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

, an accomplished courtier, scholar, and poet, was the son of sir John Suckling, comptroller of the royal household, and was born at Whitton in Middlesex, where his father resided, in 1609. His biopraphers have hitherto fixed the time of his birth in 1612, but, according to some extracts from the parish-register of Twickenham, in Lysons’s " Environs/* it appears, that he was baptised Feb. 10, 160S-9. Lloyd, from whoop we have the first account of this poet, mentions a circumstance relating to his birth, from which more was presaged than followed. He was born, according to his mother’s computation, in the eleventh month, and long life and health were expected from so extraordinary an occurrence. During his infancy he certainly displayed an uncommon facility of acquiring every branch of education. He spoke Latin at five years of age, and could write in that language at the age of nine. It is probable that he was taught more languages than one at the same time, and by practising frequently with men of education who kept company with his father, soon acquired an ease and elegance of address which qualified him for the court as well as for foreign travel. His father is represented as a man of a serious turn and grave manners; the son volatile, good-tempered, and thoughtless; characteristics which he seems to have preserved throughout life. His tutors found him particularly submissive, docile, easy to be taught, and quick in learning It does not appear that he was sent to either university, yet a perusal of his prose works can leave no doubt that he laid a very solid and extensive foundation for various learning, and studied, not only such authors as were suitable to the vivacity of his disposition, but made himself acquainted with those political and religious controversies which were about to involve his country in all the miseries of civil war.

As a poet, he was one of those who wrote for amusement, and was not stimulated by ambition, or anxious for fame. His pieces were sent loose about the world; and not having been collected until after his death, they are probably less correct than he left them. Many of his verses are as rugged and unhamionious as those of Donne; but his songs and ballads are elegant and graceful. He was particularly happy and original in expressing the feelings of artificial love, disdain, or disappointment. The “Session of the Poets,” the “Lines to a Rival,” the “Honest Lover,” and the “Ballad upon a Wedding,” are sufficient to entitle him to the honours of poetry, which the author of the lives published under the name of Gibber, is extremely anxious to wrest from him.

His works have been often reprinted; first in 1646, 8yo, again in 1659, and 1676; very correctly by Tonson in 1719, and elegantly, but incorrectly, by Davies in 1770. The edition of Tonson has been followed in the late edition of the “English Poets,” with the omission of such pieces as were thought degrading to his memory, and insulting to public decency . But whatever opinion is entertained of Suckling as a poet, it may be doubted whether his prose writings are not calculated to raise a yet higher opinion of his talents. His letters, with a dash of gallantry more free than modern times will admit, are shrewd in observation, and often elegant in style. That addressed to Mr. Germaine has already been noticed, and his “Account of Religion by Reason,” is remarkable for soundness of argument, and purity of expression, far exceeding the controversial writings of that age. This piece affords a presumption that he was even now no stranger to those reflections which elevate the human character, and that if his life had been spared, it would have been probably devoted to more honourable objects than those in which he had employed his youthful days.

, denominated the founder of the Russian theatre, was the son of Peter Sumorokof, a Russian nobleman, and was born at Moscow November 14, 1727. He received the first rudiments of learning in his father’s house, where, besides a grammatical knowledge of his native tongue, he was well grounded in the Latin language. Being removed to the seminary of the cadets at St. Petersburg!*, he prosecuted his studies with unwearied application, and gave early proofs of his genius for poetry. Even on holidays he would retire from his companions, who were engaged in play, and devote his whole time to the perusal of the Latin and French writers: nor was it long before he himself attempted to compose. The first efforts of his genius were love-songs, whose tenderness and beauties, till then unexpressed in the Russian tongue, were greatly admired, and considered as certain prognostics of his future fame. Upon quitting the seminary, he was appointed adjutant, first to count Golovkin, and afterwards to count Rosomouski: and being soon noticed and patronized by count Ivan Shuvalof, he was introduced by that Maecenas to the empress Elizabeth, who took him under her protection. About the twenty-ninth year of his age, an enthusiastic fondness he had contracted for the works of Racine, turned his genius to the drama; and he wrote the tragedy of “Koref,” which laid the foundation of the Russian theatre. This piece was first acted by some of his former schoolmates, the cadets, who had previously exercised their talents in declamations, and in acting a French play. The empress Elizabeth, informed of this phenomenon in the theatrical world, ordered the tragedy to be exhibited in her presence, upon a small theatre of the court, where German, Italian, and French plays had been performed. The applause and distinction which the author received on this occasion, encouraged him to follow the bent of his genius, and he produced other tragedies, several comedies, and two operas. With respect to his tragedies, Racine was his model; and the Russian biographer of Sumorokof, who seems a competent judge of his merit, allows, that though in some instances he has attained all the excellence of the French poet, yet he has failed in many others; but it would be uncandid to insist upon such defects in a writer who first introduced the drama among his countrymen. The French overlook in their Corneille still greater faults. “His comedies,” continues the same author, “contain much humour; but I do not imagine that our dramatic writers will adopt him for their model: for he frequently excites the laughter of the spectator at the expence of his cooler judgment. Nevertheless, they present sufficient passages to prove, that he would have attained a greater degree of perfection in this line, if he had paid more attention to paint our manners, and to follow the taste of the best foreign writers.”

With respect to his disposition, says his biographer, it was amiable; but his extreme sensibility, an excellent quality in a poet when tempered with philosophy, occasioned that singularity and vehemence of character, which gave so much trouble and uneasiness to all his acquaintance, but particularly to himself. He was polite and condescending towards those who treated him with respect, but haughty to those who behaved to him with pride. He knew no deceit; he was a true friend, and an open enemy and coul neither forget an obligation nor an injury. Passionate, and frequently inconsiderate in his pursuits^ he could not bear the least opposition and oftentimes looked upon the most trifling circumstance as the greatest evil. His extraordinary fame, the many favours which the empress conferred upon him, with the indulgence and veneration of his friends, might have made him extremely fortunate, if he had understood the art of being so. He had conceived a great, perhaps too great, idea of the character and merits of a true poet; and could not endure to see with patience this noble and much-esteemed art, which had been consecrated by Homer, Virgil, and other great men, profaned by persons without judgment or abilities. These pretenders, he would say, shock the public with their nonsense in rhyme; and clothe their monstrous conceptions in the dress of the Muses. The public recoil from them with disgust and aversion; and, deceived by their appearance, treat with irreverence those children of heaven the true Muses. The examples of Lomonozof and Sumorokof have tended to diffuse a spirit of poetry, and a taste for polite learning, among the Russians; and they are succeeded bj a, numerous band of poets.

, a Flemish historian and antiquary, was born at Antwerp in 1567. We have no particulars of his literary progress, but a general character that he was a man of science and learning, of an amiable disposition, and occasionally a wit, a poet, and a man of business. He devoted much of his time to study, and published a great many works which brought him considerable reputation. Saxius says he does not know whother he married or lived single, nor, he acids, “is it of much importance. This, I know, that he does not speak very respectfully of the ladies and their company. He says of Janus Dousa, the father, that when he returned home, he married that necessary evil, a icife” Whatever reason Swert had for using this expression, Saxius might have known from Valerius Andreas, or from Foppen, that he married Susanna Van Erp, and had a family of six children. He died at Antwerp in 1629, aged sixty- two.

, an illustrious English wit, and justly celebrated also for his political knowledge, was descended from a very ancient family, and born Nov. 30, 1667. His grandfather, Mr. Thomas Swift, was vicar of Goodrich in Herefordshire, and married Mrs. Elizabeth Dryden, aunt of Dryden the poet; by whom he had six sons, Godwin, Thomas, Dryden, William, Jonathan, and Adam. Thomas was bred at Oxford, but died young; Godwin was a barrister of Gray’s-inn; and William, Dryden, Jonathan, and Adam, were attornies. Godwin having married a relation of the old marchioness of Ormond, the old duke of Ormond made him attorney-general in the palatinate of Tipperary in Ireland. Ireland was at this time almost without lawyers, the rebellion having converted men of all conditions into soldiers. Godwin, therefore, determined to attempt the acquisition of a fortune in that kingdom, and the same motive induced his four brothers tO'go with him. Jonathan, at the age of about twenty-three, and before he went to Ireland, married Mrs. Abigail Erick, a gentlewoman of Leicestershire; and about two years after left her a widow with one child, a daughter, and pregnant with another, having no means of subsistence but an annuity of 20l. which her husband had purchased for her in England, immediately after his marriage. In this distress she was taken into the family of Godwin, her husband’s eldest brother; and there, about seven months after his death, delivered of a son, whom she called Jonathan, in remembrance of his father, and who was afterwards the celebrated dean of St. Patrick’s.

He was, in 1597, a candidate for the office of secretary to the company of merchant adventurers at Stade, of which he was a member; on which occasion the unfortunate earl of Essex interested himself in his favour, and wrote two letters in his behalf, dated from the court on the last of April; a private one to Mr. Ferrers, the deputy-governor, recommending Mr. Sylvester as an able and honest man; and a general one to the company, to the same purpose, in which he mentions that he had received a very good report of his sufficiency and fitness for the post of secretary, being both well qualified with language, and many other good parts, and honest and of good conversation; two especial motives of his lordship’s request in his behalf. Sylvester’s translation of Du Bartas is dedicated to king James;^nd among those who pay him the highest compliments appears Ben Jonson, whom tradition makes an intimate friend, and, as some think, a relation. He translated also the Quatrains of Pibrac, and many other pieces of French poetry; with some from the Latin of Fracastorius, &c. One of his own pieces has the ridiculously quaint title of “Tobacco battered, and the pipes shattered, (about their ears that idlely idolize so base and barbarous a weed; or at least-wise over-love so loathsome a vanitie:) by a volley of holy shot thundered from mount Helicon.” This may be supposed to have been written to please the great enemy of tobacco, James I. Not much can now be said in favour of his compositions, either the translations, or those that are original, although he gained greater reputation from the former than the latter. Dryden tells us, in the Dedication to the Spanish Fryar, that tf when he was a boy, he thought inimitable Spenser a mean poet, in comparison of Sylvester’s Dubartas," and ^ was wrapt into an ecstacy when he read these lines

, a citizen and senator of ancient Rome, and consul in the year 391, has left us ten books of epistles; from which, as well as from other things, we collect, that he was a warm opposer of the Christian religion. This he shews particularly in the sixty-first epistle of the tenth book, addressed to the emperor Valentinian, whom he petitioned in favour of paganism. He was very unfortunate, after having enjoyed a high degree of favour at court. The emperor Theodosius thought proper to desire that he would pronounce his panegyric before him; but when he heard that Symmachus had been equally liberal in his praises of the tyrant Maximus, who reigned before him, and to whom Theodosius himself had submitted from political motives, he banished Symmachus, and persecuted him so even in his exile, that with all his prejudices in favour of paganism, he was obliged to take refuge in a Christian church to save his life. Ammianus Marcellinus speaks of him as a man of great learning and modesty; and his epistles shew him to have been a man of acute parts, and of eloquence, such as eloquence was in his time, that is, verbose and florid. Scioppius, Pareus, and other learned men, have written notes upon the epistles of Symmachus: 'but we know of no later edition of them than that of Leyden, 1653, 12mo. The first edition, which has no date, but probably was printed between 1503 and 1513, is very rare and valuable. Ambrose, bishop of Milan, wrote against Symmachus; and so did the Christian poet Prudentius.

, an Italian poet, whose works were once proscribed by the inquisition, and having become scarce, are therefore accounted valuable, was born at Nola about 1520. He passed a great part of his life attached to the service of don Pedro de Toledo, viceroy of Naples, and don Garcias de Toledo, commander of the gallies in the same kingdom. The period of his death is not precisely known, but he is said to have been judge of Gaieta in 1569; and, as he was then in a very bad state of health, is supposed to have died soon after. He had the reputation of a very good poet, and his productions, as far as they are now known, are these 1. “II Vendeminiatore,” the Vintager, a poem in which he described in too free a manner, the licence of the inhabitants in the vicinity of Nola, at the time of the vintages; Naples, 1534; Venice, 1549, 4to. On this account all his poems were put into the Index expurgatorius. Mortified at this rigour, he addressed an ode to the pope, asserting, that, though his poem was licentious, his life had not been so; remonstrating against the inclusion of his innocent productions in the sentence with the culpable piece; and declaring that he was employed in a poem upon the tears of St. Peter, whose merits, he trusted, would atone for his offence, and procure him deserved honour. In consequence of this ode, when the next edition of the Index expurgatorius appeared, not only the innoxious poems, but the Vendemmiatore also, were omitted, as if the repentance of the poet had purified his poem! 2. “II Cavallarizzo,” Vicenza, 8vo. 4. Sonnets, Songs, Stanzas, and some Comedies, Lastly, in 1767, professor Ranza published an inedited poem of Tansillo’s, entitled “Balia,” which has been elegantly translated into English by Mr. Roscoe, under the title “The Nurse,” 1798, 4to.

, a most celebrated Italian poet, was descended from the illustrious house of the Tassi of Almcnno, about five miles from Bergamo, a family which had supported itself by alliances till the time of Bernardo Tasao, whose mother was of the house of Cornaro. The estate of Bernardo, the father of our poet, was no wise equal to his birth; but this deficiency, in point of fortune, was in some measure compensated by the gifts of understanding. His works in verse and prose are recorded as monuments of his genius; and his fidelity to Ferrante of Saiii.everino, prince of Salerno, to \\hom he was entirely devoted, entitled him to the esteem of every man of honour. This prince had made him his secretary, and taken him with him to Naples, where he settled, and married Portia di Rossi, of one of the most illustrious families in that city.

The second Leonora that was given him for a mistress was the countess of San Vitale, daughter of the count of Sala, who lived at that time at the court of Ferrara, and passed for one of the most accomplished persons in Italy. Those who imagined that Tasso would not presume to lift his eyes to his master’s sister, supposed that he loved this lady. It is certain that he had frequent opportunities of discoursing with her, and that she had frequently been the subject of his verses. The third Leonora was a lady in the service of the princess Leonora of Este. This person was thought by some to be the most proper object of the poet’s gallantry. Tasso, several times, employed his muse in her service: in one of his pieces he confesses that, considering the princess as too high for. his hope, he had fixed his affection upon her, as of a condition more suitable to his own. But if any thing can be justly drawn from this particular, it seems rather to strengthen the opinion, that his desires, at least at one time, had aspired to a greater height. It appears, however, difficult to determine with certainty in relation to Tasso' s passion; especially when we consider the privilege allowed to poets: though M. Mirabuud makes no scruple to mention it as a circumstance almost certain, and fixes it without hesitation on the princess Leonora. Tasso, himself, in several of his poems, seems to endeavour to throw an obscurity over his passion. In the mean while Tasso proceeded with his <c Jerusalem," which he completed in the thirtieth year of his age; but this poem was not published by his own authority; it was printed against his will, as soon as he had finished the last book, and before he had time to give the revisals and corrections that a work of such a nature required. The public had already seen several parts, which had been sent into the world by the authority of his patrons. The success of this work was prodigious: it was translated into the Latin, French, Spanish, and even the oriental languages, almost as soon as it appeared-, and it may be said, that no such performance ever before raised its reputation to such a height in so small a space of time. But the satisfaction which Tasso must have felt, in spite of all his philosophy, at the applause of the public, was soon disturbed by a melancholy event. Bernardo Tasso, who spent his old age in tranquillity at Ostia upon the P<>, the government of which place had been given him by the duke of Mantua, fell sick. As soon as this news reached his son, he immediately went to him, attended him with the most filial regard, and scarce ever stirred from his bedside during the whole time of his illness: but all these cares were ineffectual; Bernardo, oppressed with age, and overcome by the violence of his distemper, paid the unavoidable tribute to nature, to the great affliction of Torqua:o. The duke of Mantua, who had a sincere esteem lor Bernardo, caused him to be interred, with much pomp, in the church of St. Egidius at Mantua, with this simple inscription on his tomb:

The duke received Tasso with great seeming satisfaction, and gave him fresh marks of his esteem: but this was not all that Tasso expected; his great desire was to be master of his own works, and he was very earnest that his writings might be restored to him, which were in the duke’s possession; but this was what he could by no means obtain: his enemies had gained such an ascendancy over the mind of' Alphonso, that they made him believe, or pretend to believe, that the poet had lost all his fire, and that in his present situation he was incapable of producing any thing new, or of correcting his poems: he, therefore, exhoried him to think only of leading a quiet and easy life for the future: but Tasso was sensibly vex-ed at this proceeding, and believed the duke wanted him entirely to relinquish his studies, and pass the remainder of his days in idleness and obscurity. “He would endeavour,” says he, in his letter to the duke of Urbino, “to make me a shameful deserter of Parnassus for the gardens of Epicurus, for scenes of pleasures unknown to Virgil, Catullus, Horace, and even Lucretius himself.” Tasso, therefore, reiterated his entreaties to have his writings restored to him, but the duke continued inflexible, and, to complete our poet’s vexation, all access to the princesses was denied him: fatigued at length with useless remonstrances, he once more quitted Ferrara, and fled (as he expresses it himself) ITke another Buis, leaving behind him even his books and manuscripts.

At the approach of winter they returned to Naples, when the prince of Palena again pressed Tasso to reside with him; but Tasso, who judged it highly unadvisable to comply with his request, resolved to retire to Rome, and wait there the issue of his law-suit. He lived in that city about a year in high esteem with pope Sixtus V; when, being invited to Florence by Ferdinando, grand duke of Tuscany, who had been cardinal at Rome when Tasso first resided there, and who now employed the pope’s interest to procure a visit from him, he could not withstand such solicitations, but went to Florence, where he met with a most gracious reception. Yet not all the caresses he received at the duke’s court, nor all the promises of that prince, could overcome his love for his native country, or lessen the ardent desire he had to lead a retired and independent life. He therefore took his leave of the grand duke, wbo would have loaded him with presents; but Tasso, as usual, could be prevailed upon to accept of no more than was necessary for his present occasions. He returned to Naples by the way of Rome, and the old prince of Conca dying about this time, the young count of Palena prevailed upon Tasso, by the mediation of Manso, to accept of an apartment in his palace. Here he applied himself to a correction of his Jerusalem, or rather to compose a new work entitled “Jerusalem Conquered,” which he had begun during his first residence at Naples. The prince of Conca, being jealous lest any one should deprive him of the poet and poem, caused him to he so narrowly watched that Tasso observed it, and being displeased at such a proceeding, left the prince’s palace, and retired to his friend Manso’s, where he lived master of himself and his actions; yet he still continued upon good terms with the prince of Conca.

In a short time after he published his “Jerusalem Conquered,” which is a sufficient proof of the injustice of the criticisms that have been passed upon his “Jerusalem Delivered;” since the “Jerusalem Conquered,” in which he endeavoured to conform himself to the taste of his critics, was not received with the same approbation as the former poem, where he had entirely given himself up to the enthusiasm of his genius. He had likewise designed a third correction of the same poem, which, as we are informed, was to have been partly compounded of the Jerusalem Delivered and Conquered; but this work was never completed. In all probability, this last performance would not have equalled the first: and indeed our poet seems to owe his fame to the “Jerusalem Delivered,” the second poem upon that subject being little known.

The works of Tasso have been often printed separately, at various times and places. The abbe“Serassi has enumerated 132 editions of the” Jerusalem Delivered,“of which he thinks the best was that printed at Mantua by Francisco Osanna, in 1584, 4to. The” Jerusalem Conquered“had but thirteen editions, of which the last is in 1642.” Rinaldo“had fifteen, and” Aminta“fifty-eight, without reckoning those which appeared out of Italy. Of the translations of the first poem, Serassi mentions eleven in the different dialects of the Italian, and twenty-three in the other languages in Europe, but he has omitted some, particularly the French translation in Alexandrian verses, by M. Montenlas. Tasso’s whole works, together with his life, and several pieces for and against his” Gierusalemme Liberata,“were published at Florence, 1724, in six volumes, folio. The life was written by his friend Battista Man so, and printed at Rome in 1634; of which that by the abbe” de Charnes, printed at Paris in 1690, 12mo, is only an abridgment. But the best edition of the whole works, in Mr. Black’s opinion, is that of Venice, 12 vols. 4to, although it does not bear so high a price. His “Aminta,” and “Gierusalemme liberata,” have been translated into English; the former being published at London in 1628 the latter in 1713; and again, with the true spirit jf the original, by Mr. Hoole, in 1762. Within these few years English literature has been enriched by a very valuable and elaborate “Life of Torquato Tasso; with an historical and critical account of his writings, by John Black,” 1810, 2 vols. 4to. In this the reader will receive ample satisfaction as to the disputed parts of Tasso’s eventful history, and many illustrations of the times in which he lived, and of the lives of his contemporaries, the relative state of literary histoiy, and, indeed, will find an assemblage of every kind of evidence that can now be expected to throw light on the genius of this truly great poet.

, an Italian poet of great fame, was born at Modeua, in 1565. He was early left an orphan, and exposed to many difficulties, yet he cultivated the knowledge of the learned languages with great assiduity, and, in 1597, entered into the service of cardinal Ascanio Colonna, as his secretary. With him he went into Spain; and, after the death of that patron, contrived to be introduced into the court of Charles Emanuel duke of Savoy. Not agreeing with the prince cardinal, son of the duke, he retired, after a time, and sought an asylum with cardinal Ludovisio, who gave him a pension of 400 Iloman crowns, and apartments in his palace. After the death of this cardinal, he had recourse at length to his natural sovereign Francis I. d'Este, duke of Modena, from whom he received an honorary salary. He died in 1635, and was buried in N St. Peter’s. He was a member of the academy of the Umoristi. His character was lively and agreeable, notwithstanding his turn for satire.

His son, Nahum, at the age of sixteen, was admitted of Dublin college, but does not appear to have followed any profession. It is observed by Warburton, in the notes to the Dunciad, that he was a cold writer, of no invention, but translated tolerably when befriended by Dryden, with whom he sometimes wrote in conjunction. He succeeded Shad well as poet-laureat, and continued in that office till his death, which happened Aug. 12, 1715, in the Mint, where he then resided as a place of refuge from the debts which he had contracted, and was buried in St. George’s church. The earl of Dorset was his patron; but the chief use he made of him was to screen himself from the persecutions of his creditors. Gildon speaks of him as a man of great honesty and modesty; but he seems to have been ill qualified to advance himself in the world, A person who died in 1763, at the age of ninety, remembered him well, and said he was remarkable for a down-cast look, and had seldom much to say for himself. Oidys also describes him as a free, good-natured, but intemperate companion. With these qualities it will not appear surprising that he was poor and despised. He was the author of nine dramatic performances, and a great number of poems; but is at present better known for his version of the Psalms, in which he joined with Dr. Brady, than any other of his works. His miscellaneous poems are enumerated in Gibber’s <c Lives,“and by Jacob, who says Tate’s poem on the Death of queen Anne, which was one of the last, is” one of the best poems he ever wrote.“His share in the” Second Part of Absalom and Achitophel“is far from inconsiderable; and may be seen in the English Poets. He published also” Memorials for the Learned, collected out of eminent authors in history,“&c. 1686, 8vo and his” Proposal for regulating of the Stage and Stage Plays," Feb. 6, 1698, is among bishop Gibson’s Mss. in the Lambeth library.

In the autumn of 1661, bishop Taylor, foreseeing a vacancy in the deanery of Connor, wrote to Cambridge for some able person, who might fill that dignity, and the proposition being made to Dr. George Rust, he was preferred as soon as the vacancy took place (See Rust); and thus a friendship commenced between these two great men, which continued with mutual warmth and admiration till it was interrupted by death. Dr. Rust was the survivor, and succeeded bishop Taylor in the see of Dromore, and preached his funeral sermon. In 1662-3, bishop Taylor published “Three Sermons” which he had preached at Christ’s church, Dublin “Eleven Sermons,” preached since the restoration and his “Discourse on Confirmation” In July 1663, he preached the funeral sermon of Dr. John Bramhall, archbishop of Armagh, from whose hands he had received confirmation. This was published, and contains a well-drawn character of the primate. In the same year, at the request of the bishops of Ireland, he published “A Dissuasive from Popery, addressed to the people of Ireland.” This work went through several editions, and some answers being published by the popish party, he wrote a second part of his “Dissuasive,” which however, did not appear until after his death. He had also began a discourse on the beatitudes, when he was attacked by a fever, which proved fatal in ten days. He died at Lisburn, August 13, 1667, and was interred in the choir of the cathedral of Dromore. Dr. Rust, as we have already observed, preached his funeral sermon, and entered largely into his character. He was indisputably, as Dr. Rust represents him, a man of the acutest penetration and sagacity, the richest and most lively imagination, the solidest judgment, and the profoundest learning. He was perfectly versed in all the Greek and Roman writers, and was not unacquainted with the refined wits of later ages, whether French or Italian. His skill was great, both in civil and canon law, in casuistical divinity, in fathers, and ecclesiastical writers ancient and modern. He was a man of the greatest humility and piety: it is believed, says Dr. Rust, that he spent the greatest part of his time in heaven, and that his solemn hours of prayer took up a considerable portion of his life. He was indeed a great devotee, and had in him much of natural enthusiasm. Dr. Rust concludes his character with observing, that “he had the goodhumour of *a gentleman, the eloquence of an orator, the fancy of a poet, the aruter.ess of H schoolman, the profoundness of a philosopher, the wisdom of a chancellor, the sagacity of a prophet, the rrnson of an angel, and the piety of a saint. He had devotion enough for a cloister, learning enough for an university, and wit enough for a college of virtuosi; and had his parts and endowments been parcelled out among his clergy that he left In-hind him, it would, perhaps, have made one of the otst dioceses in the world.” Yet amidst the blaze of this panegyric, we must not forget that dispassionate criticism will assign as bishop Taylor’s highest excellence, his powers of moral suasion. He is always seen to most advantage as a moral writer, and his genius is every where inspired and invigorated by a love of what is good. Nor must it be forgot that he was one of the refiners of our language. His biographer has justly said that “English prose was in his time in a progressive state. It had been advanced very far by the genius of Sidney and the wisdom of Hooker; but the pedantry of the reign of James had done much to eclipse its lustre. In Taylor it broke out from its obscurity with energy and brightness. His polemical discourses exhibit a specimen of English composition superior to any that had gone before.”

, usually called the Water- Poet, from his being a waterman as well as a poet, and certainly more of the former than the latter, was born in Gloucestershire about 1580. Wood says he was born in the city of Gloucester, and went to school there, but he does not appear to have learned more than his accidence, as appears by some lines of his own. From this school he was brought to London, and bound apprentice to a waterman, whence he“was either pressed or went voluntarily into the naval service, for he was at the taking of Cadiz un;ler the earl of Essex, in 1596, when only sixteen years old, and was afterward* in Germany, Bohemia, Scotland, as may be collected from various passages in his works. At home he was many years collector, for the lieutenant of the Tower, of the wines which were his fee from all ships which brought them up the Thames; but was at last discharged because he would not purchase the place at more than it was worth. He calls himself the” King’s Water Poet,“and the” Queen’s Waterman," and wore the badge of the royal arms. While * waterman, he very naturally had a great hatred to coaches, and besides writing a satire against them, he fancied that the watermen were starving for want of employment, and presented a petition to James I. which was referred to certain commissioners, of whom sir Francis Bacon was one, to obtain a prohibition of all play-houses except those on the Bank-side, that the greater part of the inhabitants of London, who were desirous of seeing plays, might be compelled to go by water. Taylor himself is said to have undertaken to support this singular petition, and was prepared to oppose before the commissioners the arguments of the players, but the commission was dissolved before it came to a hearing.

The laurel wreath, the poet’s hire."

He died in 1654, aged seventy-four, as Wood was informed by his nephew, a painter of Oxford, who gave his portrait to the picture-gallery there in 1655. This nephew’s own portrait, also by himself, is on the staircase. His works were published under the title of “All the Workes of John Taylor the water-poet, being sixty and three in number, collected into one volume by the author, with sundry new additions; corrected, revised, and newly imprinted,” 1630, folio. These pieces, which are not destitute of natural humour, abound with low jingling wit, which pleased and prevailed in the reign of James I. and which too often bordered upon bombast and nonsense. He was countenanced by a few persons of rank and ingenuity; but was the darling and admiration of numbers of the rabble. He was himself the father of some cant words, and he has adopted others which were only in the mouths of the lowest vulgar. From the date of this volume it is evident that it does not contain those “pasquils” and satires which Wood says he wrote at Oxford, and which perhaps it might have been unsafe to avow, or re-publish, as he did not survive the times of the usurpation. Five articles, however, whose titles may be seen in the “Bibliotheca Angb-Poetica,” were published between 1637 and 1641. One of them is the life of old Par, printed in 1635, when Par is said to have been living at the age of one hundred and fifty-two.

, was a Latin poet and grammarian, whose age is not exactly known, unless he was the Posthumus Terentianus to whom Longinus dedicated his admirable treatise on the sublime, and whom Martial celebrates as praefect of Syene, in Egypt. Both these things are uncertain, but both have been affirmed by Vosius, and others. Some have also called him a Carthaginian; that he was a Moor, he himself tells us, and thence he is called Maurus. Certain it is, that he was earlier than St. Augustin, who quotes him, Da Civ. Dei, vi. 2. He wrote a most elegant poem in various measures, “De literis, syllabis, pedibus, et metris,” addressed to his son Bassinus, and his son-in-law Novatemus, which gives a truly pleasing impression of his genius, and admirably exemplifies the precepts it delivers. This poem is still extant, having been found in a monastery at Bobbio, in the Milanese, by G. Merula. It was first published by him at Milan, with Ausonius, in 1497; afterwards by Janus Parrhasius, and Nic. Brissaeus; then by Jacobus Micyllus, at Francfort, 1584, in 8vo. It appeared also in the “Grammatici veteres,” of Putschius, published at Hanau, in 1605, 4to; and in the “Corpus omnium veterum Poetarum Romanorum,” Geneva, 1611, 2 vols. 4to.

, or Terence, an ancient dramatic writer among the Romans, was a native of Carthage, and born in the year of Rome 560. He was brought early to Rome, among other slaves, and fell into the hands of a generous master, Terentius Lucanus, a Roman senator, who was so taken with his uncommon parts, that he gave him first a good education, and afterwards his liberty. He received his name, as well as his liberty, from Terentius Lucanus, as the custom was; and thus, by a singular fatality, says madam Dacier, while he has immortalized the name of his master, he has not been able to preserve his own. His merit soon recommended him to the acquaintance and familiarity of the chief nobility; and such was his friendship with Scipio and Laelius, that his rivals and enemies took occasion from thence to say that his plays were composed by these noblemen. Suetonius relates a story from Cornelius Nepos, which may seem to confirm such a surmise: it is, that on the 1st of March, which was the feast of the Roman ladies, Laelius being desired by his wife to sup a little sooner than ordinary, he prayed her not to disturb him; and that, coming very late to supper that night, he said he had never composed any thing with more pleasure and success; when, being asked by the company what it was, he repeated some verses out of the third scene of the fourth act in the “Heautontimorumenos.” Terence takes notice of this report in his prologue to the “Adelphi,” and does not offer to refute it; but Suetonius says that he forbore, in complaisance to his patrons, who might possibly not be displeased with it; and, indeed, in the prologue to the “Heautontimorumenos,” Terence desired the auditors not to credit the slanderous reports of his brother writers. It is very possible that Scipio and Lselius might sometimes amuse themselves with composing a scene or two lor a poet, with whom they conversed so familiarly; but the plays were certainly Terence’s.

We have six of them remaining, and probably one or two are lost, for the “Andria” does not seem to have been his first. The very prologue to this play intimates the contrary; and the circumstance related by Suetonius, about Terence’s reading his first piece to Ccecilius, proves the “Andria” not to have been it, and that Suetonius has mistaken the name of the. play for Caecilius died two years before the “Andria” was brought on the stage. Caecilius was the best poet of the age, and near fourscore ‘when. Terence offered his first play; much regard was paid to his judgment’, and therefore the cedile oftVred Terence to wait upon Caecilius with his play before he would venture to receive it. The old gentleman, being at table, bid the young- author take a stool, and begin to read it to him. It is observed by Suetonius, that Terence’s dress was mean, so that his outside did not much recommend him; but he had not gone through the first scene when Caecilius invited him to sit at table with him, deferring to have the rest of the play read till after supper. Thus, with the advantage of Csecilius’s recommendation, did Terence’s first play appear, when Terence could not be twenty-five; for the “Andria” was acted when he was but twenty-seven. The “Hecyra” was acted the year following; the “Self-tormentor, or Heautontimorumenos,” two years after that; the “Eunuch” two years after the “Selftormentor;” the “Phormio,” the latter end of the same year; and, the year afterwards, the “Adelphi, or Brothers,” was acted; that is, 160 B.C. when Terence was thirty-three years of age.

, the great preserver of Athens at the time of the Persian invasion, owed no part of his celebrity or influence to the accident of his birth. He was born about 530 B. C. his father being Neocles, an Athenian of no illustrious family, and his mother an obscure woman, a Thracian by birth (according to the best authorities), and not of the best character. His disposition was naturally vehement, yet prudent; and Plutarch says that he was pronounced Y er y early by his preceptor, to be a person who would bring either great good or great evil to his country. Some of the ancients have said that he was dissolute in his youth, and for that reason disinherited; but this is positively denied by Plutarch. His ardent but honourable ambition was soon discovered; and contributed to put him on bad terms with Aristides, and some other leading men. He pushed himself forward in public business, and seeing that it was necessary for Athens to become a maritime power, persuaded the people to declare war against JEgina, and to build an hundred triremes. In these ships he exercised the people, and thus t>ave them those means of defence and aggrandizement which they afterwards employed with so much success. Yet it happened that he had no opportunity of distinguishing his military talents in his youth, being forty years of age at the time of the battle of Marathon; after which he was frequently heard to say “that the trophies of Miltiades disturbed his rest.” As a judge, he was strict and severe; in which office, being asked by Simonides to make some stretch of power in his behalf, he replied, “Neither would you be a good poet if you transgressed the laws of numbers, nor should 1 be a good judge, if I should hold the request of any one more, sacred than the laws.” Themistocles had so much credit with the people, as to get his rival Atistides banished by ostracism. In the Persian war, it was he who first interpreted the wooden walls mentioned by the oracle, to mean the Athenian ships: by his contrivance the fleet of Xerxes was induced to fight in a most disadvantageous situation off Sulamis, where it suffered a total defeat. For his whole conduct in this action he gained the highest honours, both at home and in Sparta. This was in 480, ten years after the battle of Marathon.

which he calls a marvellous line of Theobald, “unless,” says he, “the play, called * The Double Falshood,' be (as he would have it thought) Shakspeare’s; but, whether this is his or not, he proves Shakspeare to have written as bad.” The argument* which Theobald uses to prove the play to be Shakspeare’s, are indeed, far from satisfactory, and it was afterwards Dr. Farmer’s opinion that it was Shirley’s. It was, however, vindicated by Theobald, who was attacked again in “The Art of Sinking in Poetry.” Theobald endeavoured to prove false criticisms, want of understanding Shakspeare’s manner, and perverse cavilling in Pope: he justified himself and the great dramatic poet, and attempted to prove the tragedy in question to be in reality Shakspeare’s, and not unworthy of him. Theobald, besides his edition of Shakspeare’s plays, in which he collated the ancient copies, and corrected with great pains and ingenuity many faults, was the author of several dramatic pieces. Not less than twenty, printed or acted, are enumerated in the “Biographia Dramatica.” He was also concerned in various translations, and at his death in Sept. 1744, had made some progress in an edition of Beaumont and Fletcher.

, an ancient Greek poet, was a Sicilian 1 and born at Syracuse, the son of Praxagoras and Philina. He is said to have been the scholar of Philetas, and Asclepiades, or Sicelidas: Philetas was an elegiac poet of the island of Cos, had the honour to be preceptor to Ptolemy Philadelphus, and is celebrated by Ovid and Propertius: Sieelidas was a Samian, a writer of epigcams: Theocritus mentions both these with honour in his seventh Idyllium. As to the age in which he flourished, it seems indisputably to be ascertained by two Idylliums that remain: one is addressed to Hiero king of Syracuse, and the other to Ptole^ ray Philadelphus, the Egyptian monarch. Hiero began his reign, as Casaubon asserts in his observations on Poly^­bius, in the second year of the 126th olympiad, or about 275 years before Christ; and Ptolemy in the fourth year of the 123d olympiad. Though the exploits of Hiero are recorded greatly to his advantage by Polybius, in the first book of his history; though he had many virtues, had frequently signalized his courage and conduct, and distinguishes himself by several achievements in war; yet he stems, at least in the early part of his reign, to have expressed no great affection for learning or men of letters: and this is supposed to have given occasion to the 16th Llyllinm, inscribed with the name of Hiero; where the poet asserts the dignity of his profession, complains that it met with neither favour nor protection, and in a very artful manner touches upon some of the virtues of this prince, and insinuates what an illustrious figure he would have made in poetry, had he been as noble a patron, as he was an argument for the Muses.

His not meeting with the encouragement he expected in his own country, was in all probability the reason that induced Theocritus to leave Syracuse for the more friendly climate of Alexandria, where Ptolemy Philadelphus then reigned in unrivalled splendour, the treat encourager of arts and sciences, and the patron of learned men. In his voyage to Egypt he touched at Cos, an island in the Archipelago not far from Rhodes, where he was honourably entertained by Phrasidamus and Antigenes, who invited him into the country to celebrate the festival of Ceres, as appears by the seventh Idyllium. There is every reason to imagine that he met with a more favourable reception at Alexandria, than he had experienced at Syracuse, from his encomium on Ptolemy, contained in the 17th Idy Ilium; where he rises above his pastoral style, and shows that he could upon occasion (as Virgil did afterwards) exalt his Sicilian Muse to a sublimer strain, paulo majora: he derives the race of Ptolemy from Hercules, he enumerates his many cities, he describes his great power and immense riches, but above all he commemorates his royal munificence to the sons of the Muses. Towards the conclusion of the 14th Idyllium, there is a short, but very noble panegyric on Ptolemy: in the 15th Idyllium he celebrates Berenice, the mother, and Arsinoe, the wife of Ptolemy. Little else of this poet’s life can be gathered from his works, except his friendship with Aratus, the famous author of the * 4 Phenomena;" to whom he addresses his sixth Idyllium, and whose amours he describes in the seventh. It is mentioned by all his biographers, that he red an ignominious death, and they derive their infuniiation from a distich of Ovid in his Ibis,

Sic auiniae laqueo sit via clausa tux. But it does not appear, that by the Syracusan poet, Ovid means Theocritus; more probably, as some commentators on the passage have supposed, Empedocles, who was a poet and philosopher of Sicily, is the person pointed at: others mink that Ovid by a small mistake or slip of his memory might confound Theocritus the rhetorician of Chios, who was executed by order of king Aritigonus, with Theocritus the poet of Syracuse.

The compositions of this poet are distinguished among the ancients by the name of “I-iyllia,” in order to express the smallness and variety of their natures; they would novr be called “Miscellanies, or Poems on several Occasions.” The nine first and the eleventh are confessed to be true pastorals, and hence Theocritus has usually passed for nothing more than a pastoral poet: yet he is manifestly robbed of a great part of his fame, if his other poems have not their proper laurels. For though the greater part of his “Idyllia” cannot be called the songs of shepherds, yet they have certainly their respective merits. His pastorals doubtless ought to be considered as the foundation of his credit. He was the earliest known writer of pastorals, and will be acknowledged to have excelled all his imitators, as much as originals usually do their copies. There are, says Dr. Warton, “few images and sentiments in the Eclogues of Virgil, but what are drawn from the Idylliums of Theocritus: in whom there is a rural, romantic wildness of thought, heightened by the Doric dialect; with such, lively pictures of the passions, and of simple unadorned nature, as are infinitely pleasing to lovers and judges of true poetry. Theocritus is indeed the great store-house of pastoral description; and every succeeding painter of rural beauty (except Thomson in his Seasons) hath copied his images from him, without ever looking abroad upon the face of nature themselves.” The same elegant critic, in his dissertation on pastoral poetry, says, “If I might venture to speak of the merits of the several pastoral writers, I would say, that in Theocritus we are charmed with a certain sweetness, a romantic rusticity and wildness, heightened by the Doric dialect, that are almost inimitable. Several of his pieces indicate a genius of a higher class, far superior to pastoral, and equal to the sublimest species of poetry: such are particularly his Panegyric on Ptolemy, the fight between Amycus and Pollux, the Epithalamium of Helen, the young Hercules, the grief of Hercules for Hylas, the death of Pentheus, and the killing of the Neniean Lion.” At the same time it imi;t be allowed that Theocritus descends sometimes into gross and mean ideas, and makes his shepherds ahusive and immodest, which is never the case with Virgil.

This poet was first published in folio at Milan in 1493, again by Aldus at Venice, in 1495, and by Henry Stephens at Paris, in 1566, with other Greek poets, and without a Latin version: a good edition also in Greek only was printed at Oxford, by bishop Fell, in 1676, 8vo. There are, since, the editions of Martin, Loud. 1760, 8vo, the very splendid one of Thomas Warton, 1770, 2 vols. 4to; and of Valckenaer, Leyden, 1773, 8vo. Dr. Thomas Edwards also published a very correct and critical edition of “Selecta quaedam Theocriti Idyllia,” 1779, 8vo.

, a celebrated French poet, surnamed Viaud, was born about 1590, at Clerac in the diocese of Agen, and was the son of an advocate of Bousseres SainteRadegonde, a village near Aquillon. Having come early to Paris, he was admired for his genius and fancy, and was the first who published French works with verse and prose intermixed. But his impiety and debaucheries obliged him to go into England in 1619, whence his friends procured his recall, and he turned Catholic. This change, however, did not make him more regular in his conduct, and he was at last burnt in effigy for having published in 1622, “Le Parnasse Satyrique.” Being arrested at the Chatelet, he was placed in the same dungeon of the Coneiergerie where Ravaillae had been confined; but, on his protestations of having had no share in the above mentioned publication, received only a sentence of banishment. He died September 25, 1626, in the Hotel de Montmorenci at Paris, leaving a collection of “Poems” in French, containing “Elegies, Odes, Sonnets, &c.;” a treatise “on the Immortality of the Soul,” inverse and prose; “Pyrame et Thisbe,' 4 a tragedy; three” Apologies;“some” Letters,“Paris, 1662, 12mo; his” New Works,“Paris, 1642, 8vo;” Pasiphae," a tragedy, 1628, &c.

, an ancient Greek poet, is entitled to some notice as the reputed inventor of tragedy. He was a native of mount Icaria in Attica, and flourished in the sixth century B. C. He introduced actors into his tragedies, who recited some lines between each verse of the chorus, whereas, till that time, tragedies had been performed only by a company of musicians and dancers, who sang hymns in honour of Bacchus while they danced. Thespis wrote satirical pieces also, and Horace says that this poet carried his actors about in an open cart, where they repeated their verses, having their faces besmeared with wine-lees, or, according to Suidas, with white-lead and vermillion. His poems are lost.

Tbirlby then studied the civil law, in which he lectured while the late sir Edward Walpole was his pupil; but he was a careless tutor, scarcely ever reading lectures. The late learned Dr. Jortin, who was one of his pupils, was very early in life recommended by him to translate some of Eustathius’s notes for the use of “Pope’s Homer,” and complained “that Pope having accepted and approved his. performance, never testitied any curiosity or desire to see him.” The civil law displeasing him, he applied to common law, and had chambers taken for him in the Temple by his friend Andrew Reid, with a view of being entered of that society, and being called to the bar; but of this scheme he likewise grew weary. He came, however, to London, to the bouse of his friend sir Edward Walpole, who procured for him the office of a king’s waiter in the port of London, in May 1741, a sinecure place worth about \00l. per annum. While he was in sir Edward’s house he kept a miscellaneous book of memorables, containing whatever was said or done amiss by sir Edward or any part of his family. The remainder of his days were passed in private lodgings, where he lived in a very retired manner, seeing only a few friends, and indulging occasionally in excessive drinking, being sometimes in a state of intoxication for five or six weeks together; and, as is uual with such men, appeared to be so even when sober; and in his cups he was jealous and quarrelsome* An acquaintance who found him one day in the streets haranguing the crowd, and took him home by gentle violence, was afterwards highly esteemed by Thirlby for not relating the story. He contributed some notes to Theobald’s Shakspeare; and afterwards talked of an edition of his own. Dr. Jortin undertook. to read over that poet, with a view to mark the passages where he had either imitated Greek and Latin writers, or at least had fallen into the same thoughts and expressions. Thirlby, however, dropped his design; but left a Shakspeare, with some abusive remarks on Warburton in the margin of the first volume, and a very few attempts at emendations, and those perhaps all in the first volume. In the other volumes he had only, with great diligence, counted the lines in every page. When this was told to Dr. Jortin, “I have known him,” said he, “amuse himself with still slighter employment: he would write down all the proper names that he could call into his memory.” His mind seems to have been tumultuous and desultory, and he was glad to catch any employment that might produce attention without aqxiety. The copy, such as it was, became the property of sir Edward Walpole, to whom he bequeathed all his books and papers, and who lent it to Dr. Johnson when he was preparing his valuable edition of “Shakspeare” for the press; accordingly the name of Thin by appears in it as a commentator. He died Dec. 19, 1753. One of Dr. Thirlby’s colloquial topics may be quoted, as in it he seems to have drawn his own character, with one of those excuses for which self-conceit is never at a loss. “Sometimes,” said he, “Nature sends into the world a man of powers superior to the rest, of quicker intuition, and wider comprehension; this man has all other men for his enemies, and would not be suffered to live his natural time, but that his excellencies are balanced by his failings. He that, by intellectual exaltation, thus towers above his contemporaries, is drunken, or lazy, or capricious; or, by some defect or other, is hindered from exerting his sovereignty of mind; he is thus kept upon the level, and thus preserved from the destruction which would be the natural consequence of universal hatred.”

, a member of the French academy, was born in 1732, at Clermont in Auvergne, the country of the celebrated Pascal. He received from his mother a severe, and almost a Spartan education. The three children of that estimable woman were brought up chiefly under her own eyes. His two elder brothers died, the one in 1748, the other in 1755, both young men, and both having signalized themselves in literature. Joseph, the eldest, had produced a comedy; and John, the second, excelled in Latin poetry. The death of his second brother, impressed Antony very early with a strong sense of the vanity of worldly cares; and with a profound piety ^ which enhanced the value of his character. He had a decided taste for poetry, but was designed for the bar. In obedience to the wish of his mother, he went to Clermont, to follow a study repugnant to his taste; but going with her to Paris, when John was at the point of death, his friends offered him a professorship in the qoliege of Beauvais. This, therefore, he accepted, as more congenial to his feelings, though less splendid in appearance, than the profession for which he had been designed. He was soon in high estimation for his talents as a poet and an orator; and M. Watelet, a rich man, and a man of letters, offered him a pension as a tribute to his merit; but he chose, with becoming pride, to owe his subsistence to hi own talents, rather than to the generosity of any one: He was afterwards secretary to the duke de Praslin, minister for foreign affairs; secretary to the Swiss cantons (an independent place in the government); and finally secretary to the duke of Orleans. He was also a member of the academy, tho-ugh it is said that he once refused to be chosen, when he found that he was proposed chiefly out of pique to another candidate, M. Marmontel. Without any fortune but his pension from the court, and the trifling reward he received for his assiduous attendance at the academy, he continued to reside at Paris; and latterly, with a sister* who superintended his domestic concerns. But, his health being impaired by excessive application, he was obliged to seek the more favourable climate of Nice, where for a time he recovered the use of all his powers. But his lungs had always been weak, and being seized also with a fever, he died September 17, 1785, in the ho,use of the archbishop of Lyons, and was buried at the neighbouring village of Qulins. At the time of his death he was employed in writing a poem on the czar Peter the Great, styled the “Pe*treade,” which has never been published.

On the 27th of March, 1737, Mr. Thomas was ordained a deacon, by sir George Fleming, bishop of Carlisle, at a special ordination holden in the chapel of John the Baptist, within the precincts of the Savoy, in the Strand; and, on the 25th of September, in the same year, he was ordained priest, by Dr. Joseph Wilcocks, bishop of Rochester, at a general ordination holden in the parish church of Bromley, in the county of Kent. The promotion of Dr Herring (afterwards archbishop of Canterbury) in this same year to the see of Bangor, occasioned a vacancy in the rectory of Blechingley, to which Mr. Thomas was presented by his majesty, George II. through the interest of sir W. Clayton, and was instituted, on the 27th of January, by Dr. Benjamin Hoadly, bishop of Winchester. During his incumbency on this preferment, which was thirty-six years, Mr. Thomas chiefly resided in the rectorial-house, which he enlarged, improved, and embellished, at a very considerable ex pence. In the discharge of his parochial duties, in which he never omitted any thing which he conceived inight conduce to the temporal or spiritual interests of his parishioners, he was for some time assisted by his brother; and, after his promotion to a vicarage in Norfolk, by the rev. William Thompson, the poet.

His works are, 1. “The History of Italy,” Lond. 1549, 1561, 4to. 2. “The principal rules of the Italian Grammar, with a dictionary for the better understanding of Boccacce, Petrarch, and Dante,” ibid, 1550, 1561, 1567, 4to. 3. “Le Peregrynne, or a defence of king Henry VIII. to Aretine the Italian poet,” ms. Cott. Vesp. D. 18, and in Bodl. Library. This, Wood says, was about to be published in the third volume of Brown’s “Fasciculus.” 4. “Common Places of State,” written for the use of Edward VI. ms. Cott. 5. “Of the vanity of the World,” Lond. 1549, 8vo. 5. “Translation of Cato’s speech, and Valerius’s answer, from the 4th decade of Li vy,” ibid, 1551, 12mo. He also made some translations from the Italian, which are still in manuscript.

, a scholar and poet of considerable merit, is said to have been the second son of the rev. Francis Thompson, B. D. of Queen’s college, Oxford, and vicar of Brough in Westmoreland, who died August 31, 1735, aged seventy. His mother, who died two years after, in the sixty-fifth year of her age, was the widow of the rev. Joseph Fisher, M. A. fellow of Queen’s college, Ox* ford, vicar of Brough, and archdeacon of Carlisle, by whom she had no children. Our author was born probably in the early part of the last century, but the year cannot be ascertained. He was young, when in 1734 and 1736, he wrote “Stella, Sive Amores, Tres Libri,” and “Six Pastorals,” none of which he thought it proper to include in his published works. In his poem, entitled “Sickness,” he laments the want of a mother’s tenderness, and a father’s care; but, as they died in advanced age, he could not have lost them before he had attained at least his twentieth year.

Of Thompson’s personal character, a very high opinion may be deduced from the general tenour of his acknowledged works. He appears to have been a man of warm affections in the relative duties of life, an ardent admirer of merit, with an humble consciousness of his own defects; a man of real piety, and of various learning. His studies lay much among the ancient English poets, in whose history and writings he was critically skilled. As a poet, although he has not been popular, he may be allowed to rank above some whose writings have been more anxiously preserved. Having been in early life an admirer of Spenser, he became a studied imitator of that father of English poetry; but like most of his imitators, while he adopted his measure, he thought his imitation incomplete without borrowing a greater number of antiquated words and phrases than can be either ornamental or useful. But if he be censurable on this account, it must be allowed, that in his “Nativity” he has not only imitated, but rivalled Spenser in the sweetness and solemnity which belong to his canto. His imagery is in general striking, and appropriate to the elevated subject, nor is he less happy in his personifications. His “Hymn to May” has received more praise than any of his other pieces. It is certainly more finished, but there are many luxuriancies which sober judgment would have removed, and many glittering epithets, and verbal conceits, which proceeded from a memory stored with the ancient poets, and not yet chastened into simplicity by the example and encouragement of the moderns. The poem on “Sickness” is the longest, and altogether, perhaps the most successful effort of his muse. He chose a new subject, and discovers considerable powers of invention.

, a very eminent poet, was the son of a minister in Scotland, and born at Ednam in the shire of Roxburgh, Sept. the llth, 1700. His mothers name was Beatrix Trotter, and not Hume, as Dr. Johnson says, Hume being the name of his grandmother. His father was minister of Ednam, with a family of nine children. A neighbouring clergyman, Mr. Riccarton, discovering in James uncommon promises of future excellence, undertook to give him instructions, and provide him with books; and, after the usual course of school education at Jedburgh, he was sent to the university of Edinburgh. In the second year of his admission, his studies were for some time interrupted by the death of his lather; but his mother soon after repaired with her family, which was very numerous, to Edinburgh, where she lived in a decent and frugal manner, till her favourite son had not only finished his academical course, but was even distinguished and patronized as a man of genius. Though the study of poetry was about this time become general in Scotland, the best English authors being universally read, and imitations of them attempted, yet taste had made little progress; the major part criticized according to rules and forms, and thus were very able to discern the inaccuracies of a poet, while all his fire and enthusiasm escaped their notice. Thomson believed that he deserved better judges than these, and therefore began to turn his views towards London, to which an accident soon after entirely determined him.

But his merit did not lie long concealed. Mr. Forbes, afterwards lord-president of the session, received him very kindly, and recommended him to some of his friends, particularly to Mr. Aikinan, whose premature death he has with great affection commemorated, in a copy of verses written on that occasion. The good reception he experienced wherever he was introduced, emboldened him to risque the publication of his “Winter,” in March 1726, which was no sooner read than universally admired; and from that time his acquaintance was courted by all men of taste. Dr. Ilundle, afterwards bishop of Derry, received him into his intimate confidence and friendship; promoted his reputation every where; introduced him to his great friend the lord chancellor Talbot; and some years after, when the eldest son of that nobleman was to make his tour of travelling, recommended Mr. Thomson as a proper companion for him. His affection and gratitude to Dr. Rundle are finely expressed in his poem to the memory of lord Talbot. In the mean time, the poet’s chief care had been, in return for the public favour, to finish the plan which their wishes laid out for him; and the expectations which his “Winter” had raised were fully satisfied by the successive publication of the other seasons; of “Summer,” in 1727; of “Spring,” in 1728; and of “Autumn,” in a 4to edition of his works, in 1730. Some very interesting remarks on the variations introduced into these, in subsequent editions, may be seen in the Ceusura Literaria, vols. II. III. and IV.

But his chief dependence, during this long interval, was on the protection and bounty of his royal highness Frederic prince of Wales, who, upon the recommendation of lord Lyttelton, then his chief favourite, settled on him an handsome allowance, and always received him very graciously. It happened, however, that the favour of his royal highness was, in one instance, of some disadvantage to Mr. Thomson, in the refusal of a licence for his tragedy of “Edward and Eleonora,” which he had prepared for the stage in 1739. This proceeded from the misunderstandings, which then subsisted between the court of the prince of Wales and that of the king his father. His next dramatic performance was the masque of “Alfred,”' written, jointly with Mr. Mallet, who was his good friend on many occasions, by command of the prince of Wales, for the entertainment of his royal highness’s court at his summer residence. In 1745, his “Tancred and Sigismunda,” taken from the novel in Gil Bias, was performed with applause. He had, in the mean time, been finishing his “Castle of Indolence,” an allegorical poem, in two cantos the stanza which he uses in this work is that of Spenser, borrowed from the Italian poets. This was the last piece Thomson himself published, his tragedy of “Coriolanus” heing only prepared for the theatre, when a fever seized him, and deprived the world of a very good man, as well as of an admirable poet. His death happened Aug. the 27th, 1748. His executors were lord Lyttelton and Mr. Mitchel; and by their interest, the orphan play, “Coriolanus,” was brought on the sta e to the best advantage: from the profits of which, and from the sale of his manuscripts and other effects, all demands were duly satisfied, and a handsome sum remitted to his sisters. His remains were deposited in the church of Richmond in Surrey, under a plain stone, without any inscription; but in 1762 a monument was erected to his memory in Westminster-abbey.

As a writer, says Dr. Johnson, he is entitled to one praise of the highest kind: his mode of thinking, and of expressing his thoughts, is original His blank verse is no more the blank verse of Milton, or of any other poet, than the rhymes of Prior are the rhymes of Cowley. His numbers, his pauses, his diction, are of his own growth, without transcription, without imitation. He thinks in a peculiar train, and he thinks always as a man of genius; he looks round on Nature and on Life with the eye which Nature bestows only on a poet; the eye that distinguishes, in every thing represented to its view, whatever there is on which imagination can delight to be detained, and with a,rrind that at once comprehends the vast, and attends to the minute The reader of the “Seasons” wonders that he never saw before what Thomson shews him, and that he never yet has felt what Thomson impresses. His is one of the works in which blank verse seems properly used; Thomson’s wide expansion of general views, and his enumeration of circumstantial varieties, would have been obstructed and embarrassed by the frequent interruptions of the sense, which are the necessary effects of rhyme. His descriptions of extended scenes and general effects bring before us the whole magnificence of Nature, whether pleasing or dreadful. The gaiety of Spring, the splendour of Summer, the tranquillity of Autumn, aad the horror of Winter, take in their turns possession of the mind. The poet leads us through the appearances of things as they are successively Taried by the vicissitudes of the year, and imparts to us so much of his own enthusiasm, that our thoughts expand with his imagery, and kindle with his sentiments. Nor is the naturalist without his part in the entertainment; for he is assisted to recollect and to combine, to arrange his discoveries, and to amplify the sphere of his contemplation. The great defect of the “Seasons” is want of method; but for this, perhaps, there was not any remedy. Of many appearances subsisting all at once, no rule can be given why one should be mentioned before another; yet the memory wants the help of order, and the curiosity is not excited by suspense or expectation. His diction is in the highest degree florid and luxuriant, such as may be said to be to his images and thoughts both their lustre and their shade; such as invests them with splendour, through which, perhaps, they are not always easily discerned. It is too exuberant, and sometimes may be charged with filling the ear more than the mind. The highest praise, adds Dr. Johnson, which he has received, ought not to be suppressed: it is said by lord Lyttelton, in the prologue to his posthumous play, that his works contained “No line which, dying, he could wish to blot.”

, whether of the same family with the preceding we know not, for Wood says he was a Frenchman born, and called Thoris, became a physician and Latin poet, and admired in both characters in the reign of James I. He appears to have studied medicine at Oxford, but took no degree in that faculty. He afterwards settled in London, and was very successful in practice. In the first year of the reign of Charles I. when the plague raged in London, his humanity led him to expose himself too much to the infection, and he died of that dreadful disorder in July or August 1625, and was probably buried in St. Bennet Fink church, as his residence was in that parish. It is related of this physician that he was immoderately addicted to wine, and seldom satisfied unless he made his friends keep pace with him in drinking. Gassendi informs us, that Thorius being in company with Peiresc, whom he strongly pressed to drink a large glass of wine, the latter at length consented, upon condition that he would promise to pledge him in return. When it came to the turn of Peiresc he filled a large glass of water, and drinking it off, insisted that Thorius should do the same. This, with much hesitation, and after pouring out execrations against the vile liquor, and citing a multitude of classical invectives against it, he at length performed. The story reached king James I. and much amused him.

Hearne published “A discourse of the Dutye and Office of an Heraulde of Armes,” written by Thynne, the 3d day of March, 1605. In 1651 were printed his “Histories concerning Ambassadors and their Functions,” dedicated to his good friend William, lord Cobham. He continued the Chronicle, known by the name of Holingshed’s, finishing Uie annals of Scotland, from 1586 down to where they now end. He drew up a list of English cardinals, added to the reign of Mary I. He wrote the catalogue of English historical writers; but his “Discourses” upon the earls of Leicester, archbishops of Canterbury, lords Cobham, and the catalogue of the wardens of the Cinque ports, were suppressed. He also wrote the history of Dover Castle and the Cinque Ports; the genealogical history of the Cobhams; discourses of arms, concerning the Bath and bachelor knights; the history and lives of the lord treasurers, mentioned in a manuscript life of him in the collection of sir Joseph Ayloffe, barr. Numerous as these works are, yet there are various other literary productions of his: some of them are preserved in the Cotton library, others were possessed by Anstis, sen. garter. His heraldic collections are in the college of arms, and in the Ashmolean Museum at Oxford. Some of his manuscripts are collections of antiquities, sepulchral inscriptions, taken by him from English churches, and elsewhere. He intended to have published an edition of Chaucer’s works, but declining that, gave his labours relative to it to Speght, who published them in his edition of that poet’s works, with his own notes, and those of his father, who printed an edition of this ancient writer in 1542. Thynne had meant to have written a comment upon the text, and some verses of his are prefixed to Speght’s edition.

, a Latin poet, is supposed to have been born at Rome, in the year of Rome 690, six years after the birth of Virgil, and one after that of Horace. His father was of the equestrian order; and he himself set out into the world with all the advantages of fortune, and the greatest accomplishments of mind and person. Among the great men of his age, he singled out Messala Corvinus for his patron; who was a brave and accomplished Roman, admired by Cicero, mentioned with great respect by Horace, and ranked by Quintilian among the masters of oratory. He was to Tibullus, what Maecenas was to Horace. This poet had a country seat at Pedum, a town in Latium not far from Rome. He was a great sufferer in the civil wars, yet does not seem to have been concerned in any party. He was, like Ovid, a man devoted to ease and pleasure; and his time was divided between the Muses and his mistresses. He seems indeed to have abandoned himself entirely to the passion of love, as some think, even to the neglect of his affairs. His regard for Messala, however, made him forget his love of ease and pleasure, and followthat nobleman into Gaul, who was there victorious,' and had a triumph decreed him upon his return to Rome. He was attending Messala on a second expedition to Syria, when he fell sick by the way, and was forced to stay in the island of Phaeacia or Corcyra. On this occasion he composed the third elegy of the fourth book, and desired that if he should die of his illness, he might have this epitaph engraven on his monument:

Nor is Ovid sparing of his praises of Tibullus the ninth elegy of the third book is written to bewail his death. There Ovid finely describes the sweetness and elegance of this poet’s elegies, by introducing Cupid and Venus to mourn over him; after which he places him in the Elysian fields, in company with Calvus, Catullus, and Gallus. The best critics have preferred Tibullus even to Ovid himself, for elegance and correctness of style; and Quintilian sets him at the head of all the writers in elegy. “In elegy,” says he, “we challenge also the Greeks, in which way of writing, Tibullus, according to my judgment, is by far the most neat and elegant. Some indeed give Propertius the preference; Ovid is more indecent than either of them, as Gallus is more harsh and unpolished. 1 * There is certainly in his poems an admirable mixture of passion and purity, of simplicity and elegance, and he is thought to surpass all others not only in tenderness and sentiment, but in graceful ease and harmony of members. He has left four books of” Elegies.“His panegyric upon Messala is censured by Scaliger, and suspected not to be his; and the small pieces at the end of the fourth book, which Scaliger calls” hard, languid, and rough," either do not belong to Tibullus, or never received his last corrections.

Between the years 1771 and 1793, when his great work appeared, he published many lesser performances; and, in 1773, undertook a literary magazine and review, under the title of “Nuovo Giornale de‘ Letterati d’ Italia,” and acted as editor from that time to 1790, when the whole series amounted to forty-three volumes, octavo. In this miscellany he inserted numberless very valuable papers; the most remarkable of which were, perhaps, his “Inquiries concerning the primitive discoverers of the Copernican system” “The manuscript code of the Poetics of Vida;” “The origin of the Art of Printing;” and “The origin of Rhyme.” Among his lesser separate works, were his “Life of the poet and statesman Fulvio Testi” his “Life of S. Olympia;” and some “Reflections on Genealogical Writers.”

, the projector of a French Parnassus, was the son of one of the king’s secretaries, and born at Paris in 1677. He studied at the Jesuits’ college in Paris, where he acquired a taste for the belles lettres that predominated during the whole of his life. Being destined for the military profession, he had in his fifteenth year a company of 100 fuzileers, which bore his name; and was afterwards a captain of dragoons. After the peace of Ryswick, he purchased the place of maitre d‘hotel to the dauphiness, the mother of Louis XV. Losing this situation at her death, he took a trip to Italy, and there improved his taste in painting, of which he was esteemed a connoisseur. On his return he was appointed provincial commissary at war, an office in which he conducted himself with uncommon generosity. His attachment to Louis XIV. and his admiration of the men of genius of that monarch’s time, induced him, in 1708, to project a Parnassus, in bronze, to commemorate the glories of his sovereign, and the genius of the most celebrated poets and musicians. This was no hasty performance, however, for he did not complete his plan before 1713. This Parnassus was nothing else than a mountain, with a good elevation, on which appeared Louis XIV. in the character of Apollo, crowned with laurels, and holding a lyre in his hand. Beneath him were the three French graces, madame de la Suze, madame des Houlieres, and mademoiselle de Scuderi. Round this Parnassus was a grand terras, on which were eight poets and a musician; namely, Peter Corneille, Moliere, Racan, Segrais, La Fontaine, Chapelle, Racine, Boileau, and Lully. Inferior poets were commemorated by medallions. Boileau is said to have been Tillet’s adviser in some part of this scheme, and, his biographer says, it were to be wished that celebrated poet had likewise advised him as to the selection of those on whom he was conferring immortality. His next object was to get this Parnassus erected in some public place or garden. He proposed the scheme therefore to Desforts, the minister then at the head of the ’finances, and asked only, by way of bonus, the place of farmer-general; but Desforts contented himself with praising his disinterestedness. Disappointed in this, he published, in 1727, a description of his work under the title of “Le Parnasse Francois,” 1732, fol. and afterwards three supplements, the last in 1760, containing the lives of the poets down to the last date; but the grand scheme remained unexecuted. Titon, who is represented as a generous patron of literary merit, died Dec. 26, 1762, at the advanced age of eighty- five. Besides the description of his Parnassus, he published an “Essai sur les honneurs accordés aux Savaiis,” 12mo.

, a pious French divine, was born April 30, 1640, at Rouen, of poor parents, but the inclination for learning which he discovered from his childhood, induced M. du Fosse, maitre des comptes at Rouen, to encourage him in that pursuit, and to send him to the Jesuits’ college at Paris. He completed his philosophical studies at the college de Grassins, under M. Hervent, and was afterwards vicar of $t. Etienne des Tonneliera, at Rouen, where he distinguished himself by his public services. During a visit to Paris in 1675, he gained the prize given by the French academy. Reflecting afterwards on the inconsiderate manner in which he had engaged in the sacred office, he went again to Paris, and renounced all the duties of the priesthood, that had done him so much honour, till M. de Sacy, to whom he applied for directions in his penitence, drew him from this state of dejection, and persuaded him to resume the sacred functions. His talents procured him a benefice in the holy chapel, and the priory of Villers, which the archbishop of Rouen gave him. M. Tourneux would gladly have resigned his benefice in favour of some pious ecclesiastic; but only simple resignations were at that time accepted. A change of this rule was hoped for, but did not take place during his life. The king gave him a pension of 300 crowns. He preached one Lent in the church of St. Benoit, at Paris, to a prodigious number of auditors. M. le Tourneux spent his last years at his priory of Villers-sur-Fere, in Tardenois, in the dio* cese of Soissons. M. le Maitre de Sacy, and M. de.Santeuil, who were his friends, placed great confidence in him, and frequently consulted him, in consequence of which he was involved in some difficulties. He died suddenly at Parts, Nov. 28, 1686, aged forty -seven, and his remains were interred at Port Royal. The principal among his numerous works are, “La Vie.de Jesu Christ;” “La meiliure maniere d'entendre la Messe;” “L‘Anne’e Chretienne,” Paris, 1685, 13 vols. 12mo; a French “Translation of the Roman breviary,” 4 vols. 8vo; with other works suited to persons of his communion. His translation of the breviary was censured by a sentence from M. Cheron, official of Paris, 1688; but M. Arnauld undertook its defence. An “Abridgment of the principal Theological Treatises,” 4to, is also ascribed to M. le Tourneux. L'Avocat says that he had a peculiar talent for homilies and instructions, and it is said that while he preached the Lent sermons at St. Benoft, in Paris, instead of father Quesnel, who had been obliged to abscond, Louis XIV. inquired of Boileau concerning a preacher named le Tourneux, whom every body was running after. “Sire,” replied the poet, “your majesty knows that people always run after novelties this man preaches the gospel.” The king then pressing him to give his opinion seriously, Boileau added, *' When M. le Tourneux first Ascends the pulpit, his ugliness so disgusts the congregation, that they wish he would go down again but when he begins to speak, they dread the time of his descending."

On his return to college he resumed the employment of tutor. Mr. Lovibond, the poet, and lord Bagot, were two of his pupils. In 1746 he was presented to the living of Hatfield Peverel, in Essex. In 1749 he was senior proctor of the university; and, resigning Hatfield, was presented to the rectory of Blithfield, in Staffordshire, by sir Walter Wagstaffe Bagot, bart. Soon after he quitted the proctorship he was admitted (June 15) to the degree of B. D. and the same summer Mr. Drake offered him the lower rnediety of Malpas, in the county of Chester. After some reluctance, principally arising from his unwillingness to leave Oxford, he accepted this offer, and was instituted Jan. 2, 1751. At the close of the year (Dec. 19) he quitted Oxford, and resigned his fellowship the month following. He now divided his time between Malpas and Blithfield, which he held for a few years with his new preferment; and then, having resigned it, he inducted (Feb. 23, 1759) his worthy successor, the rev. Walter Bagot, M. A. son of his esteemed friend and patron. In 1758, a very considerable accession of fortune came to him by the death of the rev. William Barcroft, rector of Fairsted and vicar of Kelvedon, in Essex, who bequeathed him his library and the principal part of his fortune, amounting in the whole to more than eight thousand pounds. According to the testimony of his biographer, his conduct as a Christian' pastor seems to have been in all respects most exemplary.

, an excellent artist of the English school, and a member of the Royal Academy of London, and of the academies of Rome and Bologna, was a native of Ireland, which country he left at an early age; and having devoted himself to the arts, repaired to Italy, at a time when an acquaintance with the master-pieces of the arts which that country possessed, was considered as an essential requisite for completing the education of a gentleman. The friendships and acquaintance formed by Mr. Tresham while abroad, were not a little conducive to the promotion of his interests on his return to this country; and their advantages were experienced by him to the last moment of his life. As an artist, Mr. Tresham possessed very considerable talents; and, while his health permitted him to exert them, they were honourably directed to the higher departments of his art. A long residence in Italy, together with a diligent study of the antique, had given him a lasting predilection for the Roman school; and his works display many of the powers and peculiarities which distinguish the productions of those great masters whose taste he had adopted. He had much facility of composition, and his fancy was well stored with materials; but his oil pictures are deficient in that richness of colouring and spirit of execution which characterize the Venetian pencil, and which have been displayed, in many instances, with rival excellence in this country. His drawings with pen and ink, and in black chalk, evince uncommon ability; the latter, in particular, are executed with a spirit, boldness, and breadth which are not often to be found in su; a productions. In that which may be termed the erudition of taste, Mr. Tresham was deeply skilled: a long acquaintance with the most eminent masters of the Italian schools made him familiar with their merits and defects; he could discriminate between all their varieties of style and manner; and as to every estimable quality of a picture, he was considered one of the ablest criticks of his day: in the just appreciation, also, of those various remains of antiquity which come under the different classifications of virtu, his opinion was sought, with eagerness, by the connoisseur as well as the artist, and held as an authority, from which few would venture lightly to dissent. This kind of knowledge proved not a little beneficial to him. Some years since, Mr. Thomas Hope, whose choice collections of every kind are well known, had given to one of his servants a number of Etruscan vases, as the refuse of a quantity which he had purchased. Accident made Mr. Tresham acquainted with the circumstance; and the whole lot was bought by him of the new owner for \00l. It was not long before he recefved 800l. from Mr. Samuel Rogers, for one moiety; and the other, increased by subsequent acquisitions, he transferred a few years ago to the earl of Carlisle. That nobleman, with a munificence and liberality which have invariably marked all his transactions, settled on the artist an annuity of 300l. for life, as the price of this collection. With such honour was this engagement fulfilled, that the amount of the last quarter, though due only a few days before Mr. Tresham’s death, was found to have been punctually paid. When Messrs. Longman and Co. commenced their splendid publication of engravings from the works of the ancient masters, in the collections of the British nobility, and others who have distinguished themselves by their patronage of the fine arts, they, with a discernment which does them credit, deputed Mr. Tresham to superintend the undertaking. To the honour of the owners of those master-pieces it must be recorded, that every facility was afforded to this artist, not only in the loan of pictures, but in the communication of such facts relating to the respective works as they were able to furnish. The salary paid him by these spirited publishers, contributed materially to the comfort of his declining years. We should not omit to mention, to the credit of Mr. Tresham, that, regardless as he had been in early life of providing those resourses for old age which prudence would suggest, yet so high were his principles, that the most celebrated dealers in virtu, auctioneers, and others, never hesitated to deliver lots to any amount purchased by him; and we may venture to assert, that he never abused their confidence. But the talents of Tresham were not confined to objects immediately connected with his profession; he had considerable taste for poetry, and his published performances in that art display a lively fancy, and powers of versification, of no ordinary kind. In society, which he loved and enjoyed to the last, he was always considered as an acquisition by his friends; and amongst those friends were included many of the most elevated and estimable characters of the time. In conversation, he was fluent, humourous, and animated, abounding in anecdote, and ready of reply. During the latter years of his life, the contrast exhibited between the playful vivacity of his manners and the occasional exclamations of agony, produced by the spasmodic affections with which he was so long afflicted, gave an interest to his appearance that enhanced the entertainment which his colloquial powers afforded. His existence seemed to hang upon so slight a thread that those who enjoyed his society were commonly under an impression that the pleasure derived from it might not be again renewed, and that a frame so feeble could scarcely survive the exertion which the vigour of his spirit for a moment sustained. The principle of life, however, was in him so strong, as to contradict all ordinary indications; and he lived on, through many years of infirmity, as much to the surprise as the gratification of his friends: his spirits unsubdued by pain, and his mind uninfluenced by the decay of his body. Though partaking, in some degree, of the proverbial irritability of the poet and the painter, no man was more free from envious and malignant feelings, or could be more ready to do justice to the claims of his competitors. So true a relish had he for the sallies of wit -and humour, that he could enjoy them even at his own expense: and he has been frequently known to repeat, with unaffected glee, the jest that has been pointed against himself. By his death, which took place June 17, 1814, the Royal Academy was deprived of one of its most enlightened members, and his profession of a liberal and accomplished artist.

, an Italian poet, who endeavoured to reform the style of his country, was born at Vicenza, July 3, 1478, and was descended from one of the most ancient families of that place. It has been said that it was late in life before he began his studies, but as the same writer who gives us this information, adds that upon his father’s death, when he was only seven years old, he applied to them with spirit, it is evident he could not have lost much time. He was first educated at Vicenza, under a priest named Francis Gragnuola, and afterwards at Milan under the celebrated Demetrius Cbalcondylcs. To the memory of this last master, who died in 1511, Trissino erected a monument in the church of St. Mary at Milan, or us others say, in that of San Salvador, with an inscription. From the Greek and Latin language, he proceeded to the' study of mathematics, architecture, natural philosophy, and other branches which form a liberal education. In 1503 he married; and with a view to domestic happiness and literary retirement, went to reside on one of his estates, for he was left very opulent, at Criccoli on the Astego. Herv he built a magnificent house, from his own design, on which he employed one of his pupils in architecture, the afterwards justly celebrated Paliadio.

, a French poet and dramatic writer, was born in the castle of Souliers, in the province of la Marche, in 1601. When attached to the household of the marquis de Verncuil, natural son of Henry IV. he fought a duel, in which his antagonist, one of the guards, was killed, and fled for some time to England. Returning to Poitou, he found friends who obtained his pardon from Louis XIII.; and Gaston of Orleans made him one of his gentlemen in ordinary. His life became then divided between poetry, gallantry, and gaming, and he experienced all the reverses and vicissitudes to which such a life is exposed, many of which he had alluded to in his “Page disgracie,” a romance published in 16-13, 4to. He wrote much for the stage, and was seldom unsuccessful. His tragedy of “Mariamne” still keeps his reputation alive, although it was fatal to the actor, Mondori, who performed the character of Herod, and died of violent exertion. Tristan was admitted into the French academy in 1649, but always lived poor. He died Sept. 7, 1655, in the fifty-fourth year of his age. His dramas and other poems were primed in '') vols. 4to. There were two others of this name: John Baptist Tristan L'Hermite Souliers, who was gentleman of his majesty’s bedchamber, and brother to the preceding. He was author of the genealogies of several families; “L'Histoire geneologique cle la Noblesse de Touraine,” 1669, fol.; “La Toscane Francoise,” 1661, 4to; “Les Corses Francoise,” 1662, 12mo; “Naples Francoise,” 1663, 4to, &c. containing the history of such persons in those countries as have been attached to France. There was also John Tristan, son of Charles Tristan, auditor of accounts at Paris. He attached himself to Gaston of France, duke of Orleans, was well skilled in antiquity and medals, and published a “Historical Commentary on the Lives of the Emperors,” 1644, 3 vols. fol. a work full of curious observations; but Angeloni and father Sirmond found several faults in it, which Tristan answered with great asperity. He was living in 1656.

, an ancient Greek poet, as we learn from Suidas, was an Egyptian; but nothing can be determined concerning his age. Some have fancied him older than Virgil, but without the least colour of probability. Others have made him a contemporary with Quintus Calaber, Nonnus, Coluthus, and Musæus, who wrote the poem on Hero and Leander, because they fancied a resemblance between his style and theirs; but this is a precarious argument, nor is it better known when these authors lived. All therefore that can be reasonably supposed concerning the age of Tryphiodorus is, that he lived between the reigns of Severus and Anastasius; the former of whom died at the beginning of the third century, and the latter at the beginning of the sixth.

His reputation among the ancients, if we may judge from their having given him the title of grammarian, was very considerable; for, though the word grammarian be now applied to persons altogether attentive to the minutiae of language, yet it was anciently a title of honour, and particularly bestowed on such as wrote well and politely in every way. The writings of this author were extremely numerous, as we learn from their titles preserved by Suidas yet none of them are come down to us, except his “Destruction of Troy,” which he calls “A Sequel to the Iliad.” He also wrote a new Odyssey, which Addison has described with equal truth and humour. After having proposed to speak of the several species of false wit among the ancients, he says, “The first I shall produce are the Lipogrammatists, or Letter-droppers, of antiquity, that would take an exception, without any reason, against some particular letter in the alphabet, so as not to admit it once into a whole poem. One Tryphiodorus was a great master in this kind of writing. He composed an Odyssey, or epic poem on the adventures of Ulysses, consisting of four and twenty books, having entirely banished the letter A from his first book, which was called ‘ Alpha,’ as lucus a non lucendo, because there was not an Alpha in it. His second book was inscribed * Beta' for the same reason: in short, the poet excluded the whole four and twenty letters in their turns, and shewed them, one after another, that he could do his business without them. It must have been very pleasant to have seen this poet avoiding the reprobate letter, as much as another would a false quantity; and making his escape from it through the several Greek dialects, when he was pressed with it in any particular syllable. For, the most apt and elegant word in the whole language was rejected, like a diamond with a flaw in it, if it appeared blemished with a wrong letter. I shall only observe upon this head, that if the work I have here mentioned had been now extant, the Odyssey of Tryphiodorus in all probability would have been oftener quoted by our learned pedants than the Odyssey of Homer. What a perpetual fund would it have been of obsolete words and phrases, unusual barbarisms and rusticities, absurd spellings and complicated dialects! I make no question, but it would have been looked upon as one of the most valuable trcasures of the Greek tongue.” It may be necessary to add that this singular composition does not exist, and that some have good-naturedly doubted whether it was written by our Tryphiodorus.

, an English poet, descended from a family of considerable note in Dorsetshire, was a younger son of Nicholas Turbervile of Whitchurch, and supposed to have been born about 1530. He received hia education at Winchester school, and became fellow of New college, Oxford, in 1561, but left the university without taking a degree, and resided for some time in one of the inns of court. He appears to have accumulated a stock of classical learning, and to have been well acquainted with modern languages. He formed his ideas of poetry partly on the classics, and partly on the study of the Italian school. His poetical pursuits, however, did not interfere with more important business, as his well-known abilities recommended him to the post of secretary to Thomas Randolph, esq. who was appointed queen Elizabeth’s ambassador at the court of Russia. While in this situation, he wrote three poetical epistles to as many friends, Edward Davies, Edmund Spenser (not the poet), and Parker, describing the manners of the Russians. These may be seen, in Hackluyt’s voyages, vol. I. p. 381. After his return, he was much courted as a man of accomplished education and manners; and the first edition of his " Songs and Sonnets/* published in 1567, seems to have added considerably to his fame. A second edition appeared in 1570, with many additions and corrections.

Our author was living in 1594, and in great esteem, but we have no account of his death. There appear to have tieen two other persons of both his names, both natives of Dorsetshire and nearly contemporaries, one of whom was a commoner of Gloucester-hall in 1581, aged eighteen, and the other a student of Magdalen-hall in 1595, aged seventeen. Wood was not able to tell which of the three was the author of“Essays, politic and moral,” which were published in 1608, nor of the “Booke of Falconrye and Hawking, heretofore published by G. Turbervile, gent, and now revived, corrected, and augmented by another hand,” Lond. loll. But the intelligent editor of “Phillips’s Theatrum” is of opinion that this work was the production of our poet, from its having commendatory verses prefixed by Gascoigne; and the curious biographical tract of Whetstone, lately reprinted in the edition of the English Poets, before Gascoigne’s works, notices a production of that author on hunting, which Mr. Park thinks is the one printed with the above “Booke of Falconrye,” and usually attributed to Turbervile. Besides these, our poet wrote commendatory verses to the works of several of his contemporaries.

, an English poet of the sixteenth century, and styled the British Varro, was born, as it is supposed, about the year 1515, at Rivenhall near Witham in Essex. His father, William Tusser, married a daughter of Thomas Smith, of Rivenhall, esq. by whom he had five sons and four daughters; and this match appears to have been the chief foundation of “the gentility of his family,” for which he refers his readers to “the Heralds’ book.” The name and race, however, have long been extinct. At an early age, much against his will, he was sent by his father to a music-school; and was soon placed as a chorister or singing-boy in the collegiate chapel of the castle of Wallingford; and after some hardships, of which he complains, and frequent change of place, he was at length admitted into St. Paul’s, where he arrived at considerable proficiency in music, under John Redford, the organist of that cathedral, a man distinguished for his attainments in the science. From St. Paul’s he was sent to Eton school, and was some time under the tuition of the famous Nicholas Udall, of whose severity he complains, in giving him fiftythree stripes at once for a trifling fault. Hence he was removed to Cambridge, and, according to some, was first entered of King’s college, and afterwards removed to Trinity hall; but his studies being interrupted by sickness, he left the university, and was employed about court, probably in his musical capacity, by the influence of his patron, William lord Paget. He appears to have been a retainer in this nobleman’s family, and he mentions his lordship in the highest terms of panegyric.

By his wife Alice, daughter of William Piper of Canter* bury, whom he married in 1524, which, according to Wood, must have been when he was at Oxford, he had three sons. The first, Lawrence, was a fellow of All Souls college, and bachelor of civil law, and an ingenious poet, but ventured no farther than some encomiastic verses prefixed to books. He lived and probably died on his father’s estate at Hardacre in Kent. He had a brother John, who also wrote verses prefixed to books; and a third, Thomas, of whom Wood has given us some farther particulars, although perhaps they are not very interesting. He was born in Canterbury, and admitted scholar of Corpus Christi college, Oxford, in 1560, and probationer fellow in 1564, being then bachelor of arts. He afterwards proceeded in arts, and then studied medicine, and in 1581 took his doctor’s degree, and practised at Lewes in Sussex, under the patronage of Thomas lord Buckhurst. He died in 1613, aged seventy, and was buried in the chancel of St. Anne’s church, Lewes. He wrote and translated many tracts, enumerated by Wood, but of very little value. He was an admirer of the mysterious philosophy of John Dee. Among his other publications tie completed Phaer’s translation of the Æneid, with Maphaeus’s thirteenth book, in 1583; translated Lhuyde’s “Breviary of Britayne, &q.;” and was editor of his father’s work “De rebus Albionicis,” which he dedicated to lord Buckhurst. He also wrote some contemptible rhirnes, then called poetry.

The “Acts of the Apostles,” set to music by Dr. Tye, were sung in the chapel of Edward VI. and probably in other places where choral service was performed; but the success of them not answering the expectation of their author, he applied himself to another kind of study, the composing of music to words selected from the Psalms of David, in four, five, and more parts; to which species of harmony, for want of a better, the name of Anthem, a corruption of Antiphon, was given. In Dr. Boyce’s collection of cathedral music, lately published, vol. II. is aa anthem of this great musician, “I will exalt thee,” a most perfect model for composition in the church-style, whether we regard the melody or the harmony, the expression or the contrivance, or, in a word, the general effect of the whole. In the Ashmolean ms. fol. 189, is the following note in the hand-writing of Antony Wood “Dr. Tye was a peevish and humoursome man, especially in his latter days and sometimes playing on the organ in the chapel of Qu. Eliz. which contained much music, but little delight to the ear, she would send to the verger to tell him that he played out of tune; whereupon he sent word, that her ears were out of tune.” The same author adds, that Dr. Tye restored church-music after it had been almost ruined by the dissolution of abbeys. What sir John Hawkins, from whom this article appears to have been taken by our predecessors, has said of Tye, is confirmed by Dr. Burney, who says that he was doubtless at the head of all our ecclesiastical composers of that period. This eminent musical historian adds, that Dr. Tye, “if compared with his contemporaries, was perhaps as good a poet as Sternhold, and as great a musician as Europe then could boast; and it is hardly fair to expect marc perfection from him, or to blame an individual for the general defects of the age in which he lived.”

, an ancient Greek poet, who flourished in the seventh century B. C. was born at Miletus, but lived at Athens, and became celebrated by all antiquity for the composition of military songs and airs, as well as the performance of them and the successof his verses has advanced his name to the rank of the greatest heroes as well as the noblest poets. The Lacedaemonians, during the second Messenian war, about 685 B. C. by advice of the Pythian Oracle, applied to the Athenians for a general. The Athenians sent them Tyrtæus, perhaps in ridicule for, besides his occupation, utterly remote from military affairs, he is reported to have been short and very deformed, blind of one eye, and lame But a memorable victory which they obtained over the Messenians is attributed to the animating sound of a new military flute or clarion, invented and played upon by Tyrtæus; and his military airs were constantly sung and played in the Spartan army, to the last hour of the republic. The poems of Tyrtæus were first printed in a collection by Frobenius in 1532, and separately in 1764 by Klotz. His “War Elegies” have been versified in English by Mr. Polwhele, and imitated by the late Mr. Pye, with a reference to the late war.

His other publications were, 1. “The Poetical remains of James I. of Scotland, consisting of the King’s Q.uair in six cantos, and * Christ’s kirk of the green,' to which is prefixed a dissertation on the life and writings of king James,” Edinburgh, 1783. This dissertation forms a valuable morsel of the literary history of Europe: for James 'ranked still higher in the literary world as a poet, than in the political world as a prince. Great justice is done to his memory in both respects in this dissertation: and the two morsels of poetry here rescued from oblivion, will be esteemed by men of taste, as long as the language in which they are written can be understood. 2. “A Dissertation on Scottish music,” first subjoined to Arnot’s “History of Edinburgh.” 3. “Observations on the Vision, a poem,” first published in Ramsay’s Evergreen, now also printed in the Transactions of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland. This may be considered as a part of the literary history of Scotland. 4. “On the fashionable amusements in Edinburgh during the last century,” ibid. He also contributed No. 16 to the periodical paper called “The Lounger.”

, a celebrated grammarian of Constantinople, died about the end of the twelfth century. Being put under proper masters at fifteen, he learnt not only the belles lettres, and the whole circle of sciences, but even the Hebrew and Syriac tongues. He had a prodigious memory, and, it is said, was able to repeat all the Scriptures by heart. He seems to have been a most accomplished person, who understood almost every thing; but was a severe critic on the performances of others, and not without a considerable share of vanity. He wrote “Commentaries upon Lycophron’s Alexandria,” which he published first under the name of his brother, Isaac Tzetzes: they are inserted by Potter in his edition of this poet at Oxford, 1697, in folio. He wrote also “Chiliades,” or miscellaneous histories, in verse, which Fabricius calls his most celebrated work, as abounding with political and civil knowledge; “Scholia upon Hesiod;” “Epigrams and other Poems;” “Pieces upon Grammar and Criticism.” He mentions also “Allegories upon Homer,” which he dedicated to the empress Irene, wife of Manuel Comnenus. This empress was married in 1143, and died in 1158, which nearly ascertains the age of Tzetzes. The “Allegories” of this author were published by Morel, Paris, 1616, 8vo, and the “Chiliades,” at Basil, 1546, fol.

, an Italian poet of the fourteenth century, was the descendant of an illustrious family of Florence, the Uberti, who, when the Guelphs became victorious, were banished from Florence, and their property divided among their enemies. Our poet was born in the poverty and obscurity to which his family had been reduced, and although the Florentines allowed him to return and reside in the country of his forefathers, he never became rich, and was obliged to attend the courts of the nobility, and gain a subsistence by chaunting his verses. Of those he composed a great many in the form of songs and other small pieces which were admired for their novelty; he is even thought to have been the inventor of the ballad species. In more advanced age, he undertook his “Dittamondo,” in imitation of Dante, who in his vision takes Virgil for his guide; Uberti takes Solinus, who conducts him over the whole habitable globe. By means of this fiction he includes geographical and historical matter, which has induced some to call his poem a geographical treatise. It is said to be written with energy and elegance, and was first printed, or at least a part of it, at Vicenza in 1474, fol. and reprinted at Venice in 1501. Both are rare, and chiefly valued for their rarity. Villani, who gives us a sort of eloge rather than a life of Uberti, says that he died at an advanced age in 1370.

, an eminent schoolmaster of the sixteenth century, styled by Leland, in his “Encomia,” Odovallus, was born in Hampshire in 1506, and was admitted scholar of Corpus Christi college, Oxford, June 18, 1520. He then took the degree of bachelor of arts, and became probationer fellow Sept. 3, 1524; but was prevented taking the degree of master soon afterwards, on account of his inclination to the tenets of Luther. He then obtained the mastership of Eton school, and, in the performance of his duty there, behaved, as Thomas Tusser the poet tells us, with great severity. He proceeded in arts in 1534, but in 15il was near losing his place, being suspected of some concern in a robbery of plate belonging to the college, with two of his scholars. For this fact he was examined by the king’s council, but we do not know the result of their inquiries. The charge probably was discovered to be ill-grounded, as he was at this time in possession of the living of Braintree in Essex, which he did not resign till 1544, and in 1552 was preferred to the rectory of Calbourne in the Isle of Wight. He afterwards was servant to queen Catherine Parr, and, in the beginning of Edward VI. 's time, was promoted to a canonry at Windsor. The time of his death is not known, unless by a manuscript note on a copy of Bale, in which that event is said to have taken place in 1557, and that he was buried at Westminster. In 1555 he had been appointed headmaster of Westminster-school, a circumstance not noticed by Wood. He is said to have written several comedies, and Bale mentions “The Tragedy of Popery.” But none of these now exist. A specimen, however, of his abilities in this wav, niay be seen in a long quotation from a rhiming interlude by him, printed in Wilson’s “Art of Logicke,” 1587, and reprinted in the new edition of Wood’s Athense. His more useful works were, 1. “Flowers for Latin speaking, selected and gathered out of Terence, and the same translated into English,” &c. often printed, particularly in 1533, 1538, 1568, and 1575. Both Leland and Newton wrote encomiastic verses on this book. 2. A translation of the “Apophthegms” of Erasmus, 1542 and 1564, 8vo. 3. “Epistolce et carmina ad Gul. Hormannum et ad Joh. Lelandum.” 4. A translation of Erasmus’s “Paraphrase on the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles,” 1551, fol. 5. A translation of Peter Martyr’s “Treatise on the Sacrament.*' He also drew up” An answer to the sixteen articles of the Commons of Devonshire and Cornwall," a ms. in the royal collection.

, a learned Italian, was born at Rubiera in 1446. He gave himself the name of Codrus, a poor poet in Juvenal, in reply to a speech made to him. After a very learned education, he was invited to Forli, to teach the languages, and while here met with an accident which appears to have affected his brain. He had an apartment in the palace, but his room was so very dark, that he was forced to use a candle in the day-time; and one day, going abroad without putting it out, his library was set on fire, and some papers which he had prepared for the press were burned. The instant he was informed of this, he ran furiously to the palace, and vented his rage in the most blasphemous imprecations, after which he rushed from the city, and passed the whole day in a wood in the vicinity, without nourishment. He returned next day, and shut himself up for six months in the house of an artificer. After a residence of about thirteen years at Forli, he was invited to Bologna, where he was appointed professor of grammar and eloquence, and where he passed the remainder of his days with credit. He died at Bologna in 1500. His works, printed at Basil in 15*0, consist of speeches, letters, and poems: to which is prefixed an account of his life. He appears to have been much esteemed by his learned contemporaries, but modern critics seem less disposed to rank him among the ornaments of his age.

, a most illustrious prelate, and as he has been justly styled by Dr. Johnson, the great luminary of the Irish church, was descended from a very antient family, and born at Dublin, Jan. 4, 1580. His father, Arnold Usher, was one of the six clerks in chancery, a gentleman of good estate and reputation, and descended of a very ancient family, which in England bore the name of Nevil, till the reign of Henry II. when it was fchanged by one of his ancestors, who about 1185, passing with prince (afterwards king) John in quality of usher into Ireland, settled there by the name of his office, a practice very common in those early ages, and probably occasioned by the ambition of founding a family; and his descendants, spreading into several branches, filled the most considerable posts in and about Dublin for many ages, to the time of our author, who gave fresh lustre to the family. His mother was the daughter of James Stanyhurst (father of Richard the poet. See Stanyhurst) thrice speaker of the House of Commons, recorder of the city of Dublin, and one of the masters in chancery. This gentleman, of whom we took some notice in our account of his son, is yet more memorable for having first moved queen Elizabeth to found and endow a college and university at Dublin; in which he was vigorously seconded by Henry Usher , archbishop of Armagh, who was James Usher’s uncle. James discovered great parts and a strong passion for books from his infancy; and this remarkable circumstance attended the beginning of his literary pursuits, that he was taught to read by two aunts, who had been blind from their cradle, but had amazing memories, and could repeat most part of the Bible with readiness and accuracy; C<ecorum mens oculatissima. At eight years of age he was sent to a school, which was opened by Mr. James Fullerton and Mr. James Hamilton, two young Scots gentlemen, who were placed at Dublin by king James I. then only king of Scotland, to keep a correspondence with the protestant nobility and gentry there, in order to secure an interest in that kingdom, in the event of queen Elizabeth’s death: but her majesty being very sore upon this point, and unwilling to think of a successor, this was a service of some danger, and therefore it was thought expedient for them to assume the disguise of school-masters, a class of men which was very much wanted in Ireland at that time. Mr. Fullerton was afterwards knighted, and of the bed-chamber to king James; and Mr. Hamilton was created viscount Clandebois.

, a French poet of the lower order, was born January 1720, at Ham in Picardy, and carried to Paris, at five years old, by his father, a small tradesman, but he was so headstrong, wild, and dissipated in his youth, that nothing could make him attend to literature. This his biographers seem willing to consider as an advantage, and as giving a degree of originality to his works; yet they tell us that he afterwards read all the best French books. He invented a new species of poetry, which his countrymen called le genre Poissard (the Billingsgate style). In bringing this style to perfection, he carefully studied the manners of the fish-women, and their dialect, and introduced it in his most popular performances, and obtained from his admirers the title of the Teniers of poetry. His various Poissard operas, songs, parodies, &c. had great success but were mostly recommended by his manner of reciting or singing them; for then, say our authorities, it was not imitation, it was nature herself. But this nature, this Poissard style, this freedom of phrase, and licentious expressions, render the works of Vad6 very dangerous, and always disgusting to hearers of taste. They also exposed him to all the temptations of dissolute company; and his passion for gaming, convivial pleasures, and women, shortened his clays. He was become sensible of his errors, and had resolved to be wiser and better, but his resolution came late, and he was cut off in his thirty-seventh year, July 4, 1757. His collected works were published in 1758, 4 vols. 8vo, and since, in 1796, in 4to, with plates, but apparently only a selection, and probably as much as modern taste could bear.

, in German Von Watte, one of the most learned men of his nation or time, was born at St. Gal, Nov. 29, 1484, of which city his father, Joachim Von Watte, was a senator. After some education at home he was sent to Vienna to pursue the higher studies, but for some time entered more into the gaieties of the place, and was distinguished particularly for his quarrels and his duels, until by the sensible and affectionate remonstrances of a merchant of that city, to whose care his father had confided him, he was induced to devote his whole time and attention to books, and never relapsed into his former follies. When he had acquired a competent share of learning he wished to relieve his father from any farther expence, and with that honourable view taught a school at Villach, in Carinthia; but finding this place too remote from literary society, he returned to Vienna, and in a short time was chosen professor of the belles lettres, and acquitted himself with such credit, and gained such reputation by some poetry which he published, that the emperor Maximilian I. honoured him with the laurel crown at Lintz in 1514. After some hesitation between law and physic, both of which he had studied, he determined in favour of the latter, as a profession, and took his doctor’s degree at Vienna in 1518. He appears to have practised in that city, and afterwards at St. Gal, until the controversies arose respecting the reformation. After examining the arguments of the contending parties, he embraced the cause of the reformers; and besides many writings in favour of their principles, befriended them in his rank of senator, to which he had been raised. In 1526 he was farther promoted to the dignity of consul of St. Gal, the duties of which he performed so much to the satisfaction of his constituents that he was re-elected to the same office seven times. He died April 6, 1551, in his sixty-sixth year. He bequeathed his books to the senate of St. Gal, which were ordered to be placed in the public library of the city, with an inscription, honourable both to his character and talents. The latter were very extensive, for he was well versed and wrote well on mathematics, geography, philosophy, and medicine. He was also a good Latin poet, and, above all, a sound divine and an able controversial writer. Joseph Scaliger places him among the most learned men of Germany. He was intimate with our illustrious prelate, archbishop Cranmer, but preceded him in some of the doctrines of the reformation. About 1536 he wrote a book entitled “Aphorismorum libri sex de consideratione Eucharistiae,” &c. which was levelled at the popish doctrine of the corporal presence, and thinking it a proper work for the archbishop to patronize, presented it to him; but Cranmer had not yet considered the question in that view, and therefore informed Vadian that his book had not made a convert of him, and that he was hurt with the idea of being thought the patron of such unscriptural opinions. Vadian therefore pursued the subject at home, and wrote two more volumes on it. The only medical work he published was his “Consilium contra Pestem, Basil, 1546, 4to. Those by which he is best known in the learned world, are, 1. A collection of remarks on various Latin authors, in his” Epistola responsoria ad Rudulphi Agricolas epistolam,“ibid. 1515, 4to. 2. His edition of” Pomponius Mela,“first printed at Vienna in 1518, fol. and often reprinted. 3.” Scholia qoaedam in C. Plinii de Nat. Hist, librum secundum,“Basil, 153 1, fol. 4.” Chronologia Ablmtum Monasterii St.Galli“”De obscuris verborum significationibus epistola;“” Farrago antiquitatum Alamannicarum,“&c. and some other treatises, which are inserted in Goldnst’s” Alamanniae Scnptores."

He composed several learned and curious works, some of which were published in his life-time, some not till after his death. Among the former are, “De Fulminum significationibus,” Romae, 1517, printed also in the 5th volume of Grsevius’s Roman Antiquities. “Pro Sacerdotum barbis defensio,” Romae, 1531, occasioned by an intention to renew a decree, pretended to be made by an ancient council, and confirmed by pope Alexander III. by which priests were forbidden to wear long beards. “Castigationes Virgilianae iectionis,” printed in Robert Stepbens’s Virgil at Paris, 1532, and since reprinted with the best editions of this poet. “Hieroglyphica, sive de sacris Egyptiorum aliarumque gentium literis Commentariorum libri LVIII.” Basil, 1566. In this he attempts to illustrate, from Egyptian, Greek, and Roman symbols, almost every branch of science and art, but is supposed to display more imagination than judgment. Among the works published after his death are, “Diaiogo della volgar lingua, non prima uscito in luce,” 4to; “Antiquitatum Belluuensium libri quatuor,” 8vo; and “Contarenus, sive de literatorum infelicitate libri duo,” 8vo; all printed at Venice in 1620, by the direction and under the care of Alorsio Lollini, bishop of Belluno. The last piece contains a great number of curious anecdotes; and is entitled “Contarenus,” because the first book of it is a dialogue between Caspar Contareno, a Venetian ambassador, and some learned persons at Rome. It has been often printed at Amsterdam, 1647, in 12mo, “cum Cornelii Tollii Appendice,” at Helmstadt, 1695, in 12mo; and at Leipsic, 1707, in 8vo, with two other pieces upon similar subjects, namely, “Alcionius de Exilio,” and “Barberius de miseria Poetarum Grascorum,” and a preface by Joannes Burchardus Menkenius, the editor. Mr. D'Israeli, who has written so well on this interesting subject, considers Valerianus’s as “a meagre performance, iti which the author shews sometimes a predilection for the marvellous, which happens so rarely in human affairs; and he is so unphilosophical, that he places among the misfortunes of literary men, those fatal casualties to which all men are alike liable.” “Yet,” adds Mr. D'Israeli, “evert this small volume has its value; for, although the historian confines his narrative to his own times, he includes a sufficient number of names to convince us that to devote t>nf life to authorship is not the true means of improving our happiness or our fortune.”

, a gentleman eminent in the very different characters of dramatic poet and architect, was descended from a family originally of Ghent in Flanders. His grandfather, Giles Vanburg, being obliged to quit his native country on account of the persecution of the protestants by the duke of Alva, came to England, and settled as a merchant in London, in the parish of St. Stephen, Walbrooke, where he continued until his death in 1646. He left a son, Giles Vanbmgb, who settled in the city of Chester, and was, it is supposed, a sugar-baker, where he acquired an ample fortune. Blome, in his “Britannia,” calls him gentleman, and afterwards he was styled an esquire. Removing to London, he obtained the place of comptroller of the Treasury-chamber. He died in 1715. He married Elizabeth, the fifth and youngest daughter and coheir of sir Dudley Carleton, of Imber-court in Surrey, knt. She died in 1711. By her he had eight sons, the second of whom was John, the subject of the present article. The time of his birth has not been ascertained, b,ut it probably was about the middle of the reign of Charles II.

Thus far the satirist was well founded party-rage warped his understanding when he censured Vanbrugh’s plays, and left him no more judgment to see their beauties than sir John had when he perceived not that they were the only beauties he was formed to compose.“Walpole, perhaps, was not aware of the handsome apology Dr. Swift and Mr. Pope have made, in the joint preface to their miscellanies” In regard to two persons only we wish our raillery, though ever so tender, or resentment, though ever so just, had not been indulged. We speak of sir John Vanbrugh, who was a man of wit, and of honour; and of Mr. Addison, whose name deserves all the respect from every lover of learning.“And notwithstanding Walpole’s own contribution of wit and flippancy to depreciate the character of Vanbrugh’s Blenheim and Castle-Howard, we are far more inclined to the opinion of our illustrious artist and elegant writer, str Joshua Reynolds, delivered, as it is, with the modesty that distinguishes, however seldom it accompanies, superior genius.” In the buildings of Vanbrugh, who was a poet as well as an architect, there is a greater display of imagination than we shall find, perhaps, in any other; and this is the ground of the effect we feel it) many of his works, notwithstanding the faults with which many of them are charged. For this purpose Vanbrugh appears to have had recourse to some principles of the Gothic architectore, which, thoueh not so ancient as the Grecian, is more so to

By his wife, Maria Ruthven, lord Cowry’s daughter, he left one daughter, married to Mr. Stepney, whose grandson, Walpole says, was George Stepney the poet. Lady Vandyck, the widow, was married again to Richard Pryse, son of sir John Pryse, of Newton-Averbecham, in Montgomeryshire, knt. by whom she had no issue. Vandyck. died rich, and was generous in his legacies, but, owing to the confusions of the times, some were with difficulty recovered, and some lost.

Milton addressed a beautiful sonnet to sir Henry Vane, in terms of high commendation, for which the adherence of that illustrious poet to the independent sect must be his excuse, yet we can scarcely think him serious when he says,

, a Jesuit, and a modern Latin poet of considerable talents, was born in 1664 at Gausses in the diocese of Beziers, in Languedoc. He was educated at the Jesuits’ college in Beziers, and became one of the society in 1680. He was afterwards professor and rector of the schools belonging to the Jesuits in Montpellier, Toulouse, and Auch and died at Toulouse in 1739. He published a volume of poetical “Opuscula” and a good “Dictionary of Poetry,” in Latin,“4to, and had made great progress on a Latin and French Dictionary, which he did not live to finish. His principal Latin poem is his” Praedium Rusticum,“on the subject of a country farm, which, some thought, raised him to the first rank of modern Latin poets. The poem, however, is confessedly tedious, perhaps from the nature of the plan, and cannot be read with pleasure unless by those who happen to unite the scholar’s taste with the farmer’s knowledge. Arthur Murphy published in 1799, a translation of the fourteenth book of the” Praedium Rusticum,“which treats of bees. This he says was a juvenile performance, but he has introduced among the bees” French principles,“” corresponding societies," and other articles of very recent date, the prototypes of which are certainly not to be found in Vaniere.

, an Italian historian, poet, and critic, was born at- Florence in 1502. His father, a lawyer, placed him with a master, who reported that he was not fit for literature, and advised him to breed the boy up to merchandise. He was accordingly sent to a counting-­house, and there his masters discovered that he never was without a book, and minded nothing but reading. His father then, after examining him, found that he had been deceived by the school-master, and determined to give his son a learned education, and for that purpose sent him to Padua and Pisa. Unfortunately, however, he prescribed the study of the law, which Varchi relished as little as commerce; and although, out of filial respect, he went through the usual courses, he immediately, on his father’s death, relinquished both the study and practice of the law, and determined to devote all his attention to polite literature. In this he acquired great reputation; but when Florence became distracted by civil commotions, he joined the party in opposition to the Medici family, and was banished. During his exile he resided at Venice, Padua, and Bologna, where his talents procured him many friends; and his works having diffused his reputation more widely, Cosmo de Medicis had the generosity to forgive the hostility he had shewn to his family, and, respecting him as a man of letters, recalled him home, and appointed him his historiographer. In this capacity he recommended him to write the history of the late revolutions in Florence. All this kindness, accompanied with a handsome pension, produced a great change in the mind of the republican Varchi, who became now the equally zealous advocate of monarchy. As soon as he had finished a part of it, he submitted it to the inspection of his patron, and some copies were taken of it. These being seen by soma persons who suspected that he would make free with their characters, or the characters of their friends, they conspired to assassinate the apostate author, as they thought him; and having one night attacked him, left him weltering in his blood, but his wounds were not mortal; and although it is said he knew who the assassins were, he declined appearing against them. He was, however, so much affected by the affair, that he embraced the ecclesiastical profession, and obtained some preferment. He died at Florence in 1565. His history, which extends from 1527 to 1538, was not published until 1721, at Cologne, and reprinted at Leydeu 1723; but both these places are wrong, as both editions were published in Italy. There is a recent edition, Milan, 1803, 5 vols. 8vo. The style, like that of all his works, is pure and elegant, though a little too much elaborated. The facts, of course, are strongly tinctured with an attachment to the house of Medici.

, usually styled the most learned of all the Romans, was born in the year of Rome 638, or 28 B.C. His immense learning made him the admiration of his time; which yet was the most flourishing for arts and glory that Rome ever knew. He was an intimate friend of Cicero; and his friendship was confirmed and immortalized by a mutual dedication of their learned works to each other. Thus Cicero dedicated his “Academic Questions” to Varro; and Varro dedicated his “Treatise on the Latin tongue” to Cicero, who, in a letter in which he recommends him as questor to Brutus, assures the commander, that he would find him perfectly qualified for the post, and particularly insists upon his good sense, his indifference to pleasure, and his patient perseverance in business. To these virtues he added uncommon abilities, and large stores of knowledge, which qualified him for the highest offices of the state. He attached himself to the party of Pompey, and in the time of the triumvirate was proscribed with Cicero: and, though he escaped with his life, he suffered the loss of his library, and of his own writings; a loss which would be severely felt by one who had devoted a great part of his hfe to letters. Returning, at length, to Rome, he spent his last years in literary leisure. He died in the 727th year of the city. His prose writings were exceedingly numerous, and treated of various topics in antiquities, chronology, geography, natural and civil history, philosophy, and criticism. He was, besides, a poet of some distinction, and wrote in almost every kind of verse. He is said to have been eighty when he wrote his three books “De Re Rustica,” which are still extant. Five of his books “De Lingua Latina,” which he addressed to Cicero, are also extant, and some fragments of his works, particularly of his “Menippean Satires,” which are medleys of prose and verse. Scaliger has likewise collected some of his epigrams from among the “Catalecta Virgilii. The first edition of Varro” De Lingua Latina“is a quarto, without date or place, but supposed to be Rome, 1471. There is a second, at Venice, 1474, 4to, and a third at Rome, 1474, fol. His whole works, with the notes of Scaliger, Turnebus, &c. were printed by Henry Stephens, 1573, 8vo, reprinted 1581; but the former edition is in greatest request among the curious, on account of a note of Scaliger' s, p. 212, of the second part, which was omitted in the subsequent editions. Varro” De Re Rustica“is inserted among the” Auctores de Re Rustica." The use which Virgil makes of this work in his Georgics entitles it *o some respect; and it is amusing as giving us a notion of the agriculture of his time, and the method of laying out gardens, and providing the luxuries of the table, in which the Romans were particularly extravagant. It contains many absurdities, however, and many of those remarks and pieces of information which would now be thought a disgrace to the meanest writer on agriculture. The rev. T. Owen, of Queen’s college, Oxford, and rector of Upper Scudamore, in Wiltshire, published a good translation of this work in 1800, 8vo.

, was born about ten years after the preceding, at a small town near Narbonne. Though infinitely below the Roman in learning, he was at least as good, if not a better poet; which perhaps has made Lilius Gyraldus, and other critics, confound them. He composed many works in verse; some fragments of which were collected, and published with those of other ancient poets at Lyons, 1603. His chief works were, *' A poem on the war with frhe Sequani, a people of Gaul;“and the” Astronomies,“which went under the name of Planciades the Grammarian. But the” Argonautics,“in four books, was what gained him the greatest reputation; and though indeed nothing but a translation of” Apollonius Rhodius," yet it has been liberally commended by Quintilian. Seneca also observes, that Virgil had so good an opinion of this author, that he sometimes inserted his verses into his works.

, an English poet and translator, called the Silurist, from being a native of that part of Wales whose ancient inhabitants were called Silures, was born, in 1621, at Newton St. Bridget, in Brecknockshir. After being educated at home under Matthew Herbert, an able grammar- master, he was entered of Jesus college, Oxford, in 1638, but after two years residence, he departed without taking a degree, his father wishing him to study law in London. On the breaking out of the rebellion he was sent for home, and followed, as Wood says, “the pleasant paths of poetry and philology,” but afterwards studied and practised physic with reputation. He was, adds Wood, “esteemed by scholars an ingenious person, but proud and humorous.” He died in April 1695, and was buried in the parish church of Llansenfreid near Brecknock. His poetical works are, 1. “Olor Iscanus, a collection of some select poems,” Lond. 1650, 8vo. 2. “Silex scintillans, or the Bleeding Heart, sacred poems and private ejaculations,” 1650, 1655, 12mo. 3. “The Mount of Olives: or. Solitary Devotions,” 1652, 8vo. 4. “Thalia Rediviva,” poems, which Wood says were ready for the press in 1673, but knows not whether they were printed. Mr. Ellis has given a few specimens from Vaughan’s poetry, but without being able to applaud it much. He translated some parts of Plutarch’s Morals, which were printed in a second edition of his “Olor Iscanus;” Anselm’s “Blessed state of Man;” Guevara “On the praise and happiness of the Country Life;” the “Life of Paulinus bishop of Nola,” and a few other articles mentioned by Wood.

, a Latin poet and moral writer, was the son of Walter Vaughan, of the Golden Grove, in Carmarthenshire, esq. and younger brother to sir John Vaughan, first earl of Carbery, and patron of bishop Jeremy Taylor. He was born at Golden Grove in 1577, and became a commoner of Jesus college, Oxford, in 1591, where he took his degrees in arts. The fruits of his scholastic attainments began to appear uncommonly early, as he was only in his fifteenth year when he prepared for printing an easy paraphrase of Persius in English and Latin; and his publications which appeared in 1597 and 1598 bespeak a prematurity of genius. After taking his degrees in arts, he applied to the study of the law, but before he proceeded in that faculty, set out on his travels, and at Vienna performed the necessary exercises for a doctor’s degree, in which he was incorporated at Oxford in 1605. He afterwards appears to have meditated a settlement in Cambriol, Newfoundland, where he was living in 1628, but the time of his death is not mentioned. His Latin poems are, 1. the “Song of Solomon, and some of the Psalms,” translated, Lond. 1597. 2. “Varia Poemata de Sphaerarum online,” 1589, 8vo. 3. “Poemata continent. Encom. Roberti Comitis Essex,” 1598, 8vo. 4. “Cambrensium Caroleia,” &c. a poem on the nuptials of Charles I. 1625 or 1630, 8vo. His English works are, “The Golden Grove, moralized in three books,” 1608, 8vo, which seems to have suggested to bishop Taylor the title of one of his most popular works; and “The Golden Fleece,” 1626, 4to: both works of the moral kind, and replete with observations on the manners of the times, and the principal personages. A particular account of both is given in the “Bibliographer,” vol. II. by which it appears that Vaughan had translated a part of Boccalini’s Advices from Parnassus, and had published “Circles called the Spirit of Detraction, conjured and convicted,” and “Commentaries upon, and paraphrase of, Juvenal and Persius,” all in early life.

, Lord Vaux of Harwedon, an English poet, was the eldest son of Nicholas, the first lord Vaux, and was born in 1510. In 1527 he was among the attendants in Wolsey’s stately embassy, when that prelate went to treat of a peace between the emperor Charles V. and the kings of England and France; and in January 1530, he took his place in parliament as a baron. In 1532 he waited on the king in his splendid expedition to Calais and Boulogne, a little before which time he is said to have had the custody of the persecuted queen Catherine. In the following year he was made a knight of the bath, at the coronation of Anne Boleyn. He appears to have held no public office but that of the captain of the island of Jersey, which he surrendered in 1536. He died early in the reign of Philip and Mary.

As a poet, he has long been deprived of his merit by his pieces having been attributed to his father, Nicholas lord Vaux, an error which Dr. Percy first detected, and the title of Thomas lord Vaux seems now indisputable. The largest collection of his poetry is in the “Paradise of dainty Devises,” lately reprinted in the “Bibliographer;” and Dr. Percy and Mr. Ellis have printed “The Assault of Cupid,” and the “Dyttye, or sonet made by the lorde Vaus in time of the noble queeneMarye, representinge the image of Deathe;” but the popular notion of lord Vaux’s having composed this last on his death-bed, seems unfounded. From the prose prologue to Sackville’s “Induction,” in the “Mirror for Magistrates,” it would seem that lord Vaux had undertaken to pen the history of king Edward’s two sons cruelly murdered in the Tower of London; but what he performed of his undertaking does not appear. Lord Vaux, as a poet, is more distinguished by morality of sentiment than by imagery; yet even in the latter, his two celebrated poems of “The Assault of Cupid,” and the “Aged Lover’s renunciation of Love,” are far from deficient and the sweet and touching simplicity of the ideas, and the airy ease of the language, entitle them to high commendation.

, or Lope-Felix de Vega Carpio, a celebrated Spanish poet, was born at Madrid, Nov. 25, 1562. He informs us that his father was a poet, but what he was besides, or the time of his death, is not known. It appears that he was an orphan when at school, about thirteen or fourteen years old, and was then impelled by so restless a desire of seeing the world, that he resolved to escape; and having concerted his project with a schoolfellow, they actually put it in execution, but were soon brought back to Madrid. Before this time, according to his own account, he had not only written verses, but composed dramas in four acts, which, as he tells us, was then the custom. Upon his return to Madrid, however, he abandoned this mode of composition, and ingratiated himself with the bishop of Avila by several pastorals, and a comedy in three acts, called “La Pastoral de Jacinto,” which is said to have formed an epoch in the annals of the theatre, and a prelude to the reform which Lope was destined to introduce.

In 1590 he returned a second time to Madrid, and soon after married again. In 1598, on the canonization of St. Isidore, a native of Madrid, he entered the lists with several authors, and overpowered them all with the number if not with the merit of his performances. Prizes had been assigned for every style of poetry, but above one could not be obtained by the same person. Lope succeeded in the hymns; but his fertile muse, not content with producing a poem of ten cantos in short verse, as well as innumerable sonnets and romances, and two comedies on the subject, celebrated by an act of supererogation both the saint and the poetical competition of the day, in a volume of sprightly poems under the feigned name of Tom6 de Burguiilos. This success raised him, no doubt, in the estimation of the public, to whom he was already known by the number and excellence of his- dramatic writings and this was probably the most fortunate period of his life, and that in which he derived most satisfaction from his pursuits. About this time, however, we must fix the short date of his domestic comforts. Of three persons who formed his family, the son died at eight years, and was soon followed by his mother; the daughter alone survived our poet. He now resolved to seek consolation in the exercises of devotion; and, having been secretary to the Inquisition, he shortly after became a priest, and in 1609 an honorary member of the brotherhood of St. Francis.

He seldom passed a year without giving some poem to the press; and scarcely a month, or even a week, without producing some play upon the stage. His “Pastores de Belen,” a work in prose and verse on the Nativity, bad confirmed his superiority in pastoral poems; and rhymes, hymns, and poems without number on sacred subjects, had evinced his zeal in the profession he embraced. Philip IV. the great patron of the Spanish theatre, to which he afterwards is said to have contributed compositions of his own, at the aera of his accession, found Lope in full possession of the stage, and in the exercise of unlimited authority over the authors, comedians, and audience. New honours and benefices were immediately heaped on our poet, and in all probability he wrote occasionally plays for the royal palace. He published about the same time “Los Triumpbos de la F6” “Los Fortunas de Diana;” three novels in prose (unsuccessful imitations of Cervantes); “Circe,” an heroic poem, dedicated to the count duke of Olivarez and “Philomena,” a singular, but tiresome, allegory, in the second book of which he vindicates himself in the person of the nightingale from the accusation of his critics, who are there represented by the thrush.

, or Mapheus Veqids, a Latin poet of the fifteenth century, was born at Lodi in 1406. He studied law, in compliance with his father, but had a stronger predilection for poetry. He made, however, such proficiency as to be successively chosen professor of both in the university of Pavia. He went afterwards to Rome, and was secretary of the briefs under the popes Eugenius IV. Nicholas V. and Pius II. and died there in 1458. He wrote a great many works in prose, as “Dialogues de miseria et felicitate,” “Disputatio inter solem, terrain et aurum,” and others of the ascetic kind, ali inserted in the Library of the fathers. Dupin and other writers of the Romish church, bestow the highest commendations on one of his treatises “De educatione liberorum,” in which he borrows much from St. Augustine. Such was his enthusiasm for this saint, that he built a chapel in his church at Rome on the right hand of the great altar, and having caused the bones of St. Augustine, and of St. Monica his mother, to be placed in a very fine shrine, he removed them from Ostia to that chapel. He wrote a poem on the death of Astyanax, four books on the expedition of the Argonauts, four on the life of St. Antony, and other poems, in which there is more of copiousness than force, and more of ease than elegance. But his supplement to Virgil is his most remarkable effort. Fancying that the Æneid was imperfect, and wanted a denouement, he wrote a thirteenth book, which has been printed in some editions of Virgil, and even translated into Italian and French. In English we have likewise a translation, published in 1758, but it is of the burlesque kind, in imitation of Cotton.

, a Spanish comic poet and satirist, was born at Icija, in Andalusia, and recommended himself at the court of Philip IV. by his humour and pleasantries, so as to obtain the title of the Spanish Scarron. He is said to have possessed in the highest degree the talent of ridicule. He was the author of several comedies, which were printed at different places in Spain; and of an humorous piece entitled “El diabolo cojuelo, novella de la otra vida,” printed at Madrid in 1641. This Le Sage afterwards imitated in French, and his work has been often printed in English under the title of the “Devil on Two Sticks,” but Le Sage is thought to have very much improved on his original. Velez died at Madrid in 1646.

, or Venantius Honorius Clementianus Fortunatus, a Christian poet of the sixth century, was a native of Italy, and studied at Ravenna. He applied himself to grammar, rhetoric, poetry, and jurisprudence, but was most attached to rhetoric and poetry, and was honoured by Hilduinus, the abbot of St. Denis, with the title of Scholasticissimus. It sems uncertain what was the cause of his leaving Italy for France, but the step was peculiarly fortunate for him, as his poetical genius procured him the most honourable reception. Princes, bishops, and persons of the highest ranks, became eager to confer on him marks of their esteem. He arrived in France during the reign of Sigebert, king of Austrasia, who received him with great respect. This being about the time of the king’s marriage with Brunehaut, in the year 566, Venantius composed an epithaiamium, in which he celebrated the graces and perfections of the new queen. It is also said, that he gave the king lectures on politics. The following year he went to Tours to perform a vow to St. Martin, whose image had cured him of a complaint in his eyes. He then went to Poictiers, and was invited by St. Radegonda, the foundress of a monastery there, to reside in the capacity of her secretary; and afterwards, when he became a priest, she appointed him her chaplain and almoner. He resided here for some years, employing his time in study and writing, and edifying the church as much by his example as by his works. He was much esteemed by Gregory of Tours and other prelates, and was at last himself raised to be bishop of Poictiers, which dignity, it is said, he did not long enjoy. He died about the commencement of the seventh century, some say in the year 609. His works consist of eleven books of poetry, mostly of the elegiac kind, and generally short: hymns adapted to the services of the church: epitaphs, letters to several bishops, and some to Gregory of Tours: courtly verses addressed to queen Radegonda, and her sister Agnes, usually sent with presents of flowers, fruit, &c. four books of the “Life of St. Martin,” in heroic verse: several lives of the saints. Editions of his works were published at Cagliari in 1573, 1574, and 1584, and at Cologne in 1600: but all these are said to be incomplete and incorrect, yet they shew the respect paid to him as the best Latin poet of his time. In 1603 Christopher Brower, a German Jesuit, produced a very correct edition, with notes, printed at Fulda, and reprinted at Mentz, in 1617, 4to; but this contains only his poems. His other works are in the “Bibliotheca Patrum,” of Lyons, 1677. The most complete edition is that of Rome, published under the title of “Venantii opera omnia quae extant, post Browerianam editionetn mine recens novis addiiamentis aucta, not. et scholiis illustr. opera Mich-Ange Luchi,” 1786—87, 2 vols. 4to.

, a very useful biographer and bibliographer, was born at Montbrison en Forez, Nov. 11, 1544. He appears to have served the king both in a military and civil capacity, and was historiographer and gentleman in ordinary to his majesty. He died at Duerne, Sept. 25, 1600. In his youth he had cultivated poetry, but of his poetical efforts he published only some indifferent specimens in his great work. He had, according to Scaliger, a fine library of Italian, French, Spanish, Greek, and Latin authors, and was conversant in books of all kinds. The fruits of his labours were, 1. “La Prosopographie, ou Description des personnes insignes, &c. avec les effigies d‘aucuns d’iceux, et braves observations de leur temps, annees, fails, et dits,” Lyons, 1373, 4to. This he reprinted three times with improvements; and the last, left also by him for the press, was published by his son Claude, who made some, few additions at Paris in 1603, 3 vols. folio. This is a very miscellaneous compilation, in which, although there are a few particulars of the eminent men of his time, it requires some patience to find them. 2. “Les Diverses lemons d'Antoine Duverclier, suivant celJes de P. Messi-e,” Lyons, 1576, 8vo. Of this there have been several editions, the most complete of which is that ofTournon, 1605. These legons were part of Duverdier’s extracts, in the course of his reading, from various Greek, Latin, and Italian authors, 3. “Le Compseutique, ou Traits facetieux,” 12mo; but there are some doubts whether this, which did not appear until 1584-, was not the compilation of another author. 4. “La Bibliotheque d'Ant. Duverdier, contenant le catalogue de tons les auteurs qui ont ecrit ou traduit en Frangais, avec le supplement Latin, du meme Duverdier, a la biblioiheque de Gesner,” Lyons, 1585, folio. Croix Du Maine’s work of the same kind had appeared the year before, and was thought to be the best executed of the two; but they have both been republished with so many improvements, that, like Moreri’s, they retain very little of the original authors. This improved edition was the production of Rigoley and Juvigny, who added the notes of Lamonnoye, the president Bouhier and Falconet, and published the whole in six handsome volumes, 4to, under the title of Les Bibliotheques Franchises de Lacroix du Maine et de Duverdier,“1772. The work is undoubtedly still capable of improvement, but, as it is, it forms a very valuable addition to the bibliographical library. There is a copy in the king’s library at Paris, with a vast mass of ms additions and corrections by Mercier de Saint-Leger. Le Long and some others attribute to Du. Verdier” La Biographic et Prosopographie des rois de France jusqu'a Henri III.“Paris, 1583, and 1586, 8vo. But others have doubted this, because he makes no mention of it in a list of his works which he wrote in 1585, and in which he gave not only what he had published, but what remained in manuscript, such as a translation of Seneca, &c. His son, Claude Verdier, was born about 1566, and had the ambition to become an author, but turned out to be a bad poet and a worse critic; he also spent the property his father left him, and lived an obscure and miserable life till about 1649, which is said to have been its period. The worst feature of his character is the disrespectful manner in which he has treated his father’s talents and labours, in a work which he published in 1586, and 1609, 4to, entitled” In autores pene omnes anttquos potissimum censiones et correctiones." It is a sufficient character of this work, that he blames Virgil for his bad Latin.

, an extraordinary enthusiast in the seventeenth century, was born in London in 1582, descended from the family of Vicars in Cumberland. He was educated in Christ’s hospital, London, and afterwards was a member of Queen’s college, Oxford, but whether he took his degrees, Wood has rppt discovered. After leaving college he went to London, and became usher of Christ’s hospital, which place he held till towards the close of his life. It does not appear that he was a preacher, although most of his writings concern the religious controversies of the times Upon the commencement of the rebellion, “he showed his great forwardness,” says Wood, “for presbyterianism, hated all people that loved obedience, and affrighted many of the weaker sort, and others, from having any agreement with the king’s party, by continually inculcating into their heads strange stories of God’s wrath against the cavaliers. Afterwards, when the independents became predominant, he manifested great enmity against them, especially after the king’s death.” Foulis, in his “History of Plots,” says that “he could out-scold the boldest face in Billingsgate, especially if kings, bishops, organs, or maypoles, were to be the objects of his zealous indignation.” This indeed is a pretty just character of John Vicars’s writings, which form a store-house of the abusive epithets and gross personal reflections which passed between the lower order of sectaries in that period of confusion. The title of his work against John Goodwin, will afford a good specimen of John’s language. This was published in 1648, “Coleman-street Conclave visited; and that grand impostor, the schismatics’ cheater-in-chief (who hath long slily lurked therein) truly and duly discovered; containing a most palpable and plain display of Mr. John Goodwin’s self-conviction (under his own hand- writing), and of the notorious heresies, errors, malice, pride, and hypocrisy, of this most huge Garagantua in falsely pretended piety, to the lamentable misleading of his too credulous soul-murdered proselytes of Coleman-street, and elsewhere; collected principally out of his own big-braggadochio wave-like swelling and swaggering writings, full fraught with six-footed terms, and fleshlie rhetorical phrases, far more than solid and sacred truths, and may fitly serve (if it be the Lord’s will) like Belshazzar’s hand-writing on the wall of his conscience, to strike terror and shame into his own soul and shameless face, and to undeceive his most miserably cheated, and iuchanted or be-witched followers.” This is accompanied by a portrait of Goodwin (the only one mentioned by Granger, and of course in great request) with a windmill over his head, and a weather-cock upon it; the devil is represented blowing the sails; and there are other emblems, significant of Goodwin’s fickleness. Vicars died Aug. 12, 1652, in the seventy-second year of his age, and was buried in Christ church, Newgate-street. Wood has given a list of sixteen of his writings, the most curious of which is his “Parliamentary Chronicle.” This is still esteemed useful, and being scarce, is generally sold at a very high price. It was printed at different times under the following titles: 1. “God in the Molint; or England’s Remembrancer, being the first and second part of a Parliamentary Chronicle,” 1644, 4to. 2. “God’s Arke overtopping the World’s waves; or, a third part of a Parliamentary Chronicle,” 1646. 3. “The Burning-bush not consumed; or the fourth and last part of a Parliamentary Chronicle,” 1646. These were then published together, under the title of “Magnalia Dei Anglicana, or, England’s Parliamentary Chronicle,” 1646. Vicars was also a poet, and in the “Censura Literaria,” we have an account and specimen of a work of this kind entitled “Mischief’s Mysterie; or, Treason’s Master-piece; the powder-plot, invented by hellish malice; prevented by heavenly mercy truly related, and from the Latin of the learned and reverend Dr. Herring, translated, and very much dilated by John Vicars,” 1617. At the end of this are some smaller poems.

, an elegant modern Latin poet and critic, was a native of Cremona, and was born, as is generally thought, about 1470, but with more probability about 1480. His parents were not wealthy, yet enabled to give him a good education. After having made considerable proficiency in philosophy, theology, an-d political science, he came to Rome in the latter part of the pontificate of Julius II. and appears to hate mixed in the literary societies of the place; and his poem on the game of chess, “Scacchiae Ludus,” introduced hi fcothe favour of Leo X. who received him with particular distinction and kindness, admitted him as an attendant at court, and rewarded him with honours and emoluments. But that upon which the poet appears chiefly to have congratulated himself was, that his works were read and approved by the pontiff himself. It was at the suggestion of Leo that he began his celebrated “Cbristiad,” which he afterwards completed in six books, but Leo did not live to see it finished. It was, however, published under the patronage of Clement VII. in 1535. In the mean time Clement had already raised Vida to the rank of apostolical secretary, and in 1532, conferred on him the bishopric of Alba. Soon after the death of that pontiff, Vida retired to his diocese, and was present at its defence against the attack of the French in 1542, where his exhortations and example animated the inhabitants successfully to oppose the enemy. After having attended in his episcopal character at the council of Trent, and taken an active part in the ecclesiastical and political transactions of the times, he died at his see at Alba, Sept. 27, 1566, more respected for his talents, integrity, and strict attention to his pastoral duties, than for the wealth which he had amassed from his preferments.

The poet’s bays and critic’s ivy grow."

The first specimen of the talents of Vida in Latin poetry appeared in a collectoin of pieces on the death of the poet Aquila, which happened in 1500, towards which he contributed two piees, which were published in that collection at Bologna, in 1504. His whole works were first printed at Romae in 1527 and 1535, in 2 vols. 4to, but he published a more complete edition at Cremona, 1550, 2 vols. 8vo. The first contains, “Hymni de rebus divinis,” and “Christiados libri sex” the second “De Arte Poetica libri tres;” “De Bombyce libri duo;” Scacchiae Ludus“”Bucolica;“” Eclogæ, et Carmina diversi generis.“Besides the poems comprehended in these two volumes, others are ascribed to him, as” Italorum Pugilum cum totidem Gallis certamen;“” Carmen Pastorale in Obltum Juliill. Pontificis Maximi;“” Epicedion in Funera Oliverii Cardinalis Caraphæ;“but these he disavowed in a postscript to the above edition of his poems. He was also the author of some pieces in prose, as” Dialogi de Republics Dignitate“” Orationes tres Cremonensium adversus Papienses in Controversia Principatus“and” Constitutiones Synodales Civitati Albæ et Diœcesi prescriptæ.“Of such of these works, a-s his reputation as a Latin poet is at this day founded on, his three books” De Arte Poetica“were probably the first produced; and these were soon afterwards followed by the” Bombyx,“and by his” Scacchias Ludus,“which, as we noticed, introduced him to Leo X. The” Bombyx,“or silk-worm, is written with classical purity, and with a just mixture of the styles of Lucretius and Virgil. Dr. Warton says it was a happy choice to write a poem on” Chess;“nor is the execution less happy.” The various stratagems and manifold intricacies of this ingenious game, so difficult to be described in Latin, are here expressed with the greatest perspicuity and elegance; so that, perhaps, the game might be learned from this description.“Of the” Christiad,“the same excellent critic observes, that amidst many prosaic flatnesses, there are many fine strokes in this poem; particularly his angels, with respect to their persons and insignia, are drawn with that dignity which we so much admire in Milton, who seems to have had his eye on those passages. The” Poetics,“however, are perhaps the most perfect of his compositions; he had formed himself upon Virgil, who is therefore his hero, and he has too much depreciated Homer. He is, in truth, so much an imitator of Virgil as to be very defective in originality. Although his precepts principally regard epic poetry, yet many of them are applicable to every species of composition. This poem has the praise of being one of the first, if not the very first piece of criticism, that appeared in Italy since the revival of learning; for it was finished, as is evident from a short advertisement prefixed to it, in 1520. We have an excellent translation of this poem by Pitt, and one more recent, with notes, by Mr. Hampson. There are, if we mistake not, English translations also of the” Game of Chess,“a'.id the” Bombyx." Of his original works, the best recent editions are that of Oxford, by Tristram, 1722, 4 vols. 8vo, with elegant plates; that of the Vulpii (including the prose works) Padua, 1731, 2 vols. 4to.

Lionardo da Vinci broke forth with a splendour which eclipsed all his predecessors: made up of all the elements of genius, favoured by form, education, and circumstances, all ear, all eye, all grasp painter, poet, sculptor, anatomist, architect, engineer,chemist, machinist, musician, philosopher, and sometimes empiric he laid hold of every beauty in the enchanted circle, but, without exclusive attachment to one, dismissed in her turn each. Fitter to scatter hints than to teach by example, he wasted life insatiate in experiment. To a capacity which at once penetrated the principle and real aim of the art, he joined an inequality of fancy that at one moment lent him wings for the pursuit of beauty, and the next flung him on the ground to crawl after deformity. We owe to him chiaroscuro with all its magic, but character was his favourite study; character he has often raised from an individual to a species, and as often depressed to a monster from an individual. His notion of the most elaborate finish, and his want of perseverance, were at least equal. Want of perseverance alone could make him abandon his cartoon designed for the great council-chamber at Florence, of which the celebrated contest of horsemen was but one group; for to him who could organize that composition, Michael Angelo himself might be an object of emulation, but could not be one of fear. His line was free from meagreness, and his forms presented beauties; but he appears not to have been very much acquainted with the antique. The strength of his conception lay in the delineation of male heads; those of his females owe nearly all their charms to chiaroscuro; they are seldom more discriminated than the children they follow; they are sisters of one family.

the most excellent of all the ancient Roman poets, was born Oct. 15, U. C. 684, B. C. 70, in the consulship of Pompey and Crassus, at a village called Andes, not far from Mantua. His father was undoubtedly a man of low birth and mean circumstances; but by his industry so much recommended himself to his master, that he gave him his daughter, named Maia, in marriage, as a reward of his fidelity. Our poet, discovering early marks of a very fine genius, was sent at twelve years old to study at Cremona, where he continued till his seventeenth year. He was then removed to Milan, and from thence to Naples, then the residence of several teachers in philosophy and polite learning; and applied himself heartily to the study of the best Greek and Roman writers. But physic and mathematics were his favourite sciences, which he cultivated with much care; and to this early tincture of geometrical learning were owing probably that regularity of thought, propriety of expression, and exactness in conducting all subjects, for which he is so remarkable. He learned the Epicurean philosophy under the celebrated Syro, of whom Cicero speaks twice with the greatest encomiums both of his learning and virtue: his acquaintance with Varus, his first patron, commenced by his being fellow-student with him under this philosopher. After Virgil had completed his studies at Naples, Donatus affirms, that he made a journey to Rome; and relates some marvellous circumstances concerning his being made known to Augustus, which, like many other particulars in his account of this poet, breathe very much the air of fable. The truth is, we have no certain knowledge of the time and occasion of Virgil’s going to Rome, how his connexions with the wits and men of quality began, nor how he was introduced to the court of Augustus.

We cannot however imagine, that such an extraordinary gemus could lie long inactive and unexerted. It is related that, in the warmth of early youth, he formed a noble design of writing an heroic poem, “On the wars of Rome;” but, after some attempts, was discouraged from proceeding by the roughness and asperity of the old Roman names, which not only disgusted his delicate ear, but, as Horace expresses it, “quse versu dicere non est.” He turned himself, therefore, to pastoral; and, being captivated with the beauty and sweetness of Theocritus, was ambitious to introduce this new species of poetry among the Romans. His first performance in this way is supposed to have been written the year before the death of Julius Caesar, when the poet was in his twenty-fifth year: it is entitled “Alexis.” Possibly “Palaemon” was his second, which is a close imitation of the fourth and fifth Idylls of Theocritus. Dr. Warton places “Silenus” next: which is said to have been publicly recited on the stage by Cytheris, a celebrated comedian. Cicero, having heard this eclogue, cried out in an extasy of admiration, that the author of it was “magna3 spes altera Romae;” esteeming himself, say the commentators, to be the first. But the words may be understood in a very different sense, and more honourable to Cicero. The subject of this eclogue, we should remember, was an account of the Epicurean philosophy, both natural and moral, which had been but lately illustrated by Lucretius, an author, of whom Cicero was so eminently fond, as to revise and publish his work. Upon hearing therefore the beautiful verses of Virgil upon the same subject, Cicero exclaimed to this purpose: “Behold another great genius rising up among us, who will prove a second Lucretius.” Dr. Warton at least has suggested this very ingenious and natural interpretation. Virgil’s fifth eclogue is composed in allusion to the death and deification of Cassar. The battle of Philippi, in the year 7 12, having put an end to the Roman liberty, the veteran soldiers began to murmur for their pay; and Augustus, to reward them, distributed among them the lands of Mantua and Cremona. Virgil was involved in this common calamity, and applied to Varus and Pollio, who warmly recommended him to Augustus, and procured for him his patrimony again. Full of gratitude to Augustus, he composed the “Tityrus,” in which he introduces two shepherds; one of them complaining of the distraction of the times, and of the h.avock the soldiers made among the Mantuan farmers; the other, rejoicing for the recovery of his estate, and promising to honour the person who restored it to him as a god. But our poet’s joy was not of long continuance: for we are told, that, when he returned to take possession of his farm, he was violently assaulted by the intruder, and would certainly have been killed by him, if he had not escaped by swimming hastily over the Mincio. Upon this unexpected disappointment, melancholy and dejected, he returned to Rome, to renew his petition; and, during his journey, seems to have composed his ninth eclogue. The celebrated eclogue, entitled “Pollio,” was composed in the year 714, upon the following occasion. The consul Pollio on the part of Antony, and Maecenas on the part of Caesar, iiad made up the differences between them; by agreeing, that Octavia, half sister to Caesar, should be given in marriage to Antony. This agreement caused an universal joy; and Virgil, in this eclogue, testified his. Octavia was with child by her late husband Marcellus at the time of this marriage; and, as the Sibylline oracles had foretold, that a child was to be born about this time who should rule the world and establish perpetual peace, the poet ingeniously supposes the child in Octavia’s womb to be the glorious infant, under whose reign mankind was to be happy, the golden age to return from heaven, and fraud and violence to be no more. In this celebrated poem, the author with great delicacy at the same time pays his court to both the chiefs, to his patron Pollio, to Octavia, and to the unborn infant. It is dedicated to Pollio by name, who was at that time consul, and therefore we are sure of the date of this eclogue, as it is known he enjoyed that high office in the year 714. In the year 715, Pollio was sent against the Parthini, a people of Illyricum; and during this expedition Virgil addressed to him a beautiful eclogue, called “Pharmaceutria.” His tentti and last eclogue is addressed to Gallus. These were our poet’s first productions; and we have been the more circumstantial in our account of some of them, as many particulars of his life are intimately connected with them.

He is supposed to have been in his forty-fifth- year when he began to write the “Æneid;” the design of which is thus explained by an able master in classical literature. Augustus being freed from his rival Antony, the government of the Roman empire was to be wholly in him; and though he* chose to be called their father, he was, in every thing but the name, their king. But the monarchical form of government must naturally displease the Romans: and therefore Virgil, like a good courtier, seems to have laid the plan of his poem to reconcile them to it. He takes advantage of their religious turn, and of some old prophecies that must have been very flattering to the Roman people, as promising them the empire of the whole world. He weaves these in with the most probable account of their origin, that of being descended from the Trojans. He shews, that ^neas was called into their country by the express order of the gods; that there was an uninterrupted succession of kings from him to Romulus; that Julius Ca;sar was of this royal race, and that Augustus was his sole heir. The result of which was, that the promises made to the Roman people in and through this race, terminating in Augustus, the Romans, if they would obey the gods, and be masters of the world, were to yield obedience to the new establishment under that prince. The poem, therefore, may very well be considered as a political work: Pope used to say, “it was evidently as much a party-piece, as Absalom and Achitophel:” and, if so, Virgil was not highly encouraged by Augustus and Maecenas for nothing. The truth is, he wrote in defence of the new usurpation of the state; and all that can be offered in his vindication, which however seems enough, is, that the Roman government could no longer be kept from falling into a single hand, and that the usurper he wrote for was as good a one as they could have. But, whatever may be said of his motives for writing it, the poem has in all ages been highly applauded. Augustus was eager to peruse it before it was finished; and entreated him by letters to communicate it. Macrobius has preserved to us part of one of Virgil’s answers to the emperor, in which the poet excuses himself; who, however, at length complied, and read himself the sixth book to the emperor, when Octavia, who had just lost her son Marcellus, the darling of Rome, and adopted son of Augustus, made one of the audience. Virgil had artfully inserted that beautiful lamentation for the death of young Marcellus, beginning with “O nate, ingentem luctum ne quaere tuorum” but suppressed his name till he came to the line “Tu Marcellus eris:” upon hearing which Octavia could bear no more, but fainted away, overcome with surprise and sorrow. When she recovered, shfc made the poet a present of ten sesterces for every line, which amounted in the whole to above 2OOO/.

The “Æneid” being brought to a conclusion, but not to the perfection our author intended to give it, he resolved to travel into Greece, to correct and polish it at leisure. It was probably on this occasion, that Horace addressed that affectionate ode to him “Sic te Diva potens Cypri,” &c. Augustus, returning victorious from the East, met with Virgil at Athens, who thought himself obliged to attend the emperor to Italy: but the poet was suddenly seized with a fatal distemper, which, being increased by the agitation of the vessel, put an end to his life as soon as he landed at Brundusium. He died Sept. the 22d, in his fifty-second year. He had ordered in his will, that the “Æneid” should be burnt, as an unfinished poem; but Augustus forbade it, and had it delivered to Varius and Tucca, with the strictest charge to make no additions, but only to publish it correctly. He died with such steadiness and tranquillity, as to be able to dictate his own epitaph, in the following words:

Parthenope cecini Pascua, Kura, Duces." His bones were carried to Naples, according to his earnest request; and a monument was erected at a small distance from the city. He was of a swarthy complexion, tall, of a sickly constitution, afflicted with frequent head-aches and spitting of blood, very temperate, sober, and chaste, whatever may have been surmised to the contrary. That he wrote in his youth some indecent verses is not to he doubted, since the younger Pliny, who had done the same, justifies himself by his example; and, in his “Bucolics,” he relates very criminal passions; but it does not thence follow that he was tainted with them. On the contrary, it is delivered down to us as a certain truth, that the inhabitants of Naples gave him the name of Parthenias, on account of the purity of his words and manners. He was so very bashful, that he frequently ran into the shops, to prevent being gazed at in the streets; yet so honoured by the Roman people, that once, coming into the theatre, the whole audience rose, out of respect to him. He was of a thoughtful and melancholy temper, spoke little, loved retirement and contemplation. His fortune was not only easy, but affluent: he had a delightful villa in Sicily, and a fine house and well furnished library near Maecenas’s gardens on the Esquiline-hill at Rome. He revised his verses with prodigious severity, and used to compare himself to a she-bear, which licks her cubs into shape. He was so benevolent and inoffensive, that most of his contemporary poets, though they envied each other, agreed in loving and esteeming him. Among Caligula’s follies we may undoubtedly reckon his contempt and hatred of Virgil; who, he had the confidence to say, had neither wit nor learning, and whose writings and effigy he endeavoured to remove out of all libraries. The emperor Alexander Severus, on the contrary, called him the Plato of the poets, and placed his picture with that of Cicero in the temple in which he had placed Achilles and other great men. So did Silius Italicus the poet, when he kept Virgil’s birthday, as Pliny relates, with greater solemnity than his own; and so did our sir William Temple, who did “not wonder that the famous Dr. Harvey, when he was reading Virgil, should sometimes throw him down upon the table, and say, `He had a devil'.” With regard to the characteristical difference between Virgil and Homer, so much disputed, it may with truth be affirmed, that the former excelled all other poets in judgment, and the latter in invention; the former is the greater genius, the latter the most correct writer. “Methinks the two poets,” says Mr. Pope, “resemble the heroes they celebrate. Homer, boundless and irresistible as Achilles, bears all before him, and shines more and more, as the tumult increases Virgil, calmly daring, like Æneas, appears undisturbed in the midst of the action, disperses all about him, and conquers with tranquillity. Or, when we look on their machines, Homer seems like his own Jupiter in his terrors, shaking Olympus, scattering the lightnings, and firing the heavens: Virgil, like the same power in his benevolence, counselling with the gods, Jaying plans for empires, and regularly ordering his whole creation.”

The genuine and undisputed works of this poet are, ten “Eclogues, or Bucolics,” four books of “Georgics,” and the “Æneid,” in twelve books. The “Culex,” the “Ciris,” and some smaller pieces, called “Catalecta,” are subjoined to some editions of his works; particularly to that of Masvicius, with the notes of Servius, at JLeewarden, 1717, in 2 vols. 4to; which is, perhaps, the best edition of Virgil, although that of Burman, at Amsterdam, 1746, in 4 vols. 4 to., bears a higher price. There are, besides these 4 several good ones; as the “Elzevir” in 1636, 12mo; “Da la Cerdu’s” in 1642, folio; that “in Usum Delphini a Ruæo, 1675,” 4to; the “Variorum” edition at Leyden, 1680, 3 vols. 8vo and the edition of Heyne, republished in London in 1793. The versions of, and commentaries upon, his works are innumerable; those into our own lair* guage by Ogilby, Dryden, and Trapp, are well known: but Dr. Warton’s edition in Latin and English, referred to above, is preferable to any of these, not on account of th translation only, but because the Latin text is correctly printed with it. The “Bucolics” and “Georgics” have also been published by Dr. John Martyn, F. R. S. professor of botany in Cambridge, with an English version in prose, and with useful and curious notes.

, the Garrick of Russia, whose talents for the stage were as great as those of Snmorokof for dramatic composition, was a tradesman’s son at Yaroslaf. This surprising genius, who was born in 1729, having discovered very early proofs of great abilities, was sent for his education to Moscow, where he learnt the German tongue, music, and drawing. His father dying, and his mother marrying a second husband, who had established a manufacture of saltpetre and sulphur, he applied himself to that trade; and, going upon the business of his fatherin-law to Petersburg!) about 1741, his natural inclination for the stage led him to frequent the German plays, and to form an intimate acquaintance with some of the actors. Upon his return to Yaroslaf, he constructed a stage in a large apartment at his father-in-law’s house; painted the scenes himself; and, with the assistance of his four brothers, acted several times before a large assembly. Their first performances were the scriptural histories composed by the archbishop of Rostof; these were succeeded by the tragedies of Lomonozof and Sumorokof; and sometimes satirical farces of their own composition against the inhabitants of Yaroslaf. As the spectators were admitted gratis at every representation, his father-in-law objected to the cxpence. Accordingly Volkof constructed in 1750, after his own plan, a large theatre, partly by subscription, and partly at his own risk: having supplied it with scenes which he painted himself, and dresses which he assisted in making, and having procured an additional number of actors, whom he regularly instructed, he and his troop performed with great applause before crowded audiences, who cheerfully paid for their admission. In 1752 the empress Elizabeth, informed of their success, summoned them to Petersburg, where they represented in the theatre of the court the tragedies of Sumorokof. In order to form the new troop to a greater degree of perfection, the four principal actors were placed in the seminary of the cadets, where they remained four years. At the conclusion of that period a regular Russian theatre was established at the court, three actresses were admitted, Sumorokof was appointed director, and 1000l. was allowed for the actors. Beside this salary, they were permitted to perform once a week to the public, and the admission-money was distributed among them without deduction, as the lights, music, and dresses, were provided at the expeoce of the empress. The chief performances were the tragedies and comedies of Sumorokof, and translations from Moliere and other French writers. The company continued to flourish under the patronage of Catharine II.; and the salaries of the actors were gradually increased to 2200l. per annum. Volkof and his brother were ennobled, and received from their imperial mistress estates in land: he performed, for the last time, at Moscow, in the tragedy of Zemira, a short time before his death, which happened in 1763, in the thirty-fifth year of his age. He equally excelled in tragedy and comedy; and his principal merit consisted in characters of madness. He was tolerably versed in music, and was no indifferent poet.

, the greatest literary character which France produced in the last century, was born at Paris, February 20, 1694. His father, Francis Arouet, was “ancien notaire du Chatelet,” and treasurer of the chamber of accounts; his mother, MaryMargaret Daumart. At the birth of this extraordinary man, who lived to the age of eighty-five years and some months, there was little probability of his being ‘reared, and for a considerable time he continued remarkably feeble. In his earliest years he displayed a ready wit and a sprightly imagination: and, as he said of himself, made verses before he was out of his cradle. He was educated under Father Por6, in the college of Louis the Great; and such was his proficiency, that many of his essays are now existing, which, though written when he was between twelve and fourteen, shew no marks of infancy. The famous Ninon de l’Enclos, to whom this ingenious boy was introduced, left him a legacy of 2000 livres to buy him a library. Having been sent to the equity-schools on his quitting college, he was so disgusted with the dryness of the law, that he devoted himself entirely to the Muses. He was admitted into the company of the abb< Chaulieu, the marquis de la Fare, the duke de Sully, the grand prior of Vendo;ne, marshal Villars, and the chevalier du Bouillon; and caught from them that easy taste and delicate humour which distinguished the court of Louis XIV. Voltaire had early imbibed a turn for satire; and, for some philippics against the government, was imprisoned almost a year in the Bastile. He had before this period produced the tragedy of “Oedipus,” which was represented in 1718 with great success; and the duke of Orleans, happening to see it performed, was so delighted, that he obtained his release from prison. The poet waiting on the duke to return thanks: “Be wise,” said the duke, “and I will take care of you.” “I am infinitely obliged,” replied the young man; “but I intreat your royal highness not to trouble yourself any farther about my lodging or board.” His father, whose ardent wish it was that the son should have been an advocate, was present at one of the representations of the new tragedy: he was affected, even to tears, embraced his son amidst the felicitations of the ladies of the court, and never more, from that time, expressed a wish that he should become a lawyer. About 1720, he went to Brussels with Madam de Rupelmonde. The celebrated Rousseau being then in that city, the two poets met, and soon conceived an unconquerable aversion for each other. Voltaire said one day to Rousseau, who was shewing him “An Ode to Posterity,” “This is a letter which will never reach the place of its address.” Another time, Voltaire, having read a satire which Rousseau thought very indifferent, was advised to suppress it, lest it should be imagined that he “had lost his abilities, and preserved only his virulence.” Such mutual reproaches soon inflamed two hearts already sufficiently estranged. Voltaire, on his return to Paris, produced, in 1722, his tragedy of “Mariamne,” without success. His “Artemira” had experienced the same fate in 1720, though it had charmed the discerning by the excellence of the poetry. These mortifications, joined to those which were occasioned by his principles of imprudence, his sentiments on religion, and the warmth of his temper, induced him to visit England, where he printed his “Henriade.” King George I. and particularly the princess of Wales (afterwards queen Caroline) distinguished him by their protection, and obtained for him a great number of subscriptions. This laid the foundation of a fortune, which was afterwards considerably increased by the sale of his writings, by the munificence of princes, by commerce, by a habit of regularity, and by an ceconomy bordering on avarice, which he did not shake off till near the end of his life. On his return to France, in 1728, he placed the money he carried with him from England into a lottery established by M. Desforts, comptroller-general of the finances; he engaged deeply, and was successful. The speculations of finance, however, did not check his attachment to the belles lettres, his darling passion. In 1730, he published “Brutus,” the most nervous of all his tragedies, which was more applauded by the judges of good writing than by the spectators. The first wits of the time, Fontenelle, La Motte, and others, advised him to give up the drama, as not being his proper forte. He answered them by publishing “Zara,” the most affecting, perhaps, of all his tragedies. His “Lettres Philosophiques,” abounding in bold expressions and indecent witticisms against religion, having been burnt by a decree of the parliament of Paris, and a warrant being issued for apprehending the author in 1733, Voltaire very prudently withdrew; and was sheltered by the marchioness du Chatelet, in her castle of Cirey, on the borders of Champagne and Lorraine, who entered with him on the study of the “System” of Leibnitz, and the “Principia” of Newton. A gallery was built, in which Voltaire formed a good collection of natural history, and made a great many experiments on light and electricity. He laboured in the mean time on his “Elements of the Newtonian Philosophy,” then totally unknown in France, and which the numerous admirers of Des Cartes were very little desirous should be known. In the midst of these philosophic pursuits, he produced the tragedy of “Alzira.” He was now in the meridian of his age and genius, as was evident from the tragedy of “Mahomet,” first acted in, 174-1 but it was represented to the “procureur general” as a performance offensive to religion and the author, by order of cardinal Fleury, withdrew it from the stage. “Merope,” played two years after, 1743, gave an idea of a species of tragedy, of which few models have existed. It was at the representation of this tragedy that the pit and boxes were clamorous for a sight of the author; yet it was severely criticised when it came from the press. He now became a favourite at court, through the interest of madam d'Etoile, afterwards marchioness of Pompadour. Being employed in preparing the festivities that were celebrated on the marriage of the dauphin, he attained additional honours by composing “The Princess of Navarre.” He was appointed a gentleman of the bed-chamber in ordinary, and historiographer of France. The latter office had, till his time, been almost a sinecure; but Voltaire, who had written, under the direction of the count d'Argenson, the “History of the War of 1741,” was employed by that minister in many important negociations from 1745 to 1747; the project of invading England in 1746 was attributed to him and he drew up the king ofFrance’s manifesto in favour of the pretender. He had frequently attempted to gain admittance into the academy of sciences, but could not obtain his wish till 1746 , when he was the first who broke through the absurd custom of filling an inaugural speech with the fulsome adulation of Richelieu; an example soon followed by other academicians. From, the satires occasioned by this innovation he felt so much uneasiness, that he was glad to retire with the marchioness du Chateletto Luneville, in the neighbourhood of king Stanislaus. The marchioness dying in 1749, Voltaire returned to Paris, where his stay was but short* Though he had many admirers, he was perpetually complaining of a cabal combined to filch from him that glory of which he was insatiable. “The jealousy and manoeuvres of a court,” he would say, “are the subject of conversation; there is more of them among the literati.” His friends and relations endeavoured in vain to relieve his anxiety, by lavishing commendations on him, and by exaggerating his success. He imagined he should find in a foreign country a greater degree of applause, tranquillity, and reward, and augment at the same time both his fortune and reputation, which were already very considerable. The king of Prussia, who had repeatedly invited him to his court, and who would have given any thing to have got him away from Silesia, attached him at last to his person by a pension of 22,000 livres, and the hope of farther favour . From the particular respect that was paid to him, his time was now spent in the most agreeable manner; his apartments were under those of the king, whom he was allowed to visit at stated hours, to read with him the best works of either ancient or modern authors, and to assist his majesty in the literary productions by which he relieved the cares of government. But this happiness was soon at an end; and Voltaire saw, to his mortification, when it was too late, that, where a man is sufficiently rich to be master of himself, neither his liberty, his family, nor his country, should be sacrificed for a pension. A dispute which our poet had with Manpertuis, the president of the academy at Berlin, was followed by disgrace . It has been said that the king of Prussia dismissed him with this reproof: “I do not drive you away, because I called you hither; I do not take away your pension, because I have given it to you; I only forbid you my presence.” Not a word of this is true; the fact is, that he sent to the king the key of his office as chamberlain, and the cross of the order of merit, with these verses:

, a very celebrated Dutch poet, was born Nov. 17, 1587. He was bred an anabaptist; afterwards joined the Arminians, for whose defence he employed his pen with great zeal; and in his old age turned Roman Catholic. His verses, it is said, would have equalled those of the greatest poets, had he been acquainted with the ancients; but he had no other master than his own genius, and did not begin to learn Latin till he was near thirty. Vondel married Mary de Wolf in 1610, and opened a hosier’s shop at Amsterdam, leaving however all the care of it to his wife, while he was wholly occupied with poetry. The profligacy of his son having at length deranged his affairs, he obtained a place worth 650 livres yearly, but discharged the business of it so negligently, that in compassion to his situation he was permitted to keep the place as a sinecure. He died February 5, 1679, in his ninety-second year. Vondel’s poems have been collected in 9 vols. 4to. The most celebrated are, “The Park of Animals;” “The Heroes of God;” “The Destruction of Jerusalem,” a tragedy; “The Grandeur of Solomon;” Jl1 Palamede, or Innocence oppressed,“a celebrated tragedy, which he wrote while an Arminian. By Palamede he meant the famous Barneveldt, who was condemned to death by prince Maurice. Vondel exclaims in this piece against both the prince and the synod of Dort, in terms which sufficiently point them out, and was near being carried to the Hague, and tried in consequence of it; but some magistrates saved him, and he escaped by paying a fine of 300 florins. He wrote also satires against the protestant ministers, full of passion and invective; and a poem in favour of the catholic church, entitled” The Mysteries, or Secrets of the Altar," &c. He translated one of Grotius’s tragedies into Dutch, on which that celebrated writer expressed a high sense of Venders friendship, in condescending to translate his works, when he could write much better of his own.

, an Anglo-Norman poet, whose works are esteemed the most ancient monuments of French literature, was born in the isle of Jersey, in the early part of the twelfth century. Huet, bishop of Avranches, assures us that his Christian name was Robert, and this opinion has generally prevailed, although Ducange calls him Mathew. From the poet himself, nothing can be determined, for in none of his works does he once mention his Christian name, calling himself generally Maitre Wace, Clerc-lisant, or Clerc de Caen. Wace commenced his studies at Caen, a city which at that time had many celebrated schools, and afterwards travelled in France to complete his education, hut under what tutors, or in what places, does not appear. Whether however from being dissatisfied with his situation, or from the natural predilection of his countrymen in favour of the English government, it is certain that he returned to Caen, and there made his first essay.

It is difficult to ascertain the first specimen he exhibited of the literature of his time. We know that he had composed many works, that he translated others into the language of his country, and that he particularly applied himself to the composition of light poetry and romances, in which last he excelled. He assures us that he composed a great number of romances; and, as most of them have been preserved, it is natural to conclude that they were held in the same estimation by his contemporaries as they have been by posterity. But it is proper to remark in this place, that the word romance is not always to be understood as applicable to those chimerical tales which have no other basis than the imagination of the inventor. During the twelfth, thirteenth, and even the fourteenth centuries, every thing that was written in French or Romance, or that was translated into that language, was generally termed a romance. Philip de Than, the most ancient of the Norman poets, and William, another poet of the same country, composed in verse a work upon the natural history of animals, and each of them called his works a romance. Richard d'Annebaut, likewise a Norman poet, translated into verse the institutes of Justinian, which he says he has romanced. Samson de Nanteuil versified the proverbs of Solomon; Helie de Winchester, Cato’s distichs; and both of them call their translations a romance.

We are not then to consider the romances of Wace as the offspring of a fertile imagination which has created events for the purpose of embellishing them with the charms of poetry; on the contrary, they are monuments of antiquity of the most respectable nature, inasmuch as they form for the most part a precious repository of the Norman and Anglo-Saxon history When this poet wrote the history of events which preceded him, he drew his materials from memoirs which then existed. He often cites the authors upon whose faith he advances his facts, and of whom many have not been preserved to us. When he wrote the history of his own times, he always relied upon the testimony of eye-witnesses, or related what he himself had seen. In general he is very candid in his narrations, and though he may sometimes appear to deal a little in the marvellous, he takes care to observe that he has found what he advances so written, and that he gives it in the same manner.

The eighth is a history of the origin of the feast of the conception of the Holy Virgin. The ninth is a life of St. Nicolas, one copy of which is in the Bodleian library, and another in that of Trinity college, Cambridge. The tenth is the Roman du Chevalier an Lion. It is also probable that our poet composed several branches of the romance of Alexander; and the conjecture qf Tyrwhitt, that he is the Robert Guasco, author of the Martyrdom of St. George, mentioned by the abhe le Boeuf (Mem. de PAcad. des Inscr. xvii. p. 729.) is not without foundation. The lighter poetry of Wace has not reached the present times.

Huet, and almost every one of those who have spoken of our poet, have maintained that he had been clerk of the chapel to king Henry II. Wace, however, mentions nothing concerning this dignity, although he minutely describes all the favours which that monarch conferred upon him; he is even so attentive upon this subject, that he assures us the king gave him many things, but had promised him more. Besides, as the title of clerk of the King’s chapel was a very honourable one, which generally led the way to a bishopric, we may presume from his silence that he was not invested with it. Monsieur Huet has certainly been misled by the description of clerk, which Wace often assumes; but he should have remarked, that he never calls himself clerc du roi, but always clerc de Caen, or clerc lisant, a title which then signified nothing more than a learned man, and which was even given to laymen, since Henry I. was surnamed Beauclerc.

To the works of Pope, our English poet, Mr. Wukefield paid particular attention, and designed to have given an edition of his works; but after he had published the first volume, the scheme was rendered abortive by Dr. Warton’s edition. He printed, however, a second volume, entitled “Notes on Pope,” and also gave a new edition of Pope’s Iliad and Odyssey. As a classical editor he appeared in a selection from the Greek tragedians, in editions of Horace, Virgil, Bion and Moschus, and finally his superb edition of Lucretius, which, after all, must decide his character as a critic. Many eminent scholars, both at home and abroad, have given their opinion of this edition, but their decision is not uniform. We would refer the reader to a vry learned and impartial view of Mr. Wakefield’s critical character by Mr. Elmsley, in one of the numbers of the “Classical Journal.” Among Mr. Wakefield’s publications, prior to this, we omitted to mention the “Memoirs” of his own life, in one volume 8vo, which appeared in 1792, and contained an account of his life nearly to that period. We have followed it partly in the preceding account, as to facts, but upon the whole are inclined to apply to him what he has advanced of a Mr. Mounsey. He is one “on whose abilities his numerous acquaintance will reflect with more pleasure than on his life.”

, an eminent English poet, was born March 3, at Colshill in Hertfordshire. His father was Robert Waller, esq. of Agrnondesham, in Buckinghamshire, whose family was originally a branch of the Wallers of Spendhurst in Kent; and his mother was the daughter of John Hampden, of Hampden in the same county, and sister to the celebrated patriot Hampden. His father died while he was yet an infant, but left him a yearly income of three thousand five hundred pounds which, rating together the value of money and the customs of life, we may reckon more than equivalent to ten thousand at the present time.

Cromwell, now protector, received Waller, as his kinsman, to familiar conversation. Waller, as he used to relate, found him sufficiently versed in ancient history; and when any of his enthusiastic friends came to advise or consult him, could sometimes overhear him discoursing in the cant of the times but, when he returned, he would say, “Cousin Waller, I must talk to these men in their own way,” and resumed the common style of conversation. He repaid the Protector for his favours, in 1654, by the famous panegyric, which has been always considered as the first of his poetical productions. His choice of encomiastic topics is very judicious; for he considers Cromwell in his exaltation, without inquiring how he attained it; there is consequently, says Johnson, no mention of the rebel or the regicide. All the former part of his hero’s life is veiled with shades; and nothing is brought to view but the chief, the governor, the defender of England’s honour, and the enlarger of her dominion. The act of violence by which he obtained the supreme power is lightly treated, and decently justified. In the poem on the war with Spain are some passages at least equal to the best parts of the panegyrick; and, in the conclusion, the poet ventures yet a higher flight of flattery, by recommending royalty to Crom^ well and the nation. Cromwell was very desirous, as appears from his conversation, related by Whitlock, of adding the title to trie power of monarchy, and is supposed to have been withheld from it partly by fear of the army, and partly by, fear of the laws, which, when he should govern by the name of king, would have restrained his authority. The poem on the death of the Protector seems to have been

Soon afterwards the restoration supplied him with another subject; and he exerted his imagination, his elegance, and his melody, with equal alacrity, for Charles II. It is not possible, says Johnson, to read without some contempt and indignation, poeius of the same author ascribing the highest degree of power and piety to Charles I. then transferring the same power and piety to Oliver Cromwell; now inviting Oliver to take the crown, and then congratulating Charles II. on his recovered right. Neither Cromwell nor Charles could value his testimony as the effect of conviction, or receive his praises as effusions of reverence; they could consider them but as the labour of invention, and the tribute of dependence. The “Congratulation,” however, was considered as inferior in poetical merit to the Panegyrick; and it is reported, that, when the king told Waller of the disparity, he answered, “Poets, sir, succeed better in fiction than in truth.” The Congratulation is, indeed, not inferior to the Panegyrick, either by decay of genius, or for want of diligence but because Cromwell had done much, and Charles had done little. Cromwell wanted nothing to raise him to heroic excellence but virtue and virtue his poet thought himself at liberty to supply. Charles had yet only the merit of struggling without success, and suffering without despair. A life of escapes and indigence could supply poetry with no splendid images.

The care of his fortune, which Clarendon imputes to him in a degree little less than criminal, was either not constant or not successful; for, having inherited a patrimony of three thousand five hundred pounds a year in the time of James the First, and augmented it at least by one wealthy marriage, he left, about the time of the revolution, an income of not more than twelve or thirteen hundred; which, when the different value of money is reckoned, will be found perhaps not more than a fourth part of what he once possessed. Of this diminution, part was the consequence of the gifts which he was forced to scatter, and the fine which he was condemned to pay at the detection of his plot; and if his estate, as is related in his Life, was sequestered, he had probably contracted debts when he lived in exile; for we are told, that at Paris he lived in splendor, and was the only Englishman, except the lord St. Alban’s, that kept a table. His unlucky plot compelled him to sell a thousand a year; of the waste of the rest there is no account, except that he is confessed by his biographer to have been a bad ceconomist. He seems to have deviated from the common practice; to have been a hoarder in his first years, and a squanderer in his last. Of his course of studies, or choice of books, notbing is known more than that he professed himself unable to read Chapman’s translation of Homer without rapture. His opinion concerning the duty of a poet is contained in his declaration, that “he would blot from his works any line, that did not contain some motive to virtue.” For his merit as a poet, we may refer with confidence to Johnson, whose life of Waller we have generally followed in the preceding sketch, and on which he appears to have bestowed more than usual pains, and is in his facts more than usually accurate. English versification, it is universally allowed, is greatly indebted to Waller, and he is every where elegant and gay. To his contemporaries he must have appeared more rich in invention, than modern critics are disposed to allow, because, as Johnson observes, they have found his novelties in later books, and do not know or inquire who produced them first. Dr. Warton thinks it remarkable that Waller never mentions Milton, whose Comus, and smaller poems, preceded his own; and he ae* counts for this by Milton’s poetry being unsuitable to the French taste on which Waller was formed *.

"Waller commends no poet of his either. Milton’s Poem came not forth

, an eminent parliamentary general, was born in 1597. He was descended, as well as the preceding poet, from the ancient family of the Wallers of Spendhurst, in the county of Kent; and received at Magdalen-ball and Hart-hall, Oxford, his first education, which he afterwards completed at Paris. He began his military career in the service of the confederate princes against the emperor, in which he acquired the reputation of a good soldier, and upon his return home, was distinguished with the honour of knighthood. He was three times married; first to Jane, daughter and heiress of sir Richard Reynell, of Ford in Devonshire, by whom he had one daughter, Margaret, married to sir Wiliiana Courtenay of Powderham castie, ancestor of the present lord viscount Courtenay; secondly, to the lady Anne Finch, daughter of the first earl of Winchelsea, by whom he had one son, William, who was afterwards an active magistrate for the county of Middlesex, and a strenuous opposer of all the measures of king Charles the Second’s government; and one daughter, Anne, married to sir Philip Harcourt, from whom is descended the present earl of that name. Of the family of Sir William’s third wife, we are not informed.

, third and youngest son of sir Robert Walpole, first earl of Orford, by his first wife Catherine Shorter, was born in 1718, and received the early part of his education at Eton, where he first became known to the celebrated Mr. Gray, whose friendship at that early period he cultivated, and whose esteem and re^ gard he retained, until the difference arose between them which we have noticed in our account of that celebrated poet. From Eton he went to KingVcollege, Cambridge; but, according to the practice of men of rank and fortune at that time, left the university without taking any degree. While there he wrote “Verses in Memory of King Henry the Sixth, founder of the college,” which are dated Feb. 2, 1738, and are probably the first production of his pen. In the same year he was appointed inspector-general of the exports and imports; a place which he soon after exchanged for that of usher of the exchequer. To these were added the post of comptroller of the pipe and clerk of the estreats; all which he held unto his death.

His intervals of leisure, health, and spirits, he employed in the works above mentioned, most of which have been favourites with the public, although they are of very opposite merits. He was alternately a poet, an historian, a politician, an antiquary, and a writer of dramas and romances. Of all his works his own opinion appeared to be humble but this was mere affectation, for he was pertinacious in maintaining what he had once asserted and being possessed of' kee*n powers of controversy, he betrayed all the irascibility of the author, while he affected to be considered only is a gentleman writing for his amusement. In his latter days he determined to vindicate his claims to literary rank, and employed himself in preparing for the press that splendid and complete edition of his works, which was published the year after his death, and was bought up with avidity, as an important addition to every library. He had begun to print this edition as far back as 1768, and nearly two volumes were completed at his private press.

, an English critic and poet, was the son of Joseph Walsh of Abberley in Worcestershire, esq. and born about 1663, for the precise time does not appear. According to Pope, his birth happened in 1659; but Wood places it four years later. He became a gentleman-commoner of Wadham-college in Oxford in 1678, but left the university without a degree, and pursued his studies in London and at home. That he studied, in whatever place, is apparent from the effect; for he became, in Dryden’s opinion, “the best critic in the nation.” He was not, however, merely a critic or a scholar. He was likewise a man of fashion, and, as Dennis remarks, ostentatiously splendid in his dress. He was likewise a member of parliament and a courtier, knight of the shire for his native county in several parliaments, in another the re* presentative of Richmond in Yorkshire, and gentleman of the horse to queen Anne under the duke of Somerset. Some of his verses shew him to have been a zealous friend to the Revolution; but his political ardour did not abate his reverence or kindness for Dryden, to whom, Dr. Johnson says, he gave a Dissertation on Virgil’s Pastorals; but this was certainly written by Dr. Chetwood, as appears by one of Drydeu’s letters. In 1705 he began to correspond with Pope, in whom he discovered very early the power of poetry, and advised him to study correctness, which the poets of his time, he said, all neglected. Their letters are written upon the pastoral comedy of the Italians, and those pastorals which Pope was then preparing to publish. The kindnesses which are first experienced are seldom forgotten. Pope always retained a grateful memory of Walsh’s notice, and mentioned him in one of his latter pieces among those that had encouraged his juvenile studies.

, an English prelate of great abilities and eminence, was born at Newark-upon-Trent, in the county of Nottingham, Dec. 24, 1698. His father was George Warburton, an attorney and town-clerk of the place in which this his eldest son received his birth and education. His mother was Elizabeth, the daughter of William Hobman, an alderman of the same town; and his parents were married about 1696. The family of Dr. Warburton came originally from the county of Chester, where his great-grandfather resided. His grandfather, William Warburton, a royalist during the rebellion, was the first that settled at Newark, where he practised the law, and was coroner of the county of Nottingham. George Warburton, the father, died about 1706, leaving his widow and five children, two sons and three daughters, of which the second son, George, died young; but, of the daughters, one- survived her brother. The bishop received the early part of his education under Mr. Twells, whose son afterwards married his sister Elizabeth; but he was principally trained under Mr. Wright, then master of Okehamschool in Rutlandshire, and afterwards vicar of Campden in Gloucestershire. Here he continued till the beginning of 1714, when his cousin Mr. William Warburton being made head -master of Newark-school, he returned to his native place, and was for a short time under the care of that learned gentleman. During his stay at school, he did not distinguish himself by any extraordinary efforts of genius or application, yet is supposed to have acquired a competent knowledge of Greek and Latin. His original designation was to the same profession as that of his father and grandfather; and he was accordingly placed clerk to Mr. Kirke, an attorney at East Markham in Nottinghamshire, with whom he continued till April 1719, when he was qualified to engage in business upon his own account. He was then admitted to one of the courts at Westminster, and for some years continued the employment of an attorney and solicitor at the place of his birth. The success he met with as a man of business was probably not great. It was certainly insufficient to induce him to devote the rest of his life to it: and it is probable, that his want of encouragement might tempt him to turn his thoughts towards a profession in which his literary acquisitions would be more valuable, and in which he might more easily pursue the bent of his inclination. He appears to have brought from school more learning than was requisite for a practising lawyer. This might rather impede than forward his progress; as it has been generally observed, that an attention to literary concerns, and the bustle of an attorney’s office, with only a moderate share of business, are wholly incompatible. It is therefore no wonder that he preferred retirement to noise, and relinquished what advantages he might expect from continuing to follow the law. It has been suggested by an ingenious writer, that he was for some time usher to a school, but this probably was founded on his giving some assistance to his relation at Newark, who in his turn assisted him in those private studies to which he was now attached; and his love of letters continually growing stronger, the seriousness of his temper, and purity of his morals, concurring, determined him to quit his profession for the church. In 1723 he received deacon’s orders from archbishop Dawes and his first printed work then appeared, consisting of translations from Cæsar, Pliny, Claudian, and others, under the title of “Miscellaneous Translations in Prose and Verse, from Roman Poets, Orators, and Historians,” 12mo. It is dedicated to hig early patron, sir Robert Sutton, who, in 1726, when Mr. Warburton had received priest’s orders from bishop Gibson, employed his interest to procure him the small vicarage of Gryesly in Nottinghamshire. About Christmas, 1726, he came to London, and, while there, was introduced to Theobald, Concanen, and other of Mr. Pope’s enemies, the novelty of whose conversation had at this time many charms for him, and he entered too eagerly into their cabals and prejudices. It was at this time that he wrote a letter to Concanen, dated Jan. 2, 1726, very disrespectful to Pope, which, by accident, falling into the hands of the late Dr. Akenside, was produced to most of that gentleman’s friends, and became the subject of much speculation. About this time he also communicated to Theobald some notes on Shakspeare, which afterwards appeared in that critic’s edition of our great dramatic poet. In 1727, his second work, entitled “A Critical and Philosophical Enquiry into the Causes of Prodigies and Miracles, as related by Historians,” &c. was published in 12mo, and was also dedicated to sir Robert Sutton in a prolix article of twenty pages. In 1727 he published a treatise, under the title of “The Legal Judicature in Chancery stated,” which he undertook at the particular request of Samuel Burroughs, esq. afterwards a master in Chancery, who put the materials into his hands, and spent some time in the country with him during the compilation of the work. On April 25, 1728, by the interest of sir Robert Sutton, he had the honour to be in the king’s list of masters of arts, created at Cambridge on his majesty’s visit to that university. In June, the same year, he was presented by sir Robert Sutton to the rectory of Burnt or Brand Broughton, in the diocese of Lincoln, and neighbourhood of Newark, where he fixed himself accompanied by his mother and sisters, to whom he was ever a most affectionate relative. Here he spent a considerable part of the prime of life in a studious retirement, devoted entirely to letters, and there planned, and in part executed, some of his most important works. They, says his biographer, who are unacquainted with the enthusiasm which true genius inspires, will hardly conceive the possibility of that intense application, with which Mr. Warburton pursued his studies in this retirement. Impatient of any interruptions, he spent the whole of his time that could be spared from the duties of his parish, in reading and writing. His constitution was strong, and his temperance extreme; so that he needed no exercise but that of walking; and a change of reading, or study, was his only amusement.

Mr. Warburton’s extraordinary merit had now attracted the notice of the heir-apparent to the crown, in whose immediate service we find him in June 1738, when he published “Faith working by Charity to Christian edification; a sermon preached at the last episcopal visitation for confirmation in the diocese of Lincoln; with a preface, shewing the reasons of its publication; and a postscript, occasioned by some letters lately published in the Weekly Miscellany: by William Warburton, M. A. chaplain to his royal highness the prince of Wales.” A second edition of “The Divine Legation” also appeared in November 1738. In March 1739, the world was in danger of being deprived of this extraordinary genius by an intermitting fever, which with some difficulty was relieved by a plentiful use of the bark. His reputation was now rising everyday; and he about this time rendered a service tt> Pope, by means of which he acquired an ascendancy over that great poet, which will astonish those who observe the air of superiority which, until this connection, had been shewed in all Pope’s friendships, even with the greatest men of the age. The “Essay on Man” had been now published some years and it is universally supposed that the author had, in the composition of it, adopted the philosophy of lord Bolingbroke, whom on this occasion he had followed as his guide, without understanding the tendency of his principles. In 1758 M. de Crousaz wrote some remarks on it, accusing the author of Spinosism and Naturalism; which falling into Mr. Warburton’s hands he published a defence of the first epistle in “The Works of the Learned,” and soon after of the remaining three, in seven letters, of which six were pri.nted in 1739, and the seventh in June 1740, under the title of “A Vindication of Mr. Pope’s Essay on Man, by the author of the Divine Legation.” The opinion which Mr. Pope conceived of these defences, as well as of their author, will be best seen in his letters. In consequence, a firm friendship was established between them, which continued with much undiminished fervour until the death of Mr. Pope, who, during the remainder of his life, paid a deference and respect to his friend’s judgment and abilities which will be considered by many as almost bordering on servility.

Mr. Pope’s affection for Mr. Warburton was of service to him in more respects than merely increasing his fame. He introduced and warmly recommended him to most of his friends, and amongst the rest to Ralph Allen, esq. of Prior Park, whose niece he some years afterwards married. In consequence of this introduction, we find Mr. Warburton at Bath in 1742. There he printed a sermon which had been preached at the abbey-church, on the 24th of October, for the benefit of Mr. Allen’s favourite charity, the general hospital, or infirmary. To this sermon, which was published at the request of the governors, was added, “A* short account of the nature, rise, and progress, of the General Infirmary, at Bath.” In this year also he printed a dissertation on the Origin of Books of Chivalry, at the end of Jarvis’s preface to a translation of Don Quixote, which, Mr. Pope tells him, he had not got over two paragraphs of before he cried out, < Aut Erasmus, aut Dmbolus. 1 “I knew you,” adds he, “as certainly as the ancients did the Gods, by the first pace and the very gait. I have not a moment to express myself in; but could not omit this, which delighted me so much.” Mr. Tyrwhitt, however, has completely demolished Warburton’s system o-n this subject. Pope’s attention to his interest did not rest in matters which were in his own power; he recommended him to some who were more able to assist him; in particular, he obtained a promise from lord Granville, which probably, however, ended in nothing. He appears also to have been very solicitous to bring lord Bolingbroke and Mr. Warburton together, and the meeting accordingly took place, but we are told by Dr. Warton, they soon parted in mutual disgust with each other. In 1742 Mr. Warburton published “A critical and philosophical Commentary on Mr. Pope’s Essay on Man: in which is contained a Vindication of the said Essay from the misrepresentations of Mr. de Resnel, the French translator, and of Mr. de Crousaz, professor of philosophy and mathematics in the academy of Lausanne, the commentator.” It was at this period, when Mr. Warburton had the entire confidence of Pope, that he advised him to complete the Dunciad, by changing the hero,- and adding to it a fourth book. This was accordingly executed in 1742, and published early in 1743, 4to, with notes by our author, who, in consequence of it, received his share of the castigation which Gibber liberally bestowed on both Pope and his annotator. In the latter end of the same year. he published complete editions of “The Essay on Man,” and “The Essay on Criticism:” and,from the specimen which he there exhibited of his abilities, it may be presumed Pope determined to commit to him the publication of those works which he should leave. At Pope’s desire, he about this time revised and corrected the “Essay on Homer,” as it now stands in the last edition of that translation. The publication of “The Dunciad” was the last service which our author rendered Pope in his life-time. After a lingering and tedious illness, the event of which had been long foreseen, this great poet died on the 30th of' May, 1744; and by his will, dated the 12th of the preceding December, bequeathed to Mr. Warburton one half of his library, and the property of all such of his works already printed as he had not otherwise disposed of or alienated, and all the. profits which should arise from any edition to be printed after his death; but at the same time directed that they should be published without any future alterations. In 1744 Warburton’s assistance to Dr. Z. Grey was handsomely acknowledged in the preface to Hudibras; but with this gentleman he had afterwards a sharp controversy (See Grey.) “The Divine Legation of Moses” had now been published some time; and various answers and objections to it had started up from different quarters. In this year, 1744, Mr Warburton turned his attention to these attacks on his favourite work; and defended himself in a manner which, if it did not prove him to be possessed of much humility or diffidence, at least demonstrated that he knew how to wield the weapons of controversy with the hand of a master. His first defence now appeared under the title of “Remarks on several Occasional Reflections, in answer to the Rev, Dr. Middleton, Dr. Pococke, the master of the Charter-house, Dr. Richard Grey, and others; serving to explain and justify divers passages in the Divine Legation as far as it is yet advanced: wherein is considered the relation the several parts bear to each other and the whole. Together with an Appendix, in answer to a late pamphlet, entitled” An Examination of Mr. W's Second Proposition,“8vo. And this was followed next year by” Remarks on several Occasional Reflections; in answer to the Rev. Doctors Stebbing and Sykes; serving to explain and justify the Two Dissertations, in the Divine Legation, concerning the command to Abraham to offer up his son, and the nature of the Jewish theocracy, objected to by those learned writers. Part II. and last;“8vo. Both these answers are couched in those high terms of confident superiority which marked almost every performance that fell from his pen during the remainder of his life. Sept. 5, 1745, the friendship between him and Mr. Allen was more closely cemented by his marriage with his niece, Miss Tucker, who survived him. At this juncture the kingdom was under a great alarm, occasioned by the rebellion breaking out in Scotland. Those who wished well to the then-established government found it necessary to exert every effort which could be used against the invading enemy. The clergy were not wanting on their part; and no one did more service than Mr. Warburton, who published three very excellent and seasonable sermons at this important crisis. I,” A faithful portrait of Popery by which it is seen to be the reverse of Christianity, as it is the destruction of morality, piety, and civil liberty. A sermon preached at St. James’s church, Westminster, Oct. 1745,“Sva. II.” A sermon occasioned by the present unnatural Rebellion, &e> preached in Mr. Allen’s chapel, at Prior Park, near Bath, Nov. 1745, and published at his request,'? 8vo. III. “The nature of National Offences truly stated. A sermon preached on the general fast-day, Dec. 18, 1745,” 1746, 8vo. On account of the last of these sermons he was again involved in a controversy with his former antagonist, Dr. Stebbing, which occasioned “An Apologetical Dedication to the Rev. Dr. Henry Stebbing, in answer to his censure and misrepresentations of the sermon preached on the general fast-day to be observed Dec. 18, 1745,” 1746, 8yo. Notwithstanding his great connections, his acknowledged abilities, and his established reputation, a reputation founded on the durable basis of learning, and upheld by the decent and attentive performance of every duty incident to his station; yet we do not find that he received any addition to the preferment given him in 1728 by sir Robert Sutton (except the chaplaihship to the prince of Wales) until April 1746, when he was unanimously called by the society of Lincoln’s Inn to be their preacher. In November he published “A Sermon preached on the Thanksgiving appointed to be observed the 9th Oct. for the suppression of the late unnatural Rebellion,” 1746, 8vo. In 1747 appeared his edition of “Sbakspeare,” from which he derived very little reputation. Of this edition, the nameless critic already quoted, says, “To us it exhibits a phenomenon unobserved before in the operations of human intellect a mind, ardent and comprehensive, acute and penetrating, warmly devoted to the subject and furnished with all the stores of literature ancient or modern, to illustrate and adorn it, yet by some perversity of understanding, or some depravation of taste, perpetually mistaking what was obvious, and perplexing what was clear; discovering erudition of which the author was incapable, and fabricating connections to which he was indifferent. Yet, with all these inconsistencies, added to the affectation, equally discernible in the editor of Pope and Shakspeare, of understanding the poet better than he understood himself, there sometimes appear, in the rational intervals of his critical delirium, elucidations so happy, and disquisitions so profound, that our admiration of the poet (even of such a poet), is suspended for a moment while we dwell on the excellencies of the commentator.”

In the same year he published, 1. “A Letter from an author to a member of parliament, concerning Literary Property,” 8vo. 2. “Preface to Mrs. Cockburn’s remarks upon the principles and reasonings of Dr. Rutherforth’s Essay on the nature and obligations of Virtue,” &c. 8vo. 3. “Preface to a critical enquiry into the opinions and practice of the Ancient Philosophers, concerning the nature of a Future State, and their method of teaching by double Doctrine,” (by Mr. Towne), 1747, 8vo, 2d edition. In 1748 a third edition of “The Alliance between Church and State corrected and enlarged.” In 1749, a very extraordinary attack was made on the moral character of Mr. Pope from a quarter whence it could be the least expected. His “Guide, Philosopher, and Friend,” lord Bolingbroke, published a book which he had formerly lent Mr. Pope in ms. The preface to this work, written by Mr. Mallet, contained an accusation of Mr. Pope’s having clandestinely printed an edition of his lordship’s performance without his leave or knowledge. (See Pope.) A defence of the poet soon after made its appearance, which was universally ascribed to Mr. Warburton, and was afterwards owned by him. It was called “'A Letter to the editor of Letters on the Spirit of Patriotism, the Idea of a patriot King, and the State of Parties, occasioned by the editor’s advertisement;” which soon afterwards produced an abusive pamphlet under the title of “A familiar epistle to the most Impudent Man living,” &c. a performance, as has been truly observed, couched in Janguage bad enough to disgrace even gaols and garrets. About this time the publication of Dr. Middleton’s “Enquiry concerning the Miraculous Powers,” gave rise to a controversy, which was managed with great warmth and asperity on both sides. On this occasion Mr. Warburton puolished an excellent performance, written with a degree of candour and temper which, it is to be lamented, he did not always exercise. The title of it was “Julian or, a discourse concerning the Earthquake and Fiery Eruption which defeated the emperor’s attempt to rebuild the Temple at Jerusalem, 1750,” 8vo. A second edition of this discourse, <c with Additions,“appeared in 1751. The critic above quoted has some remarks on this work too important to be omitted.” The gravest, the least eccentric, the most convincing of Warburton’s works, is the ' Julian, or a discourse concerning the Earthquake and Fiery Eruption, which defeated that emperor’s attempt to rebuild the Temple at Jerusalem, in which the reality of a Divine interposition is shewn, and the objections to it ar are answered/ The selection of this subject was peculiarly happy, inasmuch as this astonishing fact, buried in the ponderous volumes of the original reporters, was either little considered by an Uninquisitive age, or confounded with the crude mass of false, ridiculous, or ill-attested miracles, which “with no friendly voice” had been recently exposed by Middleton. But in this instance the occasion was important: the honour of the Deity was concerned; his power had been defied, and his word insulted. For the avowed purpose of defeating a well-known prophecy, and of giving to the world a practical demonstration that the Christian scriptures contained a lying prediction, the emperor Julian undertook to rebuild the temple of Jerusalem; when, to the astonishment and confusion of the builders, terrible flames bursting from the foundations, scorched and repelled the workmen 'till they found themselves compelled to desist. Now this phenomenon was not, the casual eruption of a volcano, for it had none of the concomitants of those awful visitations: it may even be doubted whether it were accompanied by an earthquake; but the marks of intention and specific direction were incontrovertible. The workmen desisted, the flames retired, they returned to the work, when the flames again burst forth, and that as often as the experiment was repeated.

, a poet and miscellaneous writer, was of low extraction, and born in Oxfordshire about 1667. Jacob said of him, in his Lives of the Poets, that he kept a public house in the city, but in a genteel way, which was much frequented by those who were adverse to the Whig administration. Ward, however, was affronted when he read this account, not because it made him an enemy to the Whigs, or the keeper of a public house, but because his house was said to be in the city. In a book, therefore, called “Apollo’s Maggot,” he declared this account to be a great falsity, protesting that his public house was not in the city, but in Moorfelds. Oldys says he lived a while in Gray’s-­Inn, and for some years after kept a public house in Moorfields, then in Clerkenwell, and lastly a punch-house in Fulwood’s-Rents, within one door of Gray’s-Inn, where he would entertain any company who invited him with many stories and adventures of the poets and authors he had acquaintance with. He was honoured with a place in the “Dunciad” by Pope, whom, however he contrived to vex, by retorting with some spirit. He died June 20, 1731, and was buried the 27th of the same month in St. Pancras church-yard, with one mourning-coach for his wife and daughter to attend his hearse, as himself had directed in his poetical will, which was written by him June 24, 1725. This will was printed in Appleby’s Journal, Sept. 28, 1731. Ward is most distinguished by his well-known “London Spy,” a coarse, but in some respect a true, description of London manners. He wrote one dramatic piece, called “The Humours of a Coffee-house,” and some poems in the Hudibrastic style, but not “England’s Reformation,” as asserted in Mr. Reed’s edition of the Biog. Dram. 1782. That was the production of Thomas Ward, who will be mentioned hereafter.

In 1741 he translated into Latin the life of Dr. Arthur Johnston, for auditor Benson’s edition of that poet’s Latin version of the Psalms; and in 1750 he addressed a Latin letter to Dr. Wishart, principal of the university of Edinburgh, which was the year following added to the principal^ edition of Volusenus, or Wilson, “De animi tranquillitate.” This probably led to the degree of doctor of laws, which the university of Edinburgh conferred upon Mr. Ward the same year. On the establishment of the British museum in 1753, Dr. Ward was elected one of the trustees, in which office he was singularly useful by his assiduous attendance, advice, and assistance in the formation of that establishment, and the construction of rules for rendering it a public benefit, which it is, however, now in a much higher degree than in Dr. Ward’s time.

, an old English poet, is called by Phillips, “a good honest plain writer of moral rules and precepts, in that old-fashioned kind ef seven-footed verse, which yet sometimes is in use, though in different manner, that is to say, divided into two. He may be reckoned with several other writers of the same time^ i. e> Queen Elizabeth’s reign: who, though inferior to Sidney, Spenser, Drayton, and Daniel, yet have been thought by some not unworthy to be remembered and quoted: namely George Gascoigne, Thomas Hudson, John Markham, Thomas Achely, John Weever, Charles Middleton, George TurberviTle, Henry Constable, sirEdward Dyer, Thomas Churchyard, Charles Fitzgeoffry.”

In 1750, our author contributed a few small pieces to the “Student, or Oxford and Cambridge Miscellany,” then published by Newbery. Among these was the “Progress of Discontent,” which had been written in 174-6, and was founded on a copy of Latin verses, a weekly exercise much applauded by Dr. Huddesford, and, at his desire, paraphrased into English verse: In this state his brother, Dr. Warton, preferred it to any imitation of Swift he had ever seen. His talents were now generally acknowledged, and in 1747 and 1748, he held the office of poet laureate, conferred upon him according to an ancient practice in the Common- room of Trinity-college. The duty of this office was to celebrate a lady chosen by the same authority, as the lady-patroness; and Warton performed this task, on an appointed day, crowned with a wreath of laurel. The verses, which Mr. Mant says are still to be seen in the Common-room, are written in an elegant and flowing style, but he has not thought them worthy of transcription.

The office of poet laureate was accepted by him this year, as it was offered at the express desire of his majesty, and he filled it with credit to himself and to the place. Whitehead, his immediate predecessor, had the misfor r tune to succeed Gibber, and could with difficulty make the public look seriously on the periodical labours of the laureate, yet by perseverance he contrived to restore some degree of respect to the office. Warton succeeded yet better by varying the accustomed modes of address, and by recalling the mind to gothic periods, and splendid events* The facetious authors, indeed, of the “Probationary Odes” (n set of political satires) took some freedoms with his name, but they seemed to be aware that another Gibber would have suited their purpose better; and Warton, who possessed a large share of humour, and a quick sense of ridicule, was not to be offended because he had for once been the “occasion of wit in other men *.”

The “Triumph of Isis” was written in his twenty-first year, and exhibiis the same beauties and faults which are to be found in his more mature productions. Among these last, is a redundancy of epithet which is more frequently a proof of labour than of taste. The “Pleasures of Melancholy” appears to be & more genuine specimen of early talent. He was only in his seventeenth year, when his mind was so richly stored with striking and elegant imagery­In general he seems to have taken Milton for his model, and throughout his poems we find expressions borrowed with as much freedom from Milton, as he has proved that Milton borrowed from others. One piece only, “Newmarket,” is an imitation of Pope, and is certainly one of the finest satires in our language. In this he has not only adopted the versification of Pope, and emulated his wit and point, but many of his lines are parodies on what he recollected in Pope’s Satires. This freedom of borrowing, however, seems so generally allowed, that it can form no higher objection against Warton than against Pope, Gray, and others of acknowledged eminence. We cannot be surprized that the memory of such a student as Warton should be familiar with the choicest language of poetry, and that he should often adopt it unconscious of its being the property of another. The frequent use of alliteration is a more striking defect; but perhaps these are strictures which ought not to interfere with the general merit of Warton as a poet of original genius. His descriptive pieces, had he written nothing else, would have proved his claim to that title. Nothing can be more natural, just, or delightful than his pictures of rural life. The “First of April” and the “Approach of Summer” have seldom been rivalled, and cannot perhaps be exceeded. The only objection which some critics have started is, that his descriptions are not varied by reflection. He gives an exquisite landscape, but does not always express the feelings it creates. His brother, speaking of Thomson, observes that the unexpected insertion of reflections “imparts to us the same pleasure that we feel, when, in wandering through a wilderness or grove, we suddenly behold in the turning of the walk a statue of some Virtue or Muse.” Yet in Warton’s descriptive poetry, it is no small merit to have produced so much effect, and so many exquisite pictures without this aid.

“The Suicide” perhaps deserves a yet higher character, rising to the sublime by gradations which speak to every imagination. It has indeed been objected that it is imperfect, and too allegorical. It appeals, however, so forcibly to the heart, awakens so many important reflections, and contains so happy a mixture of terror and consolation, that it seems difficult to lay it down without unmixed admiration. The ' Crusade,“and the” Grave of Arthur,“are likewise specimens of genuine poetical taste acting on materials that are difficult to manage. Both in invention and execution these odes may rank among the finest cf their species in our language. Warton has afforded many proofs of an exquisite relish for humour in his” Panegyric on Oxford Ale,“the” Progress of Discontent,“and other pieces classed under that denomination. His success in these productions leads once more to the remark that few men have combined so many qualities of mind, a taste for the sublime and the pathetic, the gay and humorous, the pursuits of the antiquary, and the pleasures of amusement, the labours of research, and the play of imagination. Upon the whole, it may be allowed that, as a poet, he is original, various, and elegant, but that in most of his pieces he discovers the taste that results from a studied train of thought, rather than the wild and enraptured strains that arise from passion, inspired on the moment, ungovernable in their progress, and grand even in their wanderings. Still he deserves to be classed among the revivers of genuine poetry, by preferring” fiction and fancy, picturesque description, and romantic imagery,“to” wit and elegance, sentiment and satire, sparkling couplets, and pointed periods."

, an elegant scholar, poet, and critic, brother to the preceding, was born at the house of his maternal grandfather, the rev. Joseph Richardson, rector of Dunsford, in 1722. Except for a very short time that he was at New-college school, he was educated by his father until he arrived at his fourteenth year. He was then admitted on the foundation of Winchester-college, under the care of the venerable Dr. Sandby, at that time the head of the school, and * afterwards chancellor of Norwich. He had not been long at this excellent seminary before he exhibited considerable intellectual powers, and a laudable ambition to outstrip the common process of education. Colons, the poet, was one of his school-fellows, and in conjunction with him and another boy, young Warton sent three poetical pieces to the Gentleman’s Magazine, of such merit as to be highly praised in that miscellany, but not, as his biographer supposes, by Dr. Johnson. A letter also to his sister, which Mr. Wooll has printed, exhibits very extraordinary proofs of fancy and observation in one so young.

“The public,” he says, “has been so much accustomed of late to didactic poetry alone, and essays on moral subjects, that any work, where the imagination is much indulged, will perhaps not be relished or regarded. The author, therefore, of these pieces is in some pain, lest certain austere critics should think them too fanciful or descriptive. But as he is convinced that the fashion of moralizing in verse has been carried too far, and as he looks upon invention and imagination to be the chief faculties of a poet, so he will be happy if the following Odes may be looked upon as an attempt to bring back poetry into its right channel.” In 1749 he published his “Ode to Mr. West.”

His biographer has considered his literary character under the three heads of a poet, a critic, and an instructor; but it is as a critic principally that he will be known to posterity, and as one who, in the language of Johnson, has taught “how the brow of criticism may be smoothed, and how she may be enabled, with all her severity, to attract and to delight.” A book, indeed, of more delightful variety than his Essay on Pope, has not yet appeared, nor one in which there is a more happy mixture of judgment and sensibility. It did not, however, flatter the current opinions on the rank of Pope among poets, and the author desisted from pursuing his subject for many years. Dr. Johnson said that this was owing “to his not having been able to persuade the world to be of his opinion as to Pope.” This was probably the truth, but not the whole truth. Motives of a delicate nature are supposed to have had some share in inducing him to desist for a time. Warburton was yet alive, the executor of Pope and the guardian of his fame, and Warburton was no less the active and zealous friend and correspondent of Thomas Warton; nor was it any secret that Warburton furnished Ruffhead with the materials for his Life of Pope, the chief object of which was a rude and impotent attack on the Essay. Warburton died in 1779, and in 1782, Dr. Warton completed his Essay, and at length persuaded the world that he did not differ from the common opinion so much as was supposed *. Still by pointing out what is not poetry, he gave unpardonable offence to those, whose names appear among poets, but whom he has reduced to moralists and versifiers.

* “I thank you for the friendly is comprehended in these words of your delicacy in which you speak of my own. He chose to be the poet of reaEssay on Pope. I uever thought we son rather than of fancy.” Letter from disagreed so much as you seem to Dr. Warton to Mr. Haylty, published imagine. All I said, and all I think, by Mr. Wooll, p. 406. of the Essay is founded, and whatever objections were raised to it, while that blind admiration of Pope which accompanied his long dictatorship continued in full force, it is now generally adopted as the test of poetical merit by the best critics, although the partialities which some entertain for individual poets may yet give rise to difference of opinion respecting the provinces of argument and feeling.

This son, the eldest of nine children, was a remarkable instance of early attention to books. He began to learn Latin at the age of four, probably at home, and was afterwards taught Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, by the Rev. John Pinhorne, master of the free-school at Southampton, rector of All-Saints in the same place, prebendary of Leekford, and vicar of Eling in the New Forest. To this gentleman Mr. Watts afterwards inscribed an elegant Latin ode, which is inserted among his “Lyric Poems.” The proficiency he made at this school induced some persons of property to raise a sum sufficient to maintain him at one of the universities; but his determination was soon fixed to remain among the dissenters, with whom his ancestors had long been connected. In 1690, he went to an academy superintended by the Rev. Thomas Rowe, where he had for his companions Hughes the poet, and Horte, afterwards archbishop of Tuam, Mr. Samuel Say, afterwards an eminent preacher among the dissenters, and other persons of literary eminence. It is well known that Dr. Watts strove to wean Hughes from his attachment to the stage. In 1693, he joined the congregation which was under the care of Mr. Rowe, as a communicant.

In this retreat, he wrote the whole or nearly the whole of those works which have immortalized his name as a divine, poet, and philosopher. He occasionally preached, and in the pulpit, says Dr. Johnson, though his low stature, which very little exceeded five feet, graced him with no advantages of appearance, yet the gravity and propriety of his utterance made his discourses very efficacious. Such was his flow of thoughts, and such his promptitude of language, that in the latter part of his life he did not precompose his cursory sermons; but having adjusted the heads, and sketched out some particulars, trusted for success to his extemporary powers.

, a modern German poet and miscellaneous writer of great fame in his country, was a native of Saxony, where he was born in 1726. He appears to have devoted the principal part of his life to literary pursuits, particularly poetry, the drama, and the principles of education. He obtained the place of electoral receiver for the circle of Upper Saxony, which probably made his circumstances easy, while it did not interrupt his numerous dramatic and other compositions. He died at Leipsic, Dec. 15, 1804, in the seventy-ninth year of his age. He wrote a great many tragedies and comedies, the former of which are esteemed by his countrymen equal to those of Racine, and his comedies had great success, although the German critics give the preference to his comic operas. They also speak in the highest terms of his Anacreontic odes, his Amazonian songs, and his translation of Tyrtaeus. He was a long time editor of the “Library of the Belles Lettres,” a much esteemed German literary journal. He published also a periodical work from 1776 to 1782, called the “Friend of Children,” collected afterwards into volumes, and consisting of many interesting articles calculated to promote a love of virtue and of instruction in young minds. In this he has had several imitators; and Berquin’s “Ami des enfans” is said to be little more than a translation or imitation of Weisse’s work. He published also “The correspondence of the family of the Friend of children,” in a periodical form, but which is said to be a new edition, in a more convenient shape, of his preceding work.

, a minor poet and miscellaneous writer, born at Abington in Northamptonshire in 1689, received the rudiments of his education in Westminsterschool, where he wrote the celebrated little poem called “Apple-Pie,” which was universally attributed to Dr. King, and as such had been incorporated in his works. Very early inlife Mr. Welsted obtained a place in the office of ordnance, by the interest of his friend the earl of Clare, to whom, in 1715, he addressed a small poem (which Jacob calls “a very good one”) on his being created duke of Newcastle; and to whom, in 1724, he dedicated an octavo volume, under the title of “Epistles, Odes, &c. written on several subjects; with a translation of Longinus’s Treatise on the Sublime.” In 1717 he wrote “The Genius, on occasion of the duke of Marlborough’s Apoplexy;” an ode much commended by Steele, and so generally admired as to be attributed to Addison; and afterwards ' An Epistle to Dr. Garth, on the Duke’s death.“He addressed a poem to the countess of Warwick, on her marriage with Mr Addison; a poetical epistle to the duke of Chandos; and an ode to earl Cadogan, which was highly extolled by Dean Smedley. Sir Richard Steele was indebted to him for boih the prologue and epilogue to” The Conscious Lovers;“and Mr. Philips, for a complimentary poem on his tragedy of” Humfrey duke of Gloucester.“In 1718, he wrote” The Triumvirate, or a letter in verse from Palemon to Celia, from Bath,“which was considered as a satire against Mr. Pope. He wrote several other occasional pieces against this gentleman, who, in recompence for his enmity, thus mentioned him in his” Dunciad:"

In another note, it is maliciously recorded that he received at one time the sum of five hundred pounds for secret service, among the other excellent authors hired to write anonymously for the ministry. That sum did certainly pass through his hands; but it is now well known that it was for the use of sir Richard Steele. And in a piece, said, but falsely, to have been written by Mr. Welsted, called “The Characters of the Times,” printed in 1728, 8vo, he is made to say of himself, that “he had, in his youth, raised so great expectations of his future genius, that there was a kind of struggle between the two universities, which should have the honour of his education; to compound this, he civilly became a member of both, and, after having passed some time at the one, he removed to the other. Thence he returned to town, where he became the darling expectation of all the polite writers, whose encouragement he acknowledged, in his occasional poems, in a manner that will make no small part of the fame of his protectors. It also appears from his works, that he was happy in the patronage of the most illustrious characters of the present age Encouraged by such a combination in his favour, he published a book of poems, some in the Ovidian, some in the Horatian, manner in both which the most exquisite judges pronounced he even rivalled his masters. His love- verses have rescued that way of writing from contempt. In translations he has given us the very soul and spirit of his authors. His odes, his epistles, his verses, his love-tales, all are the most perfect things in all poetry.” If this pleasant representation of our author’s abilities were just, it would seem no wonder, if the two universities should strive with each other for the honour of his education. Our author, however^ does not appear to have been a mean poet; he had certainly, from nature, a good genius; but, after he came to town, he became a votary to pleasure; and the applauses of his friends, which taught him to overvalue his talents, perhaps slackened his diligence; and, by making him trust solely to nature, slight the assistance of art. Prefixed to the collection of his poems is “A Dissertation concerning the Perfection of the English language, the State of Poetry,” &c.

, an eminent protestant divine, was the grandson of John James Werenfels, a clergyman at Basil, who died November 17, 1655, leaving ' Sermons“in German, and” Homilies on Ecclesiastes“in Latin. He was the son of Peter Werenfels, likewise an eminent protestant divine, born 1627, at Leichtal; wtio, after having been pastor of different churches, was appointed archdeacon of Basil in 1654, where he gave striking proofs of his piety and zeal during the pestilence which desolated the city of Basil in 1667 and 1668. His sermons, preached at that time from Psalm xci. have been printed. He was appointed professor of divinity in 1675, and died May 23, 1703, aged seventy-six, leaving a great number of valuable ”Dissertations,“some” Sermons,“and other works. His son, the immediate subject of the present article, was born March I, 1657, at Basil. He obtained a professorship of logic in 1684, and of Greek in the year following, and soon after set out on a literary journey through Holland and Germany, and then into France, with Burnet, afterwards bishop of Salisbury, and Frederick Battier. At his return to Basil he was appointed professor of rhetoric, and filled the different divinity chairs successively. He died in that city, June 1, 1740. His works have all been collected and printed in 2 vols. 4to; the most complete edition of them is that of Geneva and of Lausanne, 1739. They treat of philology, philosophy, and divinity, and are universally esteemed, particularly the tract” De Logomachiis Eruditorum.“In the same collection are several poems, which show the author to have been a good poet as well as an able philosopher and learned divine. We have also a vol. 8vo, of his” Sermons," which are much admired.

, son of the preceding, was born about 1692, and sent to Westminster-school in 1704, and admitted a king’s scholar in 1707, whence he was elected to Christ- church, Oxford, in 1711. Here, as well as at Westminster, he acquired the character of an excellent classical scholar. He was the author of two poems of considerable merit, “The Battle of the Sexes,” and “The Prisons opened;” and of another called “The Parish-Priest, a Poem, upon a clergyman lately deceased,” a very dutiful and striking eulogy on his wife’s father; which are all printed among his poems, and several humorous tales, in 1736, 4to, and after his death in 1743, 12mo. He gave to the Spalding society an annulet that had touched the heads of the three kings of Cologne, whose names were in black letters within. When he took his master’s degree, he was appointed to officiate as usher at Westminster-school; and soon after he took orders, under the patronage of bishop Atterbury, to whom he was ever greatly attached, and the banishment of that celebrated prelate made no change in his friendship for him, as he was Fully convinced of his innocence. This attachment, and his opposition to sir Robert Walpole, barred all hopes of preferment at Westminster, but in 1732 he was appointed mas* ter of Tiverton-school in Devonshire, over which he presided till his death. Samuel Wesley was unquestionably the best poet of his family, but he was a very high-rhurchman, and totally disapproved of the conduct of his brothers, John and Charles, when they became itinerant preachers, being afraid that they would make a separation from the church of England. He died at Tiverton Nov. 6, 1739, and was buried in the church-yard there, with a long epitaph.

Mr. Wesley’s brother and coadjutor, Charles, was born atEpworth, Dec, 18, 1708. He was first educated at home, under the care of his mother; but, in 1716, was sent to Westminster-school. In 1721 he was admitted a scholar on the foundation and at length became captain of the school. In 1726 he was elected to Christ-Church, Oxford at which time his brother John was fellow of Lincoln. Here he pursued his studies with remarkable diligence, and became more and more of a religious turn of mind. He proceeded master of arts in the usual course; and, in 1735, was pr/evailed upon by his brother John to accompany him in his mission to Georgia. Charles accordingly engaged himself as secretary to general Oglethorpe, in which character he left England; but he was first of all ordained both deacon and priest. After preaching to the Indians, and undergoing various difficulties and hardships, he returned to England in 1736. In England he officiated as a public minister among those of the Methodist persuasion with great popularity; sometimes residing in the metropolis, but generally as an itinerant preacher. In some points of discipline he differed much with his brother John. He died in 1788, in the 79th year of his age. He was of a warm and lively character, well acquainted with all texts of scripture; and his discourses were greatly admired. He was also respectable as a scholar and a poet, and was the author of the Hymns now used in the society. He left two sons, of great reputation in the musical world.

Soon afterwards he married, and settled himself in a very pleasant house at Wickham in Kent, where he devoted himself to learning and to piety. Of his learning his works exhibit evidence, and particularly the dissertations which accompany his version of Pindar. Of his piety the influence has probably been extended far by his “Observations on the Resurrection,” published in 1747, for which the university of Oxford created him a doctor of laws by diploma, March 30, 174S, and would doubtless have reached yet further had he lived to complete what he had for some time meditated, the Evidences of the Truth of the New Testament. Perhaps it may not be without effect to tell, that he read the prayers of the public liturgy every morning to his family, and that on Sunday evening he called his servants into the parlour, and read to them first a sermon, and then prayers. Crashaw is now not the only maker of verses to whom may be given the two venerable names of poet and saint.

, lord-chancellor of Ireland, a lawyer of whom we have very little information, studied his profession in one of the Temples. He married Elizabeth, one of the two daughters of bishop Burnet. He was appointed king’s counsel the 24th of October, 1717; and in 1725, advanced to the office of lord-chancellor of Ireland. This high post he did not long enjoy, but died the 3d of December, 1726, in circumstances not adequate to the dignity which he had possessed. He left one son, a very promising young gentleman, who is sufficiently known to the public by his friendship with Mr. Walpole, afterwards lord Orford, in whose works is his correspondence, and with the celebrated poet Gray. Our author, the chancellor, wrote, “A Discourse concerning Treasons and Bills of Attainder,” 1714. He also compiled, chiefly from the Petyt Mss. in the Inner-Temple library, entitled “De Creatione Nobilium,” 2 vols. fol. a work called “An Inquiry into the Manner cf creating Peers/ 7 1719. He wrote some papers in the” Freethinker,“a periodical essay; and Whincop says, he was supposed to have written,” Hecuba," a tragedy, 1726, 4to,

In criticism, (where writing anonymously he would probably have written with the less restraint) we find him for the most part candid and good-natured, not sparing of censure, yet lavish of applause; and affording, in numerous instances, the most agreeable proofs of genuine benevolence. Even in the instance of Gibbon, where he has been thought severe beyond all former example, we have a large mixture of sweet with the bitter. It was his critique on Gibbon which contributed principally to the reputation of the “English Review;” in which Mr. W. was the author of many valuable articles. To his pen. also the “British Critic,” and “The Antijacobiu Review,*' were indebted for various pieces of criticism. But the strength of his principles is no where more apparent than in those articles where he comes forward, armed with the panoply of truth, in defence of our civil and ecclesiastical Constitution. He was also a poet. That he contributed some fine pieces of poetry to” The Cornwall and Devon Poets,“is well known. These were published in two small octavo volumes. He occasionally displayed his powers in the several departments of the Historian, the Theologist, the Critic, the Politician, and the Poet. Versatility like Whitaker’s is, in truth, of rare occurrence. But still more rare is the splendor of original genius, exhibited in walks so various. Not that Mr. W. was equally happy in them all. His characteristic traits as a writer were, acute discernment, and a Velocity of ideas which acquired new force in composition, and a power of combining images in a manner peculiarly striking, and of flinging on every topic of discussion the strongest illustration. With little scruple, therefore, we hazard an opinion, that though hi* chief excellence be recognized in antiquarian research, he would have risen to higher eminence as a poet, had he cultivated in early youth the favour of the Muses. Be this, however, as it may; there are none who will deny him the praise of a” great“literary character. That he was” good“as well as great, would sufficiently appear in the recollection of any period of his life; whether we saw him abandoning preferment from principle, and heard him” reasoning of righteousness and judgment to come,“until a Gibbon trembled; or whether, among his parishioners, we witnessed his unaffected earnestness of preaching, his humility in conversing with the poorest cottagers, his sincerity in assisting them with advice, his tenderness in offering them consolation, and his charity in relieving -their distresses. It is true, to the same warmth of temper, together with a sense of good intentions, we must attribute an irritability at times destructive of social comfort; and an impetuousness that brooked not opposition, and bore down all before it. This precipitation was in part also to be traced to his ignorance of the world; to his simplicity in believing others like himself precisely what they seemed to be; and, oo the detection of his error, his anger at dissimulation or hypocrisy. But his general good humour, his hospitality, and his convivial pleasantry, were surely enough to atone for those sudden bursts of passion, those flashes, which betrayed his human frailty, but still argued genius. And they who knew how” fearfully and wonderfully he was made," could bear from a Whitaker what they would certainly have resented in another. We should add, that in his family Mr. Whitaker was uniformly regular; nor did he suffer, at any time, his literary cares to trench on his domestic duties.

, an amiable and ingenious poet, untimely snatched from the world, was the second son of John and Mary White, and was born at Nottingham, March 21, 1785. From his third until his fifth year he learned to read at the school of a Mrs. Garrington, who had the good sense to perceive his extraordinary capacity, and spoke of what it promised with confidence. At a very early age his love oi reading was decidedly manifested, and was a passion to which every thing else gave way. When about six years old, he was placed under the rev. John Blanchard, who kept at that time the best school in Nottingham, and here he learned writing, arithmetic, and French. When he was about eleven, he one day wrote a separate theme for every boy in the class, which consisted of about twelve or fourteen. The master said he had never known them write so well upon any subject before, and could not refrain from expressing his astonishment at young White’s. It was considered as a great thing for him to be at so good a school, yet there were some circumstances which rendered it less advantageous to him than it might have been. Mrs. White had not yet overcome her husband’s intention of breeding him up to his own business (that of a butcher), and by an arrangement which took up too much of his time, one whole day in the week, and his leisure hours on the others, were employed in carrying the butcher’s basket. Some differences at length arose between his father and Mr. Blanchard, in consequence of which Henry was removed. It is remarkable that one of the ushers, when he came to receive the money due for tuition, represented to Mrs. White, either from stupidity or malice, what an incorrigible son she had, and that it was impossible to make the lad do any thing. This unfavourable impression, however, was soon removed by a Mr. Shipley, under whose care he was next placed, and who having discovered that he was a boy of quick perception, and very admirable talents, came with joy to relieve the anxiety and painful suspicions of his family. But while his school-masters were complaining that they could make nothing of him, he discovered what nature had made him, and wrote satires upon them. These pieces were never shewn to any, except his most particular friends, who say that they were pointed and severe, and it appears that he afterwards destroyed them.

White was a benefactor to both Wykeham’s colleges, and was a man of learning and eloquence, and no inelegant Latin poet, as appears by his “Diacosio-martyrion, sive ducentorum virorum testimonia de veritate corporis et sanguinis Christi in eucharista, adversus Petrum Martyrem,” Lond. 1553, 1554, 4to. He was the author also of “Epigrammatum lib. I.” “Carmina in matrimon. Philippi Regis, cum Maria Regina Anglise,” (See Holingshed’s Chron. 111. 1120); and the memorable “Sermon preached at the funeral of queen Mary, Dec. 13, 1558,” a ms. now in the British Museum, and printed in Strype’s Memorials, but from an incorrect copy. There are many of his orations, &c. preserved in Fox’s Acts and Monuments.

, an English poet and satirist, the youngest son of Edmund Whitehead, a taylor, was born at his father’s house, in Castle-yard, Holborn, Feb. 6, 1709—10, St. Paul’s day, O. S. to which circumstance he is said to owe his name. As he was intended for trade, he received no other education than what a school at Hitchin, in Hertfordshire, afforded; and, at the usual age, was placed as an apprentice to a mercer or woollen-draper in London. Here he had for his associate the late Mr. Lowth, of Paternoster-row, long the intimate friend, and afterwards the executor, of the celebrated tragedian, James Q,uin. Whitehead and Lowth were both of a lively disposition, and fond of amusement: Lowth had attached himself to the theatre, and by his means Whitehead became acquainted with some of the theatrical personages of that day; and among others, with Fleetwood, the manager. Lowth, however, continued in business, while Whitehead was encouraged to enter himself of the Temple, and study the law.

Long before this period , Whitehead, who from his infancy had discovered a turn for poetry, and had, when at school, corresponded in rhime with his father, distinguished himself both as a poet and a politician. In the latter character, he appears to have united the principles of Jacobitism and republicanism in no very consistent proportions. As a Jacobite, he took every opportunity of venting his spleen against the reigning family; and, as a republican, he was no less outrageous in his ravings about liberty; which, in his dictionary, meant an utter abhorrence of kings, courts, and ministers. His first production of this kind was the “State Dunces,” in 1733, inscribed to Mr. Pope, and written with a close imitation of that poet’s satires. The keenness of his abuse, and harmony of his verse, and, above all, the personalities which he dealt about him with a most liberal hand, conferred popularity on this poem, and procured him the character of an enemy who was to be dreaded, and a friend who ought to be secured. He was accordingly favoured by the party then in opposition to sir Robert Walpole; and, at no great distance of time, became patronized by Bubb Dodington, and the other adherents of the Prince of Wales’ s court. The “State Dunces” was answered, in a few days, by “A Friendly Epistle” to its author, in verse not much inferior. Whitehead sold his poem to Doclsley for ten guineas; a circumstance which Dr. Johnson, who thought meanly of our poet, recollected afterwards, when Dodsley offered to purchase his “London,” and conditioned for the same sum. “I might, perhaps, have accepted of less, but that Paul Whitehead had a little before got ten guineas for a poem, and I would not take less than Paul Whitehead.”

In 1739, Whitehead published his more celebrated poem, entitled “Manners;” a satire not only upon the administration, but upon all the venerable forms of the constitution, under the assumption of a universal depravity of manners. Pope had at this time taken liberties which, in the opinion of some politicians, ought to be repressed. la his second dialogue of “Serenteen Hundred and Thirtyeight,” he gave offence to one of the Foxes, among others; which Fox, in a reply to Lyttelton, took an opportunity of repaying, by reproaching him with the friendship of a lampooner, who scattered his ink without fear or decency, and against whom he hoped the resentment of the legislature would quickly be discharged. Pope, however, was formidable, and had many powerful friends. With all his prejudices, he was the first poet of the age, and an honour to his country. But Paul Whitehead was less entitled to respect: he was formidable rather by his calumny than his talents, and might be prosecuted with effect.

His poems were appended to the last edition of Dr. Johnson’s collection, yet it may be doubted whether any partiality can assign him a very high rank even among versifiers. He was a professed imitator of Pope, in his satires, and may be entitled to all the praise which successful imitation deserves. His lines are in general harmonious and correct, and sometimes vigorous, but he owed his popularity chiefly to the personal calumnies so liberally thrown out against men of rank, in the defamation of whom a very active and extensive party was strongly interested. Like Churchill’s, therefore, his works were forgotten when the contending parties were removed or reconciled. But he had not the energetic and original genius of Churchill, nor can we find many passages in which the spirit of genuine poetry is discoverable. Of his character as a poet, he was himself very careless, considering it perhaps as only the temporary instrument of his advancement to ease and independence. No persuasions could induce him to collect his works, and they would probably* never have been collected, had not the frequent mention of his name in conjunction with those of his political patrons, and the active services of his pen, created a something like permanent reputation, and a desire to collect the various documents by which the history of factions may be illustrated.

, another English poet, of a more estimable character, was born at Cambridge in the beginning of 1715. His father was a baker in St. Botolph’s parish, and at one time must have been a man of some property or some interest, as he bestowed a liberal education on his eldest son, John, wtio after entering into the church, held the living of Pershore in the diocese of Worcester. He would probably have been enabled to extend the same care to William, his second son, had he not died when the boy was at school, and left his widow involved in debts contracted by extravagance or folly. A few acres of land, near Grantchester, on which he expended considerable sums of money, without, it would appear, expecting much return, is yet known by the name of White head’s Folly* William received the first rudiments of education at some common school at Cambridge, and at the age of fourteen was removed to Winchester, having obtained a nomination into that college by the interest of Mr. Bromley, afterwards lord MonttorC. Of his behaviour while at school his biographer, Mr. Mason, received the following account from Dr. Balguy. " He was always of a delicate turn, and though obliged to go to the hills with the other boys, spent his time there in reading either plays or poetry; and was also particularly fond of the Atalantis, and all other books of private history or character. He very early exhibited his taste for poetry; for while other boys were contented with shewing up twelve or fourteen lines, he would till half a sheet, but always with English verse. This Dr. Burton, the master, at first discouraged; but, after some time, he was so much charmed, that he spoke of them with rapture. When he was sixteen he wrote a whole comedy. In the winter of the year 1732, he is said to have acted a female part in the Andria, under Dr. Burton’s direction. Of this there are some doubts; but it is certain that he acted Marcia, in the tragedy of Cato, with much applause. In the year 1733, the earl of Peterborough, having Mr. Pope at his house near Southampton, carried him to Winchester to shew him the college, school, &c. The earl gave ten guineas to be disposed of in prizes amongst the boys, and Mr. Pope set them a subject to write upon, viz. Peterborough. Prizes of a guinea each were given to six of the boys, of whom Whitehead was one. The remaining sum was laid out for other boys in subscriptions to Pine’s Horace, then about to be published. He never excelled in writing epigrams, nor did he make any considerable figure in Latin verse, though he understood the classics very well, and had a good memory. He was, however, employed to translate into Latin the first epistle of the Essay on Man; and the translation is still extant in his own hand. Dobson’s success in translating Prior’s Solomon had put this project into Mr. Pope’s head, and he set various persons to work upon it.

In all this there is nothing extraordinary; nor can the partiality of his biographer conceal that, among the early efforts of his muse, there is not one which seems to indicate the future poet, although he, is anxious to attribute this to his having followed the example of Pope, rather than of Spenser, Fairfax, arvd Milton. The “Vision of Solomon,” however, which he copied from Whitehead’s juvenile manuscripts, is entitled to considerable praise. Even when a schoolboy he had attentively studied the various manners of the best authors; and in the course of his poetical life, attained no small felicity in exhibiting specimens of almost every kind of stanza.

When the marriage of the prince of Wales in 1736, and the birth of his son, the present king, called for the gratulatory praises of the universities, Whitehead wrote some verses on these subjects, which he inserted in the first collection of his poems, published in 1754, but omitted from the second in 1774. They are restored, however, to the late edition of the English Poets, as they have been reprinted in some subsequent collections; nor can there be much danger to the reputation of a poet in telling the world that his earliest efforts were not his best.

The production with which, in Mr. Mason’s opinion, he commenced a poet, was his epistle “On the Danger of Writing in Verse.” This, we are told, obtained general admiration, and was highly approved by Pope. But that it is “one of the most happy imitations extant of Pope’s preceptive manner,” is a praise which seems to come from Mr. Mason’s friendship, rather than his judgment. The subject is but slightly touched, and the sentiments are often obscure. The finest passage, and happiest imitation of Pope, is that in which he condemns the licentiousness of certain poets. The tale of “Atys and Adrastus,” his next publication, is altogether superior to the former. It is elegant, pathetic, and enriched with some beautiful imagery. “The Epistle of Anne Boleyn to Henry VIII.” which followed, will not be thought to rank very high among productions of this kind. “The truth is,” says Mr. Mason, “Mr. Pope’s Eloisa to Abelard is such a chef (TceuvrC) that nothing of the kind can be relished after it.” Our critic has, however, done no credit to Whitehead by this insinuation of rivalship, and yet less to himself by following it with a petulant attack on Dr. Johnson. In his eagerness to injure the reputation of a man so much his superior, and with whom, it is said, he never exchanged an angry word, he would exclude sympathy from the charms which attract in the Eloisa, and, at the expence of taste and feeling, passes a clumsy sarcasm on papistical machinery.

which he might think somewhat uncourtly in the collected works of one who had become the companion of lords, and the Poet Laureat.

Mr. Mason complains that these elegies were not popular, and states various objections made to them; he does not add by whom: but takes care to inform us that the poet bore his fate contentcrdly, because he was no longer under the necessity of adapting himself to the public taste in order to become a popular writer. He had received, while yet in Italy, two genteel patent placesf, usually united, the badges of secretary and register of the order of the Bath; and two years after, on 'he death of old Gibber, he was appointee) poet laureat. This last place was offered to Gray, by Mr. Mason’s mediation, and an apology was made for passing over Mr. Mason himself, “that being in orders, he was thought, merely on that account, less eligible for the office than a layman.” Mr. Mason says, he was glad to hear this reason assigned, and did not think it a weak one. It appears, however, that a higher respect was paid to Gray than to Whitehead, in the offer of the appointment. Gray was to hold it as a sinecure, but Whitehead was expected to do the duties of the Laureat. In this dilemma, if it may be so called, Mr. Mason endeavoured to relieve his friend by an expedient not very promising. He advised him to employ a deputy to write his annual odes, and reserve his own pen for certain great occasions, as a peace, or a royal marriage: and he pointed out to him two or three needy poets who, for the reward of five or ten guineas, would be humble enough to write under the eye of the musical composer. Whitehead had more confidence in his powers, or more respect for his royal patron, than to take this advice, and set himself to compose his annual odes with the zeal that he employed on his voluntary effusions. But although he had little to fear from the fame of his predecessor, he was not allowed to enjoy all the benefits of comparison. His odes were confessedly superior to those of Gibber, but the office itself, under Gibber’s possession, had become so ridiculous, that it was no easy task to restore it to some degree of public respect. Whitehead, however, was perhaps the man of all others, his contemporaries, who could perform this with most ease to himself. Attacked as he was, in every way, by “the little fry” of the poetical profession, he was never provoked into retaliation, aud bore even the more dangerous abuse of Churchill, with a real or apparent indifference, which to that turbulent libeller must have been truly mortifying. He was not, however, insensible of the inconvenience, to say the least, of -a situation which obliges a man to write two poems yearly upon the same subjects; and with this feeling wrote “The Pathetic Apology for all Laureats,” which, from the motto, he appears to have intended to reach that quarter where only redress could be obtained, but it was not published till after his death.

For some years after his return to England, he lived almost entirely in the house of the earl of Jersey, no longer as a tutor to his son, but as a companion of amiable manners and accomplishments, whom the good sense of that nobleman and his lady preferred to be the partner of their familiar and undisguised intimacy, and placed at their table as one not unworthy to sit with guests of whatever rank. The earl and countess were now advanced in years, and his biographer informs us, that Whitehead “willingly devoted the principal part of his time to the amusement of his patron and patroness, which, it will not be doubted by those who know with what unassuming ease, and pleasing sallies of wit, he enlivened his conversation, must have made their hours of sickness or pain pass away with much more serenity.” The father of lord Nuneham also gave him a general invitation to his table in town, and to his delightful seat in the country; and the two young lords, during the whole of his life, bestowed upon him every mark of affection and respect. During this placid enjoyment of high life, he produced “The School for Lovers,” a comedy which was performed at Drury-lane in 1762. In the advertisement prefixed to it, he acknowledges his obligations to a small dramatic piece written by M. de Fontenelle. This comedy was not unsuccessful, but was written on a plan so very different from all that is called comedy, that the critics were at. a loss where to place it. Mr. Mason, who will not allow it to be classed among the sentimental, assigns it a very high station among the small list of our genteel comedies. In the same year, he published his “Charge to the Poets,” in which, as Laureat, he humorously assumes the dignified mode of a bishop giving his visitatorial instructions to his clergy. He is said to have designed this as a continuation of “The Dangers of writing verse.” There seems, however, no very close connection, while as a poem it is far superior, not only in elegance and harmony of verse, but in the alternation of serious advice and genuine humour, the whole chastened by candour for his brethren, and a kindly wish to protect them from the fastidiousness of criticism, as well as to heal the mutual animosities of the genus irritabile. But, laudable as the attempt was, he had not even the happiness to conciliate those whose cause he pleaded. Churchill, from this time, attacked him whenever he attacked any, but Whitehead disdained to reply, and only adverted to the animosity of that poet in a few lines which he wrote towards the close of his life, and which appear to be part of some longer poem. They have already been noticed in the life of Churchill. One consequence of Churchill’s animosity, neither silence nor resentment could avert. Churchill, at this time, had possession of the town, and made some characters unpopular, merely by joining them with others who were really so. Garrick was so frightened at the abuse he threw out against Whitehead, that he would not venture to bring out a tragedy which the latter offered to him. Such is Mr. Mason’s account, but if it was likely to succeed, why was it not produced when Churchill and his animosities were forgotten? The story, however, may be true, for when in 1770, he offered his “Trip to Scotland,” a farce, to Mr. Garrick, he conditioned that it should be produced without the name of the author. The secret was accordingly preserved both in acting and publishing, and the farce was performed and read for a considerable time, without a suspicion that the grave author of “The School for Lovers” had relaxed into the broad mirth and ludicrous improbabilities of farce.

In 1774, he collected his poems and dramatic pieces together, with the few exceptions already noticed, and published them in two volumes, under the title of “Plays and Poems,” concluding with the Charge to the Poets, as a farewell to the Muses. He had, however, so much leisure, and so many of those incitements which a poet and a moralist cannot easily resist, that he still continued to employ his pen, and proved that it was by no means worn out. In 1776 he published “Variety, a tale for married people,” a light, pleasing poem, in the manner of Gay, which speedily ran through five editions. His “Goat’s Beard,” (in 1777) was less familiar and less popular, but is not inferior in moral tendency and just satire on degenerated manners. It produced an attack, entitled “Asses Ears, a Fable,” addressed to the author of the Goat’s Beard, in which the office of Laureat is denied to men of genius, and judged worthy to be held only by such poets as bhadwell and Gibber.

Charles, the eldest son, was bred under that accomplished minister and poet Mr. Stepney; and, having attended him through several courts of Germany, was, in 1702, appointed resident at the diet of Ratisbon. In 1704 he was named envoy -extraordinary to the court of Petersburg!), as he was sent ambassador-extraordinary thither on a more solemn and important occasion, in 1710. M. de Matueof, the Czar’s minister at London, had been arrested in the public street by two bailiffs, at the suit of some tradesmen, to whom he was in debt. This affront had like to have been attended with very serious consequences. The Czar demanded immediate and severe punishment of the offenders, with threats of wreaking his vengeance on all English merchants and subjects established in his dominions. In this light the menace was formidable, and the Czar’s memorials urged the queen with the satisfaction which she had extorted herself, when only the boat and servants of the earl of Manchester had been insulted at Venice. Mr. Whitworth had the honour of terminating this quarrel. In 1714, he was appointed plenipotentiary to the diet of Augsbourg and Ratisbon; in 1716, envoy-extraordinary and plenipotentiary to the king of Prussia; in 1717, envoy-extraordinary to the Hague. In 1719, he returned in his former character to Berlin; and in 1721 the late king rewarded his long services by creating him baron Whitworth of Galway, in the kingdom of Ireland. The next year his lordship was entrusted with the affairs of Great Britain at the congress of Cambray, in the character of ambassador-extraordinary and plenipotentiary. He returned home in 1724, and died the next year at his house in Gerard street, Londou. His body was interred in Westminster-abbey.

, a voluminous German writer who has been complimented with the title of the Voltaire of Germany, was born in 1733, at Biberach. Of his life no authentic account has, as far as we know, reached this country, but the following few particulars, gleaned from various sources, may perhaps be genuine, His father was a clergyman, who gave him a good education, and his attachment to the Muses discovered itself very early. At the age of fourteen, he wrote a poem on the destruction of Jerusalem, Two years after he was sent to Erfurt to study the sciences, where he became enamoured of Sophia de Gusterman, afterwards known by the name of Madame de la Roche. The youthful lovers swore eternal fidelity to each other, but Wieland’s father thought proper to interrupt the connection, and sent his son to Tubingen to study law. For this he probably had little inclination, and employed most of his thoughts and time on poetry, producing at the age of eighteen an “Art of Love” in the manner of Ovid, and a poem “On the nature of things,” in which we are told he combined the philosophy of Plato and Leibnitz. After this he appears to have devoted himself entirely to study and writing, and acquired considerable reputation as a poet of taste and fancy. For some time he appears to have resided in Swisserland, and in 1760 he returned to his native place, where he was appointed to the office of director of the chancery, and during his leisure hours wrote some of those works which completely established him in the opinion of his countrymen, as one or the greatest geniuses of the age, and honours were liberally bestowed upon him. The elector of Mentz made him professor of philosophy and polite literature at Erfurt, and he was soon after appointed tutor to the two young princes of Saxe Weimar; he was also aulic counsellor to the duke, who gave him a pension; and counsellor of government to the elector of Mentz. In 1765 he married a lady at Augsburgh, of whom he speaks so highly that we may conclude ke had overcome or moderated his attachment to the object of his first love. In 1808 Bonaparte sent him the cross of the legion of honour, and after the battle of Jena, partook of a repast with Wieland, and, we are gravely told, “conversed with him at great length on the folly and horrors of war and on various projects for the establishment of a perpetual peace!” Wieland’s latter days were employed in translating Cicero’s Letters. A paralysis of the abdominal viscera was the prelude to his death, which took place at Weimar, in January 1813, in the eighty-first year of his age.

Wieland was the author of a prodigious number of works (of which there is an edition extending to forty-two volumes, quarto), both in prose and verse, poems of all kinds, and philosophical essays, dialogues, tales, &c. Of these, the “Oberon,” (by Mr. Sotheby’s elegant translation) the “Agathon,” and some others, are not unknown, although they have never been very popular, in this country. In what estimation he is held in his own, may appear from one of the many panegyrics which German critics have pronounced on his merit: “No modern poet has written so much, or united so much deep sense with so much wit, such facility and sweetness. It may be truly said of him, that he has gone through the wide domain of human occupations, and knows all that happens in heaven and in earth. A blooming imagination and a creative wit; a deep, thinking, philosophical mind; fine and just sense, and a thorough acquaintance with both the moderns and ancients, are discernible in all his various writings. Re knows how to make the most abstract metaphysical ideas sensible, by the magic of his eloquence; he can make himself of all times and all countries; he observes the customs of every country, and knows how to join truth with miracles, sensible with spirited imagery, and romance with the most profound morality. In the `Agathon' he seems a Grecian; and in the `Fairy Tales’ a knight-errant; who wanders amidst fairies, vizards, and monsters. All his tales abound in portraits, comparisons, and parallels, taken from old and modern times, full of good sense and truth. The understanding, the heart, and the fancy, are equally satisfied. His verse is easy; there is not a word too much, or an idle false thought. He is as excellent in comical portraits as in the delineations of manners. The knowledge of Epicurus, the muses of frolic and satire, of romance and fairy land; the solidity of Locke, and the deep sense of Plato; Grecian eloquence, and Oriental luxuriance, what excites admiration in the writings of the best masters, are united in his immortal works.” Such is the opinion of his countrymen; to which, however, it is our duty to add, that in many of his works the freethinkingsystem is predominant, and that the moral tendency of others is very doubtful.

, a nonconformist divine, poet, and wit, was born at St. Ives in Huntingdonshire in 1609, and was educated at the university of Cambridge. In 1642 he was created bachelor of divinity at Oxford, and, probably had the degree of doctor there also, as he was generally called Dr. Wild. In 1646 he was appointed rector of Aynho in Northamptonshire, in the room of Dr. Longman, ejected by the parliamentary visitors; and on this occasion Calamy’s editor gives us one of his witticisms. He and another divine had preached for the living, and Wild being asked whether he or his competitor had got it, he answered “We have divided it; I have got the Ay, and he the No.” Wood says he was “a fat, jolly, and boon presbyterian,” but Calamy asserts that those who knew him commended him not only for his facetiousness, but also his strict temperance and sobriety; and he was serious, where seriousness was wanted. He was ejected from Aynho at the restoration. He died at Oundle, in Northamptonshire in 1679, aged seventy. His works afford a curious mixture. 1. “The tragedy of Christopher Love at Tower-hill,” Lond. 1660, a poem in one sheet 4to. 2. “Iter Boreaie, attempting something upon the successful and matchless march of the L Gen. George Monk from Scotland to London,” ibid. 1660, 4to, in ridicule of the republican party. This was at that time a favourite subject, and Wood mentions three other Iter Borealt’s by Eades, Corbet, and Master. 3. “A poem on the imprisonment of Mr. Edmund Calamy in Newgate,” 1662, printed on a broad sheet, which produced two similar broadsheets in answer, the one “Antiboreale, an answer to a lewd piece of poetry upon Mr. Calamy, &c.” the other “Hudibras on Calamy’s imprisonment and Wild’s poetry.” These, with his Iter Boreaie, and other pieces of a similar cast and very indifferent poetry, but with occasional flashes of genuine humour, were published together in 1668 and 1670. Wood mentions “The Benefice, a comedy,” written in his younger years, but not printed till 1689. Wood adds, that there “had like to have been” a poetical war between Wild and Flaxman, but how it terminated he knows not. Wild had the misfortune to have some of his poems printed along with some of lord Rochester’s. He has a few serrrjons extant.

, a Scotch poet of some fame in his day, was born in the parish of Dalmeny, in the county of West Lothian, Oct. 5, 1721. His father, although a small farmer, and poor and unfortunate, endeavoured to give him a liberal education, which he appears to have improved by diligence. At the age of thirteen, he was sent to the university of Edinburgh, where he made a rapid progress in learning, but before he completed his academical course, tois father died, leaving him no other inheritance than his small farm, and the care of three sisters. Necessity thus turned his attention to the study of agriculture, which he cultivated with sc- much success, although upon a confined scale, that he acquired a solid reputation as a practical farmer, and was enabled to provide for himself and his sisters. He still, however, prosecuted his studies, and at the accustomed period was admitted a preacher in the church of Scotland.

For some years this made no alteration in his mode of life; and as a clergyman he only occasionally assisted in some neighbouring churches, while he devoted his principal time to his farm and his studies. He appears to have been early ambitious of the character of a poet, and having read Homer, as Don Quixote read romances, he determined to sally forth as his rival, or continuator; and this enthusiasm produced “The Epigoniad,” published in 1753. Ou this poem he is said to have employed fourteen years, which ill agrees with what his biographers tell us of his propensity to poetry, and the original vigour of his mind; for after so much labour it appeared with all the imperfections of a rough sketch. Its reception by the English public was not very flattering, but in his own country “The Epigoniad” succeeded so well, that a second edition was called for in 1759, to which he added a dream in the manner of Spenser. Yet, as this edition was slowly called for, an extraordinary appeal from the general opinion was made by the celebrated Hume, who wrote a very long encomium on the “Epigoniad,” addressed to the editor of the Critical Review. This has been inserted in the late edition of the “English. Poets,” and those who knew Mr. Hume’s taste, friendship, or sincerity, will be best able to determine whether he is serious.

His official dispatches, says Mr. Coxe, are written with, great life and spirit; he delineates characters with truth and facility; and describes his diplomatic transactions with minuteness and accuracy, but without tediousness or formality. His verses were highly prized by his contemporaries, but in perusing those which have been given to the public, “Odes, 1775, 12mo,” and those which are still in manuscript, the greater part are political effusions, or licentious lampoons, abounding with local wit and temporary satire, eagerly read at the time of their appearance, but little interesting to posterity. Three of his pieces, however, deserve to be exempted from this general character; his poem of “Isabella, or the Morning,” is remarkable for ease of versification, and huppy discrimination of character; his epitaph on Mr. Winnington is written with great feeling; and his beautiful “Ode to Mr. Pointz,” in honour of the duke of Cumberland, breathes a spirit of sublimity, which entitles the author to the rank of a poet, and excites pur regret that his, muse was not always employed on subjects worthy of his talents.

, a name well known among the readers of old English poetry, and revived, of late, by the taste and judgment of some eminent poetical antiquaries, was born at Bentworth, near Alton in Hampshire, June 11, 1588. He was the only son of George Wither of Bentworth (by Anne Serle), who was the second son of John Wither of Manydowne near W r otton St. Lawrence in that county, at which' seat Mr. Bigg Wither, the heir (not the heir male, hut the heir female, who has taken the name), still resides. The poet was educated under John Greaves of Colemore, a celebrated schoolmaster, whom he afterwards commemorated with gratitude in a poem published in 1613. About 1604- he was sent to Magdalen college, Oxford, under the tuition of John Warner, afterwards bishop of Rochester. Here he informs us, in the proemium to his “Abuses stript and whipt,” that he found the v art of logic, to which his studies were directed, first dull and unintelligible; but at the moment it began all at once to unfold its mysteries to him, he was called home “to Jiold the plough.” He laments that he was thus obliged to forsake “the Paradise of England” to go “in quest of care, despair, and discontent.”

After he had remained some time in his own country, certain malicious advisers, under the mask of friendship, pretending that nothing was to be got by learning, endeavoured to persuade his father to put him to some mechanic trade; but our poet, finding that country occupations were not fitted to his genius, determined, on some slight gleam of hope, to try his fortune at court, and therefore entered himself as a member of Lincoln’s-inn. The world now opened upon him in characters so different from his expectations, that, having been probably educated in puritanical principles, he felt that disgust which perhaps made him a satirist for life. The first thing which appeared to fill him with dislike and anger, was the gross flattery and servility which seemed necessary to his advancement. If, however, his manners did not procure him favour with the courtiers, his talents obtained him the acquaintance and friendship of many men of genius. William Browne, the pastoral poet, who was of the Inner Temple, was an early familiar of his. And some of his verses having got abroad, began to procure the name of a poet for himself. His “Philarete’s Complaint, &c.” formed a part of his “Juvenilia,” which are said to have been his earliest compositions. He also wrote elegies in 1612 on that general subject of lamentation, the death of prince Henry.

After this time he continued to write and publish both poetry and prose without intermission to the day of his death, which yet was at a great distance. Wood remarks, with more correctness of judgment and expression than he usually attains, that our poet was now cried up, “especially by the puritan party, for his profuse pouring forth of English rhyme,” which abundant facility has certainly tempted him into an excess that has totally buried the effusions of his happier moments. Such a superfluity of easy but flat and insipid narrative, and trite prosaic remarks, scarce any writer has been guilty of. On, his pen appears in general, to have run, without the smallest effort at ex- > cellence and therefore subjected him too justly to Wood’s stigma of being a scribbler. But let it be observed, this was the fault of his will, and not of his genius. When the examples of real poetry, which he has given, are selected from his multitudinous rhymes, they are in point both of quality and quantity sufficient to stamp his fame.

Another cause of the depression of Wither’s reputation was the violent party spirit, by which a large portion of his works was dictated and degraded, as well as the active part which he took on the side of the parliament. In 1639, he had been a captain of horse in the expedition against the Scots, and quarter-master-general of his regiment, under the earl of Arundel. But as soon as the civil wars broke out in 1642, he sold his estate to raise a troop of horse for the parliament; and soon afterwards rose to the rank of major; but being taken prisoner by the royalists, “Sir John Denham the poet,” says Wood, “some of whose estate at Egham, in Surrey, Wither had got into his clutches, desired his majesty not to hang him, because so long as Wither lived, Denham would not be accounted the worst poet in England. About that time,” continues Wood, "he was constituted by the Long Parliament a justice of peace in quorum for Hampshire, Surrey, and Esse v x, which office he kept six years, and afterwards was made by Oliver, major-general of all the horse and foot in the county of Surrey, in which employment he licked his fingers sufficiently, gaining thereby a great odium from the generous loyalists/'

That Wither was a poet, and a poet deserving to be better known, has been sufficiently proved by the selection from his “Juvenilia,” printed by the late Alexander Dalfymple, esq. in 1785, and particularly by the more recent republications of his “Shepherd’s Hunting,” 1814, his “Fidelia,” 1815, and his “Hymns and Songs of the Church,” 1815, by sir Egerton Brydges, whose prefaces and remarks add no small value to these beautiful volumes, and whose judgment and taste in the revival of works of neglected merit cannot be too highly appreciated. It is to this learned baronet also that the reader is indebted for all that is valuable in the present sketch of Wither, taken frorii a more copious life of the poet in the “Bibliographer.” In the same work, the reader may be referred to a very accurate list, and history, by Mr. Park, of all Wither’s writings, amounting to 112 articles in prose and verse, from which very pleasing selections may yet be made, They are almost all of rare occurrence, and expensive in proportion, since the attention of the public has been drawn to them by the various critics mentioned in our references.

The first edition of Mr. Wodhull’s translation of “Euripides” appeared in 1782, 4 vols. 8vo, since reprinted in 3 vols. 8vo. Whoever considers the number of dramas composed by the Greek tragedian, the variety of allusions which they contain to ancient manners, and to the tenets of philosophers; and the peculiar force of the language in which they were written, will acknowledge that the attempt to render them into English verse must have failed altogether without a rare unibn of perseverance, knowledge, and ability. Original composition is the surest test of genius, but the poetical images, and ideas of one man cannot adequately be represented or expressed by another who does not himself possess the imagination and fancy of a poet. In his translation of Euripides, Mr. Wodhull has selected blank verse as the best adapted for the dialogue, and has rendered the chorusses for the most part in a Pindaric ode. The difference therefore both of the subject and versification is such that no comparison can fairly be instituted with the poetical versions of the Æneid and the Iliad. But as Dryden and Pope have secured to themselves a high rank in the list of British Classics by their translations, an honourable post will also be assigned to Mr. Wodhull, who has contributed no mean addition to the stock of British Literature, and naturalized among us him, whom he entitles “The Philosophic Bard.”

, a divine and poet, eldest son of Robert Woodford, of Northampton, gent, was born in the parish of All-hallows on the Wall, London, April 15, 1636; became a commoner of Waclham college in 1653; took one degree in arts in 1656; and in 1658 returned to the Inner Temple, where he was chamber-fellow with the poet Flatman. In 1660, he published a poem “On the return of king Charles II.” After that period, he lived first at Aldbrook, and afterwards at Bensted in Hampshire, ift^i married and secular condition, and was elected F. R. S. in Nov. 1664. He took orders from bishop Morley, and was soon after presented by sir Nicolas Stuart, bart. to the rectory of Hartley-Maudet in Hampshire. He was installed prebend of Chichester May 27, 1676; made D. D. by the diploma of archbishop Sancroft in 1677; and prebendary of Winchester, Nov. 8, 1680, by the favour of his great patron, the bishop of that diocese. He died in 1700. His poems, which have some merit, are numerous. His “Paraphrase on the Psalms, in five books,” was published in 1667, 4to, and again in 1678, 8vo. This “Paraphrase,” which was written in the Pindaric and other various sorts of verse, is commended by R. Baxter in the preface to his “Poetical Fragments,” 1681 and is called by others “an incomparable version,” especially by his friend Flatman, who wrote a Pindaric ode on it, and a copy of verses on Woodford’s “Paraphrase on the Canticles,” 1679, 8vo. With this latter paraphrase are printed, 1. “The Legend of Love, in three cantos.'. 12.” To the Muse,“a Pindaric ode. 3.” A Paraphrase upon some select Hymns of the New and Old Testament.“4.” Occasional compositions in English rhymes," with some translations out, of Latin, Greek, and Italian, but chiefly out of the last;. some of which compositions and translations were before falsely published by a too-curious collector of them, from very erroneous copies, against the will and knowledge of their author. Dr. Woodford complains, that several of his translations of some of the moral odes had been printed after the same incorrect manner.

Sir Henry Wotton was a man of eminent learning and abilities, and greatly esteemed by his contemporaries. His knowledge was very extensive, and his taste perhaps not inferior to that of any man of his time. Among other proofs of it, he was among the first who were delighted with Milton’s mask of Comus; and although Mr. Warton has pronounced him to be “on the whole a mixed and desultory character,” he has found an able defender in a living author of equal taste and judgment, who observes on Mr. Warton’s expression, that “this in a strict sense may be true, but surely not in the way of censure. He mingled the character of an active statesman with that of a recluse scholar; and he wandered from the crooked and thorny intrigues of diplomacy into the flowery paths of the muses. But is it not high praise to have been thus desultory?” The same writer says of sir Henry as a poet, “It may be true, that sir Henry’s genius was not suited to the” higher conceptions of Milton. His mind was subtle and elegant rather than sublime. In truth the habits of a diplomatist, and of a great poet, are altogether incompatible,“but” for moral and didactic poetry, the experience of a statesman does not disqualify him," and of this species, sir Henry has left some exquisite specimens. He seems to have lived in a perpetual struggle between his curiosity respecting the world, fomented by his ambition, and his love of books, contemplation, and quiet. His letters to sir Edmund Bacon, who married his niece, prove his strong family affections. His heart appears to have been moulded with a high degree of moral tenderness. This, both the sentiments attributed to him by Walton, and the cast of his poems, sufficiently evince.

, a statesman and poet, the only son and heir of sir Henry Wyat of Allington-castle, in Kent, was born in 1503. His mother was the daughter of John Skinner, of the county of Surrey. His father was imprisoned in the Tower in the reign of Richard III. when he is said to have been preserved by a cat which fed him while in that place, for which reason he was always pictured with acat in hisarms, or beside him. On the accession of Henry VIL be had great marks of favour shewn him, among which w0,s the honour of knighthood, and a seat in the privy-council. One of the last services in which he was employed by that king, was conducting to the Tower the unfortunate earl of Suffolk, who was afterwards beheaded by Henry VIII. He was also a member of Henry VIII.'s privy-council, master of the jewel-office, and of the vanguard of the army, commanded by the king in person, which fought the memorable battle of the Spurs. He died in 1533.

, an English comic poet, eldest son of Daniel Wycherley, of Cleve, in Shropshire, esq. was born about 1640. At fifteen years. of age he was sent to France, in the western parts of which he resided, upon the banks of the Charante, where he was often admitted to the conversation of one of the most accomplished ladies of the court of France, madame de Montausier, celebrated by Voiture in his “Letters.” A little before the restoration of Charles II. he became a gentleman-commoner of Queen’s-college in Oxford, where he lived in the provost’s lodge, and was entered in the public library, under the title of “Philosophic Studiosus,” in July 1660. He left the university without being matriculated, or any degree conferred on him; having, according to Wood, been by Dr. Barlow, reconciled to the Protestant Religion, which he bad a little before deserted in his travels. He afterwards entered himself of the Middle Temple; but, making his first appearance in town in a reign when wit and gaiety were the favourite distinctions, he soon quitted the dry study of the law, and pursued things more agreeable to his own genius, as well as to the taste of the age. As nothing was likely to succeed better than dramatic performances, especially comedies, he applied himself to the writing of these and in about the space of ten years published four: “Love in a Wood, or St. James’s Park,” in 1672; “The Gentleman-Dancing-Master,” 1673; “Plain Dealer,” in 1678; and “Country-Wife,” in 1683. These were collected and printed together in 1712, 8vo.

Besides the plays abovementioned, he published a volume of poems in 1704, folio, of very inferior merit; and in 1728, his “Posthumous Works in prose and verse” were published by Theobald, in octavo. His curious correspondence with Pope may be seen in that poet’s works, with many anecdotes of Wycherley, who appears to have been a libertine through the whole course of his life; nor are his works free from the licentiousness, so much encouraged when he was the favourite of Charles and James II.

, commonly called the Apostle of the Indies, was born April 7, 1506, in Navarre, at the castle of Xavier. His father, Don John de Jasso, was one of the chief counsellors of state to John III. king of Navarre. Among their numerous family of children, of which Francis was the youngest, those that were elder bore the surname of Azpilcueta, the younger that of Xavier. Francis was sent to the university of Paris, in the eighteenth year of his age. He was afterwards admitted master of arts, and tauglit philosophy in the college of Beauvais, with an intention of entering the society of the Sorbonne; but having formed a friendship with Ignatius Loyola, he renounced all establishments, and became one of his first disciples. Xavier then went to Italy, where he attended the sick at the hospital of incurables at Venice, and was ordained priest. Some time after, John III. king of Portugal, having applied to St. Ignatius for some missionaries to preach the gospel in the East Indies, Xavier was chosen for that purpose, who, embarking at Lisbon, April 7, 1541, arrived at Goa, May 6, 1542. In a short time he spread the knowledge of the Christian religion, or, to speak more properly, of the Romish system, over a great part of the continent, and in several of the islands of that remote region. Thence in 1549 he passed into Japan, and laid there, with amazing rapidity, the foundation 'of the famous church which flourished during so many years in that vast empire. His indefatigable zeal prompted him to attempt the conversion of the Chinese, and with this view he embarked for that extensive and powerful kingdom, but died on an island in sight of China, Dec. 2, 1552. The body of this missionary lies interred at Goa, where it is worshipped with the highest marks of devotion. There is also a magnificent church at Cotati dedicated to Xavier, to whom the inhabitants of the Portuguese settlements pay the most devout tribute of veneration and worship. In 1747, the late king of Portugal obtained for Xavier, or rather for his memory, the title of protector of the Indies, from Benedict XIV. There are two lives of this saint, the one by Tursellinus, and the other by Bouhours, but the latter is little more than a translation from Latin into French of the former, dressed out in a more elegant manner. They both contain the miracles ascribed to this saint, which are among the most absurd and incredible in the annals of superstition. For this, however, Xavier, who appears to have been only a zealous enthusiast, ought not to be censured. He claims no miracles for himself, nor were any such heard of for many years after his death; on the contrary, in his correspondence with his friends, during his mission, he not only makes no mention of miracles, but disclaims all supernatural assistance. For the miracles, therefore, his biographers must be accountable, and we know of no evidence they have produced in confirmation of them. The life of Xavier is not unknown in this country. No less a person than our celebrated poet Dryden published a translation of Bouhours’s Life of Xavier, in 1688, in consequence qf the queen of James II. having, when she solicited a son, recommended herself to Xavier as her patron saint. Besides this, a Wesleyan preacher published, in 1764, anabridgment of Bouhours, as if he had intended to assist bishop Lavington in proving the alliance between the enthusiasm of the methodists and papists. Xavier’s Letters were published at Paris, 1631, 8vo, with some lesser works ascribed to him.

, a divine and poet, the sixth son of Mr. John Yalden, of Sussex, was born at Exeter in 1671. Having been educated in the grammar-school belonging to Magdalen college, Oxford, he was, in 1690, at the age of nineteen, admitted commoner of Magdalen Hall, under the tuition of Josiah Pullen, a man whose name is still remembered in the university. He became next year one of the scholars of Magdalen college, where he was distinguished by a declamation, which Dr. Hough, the president, happening to attend, thought too good to be the speaker’s. Some time after, the doctor, finding him a little irregularly busy in the library, set him an exercise, for punishment; and, that he might not be deceived by any artifice, locked the door. Yalden, as it happened, had been latelyreading on the subject given, and produced with little difficulty a composition which so pleased the president that he told him his former suspicions, and promised to favour him. Among his contemporaries in the college were Addison and Sacheverell, men who were in those times friends, and who both adopted Yalden to their intimacy. Yalden continued throughout his life to think, as probably he thought at first, yet did not lose the friendship of Addison. When Namur was taken by king William, Yalden made an ode . He wrote another poem, on the death of the duke of Gloucester. In 1700 he became fellow of the college, and next year entering into orders, was presented by the society with the living of Willoughby, in Warwickshire, consistent with his fellowship, and chosen lecturer of moral philosophy, a very honourable office. On the accession of queen Anne he wrote another poem; and is said, by the author of the “Biographia,” to have declared himself one of the party who had the distinction of high-churchmen. In 1706 he was received into the family of the duke of Beaufort. Next year he became D. D. and soon after he resigned his fellowship and lecture; and, as a token of his gratitude, gave the college a picture of their founder. The duke made him rector of Chalton and Cleanville, two adjoining towns and benefices in Hertfordshire; and he had the prebends, or sinecures, of Deans, Hains, and Pendles, in Devonshire. In 1713 he was chosen preacher of Bridewell Hospital, upon the resignation of Dr. Atterbury. From this time he seems to have led a quiet and inoffensive life, till the clamour was raised about Atterbury’s plot. Every loyal eye was on the watch for abettors or partakers of the horrid conspiracy; and Dr. Yalden, having some acquaintance with the bishop, and being familiarly conversant with Kelly his secretary, fell under suspicion, and was taken into custody. Upon his examination he was charged with a dangerous correspondence with Kelly. The correspondence he acknowledged; but maintained that it had no treasonable tendency. His papers were seized; but nothing was found that could fix a crime upon him, except two words in his pocket-book, f< thorough- paced doctrine.“This expression the imagination of his examiners had impregnated with treason; and the doctor was enjoined to explain them. Thus pressed, he told them that the words had lain unheeded in his pocket-book from the time of queen Anne, and 'that he was ashamed to give an account of them; but the truth was, that he had gratified his curiosity one day by hearing Daniel Burgess in the pulpit, and these words were a memorial hint of a remarkable sentence by which he warned his congregation to” beware of thorough-paced doctrine, that doctrine, which, coming in at one ear, paces through the head, and goes out at the other.“Nothing worse than this appearing in his papers, and no evidence arising against him, he was set at liberty. It will not be supposed that a man of this character attained high dignities in the church; but he still retained the friendship, and frequented the conversation of a very numerous and splendid body of acquaintance. He died July 16, 1736, in the sixty-sixth year of his age. Of his poems which have been admitted into Dr. Johnson’s collection, his” Hymn to Darkness“seems to be his best performance, and is, for the most part, imagined with great vigour, and expressed with great propriety. His” Hymn to Light" is not equal to the other. On his other poems it is sufficient to say that they deserve perusal, though they are not always exactly polished, though the rhymes are sometimes very ill sorted, and though his faults seem rather the omissions of idleness than the negligences of enthusiasm.

, a very celebrated and popular English poet, was born at Upham, near Winchester, in June 1681. He was the son of Edward Young, at that time fellow of Winchester college, and rector of Upham: who was the son of John Young of Woodhay, in Berkshire, styled by W T ood, gentleman. In September 1682 the poet’s father was collated to the prebend of Gillingham Minor, in the church of Sarum, by bishop Ward. When Ward’s faculties were impaire'd by age, his duties were necessarily performed by others. We learn from Wood, that at a visitation of bishop Sprat, July 12, 1686, the prebendary preached a Latin sermon, afterwards published, with which the bishop was so pleased, that he told the chapter he was concerned to find the preacher had one of the worst prebends in their church. Some time after this, in consequence of his merit and reputation, and of the interest of lord Bradford, to whom, in 1702, he dedicated two volumes of sermons, he was appointed chaplain to king William and queen Mary, and preferred to the, deanery of Salisbury, where he died in 1705, in the sixtythird of his age.

In April 1714, Young took his degree of bachelor of civil laws, and his doctor’s degree in June 1719. His college appears to have set a value on his merit, both as a scholar and a poet, for in 1716, when the foundation of the present magnificent library of All-Souls was laid, he was appointed to speak the Latin oration, which, however, he desired to be omitted in the collection of his works published in 1741. It has been said, that when he first found himself independent, and his bAyri master at All-­Souls, he was not the ornament to religion and morality which he afterwards became. Yet he shewed a reverence for religion, and considerable warmth in defending it. The atheistical Tindal, who spent much of his time at All-­Souls, used to say, “The Other boys I can always answer, because I always know whence they have their arguments, which I have read an hundred times, but that fellow Young is continually pestering me with something of his own.”

As his connection with the proBigate duke of Wbarton has been thought a very objectionable part of his history, it is at least necessary to explain how it arose. His father had been well acquainted with lady Anne Wharton, the first wife of the marquis of Wharton, and she, who was celebrated by Burnet and Waller for her poetical talents, added some verses to dean Young’s visitation sermon. Wharton, after the dean’s death, was kind to Young, but died in 1715. Next year the young marquis, afterwards duke, began his travels, and the year following went to Ireland, and it is conjectured that our poet went with him. Whether this was the case or not, it is certain that he looked up to him afterwards as his patron.

, an eminent Italian mathematician, was born at Bologna in January 1692, and was educated among the Jesuits. His first pursuit was the law, which he soon exchanged for philosophy, and particularly mathematics. In philosophy he was at first a Cartesian, but when sir Isaac Newtbn’s discoveries were divulged, he was among the first to acknowledge his great superiority, particularly in optics and astronomy. He was made librarian and secretary to the academy of Bologna, and wrote a Latin history of its transactions continued down to 1766, and he also contributed many mathematical papers of great importance. But his talents were not confined to philosophy and mathematics: he was also a distinguished poet both in the Tuscan and Latin languages, and in the latter, was thought a successful imitator of Catullus, Tibullus, Ovid, and Virgil. After a life honourably spent in those various pursuits, which procured him great fame, he died Dec. 25, 1777. He published a great many works, both in Italian and Latin, which are enumerated by Fabroni.

, a learned poet, critic, and antiquary, was born in 1669, and descended from <an illustrious Venetian family, which had been long settled in the island of Candia. He early applied himself to literature, and the study of Italian history and antiquities. In 1696 he instituted at Venice the academy Degli Animosi, and was the editor of the “Giornale de‘ Letterati d’ltalia,” of which he published thirty volumes between the years 1710 and 1719. His first musical drama, “L'Inganni Felici,” was performed at Venice in 1695, and between that time and his quitting Vienna, whither he was invited by the emperor Charles VI. in 1718, he produced forty-six operas, and seventeen oratorios, besides eighteen dramas, which he wrote jointly with Pariati. His dramatic works were collected and published at Venice in 1744, in 10 vols. 8vo, by count Gozzi; and in 1752 his letters were printed in 3 vols. by Forcellini, in which Dr. Burney, whom we principally follow in. this article, says, much sound learning and criticism are manifested on various subjects. But one of the most useful of his critical labours seems to have been his commentary on the “Bibl. dell' Eloquenza Italiana di Foutanini,” which was published in 1753, with a preface by his friend Forcellini, chiefly dictated, however, by Zeno himself, just before his death. After he was engaged as imperial laureat, he set out from Venice for Vienna in July 1718, but having been overturned in a chaise, the fourth day of his journey, he had the misfortune to break his leg, and was confined at an inn in the little town of Ponticaba, nearTrevisa, till September. He arrived at Vienna, the 14th of that month, “safe,” as he says, “if not sound and cured,” after twelve days of excessive suffering on the road. Most of the dramas, sacred and secular, which he wrote for the imperial court, were set by Caldara, a grave composer and sound harmonist, to whose style Zeno seems to have been partial. But thii excellent antiquary and critic seems never to have been satisfied with his own poetical abilities. So early as 1722, in writing to his brother from Vienna, he says, “I find more and more every day, that I grow old, not only in body, but in mind; and that the business of writing verses is no longer a fit employment for me.” And afterwards he expressed a wish that he might be allowed a partner in his labours, and was so just and liberal as to mention the young Metastasio as a poet worthy to be honoured with -the emperor’s notice. If the musical dramas of Apostolo Zeno are compared with those of his predecessors and contemporaries, they will be found infinitely superior to them in conduct, regularity, character, sentiment, and force. But Metastasio’s refined sentiments, selection of words, and varied and mellifluous measures, soon obscured the theatrical glory of Zeno, who, after the arrival of his young colleague, seems to have attempted nothing but oratorios.

In 1731 he returned to Venice, and his place at court was entirely supplied by Metastasio, but the salaries of poet and historiographer were still continued to him. Zeno corresponded with the learned of Italy, and other countries; was an able antiquary, and had made an excellent collection of literary anecdotes. His candour, sincerity, affability, and other amiable qualities, rendered him universally esteemed, and highly agreeable in society. He died at Venice, November 11, 1750, in the eighty-second year of his age, and was buried at the convent of the Dominicans of the strict observance, to whom he had left his library. He is universally allowed to have possessed great talents for dramatic poetry, and is the first Italian poet who gave his countrymen good rules for tragedy, and taught them to consider music only as an embellishment. He discovers genius, spirit, and feeling; but his style, as has been remarked, is far inferior to that of Metastasio. Zeno also left a great number of works on Antiquities, &c. “Dissertationi Vossiani,” 3 vols. 8vo “Letters,” Venice, 1752, 2 vols. 4to.