several Romish authors, particularly by M. de Maupeou, M, Marsollier, and Le Nain, brother of M. de Tillemont, 2 vols. 12mo.

, music professor in the university of Cambridge, was probably a native of London, where he was born in 1715. He was brought up in the king’s chapel, and was one of the children of that choir who first performed in Handel’s oratorio of Esther, at the house of Bernard Gates, master of the boys in James-street, Westminster, on Wednesday, February 23, 1731, when it was performed in action, previous to its having been heard in public, or any where but at Cannons, the magnificent seat of the duke of Chandos, for whose chapel it was composed in 1720. Dr. Randal was never rated very high in his profession, but was regarded as a slight organ-player, and had never distinguished himself as a composer. He obtained his degree at the installation of the duke of Grafton in the university of Cambridge, for which he composed the ode written by Gray. To the astonishment of all the musical profession, he undertook to have this composition performed by the musicians resident in the university, without the expence of additional hands and voices from London, as Drs. Greens and Boyce had thought necessary on former occasions at Cambridge, and Dr. William Hayes at Oxford. As Dr. Randal’s professional life was unmarked by talents, his death, which happened March 18, 1799, in the eightyfourth year of his age, was hardly noticed, except by the candidates for the professorship, and his organist’s places.

In 1499, at the age of sixteen, Raphael left Perugia, and went with Pinturicchio to Siena, to assist him in painting for the library of the cathedral, the history of Pius II. which was executed in ten large pictures, of which Raphael made the greater part, if not all the designs, and assisted in painting them. Before this work was completed, he left Siena, probably about 1502, to pursue his studies at Florence, where the great names of Leonardo da Vinci and Michael Angelo flourished with rival pre-eminence, and where he immediately became conscious of the inferiority of the style which he had been taught and practised. Here he acquired the esteem of some persons of eminence, and pursued his studies with avidity until 1504, when he was obliged to visit Urbino to arrange some domestic affairs, and at intervals painted four small pictures for the duke of Urbino, which were much esteemed. He then went to Perugia to paint several pictures for the convents, which were all so much admired, that commissions pressed upon him; but his desire to return to Florence made him leave one which was begun in fresco for the monastery of St. Severo, to be terminated by his old master Perugino.

, Earl of Sussex, a statesman of the sixteenth century, was the eldest son of Henry Ratcliffe, the second earl of Sussex, by Elizabeth, one of the daughters of Thomas Howard, second duke of Norfolk. His first public service was in an honourable embassy to the emperor Charles the Fifth, to treat of the projected marriage of Queen Mary to Philip, which he afterwards ratified with the latter in Spain. Upon his return he was appointed lord deputy of Ireland, and chief justice of the forests north of Trent. The order of the garter, and the office of captain of the pensioners, were likewise conferred on him in that reign, a little before the conclusion of which he succeeded to his father’s honours. Elizabeth continued him for a while in the post of lord deputy, and recalled him to assume that of the president of the North, a situation rendered infinitely difficult by the delicacy of her affairs with Scotland, and the rebellious spirit of the border counties. The latter, however, was subdued by his prudence and bravery in 1569; and the assiduity and acuteness with which he studied the former, will appear from his own pen. The unfortunate affair of the duke of Norfolk, to whom he was most firmly attached, fell out in the course of that year, and would have ended happily and honourably if the duke had followed his advice. That nobleman’s last request was, that his best george, chain, and gafter, might be given to my lord of Sussex. He was the prime negociator in those two famous treaties of marriage with the archduke Charles and the duke of Alenson, Elizabeth’s real intentions in which have been so frequently the subject of historical disquisition. In 1572, he retired from the severer labours of the public service, in which he had wasted his health, to the honourable office of lord chamberlain, and the duties of a cabinet minister; and died at his house in Bermondsey, June 9, 1583, leaving little to his heirs but the bright example of a character truly noble. The earl of Sussex was twice married; first, to Elizabeth, daughter of Thomas Wriothesley, earl of Southampton, by whom he had two sons, Henry and Thomas, who died young; secondly, to Frances, daughter of sir William Sydney, afterwards the celebrated foundress of Sydney-Sussex college in Cambridge; by whom having no children, he was succeeded by Henry, his next brother.

“This great man’s conduct,” says Mr. Lodge, “united all the splendid qualities of those eminent persons who jointly rendered Elizabeth’s court an object of admiration to Europe, and was perfectly free from their faults. Wise and loyal as Burghley, without his blind attachment to the monarch; vigilant as Walsingham, but disdaining his low cunning; magnificent as Leicester, but incapable of hypocrisy; and brave as Ralegh, with the piety of a primitive Christian; he seemed above the common objects of human ambition, and wanted, if the expression may be allowed, those dark shades of character which make nien the 1 heroes of history. Hence it is, probably, that our writers have bestowed so little attention on this admirable person, who is but slightly mentioned in most historical collections, unless with regard to his disputes with Leicester, whom he hated almost to a fault.” Mr. Lodge justly esteems himself peculiarly fortunate in having been the instrument of disclosing the earl of Sussex’s letters to the public. They form a very valuable part of the “Historical Illustrations,” and, a small number excepted, are the only ones to be met with in print. These letters display both his integrity and ability in a very striking light, and are written in a clear and manly style. Four of them are particularly curious two to the queen, onthe treaty of marriage with the archduke of Austria; one to sir William Cecil, on the state of parties in Scotland; and one to her Majesty, concerning the duke of Alen$on. The letter on the affairs of Scotland is considered by Mr. Lodge as an inestimable curiosity. Farther light will be thrown on the earl of Sussex’s character, by transcribing the manly language in which he complains that his services were neglected, and declares his purpose of retiring to private life. It is in a letter to sir William Cecil. “I was firste a Lieuten‘te; I was after little better than a Marshal; I had then nothing left to me but to direct hanging matters (in the meane tyme all was disposed that was w th in my comission), and nowe I ame offered to be made a Shreif’s Bayly to deliver over possessions. Blame me not, good Mr. Secretarie, though my pen utter somewhat of that swell in my stomake, for I see I ame kepte but for a brome, and when I have done my office to be throwen out of the dore. I ame the first nobel man hathe been thus used. Trewe service deserveth honor and credite, and not reproche and open defaming; but, seeing the one is ever delivered to me in the stede of the other, I must leave to serve, or lose my honor; w^h, being continewed so long in my howse, I wolde be lothe shoolde take blemishe wth me. These matters I knowe procede not from lacke of good and honorable meaning in the Q,’ ma 1 towards me, nor from lacke of dewte' and trewthe in me towards her, which grevethe me the more and, therefore, seing I shall be still a camelyon, and yelde no other shewe then as it shall please others to give the couller, I will content my self to live a private lyfe. God send her Mate others that meane as well as I have done; and so I comitt you to th* Almightie.” From the next letter it appears that the queen had too much wisdom to part with so faithful a counsellor and servant. The earl of Sussex had a high regard and esteem for Lord Burghley. In one of his letters, dated June 28, 1580, he expresses himself, to that great statesman, in the following terms: “The trevve fere of God w^h yo r actyons have alwayes shewed to be in yo r harte, the grete and deepe care wch you have always had for the honor and salfty of the Q‘. Ma*’s most worthy p’son; the co‘tinual troubell w ch yqu have of long tyme taken for the benefyting of the com’on-welthe and the upryght course wich ye have alwaye’s taken, respectying the mattr and not the p’son, in all causes (wch be the necessary trusts of him that ferethe God trewly, s’rveth his Soverayne faythfully, and lovethe his countrey clerely) have tyed me to yo r L. in that knotte w cli no worldly fraylty can break; and, therfor, I wyll never forbere to runne any fortune that may s’rve you, and further you' godly actyons. And so, my good L. forberyng to entrobell you w th words, I end; and wysh unto you as to my self, and better, yf I may.”

Christopher Rawlinson, of Caik-hall in Carimel, in the county of Lancaster, esq. whose remains are deposited in a vault near this place. He wa son of Curwen Rawlinson, member of parliament for the town of Lancaster, and Klizabeth Monk, daughter and co-heir of the loyal Nicholas Monk, lord bishop of Hereford, brother to (Jen. Monk duke of Albemarle. The said Christopher was of Queen’s college, in Oxford, and published the Saxon version of “Boethius de Consolatione Philosophise” in the Saxon language. He was born in the parish of Springfield in Essex, June 13, 1677, and died in Jan. 1733. This monument was erected pursuant to the will of his cousin and co-heiress, Mrs. Mary Blake, youngest daughter of Roger More, of Kirkby Lonsdale, in the county of Westmoreland, serjeant at law, and Catharine Rawlinson, sister of the said Curwen Rawlinson.

The same experiments which convinced Reaumur that steel differed from iron only in having more sulphur and salt, convinced him also that cast iron differed from forged iron, only by having still more sulphur and salt than steel; it was steel with an excess of its specific difference from forged iron: he therefore set himself to take away this excess, and he succeeded so as to produce a great variety of utensils in cast iron, which were as easily wrought as forged iron, and did not cost half the money. However, a manufactory set on foot in France for rendering cast iron sufficiently ductile to be forged and wrought, was, after some time, discontinued. For discovering the secret of converting iron into steel, the duke of Orleans, being then regent, settled a pension upon Reaumur of 12,000 livres a year, and, at his request, it was settled upon the academy after his death, to be applied for defraying the expences of future attempts to improve the arts.

In 1530 there was a diet held at Augsburg, at which the duke of Brunswick was present, who prevailed on Regius to go to Lunenburg in his dominions, to take care of the church there. The duke highly esteemed him, and declared to the people of Augsburgh, who petitioned for his return, that he would as soon part with his eyes as with Regius, and made him chief pastor of all the churches in his dominions, with an ample and liberal salary. Here he passed the greater part of a useful and active life in preaching, writing, and religious conferences. He died May 23, 1541, when on a journey with the duke to Haguenau; the place of his death is said to be Zell; but we have no account of his age. He had often wished that he might die a sudden and easy death, which happened to be the case. His works were collected in 3 vols. folio: the first two contain the pieces he published in Latin, the other his German compositions. This last volume was afterwards translated into Latin, and published under the title of “Vita Opera Urbani Regii, reddita per Ernest. Regium,” Norib. 1562. Some of his pieces were translated in the 16th century into English, as “The Sermon which Christ made on the way to Emmaus, &c.” 1578, 4to. “A declaration of the twelve articles of the Christen faythe, &c.” 1548. “An Instruccyon of Christen fayth, &c.” 1588, translated by Fox the martyrologist. “The Olde Learnyng and the New compared, &c.” 1548, 8vo. “Exposition on the 87th Psalm,” 1594, 8vo. “A homily of the good and evil Angell, &c.” 1590, 8vo, and others. Besides what are included in the three volumes mentioned above, John Freder of Pomerania published, after the au^ thor’s death, a work of his, entitled “Loci Theologici ex patribus & scholasticis neotericisque collect!.”

, an eminent astronomer and mathematician, was born at Salfeldt in Thuringia, a province in Upper Saxony, the llth of October, 1511. H^ studied mathematics under James Milichi at Wittemberg, in which university he afterwards became professor of those sciences, which he taught with great applause. After writing a number of useful and learned works, he died February 19, 1553, at 42 years of age only. His writings are chiefly the following: 1. “Theorize novae Planetarum G. Purbachii,” augmented and illustrated with diagrams and Scholia in 8vo, 1542; and again in 1580. In this work, among other things worthy of notice, he teaches (p. 75 and 76) that the centre of the lunar epicycle describes an ovalfgure in each monthly period, and that the or hit of Mercury is also of the same oval figure. 2. “Ptolomy’s Almagest,” the first book, in Greek, with a Latin version, and Scholia, explaining the more obscure passages, 1549, 8vo. At the end of p. 123 he promises an edition of Theon’s Commentaries, which are wry useful for understanding Ptolomy’s meaning; but his immature death prevented Reinhold from giving this and other works which he had projected. 3. “Prutenicse Tabulae Ccelestiurn Motuum,” 1551, 4to; again in 1571; and also iii 1585. Reinhold spent seven years labour upon this work, in which he was assisted by the munificence of Albert, duke of Prussia, from whence the tables had their name. Reinhold compared the observations of Copernicus with those of Ptolomy and Hipparchus, from whence he constructed these new tables, the uses of which he has fully explained in a great number of precepts and canons, forming a complete introduction to practical astronomy. 4. “Primus liber Tabularum Directionum” to which are added, the “Canon Fcecundus,” or Table of Tangents, to every minute of the quadrant and New Tables of Climates, Parallels, and Shadows, with an Appendix containing the second Book of the Canon of Directions; 1554, 4to. Reinhold here supplies what was omitted by Regiomontanus in his Table of Directions, &c.; shewing the finding of the sines, and the construction of the tangents, the sines being found to every minute of the quadrant, to the radius 10,000,000; and he produced the Oblique Ascensions from 60 degrees to the end of the quadrant. He teaches also the use of these tables in the solution of spherical problems.

, a French writer, very learned in Oriental history and languages, was born at Paris in 1646; and, being taught classical literature by the Jesuits, and philosophy in the college of Harcourt, afterwards entered into the congregation of the oratory, where he did not continue long. His father being first physician to the dauphin, he was early introdued to scenes, where his parts, his learning, and his politeness, made him admired. His reputation was afterwards advanced and established by several learned works, which he published. In 1700, heattended cardinal de Noailles to Rome; and received great honours, together with the priory of Frossey in Bretagne, from pope Clement V. Returning by Florence he was honoured in the same manner by the great duke; and was also made a member of the academy de la Crusca. On his return to France he devoted himself entirely to letters, and composed a great number of learned dissertations, which are printed in the “Memoirs of the Academy of Inscriptions,” of which he was a member, as well as of the French academy. He died in 1720. Voltaire blames him for having prevented Bayle’s dictionary from being printed in France. This is very natural in Voltaire and Voltaire’s followers; but it is a more serious objection to Renaudot, that, while his love of learning made him glad to correspond with learned Protestants, his cowardly bigotry prevented him from avowing the connection. Not long before Dr. Pocock’s death that eminent orientalist received a letter from Renaudot, in which he professes a very high esteem for the doctor, desires the liberty of consulting him in all the doubts that should occur in preparing his “Collection of Liturgies,” &c. and promises, in return for this favour, to make a public acknowledgment of it, and preserve a perpetual memory of the obligation; yet, when the above work appeared, he travelled out of his way to reproach Dr. Pocock with a mistake, which was perhaps the only one that could be discovered in his writings.

, a German lawyer and mathematician, was born April 19, 1635, at Schleusingen in the county of Henneberg, and was educated at Leipsic and Leyden. He was afterwards appointed preceptor to the young prince of Gotha, then professor of mathematics at Kiel, 1655, and some years after professor of law in the same place, where he died Nov. 22, 1714, being then counsellor to the duke of Saxe Gotha, and member of the Royal Academy of Sciences at Berlin. Reyher translated Euclid’s works into German with algebraical demonstrations, and wrote several works in Latin, among which, that entitled “Mathesis Biblica,” and a very curious Dissertation on the Inscriptions upon our Saviour’s cross and the hour of his crucifixion, are particularly esteemed.

an excellent scholar, marshal of the camp, chamberlain to his royal highness the infant duke of Parma, and governor of that citadel, was born atComo in 1709. He acquired distinction in the army and at court, but must have devoted much of his life to literary pursuits. His first publication was a folio volume, printed at Como in 1742, entitled “De suppositis militaribus stipendiis Benedicti Odeschalci, qui pontifex maxiinus anno 1676, Innocentii prsenomine fuit renunciatus.” His next was a volume of poetry, “Musarum Epinicia,” addressed to Louis XV. Parma, 1757; but that which most entitles him to notice was his “Disquisitiones Plinianae, sive de utriusque Flinii patria, scriptis, codicibus, editionibus, atque interpretibus,” Parma, 1763, 2 vols. fol. Of this Ernesti speaks very highly in his edition of.Fabricius’s Bibl. Latina. Brunet mentions some “Academical Discourses” in Italian, published by count Rezzonico in 1772, 8vo. He died March 16, 1785. His son, the Count Gastone Della Torre Rezzonico, was born in Parma about 1740. He was early initiated into science and polite literature; and so considerable were his attainments, that in his earliest youth he was chosen fellow of the poetical academy in Rome, known under the name of Arcadia. The reigning duke of Parma havingerected in his metropolis an academy of fine arts, count Rezzonico was appointed its president; but, by some vicissitudes, was utterly disgraced at court, and deprived, not only of the place of president of the academy, but even of that of hereditary chamberlain. He was therefore obliged to leave Parma. He first undertook long tours through Europe, especially in France and England, during which he became completely master of both languages; and at his return to Italy he fixed his residence in Rome, though he often made long excursions to Naples and Florence. Availing himself of his ample leisure, he wrote several works in prose and poetry, the former of no great merit, but from his poetical works he deserves to be placed among the best Italian poets of his age. He was distinguished by liveliness of imagery, propriety of diction, exactness of epithet, and by a nobleness of expression acquired by deep study of the Greek and Latin classics. His versification, however, was something harsh, and the meaning of some phrases obscure. He died in 1795, fifty-five years of age. He was highly esteemed by the Italian nobility, and men of letters, for the elegance of his manners and the eloquence of his conversation. These qualities were, however, in the opinion of some, obscured by an immoderate self-love, and an irrational predilection for his own works. A complete collection of his poetical works in two volumes was printed at Parma by the celebrated Bodoni.

, by Scaliger named the Varro of the age, was a learned Italian, whose proper name was Ludovico Celio Richeri. He was born at Rovigo' about 1450, and studied at Ferrara and Padua, and France. On his return to Italy, he filled the office of public professor at Rovigo for some years, but in 1503 opened a school at Vicenza, where he continued till 1508, when he was in* vited to Ferrara by duke Alfonzo I. In the year 1515, Francis I. nominated him to the chair of Greek and Latin eloquence in Milan, as successor to Demetrius Chalcondylas. In 1521 he returned to Padua, and in 1523 he was deputed from his native place to Venice, to congratulate the new doge. In 1525 he died of grief, on account of the defeat and capture of Francis at the battle of Pavia. His principal work is entitled “Antiques Lectiones,” of which he published sixteen books at Venice, in 1516, fol. and fourteen more were added after his death in the editions of Basil, 1566, and Francforr, 1666. Vossius expresses his wonder, and even indignation, that so learned a miscellany was so little known.

, a celebrated Spanish Jesuit, was born at Toledo, in 1527, and was enrolled by St. Ignatius among his favourite disciples in 1540, before the society of the Jesuits had received the papal sanction. In 1542 he studied at Paris, and afterwards at Padua, where he was sent to Palermo to teach rhetoric. After many,' and long travels for the propagation of the interests of the society in various parts of Europe, he died at Madrid, Oct. 1, 1611. One of his visits was with the duke of Feria to England, in 1558, and his inquiries here, or what he made subsequently, encouraged him to publish a treatise “On the English schism,” 1594, 8vo, in which, it is said, there is less rancour and acrimony than might have been expected, and some curious anecdotes respecting the personal character of queen Mary. He is, however, chiefly known for his Lives of various Saints and Jesuits, and as the founder of that biography of the Jesuits which Alegambe and others afterwards improved into a work of some importance. One of his principal lives, published separately, is that of the founder, St. Ignatius de Loyola. Of this work there have been several editions, the first in 1572, and the second with additions in 1587, in neither of which he ascribes any miracles to his master, and is so far from supposing any, that he enters into an inquiry, whence it could happen that so holy a man had not the gift of miracles bestowed upon him, and really assigns very sensible reasons. But notwithstanding all this, in an abridged edition of his life of Ignatius, published at Ipres in 1612, miracles are ascribed to Ignatius, and Ribadeneira is made to assign, as his reason for not inserting such accounts before, that though he heard of them in 1572, they were not sufficiently authenticated. Bishop Douglas, who is inclined to blame Ribadeneira for this insufficient apology, has omitted to notice that this Ipres edition of the life was published a year after Ribadeneira’s death, and therefore it is barely possible that the miracles, and all that is said about them, might have been supplied by some zealous brother of the order. His “Lives of the Saints” were translated into English, and published in 2 vols. 8vo.

, an artist of temporary fame, was born at Belluno, near Trevisano, in 1659; and having discovered an early genius for painting, was conducted by his father to Venice, and placed as a disciple with Fred. Cervelli, a Milanese artist of good reputation, with whom he studied for nine years. He afterwards improved his practice at Bologna, &c. by copying, and obtained the favour and patronage of Rannuccio, the second duke of Parma. By the liberality of that prince, he was honourably maintained at Rome, studying the productions of the best ancient and modern masters; and there he formed that manner which distinguishes his productions, and for a while raised him into the highest esteem. Having quitted Rome, he returned to Venice, where he was so eagerly solicited for his paintings, that he had scarcely time to take even necessary refreshment. His fame spread through Europe, and he received an invitation to the court of the emperor at Vienna, to adorn the magnificent palace of Schoenbrun. From thence he was encouraged to visit London, where he was immediately and incessantly employed by the court, the nobility, and persons of fortune. Here he remained ten years, with his nephew and coadjutor, IVfarco Ricci, who painted skilfully scenes of architecture and landscape at Burlington house and Bulstrode. He acquired great wealth by the immense occupation he found; and then returned to Venice, where he remained until his death, in 1734, in the seventy-fifth year of his. age.

, a man of letters, was originally of Hexham in Northumberland; and was entered of St. John’s college, Cambridge, in 1774. Dr. Ferris, the present dean of Battle, and Dr. Pearce, now dean of Ely, were his tutors at the university. Under the superintendance of those two excellent scholars, he acquired sound learning and a correct taste. He possessed, indeed, an excellent understanding, and a sort of intuitive knowledge of mankind. He distinguished himself at college by the elegance, beauty, and vigour, of his prose and poetical compositions; a love of the Muses very early in life took possession of his mind, and often interfered with the laborious duties of his studies. He entered himself a student of the Middle Temple in 1779, and was called to the bar in 1784. But literary pursuits and political connections took up too much of his time to admit of his pursuing, with sufficient diligence, the study of the law; otherwise, it is highly probable that he would have become a distinguished ornament of the bar. The chief works in which he was publicly known to have taken a part were in those celebrated political satires, “The Rolliad,” and the “Probationary Odes,” in the composition of which his talents were conspicuous. He wrote also the comedy of “The Fugi* live,” which was honoured by a considerable share of applause, both on the stage and in the closet. In private life so happily was the suavity of his temper blended with the vigour of his understanding, that he was esteemed by his adversaries in political principles, as well as by a very large circle of private friends. He was brought into parliament by the duke of Northumberland, in whose friendship he held a distinguished place, and by whose loan of 2000l. (which the duke has given up to his family) he was enabled to become proprietor of a fourth part of Drury-Iane theatre. He was suddenly taken ill on June 8, 1803, and died next day, leaving a widow and four daughters, to lament the loss of their affectionate protector. He was interred in Egham churchyard.

In 1706 he was bound apprentice to Mr. John Wilde, a printer of some eminence in his day; whom, though a severe task-master, he served diligently for seven years. He afterwards worked as a journeyman and corrector of the press for about six years, when he, in 1719, took up his freedom, and commenced business on his own account, in a court in Fleet-street; and filled up his leisure hours in compiling indexes for the booksellers, and writing prefaces, and what he calls “honest dedications.” Dissimilar as their geniuses may seem, when the witty and wicked duke of Wharton (a kind of Lovelace), about 1723, fomented the spirit of opposition in the city, and became a member of the Waxchandlers’ company, Mr. Richardson, though his political principles were very different, was much connected with, and favoured by him, and for some little time was the printer of his “True Briton,” published twice a week. He so far exercised his judgment, however, in peremptorily refusing to be concerned in such papers as he apprehended might endanger his safety, that he stopt at the end of the sixth number, which was possibly his own production*. He printed for some time a newspaper called “The Daily Journal;” and afterwards “The Daily Gazetteer.” Through the interest of his friend Mr. Speaker Onslow, he printed the first edition of the “Journals of the House of Commons,” of which he completed 26 volumes. Mr. Onslow

, a celebrated cardinal and minister of France, was the third son of Francis du Plessis, seigneur de Richelieu, knight of the king’s orders, and grand provost of France, and was born Sept. 5, 1585, at Paris. He was admitted into the Sorbonne at the age of twenty-two, obtained a dispensation from pope Paul V. for the bishopric of Lucon, and was consecrated at Rome in 1607. On his return, he acquired considerable interest at court, and was appointed by Mary de Medicis, then regent, her grand almoner; and in 1616 was raised to the post of secretary of state. After the death of one of his friends, the marshal D'Ancre, in 1617, when Mary was banished to Blois, he followed her thither; but, the duke de Luynes becoming jealous of him, he was ordered to retire to Avignon, and there he wrote his “Method of Controversy,” on the principal points of faith.

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

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

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

, a French writer, chiefly on subjects of bibliography and literary history, was born May 19, 1730, at Apt in Provence, and was bred to the church. He was first professor of philosophy in the seminary of Sh Charles, at Avignon, a situation for which he was not very well qualified. He then became curate of Molleges, in the diocese of Aries, but was not much better satisfied with this than his preceding occupation, as he had more taste for bibliographical researches than for pastoral duties. While here he had the credit of an amour with a married woman, that did not advance him much in the public opinion; and when the husband reproached him, the abbe threw him headlong out of the window, from which, however, he received no great injury. In 1767 he came to Paris, and his turn for books being already known, the duke de Valliere appointed him his librarian, and in allusion to his arrogant manner of deciding on literary points, used to call him his bull-dog. On the revolution breaking out, he became one of the most implacable of the anarchists, and denounced vengeance on the clergy, the nobility, and especially those writers who were his rivals in bibliographical pursuits, particularly William Debure, and the abbe Mercier, to whom he was uncommonly abusive. He afterwards led a life of turbulence and hostility, which at last closed at Marseilles in 1792. Among his numerous publications, the most useful were, 1. “Eclaircissemens sur l'inyention des Cartes a jouer,” Paris, 1780, 8vo. 2. “Prospectus sur Tessai de verifier Page de Miniatures,” such as appear on manuscripts from the fourteenth to the seventeenth century; ibid. 1782, fol. 3. “Notices historiques et critiques sur deux manuscrits de la bibliotheque du due de la Valliere,” ibid. 1779, 4to. 4. “Notices sur le traite manuscrit de Galeotto Martio, intitule De Excelientibus,” ibid. 1785, 8vo. 5. “Histoire critique de la Pyramide de Caius Sestius,” &c. ibid. 1787, foi. 6. La Chasse aux Bibliographes et aux Antiquaires mal avises,“ibid. 1789, 2 vols. a receptacle of almost every kind of abuse and awkward wit against Le Long, Debure, Mercier, &c. 7.”Dictionnaire de critique litteraire," &c. with other works of a similar kind, which are very scarce even in France, as he printed but a small number of each edition.

, a celebrated French protestant divine, was born at St. Maxeut, in Poitou, Aug. I, 1572, and after some school education near home, was sent to Rochelle in 1585, where he studied the learned languages and philosophy. In 1590 he was removed to the college at Beam, where he took his master’s degree, and began the study of divinity. Having finished that course, he was in 1595 appointed minister of the church of Thoars, and chaplain to the duke of Thoars, who admitted him into his confidence, and frequently employed him in matters of importance. While in this situation he married the daughter of a divine at Thoars. He was frequently the representative of the protestant churches in national conventions and synods, and in some of these filled the chair of president, particularly in that of Vitry, in 1617. In 1620 he was appointed professor of divinity at Leyden, but about the same time had the misfortune to lose his wife. In 1621 he visiteci England, and going to Oxford was incorporated doctor in divinity, which degree had been conferred on him at Leyden just before. He gave, on this occasion, several books to the Bodleian library. While in England he married, as his second wife, Maria, the sister of Peter du Moulin, and widow of Anthony de Guyot, upon whose death in the civil wars in France, she took refuge in England. What served to introduce him at Oxford was his previous acquaintance wiih John Russe, or Rouse, who had lodged some time with him at Thoars, and was now in the situation of librarian of the Bodleian. After his return to Leyden he resumed his professorship, and passed the rest of his days in teaching and writing. He died in 1647, aged seventy-five. His works, consisting of commentaries on the scriptures, sermons, and controversial pieces, were very numerous, but it is unnecessary to specify them separately, as they were collected in 3 vols. fol. and printed at Rotterdam in 1651. His brother William, who was likewise in the church, published on “Justification,” and on “Ecclesiastical liberty.” We have in English,“A relation of the last hours of Dr. Andrew Rivet,” 12mo, translated and published by Nehemiah Coxe, by which it appears that Dr. Rivet was not more a man of great learning than of great piety.

, a very learned divine, was born in Dublin, Oct. 16, 1705. His father was a native of Scotland, who carried on the linen-manufacture there; and his mother, Diana Allen, was of a very reputable family in the bishopric of Durham, and married to his father in England. From his childhood he was of a very tender and delicate constitution, with great weakness in his eyes till he was twelve years of age, at which period he was sent to school. He had his grammar-education under the celebrated Dr. Francis Hutcheson, who then taught in Dublin, but was afterwards professor of philosophy in the university of Glasgow. He went from Dr. Hutcheson to that university in 1722, where he remained till 1725, and took the degree of M. A. He had for his tutor Mr. John Lowdon, professor of philosophy; and attended the lectures of Mr Ross, professor of humanity; of Mr. Dunlop, professor of Greek; of Mr. Morthland, professor of the Oriental languages; of Mr. Simpson, professor of mathematics; and of Dr. John Simpson, professor of divinity. In the last-mentioned year, a dispute was revived, which had been often agitated before, between Mr. John Sterling the principal, and the students, about a right to chuse a rector, whose office and power is somewhat like that of the vice-chancellor of Oxford or Cambridge. Mr. Robertson took part with his fellow- students, and was appointed by them, together with William Campbell, esq. son of Campbell of Mamore, whose family has since succeeded to the estates and titles of Argyle, to wait upon the principal with a petition signed by more than threescore matriculated students, praying that he would, on the 1st day of March, according to the statutes, summon an university-meeting for the election of a rector; which petition he rejected with contempt. On this Mr. Campbell, in his own name and in the name of all the petitioners, protested against the principal’s refusal, and all the petitioners went to the house of Hugh Montgomery, esq. the unlawful rector, where Mr. Robertson read aloud the protest against him and his- authority. Mr. Robertson, by these proceedings, became the immediate and indeed the only object of prosecution. He was cited before the faculty, i. e. the principal and the professors of the university, of wbotn the principal was sure of a majority, and, after a trial which lasted several clays, had the sentence of expulsion pronounced against him; of which sentence he demanded a copy, and was so fully persuaded of the justice of his cause, and the propriety of his proceedings, that he openly and strenuously acknowledged and adhered to what he had done. Upon this, Mr. Lowdon, his tutor, and Mr. Dunlop, professor of Greek, wrote letters to Mr. Robertson’s father, acquainting him of what had happened, and assuring him that his son had been expelled, not for any crime or immorality, but for appearing very zealous in a dispute about a matter of right between the principal and the students. These letters Mr. Robertson sent inclosed hi 'one from himself, relating his proceedings and suffer! ngs in the cause of what he thought justice and right. Upon this his father desired him to take every step he might think proper, to assert and maintain his own and his fellowstudents claims; and accordingly Mr. Robertson went up to London, and presented a memorial to John duke of Argyle, containing the claims of the students of the university of Glasgow, their proceedings in the vindication of them, and his own particular sufferings in the cause. The duke received him very graciously, but said, that “he was little acquainted with things of this sort;” and advised him “to apply to his brother Archibald earl of Hay, who was better versed in such matters than he.” He then waited on lord Hay, who, upon reading the representation of the case, said “he would consider of it.” And, upon consideration of it, he was so affected, that he applied to the king for a commission to visit the university of Glasgow, with full power to examine into and rectify all abuses therein. In the summer of 1726, the earl of Hay with the other visitors repaired to Glasgow, and, upon a full examination into the several injuries and abuses complained of, they restored to the students the right of electing their rector; recovered the right of the university to send two gentlemen, upon plentiful exhibitions, to Baliol college in Oxford; took off the expulsion of Mr. Robertson, and ordered that particularly to be recorded in the proceedings of the commission; annulled the election uf the rector who had been named by the principal; and assembled the students, who immediately chose the master of Ross, son of lord Ross, to be their rector, &c. These things so affected Mr* Sterling, that he died soon after; but the university revived, and has since continued in a most flourishing condition.

Mr. Robertson had, in 1723, married Elizabeth, daughter of major William Baxter, who, in his younger years, had been an officer in Ireland in the armies of king Charles II. and James 11.; but was cashiered by the earl of Tyrconnel, James’s lord-lieutenant of Ireland, as a person not to be depended upon in carrying on his and his master’s designs. Captain Baxter upon this repaired to London, and complained of it to the duke of Ormond. His father was at that time steward to the duke’s estate. His grace, who was then joined with other English noblemen in a correspondence with the prince of Orange, recommended him to that prince, who immediately gave him a company in his own forces. In this station he returned to England with the prince at the revolution, and acted his part vigorously in bringing about that great event. While the captain was in Holland, he wrote that remarkable letter to Dr. Burnet, afterwards bishop of Salisbury, which is inserted in the bishop’s life at the end of the “History of his own Times.” By this lady, who was extremely beautiful in her person, but much more so in her mind, Mr. Robertson had one and twenty children. There is a little poem written by him eight years after their marriage, and inscribed to her, upon her needle-work, inserted in the Gent. Mag. 1736. In 1743, Mr. Robertson obtained the bishop’s leave to nominate a curate at Ravilly, and to reside for some time in Dublin, for the education of his children. Here he was immediately invited to the cure of St. Luke’s parish; aud in this he continued five years, and then returned to Ravilly in 1748, the town air not agreeing with him. While he was in the cure of St. Luke’s, he, together with Mr. Kane Percival, then curate of St. Michan’s, formed a scheme to raise a fund for the support of widows and children of clergymen of the diocese of Dublin, which hath since produced very happy effects. In 1758 he lost his wife. In 1759 Dr. Richard Robinson was translated from the see of Killala to that of Ferns; and, in his visitation that year, he took Mr. Robertson aside, and told him, that the primate, Dr. Stone (who had been bishop of Ferns, and had kept up a correspondence with Mr. Robertson), had recommended him to his care and protection, and that he might therefore expect every thing in his power. Accordingly, the first benefice that became vacant in his lordship’s presentation was offered td him, and he thankfully accepted it. But, before he could be collated to it, he had the “Free and Candid Disquisitions” put into his hands, which he had never seen before. This inspired him with such doubts as made him defer his attendance on the good bishop. His lordship wrote to him again to come immediately for institution. Upon this, Mr. Robertson wrote him the letter which is at the end of a little book that he published some years after, entitled, “An Attempt to explain the words of Reason, Substance, Person, Creeds, Orthodoxy, Catholic Church, Subscription, and Index Expurgatorius;” in which letter Mr. Robertson returned his lordship the most grateful thanks for his kindness, but informed him that he could not comply with the terms required by law to qualify him for such preferment. However, Mr. Robertson continued at Ravilly performing his duty only, thenceforward, he omitted the Athanasian creed, &c. This gave o(Ferice and, therefore, he thought it the honestest course to resign all his benefices together, which he did in 1764; and, in 1766, he published his book by way of apology to his friends for what he had done; and soon after left Ireland, and returned to London. In 1767, Mr. Robertson presented one of his books to his old Alma Mater the university of Glasgow, and received in return a most obliging letter, with the degree of D. D. In 1768 the mastership of the freegrammar school at Wolverhampton in Staffordshire becoming vacant, the company of Merchant-Tailors, the patrons, unanimously conferred it on him. In 1772 he was chosen one of the committee to carry on the business of the society of clergymen, &c. in framing and presenting the famous petition to the House of Commons of Great Britain, praying to be relieved from the obligation of subscribing assent and consent to the thirty-nine articles, and all and every thing contained in the book of common-prayer. After this he lived several years at Wolverhampton, performing the duties of his office, in the greatest harmony with all sorts of people there; and died, of the gout in his stomach, at Wolverhampton, May 20, 1783, in the 79th year of his age; and was buried in the churchyard of the new church there.

"He appointed a day for all his nearest relations to meet him at the apartment over the gate-way of St. James’s palace, belonging to Mr. Pointz, who was married to lord Peterborough’s niece, and at that time preceptor to prince William, afterwards duke of Cumberland. Lord Peterborough also appointed lady Peterborough to be there at the same time. When they were all assembled, he began a most eloquent oration, enumerating all the virtues and perfections of Mrs. A. Robinson, and the rectitude of her conduct during his long acquaintance with her, for which he acknowledged his great obligations and sincere attachment, declaring he was determined to do her that justice which he ought to have done long ago, which was presenting her to all his family as his wife. He spoke this harangue with so much energy, and in parts so pathetically, that lady Peterborough, not being apprised of his intentions, was so affected that she fainted away in the midst of the company.

, archbishop of Armagh, a-nd lord Rokeby, was the immediate descendant of the Robinsons of Rokeby, in the north riding of the county of York, and was born in 1709. He was educated at Westminsterschool, whence he was elected to Christ church, Oxford, in 1726. After continuing his studies there for some years, and taking his master’s degree in 1733, Dr. Blackburn, archbishop of York, appointed him his chaplain, and collated him first to the rectory of Elton, in the east riding of Yorkshire, and next to the prebend of Grindal, in the cathedral of York. In 1751 he attended the duke of Dorset, lord lieutenant of Ireland, to that kingdom, as his first chaplain, and the same year was promoted to the bishopric of Kiilala. A family connexion with the earl of Holdernesse, who was secretary of state that year, with the earl of Sandwich and other noblemen related to him, opened the f.iirest prospects of attaining to the first dignity in the Irish church. Accordingly, in 1759, he was translated to the united sees of Leighlin and Ferns, and in 1761 to Kildare. The duke of Northumberland being appointed to the lieutenancy of Ireland in 1765, Dr. Robinson was advanced to the primacy of Armagh, and made lord almoner and vicechancellor of the university of Dublin. When lord Harcourt was- lord-lieutenant of Ireland in 1777, the king was pleased, by privy- seal at St. James’s, Feb. 6, and by patent at Dublin the 26th of the same month, to create him baron Rokeby of Armagh, with remainder to Matthew Robinson of West Lay ton, esq. and in 1783 he was appointed prelate to the order of St. Patrick. On the death of the duke of Rutland, lord-lieutenant of Ireland, in 1787, he was nominated one of the lords justices of that kingdom. Sir William Robiuson, his brother, dying in 1785, the primate succeeded to the title of baronet, and was the survivor in the direct male line of the Robinsons of Rokeby, being the eighth in descent from William of Kendal. His grace died at 1 Clifton, near Bristol, in the end of October, 1794.

He was designed by his parents for the clerical profession, but though he was deeply impressed with the truths of religion, he had some scruples which induced him to decline entering into orders. His friends, therefore, began to consider of some other situation in which his mathematical talents might be turned to advantage. Dr* Dick, professor of natural philosophy, being in want of an assistant, Mr Robison, then not quite nineteen years of age, was recommended by Dr. Adam Smith as a proper person for discharging that office. Dr. Dick thought him too young, but joined with Dr. Sirnson in recommending him to Dr. Blair, prebendary of Westminster, whom they understood to be in quest of a young man to go to sea with Edward duke of York, and read mathematics with his royal highness. On reaching London, however, this flattering prospect was found to have no solid foundation, the duke of York having no intention of going to sea. Mr. Robison, however, to whom a return to Glasgow would have been very disagreeable, embraced an opportunity which now offered itself, of going to sea as mathematical tutor to Mr. Knowles, eldest son of admiral Knowles, and the duke of York’s intended companion. His pupil being appointed lieutenant on board the Royal William, Mr. Robison, at his own request, was rated midshipman. Here he spent the three following years, which he often spoke of as the happiest of his life. He devoted himself particularly to the study of the art of seamanship, and was sometimes employed in making surveys of coasts and rivers.

In this capacity his merit attracted the notice of lord Anson, then at the head of the Admiralty-board, by whom he was sent, in 1762, to Jamaica, in order to make trial of Harrison’s time-keeper. But on returning from this mission he found his prospects of advancement completely clouded: lord Anson was dead; the vessel, on board of which was his pupil Mr. Knowles, had foundered at sea, and all on board perished; and admiral Knowles had retired to the country inconsolable for the loss of his son. He determined, therefore, to return to Glasgow, and admiral Knowles soon after placed under his care his remaining son, who was afterwards rear-admiral sir Charles Knowles. At Glasgow Mr. Robison renewed his studies with great assiduity, but his instructors were changed. Dr. Simson was dead and Dr. Adam Smith had left Glasgow to travel with the late duke of Buccleugh; but the place of the latter was well supplied by Dr. Reid, and Mr. Robison had also an opportunity of attending the lectures of Mr. Millar on civil law, and Dr. Black on chemistry. When, Dr, Black, in 1769, was called to Edinburgh, Mr. Hobison was appointed to succeed him as lecturer on chemistry, and read lectures on that science with great applause for three years.

In 1770, sir Charles Knowles having gone to Russia, on the invitation of the empress Catherine, then intent on the improvement of her. marine, he invited Mr. Robison to accompany him as his official secretary, with a salary of 250l. a-year. As he was still attached to the navy and to his former patron, and as, though lecturing on chemistry, he did not enjoy the rank of professor, Mr. Robison made no hesitation in accepting the proposal. His conduct at St. Petersburgh, and the knowledge which he had there occasion to display, -seems to have powerfully recommended him to the board of admiralty; for in 1772 he was appointed inspector-general of the corps of marine cadets, an academy consisting of upwards of four hundred young gentlemen and scholars under the tuition of about forty teachers. As the person who fills this office has the rank of lieutenant-colonel, it became necessary, by the customs of Russia, that Mr. Robison should prove himself a gentleman, or what is there called a dvoranin, and the proof required was entered on record. In this office his employment consisted in visiting daily every class of the academy; in receiving weekly reports from each master, stating the diligence and progress of every person in his class; and twice a year, in advancing the young gentlemen into the higher classes, according to their respective merits. Of these he was considered as the sole judge, and from his sentence there lay no appeal. He lived in terms of the utmost harmony with general Kutusoff, who was military head of the academy, and held the third place in the admiralty college. By him all Mr. Robison' s measures were supported, and he was even introduced to the notice of the grand duke, as an admirer of the Russian language, which his imperial highness patronized.

But although his situation was thus honourable and advantageous, he felt that something more was necessary to render it comfortable. He could not but regret his distance from his native country, and residence among a people who, though rapidly improving, were still tinctured with barbarism. His appointment also attached him, not to the capital, but to Cronstadt, where he was nearly cut off from all enlightened society. Receiving an invitation, therefore, from the magistrates and town-council tg fi place of professor of natural philosophy in the university of Edinburgh, he gladly removed to that city. The grand duke parted with him reluctantly, and requested, when he left the academy, that he would take with him some young men of talents from the corps of cadets; and he promised him a pension of 400 rubles (80l.) a-year. That pension was regularly paid only during the three years that the gentlemen whom he selected resided in Edinburgh; it was then discontinued, it is believed, because he did not continue a correspondence with the academy, and communicate all the British improvements in marine education.

, prince of Marsillac, and governor of Poitou, was born in 1613. He was the son of Francis, the first duke of Rocbefoucault, and was distinguished equally by his courage and his wit. At the instigation of the duchess de Longueville, to whom he had been long attached, he engaged in the civil wars, and signalized himself, particularly at the battle of St. Antoine. After his return his house became the rendezvous of all the wits of Paris, Racine, Boileau, &c. who were captivated by the charms of his conversation. He died at Paris in 1680, aged seventy-seven. As a writer he is chiefly known by a small work, which has often been reprinted in this country, in English, entitled “Maxims,” of which Voltaire has not scrupled so say, that it contributed more than any performance to form the taste of the French nation, and give it a true relish of propriety and correctness. “Though there is,” continues he, “but one truth running through this whole piece, namely, that ‘ selflove is the spring of all our actions and determinations;’ yet this thought presents itself under such a variety of forms as never fail to strike with new surprise. It is not so properly a hook itself, as a set of materials to embellish a book. This little collection was much read and admired; it accustomed our authors to think, and to comprise their thoughts in a lively, correct, and delicate turn of phrase; which was a merit utterly unknown to any European writer before him since the revival of letters.” It has, however, been mostly admired by those who entertain an unfavourable opinion of mankind, and who have been soured by disappointment and misfortune, particularly by disappointed ambition. Chesterfield and Swift are on the side of Rochefoucault. We have also of this noble author “Memoires de la Regence de la Reine Anne d'Autriche,” written with great sense and a deep penetration.

, a celebrated naval commander, was the second son of Henry Rodney, esq. of Walton on Thames, and Mary, eldest daughter and coheir to sir Henry Newton, knight, envoy- extraordinary to Genoa, LL. D. judge of the high-court of admiralty, and chancellor of the diocese of London. His father, as a naval officer, commanded the yacht in which king George I. attended by the duke of Chandos, used to embark in going to or coming from Hanover, and in consequence, asked leave that his son might be called George Brydges. He was born in Dec. 1717. At the desire, or by the command, of his royal and noble god-fathers, he entered early into the navy, and in 1742 he was lieutenant in the Namur, commanded by admiral Matthews. In November of the same year, he was promoted by the admiral to the command of ili Plymouth, of shrty gtttts; on returning home he was removed into the Sheerness, a small frigate; and in 174i he was npp.iinied to the command of the Lucliowcastle, of furty-iour guns. In this ship he does not appear to have continued long, for in May 1746, he was captain of the Eagle, a new ship of sixty guns, then employed as a cruiser on the Irish station. While here he captured two large privateers. He continued in the Eagle during the remainder of the war, and was one of the commanders under the orders of rear-admiral Hawke, when in 1747 he defeated L'Etendiere’s squadron. On this occasion capt. Rodney behaved with much spirit, and may be said to have then laid the foundation of that popularity he afterwards in so high a degree possessed. On the conclusion of the war he was, in March 1749, appointed to the Rainbow, a fourth rate, and in May following was nominated governor and commander-in-chief in and over the island of Newfoundland. Immediately afterwards he proceeded thither with the small squadron annually sent there in time of peace, for the protection of the fishery. Some time after his return in 1753 he married Miss Compton, daughter of Charles Compton, esq. and sister to Spencer, then earl of Northampton. In 1757 he was engaged, under the command of admirals Hawke and Boscawen, to attempt a descent on the coast of France, near Rochefort; and in 1759 he was advanced rear-admiral of the blue. In this same year he was sent to bombard Havre de Grace, where a large force was collected for the purpose of attempting an invasion of this country. He executed the trust committed to him so completely, that the town itself was several times on fire, and the magazines of stores and ammunition burnt with fury upwards of six hours, notwithstanding the exertions used to extinguish it. Thus had admiral Rodney the happiness of totally frustrating the design of the French court; and so completely did he destroy their preparations, that the fort itself, as a naval arsenal, was no longer during the war in a state to annoy Great Britain. In 1761 admiral Rodney was very instrumental in the capture of the islands of St Pierre, Granada, St. Lucia, and St. Vincent, when the whole Caribbees came into the possession of the English. For his skill and bravery in the war, he was, after the conclusion of it, raised to the dignity of a baronet. In 1768, after an expensive, and to sir George Rodney a ruinous, contest with Mr. Howe, he was elected member of parliament for Northampton. In the month of October 1770 he was progressively advanced to be vice-admiral of the white and red squadrons, and in the month of August 1771, to be rear-admiral of Great Britain. In the very arly part of this year he resigned the mastership of Greenwich hospital, to which he had been appointed in 1765, and was immediately after made commander-in-chief on the Jamaica station, whither he repaired, having his flag on board the Princess Amelia of 80 guns. The appointment of this ship to that service was intended as a particular and pointed compliment, it being extremely unusual to send a three-decked ship on that station, except in time of actual war. It is said the command in India was offered to him, which he declined, entertaining hopes of being appointed governor of Jamaica in case of the death of sir William Trelawney; but in this he was disappointed. After his return to England at the expiration of the time allotted for the continuance of his command, he retired to France, where he lived some years in obscurity, hoping to retrieve the losses he had suffered at the Northampton election. It is said that the French king wished to take advantage of his pecuniary embarrassments, and through the duke de Biron made him the most unbounded offers if he would quit the English for the French service. In reply to this proposal he said,“My distresses, sir, it is true, have driven me from the bosom of my country, but no temptation can estrange me from her service. Had this offer been voluntary on your part, I should have deemed it an insult, but I am glad to learn it proceeds from a source that can do no wrong.” The duke was so struck with the patriotism of the admiral, that he became attached to him as a friend, and is said to have advanced him a sum of money to revisit England, and solicit a command.

Before this event the French had united with the Americans in a war against this country, and about the close of 1779, the chief command of the Leeward islands was given to sir George Rodney, upon which he hoisted his flag on board the Sandwich. From this time he was very successful against his majesty’s enemies, but our limits do not allow us to particularize all the advantages that resulted from his services during the remainder of the war of which we are speaking. In the first year he had done enough to obtain a vote of thanks from the House of Lords, and the freedom of the cities of London and Edinburgh; but his great triumph was on the 12th of April, 1782, in an engagement in the West Indies with count de Grasse. This battle was fought among the islands of Guadaloupe, Dominique, the Saintes, and Marigalante. As soon as the day broke admiral Rodney threw out the signal for close action, and every vessel obeyed it most scrupulously. The British line was formed at the distance of one cable’s length between each ship. As the ships came up separately, they ranged close alongside their opponents, passing along the enemy for that purpose, giving and receiving, while thus taking their stations, a most dreadful and tremendous fire. The action continued in this manner till noon, when admiral Rodney resolved to carry into execution a manoeuvre which he expected would gain him a complete and decisive victory: for this purpose, in his own ship, the Formidable, supported by the Namur, the Duke, and the Canada, he bore down with all the sail set on the enemy’s line, within three ships of the centre, and succeeded in breaking through it in a most masterly style. As soon as he had accomplished this, the other ships of his division followed him, and they all wore round, doubled on the enemy, and thus they placed between two fires those vessels which, by the first part of the manoeuvre, they had cut off from the rest of the fleet. As soon as admiral Rodney and the vessels which followed him, wore, he made the signal for the van to tack, by which means they gained the windward of the French, and completed the disorder and confusion in which the breaking of the line had thrown them. One consequence of the breaking of the line was, that opportunities were given for desperate actions between single ships. The whole loss of the enemy on this occasion amounted to eight ships; one had been sunk, and another blown up after she had been taken, and six ships remained in possession of the conquerors. It was esteemed remarkably fortunate, and glorious for the victors, that de Grasse’s ship, the Ville de Paris, was the only first rate man-of-war that had ever, at that time, been taken and carried into port by any commander of any nation. And this ship was on the present occasion fought so well, that when it struck there were but three men left alive and unhurt on the upper deck.

In 1620, he was elected a burgess for Cirencester in Gloucestershire; and, the year following, sent ambassador to the grand stignor; in which station he continued under the sultans Osman, Mustapha, and Amurath IV. In his passage to Constantinople, he wrote a letter to Villiers duke of Buckingham, then lord high admiral, complaining of the great increase of pirates in the Mediterranean sea; and, during his embassy, sent “A true and faithful relation to his majesty and the prince of what hath lately happened in Constantinople, concerning the death of sultan Osman, and the setting up of Mustapha his uncle,” which was printed at London in 1622, 4to. He kept a very curious account of his negociations at the Porte, which remained in manuscript till 1740, when it was published, by the society for promoting learning, under this title “The Negotiations of Sir Thomas Roe, in his Embassy to the Ottoman Porte, from the year 1621 to 1628 inclusive; containing a great variety of curious and important matters, relating not only to the affairs of the Turkish empire, but also to those of the other states of Europe in that period: his correspondences with the most illustrious persons, for dignity or character, as, with the queen of Bohemia, Bethlem Gabor prince of Transylvania, and other potentates of different nations, &c. and many useful and instructive particulars, as well in relation to trade and commerce as to subjects of literature; as, ancient manuscripts, coins, inscriptions, and other antiquities,” folio.

When the business at Carron sunk by degrees into a matter of ordinary detail, and afforded less scope for Dr. Roebuck’s peculiar talents, he was unfortunately tempted lo engage in a new and different undertaking, from the failure of which he suffered a reverse of fortune, was deprived of the advantages resulting from his other works, and during the remainder of his life became subjected to much anxiety and disappointment. This was his becoming lessee of the duke of Hamilton’s extensive coal and salt work* at Borrowstounness. The coal there was represented to exist in great abundance, and understood to be of superior quality; and as Dr. Roebuck had made himself acquainted with the most improved methods of working coal in Kngiand, and then not practised in Scotland, he had little doubt of this adventure turning out beneficial and highly lucrative. In this, however, he was cruelly disappointed; and the result was, that after many years of labour and industry, there were sunk in this project, not only his own, and the considerable fortune brought him by his wife, but the regular profits of his more successful works: and along therewith, what distressed him above every thing, great sums of money borrowed from his relations and friends, which he was never able to repay; not to mention that from the same cause, he was, during the last twenty years of his life, subject to a constant succession of hopes and disappointments, to a course of labour and drudgery ill suited to his taste and turn of mind, to the irksome and teazing business of managing and studying the humours of working colliers. But all these difficulties his persevering spirit would have overcome, if the never-ceasing demands of his coal-works, after having exhausted the profits, had not also compelled him to withdraw his capital from all his different works in succession: from the refining work at Birmingham, the vitriol work at Preston-pans, the iron works at Carron, as well as to part with his interest in the project of improving the steam-engine, in which he had become a partner with Mr. Watt, the original inventor, and from which he had reason to hope for future emolument.

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

, peer of France, prince of Leon, colonel general of the Swiss and Grisons, one of the greatest men France produced in his age, was born August 21, 1572, at the castle of Blein, in Bretany. He distinguishcd himself at the siege of Amiens when but sixteen, in presence of Henry IV. who had a sincere regard for him, and alter the death of that prince he hccame chief of the French protestants, to whom he rendered the most important services, both at the head of their armies, and in negociations. He fought with success in Holland, Germany, Italy, and France, and carried on three wars against Louis XIII. in favour of the protestants; the last, however, ended to the advantage of the catholics, in the capture of llochelle. But notwithstanding the consternation into which this event threw the duke’s party, he supported himself by those copious resources with which his prudence furnished him, refusing to surrender but on advantageous terms, and these were granted by the peace of 1629. The civil wars with the protestants being thus terminated, he regained the favour of Louis XIII. but not choosing to live at court, retired to Venice, and was chosen by that republic for their generalissimo, after the unfortunate battle of Valleggio, against the Imperialists, but the treaty of Querasque, concluded June '2[, 1631, rendered his plans useless. The king of France afterwards employed him as ambassador extraordinary to the Orisons, to assist them in reducing to obedience the Valteline, and counties of Bormio, and Chiavenes, which were supported in rebellion by the Spaniards and Imperialists. The Orisons immediately declared him their general, and their choice was confirmed by Louis XIII. who appointed him in 1632, ambassador extraordinary to the Helvetic body; but early in 1635, he received orders to return to Venice, and having staid there some months, was sent back to the Orisons, and seized the passages of the Valteline, took Bormio, Chiavenes, and Riva, and defeated the Germans and Spaniards. The Grisons having rebelled some time after because France delayed to withdraw its forces, he made a new treaty with them March 26, 1637, which did not please the court, and this circumstance obliged him to retire to Geneva, that he might avoid the resentment of cardinal Richelieu; but he left that city in January 1638, to join his friend the duke of Saxe Weimar, who was going to engage the Imperialists near Rhinfeld. The duke of Jiohan placed himself at the head of the Nassau regiment, broke through the enemies’ ranks, was woundcd, Feb. 28, 1638, and died of his wounds, April 13 following, aged fifty-nine. He was the author of many works, among which are, 1. “Memoirs,” the most complete edition of which is in 2 vols. 12mo, containing the transactions of trance from 16 10 to 1629. 2. “Les intérésts des Princes,” 12mo. 3. “Le parfait Capitaine, ou P Abregé des Guerres des Commentaires de Cesar,” 12mo. 4. “Memoires” and Letters, relative to the war of the Valtelines, 3 vols. 12mo; vol. I. contains the “Memoirs;” the two others, the “Pieces Justificatives,” the greatest part of which had never been printed before. From the preface we learn the following anecdote: This nobleman being at Venice, was informed that the grand signor would sell him this kingdom of Cyprus, and grant him the investureof it, on condition of his giving the Porte two hundred thousand crowns, and agreeing to pay an annual tribute of twenty thousand crowns. The duke being a protestant, intended to purchase this island, and settle the protestant families of France and Germany there. He negociated the affair skilfully with the Porte, by means of the patriarch Cyril, with whom he was much connected; but that patriarch’s death, and other unexpected incidents, prevented the execution of his design. The above anecdote originated in the memoirs of the duchess of Rohan, Margaret de Bethune, daughter of the great Sully, who married at Paris, Henry de Rohan, February 7, 1605. This lady, who was a protestant, rendered herself celebrated by her courage. She defended Castres against the marechal de Thémines, 1625, lived in strict conjugal harmony with the duke her husband, and died at Paris, Oct. 22, 1660. The French biographers tell us that all Henry de Rohan’s works are excellent, and extremely proper to form good soldiers: he writes like a great general and able politician, and his letters on the war of the mountains are very instructive. The duke trod in the steps of Sertorius, which he had learned from Plutarch, and the marechal de Catinat trod in those of the duke. To all these uncommon talents, the duke joined great sweetness of temper, the most affable and pleasing manners, and a degree of generosity seldom seen. He discovered neither pride, ambition, nor selfish views; and frequently said, that glory and zeal for the public welfare, never encamp where private interest is the commander. We have two good lives of this great man, one by Fauvelet du Toe, Paris, 1666, 12mo, the other by the Abbé Perau, Paris, 1767, 2 vols. 12mo. Some notice may be taken of Benjamin de Rohan, brother of the preceding, who supported the duke’s undertakings during the protestant war, after having learned the military art in Holland under prince Maurice of Nassau. He made himself master of Lower Poiton, 1622, and went into England soon after to solicit help for the Roohellers. In 1625, he took the isle of Rhe, and ravaged the whole coast from the mouth of the Garonne to that of the Loire, by the capture of several merchant ships. M. Rohan was driven from the isle of Rhe some time after, then from that of Oleron, and forced to retire into England, where he was active in procuring the succour sent to Rochelle; but that city being taken, notwithstanding these succours, he would not return to France, and died in England 1630, leaving no children.

, sister of the duke de Rohan, deserves also to be mentioned as a zealous supporter of the reformed religion during the civil wars, in which period she sustained with great courage the hardships of the siege of Rochelie, and, with her mother, refused to be comprehended in the capitulation, choosing rather to remain a prisoner of war. She was celebrated among her party for her piety and courage, and generally respected for her learning and capacity. She was also admired for her poetical talents; particularly for a poem written on the death of Henry IV. of France. She studied the Old Testament in the original language, and used in her devotions the Hebrew Psalms. She died unmarried, September 20, 1646, at Paris, in the sixty-second year of her age. The celebrated Anna Maria Schurman addressed some letters to this lady, which are in the collection of her works.

The following catalogue of Mr. Rolt’s publications, is subjoined to his proposals in 1769. But many of them were published without his name, and in weekly numbers. In folio, he published, 1. “A Dictionary of Trade and Commerce; dedicated, by permission, to George Lord Anson.” To this Johnson wrote the preface. 2. “Lives of the Reformers dedicated to the Princess Dowager of Wales” a decent compilation, but most valued for a fine set of mezzotinto heads. In quarto, 3. “Life of John earl of Craufurd; dedicated to his grace James duke of Hamilton.” In octavo, &c. 4. <f History of the General War from 1733 to 1748,“4 vols. 1st volume dedicated to admiral Vernon; 2d, to John earl Grenville; 3d, to his grace Charley duke of Marlborough; 4th to George Dunk, earl of Halifax. 5.” Universal Visitor, with several Songs.“(la this he joined with Christopher Smart, as is before-mentioned.) 6.” Account of capt. Northall’s Travels through Italy.“7.” Letters concerning the Antigallican privateer.“8.” Case of Clifford against the Dutch West India Company.“9.” Reply to the Anssver of the Dutch Civilians to Clifford’s Case.“10.” History of England,“4 vols. 11.” History of France,“vol. 12.” History of Egypt,“4 vols. 13.” History of Greece,“6 vols. 14.” Cambria; inscribed to Prince George“(his present majesty.) 15.” Eliza,“an English opera. 16.” Aljnena,“an English opera. 17.” A Monody on the Dqath oC Frederic Priace of Wales.“18.” An Elegiac Ode t* the memory of Edward Augustus, Duke of York.“19.” A Poem on the Death of sir Watkin Williams Wynne, bart.“20.” Shakspeare in Elysium to Mr. Garrick.“21.” The Ancient Rosciad," published in 1753.

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

He painted many pieces for the grand duke and the prince his son, who rewarded him generously. The MafTei carried him to their seat at Volterra, where he painted several pictures, residing there upwards of a year: but literature took up the greatest part of his time, and it was here that he composed his satires, of which there have been several editions.

, a very eminent sculptor, was a native of Lyons in France; but of his early history no memoirs have been discovered. He appears to have come to England, about the time that Rysbrach’s fame was at its height, and became a very formidable rival to that excellent artist, who had at the same time to contend with the growing merit of Scheemaker. Roubiliac is said, however, to have had little business until sir HJdward Walpole recommended him to execute half the busts at Trinity-college, Dublin; and, by the same patron’s interest, he was employed on the fine monument of the general John duke of Argyle, in Westminster-abbey, on which the statue of eloquence is particularly graceful and masterly; but it has been thought that his fame was most completely fixed by his statue of Handel in Vauxhallgardens. Two of his principal works are the monuments of the duke and duchess of Montague in Northamptonshire, well performed and magnificent, although perhapg wanting in simplicity. His statue of George J. in the Senate-bouse at Cambridge, is well executed; as is that of their chancellor, Charles duke of Somerset, except that it is in a Vandyke-dress, which might not be the fault of the sculptor. His statue of sir Isaac Newton, in the chapei of Trinity-college, has always been greatly admired; but lord Orford objects, that the air is a little too pert for so grave a man. This able artist died Jan. 11, 1762, and was buried in the parish of St. Martin’s in the Fields, where he had lived.

, a distinguished French painter, was born at Paris in 1630. His first studies were under the direction of Swanefelt, but he afterwards visited Italy, and accomplished himself in architecture, perspective, and landscape. On his return to Paris he immediately obtained eminence, and was employed at IVLrly. He was truly accomplished in painting edifices from his minute attention to the principles of architecture. After being patronized by Louis XIV. he was compelled to leave his native country on account of his religion, being a strict protestant. Housseau afterwards visited Holland, whence he was invited to England by the duke of Montague, to exert his talents on the magnificent palace at Bloomsbury, now the British museum. Here he painted a great deal; and many of his works are also to be seen at Hampton Court. He died in England in 1694, and was buried in St. Anne’s, Soho.

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

It becomes necessary now to recur to some particulars of Rousseau’s more public and literary life, which was in many respects as censurable as his private. The commencement of his literary career was in 1750. The academy of Dijon had proposed the question, “Whether the revival of the arts and sciences has contributed to the refinement of manners.” Rousseau, it is said, at first inclined to the affirmative side of the question; but Diderot told him it was a kind of pons asinorum, and advised him to support the negative, and he would answer for his success. Nor was he disappointed, for this paradoxical discourse was allowed to be admirably written, and replete with the deepest reasoning, and was publicly crowned with the approbation of the academicians. Several answers appeared Against it, one of which was written by Stanislaus, king of Poland, who was, however, so much an admirer of Rousseau, that when the latter was ridiculed on the stage of Nancy, by Palissot, in his “Comedie des Philosophes,” the king, then duke of Lorraine, deprived Palissot of his place at the academy of Nancy. On this occasion Rousseau, with far more sense, interceded for him, and obtained his restoration. In 1752 Rousseau wrote a comedy entitled “Narcisse, ou PAmant de lui-meme.” He also composed a musical entertainment of “Le Devin du Village,” which was represented with the greatest success at Paris. His next piece was “Lettre sur la Musique Franchise,” which was to prove that the French had no such thing as vocal music, and that, from the defects in their language, they could not have it. This able work so excited the resentment of the French, that he is said to have been burnt in effigy. In 1754- he returned to Geneva, where he abjured the catholic faith, and was restored to the rights of citizenship. He now wrote his e< Discours sur les Causes de l'inegalite parmi les Hommes, et sur TOrigine des Societes.“This endeavour to prove that all mankind are equal has (in the opinion of a modern critic, by no means partial to Rousseau’s character) been much misunderstood by critics, and misrepresented by wits. Even by the author’s confession, it is rather ajeu d'esprit than a philosophical inquiry; for he owns that the natural state, such as he represents it, did probably never take place, and probably never will; and if it had taken place, he seems to think it impossible that mankind should ever have emerged from it without some very extraordinary alteration in the course of nature. He also says that this natural state is not the most advantageous for man; for that the most delightful sentiments of the human mind could not exert themselves till man had relinquished his brutal and solitary nature, and become a domestic animal. At this period, and previous to the establishment of property, he places the age most favourable to human happiness; which is precisely what the poets have done before him, in their descriptions of the golden age. After publishing this rhapsody, Rousseau did not remain long at Geneva, but returned to France, and lived some time at Paris, after which he retired to Montuiorency, and published, in 1758, his” Lettre“to M. D‘Alembert on the design of establishing a theatre at Geneva, which he proved could not be necessary in a place circumstanced as Geneva was. D’Alembert and Marmontel, however, replied, and Voltaire appears from this time to have begun his hatred for Rousseau, with whom he and the rest of the philosophers had hitherto cordially co-operated against the Christian religion. Rousseau wanted that uniform hatred to revealed religion which the others called consistency, and his fancy was apt to ramble bevond the limits they had set. In 1760 he published his 'celebrated novel entitled” Lettres de clt ux A mans,“c. bui generally known by the title of” Julie, ou la Nnuvelie Heloise.“This epistolary romance, of which the plofc is ill-managed, and the arrangement bad, like all other works of genius, has its beauties as well as its defects. Some of the letters are, indeed, admirable, both for style and sentiment, but none of the personages are reaily interesting. The character of St. Preux is weak, and often forced. Julia is an assemblage of tenderness and pity, of elevation af soul, and of coquetry, of natural parts and pedancry. Wolmar is a violent man, and almost beyond the limits of nature. In fine, when he wishes to change his style, and adopt that of the speaker, he does not long support it, and every attempt embarrasses the author and cools the reader. In this novel, however, Rousseau’s talent of rendering every thing problematical, appears very conspicuous, as, in his arguments in favour of, and against, duelling, which afford an apology for suicide, and a just condemnation of it; of his facility in palliating the crime of adultery, aud his strong reasons to make it abhorred; on the one hand, in declamations against social happiness, on the other in transports in favour of humanity; here in violent rhapsodies against philosophers; there by a rage for adopting their opinions; the existence of God is attacked by sophistry, and atheists confuted by the most irrefragable arguments; the Christian religion combated by the most specious objections, and celebrated by the most sublime eulogies. Yet in the preface to this work the author attempts to justify his consistency; he says public spectacles are necessary for great cities, and romances for a corrupted people.” I have,“he adds,” viewed the manners of my age, and have published these letters. Why did I not live at a time when I ought to have thrown them into the fire?“He affects also to say that they were not intended for an extensive circulation, and that they will suit but few readers. With regard to their effects on the female sex, he pretends to satisfy his conscience with saying” No chaste young woman ever reads romance^; and I have given this book a decisive title, that on opening it a reader may know what to expect. She who, notwithstanding, shall dare to read a single page, is undone; but let her not impute her ruin to me the mischief was done before.“Such is the impudence of this man, who had made his work as seductive as possible, and would have been greatly mortified if it had not produced its effect. Whoever, indeed, reads his” Confessions“will see that sensuality was, first and last, his predominant vice, and that moral corruption became early familiar to him. The only wonder is, that he should ever have been considered as a moral teacher, because, in order to introduce his depraved sophistry with more effect, he mixed with it some moral lessons. Yet there was a time when this was a favourite work even in our country, and it is to be feared, has been the pattern of many others, which, although written with less ability, have been encouraged in the same circles which once gave a fashion to Rousseau. His next attempt was to recommend republicanism in a work entitled” Du Contrat Social, ou Principes du Droit Politiqtie,“in which he bore his part, along with the Encyclopaedists, in exciting those awful delusions which produced the French revolution and all its disastrous consequences. It was, however, less cautious than some of his former productions, and was immediately prohibited in France and Switzerland; and hence his lasting enmity to all existing establishments, civil and religious, which brought on what he and his friends were pleased to consider as persecution. This appeared particularly in his” Emilie, ou de l'Education,“which was published in 1762. In this work, with many remarks that may be useful, there are others so mischievous and impious, that whenever it produces an effect, it must be of the worst kind. It was not, however, his dogmas on education only, which excited the public hostility to this work, so much as his insolent declamation against all which the world had agreed to hold sacred, mixed, as in his former novel, with an affected admiration of the morals of the gospel, and the character of its founder; and it is remarkable that, in this last condescension, he so much displeased his former colleagues, Voltaire, D'Alembert, &c. that they joined the public voice, although from different and concealed motives. In truth, they thought, like others, that there was too much of an insane inconsistency about Rousseau, and that no party could rank him among its supporters. In the mean time, as soon as published, the French parliament condemned this book, and entered into a criminal prosecution against the author, which forced him to a precipitate retreat. He directed his steps to his native country, but Geneva shut her gates against him, and both at Paris and Geneva, the” Emile“was burnt by the common hangman. At length he was for a time allowed to take shelter in Switzerland, where he published a letter to the archbishop of Paris, in answer to his tnandement for the burning of the” Emile;“and also his” JLettres de la Montagne,“in which occurs the following almost blasphemous paragraph:” How,“says he,” can I enter into a justification of this work? I, who think that I have effaced by it the faults of my whole life; I, who place the evils it has drawn upon me as a balance to those which I have committed; I who, filled with confidence, hope one day to say to the supreme Arbiter, ‘ Deign in thy clemency to judge a weak mortal:’ I have, it is true, done much ill upon earth, but I have published this writing.“In these letters too, he continued his hostility to revealed religion, in a manner that excited against him great indignation among the clergy of Neufchatel; and in September 1765, the populace attacked his house and his person, and with much difficulty he reached Strasburg in a very destitute condition, where he waited till the weather permitted, and then set out for Paris, and appeared in the habit of an Armenian. The celebrated Hume at this time resided in Paris, and being applied to in favour of Rousseau, undertook to find him an asylum in England, to which he accordingly conducted him in the beginning of the year 1766, and provided him with an agreeable situation. But Rousseau, whose vanity and perverse temper were ungovernable, and who thought he was not received in this country with the respect due to the first personage in Europe, which he conceived himself to be, took it in his head that Hume was in league with the French philosophers to injure his lame, and after abusing his benefactor in a letter, in the most gross manner, and even refusing a pension from the crown, left England in 1767, and went to France. At this period he published his” Dictionnaire de Musique.“Of this work Dr. Burney, after pointing out some defects, says, that” more good taste, intelligence, and extensive views are to be found in his original articles, not only than in any former musical dictionary, but in all the books on the subject of music which the literature of France can boast. And his ` Lettre sur la Musique Frangois,' may be safely pronounced the best piece of musical criticism that has ever been produced in any modern language. It must, however, be confessed, that his treatment of French music is very sarcastic, not to say contemptuous; but the music, the national character avantageux, and exclusive admiration of their own music, required strong Ian* guage. It had been proved long since, that they were not to be laughed out of their bad taste in any one of the fine arts: the national architecture, painting, and sculpture, were, in general, bad, and not what a traveller returning from Italy could bear to look at: though there have been now and then individual French artists of every kind, who have travelled and studied antiquity as well as the great masters of the Italian school; and it is now said, that at the Institute they are trying seriously to correct their errors, and to establish a classical taste throughout the empire."

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

After continuing about four years with Venius, the latter, who admired his progress, candidly told him that he could no farther advance it, and that he must visit Italy. This was Rubens’s secret wish, but the means by which he accomplished it have been variously represented. Sandrart, who was intimately acquainted with him, and accompanied him when he travelled through Holland, tells us that the archduke Albert, governor of the Netherlands, conceived so high an opinion of Rubens, from the accounts he had received of his superior talents, that he engaged him in his service, employed him to paint several fine designs for his own palace, and recommended him in the most honourable manner to the duke of Mantua, in whose court he might have access constantly to an admirable collection of paintings and antique statues, and have an opportunity of improving himself by studying as well as copying the former, and designing after the latter. On his arrival at Mantua he was received with a degree of distinction worthy of his merit; and while he continued there, he added considerably to his knowledge, though he attached himself in a more particular manner to the style of colouring peculiar to the Venetian school. From Mantua he visited Rome, Venice, and other cities of Italy, and studied the works of the greatest painters, from the time of Raphael to his own, and accomplished himself in colouring, by the accurate observations he made on the style of Titian and Paolo Veronese. It has been objected, however, that he neglected to refine his taste as much as he ought by the antique, though most of the memorable artists in painting had sublimed their own ideas of grace, expression, elegant simplicity, beautiful proportion, and nature, principally by their making those antiques their perpetual studies and models.

On his return to Mantua, he painted three magnificent pictures for the church of the Jesuits, which, in point of execution and freedom of force in effect, rank nearly among his best productions. His patron, wishing to have copies of some of the most celebrated pictures at Rome, sent Rubens thither for that purpose, which while he performed with great skill, he employed no less diligence in studying the originals. In 1605, he was honoured with one of those mixed commissions, of statesman and artist, with which he was frequently entrusted, and which place the various powers of Rubens in a very singular light. This was no less than an embassy from Mantua to the court of Spain. Carrying with him some magnificent presents for the duke of Lerma, the favourite minister of Philip III. he painted at the same time the picture of this monarch, and received from him such flattering marks of distinction, as probably facilitated the political purpose of his errand. Soon after his return to Mantua, he again visited Rome, and there and at Genoa painted some pictures for the churches, which greatly advanced his reputation. On the death of his mother, whom he appears to have deeply regretted, he formed the design of settling in Italy, bnt by the persuasion of the archduke Albert and the Infanta Isabella, was induced to take up his residence at Antwerp. Here he married his first wife, Elizabeth Brants, and built a magnificent house, which he enriched with the choicest specimens of the antique, and with valuable pictures.

In 1620 he received a commission from Mary de Medici, to adorn the gallery of the palace of the Luxembourg, for which he executed a vvellfknown series of paintings, exhibiting the principal events of the life of that princess. The whole were completed in three years, an astonishing instance both of art and labour. It was at this period he became known to the duke of Buckingham, who was then on a tour with prince Charles. He afterwards became the purchaser of Rubens’s rich museum of works of art, for which he is said to have given 10,000l. sterling.

On the return of Rubens to Antwerp, he was honoured with several conferences with the Infanta Isabella, and was by her dispatched on a political mission to the court of Madrid, where he arrived in 1628, and was most graciously received by Philip IV. He acquitted himself in his novel cap K-ity to the satisfaction of that monarch, and his minister, the duke de Olivares, by both of whom he was highly esteemed; and while his talents as a diplomatist met with the success they merited, those of the painter were not neglected.

The duke de Olivares had just completed the foundation t?f a convent of Carmelites, at the small town of Loeches, near Madrid, and the king, as a mark of his favour to the minister, commissioned liubens to paint four pictures for their church, which he executed in his grandest style, and the richest glow of his colouring. He also painted eight grand pictures for the great saloon of the palace at Madrid, which are regarded among the most brilliant of his productions. Their subjects were, the Rape of the Sabines the battle between the Romans and Sabines the Bath of Diana; Perseus and Andromeda; the Rape of Helen the Judgment of Paris; Juno, Minerva, and Venus; and the Triumph of Bacchus. He also painted a large portrait of the king on horseback, with other figures; and a picture of the martyrdom of the apostle St. Andrew, which was in the church dedicated to that saint. For these extraordinary productions he was richly rewarded* received the honour of knighthood, and was presented with the golden, key as gentleman of the chamber to the king. In 1629 he returned to Flanders, and thus, in the short space of little more than nine months, he designed and executed so extensive a series of pictures; a labour which, to any other artist not possessed of his extraordinary powers, must have required the exertion of many years. When he had rendered the account of his mission to the Infanta, she dispatched him to England, to sound the disposition of the government on the subject of a peace. There for a time he concealed the powers granted to him to negociate upon the subject, which he afterwards produced with success. In the mean time, as Lord Orford observes, neither Charles I. nor Rubens overlooked in the ambassador the talents of the painter. The king engaged him to paint the ceiling of the Banquetting-house, the design the apotheosis of king James I. The original sketch for the middle compartment was long preserved at Houghton. Rubens received 3000l. for this work. During his residence here he painted for the king the St. George, four feet high and seven feet wide. His majesty was represented in the Saint, the queen in Cleodelinde: each figure one foot and a half high: at a distance a view of Richmond and the Thames. In England are still several capital works of Rubens, at Blenheim, Wilton, Easton, &c. He was knighted during his residence here, which Lord Orford supposes did not exceed a year. The French, in their late barbarous irruptions into the Netherlands, robbed Flanders of fifty -two of Rubens’s best pictures, which however have probably since found their way to their former destination.

He left a son Albert Rubens, who was born at Antwerp in 1614, and succeeded his father in his post as secretary to the council, devoting his leisure to literary pursuits. He died in 1657, leaving behind him many works, as monuments of his great learning and sound judgment, of which the following may be mentioned. “Regum et Imperatorum Romanorum Numismata,” which is a commentary on the medals of the duke of Arscbot: “De Re Vestiaria Veterum:” “Dissertatio de Gemma Tiberiana et Augustea de Urbibus Neocoris de natali Die Caesaris Augusti,” which were published by Graevius in the “Thesaurus Antiq. Roman.”

, third son of the king of Bohemia, by the princess Elizabeth, eldest daughter of James I. of England, was born 1619, and educated, like most German princes, for the army and those who have been least inclined to favour him, admit that he was well adapted, both by natural abilities and acquired endowments, to form a great commander. On the commencement of the rebellion, which happened when he was scarcely of age, he offered his services to Charles I. and throughout the whole war behaved with great intrepidity. But his courage was of that kind which is better calculated for attack than defence, and is less adapted to the land service than that of the sea, where precipitate valour, Granger observes, is in its element. He seldom engaged but he gained the advantage, which he generally lost by pushing it too far. He was better qualified to storm a citadel, or even mount a breach, than patiently to sustain a siege, and would have been an excellent assistant to a general of a cooler head. In consideration of his services, for which we refer to the general histories of the times, and on account of his affinity to him, king Charles made him a knight of the garter, and a free denizen, and advanced him to the dignity of a peer of England, by the title of earl of Holdernesse and duke of Cumberland.

After the Restoration, he was invited to return to England, and had several offices conferred upon him. In April 1662, he was sworn a member of the privy-council; and in December following, was admitted a fellow of the Royal Society. In 1666, the king appointed him, in conjunction with the duke of Albemarle, to command the fleet, and he now exhibited all the qualities that are necessary to constitute a great admiral. By his return to the fleet on June 3d, he wrested from the Dutch the only victory they had the appearance of gaining; and on the 24th of the same month, he beat them effectually, pursued them to their own coast, and blocked up their harbour. The great intrepidity which he displayed, in this naval war, was highly and justly celebrated; and in the last Dutch war of that reign he seemed to retain all the activity and fire of his youtb, and defeated the enemy in several engagements. From this time prince Rupert led a retired life, mostly at Windsor-castle, of which he was governor, and spent a great part of his time in the prosecution of chemical and philosophical experiments, as well as the practice of mechanic arts. He delighted in making locks for fire-arms, and was the inventor of a composition called, from him, Prince’s metal. He communicated to the Royal Society his improvements upon gunpowder, by refining the several ingredients, and making it more carefully, which augmented its force, in comparison of ordinary powder, in the proportion often to one. He also acquainted them with an engine he had contrived for raising water, and sent them an instrument for casting any platform into perspective, and for which they deputed a select committee of their members to return him their thanks. He was the inventor of a gun for discharging several bullets with the utmost speed, facility, and safety; and the Royal Society received from his highness the intimation of a certain method of blowing up rocks in mines, and other subterraneous places. Dr. Hooke has preserved another invention of his for making hail-shot of all sizes. He devised a particular kind of screw, by the means of which, observations taken by a quadrant at sea were secured from receiving any alteration by the unsteadiness of the observer’s hand, or through the motion of the ship. It was said that he had also, among other secrets, that of melting or running black lead, like a metal, into a mould, and reducing it again into its original form.

After the restoration of king Charles II. the earl of Bedford, notwithstanding his past conduct, was so far in his favour, that at the solemnity of his coronation, on April 23, 1661, he had the honour to carry St. Edward’s scepter; and, on May 29, 1672, was elected a knight of the most noble order of the garter. When the prince and princess of Orange came to the throne, he was sworn one of their privy council and at their coronation, on April 11, 1689, carried the queen’s scepter with the dove. They constituted his lordship, on May 10, 1689, lord lieutenant of the counties of Bedford and Cambridge; and, on March 1, 1691, lord lieutenant and custos rotulorum for the county of Middlesex, and the liberties of Westminster. He sought for no other honours or employments; but their majesties, on May 11, 1694, created him marquis of Tavistock and duke of Bedford, and, in enumerating his merits in the patent it is expressed, “That this was not the least, that he was father to the lord Russel, the ornament of his age, whose great merits it was not enough to transmit by history to posterity; but they were willing to record them in their royal patent, to remain in the family, as a monument consecrated to his consummate virtue; whose name could never be forgot, so long as men preserved any esteem for sanctity of manners, greatness of mind, and a love to their country, constant even to death. Therefore to solace his excellent father for so great a loss, to celebrate the memory of so noble a son, and to excite his worthy grandson, the heir of such mighty hopes, more cheerfully to emulate and follow the example of his illustrious father, they intailed this high dignity upon the earl and his posterity.”

This duke, in 1695, having made the settlements previous to his grandson’s marrying Elizabeth, only daughter and heir of John Howlancl, of Stretham, esq. who was one of the greatest fortunes of that time, it was thought convenient, for the honour of this alliance, to make him baron Howland, of Stretham in Surrey, on June 13 the same year. His grace died in the eighty-seventh year of his age, September 7, 1700, and was buried with his ancestors at Cheneys, where a most noble monument is erected for him and his countess (who died on May 10, 16S1-, aged sixty-four), their two figures being exhibited under a canopy, supported by two pillars of the Corinthian order.

In 1679, when the king found it expedient to ingratiate himself with the whigs, lord William Russel was appointed one of his new council; but this could not last long, for in the following year he promoted the bill for the exclusion of the duke of York from the throne, the debate upon which was opened by him on the 26th of October, with a declaration of his opinion, that the life of his majesty, the safety of the nation, and the protestant religion, were in great danger from popery; and that either that parliament must suppress the growth and power thereof, or else popery would soon destroy, not only parliaments, but all that was dear and valuable to them, for which reason he moved, that they might in the first place take into consideration, how to suppress popery, and prevent a popish successor. The bill being accordingly passed in the House of Commons, his lordship, on the J5th of November, carried it up to the peers; who rejecting it, the Commons were exasperated at this, and lord Russel in particular said, that if ever there should happen in this nation any such change, as that he should not have the liberty to live a protestant, he was resolved to die one; and therefore would not willingly have the hands of their enemies strengthened. But these, and similar speeches from other members, having disgusted the court, the parliament was prorogued on the 10th of January, 1680-1. However, the necessity of the king’s affairs requiring the meeting of another parliament, his majesty called one, which assembled at Oxford on the 21st o March following; in which lord Russel served again as knight of the shire for the county of Bedford. But another bill of exclusion being moved for by sir Robert Clayr ton, who was seconded -.hy. his lordship, that parliament was soon after dissolved, and no other called during the reign of king Charles II. who now seemed determined to govern without one.

This state of affairs led to a conspiracy, in which the duke of Monmouth, lord llussel, and others, were concerned, to act in concert with the duke of Argyle and the Scotch. The leaders of this party had different views; but lord William Russel is said to have wished for nothing more than the exclusion of the duke of York, and a redress of grievances. While this was in meditation, another plot was laid by other conspirators to assassinate the king on his return from Newmarket, at a farm called the Kye-house, from which this plot has taken its name. Both conspiracies having been discovered, lord William Russel was apprehended and brought to trial at the Old Bailey July 13, 1683. In the indictment, the noble lord was charged with the treasonable purpose of killing the king, which was made an inference from his being engaged in a plan of insurrection. “On the whole,” says Hume, after describing the nature of the evidence produced on the trial, “it was undoubtedly proved, that the insurrection had been deliberated on by the prisoner, and fully resolved; the surprisal of the guards deliberated on, but not fully resolved, and that an assassination had not been once mentioned or imagined by him. So far the matter of fact seems certain: but still, with regard to the law, there remained a difficulty, and that an important one. The English laws of treason, both in the manner of defining that crime, and in the proof required, are the mildest and most indulgent, and consequently the most equitable, that are any where to be found. The two chief species of treason contained in the statute of Edw. III. are the compassing and intending of the king’s death, and the actually levying of war against him; and by the law of Mary, the crime must be proved by the concurring testimony of two witnesses, to some overt act, tending to these purposes. But the lawyers, partly desirous of paying court to the sovereign, partly convinced of the ill consequences which might attend such narrow limitations, had introduced a greater latitude, both in the proof and definition of the crime; and the jury, after a very short deliberation, found the prisoner guilty, and sentence of death was passed upon him. As he refused to adopt some means which were very likely to have enabled him to escape, it has been imputed, by his admirers, to the pressing solicitations of his friends, that he wrote a very meanly supplicatory letter to the duke of York, in which he declared,” that what he had done in opposition to his royal highness, did not proceed from any personal ill-will or animosity to him, hut merely from opinion, that it was the best way for preserving the religion established by law; in which if he was mistaken, yet he had acted sincerely, without any ill end in it. And as for any base design against the duke’s person, he hoped he would be so just to him, as not to think him capable of so vile a thought. But that he was now resolved, and did faithfully engage himself, that if it should please the king to pardon him, and if his royal highness would interpose in it, he would in no sort meddle any more in the least opposition to his highness, but would be readily determined to live in any part of the world, which the king should prescribe, and would wholly withdraw himself from the affairs of England, unless called by his majesty’s orders to serve him; which he should never be wanting to do to the uttermost of his power. And that if his royal highness would be so gracious to him, as to move on his account, as ijt would be an engagement upon him beyond what he could in reason expect, so it would make the deepest impression on him possible; for no fear of death could work so much upon him, as so great an obligation would for ever do.“A few days after he wrote a letter to the king, to be delivered after his death, as it was by his uncle col. Russel; in which he observed,” that his chief business was humbly to ask his majesty’s pardon for any thing he had either said or done, which might look like want of respect to him, or of duty to his government; in which, though he did to the last moment acquit himself of all designs against his person, or of altering the government, and protested he knew of no design then on foot against either, yet he did not deny, but he had heard many things, and said some things, contrary to his duty; for which he had asked God’s pardon," &c. &c.

His implacable enemy, the duke of York, when James II. was reminded of his courage and virtues in a very affecting manner. Upon the approach of the prince of Orange, the infatuated king called an extraordinary council to consider of his highness’s proposals. Lord William Russel’s father, the earl of Bedford, being of the number, the king made earnest application to him, saying, “My lord, you are a good man, and have a great influence; you can do much for me at this time.” His lordship replied, “I am an old man, and can do but little, but I once had a son.” The king felt the full force of this appeal, and was struck dumb.

, a celebrated Dutch admiral, was born at Flushing in 1607, and entered into the naval service of his country very early. Much of the early part of his life was spent in the service in the West Indies, to which he is said to have made eight voyages, and two to Brasil. Jn 1641 he was sent to the assistance of the Portuguese, who had thrown off the yoke of Spain, and on this occasion he was raised to the rank of rear-admiral. He afterwards rendered some important services on the Barbary coast, entering the road of Sallee in a single ship, although five Algerine corsairs disputed the passage. When war broke out, in 1652, between the English and Dutch, Van Tromp having been disgraced, De Ruyter was appointed to the command of a separate squadron, for the purpose of convoying home a rich fleet of merchantmen. He fell in with the English admiral Ayscough, with whom he had an engagement off Plymouth, in the month of August, which lasted two days, and terminated so far to the advantage of the Dutch, that he brought his convoy safe into port. In the following October De Ruyter aud De Witte had an action with Blake and Ayscough on the Flemish coast, which was severely contested; but De Ruyter, being deserted by some of his captains, found it advisable to retreat to his own coast, the loss having been Dearly equal on both sides. Van Tromp was now restored to the chief command, and De Ruyter had a squadron under him in the battle of December, offFolkstone, in which Blake was obliged to take shelter in the Thames. De Ruyter likewise distinguished himself in the terrible battle of three days, fought in February 1653, between Tromp and Blake, near the mouth of the Channel. In the month of June, Tromp and De Ruyter engaged Monk and Dean off Nieuport; and after a battle of two days, in which the two Dutch admirals successively rescued each other from imminent danger, the Dutch confessed their inferiority by retiring behind their own sand-banks, where having received a reinforcement, they were enabled to attack the English under Monk and Lawson, near Scheveling. In the final battle between the two fleets Tromp was killed, and De Ruyter compelled to withdraw his shattered ships to the Meuse. After the peace, which was concluded the following year, De Ruyter was sent to cruize in the Mediterranean, to reinforce Opdam; and this service being effected, he returned to his station, and put an end to the predatory warfare carried on by the French privateers. The Dutch having quarrelled with Portugal, De Ruyter exhibited his vigilance, taking several Portuguese ships at the mouth of the Tagus, and made several prizes from the Brazil fleet, till a want of provisions obliged him to return to Holland. War having recommenced between the Swedes and Danes in 1658, De Ruyter, who was sent with a fleet to the assistance of the latter, made a descent on the island of Funen, defeated the Swedes, and forced them to surrender at discretion in Nyborg, whither they had retired. He then wintered at Copenhagen, where the king of Denmark ennobled him for his services. In 1662 he was sent with a strong squadron to curb the insolence of the Barbary states, who had exercised their piracy upon the Dutch shipping, and succeeded entirely to the satisfaction of his employers. At the commencement of the disputes between Charles II. and the United Provinces, De Ruyter had a command on the coast of Africa, where he recovered the forts which had been taken from the Dutch by the English, and made prizes of some merchant ships. After the defeat of the fleet of Opdam by the duke of York in 1665, D Ruyter returned, and was raised to the rank of lieutenant-admiralgeneral of the Dutch navy. The first service of De Ruyter was to convoy home a fleet of merchantmen; and in June 1666, the great fleets of the two maritime powers met in the Downs; the Dutch commanded by De lluyter and Tromp, the English by prince Rupert, and Monk, now the duke of Albemarle. In the three days’ fight which ensued, the Dutch had the advantage, though the valour of the English rendered the contest very severe; and on the fourth, the English, who had been the greatest sufferers, withdrew to their harbours.

In the following August the duke of Albemarle and prince Rupert fell in, near the coast of Essex, with De Ruyter and Tromp, and in the ensuing action, Tromp, eagerly pursuing a defeated division of the English fleet, left De Ruyter alone to contend with the main body of the enemy, who, after a long and most severe contest, was obliged to retreat, exclaiming, how wretched he was that not one bullet of so many thousands would free him from the disgrace. The year 1667 was memorable for the disgrace which the reign of Charles II. incurred by the triumphant entrance of the Dutch into the Thames. Negociations for peace had been carrying on at Breda, which De Witte had protracted, while he hastened the naval preparations; which being completed, the Dutch fleet appeared in the Thames, under the command of De Ruyter, and took Sheerness, and burnt several English men of war. The peace which soon followed gave some repose to De Ruyter, till the alliance between Charles II. and Louis XIV. against the Dutch, rendered his services again necessary. In June 1672, with a fleet of ninety-one sail, he attacked the combined fleets of one hundred and thirty sail, under the command of the duke of York, lord Sandwich, and count d'Estrees, in Solebay; an obstinate engagement took place, which was in some measure undecided, as night parted them, but De Ruyter kept the sea, and safely convoyed home a fleet of merchantmen. In 1673 he was again sent to sea with a strong fleet in quest of the combined English and French, who were on the Dutch coast. Three engagements took place, which were obstinately fought, but both parties claimed the victory. De Ruyter’s other actions against the French were of little comparative importance. In the last, however, fought near Messina, against the French fleet, April 21, 1676, he was mortally wounded by a cannon-shot, and died a week after in the port of Syracuse, deeply regretted by his country. He was interred at Amsterdam, at the public expense, and a superb monument erected to his* Hiemory.

, historiographer to the king, and one of the forty members of the French academy, was born 1605, at Paris, and was the son of Isaac Ryer, who died about 1631, and has left some “Pastoral Poems.” Peter Ryer gained some reputation by his translations, though they were not exact, his urgent engagements with the booksellers preventing him from reviewing and correcting them properly. He obtained the place of king’s secretary in 1616, but having married imprudently, sold it in 1633, was afterwards secretary to Caesar duke de Vendome, and had a brevet of historiographer of France, with a pension from the crown. He died November 6, 1658, at Paris, aged fifty-three, leaving French translations of numerous works. Du Ryer’s style is pure and smooth; he wrote with great ease, both in verse and prose, and could doubtless have furnished the publick with very excellent works, had not the necessity of providing for his family, deprived him of leisure to polish and bring them to perfection. He also wrote nineteen tragedies, among which “Alcyonee,” “Saul,” and “Scevole,” are still remembered.

Among his works may be enumerated, the monuments of sir Isaac Newton and of the duke of Marlborough at Blenheim, and the equestrian statue in bronze of king William at Bristol, in 1733, for which he received 1800l.; a great many busts, and most of them very like, as of Pope, Gibbs, sir Robert Walpole, the duke and duchess of Argyle, the duchess of Marlborough, lord Bolingbroke, Wootton, Ben Jonson, Butler, Milton, Cromwell, and himself; the statues of George I. and II. at the Royal Exchange; the heads in the hermitage at Richmond, and those of the English worthies at Stowe. The competition of Scheemaker and Roubiliac hurt the business, if not the reputation of Rysbrach, for some time, and induced him to produce his three statues of Palladio, Liigo Jones, and Fiarningo, and at last his chef d'ceuvre, his Hercules; an exquisite summary of his knowledge, skill, and judgment. This athletic statue, for which he borrowed the head of the Farnesian god, was compiled from various parts and limbs of seven or eight of the strongest and best made men in London, chiefly the bruisers and boxers of the then flourishing amphitheatre for boxing: the sculptor selecting the parts which were the most truly formed in each. The arms were Broughton’s, the breasts a celebrated coachman’s, a bruiser, and the legs were those of Ellis the painter, a great frequenter of that gymnasium. As the games of that Olympic academy frequently terminated at the gallows, it was soon after suppressed by act of parliament; so that in reality Rysbrach’s Hercules is the monument of those gladiators. It was purchased by Mr. Hoare, and is the principal ornament of the noble temple at Stourhead, that beautiful assemblage of art, taste, and landscapes.

Sackville is said by Warton to have been the inventor and principal contributor to that celebrated collection of historical legends* entitled “The Mirror for Magistrates,” first edited in 1559 by William Baldwin; but sir Egerton Brydges thinks there is some reason to doubt this, as Sackville’s “Induction,” and “Legend of the duke of Buckingham,” did not appear appended to that work till the second edition in 1563. The reader, however, has now an opportunity of examining the evidence on this point in the very accurate and splendid edition of this work just published by Joseph Haslewood, esq. It is allowed that Sackville' s share exceeds in dignity and genius all the other contributions to the work. The “Induction” contains some of the finest strains of English poetry, and some of the most magnificent personifications of abstract ideas in our language; exceeding Spenser in dignity, and not short of h^m in brilliance; and the “Complaint of Henry duke 6f Buckingham” is written, says Warton, with a force and even elegance of expression, a copiousness of phraseology, and an exactness of versification, not to be found in any other part of the collection. 1

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

Lord Dorset wrote several little poems, which, however, are not numerous enough to make a volume of themselves, but are included in Johnson’s collection of the “English Poets.” He was a great patron of poets and men of wit, who have not failed in their turn to transmit his with lustre to posterity. Prior, Dryden, Congreve, Addisou, and many more, have all exerted themselves in their several paiu-gyrics upon this patron; Prior more particularly, whose exquisitely-wrought character of him, in the dedication of his poe.ns to his son, the first duke of Dorset, is to this day admired as a master-piece. He says, “The brightness of his parts, the solidity of his judgment, and the candour, and generosity of his temper, distinguished him in an age of great politeness, and at a court abounding with men of the finest sense and learning. The most eminent masters in their several ways appealed to his determination: Waller thought it an honour to consult him in the softness and harmony of his verse and Dr. Sprat, in the delicacy and turn of his prose Dryden determines by him, under the character of Eugenius, as to the laws of dramatic poetry Butler owed it to him, that the court tasted his ‘ Hudibras:’ Wycherley, that the town liked his ‘Plain Dealer; and the late duke of Buckingham deferred to publish his * Rehearsal’ till he was sure, as he expressed it, that my lord Dorset would not rehearse upon him again. If we wanted foreign testimdny, La Fontaine and St. Evremond have acknowledged that he was a perfect master of the beauty and fineness of their language, and of all they call * les belles lettres.' Nor was this nicety of his judgment confined only to books and literature: he was the same in statuary, painting, and other parts of art. Bernini would have taken his opinion upon the beauty and attitude of a figure; and king Charles did not agree with Lely, that my lady Cleveland’s picture was finished, till it had the approbation of my lord Bnckhursu”

In the same year, 1540, he lost his patron Cromwell, who was beheaded; but he retained his favour with Henry, and in 1541 was again sent to Scotland, to detach the king from the pope and the. popish clergy, and to press upon him the propriety of a personal meeting with Henry. This however the king of Scotland appears to have evaded with considerable address, and died the following year of a broken heart, in consequence of hearing of the fatal battle of Solway. The crown was now left to James V.'s infant daughter Mary; and sir Ralph Sadler’s next employment was to lend his aid to the match, projected by Henry VIII. between his son Edward and the young queen. But this ended so unsuccessfully, that Sadler was obliged to return to England in Dee 1543, and Henry declared war against Scotland. In the mean time he was so satisfied with Sadler’s services, even in this last negociation, that he included him, by the title of sir Ralph Sad ley r, knight, among the twelve persons whom he named as a privy-council to the sixteen nobles to whom, in his will, he bequeathed the care of his son, and of the kingdom. When this will was set aside by the protector duke of Somerset, and it became necessary to reconcile the king’s executors and privy-counsellors, by wealth and honours, sir Ralph Sadler received a confirmation of all the church-lands formerly assigned to him by Henry, with splendid additions.

, the first of a family of distinguished engravers, the son of a founder and chaser, was born at Brussels in 1550. He applied early in life to drawing and engraving, and published some prints at Antwerp, which did him great honour. Encouraged by this success, he travelled over Holland that he might work under the inspection of the best masters, and found a generous benefactor in the duke of Bavaria. He went afterwards into Italy, and presented some of his prints to pope Clement VIII. but receiving only empty compliments fram that pontiff, retired to Venice, where he died 1600, in his fiftieth year, leaving a son named Juste or Justin, by whom also we have some good prints. Raphael Sadeler, John’s brother, and pupil, was born in 1555, and distinguished himself as an engraver, by the correctness of his drawings and the natural expression of his figures. He accompanied John to Rome and to Venice, and died in the latter city. Raphael engraved some plates for a work entitled “de opificio mundi,” 1617, 8vo, which is seldom found perfect. The works executed by him and John in conjunction, are, “Solitudo, sive vitas patrum eremicolarum,” 4to “Sylvse sacrae,,” “Trophaeum vitae solitaries” “ Oraculum anacboreticum,” “Solitude sive vitae feminarura anachoreticarum;” “Recueil d‘Estampes, d’apres Raphael, Titien, Carrache,” &c. amounting to more than 500 prints, in 2 vols. fol. Giles Sadeler was nephew and pupil of John and Raphael, but excelled them in correct drawing, and in the taste and neatness of his engraving. After having remained some time in Italy, he was invited into Germany by the emperor Rodolphus II. who settled a pension upon him; and Matthias and Ferdinand, this emperor’s successors, continued also to esteem and honour him. He died at Prague in 1629, aged fifty-nine, being born at Antwerp in 1570, leaving “Vestigi dell' antichita di Roma,” Rome, 1660, fol. obi. These engravers employed their talents chiefly on scripture subjects. Mark Sadeler, related to the three above mentioned, seems to have been merely the editor of th^ir works.

, an eminent Lutheran divine, historian to the duke of Saxony, and professor of history at Halle, was born Sept. 23, 1643, at Lunenburg. He studied in, or visited the greatest part of the German universities, where he was much esteemed for his extensive knowledge of history and antiquities. He died March 9, 1694, leaving nearly 70 volumes of dissertations, principally on historical subjects on oracles on the gates of the ancients “The succession of the Princes of Orange,” 4to “History of the City of Herderwich” a life of St. Norbert, 1683 “Tractatus varii da historia legenda,” 4to “Historia antiqua Noribergse,” 4to “Origin of the Dukes of Brunswick” “History of Lubec” “Antiquities of the kingdom of Thuringia” “History of the Marquises and Electors of Brandenburg,” and many others, enumerated by Niceron. His life was written by Schmid, and published in 1713, 8vo.

, in Latin Sanctesius, was born in 1525, at Perche. He entered as a regular canon in the abbey de St. Cheron, near Chartres; at the age of fifteen was admitted doctor of the Sorbonne, 1555, and resided afterwards in the house of cardinal de Lorraine, who employed him at the conference of Poissy, in 1561, and persuaded king Charles IX. to send him to the council of Trent, with eleven other doctors. In 1566 De Sainctes, with Simon Vigor, afterwards archbishop of Narbonne, disputed against two protestant ministers, at the house of the duke de Nevers, and published the records of this conference two years after, and had also a controversy with Sadeel, as we have recently noticed in his article. He became so celebrated for his writings, sermons, and zeal against the protestants, as to be promoted to the bishopric of Evreux in 1575. The following year he attended the states of Blois, and in 1581, the council of Rouen; but having afterwards joined the most violent among the Leaguers, was seized at Louviers by Henry IVth’s party, who found a writing among his papers, in which he pretended to justify the assassination of Henry III. and declared that the present king deserved the same treatment. Being carried as a prisoner to Caen, he would there have received the punishment due to his attempt, had not cardinal de Bourbon, and some other prelates, interceded that his punishment should be perpetual imprisonment. He was accordingly confined in the castle de Crev^cceur, in the diocese of Lisieux, where he died in 1591, De Sainctes left many learned works, the largest and most scarce among which is a “Treatise on the Eucharist,” in Latin, folio, an edition of St. James’s, St. Basil’s, and St. Chrysostom’s “Liturgies,” Antwerp, 1560, 8vo, afterwards reprinted, but this is the only edition that is valued.

, a classical scholar and critic, was probably the descendant of a French family, but we find no mention of him in any French biographical work, and are unable to say much of his early history. In 1705, he was a student at Lincoln college, Oxford, but made no long stay there. His passion for Greek literature, but particularly for acquiring materials towards a new edition of Theocritus, led him to Italy, where, though young, for he was scarce twenty, he obtained a distinguished reputation for learning, and became acquainted with men of the first erudition, among whom were Gravina, Fontanini, and others. By their acquaintance he was easily introduced into the best libraries; and at Florence in particular, he was favoured with the friendship of the learned professor Salvini, who furnished him with several materials relating to Theocritus from the Laurentian library and St. Mary’s monastery of Benedictines. The patronage and friendship of Mr. Newton too, the English ambassador at the grand duke’s court, were of signal service to him. After spending some time with these and other learned men, in a mutual exchange of literary treasures and observations, he returned to England by way of Geneva and Paris, and died, not about 1750, as Mr. Warton says, but Sept. 5, 1754, at his house in Red-lion-square, leaving the valuable collection of books and Mss. he had made abroad to the Bodleian library, and the duplicates of his books to Lincoln college. Of the Mss. Mr. Warton availed himself in his edition of Theocritus. Mr. St. Amand left also 8000l. to Christ’s hospital, and other legacies, which shew that he was a man of considerable opulence.

Persevering steadily in the same tory-connections, to which he adhered against the whig principles of his family, his father and grandfather being both of that party, he gained such an influence in the house, that on April 10, 1704, he was appointed secretary of war, and of the marines. As this post required a constant correspondence with the duke of Marlborough, it appears to have been the principal foundation of the rumours raised many years after, that he was in a particular manner attached to the duke. It is certain, that he knew his worth, and was a sincere admirer of him but he always denied any particular connection nor was he ever charged by the duke or duchess with ingratitude or breach of engagement to them. In all political measures, Mr. St. John acted with Mr. Harley: and, therefore, when this minister was removed from the seals in 1707, Mr. St. John chose to follow his fortune, and the next day resigned his place. He was not returned in the subsequent parliament; but, upon the dissolution of it in 1710, Harley being made chancellor and tinder-treasurer of the Exchequer, the post of secretary of state was given to St. John. About the same time he wrote the famous “Letter to the Examiner,” to be found among the first of those papers: it was then universally ascribed to him, and gave no inconsiderable proofs of his abilities as a writer; for in this single shost paper are comprehended the outlines of that design on which Swift employed himself for near a twelvemonth.

Upon his arrival at Paris, he received an invitation from the Pretender, then at Barr, to engage in his service: which he at first absolutely refused, and thought it wiser to make the best application, that his present circumstances would admit, to prevent the progress of his prosecution in England. While this was in doubt, he retired into Dauphine“, where he continued till the beginning of July; and then, upon receiving unfavourable news from some of iiis party in England, he complied with a second invitation from the Pretender; and, taking the seals of the secretary’s office at Commercy, set out with them for Paris, and arrived thither the latter end of the same month, in order to procure from that court the necessary succours for his new master’s intended invasion of England. The vote for impeaching him of high treason had passed in the House of Commons the June preceding; and six articles were brought into the house, and read by Walpole, August 4, 1715, which were in substance as follows: 1.” That whereas he had assured the ministers of the States General, by order from her majesty in 1711, that she would make no peace but in concert with them; yet he sent Mr. Prior to France, that same year, with proposals for a treaty of peace with that monarch, without the consent of the allies.“2.” That he advised and promoted the making of a separate treaty or convention, with France, which was signed in September.“3.” That he disclosed to M. Mesnager, the French minister at London, this convention, which was the preliminary instruction to her majesty’s plenipotentiaries at Utrecht, in October.“4.” That her majesty’s final instructions to her said plenipotentiaries were disclosed by him to the abbot Gualtier, an emissary of France.“5.” That he disclosed to the French the manner how Tournay in Flanders might be gained by them.“6.” That he advised and promoted the yielding up of Spain and the West-Indies to the duke of Anjou, then an enemy to her majesty." These articles were sent up to the Lords in August; in consequence of which, he stood attainted of high-treason, September the 10th of the same year.

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

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

, a French writer of memoirs, was the son of a duke of the same title, born June 16, 1675, and was introduced at the court of Louis XIV. in his fifteenth year, but had been educated in virtuous principles, and never departed from them, either at court or in the army, in which he served till 1697. In 1721 he was appointed ambassador extraordinary to the court of Spain, for the purpose of soliciting the infanta in marriage for Louis XV. After being for some time confidential adviser to the regent, duke of Orleans, he retired to his estate, and passed most of his time in his library, where he read incessantly and forgot nothing. The marshal de Belle-Isle used to say that he was the most interesting and agreeable dictionary he had ever consulted. At fourscore he enjoyed all his faculties as perfect as at forty: the precise time of his death is not mentioned, but it appears to have taken place about 1757. He composed “Memoirs of the reign of Louis XIV. and the Regency,” which consist of a variety of anecdotes relative to the courts of Louis XIV. and XV. which are told in an elegant style, but his manner is often sarcastic, although his justice has never been called in question. M. Anquetil has made this nobleman’s memoirs the basis of his history of “Louis XIV. his Court and the Regent.” Some of the editions of these Memoirs have been mutilated, but the most complete was printed at Strasburg, in 1791, iS vols. 8vo.

, called Tl Salviati, from the favour and patronage of the cardinal Salviati, was the on of Michelangiolo Rossi, and was born at Florence in 1510. He was first placed as a pupil under Andrea del Sarto, and afterwards, with far more advantage, with Baccio Bandinelii. Here he had for his fellow pupil, Vasari, who afterwards pronounced him the greatest painter then in Rome. His employment kept pace with his reputation,­and, among other beneficial orders, he was engaged by his patron, the cardinal, to adorn his chapel with a series of frescoes, the subjects being taken from the life of St. John Baptist. He produced a set of cartoons of the history of Alexander, as patterns for tapestries; and, in conjunction with Vasari, ornamented the apartments of the Cancellaria with paintings in fresco. From Rome he went to Venice, where he painted many pictures, both for public edih'ces and private collections, particularly the history of Psyche for the Palazzo Grimaldi. He afterwards travelled through Lombardy, aid made some stay at Mantua, studying with much delight the works of Julio Romano. At Florence, he was employed by the grand-duke to adorn the Palazzo Vecchio: in one of the saloons he represented the victory and triumph of Furius Camillus, a work greatly admired for the truth and taste of the imitation, and the vigour and spirit of the composition.

, a learned physician, was born March 7, 1766, at Penna-Macor, in Portugal. His father, who was an opulent merchant, and iritended him for the bar, gave him a liberal education; but, being displeased at finding him, at the age of eighteen, obstinately bent on the profession of physic, withdrew his protection, and he was indebted to Dr. Nunés Ribeiro, his mother’s brother, who was a physician of considerable repute at Lisbon, for the means of prosecuting his medical studies, which he did, first at Coimbra, and afterwards at Salamanca, where he took the degree of M. D. in 1724; and the year following procured the appointment of phvsician to the town of Benevente in Portugal; for which, as is the custom of that country, he had a small pension, His stay at this place, however, was hut short. He was desirous of seeing more of the world, and of improving himself in his profession. With this view he came and passed two years in London, and had even an intention of fixing there; but a bad state of health, which he attributed to the climate, induced him to return to the continent. Soon after, we find him prosecuting his medical studies at Leyden, under the celebrated Boerhaavc; and it will be a sufficient proof of his diligence and merit to observe, that in 1731, when the Empress of Russia (Anne) requested Boerhaave to recommend -to her three physicians, the professor immediately fixed upon Dr. Sanches to be one of the number. Just as he was setting out for Russia, he was informed that his father was lately dead; and that his mother, in an unsuccessful law-suit with the Portuguese admiralty, had lost the greater part of her fortune. He immediately assigned over his own little claims and expectations in Portugal for her support. Soon after his arrival at St. Petersburg, Dr. Bidloo (son of the famous physician of that name), who was at that time first physician to the empress, -ave him an appointment in the hospital at Moscow, where he remained till 1734, when he was employed as physician to the army, in which capacity he was present at the siege of Asoph, where he was attacked with a dangerous fever, and, when he began to recover, found himself in a tent, abandoned by hjs attendants, and plundered of his papers and effects. In 1740, he was appointed one of the physicians to the court, and consulted by the empress, who had for eight years been labouring under a disease, the cause of which had never been satisfactorily ascertained Dr. Sanches, jn a conversation with the prime minister, gave it us his opinion, that the complaint originated from a stone in one of the kidneys, and admitted only of palliation. At the end of six: months the empress died, and the truth of his opinion was confirmed by dissection. Soon after the death of the empress, Dr. Sanche*s was advanced by the regent to the office of first physician; but the revolution of 1742, which placed Elizabeth Petrowna on the throne, deprived him of all his appointments. Hardly a day passed that he did not hear of some of his friends perishing on the scaffold; and it was not without much difficulty that he obtained leave to retire from Russia. His library, which had cost him 1200 pounds sterling, he disposed of to the academy of St. Petersburg, of which he was an honorary member; and, in return, they agreed to give him a pension of forty pounds per annum. During his residence in Russia, he had availed himself of his situation at court, to establish a correspondence with the Jesuits in China, who, in return for books of astronomy and other presents, sent him seeds or plants, together with other articles of natural history. It was from Dr. Sanche*s that the late Mr. Peter Cqllinson first received the seeds of the true rhubarb, but the plants were destroyed by some accident; and it was not till several years afterwards that rhubarb was cultivated with success in this country, from seeds sent over by the late Dr. Mounsey. In 1747, he went to reside at Paris, where he remained till his death. He enjoyed the friendship of the celebrated physicians and philosophers of that capital, and, at the institution of a Royal Medical Society, he was chosen a foreign associate. He was likewise a member of the royal academy of Lisbon, to the establishment of which his advice had probably contributed, as he drew up, at the desire of the court of Portugal, several memorials on the plans necessary to be adopted for the encouragement of science. Some of these papers, relative to the establishment of an university, were printed during his lifetime in Portuguese, and the rest have been found among. his manuscripts. His services in Russia remained for sixteen years unnoticed but, when the late empress Catherine ascended the throne, Dr. Sanches was not forgotten. He had attended her in a dangerous illness when she was very young; and she now rewarded him with a pension of a thousand roubles, which was punctually paid till his death. He likewise received a, pension from the court of Portugal, and another from prince Gallitzin. A great part of this income he employed in acts of benevolence. Of the liberality with with he administered to the wants of his rela T tions and friends, several striking instances, which our limits will not permit us to insert, have been related by Mr. de Magellan. He was naturally of an infirm habit of body, and, during the last thirty years of his life, frequently voided small stones with his urine. The disposition to this disease increased as he advanced in years, and for a considerable time before his death, he was confined to his apartments. The last visit he mad was, in 1782, to the grand duke of Russia, who was then at Paris. In September 1783, he perceived that his end was approaching, and he died on the 14th of October following. His library, which was considerable, he bequeathed to his brother, Dr. Marcello Sanches, who was likewise a pupil of Boerhaave", and who resided at Naples. His manuscripts (amorig which, besides a considerable number of papers on medical subjects, are letters written by him to Boerhaave. Van Swiften, Gaubius, Halter, Werlhof, Pringle, Fothergill, and other learned men) are in. the possession of Dr. An dry. His printed works, on the origin of the venereal disease and other subjects, are well known to medical readers; but his knowledge, it seems, was not confined to his own profession; he possessed a fund of general learning, and is said to have been profoundly versed in politics.

, an extraordinary Negro, was born in 1729, on board a ship in the slave-trade, a few days after it had quitted the coast of Guinea for the Spanish West Indies; and at Carthagena, received baptism from the hand of the bishop, and the name of Ignatius. He lost his parents in his infancy, a disease of the new climate having put an early period to his mother’s existence; while his father defeated the miseries of slavery by an act of suicide. At little more than two years old, his master brought him to England, and gave him to three maiden sisters, resident at Greenwich; who thought, agreeable to prejudices not uncommon at that time, that ignorance was the only security for his obedience, and that to enlarge his mind would go near to emancipate his person. By them he was surnamed Sancho, from a fancied resemblance to the 'Squire of Don Quixote. While in this situation, the duke of Montagu, who lived on Blackheath, accidentally saw, and admired in him a native frankness of manner, as yet unbroken in servitude, and unrefined by education; brought him frequently home to the duchess; indulged his turn for reading with presents of books, and strongly recommended to his mistresses the duty of cultivating a genius of such apparent fertility. His mistresses, however, were inflexible^ and even threatened on angry occasions to return Sancho to his African slavery. The love of freedom had increased with years, and began to beat high in his bosom. Indignation, and the dread of constant reproach arising from the detection of an amour, finally determined him to abandon the family, and as his noble patron was recently dead, he flew to the duchess for protection, who dismissed him with reproof. She at length, however, consented to admit him into her household, where he remained as butler till her death, when he found himself by her grace’s bequest and his own ceconomy, possessed of seventy pounds in money^ and an annuity of thirty. Freedom, riches, and leisure, naturally led a disposition of African texture into indulgences; and that which dissipated the mind of Ignatius completely drained the purse. Cards had formerly seduced him; but an unsuccessful contest at cribbage with a Jew, who won his clothes, had determined him to abjure the propensity which appears to be innate among his countrymen. Ignatius loved the theatre^ and had been even induced to consider it as a resource in fhe hour of adversity, and his complexion suggested aa offer to the manager of attempting Othello and Oroonoko; but a defective and incorrigible articulation rendered this abortive. He turned his mind once more to service, and was retained a few months by the chaplain at Montaguhouse. That roof had been ever auspicious to him; and the last duke soon placed him about his person, where habitual regularity of life led him to think of a matrimonial connexion, and he formed one accordingly with a very deserving young woman of West India origin. Towards the close of 1773, repeated attacks of the gout and a constitutional corpulence rendered him incapable of farther attendance in the duke’s family. At this crisis, the munificence which had protected him through various vicissitudes did not fail to exert itself; with the result of his own frugality, it enabled him and his wife to settle themselves in a shop of grocery, where mutual and rigid industry decently maintained a numerous family of children, and where a life of domestic virtue engaged private patronage, and merited public imitation. He died Dec. 15, 1780, of a series of complicated disorders. Mr. Jekyll remarks that, of a negro, a butler, and a grocer, there are but slender anecdotes to animate the page of the biographer, yet it has been held necessary to give some sketch of the very singular man, whose letters, with all their imperfections on their head, have given such general satisfaction to the public*. The display which those writings exhibit of epistolary talent, rapid and just conception, of mild patriotism, and of universal philanthropy, attracted the protection of the great, and the friendship of the learned. A commerce with the Muses was supported amid the trivial and momentary interruptions of a shop; the poets were studied, and even imitated with some success; two pieces were constructed for the stage; the theory of music was discussed, published, and dedicated to the Princess royal; and painting was so much within the circle of Ignatius Sancho’s judgment and criticism, that several artists paid great deference to his opinion.

, an ingenious artist, descended from a branch of the family of Saunby, of Babworth in Nottinghamshire, was born at Nottingham in 1732. In 1746 he came to London, and having an early predilection for the arts, procured admission to the drawing room in the Tower, where he first studied. In 1748, William duke of Cumberland, wishing to have a survey of the Highlands of Scotland, which was the scene of his memorable campaign in 1745-6, Mr. Sandby was appointed draughtsman, under the inspection of general David Watson, with whom he travelled through the North and Western parts of that most romantic country, and made many sketches. During his stay at Edinburgh he made a number of small etchings from these designs; which on his return to London were published in a folio volume. But drawing of plans abounding in straight lines being neither congenial to his taste nor worthy of his talents, he in 1752 quitted the service of the survey, and resided with his brother, Mr. Thomas Sandby, at Windsor, and during his continuance there took more than seventy views of Windsor and Eton. The accuracy, taste, and spirit with which they were in an eminent degree marked, so forcibly struck sir Joseph Banks, that he purchased them all, and at a very liberal price. Mr. Sandby had soon afterwards the honour of being one of this gentleman’s party in a tour through North and South Walesj and made a great number of sketches from remarkable scenes, castles, seats, &c. Under the patronage of the late sir Watkin Williams Wynne, he afterwards took many more views from scenes in the same country, which with those before mentioned he transferred to copper-plates, and made several sets of prints in imitation of drawings, in bister or Indian ink. The first hint of the process by which this effect is given to an engraving, Mr. Sandby is said to have received from the hon. Charles Greville, a gentleman of acknowledged taste and judgment in every branch of polite art. Profiting by this hint, Mr. Sandby so far improved upon it as to bring the captivating art of Aquatinta to a degree of perfection never before known in this country.

On the institution of the Royal Academy, Mr. Sandby was elected a royal academician. By the recommendation of the duke of Grafton, the marquis of Granby in 1768 appointed him chief drawing-master of the Royal Academy at Woolwich, which office he held with great honour to himself and advantage to the institution; and saw many able and distinguished draughtsmen among the officers of artillery, and corps of Engineers, formed under his instructions.

, a herald and heraldic writer, descended from a very ancient and respectable family, still seated at Sandford, in the county of Salop, was the third son of Francis Sandford, *of that place, esq. by Elizabeth, daughter of Calcot Chambre, of Williamscot in Oxfordshire, and of Carnow in Wicklow in Ireland. He was born in 1630, in the castle of Carnow in the province of Wicklow, part of the half barony of Shelelak, purchased of James I., by his maternal grandfather, Chalcot Chambre. He partook in an eminent degree the miseries of the period which marked his youth. At eleven years of age he sought an asylum in Sandford, being driven by the rebellion from Ireland. No sooner had his pitying relatives determined to educate him to some profession, than they were proscribed for adhering to the cause of their sovereign; he received, therefore, only that learning which a grammar school could give. As some recompence for the hardships he and his family had experienced, he was admitted, at the restoration, as pursuivant in the college of arms; but conscientiously attached to James II., he obtained leave to resign his tabard to Mr. King, rougedragon, who paid him 220l. for his office. He retired to Bloomsbury, or its vicinity, where he died, January 16, 1693, and was buried in St. Bride’s upper church yard. The last days of this valuable man corresponded too unhappily with the first, for he died “advanced in years, neglected, and poor.' 7 He married Margaret, daughter of William Jokes, of Bottington, in the county of Montgomery, relict of William Kerry, by whom he had issue. His literary works are, 1.” A genealogical History of the Kings of Portugal,“&c. London, 1664, fol. partly a translation, published in compliment to Catherine of Braganza, consort to Charles II. It is become scarce. 2.” The Order and Ceremonies used at the Funeral of his Grace, George Duke of Albemarle,“Savoy, 1670. This is a thin folio, the whole represented in engraving. 3.” A genealogical History of the Kings of England, and Monarchs of Great Britain, from the Norman Conquest, Anno 1066, to the year 1677, in seven Parts or Books, containing a Discourse of their several Lives, Marriages, and Issues, Times of Birth, Death, Places of Burial, and monumental Inscriptions, with their Effigies, Seals, Tombs, Cenotaphs, Devices, Arms,“&c. Savoy, 1677, fol. dedicated to Charles II., by whose command the work was undertaken. It is his best and most estimable performance. The plan is excellent, the fineness of the numerous engravings greatly enrich and adorn it: many are by Hollar, others by the best artists of that period, inferior to him, but not contemptible, even when seen at this age of improvement in graphic art. The original notes are not the least valuable part of the work, conveying great information, relative to the heraldic history of our monarchs, princes, and nobility. Mr. Stebbing, Somerset herald, reprinted it in 1707, continuing it until that year, giving some additional information to the original works; but the plates being worn out, or ill touched, this edition is far inferior to the first.” The Coronation of K. James II. and Q. Mary," &c. illustrated with sculptures, Savoy, 1687, a most superb work. When James declared he would have the account of his coronation printed, Mr. Sandford and Mr. King, then rouge-dragon, obtained the earl marshal’s consent to execute it; the latter says, the greatest part passed through his hands, as well as the whole management and economy of it, though he declined having his name appear in the title-page, contenting himself with one third part of the property, leaving the honour, and two remaining shares of it, to Mr. Sandford well foreseeing, he says, that they would be maligned for it by others of their office and he was not mistaken, for Sandford, with all the honour, had all the malice, for having opposed the earl marshal’sappointing Mr. Burghill to be receiver of fees of honour for the heralds, and endeavouring to vest it in the king; so that the affair was taken and argued at the council table. The earl marshal, at the insinuation of some of the heraids, suspended him, under pretence that he had not finished the history of the coronation; but he submitting, the suspension was soon taken off. The book at last was not successful, for the publication being delayed until 1687, and the revolution following, which threw a damp on such an undertaking, Messrs. Sandford and King gained no more than their expences, amounting to 600l.

, a German painter, was born at Francfort in 1606. He was sent by his father to a grammar school; his inclination to engraving and designing . being irresistible, he was suffered to indulge it, and went on foot to Prague, where he put himself under Giles Sadeler, the famous engraver, who persuaded him to apply his genius to painting. He accordingly went to Utrecht, and was some time under Gerard lionthrost, who took him into England with him; where he stayed till 1627, the year in which the duke of Buckingham, who was the patron of painting and painters, was assassinated by Felton at Portsmouth. He went afterwards to Venice, where he copied the finest pictures of Titian and Paul Veronese; and from Venice to Rome, where he became one of the most considerable painters of his time. The king of Spain sending to Rome for twelve pictures of the most skilful hands then in that city, twelve painters were set to work, one of whom was Sandrart. After a long stay in Rome, he went to Naples, thence to Sicily and Malta, and at length returned through Lombardy to Francfort, where he married. A great famine happening about that time, he removed to Amsterdam; but returned to Francfort upon the cessation of that grievance. Not long after, he took possession of the manor of Stokau, in the duchy of Neuburg, which was fallen to him; and, finding it much in decay, sold all his pictures, designs, and other curiosities, in order to raise money for repairs’. He had but just completed these, when, the war breaking out between the Germans and the French, it was burned by the latter to the ground. He then rebuilt it in a better style; but, fearing a second invasion, sold it, and settled at Augsburgh, where he executed many fine pictures. His wife dying, he left Augsburgh, and went to Nuremberg, where he established an academy of painting. Here he published his “Academia artis pictoria?,” 1683, fol. being an abridgment of Vasari and Ridolfi for what concerns the Italian painters, and of Charles Van Manderfor the Flemings, of the seventeenth century. He died at Nuremberg, in 16S8. His work above mentioned, which some have called superficial, is but a part of a larger work, which he published before under the title of “Academia Todesca della architettura, scultura, e pittura, oderTeutsche academic der edlen banbild-rnahleren-kunste,” Nuremberg, 1675 79, 2 vols. fol. He published also, “Iconologia Deorum, qui ab antiquis colebantur (Germanice), ibid. 1680, fol.” Admiranda Sculptures veteris, sive delineatio vera perfectissrma statuarum,“ibid. 1680, fol.” Koiiiaj antiquse et novae theatrum,“1684, fol. ”Rotna-norum Fontinalia," ibid. 1685, fol. A German edition of all his works was published by Volkmann, at Nuremberg, in 1669 75, 8 vols. fol.

During this interval Sandys, who, from the independence of his fortune, or some other cause, had never been scholar or fellow of his college, though he had served the office of proctor for the university, was in 1547 elected master of Catherine-hall. He was probably at this time vicar of Haversham, in Bucks> his first considerable preferment, to which, in 1548, was added a prebend of Peterborough, and in 1552, the second stall at Carlisle. Without the last of these preferments he was enabled to marry, and chose a lady of his own name, the daughter of a branch unnoticed by the genealogists, a beautiful and pious wo^ man. The next year, which was that of his vice-chancellorship, rendered him unhappily conspicuous by his yielding to the command or request of Dudley, duke of Northumberland, and preaching a sermon in support of lady Jane Gray’s pretensions to the crown, after the death of Edward VI. The designs of Dudley’s party having been almost immediately defeated, Sandys was marked out for vengeance; and the popish party in the university, as the first step towards regaining an ascendant, resolved to depose the vice-chancellor, which was performed in a manner very characteristic of the tumultuous spirit of the times. From this time, in July 1553, he ceased to reside in college, or to take any part in the administration of its concerns.

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

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

At this time he was in his twentieth year, and defended in a public assembly at Mantua, several difficult propositions in natural philosophy and divinity, with such uncommon genius and learning, that the duke of Mantua, a great patron of letters, appointed him his chaplain, at the same time that the bishop of that city made him reader of canon law and divinity in his cathedral. These employments animated him to improve himself in Hebrew; and he applied also with much vigour to the study of history, in which he was afterwards to shine. During his stay at Mantua he became acquainted with many eminent persons; and his patron, the duke, obliged him to dispute with persons of all professions, and on all subjects. Paul had a profound knowledge in the mathematics, but the utmost contempt for judicial astrology: “We cannot, 17 he used to say,” either find out, or we cannot avoid, what will happen hereafter." Fulgentio, his biographer, relates a ludicrous story, in which his patron appears to have been a chief actor. The duke, who loved to soften the cares of government with sallies of humour, having a mare ready to foal a mule, engaged Paul to take the horoscope of the animal’s nativity. This being done, and the scheme settled, the duke sent it to all the famous astrologers in Europe, informing them, that under such an aspect a bastard was born in the duke’s palace. The astrologers returned very different judgments; some asserting that this bastard would be a cardinal, others a great warrior, others a bishop, and others a pope, and these wise conjectures tended not a little to abate the credulity of the times.

About 1602, he was diverted from his private studies, which he had now indulged, though amidst numerous vexations, for many years, by the state of public affairs. A dispute arose between the republic of Venice and the court of Rome, relating to ecclesiastical immunities; and, as both divinity and Taw were concerned in it, father Paul was appointed divine and canonist for the republic of Venice, to act in concert with the iaw-consultors. The dispute had commenced, and been carried on, under ClementVIII.; but when Paul V. came to the popedom, he required absolute obedience without disputes. At length, when he found his commands slighted, the pope excommunicated the duke, the whole senate, and all their dominions, in April 1606, and the Venetians in return recalled their ambassador at Rome, suspended the inquisition by order of state, and published by sound of trumpet a proclamation to this eilect, viz. “That whosoever hath received from Rome any copy of a papal edict, published there, as well against the law of God, as against the honour of this nation, shall immediately bring it to the council of ten upon pain of death.” But as the minds, not only of the common burghers, but also of some noble personages belonging to the state, were alarmed at this papal interdict, Paul endeavoured to relieve their fears, by a piece entitled “Consolation of mind, to quiet the consciences of those who live well, against the terrors of the interdict by Paul V.” As this was written for the sole use of the government under which he was born, it was deposited in the archives of Venice; till at length, from a copy clandestinely taken, it was first published at the Hague, both in the Italian and French languages, and the same year in English, under this title, “The Rights of Sovereigns and Subjects, argued from the civil, canon, and common law, under the several heads of Excommunications, Interdicts, Persecution, Councils, Appeals, Infallibility, describing the boundaries of that power which is claimed throughout Christendom by the Crown and the Mitre; and of the privileges which appertain to the subjects, both clergy and laity, according to the laws of God and Man.” Paul wrote, or assisted in writing and publishing, several other pieces in this controversy between the two states; and had the Inquisition, cardinal Bellarmine, and other great personages, for his antagonists. Paul and his brother writers, whatever might be the abilities of their adversaries, were at least superior to them in the justice of their cause. The propositions maintained on the side of Rome were these; that the pope is invested with all the authority of heaven and earth that all princes are his vassals, and that he may annul their laws at pleasure that kings may appeal to him, as he is temporal monarch of the whole earth; that he can discharge subjects from their oaths of allegiance, and make it their duty to take up arms against their sovereign that he may depose kings without any fault committed by them, if the good of the church requires it that the clergy are exempt from all tribute to kings, and are not accountable to them even in cases of high treason; that the pope cannot err; that his decisions are to be received and obeyed on pain of sin, though all the world should judge them to be false; that the pope is God upon earth, and that to call his power in question, is to call in question the power of God; maxims equally shocking, weak, pernicious, and absurd, which did not require the abilities or learning of father Paul, to demonstrate their falsehood, and destructive tendency. The court of Rome, however, was now so exasperated against him, as to cite him by a decree, Oct. 30, 1606, under pain of absolute excommunication, to appear in person at Rome, to answer the charges of heresies against him. Instead cf appearing, he published a manifesto, shewing the invalidity of the summons; yet offered to dispute with any of the pope’s advocates, in a place of safety, on the articles laid to his charge.

As he was instructing the academical youth in the principles of the Newtonian philosophy, it was not long before he became acquainted with the incomparable author, although he had left the university several years; and enjoyed his frequent conversation concerning the more difficult parts of his works. He lived in friendship also with the most eminent mathematicians of the age? with Halley, Cotes, De Moivre, &c. Upon the removal of Whiston from his professorship, Saunderson’s mathematical merit was universally allowed so much superior to that of any competitor, that an extraordinary step was taken in his favour, to qualify him with a degree, which the statutes require. Upon application made by the heads of colleges to the duke of Somerset, their chancellor, a mandate was readily granted by the queen for conferring on him the degree of master of arts: upon which he was chosen Lucasian professor of the mathematics, Nov. 1711, sir Isaac Newton all the while interesting himself very much in the affair. His first performance, after he was seated in the chair, was an inauguration-speech made in very elegant Latin, and a style truly Ciceronian; for he was well versed in the writings of Tully, who was his favourite in prose, as Virgil and Horace were in verse. From this time he applied himself closely to the reading of lectures, and gave up his whole frime to his pupils. He continued among the gentlemen of Christ’s college till 1723; when he took a house in Cambridge, and soon after married a daughter of the rev. Mr. Dickens, rector of Boxworth in Cambridgeshire, by whom he had a son and a daughter. In 1728, when George II. visited the university, he was pleased to signify his desire of seeing so remarkable a person; and accordingly the professor waited upon his majesty in the senatehouse, and was there created doctor of laws by royal favour. Saunderson was naturally of a strong healthy constitution; but being too sedentary, and constantly confining himself to the house, he became at length a valetudinarian. For some years he frequently complained of a numbness in his limbs, which, in the spring of 1739, ended in an incurable mortification of his foot. He died April 19, aged fifty-seven, and was buried, according to his request, in the chancel at Boxworth. He was a man rather to be admired than loved. He had much wit and vivacity in conversation, and many reckoned him a good companion. He had also a great regard to truth, but was one of those who think it their duty to express their sentiments on men and opinions, without reserve or restraint, or any of the courtesies of conversation, which created him many enemies; nor was he less offensive by a habit of profane swearing, and the obtrusion of infidel opinions, which last he held, notwithstanding the kindness of providence towards him throughout his extraordinary life*. He is said, however, to have received the notice of his approaching death with great calmness and serenity; and after a short silence, resuming life and spirit, talked with as much composure as usual, and at length, we are told, appointed to receive the sacrament the evening before his death, which a delirium that never went off prevented him from doing.

, a very celebrated preacher, was the son of an eminent protestant lawyer, and was born at Nismes in 1677. His father retired, after the repeal of the edict of Nantz, to Geneva, at which place he died. Saurin made no small progress in his studies, but abandoned them for some time, that he might follow arms. In 1694, he made a campaign as a cadet in lord Galloway’s company, and soon afterwards procured a pair of colours. But as soon as the duke of Savoy had concluded a peace with France, Saurin quitted a profession for which he never was designed; and, on his return to Geneva again, applied himself to philosophy and divinity, under Turretin and other professors. In 1700, he visited both Holland and England. In this last country he remained five years, and preached among the French refugees in London. Here also he married in 1703, and returned to the Hague in 1705. Soon after he became pastor to the church of French refugees, who were permitted to assemble in the chapel belonging to the palace of the princes of Orange at the Hague, in which he officiated during the remainder of his life. When the princess of Wales, afterwards queen Caroline, passed through Holland on her way to England, Saurin had the honour of paying his respects to her, and she, upon her return, desired Dr. Boulter, the preceptor to prince Frederic, the father of the present king, to write to Saurin, to draw up a treatise “on the education of princes.” The work was done, but never printed, and the author received a handsome present from the princess, and afterwards a pension from George II. to whom he dedicated a volume of his sermons. Saurin died Dec. 30, 1730. He possessed great talents, with a fine address, and a strong, clear, and harmonious voice, while his style was pure, unaffected, and eloquent. His principles were what are called moderate Calvinism. Five volumes of his sermons have made their appearance at different times; the first in 1708, the second in 1712, the third some years after, the fourth in 1722, and the fifth in 1725. Since his death, the sermons relating to the passion of Jesus Christ, and other subjects, were published in two volumes. In 1727 he published “The State of Christianity in France.”

, marquis of Halifax, a celebrated statesman, but of equivocal character, was descended from an ancient family in Yorkshire. He was the son of sir William Savile, bart. and Anne, daughter of Thomas lord Coventry, lord keeper of the great seal. He was born, probably about 1630. Upon the death of his father, he succeeded to the title of baronet, and soon distinguished himself by his abilities in public affairs; and being zealous in bringing about the restoration, was created a peer, in consideration of his own and his father’s merits. In 1668 he was appointed of that remarkable committee, which sat at Brook-hall for the examination of the accounts of the money which had been given during the Dutch war, of which no member of the House of Commons was admitted. In April 1672 he was called to a seat in the privy council; and, June following, went over to Holland with the duke of Buckingham and the earl of Arlington, as ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary, to treat about a peace with France, when he met with great opposition from hi* colleagues.

In 1675 he opposed with vigour the non-resisting testbill; and was removed from the council-board the year following by the interest of the earl of Dauby, the treasurer. He had provoked this lord by one of those witticisms in which he dealt so largely. In the examination before the council concerning the revenue of Ireland, lord Widrington confessed that he had made an offer of a considerable sum to the lord treasurer, and that his lordship had rejected it very mildly, and in such a mariner as not to discourage a second attempt. Lord Halifax observed upon this, that “it would be somewhat strange if a man should ask the use of another man’s wife, and the other should indeed refuse it, but with great civility.” His removal was very agreeable to the duke of York, who at that time had a more violent aversion to him than even to Shaftesbury himself, because he had spoken with great firmness and spirit in the House of Lords against the declaration for a toleration. However, upon a change of the ministry in 1679, his lordship was made a member of the new council. The same year, during the agitation of the bill for the exclusion of the duke of York, he seemed averse to it; but proposed such limitations of the duke’s authority when the crown should devolve upon him, as should disable him from doing any harm either in church or state; such as the taking out of his hands all power in ecclesiastical matters^ the disposal of the public money, and the power of peace or war, and lodging these in the two Houses of Parliament; and that the parliament in being at the king’s death should continue without a new summons, and assume the administration; but his lordship’s arguing so much against the danger of turning the monarchy, by the bill of exclusion, into an elective government, was thought the more extraordinary, because he made an hereditary king the subject of his mirth, and had often said “Who takes a coachman to drive him, because his father was a good coachman” Yet he was now jealous of a small slip in the succession; though he at the same time studied to infuse into some persons a zeal for a commonwealth; and to these he pretended, that he preferred limitations to an exclusion, because the one kept up the monarchy still, only passing over one person; whereas the other really introduced a commonwealth, as soon as there was a popish king on the throne. And it was said by some of his friends, that the limitations proposed were so advantageous to public liberty, that a man might be tempted to wish for a popish king, in order to obtain them. Upon this great difference of opinion, a faction was quickly formed in the new council; lord Halifax, with the earls of Essex and Sunderland, declaring for limitations, and against the exclusion, while the earl of Shaftesbury was equally zealous for the latter; and when the bill for it was brought into the House of Lords, lord Halifax appeared with great resolution at the head of the debates against it. This so highly exasperated the House of Commons, that they addressed the king to remove him from his councils and presence for ever: but he prevailed with his majesty soon after to dissolve that parliament, and was created an earl. However, upon his majesty’s deferring to call a new parliament, according to his promise to his lordship, his vexation is said to have been so great as to affect his health, and he expostulated severely with those who were sent to him on that affair, refusing the post both of secretary of state and lord-lieutenant of Ireland. A parliament being called in 1680, he still opposed the exclusion-bill, and gained great reputation by his management of the debate, though it occasioned a new address from the House of Commons to remove him. However, after rejecting that bill in the House of Lords, his lordship pressed them, though without*success, to proceed to limitations; and began with moving that the duke might be obliged to live five hundred miles out of England during the king’s life. In August 1682, he was created a marquis, and soon after made privy-seal, and, upon king James’s accession, president of the council. But on refusing his consent to the repeal of the tests, he was told by that monarch, that, though he could never forget his past services, yet, since he would not comply in that point, he was resolved to have unanimity in his councils, and, therefore, dismissed him from all public employments. He was afterwards consulted by Mr. Sidney, whether he would advise the prince of Orange’s coming over; but, this matter being only hinted, he did not encourage a farther explanation, looking upon the attempt as impracticable, since it depended on so many accidents. Upon the arrival of that prince, he was sent by the king, with the earls of Kochester and Godolphin, to treat with him, then at Hungerford.

, a celebrated commander, was born October 19, 1696, at Dresden, and was the natural son of Frederick Augustus If. king of Poland, and Aurora, countess of Konigsinarc. He gave evident proofs of his taste for military affairs from his childhood; was taught to read and write with the utmost difficulty; nor could he ever be prevailed upon to study a few ho irs in the morning, otherwise than by a promise that he should ride on horseback in the afternoon. He liked to have Frenchmen about him, for which reason their language was the only foreign one which he willingly learnt grammatically. He attended the elector in all his military expeditions; was at the siege of Lisle in 1708, when only twelve years old, and mounted the trenches several times both at the city and at the fortress, in sight of the king, his father, who admired his intrepidity. Nor did he discover less courage at the siege of Tournay, the year following, where he twice narrowly escaped death; and at the buttle of Malplaquet, far from being shocked by the dreadful carnage which attended the engagement, he declared in the evening, “that he was well pleased with the day.” In 1711, he followed the king of Poland to Stralsund, where he swam over the river, in sight of the enemy, with his pistol in his hand, during which time he saw, /vithout any seeming emotion, three officers and above twenty soldiers fall by his side. When he retired to Dresden, the king, who had been witness to his courage and abilities, raised a company of horse for him. Count Saxe spent the whole winter in teaching his regiment some new evolutions, which he had invented, and marched them against the Swedes the year following. This regiment suffered much st the battle of Gadelbusli, where he made them return three times to the attack. This campaign being ended, mad. de Konigsmarc married him to the young countess de Loben, a rich and amiable lady, whose name Avas Victoria, which name, count Saxe afterwards said, contributed as much to fix his choice on the countess, as her beauty and largtr fortune. This lady brought him a son, who died young, and the count having at length a disagreement with her, procured his marriage to be dissolved in 1721, but promised the countess never to marry again, and kept his word. She married a Saxon officer soon after, by whom she had three children, and they lived in harmony together. It was with, great reluctance that the countess had consented to her Carriage being dissolved, for she loved count Saxe; and the latter frequently repented afterwards of having taken such a step. He continued to signalize himself in the war against Sweden, was at the siege of Stralsund in December 1715, when Charles XII. was blocked up, and had the satisfaction of seeing him in the midst of his grenadiers“. The behaviour of this celebrated warrior inspired count Saxe with a high degree of veneration, which he ever retained for his memory. He served against the Turks in Hungary in 1717, and on his return to Poland in 1718, received the order of the white eagle from the king. In 1720, he visited France, and the duke of Orleans, then regent, gave him a brevet of marechal de camp. Count Saxe afterwards obtained leave from his Polish majesty to serve in France, where he purchased a German regiment in 1722, which afterwards bore his name. He changed the ancient exercise of this regiment for one of his own invention; and the chevalier Folard, on seeing this exercise, foretold immediately, in his Commentary on Polybius, torn. III. b. ii. chap. 14, that count Saxe would be a great general. During his residence in France, he learnt mathematics and the art of fortification with astonishing facility, till 1725, when prince Ferdinand, duke of Courland, falling dangerously ill in the month of December, he turned his thoughts to obtaining the sovereignty of Courland. With this view, he set out for Mittau, and arrived there, May 18, 1726. He was received with open arms by the states, and had several private interviews with the duchess dowager of Courland, who had resided there since her husband’s decease. This lady was Anne Iwanaw, second daughter of the czar I wan Alexiowitz, brother of Peter the Great. Count Saxe, having communicated his design to her, soon engaged her in his interests; and she acted with such indefatigable ardour, and conducted affairs so well, that he was unanimously elected duke of Courland, July 5, 1726. Thia choice being; opposed by Poland and Russia, the duchess supported count Saxe with all her interest, and even went to Riga and Petersburg, where she redoubled her solicitations in favour of the late election. There seems indeed to be no doubt, but that, if the count had returned her passion, he would not only have maintained his ground in Courland, but shared the throne of Russia, which this princess afterwards ascended; but, during his stay at Mittau, an affair of gallantry between him and one of her ladies broke off the marriage, and induced the duchess to abandon him. From that moment the count’s affairs took an unhappy turn, and he was forced to go back to Paris in 1729. The following remarkable circumstance occurred during the course of his enterprise: Having written from Ccmrlandto France for a supply of men and money, mademoiselle le Couvreur, a celebrated actress, who was at that time attached to him, pawned her jewels and plate, and sent him 40,000 livres. When count Saxe returned to Paris, he applied himself to obtain a complete knowledge of the mathematics, and acquired a taste for mechanics. He refused the command of the Polish army offered him by the king, his brother, in 1733, and distinguished himself on the Rhine under marechal Berwick, particularly at the lines of Etlingen, and the siege of Philipsburg, after which he was made lieutenant-general August 1, 1734. Hostilities having recommenced on the death of the emperor Charles VI. count Saxc took Prague by assault, Nov. 26, 1741, then Egra and Ellebogen, raised a regiment of Hullans, and brought back marechal de Broglio’s army upon the Rhine, where, he fixed various posts, and seized the trenches of Lanterburg. He was appointed marechal of France, March 26, 1744, and commanded the main bocly of the army in Flanders, where he so exactly observed the motions of the enemies, who were superior in, number, and made use of such excellent manoeuvres, that he reduced them to remain inactive, for they were afraid to undertake any thing. This campaign in Fianders did count Saxe great honour, and was considered as a chefd'ceuvre of the military art. He won the famous battle of Fonterioi, under the king’s command, May 11, 1745, where, though sick and weak, he gave his orders with such presence of mind, vigilance, courage, and judgment, as made him the admiration of the whole army. This victory was followed by the capture of Tournay, which the French be^ sieged; of Ghent, Bruges, Oudenarde, Ostend, Ath, &c. and at the time that the campaign was supposed to be finished, he took Brussels, February 28, 1746. Nor was the next campaign less honourable to count Saxe. He won the battle of Kauconx, Oct. I 1, the same year, 1746; and his majesty, to reward such a constant series of glorious services, dtrlurod him marechal general of his camps and armies, Jan. 12, 1747. Marechal Saxe carried troops into Zealand, gained the battle of Lanfeldt, July 2 following-, approved the siege of Bergen-op-Zoom, of which M. de Loewen made himself master, and took Maestrecht, May 7, 1748. In consequence of these victories a peace was concluded at Aix-la-Chapelle, Oct. 18, the same year. Marechai Saxe went afterwards to Chambord, which the king had given him, ordered his regiment of Hullans thither, and kept a stud of wild horses, more proper for light cavalry than those used by the French. He visited Berlin some time after, and was magnificently entertained by his Prussian majesty. On his return to Paris, he formed a plan for the establishment of a colony in the island of Tobago; but gave it up, when he found that England and Holland opposed it. Count Saxe died, after a nine days 7 illness, at Chambord, Nov. 30, 1750, in the fifty-fourth year of his age. He wrote a book on the art of war, called” Mes Reveries/ 1 of which a very splendid edition, with his life, was published in 1757, 2 vols. 4to. There is also an English translation of it. His “Life” was printed in 1752 > vols. 12mo, reprinted often.

, a celebrated German physician and philosopher, was born March 3, 1649, at Jena,.;ui was son of Christopher Schelhamm T, a it an- lessor of anatomy and surgery in that city, and fir where he was also physician to the duke of Holstei“uthier died January 11, 1716, in his sixtyseventieth year leaving” Introductio in artem medicam," Hali. 1726, 4to, and a great number of valuable and learned wor > physu;, of which it is to be wished that a complete co: v'Jtion was published. He published also some botanical dissertations, and first described the peculiar change wliici during germination, takes place in the cotyledon of palms. The Schelhammera, in botany, was so called in honour of him. His life, by Scheffelius, in Latin, Visnr*r, 17 % 8vo, is prefixed to the letters written to him by several of the literati.

, or rather Schedone (Bartolomeo), was born at Modena in 1560. He is said to have acquired the principles of the art of painting in the school of the Caracci, but must have remained there a very short time, as it is difficult to meet with any traces of their style in his works. He afterwards studied, and with the greatest success, the works and manner of Corregio. When his early works came to be admired, Ranuccio, duke of Parma, took him into his service, and for this patron he painted several pictures, which were among the principal ornaments of the collection of the king of Naples, who was heir to the Farnese family. Sir Robert Strange counted in that palace and the city of Naples near fourscore pictures by this artist. There are but few in the other collections. In the cathedral of Modena there is an admirable picture of his, of S. Geminiano restoring a dead child to life; there are also a few at Parma, but in general they are seldom to be met with to purchase. In all he is the imitator of Corregio, and between their works some connoisseurs have found it difficult to distinguish, nor has any artist so successfully imitated him, either in the harmony of his colouring, his knowledge of light and shadow, or the graces he has diffused throughout many of his compositions. Schidoni is said to have been addicted to gaming, which wasted his substance, and disturbed his mind; and at last to have fallen a sacrifice to it, not being able to overcome the mortification of having one night lost more than he was able to pay. He died at the age of fifty-six, in 1616.

, a German writer, principally known in this country as a dramatist, was born Nov. 10, 1759, at Marbach, in the duchy jf Wurtemberg, where his father was lieutenant in the service of the duke. While a boy, he was distinguished by uncommon ardour of imagination, which he never sought to limit or controul. When young, he was placed in the military school at Stuttgard, but disliked the necessary subordination. He was intended for the profession of surgery, and which he studied for some time; but from the freedom of his opinions, he was obliged to withdraw himself through apprehension of the consequences, and it is said that, at this time, he produced his first play, “The Robbers.” This tragedy, though full of faults and pernicious extravagancies, was the admiration of all the youth of enthusiastic sentiments in Germany, and several students at Leipsic deserted their college, with the avowed purpose of forming a troop of banditti in the forests of Bohemia; but their first disorders brought on them a summary punishment, which restored them to their senses, and Schiller’s biographer gravely tells us, that this circumstance added to his reputation. The tragedy certainly was quite adapted to the taste of Germany, was soon translated into several foreign languages, and the author appointed to the office of dramatic composer to the theatre of Mauheim. For this he now wrote his ' Cabal and Love,“the” Conspiracy of Fiesco,“and” Don Carlos,“and published a volume of poems, which procured him a wife of good family and fortune. This lady fell in love with him from reading his works, and is said to have roused him from those habits of dissipation in which he had in* dulged, and to which he was in great danger of falling a victim. He was now patronized by the duke of Saxe- Weimar, who conferred on him the title of aulic counsellor, and nominated him to the professorship of history and philosophy at the university of Jena. He had previously written an account of the” Revolt of the Netherlands from the Spanish government,“and he now set about composing his 4< History of the thirty Years’ War in Germany,” a work which has been much admired in his own country. At length he removed to Weimar, where the pension, as honorary professor from the duke, was continued to him; and produced the “History of the most memorable Conspira cies,” and the “Ghost-Seer,” which displayed the peculiar turn of his mind, and were much read. In the latter part of his life he conducted a monthly work published at Tubingen, and an annual poetical almanac, and composed a tragedy entitled “The Maid of Orleans.” He was the author of other dramatic pieces, some of which are known, though imperfectly, in this country, through the medium of translation. He died at Weimar, May 9, 1805, and he was interred with great funeral solemnity. In his private character Schiller was friendly, candid, and sincere. In his youth he affected eccentricity in his manners and appearance, and a degree of singularity seems always to have adhered to him. In his works, brilliant strokes of genius are unquestionably to be found, but more instances of extravagant representation of passion, and violation of truth and nature. They enjoyed some degree of popularity here, during the rage for translating and adapting German plays for our theatres; and although this be abated, they have contributed to the degeneracy of dramatic taste, and have not produced the happiest effects on our poetry.

, was son of a native of Zurich, in Switzerland, lieutenant in the Dutch army at the memorable siege of Bergen-op-Zoom in 1747; when, after a gallant resistance of two months, it was, as generally believed, surprised by the French under marshal Lowendal. Upon quitting the service Mr. Schnebbelie came over to England, and settled in the business of a confectioner, in which capacity he had frequently the honour of attending on king George II. He afterwards opened a shop at Rochester, where one of his sons still resides; and the same profession his son Jacob (who was born Aug. 30, 1760, in Duke’s Court, in the parish of St. Martin in the Fields) followed for some time, first at Canterbury, and afterwards at Hammersmith till, nature pointing out to him the proper road to fame and credit, he quitted his shop and commenced self-taught teacher, at Westminster and other public schools, of the art of drawing, in which he made a proficiency which introduced him to the notice of many among the learned and the great. To the earl of Leicester’s notice he was first introduced by accidentally sketching a view in his park near Hertford, and was employed by him in taking some of the most picturesque landscapes about Tunbridge Wells, with a view to their publication for his benefit. At their noble president’s express recommendation he was appointed draughtsman of the society of antiquaries; and filled that office with equal credit to himself and his patron. The merits of his pencil are too generally known and acknowledged to require any exaggerated eulogium, Happy in a quick eye and a discriminating taste, he caught the most beautiful objects in the happiest points of view; and for fidelity and elegance of delineation, may be ranked high among the list of firstrate artists. The works put forth on his own account are not numerous. In 1781 he intended to publish six views of St. Augustine’s Monastery, to be engraved by Mr. Rogers, &c. five of which. were completed, and one small view of that religious house was etched by himself. In 1787 he etched a plate representing the Serpentine River, part of Hyde Park, with the house of earl Bathurst, a distant view of Westminster Abbey, &c. now the property and in the possession of Mr. Jukes, intended to be aquatinted for publication, Mr. Jukes purchased also from him several views of Canterbury cathedral, St. Augustine’s monastery, &c. In March 1788 he published four views of St. Alban’s town and abbey, drawn and etched by himself; which in the November following were published, aquatinted by F. Jukes. About the same time that he set on foot the “Antiquaries Museum,' he became an associate with the late James Moore, esq. F. S. A. and Mr, Parkyns, in the f< Monastic Remains*;” which, after five numbers had appeared, he relinquished to his coadjutors. The assistance he occasionally gave to “The Gentleman’s Magazine,” the smallest part of his merit, it will be needless to particularize; his masterly hand being visible on whatever it was exerted. It is of more consequence to his fame to point out the beauties of many of the plates in the second and third volumes of the “Vetusta Monumenta” of the Society of Antiquaries and in the second volume of the “Sepulchral Monuments of Great Britain ,” the far greater part of the numerous plates in which are after him; or in the very many drawings he had finished, and the sketches he had designed, for Mr. Nichols’s “History of Leicestershire.” He had completed also some views of King’s college chapel at Cambridge, in a style worthy that most beautiful and most perfect of all our gothic buildings, and in a manner which had so far recommended him to royal notice, that, had his life been spared, there is no doubt but he would have been properly distinguished.

, a learned historian and antiquary, was born September 6, 1694-, at Sulzbourg, a town in the margraviate of Baden Dourlach; his father, holding an honourable office in the margrave’s court, died soon after in Alsace, leaving his son to the care of his mother. After tei: years studying at Dourlach and Basil, he kept a public exercise on some contested points of ancient history with applause, and finished his studies in eight years more at Strasbourg. In 1717, he there spoke a Latin panegyric on Ge^manicus, that favourite hero of Germany, which was printed by order of the city. In return for this favour he spoke a funeral oration on M. Barth, under whom he had studied; and another on Kuhn, the professor of eloquence and history there, whom he was soon after elected to succeed in 1720, at the age of twenty ­ix. The resort of students to him from the Northern nations was very great, and the princes of Germany sent their sons to study law under him. The professorship of history at Francfort on the Oder was offered to him; the czarina invited him to another at St. Petersburg, with the title of historiographer royal; Sweden offered him the same professorship at Upsal, formerly held by Scheffer and Boeder, his countrymen; and the university of Leyden named him successor to the learned Vitriarius. He preferred Strasbourg to all. Amidst the succession of lectures public and private, he found time to publish an innumerable quantity of historical and critical dissertations, too many to be here particularised. In 1725 he pronounced a congratulatory oration before king Stanislaus, in the name of the university, on the marriage of his daughter to the king of France; and, in 1726, another on the birth of the dauphin, besides an anniversary one on the king of France’s birthday, and others on his victories. In 1726 he quitted his professorship, and began his travels at the public expence. From Paris he went to Italy, stayed at Rome six months, re* ceived from the king of the Two Sicilies a copy of the “Antiquities of Herculaneum,” and from the duke of Parma the “Museum Florentinum.” He came to England at the beginning of the late king’s reign, and left it the day that Pere Courayer, driven out of Paris by theological disputes, arrived in London. He was now honoured with a canonry of St. Thomas, one of the most distinguished Lutheran chapters, and visited Paris a third time in 1728. Several dissertations by him are inserted in the “Memoirs of the academy of inscriptions and belles lettres;” one, ascribing the invention of moveable types to Guttenberg of Strasbourg, 1440, against Meerman,

, a distinguished general, was descended of a noble family in Germany, and waa the son of count Schomberg, by his first wife, an English lady, daughter of the lord Dudley; which count was killed at the battle of Prague in Bohemia in 1620, together with several of his sons. The duke was born in 1608. He served first in the army of the United Provinces, and afterwards became the particular confident of William II. prince of Orange; in whose last violent actions he had so great a share, and particularly in the attempt upon Amsterdam, that, on the prince’s death in 1650, he retired into France. Here he gained so high a reputation, that, next to the prince of Conde, and Turenne, he was esteemed the best general in that kingdom; though, on account of his firm adherence to the Protestant religion, he was not for a considerable time raised to the dignity of a marshal. In Nov. 1659 he offered his service to Charles II. for his restoration to the throne of England; and, the year following, the court of France being greatly solicitous for the interest of Portugal against the Spaniards, he was sent to Lisbon; and in his way thither passed through England, in order to concert measures with king Charles for the suppoxt of Portugal. Among other discourse which he had with, that prince, he advised his majesty to set up for the head of the Protestant religion; which would give him a vast ascendant among the princes of Germany, make him umpire of all their affairs, procure him great credit with the protestants of France, and keep that crown in perpetual fear of him. He urged him likewise not to part with Dunkirk, the sale of which was then in agitation; since, considering the naval power of England, it could not be taken, and the possession of it would keep both France and Spain in a dependence upon his majesty.

When the prince of Orange was almost ready for his expedition into England, marshal Schomberg obtained leave of the elector of Brandenbourg to accompany his highness in that attempt; and, after their arrival at London, he is supposed to have been the author of that remarkable stratagem for trying the affections of the people, by raising an universal apprehension over the kingdom of the approach of the Irish with fire and sword. Upon the prince’s advancement to the throne of England, he was appointed master of the ordnance, and general of his majesty’s forces; in April 1689, knight of the garter, and the same month naturalized by act of parliament; and, in May, was created a baron, earl, marquis, and duke of this kingdom, by the name and title of baron Teys, earl of Brentford, marquis of Harwich, and duke of Schomberg. The House of Commons likewise voted to him 100,000l. for the services which he had done; but he received only a small part of that sum, the king after his death paying his son 5000l. a year for the remainder. In Aug. 1689 he sailed for Ireland, with an army, for the reduction of that kingdom; and, having mustered all his forces there, and finding them to be not above 14,000 men, among whom there were but 2000 horse, he marched to Dundalk, where he posted himself; king James being come to Ardee. within five or six miles of him, with above thrice his number. Schomberg, therefore, being disappointed of the supplies from England, which had been promised him, and his army being so greatly inferior to the Irish, resolved to keep himself on the defensive. He lay there six weeks in a rainy season; and his men, for want of due management, contracted such diseases that almost one half of them perished.

He was censured by some for not making a bold attempt; and such complaints were sent of this to king William, that his majesty wrote twice to him, pressing him on the subject. But the duke saw that the enemy was well posted and well provided, and had several good officers among them; and knew that, if he met with a check, his whole army, and consequently all Ireland, had been lost, since he could not have made a regular retreat. The surest method was to preserve hi’s army; which would save Ulster, and although his conduct exposed him to the reproaches of some persons, better judges thought, that his management of this campaign was one of the greatest actions of his life. At the battle of the Boyne, July 1, 1690, he passed the river in his station, and immediately rallied and encouraged the French Protestants, who had been left exposed by the death of their commander, with this short harangue; “Aliens, messieurs, voila vos persecuteurs,” pointing to the French Papists in the enemy’s army. But these words were scarcely uttered, when a few of king James’s guards, who returned full speed to their main body, after the slaughter of their companions, and whom the French refugees suffered to pass, thinking them to 1 be of their own party, fell furiously upon the duke, and gave him two wounds over the head, which, however, were not mortal. Upon this, the French regiment acknowledged their error by committing a greater; for, firing rashly on the enemy, they shot him through the neck, of which wound he instantly died. He was buried in St. Patrick’s cathedral, where the dean and chapter erected a small monument to his honour, at their own expence, with an elegant inscription by Dr. Swift, which is printed in the Dean’s works.

Burnet tells us, that he was “a calm man, of great application and conduct, and thought much better than he spoke; of true judgment, of exact probity, and of an humble and obliging temper.” And another writer observes, that he had a thorough experience of the world; knew men and things better than any man of his profession evet clicl; and was as great in council as at the head of an army. He appeared courteous and affable to every person, and yet had an air of grandeur that commanded respect from all. In king William’s cabinet are the dispatches of the duke of Schomberg in Ireland to king William, which sir John Dalrymple has printed in the second volume of his memoirs “because,” he remarks, " they paint in lively colours the state of the army in that country clear Schoinberg of inactivity, which has been unjustly thrown upon him; and do honour to the talents of a man, who wrote with the elegant simplicity of Caesar, and to whose reputation and conduct, next to those of king William, the English nation owes the revolution.

, a learned German, was born December 1641, at Corback, in the county of Waldeck. Having taken a doctor’s degree in philosophy at Wittemberg, in 1664, he returned to Corbac, where he taught during some time instead of his father, and then returning to Wittemberg, published a learned piece, entitled “Judicium de novissimis prudentise civilis scriptoribus,” &c. under the assumed name of “Eubulus Theodatus Sarckmasius.” Jn this little work, which consists but of a leaf and half, the author passes judgment very freely on fifteen German lawyers, or political writers, which raised him many enemies, and engaged him in a literary war, which produced a great number of pieces collected by Crusius, 8vo, under the title of “Acta Siirckmasiana,” and even occasioned his being struck out from the list of doctors by the university of Wittemberg. He was, however, not only restored to that title two years after, but appointed professor of history, then of poetry, and at length of Greek. In 1700, Schurtztieisch succeeded to the rhetorical chair, and became counsellor and librarian to the duke of Saxe-Weimar, and died July 7, 1708. He left a great number of learned works on history, poetry, criticism, literature, &c. the most celebrated of which are, “Disputationes historic^ civiles,” Leipsic, 1699,3 torn. 4to. Henry Leonard Schurtzfteisch, his brother, was also author of some works, among which is, “Historia Ensiferorum ordinis Teutonic!,” Wittemberg, 1701, 12mo.

, a very learned German, was descended from ancient and noble families; and born at Aurach, a town of Franconia, Dec. 20, 1626. He made good use of a liberal education, and was not only a master of the French, Latin, Greek, and Hebrew languages, but had also some skill in mathematics and the sciences, The great progress he made in his youth coming to the ears of Ernest the pious, duke of Saxe-Goth'a, this prince sent for him from Cobourg, where he then was, to be educated with his children. After remaining two years at Gotha, he went, in 1642, to Strasbnrg; but returned to Gotha in. 1646, and was made honorary librarian to the duke. In 1651, he was made an lie and ecclesiastical counsellor; and, in 1663, a counsellor of state, first minister, and sovereign director of the consistory. The year after, he went into the service of Maurice, duke of Saxe-Zeist, as counsellor of state and chancellor; and was no less regarded by this new master than he had been by the duke of SaxeGotha. He continued with him till his death, which happened in 1681; and then preferred a life of retirement, during which he composed a great many works; but Frederic III. elector of Brandenburg, again brought him into public life, and made him^. counsellor of state and chancellor of the university of Halle, dignities which he did not enjoy long, for he died at Halle Dec. 18, 1692, in the sixty-sixth year of his age. He was twice married, but had only one son, who survived him. Besides his knowledge of languages, he was learned in law, history, divinity; and is also said to have been a tolerable painter and engraver. Of his numerous writings, that in most estimation for its utility, was published at Francfort, 1692, 2 vols. folio, usually bound up in one, with the title, “Commentarius Historicus & Apologeticus de Lutheranisrno, sive de lleformatione Religionis ductu D. Martini Lutberi in magna Germania, aliisque regionibus, & speciatim in Saxonia, recepta & stabilita,” &c. This work, which is very valuable on many accounts, and particularly curious for several singular pieces and extracts that are to be found in it, still holds its repu^ tation, and is referred to by all writers on the reformation.

At Houghton Mr. Seeker applied himself with alacrity to all the duties of a country clergyman, omitting nothing which he thought could be of use to his Bock. He brought clown his conversation and his sermons to the level of their understandings; visited them in private, catechised the young and ignorant, received his country neighbours and tenants kindly and hospitably, and was of great service to the poorer sort by his skill in physic, which was the only use he ever made of it. Though this place was in a very remote part of the world, yet the solitude of it perfectly suited his studious disposition, and the income arising from it bounded his ambition. Here he would have been content to live and die here, as he has often been heard to declare, he spent some of the happiest hours of his life and it was no thought or choice of his own that removed "him to a higher and more public sphere. But Mrs. Seeker’s health, which was thought to have been injured by the dampness of the situation, obliged him to think of exchanging it for a more healthy one. On this account he procured an exchange of Houghton for a prebend of Durham, and the rectory of Ryton, in 1727; and for the two following years he lived chiefly at Durham, going over every week to officiate at Ryton, and spending there two or three months together in the summer. In July 1732, the duke of Grafton, then lord chamberlain, appointed him chaplain to the king. For this favour he was indebted to bishop Sherlock, who having heard him preach at Bath, thought his abilities worthy of being brought forward into public notice. From that time an intimacy commenced betwixt them, and he received from that prelate many solid proofs of esteem and friendship. This preferment produced him also the honour of a conversation with queen Caroline. Mr. Seeker’s character was now so well established, that on the resignation of Dr. Tyrwhit, he was instituted to the rectory of St. James’s, May 18, 1733, and in the beginning of July went to Oxford to take his degree of doctor of laws, not being of sufficient standing for that of divinity. On this occasion he preached his celebrated Act sermon, on the advantages and duties of academical education, which was printed at the desire of the heads of houses, and quickly passed through several editions. The queen, in a subsequent interview, expressed her high opinion of this sermon, which was also thought to have contributed not a little to his promotion to the bishopric of Bristol, to which he was consecrated Jan. 19, 1735.

In public affairs, his grace acted the part of an honest citizen, and a worthy member of the British legislature. From his entrance into the House of Peers, his parliamentary conduct was uniformly upright and noble. He kept equally clear from the extremes of factious petulance and servile dependence: never wantonly thwarting administration from motives of party zeal or private pique, or personal attachment, or a passion for popularity: nor yet going every length with every minister, from views of interest or ambition. He seldom, however, spoke in parliament, except where the interests of religion and virtue seemed to require it: but whenever he did, he spoke with propriety and strength, and was heard with attention and deference. Though he never attached himself blindly to any set of men, yet his chief political connections were with the late duke of Newcastle, and lord chancellor Hardwicke. To these he owed principally his advancement: and he lived long enough to shew his gratitude to them or their descendants.

, an early Italian writer, was born at Florence about the close of the fifteenth century. He was educated at Padua, where he became an accomplished classical scholar, but appears afterwards to have gone into public life, and was employed in various embassies and iiegociations by duke Cosmo, of Florence. He wrote an excellent history of Florence from 1527 to 1555, which, however, remained in ms. until 1723, when it appeared, together with a life of Niccolo Capponi, gonfalonier of Florence, Segni’s uncle. He likewise translated Aristotle’s Ethics. “L‘Etica d’Aristotele, tradotta in volga Fiorentino,” Florence, 1550, 4to, a very elegant book; and “DelP Anima d'Aristotele,” 1583, also the Rhetoric and Poetics of the same author, &c. He died in 1559.

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