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

, D.D. one of the most illustrious names in modern literature, and one of the most eminent of modern historians, was born in 1721, at Borthwick, in the county of Mid-Lothian, where his father was then minister; and received the first rudiments of his education at the school of Daikeith. In 1733, when his father removed to Edinburgh, on being appointed minister of the old Gray-friars’ church, tie placed his son at the university, where his industry and application appear to have been of that extraordinary and spontaneous kind, which bespeaks a thirst for knowledge, and is a pledge of future eminence. From a very early period of life he employed every means to overcome the peculiarities of a provincial idiom, and accustom his pen to the graces of the best English style. For this purpose he frequently exercised himself in the practice of translation, and was about to have prepared for the press a version of Marcus Antoninus, when he was anticipated by an anonymous publication at Glasgow. Nor did he bestow less pains on acquiring a fluent and correct eloquence, associating for that purpose with some fellowstudents and others, who assembled periodically for extempore discussion and debate. Thus in all his early pursuits he deviated knowingly, or was insensibly directed into those paths which led to the high fame he afterwards enjoyed.

His studies at the university being finished, he was licensed to preach in 1741, and in 1743 was presented to the living of Gladsmuir, in East Lothian, by John, second earl of Hopeton. This preferment, although the whole emoluments did not exceed 100l. a year, was singularly opportune, as his father and mother died about this time, leaving a family of six daughters and a younger son unprovided for, whom our author removed to Gladsmuir, and maintained with decency and frugality, until they were settled in the world. During the rebellion in 1745, when the capital of Scotland was in danger of falling into the hands of the rebels, the state of public affairs appeared so critical that he thought himself justified in laying aside for a time the pacific habits of his profession, and in quitting his parochial residence at Gladsmuir, to join the volunteers of Edinburgh; and, when at last it was determined that the city should be surrendered, he was one of the small band who repaired to Haddington, and offered their services to the commander-in-chief of his majesty’s forces. He returned, however, as soon as peace was restored, to Gladsmuir, and in 1751 married his cousin, miss Mary Nesbit, daughter of the Rev. Mr. Nesbit, o e of the mU nisters of Edinburgh, He now applied himself to his pastoral duties, which he discharged with a punctuality that procured him the veneration and attachment of his parishioners, and as his eloquence in the pulpit began to attract the notice of the neighbouring clergy, this circumstance, no doubt, prepared the way for that influence in the church which he afterwards attained. In 1755 he published “A Sermon preached before the Society for promoting Christian knowledge,” which has been deservedly admired, and encouraged by a sale of five editions, besides a translation into German. He had some time before this made his appearance in the General Assembly of the church of Scotland, and had taken an active part in their proceedings. In 1757, he distinguished himself in the defence of Mr. John Home, minister of Athelstoneford, who had written the tragedy of “Douglas.” This was considered as so bold a departure from the austerity expected in a presbyterian divine, that the author, and some of his brethren, who had witnessed the play in the theatre, were prosecuted in the ecclesiastical court. On this occasion Dr. Robertson contributed much, by his eloquence, to the mildness of the sentence in which the prosecution terminated; and his conduct was no inconsiderable proof of his general candour, as he had never himself entered within the walls of a play-house, avoiding such an indulgence as inconsistent with the scruis circumspection which he maintained in his private character.

In the mean time, his leisure hours had been so well employed that, in 1758, he went to London to concert measures for the publication of his first celebrated work, “The History of Scotland during the reigns of queen Mary and king James VI. till his accession to the crown of England; with a review of the Scottish history previous to that period; and an Appendix, containing original papers,” 2 vols. 4to. The plan of this work is said to have been formed soon after his settlement at Gladsinuir. It was accordingly published on the 1st of February, 1759, and so eager and extensive was the sale, that before the end of that month, he was desired by his bookseller to prepare for a, second edition. “It was regarded,” says his biographer, “as an attempt towards a species of composition that had been cultivated with very little success in this island; and accordingly it entitles the author, not merely to the praise which would now be due to an historian of equal eminence, but to a high rank among those original and leading minds that form and guide the taste of a nation.” Contemporary puhlications abounded in its praises, but it would be superfluous to coiiect options in favour of a work familiarized to the public by so ^any editions. Among the most judicious of the literati of that period who were the first to perceive and predict the reputation our author was about to establish, were, hon. Horace Walpole, bishop Warburton, lord Royston, the late sir Gilbert Elliot, Dr. Birch, Dr. Douglas, late bishop of Salisbury, Dr. John Biair, late prebendary of Westminster, and Mr. Hume. It may suffice to add, that fourteen editions of this work were published in the author’s life-time.

While the “History of Scotland” was in the press, Dr. Robertson removed, with his family, from Gladsmuir to Edinburgh, in consequence of a presentation which he had received to one of the churches of that city. His preferments now multiplied rapidly. In 1759, he was appointed chaplain of Stirling castle; in 1761, one of his majesty’s chaplains in ordinary for Scotland; and in 1762 he was chosen principal of the university of Edinburgh. Two years afterward, the office of king’s historiographer for Scotland (with a salary of 200l. a year) was revived in his favour. About this time, likewise, it appears that he was solicited to become a member of the church of England, by friends who considered that establishment as more likely to reward his merit than the highest emoluments his own church could afford. He resisted this temptation, however, with a decision which prevented its being farther urged, although it appears at the same time, from his correspondence, that he would not have been sorry to accept any situation which might have relieved him from the duties of his pastoral office, and afford him the power of applying himself wholly to his studies. His refusal, therefore, as his biographer justly observes, “became the consistency and dignity of his character,” and it is greatly to his honour, that whatever offices or wealth he acquired throughout life, were the fair reward of his own exertions. He was, however, about this time, desirous of profiting by the indulgence the public had shewn him, and consulted his friends relative to the choice of another historical subject. A history of England was strongly recommended, and encouragement promised from the most exalted source of honour. His majesty was pleased to express a wish to see a history of England from his pen, and the earl of Bute promised him every assistance that could be derived from the records in possession of government, and held out the most flattering views of encouragement in other respects. At first Dr. Robertson was averse to this scheme, as interfering with the plan of Hume, with whom, notwithstanding the contrariety of their sentiments, both in religion and politics, he lived in the greatest friendship; but afterwards, wben the royal patronage was so liberally tendered, appears to have inclined to the undertaking. This perhaps cannot be better expressed than in his own words. “The case, I now think, is entirely changed. His (Hume’s) history will have been published several years before any work of mine on the same subject can appear: its first run will not be marred by any jostling with me, and it will have taken that station in the literary system which belongs to it. This objection, therefore, which I thought, and still think, so weighty at that time, makes no impression on me at present, and I can now justify my undertaking the English history, to myself, to the world, and to him. Besides, our manner of viewing the same subject is so different or peculiar, that (as was the case in our last books) both may maintain their own rank, have their own partizans, and possess their own merit, without hurting each other.”

What “station in the literary system” Hume’s history might have occupied, if Dr. Robertson had executed his intention, it is impossible to conjecture. It is certain, however, that after a lapse of nearly half a century no work has appeared which can be at all compared to Hume’s, in jrespect to popularity, or rather that commanding influence which a work of established reputation attains, notwithstanding any defects which criticism or superior opportunities of knowledge may point out. The contest between two such writers would have been a noble object of curiosity; and to have been so near it, as the world once was, may yet be felt as a severe disappointment.

After more deliberation, however, Dr. Robertson determined to relinquish this scheme, and to undertake the “History of Charles V.” which, indeed, he had begun before the other plan was so strongly recommended. His character as a historian now stood so high that this new production was expected with the utmost impatience, nor was that expectation disappointed. The preliminary dissertation, under the unassuming title of an “Introduction to the History of Charles V.” is particularly valuable as an introduction to the history of modern Europe, and suggests in every page matter of speculation to the politician and the philosopher. The whole appeared under the title of “The History of the reign of the Emperor Charles V. with a View of the Progress of Society in Europe, from the subversion of the Roman Empire to the beginning of the sixteenth century,” 1769, 3 vols. 4-to.

After an interval of eight years, Dr. Robertson produced his “History of America,” 1777, 2 vols. 4to, in undertaking which his original intention was only to complete his account of the great events connected with the reign of Charles V.; but perceiving, as he advanced, that a history of America, confined solely to the operations and concerns of the Spaniards, would not be likely to excite a very general interest, he resolved to include in his plan the transactions of all the European nations in the New World. The origin and progress of the British empire there, however, he destined for the subject of one entire volume, but afterwards abandoned, or rather suspended the execution of this part of his design, as he was of opinion that during a civil war between Great Britain and her colonies, inquiries and speculations concerning ancient forms of policy and laws, which no longer existed, could not be interesting. It would be superfluous to say how much this work enlarged his fame, unless, indeed, which is no hyperbole, we consider the fame arising from his former works as incapable of enlargement. He treated a subject here, which demanded all his abilities, and afforded a full scope for his genius, and he proved how eminently he could excel in splendid, romantic, and poetical delineations, with the originals of which he could not be supposed to have much interest. This work, however, laid him more open to censure than any of his former. The world had become more critical, and from having enjoyed the excellence of his histories of Scotland and of Charles V. more fastidious; and perhaps the dread of his acknowledged name had in some degree been abated by time. Besides, it was impossible by any force of argument to vindicate the disposition he shews to palliate or to veil the enormities of the Spaniards in their American conquests. This was the more unaccountable in an author whose writings in general are most friendly to the interests of humanity, and who in his previous researches and inquiries after information, lay under no extraordinary obligaiions to the Spanish court. This blemish in his history was soon followed by a compliment which shews too evidently the light in which it was viewed in Spain. He Was elected a member of the Royal Academy of History at Madrid, “in testimony of their approbation of the industry and care wiih which he has applied to the study of Spanish history, and as a recompense for his. merit in baling contributed so much to illustrate and spread the knowledge of it in foreign countries.” The academy at the same time appointed one of its members to translate the History of America into Spanish, but the government put a stop to the undertaking. It may here be introduced, that as these volumes did not complete Dr. Robertson’s original design, he announced in his preface his intention to resume the subject at a future period. A fragment of this intended work, entitled “Two additional chapters of the History of America,” 4to, was published after his death.

In consequence of the interruption of Dr. Robertson’s plans, which was produced by the American revolution, he was led to think of some other subject which might, in the mean time, give employment to his studious leisure. Many of his friends suggested the history of Great Britain from the Revolution to the accession of the house of Hanover; and he appears to have entertained some thoughts of acceding to their wishes. Mr. Gibbon, with whom he was in the habit of intimate correspondence, recommended to him to write a history of the Protestants in France. What answer he returned to this is not known; nor have we learned what the circumstances were which induced him to lay aside his plan with respect to the history of England. For some time, however, he seems to have relinquished all thoughts of writing any more for the publick. His circumstances were now independent, he was approaching to the age of sixty, with a constitution considerably impaired by a sedentary life. He retired from the business of the General Assembly about the year 1780; and, for seven or eight years, divided the hours which he could spare from his professional duties between the luxury of reading and the conversation of his friends. To this literary leisure the public is indebted for a valuable performance, of which the materials seem almost insensibly to have swelled to a volume, long after his most intimate friends imagined that he had renounced all tt ughts of the press. The “Historical Disquisition concerning the knowledge which the Ancients had of India, and the Progress of Trade with that country prior to the discovery of the Cape of Good Hope,” 1791, 4to, took its rise, as he himself informs us, from the perusal of major Rennet’s excellent memoir for illustrating his map of Hindostan. This suggested to his mind the idea of examining, more fully than he had done in his History of America, into the knowledge which the ancients had of India: and of considering what is certain, what is obscure, and what is fabulous in their accounts of that remote country. It is divided into four sections. He published this work in his sixty-eighth year; and it appears to have been written in about twelve months. Although less amusing to common readers than his former works, and become less interesting wpon the whole, in consequence of the discoveries since brought to light in Asia, it is not inferior in diligence of research, soundness of judgment, or perspicuity of method.

With this publication his historical labours closed labours which, for extent and variety, have not been equalled by any writer in our times. All the essential merits of a historian were his; fidelity, the skill of narrative, the combination of philosophy with detail, so seldom attempted, and generally so unsuccessfully executed, and the power of giving an uncommon interest to his personages and events in the mind of the reader. His style has been iSo justly characterized by his biographer, that we may, without hesitation, recommend it as a decision from which it will not be easy to appeal. “The general strain of his composition,” says professor Stewart, “is flowing, equal, and majestic; harmonious beyond that of most English writers, yet seldom deviating, in quest of harmony, into inversion, redundancy, or affectation. If, in some passages, it may be thought that the effect might have been heightened by somewhat more of variety in the structure and cadence of his periods, it must be recollected, that this criticism involves an encomium on the beauty of his style; for it is only when the ear is habitually gratified, that the rhythm of composition becomes an object of the reader’s attention. The same judicious critic has re* marked, that,” perhaps, on the whole, it will be found that of all his performances Charles V. is that which unites the various requisites of good writing in the greatest degree. The style is more natural and flowing than that of the History of Scotland: while, at the same time, idiomatical phrases are introduced with so sparing and timid a hand, that it is easy to perceive the author’s attention to correctness was not sensibly diminished. In the History of America, although it contains many passages equal, if not superior, to anything else in his writings, the composition does not seem to me to be so uniformly polished as that of his former works; nor does it always possess, in the same degree, the recommendations of conciseness and simplicity."

In his own country, Dr. Robertson’s reputation was considerably enhanced by his conduct as a leading member of the General Assembly of the church of Scotland, the proceedings of which he regulated, in difficult times and trying emergencies, with great political skill, address, and elo* quence, for nearly thirty years. In his pastoral office he was also very assiduous, preaching once every Sunday until a short time before his death. Of his sermons, one only has been printed; but their general merit may be understood from the character given by his colleague, the late Dr. Erskine: “They were so plain,” says this candid and venerable man, “that the most illiterate might easily understand them, and yet so correct and elegant that they could not incur their censure whose taste was more refined. For several years before his death, he seldom wrote his sermons fully, or exactly committed his older sermons to memory though, ha>l I not learned this from hi;p.self, I should not have suspected it; such was the variety and fitness of his illustrations, the accuracy > of his method, and the propriety of his style.” To his other merits may likewise be added, the diligence, address, and ability, with which he studied and promoted the interests of the university, as Principal, which will be long remembered to his honGtir. In all his public characters he had the happy talent of gaining influence without the appearance of effort, and of conciliating differences without departing from consistency, or endangering friendship, Ah his pursuits were those of a great, a steady, and a persevering mind. His private and social virtues, which are also highly spoken of, no doubt contribute to the commanding celebrity of his public character.

In 1791, his health began apparently to decline, and on this he retired to, and for some time was enabled to enjoy, the placid comforts of a country residence, where, however, his disorder terminated in his death on the llth of June, 1793, in the seventy -first year of his age. He left a widow, three sons (the eldest an eminent lawyer at the Scotch bar, and the two younger embraced a military life), and two daughters, one married to Mr. Brydone, the traveller, and the other is the widow of John Russell, esq. clerk to the signet.

It yet remains to be mentioned, as a part of Dr. Robertson’s literary history, that in 1776, he reviewed, and made considerable alterations, in his “History of Scotland.” He took the same pains, in 1778, with his “History of America;” and these “additions and corrections” were sold separately. His “History of Scotland,” and that of "Charles V.*' were translated into French. The honour conferred upon him by the Royal Academy of History at Madrid has already been noticed. In 1781, he was elected one of the foreign members of the Academy of Sciences at Padua; and in 1783 one of the foreign members of the Imperial Academy of Sciences at St. Petersburgh. The late empress Catherine, a warm admirer of his works, sent him a present of a very handsome gold enamelled snuff-box, richly set with diamonds. These honours, however, can scarcely be put in competition with, because they were only the natural consequence of, a higher degree of fame over all Europe, than almost any modern writer has enjoyed, and of fame which no rivalship has been enabled to impair.

, an eminent French mathematician, was born in 1602, at Roberval, a parish in the diocese of Beauvais. He was first professor of mathematics at the college of Maitre-Gervais, and afterwards at the college-royal. A similarity of taste connected him with Gassendi andMorin; the latter of whom he succeeded in the mathematical chair at the royal college? without quitting, however, that of Ramus. Roberval made experiments on the Torricellian vacuum: he invented two new kinds of balance, one of which was proper for weighing air; and made many other curious experiments. He was one of the first members of the ancient academy of sciences of 1666; but died in 1675, at seventy-thre years of age. His principal works are, 1. “A treatise on Mechanics.” 2. A work entitled “Aristarchus Samos.” Several memoirs inserted in the volumes ofl the academy of sciences of 1666; viz. 1. Experiments concerning the pressure of the air. 2. Observations on the composition of motion, and on the tangents of curve lines. 3. The recognition of equations. 4. The geometrical resolution of plane and cubic equations. 5. Treatise on indivisibles. 6. On the Trochoicl, or Cycloid. 7. A letter to father Mersenne. 8. Two letters from Torricelli. 9. A new kind of balance. Robervallian Lines were his, for the transformation of figures. They bound spaces that are infinitely extended in length, which are nevertheless equal to other spaces that are terminated on all sides. The abbot Gallois, in the Memoirs of the Royal Academy, anno 1693, observes, that the method of transforming figures, explained at the latter end of RobervaPs treatise of indivisibles, was the same with that afterwards published by James Gregory, in his Geometria Ujiiversalis, and also by Barrow in his LectiotteV Geometric^; and that, by a letter of Torricelli, it appears, that Roberval was the inventor of this manner of transforming figures, by means of certain lines, which Torricelli therefore called Robervaliian Lines. He adds, that it is highly probable, that J. Gregory first learned the method in the journey he made to Padua in 1668, the method itself having been known in Italy from 164-6, though the book was not published till 1692. This account David Gregory has endeavoured to refute, in vindication of his uncle James. His answer is inserted in the Philos. Trans, of 1694, and the abbot rejoined in the French Memoirs of the Academy of 1703.

, the most ferocious of those tyrants which the French revolution produced, was born at Arras in 1759, where his father was a lawyer, a man of character and knowledge in his profession, but so improvident as to die insolvent, and leave his two sons, of whom Maximilian was the eldest, in poverty. They soon, however, found a generous patron in De Conzie, bishop of Arras, who in a manner adopted them, but honoured Maximilian with his particular care, and after providing him with school education, sent him to Paris, and procured him an exhibition in the college of Louis Le Grand. The manner in which Robespierre conducted himself here, answered the expectation of his protector. He was assiduous and successful in his studies, and obtained many of the yearly prizes. There was nothing, however, about him, which indicated his future destiny. Being an apt scholar, it might be thought that he would make a figure in the world; but we are told that even this was not the case, and that his instructors discovered neither in his conversation nor his actions any trace of that propensity, which could lead them to conjecture that his glory would exceed the bounds of the college. When he had, however, attained the age of sixteen or seventeen, he was advised to study the law; and this he pursued, under the auspices of a Mons. Ferrieres, but displayed no extraordinary enthusiasm for the profession. He had neither perseverance, address, nor eloquence, and, according to one of his biographers, his consciousness of inferiority to those who were making a great figure at the bar, gave him an air of gloominess and dissatisfaction. It was at first determined, that he should practise before the parliament of Paris, but this scheme was never carried into execution, for he returned to his native province, and was admitted an advocate in the supreme council of Artois. About this time he is said to have published, in 1783, a treatise on electricity, in order to remove the vulgar prejudices against conductors. In this piece he introduced a laboured eloge on the character of Louis XVI.; but the subject of his next literary performance was yet more remarkable; it was against death as a punishment, and in this he reproaches all modern governments for permitting such a punishment to remain on their codes, and even doubts the right claimed by society to cut off the life of an individual!

Such were the sentiments and situation of this man, when the revolution took place, and raised him, and hundreds equally obscure, and perhaps more contemptible, into some degree of consequence. Robespierre, however inferior hitherto in fame, was conscious that he had many of the materials about him that were wanted at this time. Either he actually had good qualities, which is scarcely credible, or by the most consummate hypocrisy, he persuaded the people that he was a steady and upright man. He was elected a representative to the states general, but although he attached himself by turns to the faction that seemed uppermost, he remained long in a state of obscurity. He was considered as a passionate hot-headed young man, whose chief merit consisted in his being warm in the cause of liberty. He had, we are told, another merit, that of bringing the term aristocrat into common use, which afterwards became the watchword of his proscriptions. He tried, too, a journal called “L'Union, ou Journal de la Liberté,” which was conducted with extreme violence. But it was suited to the people who read it, and Robespierre obtained the surname of the Incorruptible, from an affectation of independence, and continually declaiming against courtly corruption.

The Jacobin club, however, raised Robespierre to power and celebrity; they even proclaimed “that the national assembly had ruined France, and Robespierre alone could save it.” It was during the national convention that he attained the summit of his ambition, if indeed he knew what that was. In the first legislature, he joined the patriots, as they were called; in the second he declared for the republicans, and in both the party to which he attached himself proved victorious. In the third, the national convention, he carried all before him; the commune of Paris, the Jacobin club, and even the convention itself, were filled with his creatures, and became obedient to his commands. A scene of blood followed, which exceeded the proscriptions of Sylla and Marius. Men and women of all ranks perished indiscriminately. Suspected persons, that is, those either dreaded or hated by this monster and his accomplices, were arrested; domiciliary visits awakened the sleeping victims of persecution to misery and destruction while revolutionary tribunals, as they were called, condemned them by scores, unpitied and even unheard. The laws were no longer maintained; the idea of a constitution became intolerable; all power was concentrated in a junto, called the Committee of Public Safety, which regulated every thing, absolved or tried, spoiled or enriched, murdered or saved; and this committee was entirely reguJated by the will of Robespierre, who governed it by means of his creatures, St. Just and Couthon. In the short space of two years, nearly 3000 persons perished by the guillotine in Paris only. Even the revolutionary forms were thought too dilatory; the execution of four or five in a day did not satiate Robespierre’s vengeance; the murder of thirty or forty was demanded, and obtained; the streets became deluged with blood; canals were necessary to convey it to the Seine; and experiments were actually made at one of the prisons with an instrument for cutting off half a score heads at a single motion. Among the victims of this tyrant, it ought not to be forgot, that the greater part of those men perished, who had been the means of revolutionizing the people, and so deluding them with the pretences of liberty, that they could calmly exchange the mild government of a Louis XVI. for that of a Robespierre. In this retributive justice was guided by a superior hand.

At length Robespierre began to be dreaded even by his own accomplices, while the nation at large, roused from its infatuation, looked eagerly forward to the destruction of this monster. In this, however, the nation at large had no share. It was the work of his accomplices; it was still one faction destroying another, and although a second Robespierre did not immediately rise, the way remained open to one whose tyrannical ambition was not satisfied with France as his victim. The first storm against Robespierre burst in the convention; and after exercising its violence as all preceding storms of that kind had, Robespierre was arrested on July 9, 1794, and next day was led to execution, amidst the execrations of the people. His fall, it has been well observed, was the triumph of fear rather than of justice; and the satisfaction with which it must be contemplated, was incomplete, because a few monsters even worse than himself were among the foremost in sending him to the scaffold. His punishment, however, was as signal as his crimes. His under jaw was shattered with a pistol shot, either by himself in an ineffectual attempt at suicide, or by a gendarme in the struggle; it was bound up with a slight dressing as he lay in the lobby of the convention, he wished to wipe away the blood which filled his mouth, they gave him a bloody cloth, and as he pushed it from him, they paid to him “It is blood it is what thou likest!” There he lay on one of the benches, and, in his agony of mind and body, clenched one of his thighs through his torn clothes with such force that his nails entered his own flesh, and were rimmed round with blood. He was carried to the same dungeon which Hebert, and Chaumette, and Danton, had successively occupied the gaoler knocked him about without ceremony, and when he made signs to one of them (for he could not speak) to bring him pen and ink, the man made answer—“What dost thou want with it? is it to write to thy Maker? thou wilt see him presently!” He was placed in a cart between Henriot and Couthon; the shops, and the windows, and the house-tops were crowded with rejoicing spectators to see him pass, and as the cart proceeded, shouts of exultation went before it, and surrounded it, and followed its way. His head was wrapt in a bloody cloth which bound up his shattered jaw, so that his pale and livid countenance was but half seen. The horsemen who escorted him shewed him to the spectators with the point of their sabres. The mob stopt him before the house in which he lived; some women danced before the cart, and one of them cried out to him, “Descend to hell with the curses of all wives and of all mothers” The executioner, when preparing for the performance of his office, roughly tore off the bandage from his wound; Robespierre then uttered a dreadful cry, his under jaw fell from the upper, and the head while he was yet living exhibited as ghastly a spectacle as when a few minutes afterwards Sampson, the executioner, holding it by the hair, exhibited it to the multitude.

In this wretched man’s person, there was little to recommend him. His figure, ill-delineated, without regularity, without proportion, without grace in the outline, was something above the middle size. He had in his hands, shoulders, neck, and eyes, a convulsive motion. His physiognomy, his look was without expression. He carried on his livid countenance, and on his brow, which he often wrinkled, the traces of a choleric disposition. His manners were brutal, his gait was at once abrupt and heavy. The harsh inflections of his voice struck the ear disagreeably; he screeched rather than spoke: a residence in the capital had not been able to overcome entirely the harshness of his articulation. In the pronunciation of many words his provincial accent was discoverable; and this deprived his speech of all melody.

Some have expressed their surprize that a man to whom nature hud thus been so niggardly, and whose mind owed so little to cultivation, should have acquired such an ascendancy; but a more minute acquaintance with the leading men in France during his time will remove much of this surprize. It has been said that Nero was not the worst man of his court; and it is certain that Robespierre was preceded, accompanied, and followed, by men who could have acted his part with equal inclination and facility, had they been placed in his circumstances.

, an English mathematician of great genius and eminence, was born at Bath in Somersetshire in 1707. His parents, who were quakers, were of low condition, and consequently neither able, from their circumstances, nor willing from their religious profession, to have him much instructed in that kind of learning which they are taught to despise as human. Yet he made an early and surprising progress in various branches of science and literature, in the mathematics particularly; and his friends, being desirous that he might continue his pursuits, and that his merit might not be buried in obscurity, wished that he could be properly recommended to teach this science in London. Accordingly, a specimen of his abilities was shewn to Dr. Pemberton, the author of the “View of Sir Isaac Newton’s Philosophy;” who conceiving a good opinion of the writer, for a farther trial of his proficiency, sent him some problems, which Robins solved very much to his satisfaction. He then came to London, where he confirmed the opinion which had been formed of his abilities and knowledge.

But though Robins was possessed of much more skill than is usually required in a common teacher, yet, being very young, it was thought proper that he should employ some time in perusing the best writers upon the sublimer parts of the mathematics before he undertook publicly the instruction of others. In this interval, besides improving himself in the modern languages, he had opportunities of reading in particular the works of Apollonius, Archimedes, Fermat, Huygens, De Witt, Slusius, James Gregory, Dr. Barrow, sir Isaac Newton, Dr. Taylor, and Mr. Cotes. These authors he readily understood without any assistance, of which he gave frequent proofs to his friends: one was, a demonstration of the last proposition of sir Isaac Newton’s treatise on quadratures, which was thought not undeserving a place in the “Philosophical Transactions,” No. 397, for 1727. Not long after, an opportunity offered of exhibiting to the public a specimen also of his knowledge in natural philosophy. The royal academy of sciences at Paris had proposed, among their prize-questions in 1724 and 1726, to demonstrate the laws. of motion in bodies impinging on one another. John Bernoulli here condescended to be a candidate; and, though his dissertation lost the reward, he appealed to the learned world by printing it in 1727; and, in it, endeavoured to establish Leibnitz’s opinion of the force of bodies in motion, from the effects of their striking against springing materials; as signor Poleni had before attempted to evince the same thing from experiments of bodies falling on soft and yielding substances. But as the insufficiency of Poleni’s arguments had been demonstrated in the “Philosophical Transactions,” No. 371, for 1722, so Robins published in the “Present State of the Republic of Letters,” for May 1728, a confutation of Bernoulli’s performance, which was allowed to be unanswerable.

Robins now began to take scholars, and about this time quitted the garb and profession of a quaker; but though he professed to teach the mathematics only, he would frequently assist particular friends in other matters; for, he was a man of universal knowledge: and, the confinement of his way of life not suiting his disposition, which was active, he gradually declined it, and adopted other pursuits that required more exercise. Hence he tried many laborious experiments in gunnery; believing, that the resistance of the air had a much greater influence on swift projectiles than was generally supposed. Hence he was led to consider those mechanic arts that depended on mathematical principles, in which he might employ his invention; as, the constructing of mills, the building of bridges, draining of fens, rendering of rivers navigable, and making of harbours. Among other arts of this kind, fortification very much engaged his attention; in which he met with opportunities of perfecting himself, by a view of the principal strong places of Flanders, in some journeys he made abroad with persons of distinction.

On his return home from one of these excursions, he found the learned here amused with Dr. Berkeley’s treatise, printed in 1734, entitled “The Analyst;” in which an examination was made in the grounds of the fluxionary method, and occasion taken thus to explode that method. Robins therefore was advised to clear up this affair, by giving a full and distinct account of sir Isaac Newton’s doctrines in such a manner as to obviate all the objections, without naming them, which had been advanced -by the author of “The Analyst;” and accordingly he published, in 1735, “A Discourse concerning the nature and certainty of sir Isaac Newton’s method of Fluxions, and of prime and ultimate ratios.” Some even of those who had written against “The Analyst,” taking exception at Robins’s manner of defending sir Isaac Newton’s doctrine, he afterwards wrote two or three additional discourses. In 1738, he defended sir Isaac Newton against an objection, contained in a note at the end of a Latin piece, called “Matho, sive Cosmotheoria puerilis,” written by Baxter, author of the “Inquiry into the Nature of the human Soul;” and, the year after, printed “Remarks” on Euler’s “Treatise of Motion,” on Smith’s “System of Optics,” and on Jurin’s “Discourse of distinct and indistinct Vision,” annexed to Dr. Smith’s work. In the mean time Robins’s performances were not confined to mathematical subjects: for, in 1739, there came out three pamphlets upon political affairs, which did him great honour. The first was entitled “Observations on the present Convention with Spain;” the second, “A Narrative of what passed in the Common Hall of the citizens of London, assembled for the election of a lord mayor;” the third, “An Address to the Electors and other free subjects of Great Britain, occasioned by the late Succession; in which is contained a particular account of all our negotiations with Spain, and their treatment of us for above ten years past.” These were all published without his name; and the first and last were so universally esteemed, that they were generally reputed to have been the production of Mr. Pulteney, who was at the head of the opposition to sir Robert Walpole. They proved of such consequence to Mr. Robins as to occasion his being employed in a very honourable post; for, the opposition having defeated sir Robert, and a committee of the House of Commons being appointed to" examine into his past conduct, Robins was chosen their secretary. But after a committee had presented two reports of their proceedings, a sudden stop was put to their farther progress, by a compromise between the contending parties.

In 1742, being again at leisure, he published a small treatise, entitled “New Principles of Gunnery:” containing the result of many experiments he had made, by which are discovered the force of gun-powder, and the difference in the resisting power of the air to swift and slow motion. This treatise was preceded by an account of the progress which modern fortification had made from its first rise; as also of the invention of gun-powder, and of what had already been performed in the theory of gunnery. Upon a discourse concerning certain experiments being published in the “Philosophical Transactions,” in order to invalidate some opinions of Robins, he thought proper, in an account he gave of his book in the same Transactions, to take notice of those experiments: and, in consequence of this, several dissertations of his on the resistance of the air were read, and the experiments exhibited before the Royal Society, in 1746 and 1747; for which he was presented with a gold medal by that society.

In 1748, came out lord Anson’s “Voyage round the World;” which, though ifc carries Walter’s name in the title-page, was in reality written by Robins. Of this voyage the public had, for some time, been in expectation of seeing an account, composed under his lordship’s own inspection: for which purpose the rev. Richard Walter was employed, as having been chaplain to the Centurion the greatest part of the expedition. Walter had accordingly almost finished his task, having brought it down to his own departure from Macao for England; when he proposed to print his work by subscription. It was thought proper, however, that?.n able judge should first review and correct it, and Robins was appointed; when, upon examination, it was resolved, that the whole should be written entirely by Robins, and that what Walter iiad done, being almost all taken verbatim from the journals, should serve as materials only. Hence the introduction entire, and many dissertations in the body of the book, were composed by Robins, without receiving the least hint from Walter’s manuscript; and what he had thence transcribed regarded chiefly the wind and the weather, the currents, courses, bearings, distances, offings, soundings, moorings, the qualities of the ground they anchored on, and such particulars as generally fill up a sailor’s account. No production of this kind ever met with a more favourable reception, four large impressions being sold off within a twelvemonth: it has been translated into most of the European languages; and it still supports its reputation, having been repeatedly reprinted in various sizes. The fifth edition at London in 1749 was revised* and corrected by Robins himself. He was next requested to compose an apology for the unfortunate affair at Preston Pans in Scotland. This was prefixed as a preface to “The Report of the Proceedings and Opinion of the Board of General Officers on their examination into the conduct of Lieutenant-general sir John Cope, &c.” printed at London in 1749 and this preface was esteemed a master-piece in its kind. Afterwards, Robins had, by the favour of lord Anson, opportunities of making farther experiments in gunnery; which have been published since his death. He also not a little contributed to the improvements made in the royal observatory at Greenwich, by procuring for it, through the interest of the same noble person, a second mural quadrant and other instruments, by which it became perhaps the completest observatory then known. His reputation being now arrived at its full height, he was offered the choice of two very considerable employments. The first was to go to Paris, as one of the commissaries for adjusting the limits in Acadia; the other, to be engineer-general to the East India Company, whose forts, being in a most ruinous condition, wanted a capable person to put them into a posture of defence. This latter he accepted, as it was suitable to his genius, and as the Company’s terms were both advantageous and honourable. He designed, if he had remained in England, to have written a second part of the “Voyage round the World” as appears by a letter from lord Anson to him, dated “Bath, October 22, 1749”

Robins was also preparing an enlarged edition of his “New Principles of Gunnery:” but, having provided himself with a complete set of astronomical and other instruments, for making observations and experiments in the Indies, he departed hence at Christmas in 1749; and, after a voyage in which the ship was near being cast away, arrived at the Indies, July 13, 1750. There he immediately set about his proper business with unwearied diligence, and formed complete plans for Fort St. David and Madras: but he lived not to put them into execution. For, the great difference of the climate being beyond his constitution to support, he was attacked by a fever in September; and, though he recovered out of this, yet about eight months after he fell into a languishing condition, in which he continued till his death, July 29, 1751. By his last will, he left the publishing of his mathematical works to his honoured and intimate friend Martin Folkes, esq. president of the Royal Society, and to James Wilson, M. D. doctor of physic; but, the former of these gentlemen being incapacitated by a paralytic disorder for some time before his death, they were afterwards published by the latter, 1761, 2 vols. 8vo. To this collection, which contains his mathematical and philosophical pieces only, Dr. Wilson has prefixed an account of Mr. Robins, from which this memoir is chiefly extracted. He added also a large appendix at the end of the second volume, containing a great many curious and critical matters in various interesting parts of the mathematics.

It is but justice to say that Mr. Robins was one of the most accurate and elegant mathematical writers that our language can boast of; and that he made more real improvements in artillery, the flight and the resistance of projectiles, than all the preceding writers on that subject. His “New Principles of Gunnery” were translated into several other languages, and commented upon by several eminent writers. The celebrated Euler translated the work into the German language, accompanied with a large and critical commentary; and this work of Euler’s was again translated into English in 1784, by Mr. Hugh Brown, with notes, in one volume, 4to.

, an English mathematician, was born in Staffordshire about the close of the 15th century, as he was entered a student at Oxford in 1516, and was in 1620 elected a fellow of All Souls college, where he took his degrees in arts, and was ordained. But the bent of his genius lay to the sciences, and he soon made such a progress, says Wood, in “the pleasant studies of mathematics and astrology, that he became the ablest person in his time for those studies, not excepted his friend Record, whose learning was more general. At length, taking the degree of B. D. in 1531, he was the year following made by king Henry the VIIIth (to whom he was chaplain) one of the canons of his college in Oxon, and in December 1543, canon of Windsor, and in fine chaplain to queen Mary, who had him in great veneration for his learning. Among several things that he hath written relating to astrology (or astronomy) I find these following: `De culminatione Fixarum Stellarum,‘ &c.; `De ortu et occasu Stellarum Fixarum,’ &c.; ‘Annotationes Astrologicæ,’ &c. lib. 3;‘ `Annotationes Edwardo VI.;’ `Tractatus de prognosticatione per Eclipsin.‘ All which books, that are in ms. were some time in the choice library of Mr. Thomas Allen of Glocester Hall. After his death, coming into the hands of Sir Kenelm Digby, they were by him given to the Bodleian library, where they yet remain. It is also said, that he the said Robyns hath written a book entitled `De Portentosis Cometis;’ but such a thing I have not yet seen, nor do I know any thing else of the author, only that paying his last debt to nature the 25th of August 1558, he was buried in the chapel of St. George, at Windsore.” This treatise “De Portentosis Cometis,” which Wood had not seen, is in the royal library (12 B. xv.); and in the British museum (Ayscough’s Cat.) are other works by Robins; and one “De sterilitatem generantibus,” in the Ashmolean museum.

, an accomplished musical performer, descended from a good family in Leicestershire, was the daughter of a portrait painter, who, having visited Italy for improvement in his art, had made himself master of the Italian language, and acquired a good taste in music. Finding that his daughter Anastasia, during her childhood, had an ear for music, and a promising voice, he had her taught by Dr. Crofts, at first as an accomplishment; but afterwards being afflicted with a disorder in his eyes, which terminated in a total loss of sight, and this misfortune depriving him of the means of supporting himself and family by his pencil, he was under the necessity of availing himself of his daughter’s disposition for music, to turn it to account as a profession. She not only prosecuted her musical studies with great diligence, but by the assistance of her father had acquired such a knowledge in the Italian tongue as enabled her to converse in that language, and to read the best poets in it with facility. And that her taste in singing might approach nearer to that of the natives of Italy, she had vocal instructions from Sandoni, at that time an eminent Iialian singing-master resident in London, and likewise from the opera singer called the Baconess.

Her first public exhibition was at the concerts in Yorkbuildings, and at other places, where she usually accompanied herself on the harpsichord. Her general education had been pursued with the utmost care and attention to the improvement of her mind, as well as to ornamental and external accomplishments; and these advantages, seconded by her own disposition and amiable qualities, rendered her conduct strictly prudent and irreproachable. And what still entitled her to general favour, was a behaviour full of timidity and respect to her superiors, and an undissembled gentleness and affability to others, which, with a native cheerfulness that diffused itself to all around her, gained her at all times such a reception from the public, as seemed. to ensure her success in whatever she should undertake. Encouraged by the partiality of the public towards his daughter, and particularly by the countenance and patronage of some persons of high rank of her own sex, Mr. Robinson took a house in Golden square, where he established weekly concerts and assemblies in the manner of conversazioni, which were frequented by all such as had any pretensions to politeness and good taste.

Thus qualified and encouraged, she was prevailed upon to accept of an engagement at the Opera, where she made her first appearance in Creso, and her second in the character of Ismina, the principal female part in Arminio. From this period till 1724, she continued to perform a principal part at the Opera with increasing favour and applause. Her salary is said to have been 1000l. and her emoluments, by benefits and presents, were estimated at nearly as much more. When she quitted the stage it was supposed to have been in consequence other marriage with the gallant earl of Peterborough, the friend of Pope and Swift, who distinguished himself so heroically in Spain during the reign of queen Anne. Though the marriage was not publicly declared till the earl’s death in 1735, yet it was then spoken of as an event which had long taken place. And such was the purity of her conduct and character, that she was instantly visited at Fulham as the lady of the mansion, by persons of the highest rank. Here, and at Mount Bevis, the earl’s seat near Southampton, she resided in an exalted station till the year of her decease, 1750, surviving her lord fifteen years; who, at the time of the connexion, must have been considerably beyond his prime, as he was arrived at his seventy-fifth year when he died.

The following anecdotes of Mrs. Anastasia Robinson were communicated to Dr. Burney in 1787, by the late venerable Mrs. Delany, her contemporary and intimate acquaintance. " Mrs. Anastasia Robinson was of a middling stature, not handsome, but of a pleasing, modest countenance, with large blue eyes. Her deportment was easy, unaffected, and graceful. Her manner and address very engaging; and her behaviour, on all occasions, that of a gentlewoman, with perfect propriety. She was not only liked by all her acquaintance, but loved and caressed by persons of the highest rank, with whom she appeared always equal, without assuming. Her father’s house in Golden-square was frequented by all the men of genius and refined taste of the times; among the number of persons of distinction who frequented Mr. Robinson’s house, and seemed to distinguish his daughter in a particular manner, were the earl of Peterborough and general H; the

latter had shewn a long attachment to her, and his attentions were so remarkable, that they seemed more than the effects of common politeness; and as he was a very agreeable man, and in good circumstances, he was favourably received, not doubting but that his intentions were honourable. A declaration of a very contrary nature was treated with the contempt it deserved, though Mrs. A. Robinson was very much prepossessed in his favour.

"Soon after this, lord Peterborough endeavoured to convince her of his partial regard for her but, agreeable and artful as he was, she remained very much upon her guard, which rather increased than diminished his admiration and passion for her. Yet still his pride struggled with his inclination; for all this time she was engaged to sing in public, a circumstance very grievous to her, but urged by the best of motives, she submitted to it, in order to assist her parents, whose fortune was much reduced by Mr. Robinson’s loss of sight, which deprived him of the benefit of his profession as a painter.

"At length lord Peterborough made his declaration to her on honourable terms; he found it would be vain to make proposals on any other; and as he omitted no circumstance that could engage her esteem and gratitude, she accepted them, as she was sincerely attached to him. He earnestly requested her keeping it a secret till it was a more convenient time for him to make it known, to which she readily consented, having a perfect confidence in his honour. Among the persons of distinction that professed a friendship for Mrs. A. Robinson, were the earl and countess of Oxford, daughter-in-law to the lord-treasurer Oxford, who not only bore every public testimony of their affection and esteem for Mrs. A. Robinson, but lady Oxford attended her when she was privately married to the earl of Peterborough, and lady Peterborough ever acknowledged her obligations with the warmest gratitude; and after lady Oxford’s death she was particularly distinguished by the duchess of Portland, lady Oxford’s daughter, and was always mentioned by her with the greatest kindness for the many friendly offices she used to do her in her childhood when in lady Oxford’s family, which made a lasting impression upon the duchess of Portland’s noble and generous heart.

"His haughty spirit was still reluctant to the making a declaration that would have done justice to so worthy a character as the person to whom he was now united; and, indeed, his uncontrollable temper, and high opinion of his own actions, made him;i very awful husband, ill suited to lady Peterborough’s good sense, amiable temper, and delicate sentiments. She was a Roman catholic, but never gave offence to those of a contrary opinion, though very strict in what she thought her duty. Her excellent principles and fortitude of mind supported her through many severe trials in her conjugal state. But at last he prevailed en himself to do her justice, instigated, it is supposed, by his bad state of health, which obliged him to seek another climate, and she absolutely refused to go with him unless he declared his marriage; her attendance Upon him in his illness nearly cost her her life.

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

"After lord Peterborough’s death she lived a very retired life, chiefly at Mount Bevis, and was seldom prevailed on to leave that habitation, but by the duchess of Portland, who was always happy to have her company at Bulstrode when she could obtain it, and often visited her at her own house.

, a learned divine and schoolmaster, was born in St. Mary’s parish, in the county of Anglesea, and educated at Winchester school, where he was admitted probationary fellow of New college, Oxford, in 1603, and in 1605 perpetual fellow. He completed his master’s degree in 1611, and about three years after, leaving college, became chief master of Winchester school. He was afterwards archdeacon of Winchester, canon of Wei is, D. D. and archdeacon of Gloucester. Having sided with the party that were reducing the church to the presbyterian form, and taken the covenant, he lost the advantages of his canonry and archdeaconry, but obtained the rectory of Hinton, near Winchester, in room of a loyalist. He died March 30, 1655, and was buried in St. GilesVin-the-Fields, London. Wood gives him the character of an excellent linguist, an able divine, and very conversant in ancient history. He wrote for the use of Winchester school, “Preces; Grammaticalis quaedam & Antiquae Historian Synopsis,” printed together at Oxford in 1616, 8vo “Scholar Wintoniensis Phrases Latinse,” Lond. 1654 and 1664, published by his son Nicholas; and “Annalium mundi universalium, &c. Tomus Unicus, lib. 14. absolutus,” &c. Lond. 1677, fol. improved by Dr. Thomas Peirce, dean of Salisbury, by the king’s command. Wood adds, that he wrote a vindication of the covenant, which he had not seen.

, a distinguished English prelate and statesman, was born at Cleasby, in Yorkshire, Nov. 7, 1650, and educated at Oriel college, Oxford, to which he was afterwards a liberal benefactor. After he had completed his master’s degree, and taken orders, he went about 1683 to Sweden, as domestic chaplain to the British ambassador at that court; and in his absence was appointed first resident, then envoy extraordinary, and lastly ambassador. He remained in this rank until 1708. During this time he published his “Account of Sweden, as it was in 1688,” which is generally printed with lord Molesvvorth’s account of Denmark. On his return to England, her majesty, queen Anne, was so sensible of the value of his services, that she made him dean of Windsor, registrar of the order of the garter, and prebendary of Canterbury. He was also in 1710 preferred to the bishopric of Bristol. His political knowledge recommended him to the confidence of the earl of Oxford, then at the head of administration, who resolved to have him of the privy council. For this purpose, he was first made lord privy seal, and afterwards was admitted to a seat at the council board, where he so distinguished himself that queen Anne made choice of him as one of her plenipotentiaries at the memorable treaty of Utrecht. With what spirit he behaved on this occasion, appears from the common histories of the treaty, and Swift’s “Four last years of the Queen.” He was also appointed one of the commissioners for finishing St. Paul’s cathedral, and for building fifty new churches in London; was a governor of the Charter-house, and dean of the chapel royal. On the death of Dr. Compton in 1714, he was translated to the see of London, and the qneen, indeed, had such regard for him, that had she outlived the archbishop of Canterbury, she would have made Dr. Robinson primate.

After his advancement to the see of London, he gave many proofs of his great affection for the established church, by opposing innovations, contributing to, and promoting the augmentation of poor livings, and by vindicating his clergy against unjust aspersions. His steady attachment to the civil constitution was not less conspicuous, in his charges to his clergy, and his personal example and conduct. As a benefactor, he was distinguished by many acts of munificence. Every place, indeed, with which he was connected, felt the benefit of his public spirit; the place of his birth, in the building and endowment of a chapel and a school; Oriel college, in the addition of buildings towards the east side of the garden, and the foundation of some ample exhibitions; the ecclesiastical houses in which, he resided were generally repaired by him at great expence; and to the poor in general he was very generous.

Mackay has described this worthy prelate as “a little brown man; of a grave and venerable countenance; very charitable and good-humoured*; strictly religious himself, and taking what care he can to make others so.” He died at Hampstead, of an asthmatic disorder, April 11, 1723, and was buried at Fulham, April 19. He was twice married; his first wife, Maria, was daughter of William Langton, esq. Her liberal mind is delicately commemorated on the inscription on the front of his buildings at Oriel college. His second wife, Emma, whose family name we

* It was on this prelate that the other booksellers, and that he would

Curll allowed shat such an edition was preferred copy, know not, survived him, and was buried at Fulham, Jan. 26, 1748. He left no issue, but many collateral descendants.

, a lady of considerable literary talents, whose maiden name was Darby, was born at Bristol, Nov. 27, 1758. Her life having been published, in part written by herself, and completed by a friend, it may be thought we cannot be deficient in materials for the present article. But these documents partake too much of the nature of a novel for our purpose. Mrs. Robinson was a frail lady of much note in her day, and for such it has been the fashion of late years to encourage the publication of “Apologies,” the object of all which, for they are very uniform, is to relax the obligations of virtue, and to prove that vice, with its attendants, vanity and extravagance, has nothing to dread but from poverty. It is then only, when all is spent, and indigence stares in the face, that we are to begin to think that something has been amiss, and to pour out our exculpatory sympathies in sentimental strains. From such narratives, it becomes us to borrow with caution.

Mrs. Robinson was married very early in life to a husband who had little to maintain her, and for some time she shared in his misfortunes, but, according to her own account, she spent what she could in dress, resorted much to public places, and admitted the visits of noblemen of libertine characters. At length she had recourse to the stage, and while performing the character of Perdita in Shakspeare’s “Winter’s Tale,” captivated the youthful affections of a distinguished personage, and consented to his terms. This connexion, with all its gay and splendid embellishments, and all the flattery and admiration which beauty and levity could wish, lasted about two years, at the end of which period she found herself in possession of jewels to the amount of 8000l. and an annuity of 500l. After a, short recess from a mode of life, into which her apologists tell us she was driven by necessity, she formed another connexion of the same kind, which they allow was from choice, with a gentleman of the army, and lavished the whole of her disposable property on this new favourite. She also lost the use of her limbs in following him, during a severe winter night, to a sea-port, where she hasted to relieve him from a temporary embarrassment Not long after, she went to the continent for her health, and remained there about five years. On her return in 1788, she commenced her literary career, in which she had considerable success. In 1800 her health began to decline rapidly, principally from want of proper exercise, for she never recovered the use of her limbs; and after lingering for some time, she died at nglefield Green, Dec. 28, of that year, and was buried in Old Windsor church-yard. She retained in her latter days, although only forty-two years old, but little of that beauty for which she was once admired, and which, from the moment a price was set upon it, proved the cause of all her misfortunes.

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

But it was at Armagh, the ancient seat of the primacy, that he displayed a princely munificence. A very elegant palace, 90 feet by 60, and 40 high, adorns that town; it is light and pleasing, without the addition of wings or lesser parts; which too frequently, wanting a sufficient uniformity with the body of the edifice, are unconnected with it in effect, and divide the attention. Large and ample offices are conveniently placed behrnd a plantation at a small distance. Around the palace is a large lawn, which spreads on every side over the hills, skirted by young plantations, in one of which is a terrace, which commands a most beautiful view of cultivated hill and dale. This view from the palace is much improved by the barracks, the school,, and a new church at a distance all which are so placed as to be exceedingly ornamental to the whole country. The barracks were erected under the primate’s direction, and form a large and handsome edifice. The school is a building of considerable extent, and admirably adapted for the purpose; a more beautiful, or one better contrived, is no where to be seen; there are apartments for a master; a schoolroom 56 feet by 28, a large dining-room and spacious airy dormitories, with every other necessary, and a spacious play-ground, walled in; the whole forming a handsome front: and attention being paid to the residence of the master (the salary is 400l. a year) the school flourishes, and must prove one of the greatest advantages to the country. This edifice was built entirely at the primate’s expence. The church is erected of white stone, and having a tall spire, makes a very agreeable object, in a country where churches and spires do not abound. The primate built three other churches, and made considerable reparations in the cathedral: he was also the means of erecting a public infirmary, contributing amply to it himself. He likewise constructed a public library at his own cost, endowed it, and gave it a large collection of books. The roorh is 45 feet by 25, and 20 high, with a gallery; and apartments for the librarian. The town he ornamented with a markethouse and shambles, and was the direct means, by giving leases upon that condition, of almost new building the whole place He found it a nest of mud-cabins, and he left it a well-built city of stone and slate. Nor was he forgetful of the place of his education. On the new gate, built by Wyat, for Christ-church, Oxford, the primate is commemorated as one of the principal contributors to the expence of building that gate and repairing Canterbury quadrangle. In these noble and spirited works, the primate expended upwards of 30,000l. The celebrated Mrs. Montagu was cousin to this prelate; and her brother, the late eccentric lord Rokeby, his successor in that title, on which, however, he set no value.

, a dissenting divine, of the Baptist persuasion, was born in October 1735, at Swaffham, in the county of Norfolk, and was son of Mr. Michael Robinson, a native of North Britain, who possessed a moderate independence. He was sent to a Latin school at SwalFham, at the age of six years, where he made a considerable proficiency, and discovered an uncommon capacity for learning, and afterwards to an endowed grammar-school at Seaming, where he gained some knowledge of the French, as well as of the classical languages. All this, however, ended in his being put apprentice to a hair-dresser, in Crutched-Friars, London. For tjhis occupation his mind was, as may be supposed, already unfitted by the taste for learning which his education had given him, and which he still endeavoured to improve during some part of the hours devoted to sleep. During his apprenticeship he appears to have imbibed serious impressions of religion, which he encouraged, by attending the most celebrated preachers of the day among the independents, the baptists, and the Calvinistic clergy. Dr. Guyse and Gill among the dissenters, Romaine in the church, and Whitfield, the leader of the Calvinistical methodists, were his chief favourites.

When about the age of twenty, his indentures were given up, at his own request, as he had a strong desire to become a preacher. His first sermon was delivered to a small congregation at Mildenhal!, in Suffolk, and he afterwards continued to preach among the methodists, at various places, for about two years, when being unsuccessful in forming a church among them, he left them, and formed a small independent congregation at, Norwich, on leaving which, he also gave up infant baptism. In 1759, he became preacher to a congregation of baptists at Cambridge, and such was his popularity here, that his hearers, dady increasing, were enabled to build a new and commodious meeting, in 1774. Here he was frequently interrupted by the impertinent visits of some under-graduates, against whom he was finally compelled to appeal to the laws of his country, which secured the future tranquillity of the assembly. This seems to be the period of his life most happy and faultless. He had not as yet publicly engaged in abstruse theological disputations; he vigilantly performed the duties of his pastoral office; and, if some of the younger students of the university, in the gaiety of youthful intemperance, had insulted him, he was amply repaid for it by the friendship and protection of many of its most worthy and learned members; for, he embraced every opportunity which that university afforded of making amends for a defective education, and pursued a course of reading extensive and varied. The public libraries were not only open to him, but he was allowed the privilege of having books from them at his own habitation.

In 1773, as his salary was inadequate to provide for his numerous family (he married in 1759), he removed to Chesterton, near Cambridge, and commenced farmer, to which, in time, he added the business of a dealer in corn and coals. These occupations, however, did not interrupt his literary pursuits, nor do they appear to have been very profitable. He was first known as an author by publishing, in 1774, “Arcana,” a pamphlet respecting the petition “to parliament for relief in matters of subscription; and the following year, an appendix to Alleyne’s” Legal Degrees of Marriage.“It consists of a discussion of the question,” Is it lawful and right for a man to marry the sister of his deceased wife?“in which he maintained the affirmative. In the same year he published a volume of” Sermons," translated from the French of Saurin, which was followed, at different periods, by four others. Introductory to these volumes are prefatory dissertations, containing memoirs of the reformation in France, and the life of Saurin, together with reflections on deism, Christian liberty, &c.

In the year 1776, during the controversy respecting the divinity of Christ, which had been carried on principally by members of the church of England, Mr. Robinson published “A Plea for the Divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, &c.” This piece is written with much ingenuity, and it procured the author a number of handsome compliments, not only from dissenting ministers, but also from several dignitaries of the established church. Among the latter were Dr. HinchlirTe, Bishop of Peterborough, Dr. Hallifax, afterwards bishop of Gloucester, Dr. Beadon, afterwards bishop of Bath and Weils, and Dr. Tucker, dean of Gloucester. Some years after, Mr. Lindsey published, first without, but afterwards with his name, “An Examination of Mr.Robinson’s Plea for the Divinity of Christ;” to which Mr. Robinson, although frequently called upon, declined to reply. To his friends he said, “The anonymous examiner has not touched my arguments, and his spirit is bitter and contemptuous. His faith stands on criticisms; and my argument is, that if the doctrine requires critical proof, it is not popular, and therefore not divine.” This silence, however, occasioned some suspicion that he was not very sincere, which his conduct afterwards continued. In 1777, Mr. Robinson published a small tract, entitled “The History and Mystery of Good Friday,” in which he employed the same “bitter and contemptuous spirit,” which he had just complained of, in ridiculing the commemoration of the death of our Saviour. In 1778, Mr. Robinson published *' A Plan of Lectures on the Principles of Nonconformity, for the instruction of Catechumens.“This piece contains an outline of the whole controversy of the dissenters with the church of England, and of their history, from the period of the reformation, to 1778, which of course appeared highly satisfactory to his brethren. Towards the close of the same year, he published” An Essay on the Composition of a Sermon, translated from the original French of the rev. John Claude, with Notes,“in 2 vols. 8vo. The preface to the first volume of the Cl Essay” consists of memoirs of the life of the author.

In 1780, Mr. Robinson paid a visit to the university of Oxford, and afterwards accompanied some friends on a tour into Scotland, where he was much gratified by civilities shewn him by some of the literati of Edinburgh; and be might have received the diploma of doctor of divinity, had he not thought proper to decline that compliment. Soon after his return to Cambridge, he published a little tract well calculated to produce a Catholic spirit among his brethren of the Baptist denomination, entitled “The General Doctrine of Toleration, applied to the particular Case of Free Communion.” It was about this period he preached and published a sermon, entitled “Slavery inconsistent with the Spirit of Christianity,” and he was the author of an excellent petition from the gentry, clergy, freeholders, and other inhabitants in the county of Cambridge, which was presented to the House of Commons. In the year 1781, at the desire of his brethren, he began to collect materials for the History of the English Baptists. In his researches he was led to enter on a larger field than what had been originally proposed to him, and, instead of confining himself to the history of English Baptists, he was induced to trace the history of baptism from the earliest use of that rite, as well as that of Baptists in all ages.

In the year 1782, Mr, Robinson published “A Political Catechism,” intended to convey, in a familiar manner, what he conceived to be just ideas of good civil government, and the British constitution. In 1786, he published “Sixteen Discourses on several Texts of Scripture, addressed to Christian Assemblies, in villages near Cambridge; to which are added, Six Morning Exercises.” Such of these as touch on doctrinal subjects were written in a manner which gave his friends reason to think that he was now beginning to depart from the principles he had hitherto held so strenuously; and they were not mistaken. With his congregation at Cambridge, however, he still continued his ministerial labours; and remained high in their esteem, although, as a public instructor, he must, among so many changes, have become either useless or dangerous.

During the latter years of his life the intense application he had bestowed on his work on Baptism undermined the strength of his constitution, and brought on a gradual decay, attended with a great depression of spirits. In these circumstances, it was hoped by his family that a journey to Birmingham, and an interview with Dr. Priestley, which he had long wished for, might prove beneficial to him. Having arrived at that town, he ventured to preach twice on the same Sunday, for the benefit of the charity schools. His friends perceived that he was ill, but none of them suspected his end was so near; he spent the evening of the following Tuesday in the cheerful society of his friends, but next morning, June 8, 1790, he was found dead in his bed. Some time before this he had become a complete convert to the doctrines of the modern Socinians; a change which they seem willing to attribute to the writings of Dr. Priestley. This divine, we are told, charmed as he was with Mr. Robinson’s conversation, confessed himself much disappointed with his preaching, and characterized it in these words: “His discourse was unconnected and desultory: and his manner of treating the Trinity savoured rather of burlesque than serious reasoning. He attacked orthodoxy more pointedly and sarcastically than ever I did in my life.” Few of our readers will require any other character of Mr. Robinson’s attacks on those principles which he once held sacred. His largest work, “The History of Baptism,” &c. appeared after his death in a quartovolume, with another connected with the subject, but entitled, “Ecclesiastical Researches;” both written with considerable ability, but less finished than if he had lived to prepare them for the press. The latter, in particular, exhibits striking proofs of his rooted inveteracy to the established church, as well as of his glaring inconsistency. He appears, indeed, in none of his works, as a man who had attained that truth, or those positions, which he sought to establish; what was wanting in argument he aimed to supply by a kind of buffoonery peculiar to himself; and yet, while thus versatile and unsteady in all his opinions, no man was more intolerant towards those who rested in the belief of what they had been taught, and were desirous to propagate.

, a learned physician and botanist, and physician in ordinary to George I. by whom he was knighted, was the very intimate friend of the celebrated Ray, who distinguishes him by the title of amicorum alpha. Of his early history we have not been able to recover many particulars. He was nearly of an age, and ran his course for some time with sir Hans Sloane, with whom, when a student, he travelled to France. He was educated at St. John’s college, Cambridge, where he took his degree of bachelor of medicine in 1679, and that of doctor in 1685. While at Montpellier he wrote a letter to Dr. Martin Lister, dated Aug. 4, 1683, concerning the fabric of the remarkable bridge, called Pont de S. Esprit, on the Rhine, which was printed in the Philosophical Transactions for June 1684; and, after his return in lhat year, he was elected a fellow of the Royal Society. To this learned body he made various communications, particularly an account of the first four volumes of the “Horius Malabariciis” on the natural sublimation of sulphur from the pyrites and limestone at ^tna, &c. an account of Henry Jenkins, who lived 169 years and on other topics of natural history. The printed correspondence between him and Ray commenced during Dr. Robinson’s travels, before mentioned, and was continued for upwards of ten years. Seventeen of his letters appear in the “Philosophical Correspondence,” with all Mr. Ray’s answers. They run much on the subject of Zoology; but contain also botanical and philosophical observations. These, and what he communicated to the “Philosophical Transactions,” prove him to have been a man well acquainted with various parts of learning to which he added also an intimate knowledge of natural history. In this branch Ray had the highest opinion of him, and placed the greatest confidence in his assistance. He had a seat in the council of the Royal Society for many years. He died March 29, 1748.

, a late eminent divine at Leicester, the son of James Robinson, hosier of Wakefield in Yorkshire, was born Aug. 29, 1749. He was educated at the grammar-school of his native place, where he made such proficiency that his masters earnestly solicited his father to permit him to continue a learned education, instead of putting him to business, which was his original intention; and when it was determined to send him to the university, the governors of the school unanimously agreed to allow him a double exhibition. With this provision he was admitted a sizar of Trinity college, Cambridge, in Oct. 1768. Various circumstances, for which we may refer the reader to an elaborate life of him latelypublished, contributed to give his mind more serious impressions than are usual at his period of life, and his whole behaviour as a student became exemplary. He scrupulously observed all the attendances which were required of him, and quickly obtained the reputation of having made much proficiency as a scholar. His religious character too, though not yet formed to that degree of strictness which it afterwards attained, was at least so far advanced as to make his habits, conversation, and avowed opinions widely different from those of the greater part of his contemporaries.

In his academical pursuits, he appears to have divided his attention between the classics and mathematics, relieving both occasionally by the perusal of treatises in divinity, in which he gave the preference to those of the Calvinistic kind. In April 1771 he was elected a scholar of Trinitycollege, after a strict and comprehensive examination. In December of the same year he obtained the second of Dr. Hooper’s prizes for the best English declamation. He gained great credit from his mathematical disputations in the schools, the year previous to his tirst degree. What is not very common even with the more advanced mathematical proficients, he always made his own arguments, when be kept an opponency, and these were in general skilful, as well as ably defended. In one of those disputations, he invented an argument against the doctrine of prime and ultimate ratios, as taught by one of our ablest mathematicians, which, it is said, has never yet been satisfactorily answered. Infleed, he was particularly calculated to excel in this species of exercise; as possessing a remarkable degree of acuteness, solidity, and self-possession, together with a fair share of mathematical knowledge. He was well acquainted with natural philosophy, though but little with analytics.

Accordingly he was ranked high from the schools, being placed in the first class; so as to be a competitor with those who were far his superiors in depth of reading. He stood seventh in the senate-house examination; which was considered a high degree at that time, for one who had not enjoyed the advantage of a private tutor. Dr. Tomline, the present bishop of Lincoln, the senior wrangler of the year, with whom he was engaged in this honourable competition for academical distinction, is well known to have expressed a high respect for Mr. Robinson’s character, and for his attainments as a scholar. Mr. Robinson at this time used to say that he never expected to cope with his lordship and with his other competitors, who were placed before him, in algebra and fluxions; what he knew was chiefly in philosophy. Locke’s “Essay,” and Butler’s “Analogy,” which he had studied attentively, were also of service to him in the examination. His friends, who could duly estimate hrs talents, were anxious that be should be a candidate for one of the classical medals; hut he declined offering himself, through the determination he had formed of entering as soon as possible into the church. He was elected fellow of Trinity-college, with peculiar circumstances of distinction, Oct. 1, 1772; and in 1773 he obtained the second of the middle bachelor’s prizes for the best Latin essay on some moral subject. On this occasion he had eight competitors. Dr. James, the late head roaster of Rugby-school, who particularly excelled in writing Latin prose, gained the first prize; but Mr. Robinson was allowed to be at this time the best general scholar of his year; and his seniors, who were most competent tq decide upon his literary merits, declared that they had not known his superior. His biographer gives us an anecdote which shows, in a very striking point of view, the character he held among his contemporaries. An attempt was made, during his under-graduateship, to set aside subscription to the Thirty-nine articles. Some young men went about the university, endeavouring to prevail upon the under-graduates to sign a petition for that purpose. In Trinity-college, the first question which the undergraduates put to those persons who applied to them was, “Has Robinson signed the petition?” and they declined signing it, when they found he had not and the argument which the persons applying made use of to prevail upon Mr. Robinson to sign was, “If you will sign, all the under-graduates in Trinity-college will sign.” Mr. Robinson, it is scarcely necessary to add, refused to sign this petition.

Soon after receiving his first degree, Mr. Robinson was ordained by bishop Keene, and entered upon the curacy of Witcham, in the Isle of Ely. To this was added that of Wichford; and his performance of the duties of both was equally conscientious and successful. About two years after, he quitted this situation and accepted the curacy of St. Martin’s Leicester, under the rev. Mr. Haines: here he had considerable opposition to encounter; but at length acquired a great degree of general popularity, and the respect of many of the upper classes, who were at first prejudiced against his youth and his doctrines. He was also chosen afternoon lecturer of All Saints, and in 1774, chaplain to the Infirmary. To these labours tie added, during 4 considerable part of his life, the care of instructing s young gentlemen in classical learning, who were preparing for the university, but in some cases at least, would accept of no pecuniary compensation. In the same year (1774) he married a lady, whose name his biographer does not mention, by whom he had a family, and who died in 1791. In 1778 a weekly lecture being founded at St. Mary’s church by Mr. Joseph Wheatley, an opulent manufacturer of Leicester, with the consent of the incumbent, and of the bishop of the diocese, Mr. Robinson was appointed first lecturer. Soon after, in the same year, on the death of the incumbent, Mr. Robinson was instituted to the living of this church, by the lord-chancellor. It was here that he preached a course of sermons on “Scripture Characters,” which has since been printed, and forms the most popular of his works, having gone through several editions, in 4 vols. 8vo.

In 1788, when a general stir was made by the dissenters, throughout the kingdom, to obtain the repeal of the Corporation and Test Acts, and when the Midland counties were made to feel the more intense flame which burned pretty widely, through the adjacent influence of Dr. Priestley, a large central meeting, for the purpose of promoting the common object, was held at Leicester, to which Mr. Robinson was earnestly invited, but be peremptorily refused, and that in language which could not be agreeable; for, among other things, he told the applicants that it was “money and power” which they wanted, and “not the means of serving God more acceptably, or of preaching his gospel more extensively.” Strong attachment to government; deference to the powers that be; an high sense of the importance and utility of a dignified hierarchy, together with cordial approbation of the forms and discipline of the church of England, not less than of her doctrines; were a sort of primary element in his mind. On the same principles, one of his last public acts was to unite with a large body of his brother clergymen, in petitioning parliament against the repeal of the remaining restrictions upon popery.

The seventh of March 1813 was the thirty-ninth anniversary of Mr. Robinson’s connection, as a preacher, with the town of Leicester. He had been vicar of St. Mary’s during thirty-four years, and by his zeal and ability in performing his pastoral duties, as well as by his pious and benevolent character in private life, had overcome all opposition and all prejudice, when he was seized with a fit of apoplexy on the 24th of the month before-mentioned, and expired within a few hours, in his sixty-fourth year. For many minutiae of character, many illustrative anecdotes, and much discussion on his character and writings, we must refer to our authority. Besides his “Scripture Characters,” already noticed, he was the author of “A serious exhortation to the Inhabitants of Great Britain, with reference to the approaching Fast,” 1795; “An address to the Loyal Leicester Volunteer Infantry,” 1795; “The Christian System unfolded, or Essays on the Doctrines and Duties of Christianity,” 3 vols. 8vo, intended as a popular body of divinity, but drawn out in the form of Essays, instead of Sermons, in winch the subjects had been formerly discussed from the pulpit “The Parochial Minister’s address to his Parishioners” a tract “On Confirmation” “Address on the Peace of 1802;” “The Serious Call;” one or two occasional sermons, and “Prophecies on the Messiah.”

, an eminent natural philosopher and mathematician, was born at Boghall, in the county of Stirling, in Scotland, in 1739. His father, a merchant in Glasgow, having, by a course of successful industry, acquired considerable property, employed it in the purchase of an estate to which he retired during the latter part of his life. His son was educated at Glasgow, and before entering on his nineteenth year had completed his course of study at that university, but had manifested a peculiar predilection for the mathematics. Though he went deep into algebra and fluxions, yet he derived frm the celebrated Simson, and always retained, a disposition to prefer the more accurate though less comprehensive system of ancient geometry. The first thing which is said to have obtained him the notice of that eminent professor, was his having produced a geometrical solution of a problem which had been given out to the class in an algebraic form.

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

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

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

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

Of his lectures, in his new professorship, high expectations were formed and were not disappointed. If there was any defect, it was that he was sometimes abstruse, and did not lower himself sufficiently to the comprehension of his youthful auditors. This, however, appears to have been owing, not to any want of order or perspicuity, but to his expecting to find in them a more complete acquaintance with pure mathematics than many of them had attained. Unfortunately, he was prevented for many years from teaching, by a languishing state of health, accompanied with peculiar depression of spirits, a not unfrequent attendant on too entire a devotion to mathematical studies, and of the recluse and pensive habits which they tend to generate. By the judicious choice, however, which he made of substitutes, the want of his personal instructions was less severely felt. For a year or two before his death he Ibegan again to lecture, having only engaged the rev. Thomas Macknight to afford him occasional assistance; an office which was performed by that gentleman with acknowledged ability. When the Royal Society of Edinburgh was incorporated by charter in 1783, he was chosen by that learned body to be their general secretary, and discharged that office to their entire satisfaction, as long as his health permitted, on the decline of which he resigned it. To their Transactions he contributed several interesting papers.

In 1798, Mr. Robison published a work which attracted, in an uncommon degree, the attention of the public, under the title of “Proofs of a Conspiracy against all the religions and governments of Europe, carried on in the secret meetings of Free masons, Illuminati, and reading societies, &c.” 8vo. It is neeJless to say how different have been thq judgments pronounced an this publication, according ta the different parties to which its readers happened to be attached. That there is considerable ground for the statements contained in it, appears evidently from the best informed German authors; at the same time several circumstances led the author to form an idea of the magnitude and consequences of the conspiracy, which perhaps was somewhat exaggerated. But whatever opinion was formed on this subject, it was generally acknowledged that his mistakes were unintentional, and that the work was written from the best of motives, and with the sole view of defending the most important interests of religion and civil society.

A few years after, on the death of Dr. Black, Mr. Robison published the lectures of that great chemical discoverer, with notes, which are universally allowed to add greatly to their value. In consequence of Mr. Robison’s connexion with the court of Russia, a copy of this publication was sent to the reigning emperor, and the editor received, in return, the present of a box set in diamonds, accompanied by a letter strongly impressive of the regard in which his character and talents were held by that virtuous and enlightened monarch. The last work on which Mr. Robison’s attention and care was bestowed, was his “Elements of Mechanical Philosophy,” intended to comprize the substance of his lectures on that subject, and to consist of four or five volumes. The first appeared accordingly in 1804, and fully answered the expectations which the scientific world had entertained; and although his death prevented the completion of the plan, he is said to have left materials for a continuation, which are intended for the press. On Monday, Jan. 28, 1805. he delivered a lecture, as usual to his class, and went afterwards to take his accustomed walk. Being, however, exposed to a greater degree of cold than usual, he was seized soon after his return with un extreme degree of debility, which terminated in his death, Wednesday morning the 30th. This seems to have been less the consequence of any particular illness, than of a frame worn out by long-continued illness and suffering.

In 1798 he was complimented with the diploma of LL.D. by the American college in New Jersey, and in the following year received the same honour 'from the university of Glasgow. In 1800, he was unanimously elected foreign member of the imperial academy of sciences at St. Petersburgh, in the room of Dr. Black. Besides the works already mentioned, it must not be forgot that Mr. Robison furnished some most valuable contributions to the edition of the “Encyclopaedia Britannica,” superintended by his friend Dr. Gleig, to whom the public is indebted for the preceding particulars of his life; and it is said to be the intention of Mr. Robison’s friends to collect the articles he furnished for this work, and publish them in a separate form, along with what he inserted in the " Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh.

, a celebrated critic in the sixteenth century, was born at Udina in 1516. After being educated at Bologna, he taught rhetoric and moral philosophy with reputation at Lucca, Pisa, Venice, Bologna, and Padua, in which last city he died, March 18, 1567, aged fifty-one. He has left a treatise “On History,” 1543, 8vo, which is of little value; commentaries on several Greek and Latin poets; “De Vita et victu populi Romani sub Imperatoribus,” 1551', folio, and other works on Roman antiquities, in which he frequently discovers a degree of asperity unworthy of a liberal mind. His contentious disposition had at one time nearly proved fatal, as he received a wound from the sword of Baptist Egnacius, and for some time his life was thought to be in danger. He had also some fierce literary contests with Alciatus and Sigonius.

, a celebrated general of the Dominicans, and one of the most zealous defenders of papal authority, was born at Peselada on the frontiers of Roussillon and Catalonia, about 1624. He was the son of Francis viscount de Rocaberti, of an ancient family. Having entered the Dominican order early in life, he became provincial of Arragon in 1666, general of his order in 1670, archbishop of Valencia in 1676, and grand inquisitor of the faith in 1695. His catholic majesty, whose favour he acquired, made him twice viceroy of Valencia. He died June 13, 1699, leaving a long treatise “De Romani Pontilicis Automate,” 3 vols. folio, esteemed in Spain and Italy, but prohibited in France; and “Bibliotheca Pontificia;” a large collection of all the treatises which have been written by different authors in favour of the pope’s authority and infallibility, Rome, 1700, &c. 21 vols, folio. The parliament of Paris also prohibited the sale of this immense collection.

, a learned Italian, was a native of Rocca Contrata, a town in the marche of Ancona, and horn in 1545. When young he was sent to Camerino, where, in 1552, he took the habit among the hermits of St. Augustine, and remained so long here that some have given him the surname of Camero. He afterwards continued his studies at Rome, Venice, Perusia, and Padua. He received the degree of doctor of divinity at the university of Padua, in Sept. 1577, and acquired much celebrity as a preacher at Venice, and as a teacher of the belles lettres to the juniors of his order. In 1579 Fivizani, the vicargeneral of the Augustines, invited him to Rome to be iiis secretary, and pope Sixtus V. placed him in the Vatican in 1585, and confided to his superintendance those editions of the Bible, the councils, and the fathers, which issued from the apostolical press during his pontificate. In 1595, pope Clement VIII. made him apostolical sacristan in the room of Fivizani, now deceased, and titular bishop of Tagaste in Numidia. He collected a very large and excellent library, which he presented in his life-time, by a deed of gift, dated Oct. 23, 1614, to the Augustinian monastery at Rome; but upon the express condition, that it should be always open for the benefit of the public. Rocca died April 8, 1620, at the age of seventy-five. Rocca had read much, but was either deficient in, or seldom exercised his judgment, as appears by the most of his works. Among these may be mentioned his “Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana,” which Fabricius calls a very trifling work “Bibliotheca Theologica et Scripturalis” “Notae in Novum Testamentum;” “De Patientia” “De Cometis” “Observationes in VI Libros Elegantiarum Laur. Valise;” “Observationes de Lingua Latina” and other pieces which were collected together, and printed in 1719, 2 vols. folio. From his manuscripts was aiso published, in 1745, a very curious collection, entitled “Thesaurus Pontificiarum Antiquitatum, necnon Rituurn ac Ceremoniarum,” in 2 vols. folio.

, a modern French writer, was born in 1731, at Lyons. He had an employ ment in the finances at Cette in Languedoc, which he held for ten years; but having more turn for literature than calculations, he went to Paris, and composed three tragedies upon the Greek models, but had no more success than others who have made similar experiments on the public taste. In prose he published a “Refutation du Systeme de la Nature;” a “Critical History of the opinions of the Ancients concerning Happiness, 1778,” 8vo; and a “Complete Translation of the Plays of Sophocles.” The last-named work gained him much credit by the elegance and fidelity of the version, and the judicious notes annexed to it. He undertook also a complete translation of Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey, of which the preliminary discourses and the notes obtained more applause than the version itself, which, however, he had splendidly printed at the royal press in 1781, in 4to. He was a member of the academy of inscriptions and belles lettres, to which he contributed several learned memoirs. He died in 1788, highly esteemed for a temper in which there was nothing unsocial or selfish. He was always, we are told, fonder of talking of other people’s works than of his own, a case, it is added, of some singularity in literary company.

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

The abbe" D'Olivet, in his History of the French academy, says that Rochefoucauit could never be a member of it, though greatly desired both by the academicians and himself, from the necessity of making a speech of thanks on the day of admission: with all the courage he had shewn on so many eminent occasions, and with all the superiority that birth, and such prodigious parts as the world allowed, gave him, he was not able to bear the look of an audience, nor could pronounce four lines in public without fainting.

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

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

The British nation were so sensible of the bravery displayed both by officers and men in this action, and of the importance of it as the only means of preserving the remainder of the West India islands, that they manifested the most excessive joy when intelligence of the victory arrived. It came extremely seasonable in other points of view. Neither by land, nor by sea, except where admiral Rodney had been engaged, had we been able to meet the enemj on any occasion with great and decisive advantage; and, in too many instances, we had retired from the contest not in the most honourable manner. As the means of obtaining more favourable terms of peace, this important victory was hailed with joy and exultation; and as admiral Rodney was looked up to as the cause of it, the gratitude of the nation towards him was deeply felt, and expressed in warm and glowing language. It was recollected that the fortune of sir George Rodney had been peculiarly singular, as well as highly glorious in the war. Within little more than two years he had given a severe blow to each of our three powerful continental enemies, the French, Spaniards, and Dutch. He had in that time taken an admiral of each nation; added twelve line of battle ships, all taken from the enemy, to the British navy; and destroyed five more. He received the unanimous thanks of both houses of parliament; and his majesty added dignity to the peerage of the realm, by calling the victorious admiral to a seat in the upper house, by the title of baron Rodney, of Rodney Stoke, in the county of Somerset.

It has been observed that the victory of the 12th of April was gained by putting in practice an entirely new system of naval tactics, the adoption of which formed an era in our naval history, and may be regarded as the cause of the glorious victories by which the fame of British seamen has been raised to such a pitch of glory; and the maritime power of our enemies in the late war, has not only been crippled, but absolutely annihilated. It has been said, in order to derogate from the honour of the admiral, that, in the instance of the 12th of April, it was the effect of chance, and not effected by the foresight of sir George Rodney. This idea has been satisfactorily exposed and refuted. The only question on the subject is, whether the honour of the plan is due to admiral Rodney or Mr. Clerk, the author of a treatise on “Naval Tactics;” but on this our limits will not permit us to enter.

With the brilliant victory of the 12th of April sir George closed his professional career; to his title was added a pension of 2000l. to descend to his heirs. He died in London the 24th of May, 1792. For his important services to the West Indian islands in particular, a temple was built to receive his statue at Spanish Town, Jamaica. but few his equals. He possessed a bold and original genius, which always carried him direcily to the object he had in view. As a man, he was benevolent, generous, and friendly. He has been known to be writing his private letters, and dictating to three secretaries at the same time. “In private life he displayed the manners of an accomplished gentleman and he who, when called by his country, could hurl its thunders against the foes, and lead its navies to almost undeviating victory, was, in peace, the ornament of domestic society, and a pattern of that elegant and polished behaviour, which almost always distinguishes the higher orders among us.”

, a celebrated French professor of philosophy in the seventeenth century, was born, according to Bayle, in Duuphiny, but more probably at Orange, where, as well as at Die, Nismes, and Geneva, he taught philosophy, and was accounted the greatest master of dialectics in his time. The story of aut Erasmus aut diabolus has been told of him; a stranger to his person, when puzzled by his arguments, having exclaimed es diabolus aut Dtrodo. In physics he adhered to the principles of Gassendus. He had been educated in the protestant religion, but embraced that of popery in 1630, and published his reasons in a volume entitled “Quatre raisons pour lesquelles on doit quitter la religion pretendue reformee,” Paris, 1631, 12mo. Bayle had never seen this, and makes him to have been educated a papist. But whatever satisfaction his “quatre raisons” might have afforded to the catholics, they were not of permanent influence on his own mind, for he afterwards became again an adherent to the reformed religion, in which he died. In 1645 he published in 8vo, his “Disputatio de supposito,” at Francfort (Orange), in which, Bayle tells us, he declared for Nestorius against St. Cyril, not in admitting two persons, but in maintaining that Nestorius does not admit them, and that St. Cyril confounds the two natures of Jesus Christ. This was the opinion of Giles Gaillard, a gentleman of Provence, and an intimate friend of Rodon’s, whom he often quotes, but without naming. The work was condemned to be burnt by the parliament of Toulouse, and the copies are therefore now very rare. Bayle had not been able to procure one, and is misled by Sorbiere in thinking that Gaillard wrote a book with the same title as Rodon’s. But the work of Rodon which made the most noise was his “Tombeau de la Messe,” or downfall of the mass, published at Geneva in 1654, 8vo, 1662, Amst. 1682. For this he was banished from France, by an arret of Jan. 29, 1663, on which he took refuge in Geneva, where he died in 1664. Saurin, who saw him in that city about the time of his death, says he appeared to him to be perfectly orthodox. His character is amply discussed in Saurin’s controversy with Jurieu, “Examen de la Theologie de M. Jurieu, &c.” and Jurieu’s answers.

Senebier, in his literary history of Geneva, gives the following list of Rodon’s other works: 1. “Dispute de TEucharistie,” 1655, 8vo. 2. “Metaphysica,” Orange, 1659, 8vo. 3. “Logica restituta,” Geneva, 1659, 4to. 4. “De existentia Dei,” 1661, 4to. 5. “De Atomis,” Geneva, 1662, 8vo. This is probably his “Disputatio de libertate et atomis,” which he printed at Nismes the same year. 6. “Disputatio realis de ente reali,” Nismes, 1662. 7. “Disputes de la Messe,” or a discourse on these words, “This is my body,” Nismes,“1662, 8vo. 8.” Discours centre I'Astrologie judiciare,“1663, 8vo. 9.” Opera philosophica,“Geneva, 1664, 4to. 10.” Philosophia con^ tracta,“1664, 4to. 11.” La Lumiere de la raison opposee aux tenebres de I'lmpiete*,“Geneva, 1665. 12.” Les Inconstants,“Geneva, 1672, 8vo. To these from Senebier, we may add his” Compendium Logicæ,“1663, 8vo, and” L'Atheisme convaincu,“in 1649, 8vo. Some authors ascribe to him a treatise entitled” Messe trouvee dans L'Ecriture," 1647, 8vo, written when he was a catholic, but there is more reason to attribute this to Lucas Jansen.

, an able statesman and ambassador, was born at Low-Layton in Essex, about 1580, and admitted into Magdalen college, Oxford, in 1593. He was taken from the university in a year or two; and, after spending some time in one of the inns of court, and in France, was made esquire of the body to queen Elizabeth. In 1604, he was knighted by king James; and soon after sent, by Henry prince of Wales, to make discoveries in America. In 1614, he was sent ambassador to the great mogul, at whose court he continued till 1618. During his residence there, he employed himself zealously in the service of the East India merchants, but gave a singular offence to the grand mogul. This monarch, happy in his pride and ignorance, fancied his dominions to be the greater part of the habitable world. But his mortification was great when, in Mercator’s maps, presented to him by sir Thomas Roe, he found that he possessed but a small part of it; and he was so chagrined, that he ordered the maps to be given to sir Thomas again.

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

During his residence in the East, he made a large collection of valuable manuscripts in the Greek and oriental languages; which, in 1628, he presented to the Bodleian library. He also brought over the fine Alexandrian manuscript of the Greek Bible, sent as a present to Charles I. by Cyril, patriarch of Constantinople; which has since been transcribed and published by Dr. Grabe. In 1629, he was sent ambassador to mediate a peace between the kings of Poland and Sweden. He succeeded in his negociation and gained so much credit with the great Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden, that he inspired that king with a design, which he executed in 1630, of making a descent into Germany to restore the freedom of the empire. Adolphus, upon gaining the victory of Leipsic, sent sir Thomas a present of 2000l. and in his letter calls him his “strenuum consultorem,” he being the first who had advised him to the war. He was afterwards employed in other negociations. In 1640, he was chosen member of parliament for the university of Oxford; and shewed himself a person of great eloquence, learning, and experience, as appears from his printed speeches. The year after, he was sent ambassador to the diet of Ratisbon, in order to mediate the restoration of the late king of Bohemia’s son to the palatinate; and, upon his return, was made chancellor of the garter, and one of the privy couuc;!. The calamities of the nation, in which he cou!d not avoid having a share, not only embittered his life, but probably contributed to shorten it; for he died in Nov. 1644. An epitaph was composed for him by Dr. Gerard Langbaine, but never set up: it may be seen in Wood’s “Athen. Oxon.” By will he left to the Bodleian two hundred and forty-two silver medals.

He had all the accomplishments of the scholar, the gentleman, and the courtier. He left a great number of manuscripts behind him; and, in 1730, proposals were published for printing by subscription, in 5 vols. folio, “The Negotiations and Embasbies of Sir Thomas Roe, from 1620 to 1644:” but, the undertakers not meeting with sufficient encouragement, the design was dropped, and only the volume mentioned above was published in 1740 by Mr. Richardson.

, an eminent physician and great benefactor to Scotland, was born at Sheffield in Yorkshire, in 1718. His father Whs a considerable manufacturer and exporter of Sheffield goods, and intended this his son for the same business, but perceiving his inclination to learning, determined to give him a liberal education, or such as was attainable among the dissenters, of which he was one of the strict sort. After sone school education, therefore, at Sheffield, he sent him to the academy kept by the celebrated Dr. Doddridge at Northampton, where thd young man laid the foundation of that classical taste and knowledge for which he was afterwards much distinguished. From Northampton he was sent to the university of Edinburgh, where he studied medicine, and particularly chemistry. After the usual course of these studies here, he pursued the same at Leyden, then considered as the first medical school in Europe, and took his doctor’s degree in February 1743.

Soon after his return from the continent, some circumstances induced Dr. Roebuck to settle as a physician at Birmingham, where he met with great encouragement, and at his leisure hours was induced to turn his studies and industry to various objects besides those of his profession. Strongly attached to the rising science of chemistry, he conceived high views of extending its usefulness, and rendering it subservient to the improvement of arts and manufactures. With this view he fitted up a small laboratory in his house, in which he spent every moment of his time which he could spare from the duties of his profession. The first efforts of his genius and industry led him to the discovery of certain improved methods of refining gold and silver, and particularly to an ingenious method of collecting the smaller particles of these precious metals, which had formerly been lost in the practical operations of many of the manufacturers. By other chemical processes, carried on about the same time in his little laboratory, he discovered also improved methods of making sublimate, hartshorn, and sundry other articles of equal importance. In order to render these beneficial to himself, and useful to the public, he associated himself with Mr. Samuel Garbet, of Birmingham, a gentleman of abilities and enterprizing spirit, and established a laboratory upon a large scale, which was productive of many advantages to the manufacturers of that place, and of such emolument to themselves, as contributed greatly to the boldness of their future projects.

The extensive use of the vitriolic (sulphuric) acid irr chemistry, and the prospect of its application to some of the mechanic arts, had produced a great demand for that article, and turned the attention of the chemists to various methods of obtaining it. Dr. Ward had made great progress in this, and was the first who established a profitable manufacture, but the price of it was still high, arising from ther great expence of the glass vessels, which he used in procuring it, and the frequent accidents to which they were liable in the process. Dr. Roebuck, however, who hucl been for some time making experiments on the subject, discovered a method of preparing it by substituting, in place of the glass vessels formerly used, lead ones of a great size, which, together with various other improvements in different parts of the process, completely effected his end. After the necessary preparations had been made, Messrs. Roebuck and Garbet established a manufacture of the oil of vitriol at Preston-pans in Scotland, in 1749, and not onlyserved the public at a cheaper rate than had ever been done formerly, but realized a greater annual profit from a smaller capital than had been done in any similar undertaking. The vitriol work is still carried on at Preston-pans; but long before Dr. Roebuck’s death, he withdrew his capital from it.

About this time Dr. Roebuck was urged, by some of his friends, to leave Birmingham, and to settle as a physician at London, where his abilities might have a more extensive field of exertion. But the chemical concerns, with which he was now deeply occupied, holding out to him the prospect of a richer harvest, determined him to give up the practice of medicine altogether, and to fix his residence for the greatest part of the year in Scotland. In the prosecution of his chemical experiments, he had been led to bestow great attention on the processes of smelting iron stone, and had made some discoveries, by which that operation might be greatly facilitated, particularly by using pit-coal in place of charcoal. This led him and his enterprizing partner to project a very extensive manufactory of iron; and such was the confidence which their friends reposed in their abilities and integrity, that a sufficient capital was soon procured. When all previous matters had been concerted, Dr. Roebuck began to look round for a proper situation, and after a careful examination of many places, at length made choice of a spot on the banks of the river Carron, as the most advantageous situation for the establishment of the iron manufacture. Here he found they could easily command abundance of water for the necessary machinery; and in the neighbourhood of it, as uell as every where both along the north and south coasts of the Frith of Forth, were to be found inexhaustible quarries’of iron-stone, liuie-stone, and coal. From Carron also, they could easily transport their manufactures to different countries by sea. The communication with Glasgow at that time by land carriage, which opened to them a ready way to the American market, was short and easy.

Many other things, that need not be here enumerated, fell to Dr. Roebuck’s share in preparing and providing for the introduction of this new manufacture into Scotland, particularly with respect to the planning and erection of the furnaces and machinery. To insure success in that department, nothing was omitted which ability, industry, and experience could suggest. With this view he called in the assistance of Mr. Smeaton, then by far the first engineer in England, and from him received plans and drawings of the water-wheels and blowing apparatus, which, notwithstanding all the mechanical improvements which have been made since, remain unrivalled in any of the other ironworks erected in Britain. This was the first introduction of Mr. Smeaton into Scotland, and was the occasion of various other displays of the skill and experience of that celebrated engineer ia that part of the island. With the same view, and to the same effect, in a future period of his operations, he employed the celebrated Mr.jJames Watt, then of Glasgow, and had the merit of rendering that inventive genius in the mechanical arts, better known both in Scotland and England. The necessary preparations for the establishment of the iron works at Carron were finished in the end of the year 1759, and on Jan. 1, 1760, the first furnace was blown; and in a short time afterwards a second was erected. The subsequent progress of this great work, the many improvements introduced, and its vast importance to Scotland, are matters of local history and interest, on which we cannot enter in this place; but enough has been said to prove that it is to Dr. Roebuck that country owes these great advantages.

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

It would be painful to mention the unhappy consequences of this ruinous adventure to his family and to himself. It cut off for ever the flattering prospect which they had of an independent fortune, suited to their education and rank in life. It made many cruel encroachments upon the time and occupations of a man whose mind was equally fitted to enjoy the high attainments of science, and the elegant amusements of taste. As the price of so many sacrifices, he was only enabled to draw from his colliery, and that by the indulgence of his creditors, a moderate annual maintenance for himself and his family during his life. At his death, his widow was left without any proVision whatever for her immediate or future support, and without the smallest advantage from the extraordinary exertions and meritorious industry of her husband.

Dr. Roebuck had, some years before his death been attacked by a complaint that required a dangerous chirurgical operation, which he supported with his usual spirit and resolution. In a short time he was restored to a considerable share of his former health and activity; but the effects of it never entirely left him, and several slighter returns of the complaint gradually impaired his constitution. He still, however, continued, until within a few weeks of his death, to visit his works, and to give directions to his clerks and overseers. He was confined to his bed only a few days, and died July 17, 1794, in the seventy-sixth year of his age, retaining to the last all his faculties, his spirit and good humour, as well as the great interest which he took, as a man of science and reflection, in the uncommon events which the present age has exhibited.

From a man so deeply and so constantly engaged in the detail of active business, many literary compositions were not to be expected. The great object which he kept invariably in view, and which gives him a just claim to the respect and gratitude of his country, was to promote arts and manufactures, rather than to establish theories and hypotheses. The few essays which he left, however, enable us to judge of what might have been expected from his talents, knowledge, and boldness of invention, if he had had more leisure for study and investigation. A comparison of the heat of London and Edinburgh, read in the Royal Society of London June 29, 1775; experiments on ignited bodies, read there. Feb. 1C, 1776; observations on the ripening and filling of corn, read in the Royal Society of Edinburgh June 5, 1784, are all the writings of his, two political pamphlets excepted, which have been published.

, a celebrated protestant divine, and theological professor, was born in 1653 at Doelberg, in Westphalia. He received, at Unna, an excellent education in the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew languages, and in 1670 maintained with great ability a thesis “de studio mathematico philosophic prsemittendo.” In the same year he went to Utrecht, where he received lectures from the celebrated Francis Burmann on the scriptures; but on the war with France, was obliged to go to Gottingen, where he studied under James Alting: this place also becoming unsafe, he returned to Germany, and studied for some time at Marpurg, and after that at Heidelberg. From thence he went to Basil and Zurich; and in 1676 he once more visited the United Provinces, and spent two years at the universities of Utrecht and Leyden. No sooner had he returned to his native country than he received an invitation to become pastor of the protcstant church at Cologne, which he declined, owing to ill-health; and he undertook the chaplainship to Elizabeth, abbess of Hervorden, and daughter of Frederic, king of Bohemia; which post he retained till the death of the princess, in 1680. After this he was appointed preacher to Albertine, princess of Orange, and widow of William of Nassau; and in 1686, was elected professor of divinity at the university of Franeker. In June 1704 he was appointed, on very honourable and advantageous terms, professor of divinity at Utrecht, a post which he retained with great reputation till his death, July 12, 1718, in the 66th year of his age. Barman says, he was without dispute a first-rate philosopher and divine; but leaves it to his brethren to determine whether he was not somewhat heretical in his singular opinions on the generation of the son of God, and on the temporal death of believers. These were expressed in his “Theses Theologicos de generatione filii, et morte fidelium temporali,” Francfort, 1689, 4to, and were answered by Vitringa and others. His principal works are, 1. “Commentarius in principinm epistolae Pauli ad Epht’sos,” Utrecht, 1715, 4to. 2. A continuation of the same, with an exegesis on the Colossians, ibid. 1731, 4to. 3. “Explicatio Catecheseos Heidelbergensis,” ibid. 1728. 4. “Exegesis in Psalmum Ixxxix.” Duisburg, 1728, 8vo. 5. “Gulichii Analysis et compendium hbrorum propheticorum antiqui et novi fcederis,” Amst. 1683, 4to. 6. “Oratio inauguralis de religione rationali,” afterwards, and often reprinted under the title of a “Dissertntio,” which Heumann calls a very learned and elegant work,

, or Rømer (Olaus), a Danish astronomer and mathematician, was born at Arhusen in Jutland in 1644; and, at eighteen, was sent to the university of Copenhagen. He applied himself assiduously to the study of mathematics and astronomy, and became such an adept in those sciences, that, when Picard was sent by Lewis XIV. in 1671, to make observations in the North, he was so pleased with him, that he engaged him to return with him to France, and had him presented to the king, who ordered him to teach the dauphin mathematics, and settled a pension on him. He was joined with Picard and Cassini, in making astronomical observations; and, in 1672, was admitted a member of the academy of sciences. During the ten years he resided at Paris, he gained a prodigious reputation by his discoveries; yet is said. to have complained afterwards that his coadjutors ran away with the honour of many things which belonged to him. In 1681, Christian V. king of Denmark called him back to his own country, and made him professor of astronomy at Copenhagen. He employed him also in reforming the coin and the architecture, in regulating the weights and measures, and in measuring the high roads throughout the kingdom. Frederic IV. the successor of Christian, shewed the same favour to Roemer, and conferred new dignities on him. He was preparing to publish the result of his observations, when he died Sept. 19, 1710, aged 66; but some of his observations, with his manner of making those observations, were published in 1735, under the title of “Basis Astronomise,” by his scholar Peter Horrebow, then professor of astronomy at Copenhagen. Roemer was the first who found out the velocity with which light moves, by means of the eclipses of Jupiter’s satellites. He had observed for many years that, when Jupiter was at his greatest distance from the earth, where he could be observed, the emersions of his first satellite happened constantly 15 or J 6 minutes later than the calculation gave them. Hence he concluded that the light reflected by Jupiter took up this time in running over the excess of distance, and consequently that it took up 16 or 18 minutes in running over the diameter of the earth’s orbit, and 8 or in coming from the sun to us, provided its velocity was nearly uniform. This discovery had at first many opposers but it was afterwards confirmed by Dr. Bradley in the most ingenious and beautiful manner.

, or rather Richard Of Hexham, an ancient historian, was brought up in the convent of Hexham, in Northumberland, where he embraced the monastic life, and was elected prior some time at least befqre 1138, for he saw the Scottish army march into Yorkshire, under their king David I. previous to the battle of the Standard, which was fought in September that year. He wrote the history of that campaign, wherein he points out, in the most declamatory style, the ravages committed by the Scottish army. But such was his ignorance, that he calls the Highlanders, and Galovidians, who composed part of king David’s army, P-icti, or Picts, as if they had painted their bodies in the same manner as in ancient times; whereas those people only wore party-coloured garments, which the Highlanders call Tartans.

, doctor of music, and an ecclesiastical composer, whose works are still contained in our cathedral service, and for whose fame Anthony Wood has manifested great zeal, was born at Windsor, and brought up in that college under Dr. Nath. Giles; being employed there, first as a singing boy, and afterwards in the capacity of lay clerk or singing man. Thence he went to Ireland, and was appointed organist of Christ-church ia Dublin, where he continued till the breaking out of the rebellion, in 1641; at which time, being forced to quit his station, he returned to Windsor, where he was again reinstated as choirman; but being soon after silenced in consequence of the civil wars, he procured a subsistence by teaching in the neighbourhood. And during this time, according to his friend Anthony Wood, having addicted himself much to study, he acquired great credit as a composer, and produced several sets of airs in four parts for violins and an organ, which being then imagined the best that could be composed of that kind, were sent as great rarities to the archduke Leopold, afterwards emperor, and himself a great musician; and, upon their being performed by his band, they were very much admired.

In 1658, by the favour of his friend Dr. Ingelo, he'obtained the degree of bachelor in music at Cambridge, and acquired great reputation in that university by his exercise. Soon after, on Dr. Ingelo going chaplain to Bulstrode lord Whitelock, into Sweden, he carried with him some of Rogers’s best compositions, which, upon being repcatedly performed in the presence of Christiana, queen of Sweden, were very much applauded. At the restoration he was appointed to compose the music that was performed at Guildhall, on the day iiis majesty and his brothers, the dukes of York and Gloucester, dined there with the lordmayor, by which he greatly increased his reputation. About this time also he was chosen organist of Eton college, which he resigned soon after, on being invited to Oxford, where he was appointed to the same office in Magdalen college. And in I6G9, upon opening the new theatre in that city, he was created doctor in music. Me continued, says Ant. Wood, in the university, where he was much esteemed, till 1685, when he was ejected, in company with the fellows of his college, by king James II. after which he long resided in the skirts of the town, wholly disregarded.

“His compositions for instruments,” says Ant. Wood, “whether in two, three, or four parts, have been highly valued, and were thirty years ago always first called for, taken out and played as well in the public music schools, as in private chambers: and Dr. Wilson, the professor, (the greatest and most curious judge of music that ever was), usually wept when he heard them well performed, as being wrapt up in an ecstacy or, if you will, melted down while others smiled, or had their hands and eyes lifted up, at the excellence of them.” “It is to be feared,” says Dr. Burney, “that instead of weeping, the wicked lovers of modern music would now laugh, if they were to hear the quaint and starched strains, and see on paper the ruffs and roll-ups of honest Ben. Rogers at the Operahouse, or professional concert, Hanover-square. Bin, alas! what is the secular music, that thirty years have not wrinkled, withered, and rendered superannuated!”

, an antiquary, and a man of taste, was born Aug. 2, 1711, in Dean-street, Soho, and received the first rudiments of education at a private school near the Mews, but he did not for some time after this devote himself seriously to literary pursuits. When he did, however, he exerted that innate industry and application, which constituted a striking part of his character; and, with no aid but his own abilities, overcame all other difficulties which stood in the way of an acquaintance with learning and science. In May 1731, he was placed in the Custom-house, where he executed the duties of the several places which he held, with strict attention and integrity, and at length arrived at the office of clerk of the certificates, in which he continued almost to the end of his life.

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

, a man of considerable ability in the court of queen Elizabeth, and who in some of his writings calls himself Albimontan us, was the son of John Rogers of Derytend in the parish of Aston in Warwickshire, where he was born about 1540. His father, who had emtxraced the reformed religion, being obliged to quit his country, at the accession of queen Mary, took his son abroad with him, where, at Wittemberg, he was educated under the celebrated Melancthon. When the death of qneen Mary had put an end to persecution for religion’s sake, Mr. Rogers, senior, returned with his family, and placed his son at Oxford, where he appears to have taken his degrees, although Wood has not been able to specify when, or in what college he studied. Afterwards he obtained an introduction to court, where his talents recommended him to the place of one of the clerks of the council, and he had the farther honour of being often employed by queen Elizabeth in embassies to the Netherlands and other parts, in 1575, 1577, and 1588. During these embassies he appears to have acted with wisdom, diligence, and caution, and to have been of the greatest utility to Cecil from the correct information he procured of the proceedings of foreign governments. Strype, who had seen a volume of his political notes and letters, formed during his residence abroad, has preserved one of his communications to secretary Cecil, in the appendix to his “Annals,” No. 48. It contains some important intelligence on political subjects, and is evidently the production of a sensible man accustomed to view the world and its inhabitants with an eye of penetration and sagacity. Many of his letters and instructions are among the Cotton Mss. in the British Museum. He died Feb. 11, 1590, and was buried in Sunbury church, Middlesex.

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

, the proto-martyr in the days of queew Mary, received a liberal education in the university of Cambridge, and there, we presume, entered into holy orders. Some time after this the company of merchant adventurers, as they were then called, appointed him their chaplain at Antwerp, where he remained many years. This proved also the means of his conversion from popery, for meeting there with Tindal and Coverdale, who had left England that they might enjoy their religious opinions with more freedom, he was induced by their conversation to examine the points in controversy more closely, the result of which was his embracing the sentiments of the reformers as far as then understood. He also joined with these colleagues in making the first translation of the Bible into English, which appeared at Hamburgh in 1532, under the fictitious name of Thomas Matthew. Rogers was corrector of the press on this occasion, and translated that part of the Apocrypha which was left unfinished by Tindal,' and also contributed some of the marginal notes. At Antwerp Mr. Rogers married, and thence went to Wittemberg, and had acquired such readiness in the Dutch language that he was chosen pastor of a congregation there, which office he discharged greatly to their satisfaction until the accession of Edward VI. At this time bishop Ridley invited him home, and made him prebendary and divinity-reader of St. Paul’s, where he was a very frequent preacher as long as Edward lived. When queen Mary made her triumphal entry into London, Aug. 3, 1553, Rogers had the boldness to preach a sermon at Paul’s Cross on the following Sunday, in which he exhorted the people to abide by the doctrine taught in king Edward’s days, and to resist popery in all its forms and superstitions. For this he was immediately called before the privy-council, in which were several of the restored popish bishops, but appears to have defended himself so ably that he was dismissed unhurt. This security, however, was not of long duration, and two days before Mary issued her proclamation against preaching the reformed doctrines (August 18) he was ordered to remain a prisoner in his own house at St. Paul’s. Erom this he might, it is thought, easily have escaped, and he certainly had many inducements to make the attempt. He knew he could expect no forgiveness; that he might be well provided for in Germany; and that he had a wife and ten children; but he preferred giving his testimony to the truth of what he had believed and preached, at whatever risk.

After being confined six months in his own house he was removed to Newgate, where his confinement was aggravated by every species of severity and in January 1555, was examined before Gardiner, bishop of Winchester the purport of his examination, as written by himself, isgiven at considerable length by Fox, but is not capable of abridgment. The issue was that Mr. Rogers was condemned to be burnt on Feb. 4, which sentence he bore with the greatest constancy and patience. On the day of his execution he was awakened with some difficulty out of a sound sleep, and only requested of Bonner, who came to perform the office of degrading him from holy orders, that he might see his family; but this was denied him. On his way, however, to Smithfield, his wife and ten children, with one at the breast, contrived to meet him. When he came to the stake, although not permitted to say much, he exhorted the people to remain steady in the faith and doctrine which had been taught them, and for which he was now willingto resign his life. As he was the first who had suffered in this reign, and one well known for his piety and usefulness, his death made no slight impression on the multitude who witnessed it, many of whom were afterwards emboldened by such scenes as this wretched reign presented, either to suffer in the same cause, or to preserve the tenour and spirit of the reformation until the accession of Elizabeth restored them to their riberty.

, an English divine, was born in 1679, at Ensham in Oxfordshire, where his father was vicar and rector of Wick-Rissington, in Gloucestershire. He was educated at New college school, in Oxford; and, in 1693, elected scholar of Corpus Christi college. After taking the degrees in arts, and entering into orders, he waited a long time for a fellowship, by reason of the slowsuccession in the college; but at length succeeded Mr, Edmund Chishull, in 1706, but in the mean time had becti presented to the vicarage of Buchland, in Berkshire, about ten miles from Oxford, in which he continued about five or six years, dividing his’ time usefully between his cure and the university. At the former he became so popular, that the inhabitants entered into a handsome subscription for an afternoon sermon by him, which was discontinued after he left them. Jn 1710, be took a bachelor of divinity’s degree; and, two years after, went to London, to be lecturer of St. Clement’s Danes. He afterwards became lecturer of the united parishes of Christ-church, and St. Leonard’s Foster-lane. In 1716, he was presented to the rectory of Wrington, in Somersetshire; and, the same year, resigning his fellowship, married the hon. Mrs. Lydia Hare, sister to the lord Colerane, who was his pupil in the university. Some time after, he was elected canon residentiary of the church of Wells; in which he also bore the office of sub-dean. In 1719, he engaged in the Bangorian controversy, and published, upon that occasion, “A Discourse of the visible and invisible Church of Christ: in which it is shewn, that the powers, claimed by the officers of the visible church, are not inconsistent with the supremacy of Christ as head, or with the rights and liberties of Christians, as members of the invisible church,” 8vo. The Rev. Dr. Sykes having published an “Answer to this Discourse,” our author replied to him in “A Review of the Discourse of the visible and invisible Church of Christ.”

He gained much credit by these performances, even those who were against his argument allowing him to have good parts and an excellent pen; and the university of Oxford made a public acknowledgment of their opinion of his merit, by conferring on him, in 1721, without his knowledge, and by diploma, the 'degree of doctor in divinity. In 1726, he was made chaplain to George II. then prince of Wales and about the same time appeared in defence of Christianity, against the attacks of Collins in his “Scheme of Literal Prophecy.” Rogers did not at, first professedly write against the “Scheme;” but, publiihing, in 1727, a volume of sermons, entitled “The necessity of Divine Revelation, and the truth of the Christian Religion, asserted,” he prefixed to them “A Preface with Remarks on the Scheme of Literal Prophecy.” This preface, however, in the opinion of his friends, seemed Kable to some exception, or at least to demand a more full and distinct explication: and he received a letter upon it the same year from his friend Dr. Nath. Marshall. He endeavoured to give satisfaction to all; and therefore, Collins having written “A Letter to the Rev. Dr. Rogers, on occasion of his eight Sermons concerning the necessity of Divine Revelation, and the Preface prefixed to them,” our author published “A Vindication of the Civil Establishment of Religion, wherein some positions of Mr. Chandler, the author of the l Literal Scheme, 7 &c. and an aiionymo-us Letter on that subject, are occasionally considered. With an Appendix, containing a Letter from the Rev. Dr. Marshall, and an Answer to the same,” 1723, 8vo.

The same year, 1726, having resigned his lecture of St. Clement’s Danes, he retired from London, with an intention to spend the remainder of his life in the country, chiefly at Wrington: but he had not been there long, when he received an offer, from the dean and chapter of St. Paul’s, of the vicarage of St. Giles’s Cripplegate, in London. Be was instituted to it, Oct. 1728, but with the greatest anxiety and reluctance; for he had set his heart upon the country, and was then, as he had always been from hi youth, remarkably fond of rural exercises and diversions. He did not enjoy his new preferment above six months; for he died May 1, 1729, in his fiftieth year. He was buried in the parish church of Ensham, where a handsome monument is erected to his memory: his funeral sermon was preached by Dr. Marshall. After his decease, some volumes of his sermons were published and two tracts, viz. “Reasons against Conversion to the Church of Rome,” and “A Persuasive to Conformity addressed to Dissenters,” never before printed.

Dr. Rogers was a man of good abilities, and an excellent writer, though no profound scholar, nor ambitious of being thought one. He neither collected nor read many books; being persuaded, that a few well chosen, and read to good purpose, serve infinitely more to edification, if not so much to ostentation and parade. We are told, that the judicious Hooker and the ingenious Mr. Norris were his favourites; and that he was particularly conversant in their writings.

, whom Wood styles “a most admirable theologist, an excellent preacher, and well deserving every way of the sacred function,” was a native of Cheshire, and entered a student of Christ church in 1568. He took orders very early, and became a constant preacher; was M. A. in 1576, chaplain to 'Bancroft, bishop of London; and at last, in 1581, rector of Horninger, near Bury St. Edmunds, in Suffolk, where he lived in great esteem, and died Feb. 22, 1616. These are all the particulars Wood has given of this Mr. Rogers, who appears to have been a voluminous author and translator. Among his original works are, 1. “A Philosophical Discourse, entitled, The Anatomy of the Mind,” Lond. 1576, 8vo, with some encomiastic verses by his fellow student, afterwards the celebrated Camden. 2. “Of the End of the World, and Second Coming of Christ,” ibid. Lond. 1577, 4to, reprinted 1582 and 1583, in 8vo. 3. “The English Creed, wherein is contained in tables an exposition on the articles which every man is to subscribe unto,” &c. ibid. 1579 and 1585, fol. This appears also to have been reprinted twice under a somewhat different title; the last edition, in 1586 and 1621, is called “An Exposition of the 39 articles of the Church of England,” 4to. This work, according to Wood, was not at first received so well as it deserved, and some things in it he says gave offence, not only to papists and schismatics, but even to “many protestants of a middle temper.” Wood has expressed their objections rather obscurely, but it may be conjectured that Mr. Rogers interpreted the articles in their literal sense, and did not admit, as Wood adds, of “the charitable latitude formerly allowed in those articles.” 4. “A golden chain taken out of the rich treasurehouse of the Psalms of David,” ibid. 1579 and 1587, 12mo. 5. “Historical Dialoguetouchingantichristand popery,” &c. ibid. 1589, 8vo. 6. “Sermons on Romans xii. v. 6, 7, 8,” ibid. 1590. 7. “Miles Christian us, or, a Defence of all necessary writings and writers, written against an Epistle prefixed to a Catechism by Miles Moses,” ibid. 1590, 4to. 8. “Table of the lawful use of an Oath, and the cursed state of vain swearers,” ibid. 9. “Two Dialogues,” or Conferences concerning kneeling at the Sacrament, ibid. 1608. Wood enumerates about thirteen volumes of translations from various foreign divines, among whom are St. Augustine, Thomas a Kempis, &c. &C.

, another English divine, of a somewhat different stamp, was the son and grandson of two successive rectors of Bishops Hampton, in Warwickshire, where he was horn, Dec. 27, 1660, and educated at the free-school there. In Lent-term 1675, he entered of Trinity college, Oxford, but soon after removed to Hart hall, where he took his degrees in arts, and went into holy orders. Wood celebrates him as a man of extraordinary memory, and independent of the common helps to that faculty, either in the pulpit or in conversation. The latter he enlivened by quotations of uncommon accuracy, particularly from the classics, and would even give the page, &c. if required* His sermons he carefully studied, yet delivered them fluently without notes, and, as Wood says, in elegant and correct language. In July 1689, he was inducted to the small rectory of Slapton, near Towcester, in Northamptonshire. He died of the small-pox, while on a visit at London, June 8, 1694, and was buried in St. Saviour’s, Southwark. Wood speaks of him as a true son of the church of England, in opposition to all extremes, and his writings shew him a friend to the revolution. These writings are mostly poetical, published without his name. As we have not seen any of them, we can only deduce from some expressions used by Wood, that they were not all becoming the character of a divine; their titles are, 1. “Lux occidentalis or Providence displayed in the coronation of king William and queen Mary,” Lond. 1689. 2. “The Loyal and Impartial Satyrist, containing eight miscellany poems,” ibid. 1693, 4to. These seem mostly levelled at the Jesuits and Jacobites. 3. “A Poesy for Lovers,” &c. ibid. 1693, 4to. 4. “The conspiracy of guts and brains; or an answer to the Turn-shams,” ibid. 1693. In prose, he wrote “A true Protestant Bridle; or some cursory remarks upon a Sermon preached (by William Stephens, rector of Sutton) before the Lord Mayor, &c. Jan. 30, 1693,” ibid. 1694, 4to; and the “Commonwealthsman unmasked,” a rebuke, as he calls it, to the “Account of Denmark,” by Molesworth. This he dedicated, and had the honour to present to king William, who received it very graciously.

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

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

, a French philosopher, was the son of a rich merchant at Amiens, and born there in 1620. He cultivated the languages and belles lettres in his own country, and then was sent to Paris to study philosophy. He seems to have been a lover of truth, and to have sought it with much impartiality. He read the ancient and modern philosophers; but was most struck with Des Cartes, of whom he became a zealous follower, and drew up an abridgment and explanation of his philosophy with great clearness and method. In the preface to his “Physics,” for so his work is entitled, he makes no scruple to say, that “the abilities and accomplishments of this philosopher must oblige the whole world to confess, that France is at least as capable of producing and raising men versed in all arts and branches of knowledge as ancient Greece.” Clerselier, well known for his translation of many pieces of Des Cartes, conceived such an affection for Rohault, on account of his attachment to this philosopher, that he gave him his daughter in marriage, against all the remonstrances of his family.

, wife of one of the republican ministers of France, who signed the order for the execution of the king, was born at Paris in 1754. She was the daughter of an engraver, and acquired some skill in music and painting, and a general taste for the fine arts. In 1780 she married Roland, and in 1787 visited Switzerland and England, and in these countries is said to have acquired that ardent attachment to the principles of liberty, which was in general so little understood by her countrymen. M. Roland having been appointed inspector of the manufactories at Lyons, was deputed to the constituent assembly, to obtain from it succours necessary for the payment of the debt of that town. Madame Roland at this period settled with her husband in the capital, and took delight in making her house the rendezvous of the Brissotine party, and among them acquired such superiority, that her biographers would have us believe that, for a time, she was the secret power that directed the whole government of France; perhaps one reason why it was so ill directed. Jn Marcji 1792, when the king endea r voured to allay the public discontents, by appointing 3, popular administration, Roland was chosen minister or the interior, and what kind of minister he was may be conjectured from a speech of Danton’s. When Roland resigned, and was urgently pressed by the assembly to resume his functions, Dan ton exclaimed, “if we give an invitation to Roland, we must give one to his wife too. I know all the virtues of the minister, but we want men who see otherwise than by their wives.” Indeed this lady, who had a remarkably good opinion of herself, informs us in her memoirs that she was in fact the minister without the name; and revised, or perhaps dictated, the letter which Roland addressed to the king on going out of office; “if he had written sermons,” said she, “I should have done the same.” On the 7th of December, 1792, having appeared at the bar of the national convention, to repel a denunciation made against her, she spoke with ease and eloquence, and was afterwards admitted to the honours of a sitting. She presented herself there again, when the decree was passed against her husband; but then, her eloquence having lost its charms, she was refused a hearing, and was herself sent to the Abbaye. From this prison she wrote to the assembly, and to the minister of the interior; her section also demanded her liberty, but it was in vain; and on the 24th of June, 1793, she was sent to the convent of St. Pelagic, which had been converted into a prison, where she passed her time in consoling her fellow prisoners, and composing an account of her own life, which has since been published. At length she was called before the revolutionary tribunal, and on Nov. 8, was condemned to death for having conspired against the unity and indivisibility of the republic. Her execution immediately followed. On passing the statue of liberty, in the Place de la Revolution, she bent her head towards it, exclaiming, “O Liberty, how many crimes are perpetrated in thy name.” She left one daughter, whose only provision was her mother’s writings, which are as follows: “Opuscules,” on moral topics, which treat of the soul, melancholy, morality, old age, friendship, love, retirement, &c. “Voyage en Angleterre et en Suisse;” and when in prison she composed what she entitled “Appel a Timpartiale Posterite”,“containing her own private memoirs, a strange mixture of modern philosophy and the current politics of the revolution, with rhapsodies of romance, and every thing that can shew the dangers of a <* little learning.” Although this work was written when. she was in hourly expectation of death, its principal characteristics are levity and vanity. She was unquestionably a woman of considerable abilities, and might have been, what we are told she was very ambitious of, a second Macauley, without exciting the envy of the amiable part of her sex; but she would be the head of a political party that was to guide the affairs of a distracted nation, and she fell a sacrifice to the confusion of principle in which she had assisted.

, an early Italian historian, was born at Padua in 1200. He studied at Bologna, and had kept a chronicle of memorable events as they occurred, which was continued by his son, and in 1262 was read publicly before the university of Padua, submitted to an attentive examination, and solemnly approved, Rolandino died in 1276. His history, which extends to 1260, is accounted faithful, and has been highly praised by Vossius, who thinks that he surpassed all the writers of his age in perspicuity, order, and judgment. An edition of his work, with other chronicles, was given at Venice in 1636, by Felix Osius, and it has been reprinted by Muratori, in the seventh volume of his Italian historians.

, a learned and upright judge, was the second son of Robert Rolle of Heanton in Devonshire, where he was born in 1589. In 1606 he entered Exeter college, Oxford, and resided there about two years, after which he was admitted a member of the Inner Temple, Feb. 6, 1608, and studied the law with great perseverance and success. His contemporaries Here were Littleton, Herbert, Gardiner, and Selden, with all whom he formed a lasting friendship. Being admitted to the bar, he practised in the court of King’s Bench, and raised a very high reputation as a sound lawyer. His reading and practice were equally extensive; and he seems to have been formed by nature for patient study, deep penetration, and clearness and solidity of judgment. He soon discovered the hinge upon which every cause turned, and when he was convinced himself, had the art of easily convincing others. In the latter end of the reign of James I. and beginning of that of Charles I. he sat as member of parliament for Kellington in Cornwall; and in 1638 was elected summer reader of the Inner Temple,but the plague raging then in London, he did not read until Lent following, and in 1640 he was made serjeant at law. On the breaking out of the rebellion, he took the covenant, and, in 1645, was made one of the judges; and in 1648 was promoted to be lord chief justice of the King’s Bench, in which office his integrity was acknowledged by the generality of the loyalists themselves. He was, of all the judges, the most averse from trying any of the king’s party for treason, thinking indeed that their defence, in which they insisted upon the illegality of the government, was too well founded. He resigned his office some time before his death, which happened July 30, 1656. He was buried in the chinch of Shapwicke near Glastonbury in Somersetshire, the manor of which he had purchased some years before, and had his residence there. In Tawstock church near Barnstaple in Devonshire, is a monument to Alexander Rolle, a lawyer, who died in 1660, aged forty-eight, and was probably son to our judge.

The “Reports of sir Henry Rolle in the King’s Bench from 12 to 22 Jac. I.” 2 vols. folio, French, as well as his other learned works, are held in great repute; and besides these, which were printed in 1675, he wrote “An Abridgment of Cases, and Resolutions of the Law,” in French, which was published by sir Matthew Hale, with a learned English preface, addressed to the young students in the law of England, in which he gives judge Rolle a very high character. According to Wood, the “great men of the law living in those times used to say, that this Henry Rolle was a just man, and' that Matthew Hale was a good man; yet the former was by nature penurious, and his wife made him worse: the other was contrary, being wonderfully charitable and open-handed.” Mr. Hargrave mentions the above “Abridgment” as excellent in its kind, and in point of method, succinctness, legal precision, and many other respects, fit to be proposed as an example for other abridgments of the law. D‘Anvers and Viner were so sensible of this, that they both adopted lord Rolle’s method; in fact D’Anvers’s abridgment, as far as it goes, is translated from that of lord Rolle.

, a French mathematician, was born at Ambert, a small town in Auvergne, April 21, 1652. His first studies and employments were under notaries and attorneys occupations but little suited to his genius, and therefore he quitted them and went to Paris in 1675, with no other recommendation than that of writing a fine hand, and subsisted by giving lessons in penmanship. But as it was his inclination for the mathematics which had drawn him to that city, he attended the masters in this science, and soon became one himself. Ozanam proposed a question in arithmetic to him, to which Rolle gave a solution so clear and good, that the minister Colbert made him a handsome gratuity, which at last became a fixed pension. He then abandoned penmanship, and gave himself up entirely to algebra and other branches of the mathematics. His conduct in life gained him many friends; in which his scientific merit, his peaceable and regular behaviour, with an exact and scrupulous probity of manners, were conspicuous. He was chosen a member of the ancient academy of sciences in 1685, and named second geometrical-pensionary on its renewal in 1699; which he enjoyed till his death, which happened July 5, 1719, at the age of 67.

, a learned Italian, was born at Rome in 1687. He was the son of an architect, and a pupil of the celebrated Gravina, who inspired him with a taste for learning and poetry. An intelligent and learned English lord, we believe lord Burlington, having brought Jaini to London, introduced him to the female branches of the royal family as their master in the Tuscan language, and he remained in England until the death of queen Caroline, who patronized him. In 1729 he was elected a fellow of the Royal Society, by the title of Dr. Paul Antonio Rolli. He returned to Italy in 1747, where he died in 1767, in the eightieth year of his age, leaving behind him a very curious collection in natural history, &c. and a valuable and well-chosen library. His principal works first appeared in London in 1735, 8vo, consisting of odes in blank verse, elegies, songs, &c. after the manner of Catullus. There is likewise by him, a collection of epigrams, of which there are a few good, printed at Florence in 1776, 8vo, and preceded by his life by the abbe Fondini. Rolli bore the character of one of the best Italian poets of his day, and during his stay in London superintended editions of several authors of his own country. The principal of these were the satires of Ariosto, the burlesque works of Berni, Varchi, &c. 2 vols. 8vo the “Decameron” of Boccaccio, 1727, 4to and folio, from the valuable edition of 1527; and lastly, of the elegant “Lucretius” of Marchetti (see Marchetti), which, after the manuscript was revised, was printed at London in 1717. There are likewise by Rolli, translations into Italian verse of Milton’s “Paradise Lost,” 1735, folio, and of “Anacreon,” 1739, 8vo.

, a French writer of very great abilities, was the second son of a master-cutler at Paris and born there Jan. 30, 1661. He was intended, as well as his elder brother, for his father’s profession; when a Benedictine, perceiving in him a peculiar turn for letters, communicated this to his mother, and pressed her to give him a liberal education. The proposal was flattering, but as she had been left a widow, and had nothing to depend upon but the continuation of her late husband’s business, and was incapable of providing for his education, she was reluctant to lose the advantages of her son’s skill. The good Benedictine, however, removed part of her fears, by procuring the youth a pension in the college of Du Plessis, and Roliin was now suffered to pursue the natural bent of his inclination. He distinguished himself immediately by parts and application, and easily obtained the first rank among his felloe-students. Many stories are told to his advantage in this respect, and how he became known and esteemed by the minister Pelletier, whose two eldest sons were of Rollin’s class. He studied rhetoric in the college of Du Plessis under Mr. Hersan, whose custom it was to create emulation among his scholars, by bestowing on them epithets, each according to his merit; and is said to have declared in public, that he knew not sufficiently to distinguish the young Roliin otherwise than by giving hirn. the title of “Divine:” and when Hersan was asked for any piece in verse or prose, he used to refer them to Roliin, “who,” he said, “would do it better than he could.” Hersan intended Roliin for his successor, therefore first took him as an assistant in 1683, and afterwards, in. 1687, gave up the chair to him. The year after, Hersan, with the king’s leave and approbation, declined the professorship of eloquence in the royal college in favour of his beloved disciple Roliin, who was admitted into it. No man ever exercised the functions of it with greater eclat: he often made Latin orations, to celebrate the memorable events of the times; and frequently accompanied them with poems, which wer^ generally read and esteemed. In 1694, he was chosen rector of the university, and continued in that office two years, which was then a great mark of distinction. By virtue of his office, he spoke the annual panegyric upon Louis XIV. He made many useful regulations in the university, and particularly revived the study of the Greek language, which was then growing into neglect. He was a man of indefatigable attention, and trained innumerable persons, who did honour to the church, the state, and the army. The first president Portail was pleased one day to reproach Roilin in a jocular strain, as if he exceeded even himself in doing business: to whom Roilin replied, with that plainness and sincerity which was natural to him, “It becomes you well, Sir, to reproach me with this: it is this habit of labour in me, which has distinguished you in the place of advocate general, which has raised you to that of first president: you owe the greatness of your fortune to me,” Upon the expiration of the rectorship, cardinal Noailles engaged him to superintend the studies of his nephews, who were in the college of Laon; and in this office he was agreeably employed, when, in 1699, he was with great reluctance made coadjutor to the principal of the college of Beauvais. This college was then a kind of a desert, inhabited by very few students, and without any manner of discipline: but Rollings great reputation and industry soon made it a most flourishing society. In this situation he remained till 1712; when, the contests between the Jesuits and the Jansenists drawing towards a crisis, he fell a sacrifice to the prevalence of the former. F. Le Tellier, the king’s confessor, and bigoted agent of the Jesuits, infused into his master prejudices against Rollin, whose connections with cardinal de Noailles would alone have sufficed to have made him a Jansenist; and on this account he lost his share in the principality of Beauvais. No man, however, could have lost less in this than Rollin, who had every thing left him that was necessary to make him happy; retirement, books, and a decent competence. He now began to employ himself upon Quintilian; an author he justly valued, and not without uneasiness saw neglected. He retrenched in him whatever he thought rather curious than useful for the instruction of youth: he placed summaries or contents at the head of each chapter; and he accompanied the text with short select notes. His edition appeared in 1715, in 2 vols. 12mo, with an elegant preface, setting forth his method and views.

In 1720, the university of Paris, willing to have a head suitable to the importance of their interests in the then critical conjuncture of affairs, chose Rollin again rector: but he was displaced in about two months by a lettrede cachet. The university had presented to the parliament a petition, in which it had protested against taking any part in the adjustment of the late disputes; and their being congratulated in a public oration by Rollin on this step occasioned the letter, which ordered them to chuse a rector of more moderation. Whatever the university might suffer by the removal of Rollin, the public was probably a gainer; for he now applied himself to compose his excellent treatise <4 Upon the manner of studying and teaching the Belles Lettres:“” De la maniere d‘etudier et d’enseigner les Belles Lettres." This work was published 1726, in two volumes, and two more in 1728, 8vo, and a copy of it presented to bishop Atterbury, then in banishment, who wrote to Rollin a Latin letter, of great beauty and elegance, which gives a just idea of our author and his writings. Whatever defects more recent inquiries have discovered in this work, it was for many years the first of its kind, and may yet be recommended as laying the foundation of a good taste.

Encouraged by the great success of this work, and the happy reception it met with, he undertook another of equal use and entertainment; his “Histoire Ancienne,” &c. or “Ancient History of the Egyptians, Carthaginians, Babylonians, Medes and Persians, Macedonians and Greeks,” which he finished in 13 vols. 8vo, and published between 1730 and 1738. Voltaire, after having observed that Rollin was “the first member of the university of Paris who wrote French with dignity and correctness,” says of this work, that “though the last volumes, which were written in too great a hurry, are not equal to the first, it is nevertheless the best compilation that has yet appeared in any language; because it is seldom that compilers are eloquent, and Rollin was remarkably so.” While the last volumes of his “Ancient History” were printing, he published the first of his “Roman History;” which he lived to carry on, through the eighth and into part of the ninth, to the war against the Cimbri, about seventy years before the battle of Actium. Crevier, the worthy disciple of Rollin, continued the history to the battle of Actium, which closes the tenth volume; and has since completed the original plan of Rollin, in 16 vols. 12mo, which was to bring it down from the foundation of the city to the reign of Constantine the Great. All these works of Rollin have met with universal approbation, been translated into several languages, and in English have long been popular, although strict criticism may find much to object, as to inaccuracies, and want of purity of style. What, however, forms an honourable distinction in all his works, is his regard for the interests of religion and virtue.

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

, the first principal of the college of Edinburgh, was the son of David Rollock, of Poohouse, or, as it is now written, Powis, in the neighbourhood of Sterling, in Scotland. He was born in 1555, and learned the rudiments of the Latin language from Mr. Thomas Buchanan, who kept, says archbishop Spotswood, a famous school at that time, at Sterling, as we learn from Melchior Adam, who appears to have copied from the Latin life of Rollock. From school he was sent to the university of St. Andrew’s, and admitted a student in St. Salvator’s college. His progress in the sciences, which were then taught, was so great and so rapid, that he had no sooner taken his master’s degree than he was chosen a professor of philosophy, and immediately began to read lectures in St. Salvator’s college. This must have been at a very early period of life, for he quitted St. Andrew’s in 1583, when, according to Mackenzie, he had taught philosophy for some time. Not long before this period, the magistrates of Edinburgh having petitioned the king to erect a university in that city, he granted them a charter under the great seal, allowing them all the privileges of a university and the college being built in 1582, they made choice of Mr. Rollock to be their principal and professor of divinity.

At what time he was ordained, or whether ordained at all, has been the subject of some controversy, but it is certain that he became famous in the university, and among his countrymen in general, for his lectures in theology, and for the persuasive power of his preaching for Calderwood assures us that in 1589, he and Mr. Robert Bruce, another popular preacher, made the earl of Bothwell so sensible of his vicious courses, that, upon Nov. 9, his lordship humbled himself upon his knees in the east church in the forenoon, and in the high church in the afternoon, confessing before the people, with tears in his eyes, his dissolute and licentious life, and promising to prove for the future, another man.

In 1593 principal Rollock and others were appointed by the parliament to confer with the popish lords; and in the next year he was one of those who, by appointment of the. general assembly of the church, met at Edinburgh in the month of May, and presented, to his majesty a paper en titled “The dangers which, through the impunity of excommunicated papists, traffickers with the Spaniards, and other enemies of the religion and estates, are imminent to the true religion professed within this realm, his majesty’s person, crown, and liberty of this our native country.” In 1595 he was nominated one of the commissioners for the visitation of colleges, to inquire into the doctrine and life of the several masters, the discipline used by them, the state of their rents and living, and to make their report to the next assembly. In 1596, the behaviour of some of the clergy having drawn upon them the resentment of the king, Mr. Rollock was employed, on account of his moderation, to soften that resentment, and to turn his majesty’s wrath against the papists. In 1597 he was chosen moderator of the general assembly, the highest dignity in the Scotch church, and had the influence to get some abuses redressed. Being one of the fourteen ministers appointed by this assembly to take care of the affairs of the church, the first thing which he did was to procure an act of the legislature, restoring to the bishops their seats in parliament. Though he spent the greater part of his life in conducting the affairs of the church, we have the authority of Spotswood for saying, that he would have preferred retirement and study. To the bustle of public life, especially at that turbulent period, his constitution was not equal; and his inclination would have confined him to his college and his library. He was dreadfully afflicted with the stone; the torments of which he long bore with the fortitude and resignation of a Christian. He died at Edinburgh Feb. 28, 1598, in the forty-third year of his age, having exhorted his brethren, with his dying breath, to carry themselves more dutifully to their gracious sovereign.

The only English work Mr. Rollock published was, “Certain Sermons on several places of St. Paul’s Epistles,” Edinburgh, 1597, 8vo. The rest of his works are in Latin, and consist of commentaries on Daniel, on the gospel of St. John, on some of the Psalms, and on most of the Epistles. Besides these he published “Prolegomena in primum librum Qucestionum Theodori Bezse;” “Tractatus de vocatione efficaci,” Edinburgh, 1597; “Questiones et Responsiones aliquot, de feed ere Dei et de Sacramentis,” ibid. 1596, 8vo; “Tractatus brevis de providentia Dei” and “Tractatus de Excommunicatione,” Lond. Geneva, 1602, 8vo. A Latin life of him was published by George Robertson at Edinburgh in 1599, 12mo, which Melchior Adam has chiefly followed. It contains encomiums and epitaphs on Mr. Rollotk from many of the most eminent divines and scholars of his time.

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

By the above-mentioned, and some other eminent persons, Rolt was encouraged to undertake his “History of the general War” which terminated in 1748. This was published in four successive volumes, octavo, and procured him a correspondence with Voltaire, who sent him some flattering letters. He was also engaged to write the “Life of John earl of Craufurd,” an officer of distinction. The above publications do him no discredit; and he shewed considerable ability in defending the case of Clifford against the Dutch West India company, and in a reply to the answers of the Dutch civilians in that case as also in a series of letters concerning the Antigallican privateer and prize, which had been illegally seized and confiscated by the Spaniards.

Being an author by profession, he was constantly employed by the booksellers in successive compilations, historical, commercial, &c. and in periodical publications, in which he was concerned with Smart and others. In one of these, “The Universal Visitor,” he and Smart are said to have been bound by a contract to engage in no other undertaking, and that this contract was to remain in force u for the term of ninety-nine years.“So absurd an engagement, if it ever existed, could not be supposed to last long. Rolt, who had no other resources but from his pen, was not to be confined in his employment, which in one instance was thought rather singular, but more recent times have afforded many similar impositions. Mr. Woodington, a relation of his wife, being in India, became acquainted with captain John Northall, of the royal regiment of artillery, the second in command at the siege of Surat, where he died of an apoplectic fit in the march to that city in February 1759. This gentleman, having been stationed at Minorca, had made an excursion, in 1753, to Italy, of which he completed an entire tour; and being a man of curiosity and taste, noted down in his pocket-book all the fine pictures, statues, &c. with such remarks as everywhere occurred to him. This pocket-book fell into the hands of Mr. Woodington who, at his return to England, gave it to Rolt, and he from this manuscript journal, with the help of former printed travels, compiled a large octavo volume, which he published under the title of” Travels through Italy; containing new and curious Observations on that country with the most authentic Account yet published of capital Pieces in Painting, Sculpture, and Architecture, that are to be seen in Italy. By John Northall, esq." c. &c. &c. 1766.

The proposals for printing, by subscription, his poetical works, was the last attempt of Mr. Rolt, who died March 2, 1770, aged 45 having had two wives, by each of whom he left a daughter. To his second wife, who survived him many years, and who, by her mother, was descended from the Percys of Worcester, the late bishop of Dromore, to whom she was thus related, allowed a pension to her death.

This lady Sondes, who was daughter of the right hon. Henry Pelham, was one of the most charitable persons of quality in her time. She had a little French woman, who was her almoner, and whose whole life was spent in finding out proper objects for her lady’s bounty, which she distributed with a zeal for their welfare, and a delicacy for their feelings, which makes it the subject of regret, that the name of this excellent creature is not recollected. They, unsolicited, discovered and applied to Mrs. Rolt the protection of lady Sondes, on the death of her husband.

, an English divine and writer of great popularity, was born at Hartlepool in the county of Durham, Sept. 25, 1714. His father, one of the French protestants who took refuge in England upon the revocation of the edict of Nantz, resided at Hartlepool as a merchant, and particularly as a dealer in corn. He had two sons and three daughters, whom he educated in the strict doctrines and discipline of the church of England, and lived to see well settled in the world before be left it in 1757. His second son, William, gave indication, at a very early age, of considerable talents, and a laudable eagerness to improve them. This induced his father to send him to the grammar-school, at Houghton-le-Spring, a village in the road from Durham to Sunderland. This school was founded by the celebrated Bernard Gilpin, rector of that parish at the memorable acra of the reformation. At this seminary Mr. Romaine remained seven years, and in 1730 or 1731 was sent to Oxford, where he was entered first at Hertford-college, and thence removed to Christchurch. He resided principally at Oxford till he took his degree of master of arts, Oct. 15, 1737, having been ordained a deacon at Hereford, a year before, by Dr. Egerton, bishop of that diocese.

His first engagement was the curacy of Loe Trenchard, near Lid ford in Devonshire. In the year following he appears to have been resident at Epsom in Surrey, from the date of a letter from him, Oct. 4, 1733, to rev. William Warburton, upon the publication of his “Divine Legation of Moses.” In the same year he was ordained a priest by Dr. Hoadly, bishop of Winchester. His title for orders was probably a nomination to the church of Banstead, which he served some years, together with that of Horton, near Epsom, being curate to Mr. Edwards, who had both these livings. At Banstead he became acquainted with sir Daniel Lambert, lord-mayor of London in 1741, who had a country-house in this parish, and appointed Mr. Romaine to be chaplain during his mayoralty.

The first sermon which he printed had been preached before the university of Oxford, March 4, 1739. It was entitled “The Divine Legation of Moses demonstrated, from his having made express mention of, and insisted so. much on, the doctrine of a future state; whereby Mr. Warburton’s attempt to prove the Divine Legation of Moses from the omission of a future state, is proved to be absurd, and destructive of all revelation.” This was followed by a second sermon, preached also before the university, entitled “Future rewards and punishments proved to be the sanctions of the Mosaic dispensation.” These sermons and the letter above-mentioned to Mr. Warburton involved him in a personal dispute with that gentleman Mr. Romaine in his letter attempted to be witty and sarcastic; Warburton used the same weapons and could handle them better. The controversy, however, did not last long. Mr. Romaine appeared to more advantage in 1742, in another sermon before the university, entitled “Jepthah’s Vow fulfilled, and his daughter not sacrificed.” The ingenuity with which he proved this opinion obtained him much credit, and was by many looked upon as a new discovery, which it certainly was not, as the same point was contended for in a sermon printed in the works of Dr. Thomas Taylor, of Aldermanbury, an eminent puritan divine, who died in 1632. Besides other sermons before the university, he preached one in 1757, entitled “The Lord our Righteousness,” in consequence of which he was refused any future admission into the university pulpit. He interpreted the articles of the church in the strict Calvinistic sense, which at this time gave great offence.

Mr. Romaine had been engaged in superintending for the press a new edition of “Calasio’s Hebrew Concordance and Lexicon,” in four volumes folio, a work which employed him seven years, and in 1747 he published the first volume. The original of this work was the concordance of Rabbi Nathan, a Jew, entitled “Meir Nethib,” published at Venice in 1523, fol. with great faults and de- 1 fects. A second edition was published at Basil by Froben, much more correct, in 1581, fol. The third edition is this of Calasio, which he swelled into four large volumes by adding, l. A Latin translation of Rab.' Nathan’s explanation of the several roots, with the author’s own enlargements. 2. The Rabbinical, Chaldee, Syriac, and Arabic words, derived from, or agreeing with the Hebrew root in signification. 3. A literal version of the Hebrew text. 4. The variations of the Vulgate and Septuagint 5. The proper names of men, rivers, mountains. Mr. Romaine’s work is a very splendid and useful book, improved from that of Calasio, but in point of usefulness thought greatly inferior to Dr. Taylor’s Hebrew concordance. The hon. and rev. Mr. Cadogan, in the life of Mr. Romaine, censures him for having omitted his author’s account of the word which is usually rendered God, and having substituted his own in the body of the work; a liberty which no editor is entitled to take, although he may be justified in adding, by way of note, to what his author has advanced.

The theological sentiments of Mr. Romaine were not so common in his early days as they are now, and therefore rendered him more conspicuous. As a clergyman of the church of England he adhered to the most rigid interpretation of the thirty-nine articles. The grand point which he laboured in the pulpit, and in all his writings, was the doctrine of the imputed righteousness of Christ. He was also a zealous disciple of the celebrated Hutchinson, at a time when he had not many followers in this kingdom. From some dissatisfaction, however, or want of success in his ministry, he appears to have formed an intention of leaving England, and settling in the country of his ancestors. He was prevented from executing this design, by what he piously deemed a providential interposition. He had actually made the necessary preparations, and wa going to the water-side, in order to secure his passage^ when he was met by a gentleman, a total stranger to him, who asked him if his name was not Romaine. He answered that it was. The gentleman had formerly been acquainted with his father, and, observing a strong resemblance tot him in his son, was induced to make the inquiry. After some introductory conversation, he told him, that the lectureship for the united parishes of St. George’s Botolphlane and St. Botolph’s Billingsgate was then vacant; and that, having some interest in those parishes, he would exert it in his behalf, if he would become a candidate for the lectureship. Mr. Romaine consented, provided he should not be obliged to canvass in person; a customwhich he always thought inconsistent with the character of a clergyman, and against which he openly protested many years afterwards, when he was candidate for the living of Blackfriars. He was chosen lecturer of St. Botolph’s in 1748, and the year following lecturer of St. Dunstan’s in the West. In the person of his predecessor in the latter (Dr.Terrick), two lectureships were united: the onefounded by Dr. White, for the use of the benchers of the Temple; the other a common parish lectureship. Mr. Romaine wai elected to both, and continued some years in the quiet exercise of his office, until an opposition arose which ended in a law-suit that deprived him of the parish-lectureship^ but confirmed him in that founded by Dr. White, and endowed with a salary of eighteen pounds a-year. Lest this should be removed from the parish, the use of the church was granted to him, but as lord Mansfield’s decision was, that seven o'clock in the evening was a convenient time to preach the lecture, the church-wardens refused to open the church till that hour, and to light it when there was occasion. His predecessor, however, Dr. Terrick, then become bishop of London, interposed so effectually, and gave such a character of Mr. Romaine, that this ungenerous opposition ceased, every proper accommodation was allowed to his congregation, and he continued quietly to exercise his ministry here to the end of his life.

In 1750 he was appointed assistant morning preacher in the church of St. George, Hanover-square. The rector, who both appointed him to this place, and removed him from it, was Dr. Trebeck. Mr. Cadogan informs us that “the first act originated not in personal friendship, but in the recommendation of his character the latter arose from the popularity and plainness of his ministry. He preached Christ crucified among those who are least disposed to receive him. The church was filled with the poor, and forsaken by the rich: and that which (as a nobleman is said to have observed) was never complained of in a play-house, was admitted as a just cause of complaint in the house of God. When notice was given him that the crowd of people attending from different parts caused great inconvenience to the inhabitants, who could not safely get to their seats, he received it in the most placid manner, and said, he was willing to relinquish an office which he had faithfully performed, hoping that his doctrine had been Christian, and owning the inconvenience which had attended the parishioners.”

About 1752, he was appointed professor of astronomy in Gresham college. His knowledge of the subject was sufficient to qualify him for this situation, but his zeal for Hutchinsonian principles led him to dispute some parts of the Newtonian philosophy in a way which did uot greatly advance his reputation, and he did not retain his professorship long. He was far more popular afterwards in his opposition to the Jew Bill. All his writings on this subject were collected by himself, and printed by the city of London. On quitting his situation in St. George’s, Hanoversquare, in 1756, he became curate and morning preacher at St. Olave’s, Southwark, and when he left it in 1759, he became morning preacher, for nearly two years, at St. Bartholomew the Great, near West Smithfield. In 1764, he was chosen by the inhabitants of St. Andrew, Wardrobe, and St. Anne, Blackfriars, to be their rector, the right of presentation, which is vested in the crown and in the parishioners alternately, then belonging to the latter. This produced a suit in chancery, which was decided in his favour in 1766. In this situation he continued during thirty years, and was probably the most popular preacher of his day. It was noticed in the newspapers that on the Good Friday after his being settled here, he administered the sacrament to upwards of five hundred persons, and on the Sunday following to upwards of three hundred, numbers which had never been remembered by the oldest inhabitant, From this time he devoted himself to the service of his parishioners and his hearers at St. Dunstan’s, but was frequently solicited to plead the cause of charity for various institutions, and few preachers ever produced more money on such occasions.

His useful labours at length terminated on Sunday, July 26, 1795. During his illness, which lasted seven weeks, his 'zeal, his faith, his animated views of immortality, accorded with the uniform example of his life, and evinced, in the gradual approaches of death, the hope, and consolation, and triumph of a Christian. His character throughout life was uniform and regular: his surviving friends have dwelt on it with pleasure, and it certainly was as free from frailty as the imperfect state of human nature can admit. The only prominent objection was a degree of hastiness of temper, or occasional irritability, but even that he had conquered, in a great measure, many years before his death. By trfem to whom his preaching was acceptable, and to whom his memory is yet dear, his printed works are held in high estimation, and have gone through various editions. Besides the single Sermons, Calasio’s Concordance, and a Comment on the 107th Psalm, Mr. Romaine published, in the course of his life, 1. “Twelve Sermons upon Solomon’s Song,” 1759. 2. “Twelve Discourses upon the Law and Gospel,” 1760. 3. “The Life of Faith,” 1763. 4. “The Scripture Doctrine of the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper,” 1765. 5. “The Walk of Faith,” 1771, 2 vols. 6. “An Essay on Psalmody,” 1775. 7. “The Triumph of Faith.”

These were collected soon after his death, in uniform edition, with some additional pieces and a life, in which a very full account is given of his religious principles and ministerial labours. He appears to have been in some respects an extraordinary character. Although usually reproached with being a methodist, a word which is not always very clearly understood by those who employ it in the service of controversial animosity, he was one of the most zealous advocates for the church of England that has appeared in modern times. His attachment to her doctrines and discipline, indeed, was such as left him but a moderate share of respect for the dissenters, by whom he was often accused of intolerance and bigotry. Towards the close of life, however, it is said, he entertained more candour towards the Calvinist dissenters, although he was to the last a strenuous advocate for the service and forms of the church; and it is certain that many dissenters of the stricter sort contributed to increase his audiences, which were in general the fullest ever known in London. Nor ought it to be forgotten in the catalogue of his virtues that he evinced, in money matters, a great share of independent spirit. He refused large offers from the booksellers for the use of his name to religious compilations, and on one occasion no less than 500l. when his annual income did not amount to half the sum. His funeral, besides being attended by a very numerous concourse of friends, and a long train of carriages of persons of considerable rank, was honoured with the presence of the city marshals and other officers, and funeral sermons were preached on the occasion in various churches, some of which were afterwards published. Mr. Romaine married in 1755, a Miss Price, who survived him about six years, by whom he had a daughter who died young, and two sons, the eldest, Dr. Romaine of Reading, now living, the second, capt. Romaine, who died in 1782, at Trincomale, in the island of Ceylon.

, a distinguished French mineralogist, was born in 1736, at Gray in Franche-Comte, and had scarcely acquired some knowledge of Latin, before he was sent to India in quality of secretary to a corps of engineers. It is not certain at what period he returned, but he went again to India in 1757, was taken prisoner at Pondicherry, and came to Europe in 1764, after suffering five years’ captivity. At this period, in his twenty-ninth year, he directed his attention to natural history in company with M. Sage, who appears to be the first Frenchman who directed his chemical knowledge to the explanation of mineralogy. In 1766, he published a “Letter to M. Bertrand on fresh-water polypes.” The polypus he considered as a hive, a receptacle for an infinity of small isolated animals, directed to the same purpose, that of repairing any loss in the parent; but this opinion was supported only by its ingenuity, without the aid of experiments. His first step in mineralogy was the publication of a “Catalogue raisonnee” of M. Davila’s collection, which he wished to dispose of. It was published in 1767, 3 vols. 8vo, and thence arose his eager wish to examine the forms of crystals, and to construct a system on this plan. His first essay on crystallography was published in 1771, and contains 110 species of crystals, of which Linnæus knew only about 40, though the number has been since extended to above. 400. From this work M. de L' Isle’s fame arose his correspondence was cultivated, and Linnæus added his warmest praises to the applause of philosophers. Our author’s fame from this time rapidly increased, and he was judged worthy of a seat in almost every academy but that of his own country. By the academicians of Paris he was styled contemptuously a maker of catalogues, and in reality, from a scanty fortune, as well as a wish to extend his knowledge of specimens, he was much employed in this business; and from 1767 to 1782, he published eight explanatory catalogues of different collections. In 1778 he published an explanation of M. Sage’s theory of chemistry; and in the following year a memoir against the central fire under the title of “L'Action de Feu central banni de la surface du globe, et le Soleil retabli dans ses droits.” But in the interval his great work was constantly kept in view, and his new edition appeared in 1783, “Christallographie, ou description des formes propres a tons les corps du regne minerale,” 4 vols. Of this elaborate work, it has been justly said that those only who have examined it frequently, can judge of the great labour which it must have cost, the extent of the author’s erudition, and the information to be collected from it, independent of the science of crystallization, which has here attained a state approaching to perfection.

As executor to M. d'Ennery, who possessed a very rich collection of medals, he was induced to examine the relation of the Roman pound to the French marc, and the value of the money of the different nations of European and Asiastic Greece. This produced his “Metrologie, ou Tables pour servir a l‘intelligence des poids et des mesures des anciens d’apres leur rapport avec les poids et les mesures de la France,” which was published in 1789, and addressed to the national assembly to guide their new regulations of weights and measures. From the immense labours of his various works, his eyes soon failed, and his later enjoyments arose from the fanciful prospects of the great good his country and the whole world was to derive from the revolution. He died of a dropsy, at Paris, March 10, 1790.

, an eminent modern artist, was born at Dalton, in Lancashire, Dec. 26, 1734, where his father was a merchant, builder, and farmer, but derived from none of his occupations more than what yielded a bare maintenance to his numerous family. In his twelfth year, George was taken from the village school, and engaged to superintend his father’s workmen; his leisure hours he employed in carving; and being fond of music, made a violin for himself, which be preserved till his death. He was first tempted to draw, from seeing some ordinary prints in a magazine, which he imitated with considerable success: and his first attempt at portrait was from memory, when endeavouring to describe the features of a stranger whom he had seen at church. After some attempts by his father to place him in trade, he consented to let him become a painter, and his first master was an artist of the name of Steele, who taught him, to a certain extent, the knowledge and use of the materials of the art. Leaving this master, he began to practise portrait-painting in the country, and being ambitious to try his fate in the metropolis, as soon as he had acquired nearly an hundred guineas, he took thirty for his travelling expences, and leaving the remainder with his wife, set out for, and arrived in London in 1762.

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

Of Romney, as an artist, it is by no means easy to appreciate the just character. That he possessed genius and talents in an eminent degree, no one can deny. Fuseli, in his edition of Pilkington’s Dictionary, has said, “that he was made for the times, and the times for him.” It had perhaps, says the critic in the Cyclopædia, been more just to have observed that Homney was made for better times than those in which he lived. His perception of art was far purer than most of his contemporaries, at least in this country, were capable of enjoying; and it must be remembered, that no one ever set forth in the career of an artist under greater disadvantages than he did. The taste he imbibed for simplicity and grandeur, on seeing, at an advanced period of his life, the works of the ancient artists, prove what might have been fairly expected of him, had he been sooner initiated in the mysteries of his art. Without this aid, Romney had to separate for himself the partial, from the general effects of nature; and the inequality with which he, in this point, met the rivalry of more fortunate artists, is too evident in most of his productions. Frequently, his chiaroscuro is ill conducted, and his harmony of forms and colours imperfect, even in pictures produced when enjoying the height of his intellectual power, and at the happiest period of his executive skill: at the same time they exhibit great fertility of invention, with sweetness and delicacy of sentiment.

He was happily endowed with an inquisitive mind, that delighted in science, and pursued it warmly, with the best means he had; and he possessed a versatility of genius, which is exemplified by the variety of subjects he chose for representation. Both the comic and serious impressions of the mind had charms for him. Early in life he painted two pictures from Tristram Shandy; one, of the arrival of Dr. Slop at Shandy-hall, after the unlucky catastrophe he met with on the road; which afforded scope fur sentimental comic humour; the other from the affecting story of the death of Le Fevre; both of them were highly approved for truth and propriety of feeling and expression, though differing so widely in their effects upon the mind. His journey to Italy expanded his view of art; new scenes, and new sources of information, were presented to him, of which he did not neglect to avail himself. The works of fancy he produced after his return home exemplify the use he made of the two years he spent among the unrivalled productions of art he there met with. The purity and perfection of ancient sculpture appear to have made the deepest impression upon his mind; and he afterwards assiduously cherished the taste he then imbibed, by procuring a collection of cast; from the best models of ancient stathes, groups, basso-relievos, &c. which he would sit by the hour to contemplate; examining their appearances under all changes of sun-shine, and common day-light; and with lamps, prepared on purpose, he would try their effects in various modes of illumination, with rapturous delight. Hence, grandeur and simplicity became the principal objects of his ambition; he perceived these qualities distinctly, and employed them judiciously; even whilst imitating nature in his most usual occupation, portrait painting. To present his figure, or tell his story, with simple undisturbed effect, rejecting all unnecessary minutiae, wa the point he aimed at and obtained.

On his return from the continent his zeal for historical painting revived, or rather became strengthened. In several epistles to Mr. Hayley, he laments his confinement to portraits: in one he says, “this cursed portrait painting, how I am shackled with it! I am determined to live frugally, and cut it short as soon as I can.” In another, he^ mentions his “wish to be retired, in order to compose with: more effect and propriety.” And whenever he returned ttf London from Eastham, the hospitable retreat of his admiring correspondent and friend, whose play fulness of fancy was’ a constant and useful stimulus to Romney’s dejected and desponding mind, he felt it a weight of drudgery again to fall into the trammels of portraiture; yet from the enjoyment he by nature found in the practice of his profession^ a short time inured him afresh to it, and still he felt pleasure in tracing the features of each new face that presented itself; till again his exhausted frame required the exhilaration of retirement, and the refreshment afforded by pure uncontaminated air, free from the gross vapours of a great and populous city. It is not a little surprising that amidst his continual labours in that branch of the art he more immediately professed, he should have found time to produce so great a number of fancy pictures as he left behind him. He also frequently spent his evenings in making large cartoons in charcoal, of subjects which suited his fancy; ge^ nerally of a sublime cast. Amongst these was one of the dream of Attossa, from the Persian of TEschylus, which was conducted with the taste and feeling of the ancient Greek artists.

He was in general fortunate in the choice of his historical subjects; and certainly, in this respect, had far the advantage of his great rival, sir Joshua Reynolds; and no less so in the power of expression, which he scarcely ever failed to obtain; whilst the latter, in his historical pictures, has rarely been so happy. Reynolds gave beauty and grace to his figures: Romney imparted soul. The former delights the eye with the harmony and richness of colour, and beauty of effect; the latter thrills and gratifies the heart with truth and force of expression, in action and countenance; wrought with more simplicity, but with less art. His picture of Ophelia seated upon a branch of a tree, the breaking of which threatens her destruction in the stream below, whilst the melancholy distraction visible in her lovely face accounts for her apparent insensibility to danger, is a sufficient proof of this assertion. His composition also of “Titania and her Indian Votaress,” in the possession of Mr. Beckford; “Titania, Puck, and the Changeling,” at sir John Leicester’s, and others of his works of the like playful and interesting kind, might be brought forward to support it. In portraiture, however, the justly exalted president of the royal academy stood alone, and Romney was not able to cope with him. In the composition of his figures, our artist exhibited the taste he had acquired by the study of the antique; and he admirably varied the characters of his heads. The arrangement of drapery which he adopted, partook largely of the same style; and being well understood, was painted with great dexterity; though it must be confessed, that in form, it was not unfrequently better adapted to sculpture than to painting. His style of colouring was simple and broad. In that of his flesh he was very successful; exhibiting a great variety of complexion, with much warmth and richness. It was not always, however, that his pictures were complete in the general tone; but crude discordant colours were sometimes introduced in the back-grounds, which not being blended or broken into unison with the hue of the principal figures, interrupted the harmony of the whole. The executive part of his works was free, learned, and precise, without being trifling or minute, possessing great simplicity, and exhibiting a purity of feeling consonant with the style of his compositions. He aimed at the best of all principles in the imitation of nature, viz. to generalize its effects; he even carried it so far as to subject himself to the charge of negligence in the completion of his forms: but the truth of his imitation is sufficiently perfect to satisfy the minds of those who regard nature systematically, and hot individually, or too minutely. In a word, adds the critic whom we have principally followed in this character, every lover of art who knows how to appreciate truly what is most valuable in painting, will hold the name of llomney in increasing estimation, the more frequently and impartially he examines his productions.

, a celebrated professor of physic at Montpellier, was born in that city, September 27, 1507. After having practised in various places of inferior note, he went to Paris, learned Greek there, and returning to his native city, practised physic with great credit. So ardent was M. de Uondelet’s application to anatomy, that he dissected one of his own children, which gained him the character of an unnatural father. He died at Realmont, in Albigeois, July 18, 1566. He is principally celebrated for his treatise on fishes, in Latin, 1554, 2 torn. fol. and 1558, fol. in French. Of his medical works there is a collection printed at Geneva, 1628, 8vo, but they are not equal to the high reputation their author had acquired. It is this physician whom Rabelais ridicules under the name of Rondibilis. His life may be found in Joubert’s works.

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

II. Charles IX. and Henry III. had a particular esteem for him, and became his liberal patrons. In 1562 he put himself at the head of some soldiers in Vendomois, and fought against the protestants, which occasioned the publication of some very satirical pieces against him at Orleans, in which he was represented as a priest: but he defended himself in verse, and denied his being an ecclesiastic. He had, however, some benefices in commendam; and, among others, the priory of St. Cosmas near Tours, where he died in 1585. Du Perron, afterwards cardinal, made his funeral oration; and a noble monument was erected there to his memory some years after. He was much afflicted with the gout, which, it is said, was owing to his debauched way of life. His poems consist of odes, hymns, elegies, sonnets, epigrams, and pieces of amatory poetry, not of the most chaste description. He was considered in his day as possessing great talents for poetry; but these are not so visible to the eye of modern criticism. His style is extremely harsh and obscure, which, it is said^ would have been more excusable, had he not been preceded by Marot. What learning he had appears in a pedantic affectation of allusions, examples, and words, drawn from Greek and Latin, which increase the obscurity of his style. Boileau justly says “It is the approbation of posterity alone which must establish the true merit of works. Whatever eclat a writer may make during his life, whatever eloges he may receive, we cannot conclude infallibly from this, that his works are excellent. False beauties, novelty of style, and a particular taste or manner of judging, which happens to prevail at that time, may raise a writer into high credit and esteem; and, in the next age, when the eyes of men are opened, that which was the object of admiration, shall be the object of contempt. We have a fine example of this in Ronsard, and his imitators, Du Bellay, Du Bartas, Desportes, who in the last age were admired by all the world, in this are read by nobody.” The best editions of Ronsard’s works are those by Binet, Paris, 1587, or 1604, 5 vols. 12mo, and by Richelet, 1623, 2 vols. fol.

, a brave naval officer, was born in Kent, 1650, of an ancient and honourable family. His father, sir William Rooke, knight, qualified him by a proper education for a liberal profession but was at last obliged to give way to his inclination to the navy. His first station was that of a volunteer, from which his merit raised him by regular steps to be vice-admiral, and one of the council to prince George of Denmark, lord high admiral. He had the command of several expeditions in the reigns of William and Anne, in which his conduct and courage were eminently displayed. The former appeared in his behaviour on the Irish station, when he was sent as commodore with a squadron to assist in the reduction of that kingdom; in his wise and prudent management when he preserved so great a part of the Smyrna fleet, which fortune had put into the hands of the French, who suffered themselves to be deprived of an immense booty by the superior skill of this admiral; but more particularly in the taking of Gibraltar, which was a project conceived and executed in less than a week, though it has since endured sieges of not only months but years, and more than once baffled the united forces of France and Spain. Of his courage he gave abundant testimonies, but especially in burning the French ships at La Hogue, and in the battle of Malaga, where he behaved with all the resolution of a British admiral; and, as he was first in command, was first also in danger; and all times must preserve the memory of his glorious action at Vigo.

He was chosen in several parliaments the representative for Portsmouth; but, in that house, his free independent spirit did not recommend him much to ministerial favour. An attempt was made to ruin him in king William’s esteem, and to get him removed from the admiralty-board; but that prince answered plainly, “I will not; sir George Rooke served me faithfully at sea, and I will never displace him for acting as he thinks most for the service of his country in the House of Commons:” an answer worthy of a British king, as it tends to preserve the freedom of our constitution, and the liberty of parliament. In 1701 he voted for Mr. Harley to be speaker of the House of Commons, in opposition to the court; which brought on him many severe reflections from the whig party, and attempts were made to obscure all the great actions that he did. From this period, Burnet never mentions him without the utmost prejudice and partiality. In his relation of the Vigo enterprize, he says he very unwillingly steered his cc-urse that way; and, without allowing the admiral any share of the honour of the action, only says, “the ships broke the boom, and forced the port,” as if they had done it without command, and Rooke had no concern in the matter. The taking of Gibraltar, an action in which the greatest bravery and military skill was shewn, he will have to be the effect of pure chance. Such was the prevalence of party spirit, that it obliged this brave commander to quit the service of his country, and to spend the latter part of his life in retirement. Perhaps, indeed, he was himself, in party matters, too warm and eager. His good conduct and courage, however, are unimpeachable. He was thrice married; and, by his second lady (Mrs. Luttrel) left one son.

He died Jan. 24, 1708-9, in his fifty-eighth year, and was buried in Canterbury cathedral, where a monument is erected to his memory. In his private life he was a good husband, and a kind master, lived hospitably towards his neighbours, and left behind him a moderate fortune; so moderate, that when he came to make his will it surprized those who were present; but sir George assigned the reason in a few words, “I do not leave much,” said he, i( but what I leave was honestly gotten it never cost a sailor a tear, or the nation a farthing." 1 Rooke (Lawrence), an English astronomer and geometrician, was born at Deptford, in Kent, 1623, and educated at Eton school, whence he removed to King’s college, Cambridge, in 1639. After taking the degree of M. A. in 1647, he retired for some time into the country, but in 1650 went to Oxford, and settled in Wadham college, that he might associate with Dr. Wilkins, and Mr. Seth Ward the astronomy professor; and also accompany Mr. Boyle in his chemical operations. After the death of Mr. Foster he was chosen astronomy professor in Gresham college, London, in 1652. He made some observations upon the comet at Oxford, which appeared in the month of December that year; which were printed by Mr. Seth Ward the year following. And, in 1655, Dr. Wallis publishing his treatise on conic sections, he dedicated that work to those two gentlemen. In 1657 Mr. Rooke was permitted to exchange the astronomy professorship for that of geometry. This step might seem strange, as astronomy still continued to be his favourite study; but it was thought to have been from the convenience of the lodgings, which opened behind the reading hall, and therefore were proper for the reception of those gentlemen after the lectures, who, in 1660, laid the foundation of the royal society. Most of those learned men who had been accustomed to assemble with him at Oxford, coining to London, joined with other philosophical gentlemen, and usually met at Gresham college to hear Mr. Rooke’s iectwes, and afterwards withdrew into his apartment; till their meetings were interrupted by the quartering of soldiers in the college in 1658. And after the royal society came to be formed into a regular body, Mr. Rooke was very zealous and serviceable in promoting that great and useful institution; though he did not live till it received its establishment by the royal charter.

The marquis of Dorchester, a patron of learning, and learned himself, used to entertain Mr. Rooke at his seat at Ilighgate after the restoration, and bring him every Wednesday in his coach to the Royal Society, which then met on that day of the week at Gresham college. But the last time Mr. Rooke was at Highgate, he walked from thence; and it being in the summer, he overheated himself, and taking cold after it, he was thrown into a fever, which cost him his life. He died at his apartments at Gresham college, June 27, 1662, in the fortieth year of his age. It was reckoned very unfortunate that his death happened the very night that he had for some years expected to finish his accurate observations on the satellites of Jupiter. When, he found his illness prevented him from making that observation, Dr. Pope says, he sent to the Society his request, that some other person, properly qualified, might be appointed for that purpose; so intent was he to the last onmaking those curious and useful discoveries, in which he had been so long engaged. He made a nuncupatory will, leaving what he had to Dr. Ward, the,n lately made bishop of Exeter: whom he permitted to receive what was due upon bond, if the debtors offered payment willingly, otherwise he would not have the bonds put in suit: “for,” said he, “as I never was in law, nor had any contention with, any man, in my life-time, neither would I be so after my death.”

Few persons have left behind them a more agreeable character than Mr. Rooke, from every person that was acquainted with him, or with his qualifications; and in nothing more than for his veracity: for what he asserted positively, might be fully relied on: but if his opinion was asked concerning any thing that was dubious, his usual answer was, “I have no opinion.” Mr. Hook has given this copious, though concise character of him: “I never was acquainted with any person who knew more, and spoke less, being indeed eminent for the knowledge and improvement of astronomy.” Dr. Wren and Dr. Seth Ward describe him as a man of profound judgment, a vast comprehension, prodigious memory, and solid experience. His skill in the mathematics was reverenced by all the lovers of those studies, and his perfection in many other sorts of learning deserves no less admiration; but above all, as another writer characterizes him, his extensive knowledge had a right influence on the temper of his mind, which had all the humility, calmness, strength, and sincerity of a sound philosopher. For more particulars of his character we may refer to Dr. Isaac Barrow’s oration at Gresham college. The only pieces which were published from his papers consist of “Observationes in Cometam, qui mense Decembri anno 1652 apparuit” printed by Dr. Seth Ward in his “Lectures on Comets,” 1653, 4to. “Directions for Seamen going to the East and West Indies,” which were drawn up at the appointment of the Royal Society, and inserted in their Transactions for 1665; “A Method for observing the Eclipses of the Moon,” in the Philos. Trans, for Feb. 1666. “A Discourse concerning the Observations of the Eclipses of the Satellites of Jupiter,” in the History of the Royal Society, p. 183; and “An Account of an Experiment made with Oil in a long Tube,” read to the Royal Society, April 23, 1662. By this experiment it was found, that the oil sunk when the sun shone out, and rose when he was clouded; the proportions of which are set down in the account.

, or Michael Angelo, an honorary name given him by Paul Sandby, was the son of Edward Rooker, an engraver, who died in 1774, and whose excellence lay in engraving architecture, particularly the section of St. Paul’s cathedral, from a drawing by Wale, which is his finest, and a very wonderful performance. Michael, who was born in 1743, after being taught the use of the graver by his father, was placed under the care of his father’s friend, Paul Sandby, to be instructed in drawing and painting landscape. He appeared first as an engraver, in which capacity he gave early proofs of ability, which were confirmed by his mature productions, excellent specimens of which may be seen in a view of Wolterton hall, Nottinghamshire, and in many other prints which he engraved. But his talents were not confined to the graver, for he also employed the pencil, and in 1772 exhibited a view of Temple Bar, as it then stood, which had considerable merit. He was for many years employed as principal scenerpainter for the little theatre in the Hay-market; and in the summer season generally visited some part of the country, where he selected views, of which he afterwards made finished drawings; so that at his death he possessed a very numerous collection of topographical drawings of great merit. It is, however, on his powers as an engraver that his fame principally depends. He was for many years engaged to engrave the head-pieces to the Oxford almanacks, for which he received 50l. each, a large sum in those days,, although not unsuitable to his merit, or the liberality of his employers. But this engagement he relinquished a fevr years before his death, because he took a dislike to the practice of engraving. The Oxford views were executed from his own drawings, and exhibit some of the best and most accurate that ever were taken of that beautiful city.

He died suddenly, after a lingering illness, at his lodgings in Dean-street, Soho, March 3, 1801, about fiftyeight years of age, and was buried at St. Giles’s-in-theFields. His drawings, of which he left a large collection, produced, at a sale of four days, the sum of 1240l. He was chosen among those who were elected the first associates of the Royal Academy. There was something rough in his manners, but he was a man of integrity.

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

, a pious and learned Protestant clergyman, was born in 1685, at Canne, a small town in Upper Languedoc. He was appointed minister of the French church at Basil, in 1710, in which city he acquired the highest reputation by his integrity and his writings, and died there, 1748. Those of his communion greaily value his very numerous works, the principal of which are, “Le Pasteur Evangelique,” 4to. This his admirers praise in the highest terms, and continually recommend the study of it to their young divines. He also wrote “Sermons sur divers sujets de morale;” a theological and critical dissertation, in which the author endeavours to prove that the soul of Jesus Christ was a pure and glorious intelligence in heaven before its union with a human body. This opinion, which is far from new, being attacked by M. de la Chapelle, in torn. 24 of “La Defense du Christianism,” M. lloques answered them in the journal printed 1640, at Geneva. He also was editor of an enlarged edition of Moreri’s Dictionary, Basil, 1731, 6 vols. fol.; the new edition of “Martin’s Bible,” 2 vols. 4to; an edition of M. Basnage’s “Dissertations on Duels, and the Orders of Knighthood,” 1740, augmented several pieces in the “Helvetic Journal,” and in the “Bibliotheque Gerrmmique,”

, an eminent painter, was the son of a land surveyor, and born at Naples in 1615. He was brought up under Francisco Francanzano, a painter of that city, and his relation, but was forced to get his bread by exposing his pictures to sale in stalls in the streets. Lanfranco, the painter, happening to pass by, bought one, and to encourage Salvator bespoke more. Salvator placing himself afterwards under Ribera, with whom he lived till he was twenty, and his father then dying, Ribera took him with him to Rome. After four years’ stay in that city, dur^ ing which Salvator made considerable progress in his art, cardinal Brancacci carried him to his bishopric of Viterbo, where he painted several pieces. He staid some time at Naples, but gave the preference to Rome, and wherever he went he made himself' friends by his picturesque and poetic talents. As he notv began to have a name, prince John Charles of Medici, being at Rome, carried him to Florence, where he staid nine years, dividing his time between painting and poetry: he had a particular turn for satiric poetry; and understood music. The literati at Florence were highly delighted with his conversation; and his house was a kind of academy, where plays written by himself were often represented, and he constantly played some part in them.

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

After his return from Florence he fixed at Rome, where for a long time he would sell none of his paintings but at an extravagant price. He did not, however, like to be called a landscape painter, his ambition being for the character of an able history painter. He paiuted several pieces for the churches, which are indisputable proofs of his capacity for history: but his business was frequently interrupted by his turn for poetic satire, which he often interspersed with songs, and took a pleasure in reciting them. The philosopher appeared in his manner of living; and he endeavoured to shew it also in his paintings, always conveying in them some moral. Such was his iove of liberty, that he declined entering into the service of any prince, though often invited. He was much of an humourist, and loved a practical joke. When the painters of Rome had refused to receive him into the academy of St. Luke, on a holiday, when he knew they were to meet, and several paintings were exposed in the diurch of that saint, he caused one of his own to be carried thither, in which he had concealed his manner; and shewing it, told them that it was done by a surgeon to whom hey had judged very ill in refusing a place in their academy, having the greatest need of one to set the limbs which they daily dislocated or distorted. Another time, finding a harpsichord on which he had sat down to play, good for nothing, “I'll make,” says he, “this harpsichord worth at least 100 crowns.” He painted on the lid a piece which immediately fetched that money. A gentleman desirous of having the pictures of his friends in his gallery, desired Salvator to draw them. He did it, but made all the portraits caricatures, in which he excelled: but as he drew himself, among the rest, in the same manner, none could be offended.

He was a man of a very generous spirit, and worked for reputation, rather than gain. A man of great wealth had been long treating with him for a large landscape, and every time he came Salvator raised his price 100 crowns. The gentleman expressing his surprise, Salvator told him, that with all his riches he could not purchase it; and to put an end to the other’s importunities, destroyed it before his face. The constable Colonna bespoke a large painting, on which Salvator bestowed great pains, and delivered it, with out asking any price. The constable generously sent him a purse of gold. Salvator, seeing his work rewarded so liberally, sent the constable a second piece, which was no less generously paid for than the first: a third, and a fourth followed; and at each time the constable augmented the sum. On receiving a fifth painting, he sent Salvator two purses equal to the first, and thanked him; but told him the match was not equal; for he could not so easily fill purses with gold, as Salvator could cover canvas with fine paintings.

After a long stay at Rome, Salvator was seized with a dropsy; and during his illness he married his mistress, a Florentine, by whom he had had several children. It was with the utmost reluctance he consented to this marriage. He had long known her to be a bad woman of low birth, and she had always behaved rather like a mistress over him, than a servant. He knew that he had shared her favours with several others: and the thoughts of her character made her, at this time, the object of his aversion; because he foresaw the loss of his honour (if he took her for a wife) of which he was extremely tender. He was persuaded, however, by the importunities of his confessor. A tedious illness made no alteration in his characteristic humour. He ended his daysatRome, in 1673, aged fifty-eight.

In both the sister arts of poesy and painting, he was esteemed one of the most excellent masters that Italy produced in the seventeenth century. In the first, his province was satire; in the latter, landscapes, battles, havens, c. with little figures, which are still admired, and are purchased at high prices. Mr. Fuseli says that, without choice of form in design, or much propriety of conception, by picturesque combination, concordant tones, facility and dash of pencil, he obtained a conspicuous place among historic painters. Though his talent was better adapted to smaller dimensions, he knew how to fill an altar-piece or a large canvas with striking and terrific effects, of which the conspiracy of Catiline, in the house of Martelli at Florence, is a powerful instance. In landscape he was a genius. His choice is the original scenery of Abruzzo, which he made often, though not always, a vehicle of terror: he delights in ideas of desolation, solitude, and danger, impenetrable forests, rocky or storm-lashed shores; in lonely dells leading to dens and caverns of banditti, alpine ridges, trees blasted by lightning or sapped by time, or stretching their extravagant arms athwart a murky sky, louring or thundering clouds, and suns shorn of their beams. His figures are wandering shepherds, forlorn travellers, wrecked mariners, banditti lurking for their prey, or dividing their spoils. But this genuine vein of sublimity or terror forsook him in the pursuit of witcheries, apparitions, and spectres; here he is only grotesque or capricious. His celebrated witch of Endor is a hag; and cauldrons, skeletons, bats, toads, and herbs, are vainly accumulated to palliate the want of dignity and pathos in Saul, and of sublimity in the apparition.

Among some musical Mss. purchased at Rome in 1770, was the music-book of Salvator Rosa, in which are contained, not only airs and cantatas set by Carissimi, Cesti, Luigi, Cavalli, Legrenzi, Capellini, Pasqualini, and Bandini, of which the words of several are by Salvator Rosa; but eight entire cantatas written, set, and transcribed by this celebrated painter himself. The book was purchased of his great grand-daughter, who inhabited the house in which her ancestor lived and died. The hand-writing was ascertained by collation with his letters and satires, of which the originals are still preserved by his descendants. The historians of Italian poetry, though they often mention Salvator as a satirist, seem never to have heard of his lyrical productions. This book is fully described by Dr. Burney.

, Ruzelin, or Rucelin, a canon of Compeigne, who flourished about the end of the eleventh century, was born in Bretagne. He was a man well versed in the learning of the times, a profound dialectician, and the most eminent doctor of the sect called Nominalists, and by applying some of their tenets to the subject of the Trinity excited a warm controversy in France about 1089. He held it inconceivable and impossible that the son of God should assume the human nature alone, i. e. without the Father and the Holy Ghost becoming incarnate also, unless by the three persons in the Godhead were meant three distinct objects, or natures existing separately (such as three angels or three distinct spirits), though endued with one will and acting by one power. When it was insinuated to Roscellinus, that this manner of reasoning led directly to Tritheism, or the doctrine of three Gods, he answered boldly, that the existence of three Gods might be asserted with truth, were not the expression harsh, and contrary to the phraseology generally received. He was, however, obliged to retract this error in a council held at Soissons, in 1092; but he resumed it when the council was dismissed and the danger apparently over. He was, however, assaulted on account of his doctrine, and therefore took refuge in England, where he excited a controversy of another kind, by maintaining, among other things, that persons born out of lawful wedlock ought to be deemed incapable of admission to holy orders. Some even of the prelates being in this condition, Roscellinus made very powerful enemies, and among others Anselm, archbishop of Canterbury, and was finally obliged to quit England. He then returned to France, and by propagating his doctrine concerning the Trinity, occasioned such contests as made him glad to retire to Aquitaine, where he passed the rest of his days unmolested. He is supposed to have died about 1106, Such is the account given of his doctrines by John, his accuser, in a letter to Anselm, published by Baluzius in his “Miscellanea,” and by others who, however, as the annotator on Mosheim remarks, were the inveterate enemies of Roscellinus, and perhaps comprehended his meaning imperfectly, or perverted it wilfully. But as none of the writings of this metaphysical ecclesiastic are extant, we cannot form any other notion of the controversy than appears from the testimony of his enemies.

, Quintius, a Roman actor, was born at Lanuvium, and became so celebrated on the stage that every actor of superior eminence to his contemporaries has been since called a Roscius. It is said that he was not without some personal defects; particularly his eyes were so distorted that he always appeared on the stage with a mask; but the Romans frequently obliged him to take it off, and overlooked the deformities of his face, that they might the better hear his elegant pronunciation. In private life he was so much esteemed as to be raised to the rank of senator. When falsely accused, Cicero, who had been one of his pupils, undertook his defence, and cleared him of the malevolent aspersions of his enemies, in an elegant oration extant in his works. Roscius wrote a treatise, which, however, has not descended to our times, comparing with great success and learning, the profession of the orator with that of the comedian. He died about 61 before Christ. His daily pay for acting is said to have been 1000 denarii, or 32l. 6s. of our money, though Cicero makes his yearly income amount to the enormous sum of 48,434l. 10s.

, a worthy French priest, a doctor in divinity and member of the academy of Besançon, was born at Quingey, Feb. 7, 1716. Of his early history we find no account, previous to his appearing as an author in 1767, when he published, 1. “Traité elementaire de Morale,” 2 vols. 12mo, which had the year before gained the prize offered by the academy of Dijon, and was thought a performance of very superior merit. 2. “La Morale evangelique, comparée à celle des differentes sectes de religion et de philosophie,” 1772, 2 vols. 12mo. 3. “Traité sur le Providence,” which was read in ms. and approved by cardinal de Choiseul, previous to its being published. 4. “L'Esprit des Peres, comparé aux plus celebres ecrivains, sur les matieres interessantes de la philosophie et de la religion,” 1791, 3 vols. 12mo. In this work he attempts to prove that the fathers are unanimous in all the essential doctrines of religion. M. Rose was also a good mathematician, and in 1778 sent to the academy of sciences at Paris, a “Memoire sur une courbe à double courbure,” of which it is sufficient to say that it was approved by La Place, and, printed in 1779 at Besançon. In the same year he sent to the same academy, a memoir, which had been read in that of Besançon, relative to “the passage of Venus over the Sun.” In 1791 he published a small work on “the organization of the Clergy,” and left some valuable papers in manuscript. He appears to have escaped the dangers of the revolution, although an orthodox and pious priest. He died August 12, 1805, and the tears of the poor spoke his eulogium.

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

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

In this they were unfortunately disappointed. Though like most men of middling stature, he possessed a considerable portion of bodily strength and agility, his constitution was naturally delicate, and symptoms of decline appeared very visibly in the end of 1803. His complaint was severely aggravated by attending the Sussex sessions in 1804, where he caught a cold so severe that it produced a rheumatic fever in the head, and within a few months his frame and countenance discovered the most alarming appearances of a rapid and incurable decay. In the course of the autumn, he tried the air of the Kentish coast; but returned to London in a state so far from recovery, that his physicians considered his disorder as a confirmed hectic, which after much lingering pain, borne by him with uncommon patience, proved fatal, at his house in Chancery-lane, Dec. 20, 1804, in his thirty-eighth year.

, a painter and entomologist, the descendant of a decayed noble family, was born in 1705 near Arnstadt, and settled at Nuremberg as a miniature-painter, but particularly distinguished himself as one of the greatest insect-painters. The works which he published from his coloured designs will not only, whilst they last, interest the classic entomologist, but every one whose taste for form and colour in animal nature is not confined to men, quadrupeds, or birds. He treated objects which required the minuteness of Denner, with equal truth and better judgment, in a style of energy and animated grandeur which approaches to history. As a writer he is as authentic and faithful as tiresome and prolix; but though he lived in the infancy of the science, the simple and constant characteristics by which he distinguished the classes of the genera he represented and described, have not yet been superseded by the complex and involved systems Of his successors. He died in 1759.

, an eminent physician, whose treatment df Linna3Us we have already noticed (see Linnaeus, p; 297), was born Feb. 1, 1706, at a village near Gottenburgh, and was sent to the college of that place in 1718. His father was a divine, and he was intended for the same profession, biit gave a decided preference to medicine, whidh he studied at Lund tinder Kilian Stobseus. After residing four years at this university he went to Stockholm, and became tutor in a nobleman’s family. la 1728, when the assessor Martin died at Upsal, Rosen became substitute professor of physic; but before he took tipon him this office^ he made a tour through Germany, Switzerland, France, and Holland, and took his doctor’s degree at Harderwyk in 1730. In the spring of the following year he entered on his professorship at Upsal, became member of the academy of sciences there, and was received a member of the royal academy of Stockholm in 1739. In 1740 he became ordinary professor in room of Rudbeck; in 1757, he was created a knight of the order of the polar star, and was ennobled in 1762, when queen Louisa Ulrica gave him the name of Rosenstein. He gairied great celebrity as physician to the royal family of Sweden, and received in 1769^ for his inoculation of some of them for the small pox, a reward of 100,000 rix dollars from the states of the kingdom. In his last illness, his animosity to Linnreus was so subdued, that he requested the medical assistance of that celebrated man. He died July 16, 1773. The academy of Stockholm struck a medal to his memory, with the inscription, “Sscculi decus incferlibile nostri.” He had a brother, who was also eminent as a physician and botanist; and in honour of both, Thunberg named a plant Rosenia. Dr. Nicholas Rosen’s principal works, which were all published in the Swedish language, are, “A medical repository of Domestic Medicine,” published by order of the queen dowager, &c. “A Treatise on the Diseases of Children,” which has been translated into German, English, Dutch, French, and Italian. He contributed likewise several papers to the memoirs of the academy of Stockholm.

, in German Roszfelit, an able antiquary, was born at Eisenac in Thuringia about 1550. He was educated in the university of Jena; in 1579, became sub-rector of a school at Ratisbon; and, afterwards was chosen minister of a Lutheran church at Wickerstadt, in the duchy of Weimar. In 1592, he was invited to Naumburg in Saxony, to be preacher at the catli-edral church; and there continued till 1626, when he died of the plague. He was a very learned man, and the first who composed a body of Roman antiquities, entitled “Antiquitatum Romanarum libri decem,” printed at Basil in 1585, foho. It was at first censured by some critics, but is ably defended by Fabricius in his “Bibliographia Antiqnaria.” It went through several editions; the latter of which have large additions by Dempster. That of Amsterdam, 1635, in 4to, is printed with an Elzevir letter, upon a good paper, and has the following title: ' Joannis Rosini Antiquitatum Romanarum corpus absolutissimum. Cum notis doctissimis ac locupletissimis Thomae Dempsteri J. C. Huic postremae editioni accuratissimae accesserunt Pauli Manutii libri If. de Legibus & de Senatu, cum Andreoe Schotti Klectis. I. De Priscis Romanis Gentibus ac Familiis. 2. De Tribubus Rom. xxxv. Rusticis atque Urbanis. 3. De ludis festisque Romanis ex Kalendario Vetere. Cum Indrce locupletissimo, & anneis figuris accuratissimis.“His other works are,” Exempla pietatis illustris, seu vitae trium Saxonirc Ducum electorum, Frederici II. Sapient 'is Joannis Constantly et Joannis Frederici Magnanimi“Jena, 1602, 4to a continuation of” Drechsleri Chronicon,“Leipsic, 1594, 8vo;” Anti-Turcica Lutberi," in German, a collection of some writings of Luther of the prophetic kind, against the TurksLeipsic, 1596, 8vo.

, a voluminous author of the seventeenth century, was born in 1590 in Scotland, and became a divine, but left that country in Charles I.'s reign, and was appointed one of his majesty’s chaplainsj and master of the free-school at Southampton. He died in 1654, leaving a handsome bequest to the above school, from which it is said he had retired for some time before his death, and passed the remainder of his days in the family of the Henleys of Hampshire, to whom he left a large library and a considerable sum of money, part of which was concealed among his books. Echard says “he was a busy, various, and voluminous writer, who by his pen and ether ways made a considerable noise and figure in these* times, and who so managed his affairs, that in the midst of these storms, he died very rich, as appears from the several benefactions he made.” We have a list before us of thirty pieces by this author, but whether published separately, each forming a volume, we know not. Most of them occur very seldom. Among them are some whose dates we have recovered, but cannot vouch for the accuracy of the list. 1. “Comment, de Terrae motu refutatum/' Lond. 1634, 4to. 2.” The new Planet no Planet^ or, the earth no wandering star,“ibid. 1640, 4to, reprinted in 1646. 3.” Virgilius Evangelizans;“ibid. 1634, 8vo. This is a cento on the life of Christ, collected entirely from Virgil. Granger says it is ingenious, and was deservedly admired. 4.” Medicus medicatus, or, the physician’s religion cured,“ibid. 1645, 8vo. Th;s was one of the pieces in which he attacked the reputation of sir Thomas Browne in his” ReJigio Medici.“We find him returning to the charge afterwards in a work entitled, 5.” Refutation of Dr. Browne’s Vulgar Errors,“ibid. 1652, 8vo. 6.” Observations upon sir Kenelm Digby’s Discourse on the nature of Bodies,“ibid. 1645, 4to. 7.” The picture of the Conscience,“ibid. 1646, 12mo. 8.” The Muses’ Interpreter,“ibid. 1646, 8vo. 9.” Arcana Microcosmi,“ibid. 1651 and 1652, 12mo and 8vo. 10.” Observations upon Hobbes’s Leviathan,“ibid. 1653, 12mo. 11.” Observations upon sir Walter Raleigh’s History of the World,“ibid. 12mo. After this he published” A Continuation“of that history, which Granger calls his” great work;“but adds, that it is like a piece of bad Gothic tacked to a magnificent pile of Roman architecture, which serves to heighten the effect of it, while it exposes its own deficiency in strength and beauty. 12.” An Epitome“of the same history. 13.” A View of all Religions,“the work for which he is best known, and which has passed through variotfs editions, the sixth in 1683. It had the merit of being the first compilation of the kind in our language, and attained a great degree of popularity. 14.” Abridgment and translation of John Wollebius’s Christian divinity,“ibid. 1657, 8vo. 15*” Three Decades of Divine Meditations,“no date. This is one of his poetical works, and valued in the” Bibliotheca Anglo-Poetica“at Si. tis. 16.” Mel Helreonium, or, Poetical Honey gathered out of the weeds of Parnassus, &c.“ibid. 1642, 8vo. This, of which an account is given by Mr. Park in the” Censura Literaria,“is an attempt to spiritualize the Greek and Roman mythology. In moral and metre it resembles Quarles. Of the following works we have no dates:” De rebus Judaicis, libri quatuor,“in hexameter verse;” Rasura tonsoris,“prose;” Chymera Pythagoria;“”Meditations upon Predestination;“” Questions upon Genesis;“” Melissomachia;“”Four books of Epigrams,“in Latin elegiacs” Mystagogus poeticus“”ColloquiaPlantina;“” Chronology,“in English” Christiados poematis libri tredecim," with others, which seem of doubtful authority.

, a learned Italian, who assumed and is generally known by the name of Janus Njcius Erythræus, was born at Rome, of a noble, but not opulent family, about 1577. He studied in the college of the Jesuits, and before he was nineteen years of age had made such progress in the law, that he was permitted to give lessons on the subject. These were so much admired by a magistrate of eminence, that he appointed Rossi his auditor; but as this gentleman died the same year, all his hopes from his patronage were disappointed. The law, however, still holding out the prospect of those honours to which he aspired, he omitted no opportunity of increasing his knowledge under the direction of Lepidus Piccolomini, one of the most famous lawyers of his time, and who advised him to turn pleader; but Piccolomini dying soon after, Rossi was so discouraged by this second disappointment that, as he had devoted himself to the study of the law rather from ambition than liking, he now determined to employ his time in the study of the belles lettres. With this view he became a member of the academy of the Umoristi, where he read several of his compositions, the style of which was so much admired by Marcel Vestri, secretary of the briefs to pope Paul V., that he invited Rossi to his house, to assist in drawing up the briefs, and with a view that he should be his successor in case of himself rising to higher preferment. Rossi soon made himself useful in this office, but unfortunately Vestri died in about eight months, and Rossi was again left unemployed, Many expedients he tried, and made many applications, but without success, and his only consolation, we are told, he derived from his vanity, which suggested to him that persons in office would not employ him, from a consciousness of their inferiority to him, and a jealousy of his supplanting them. It appears, however, that a certain satirical and arrogant temper was more to blame; for this was what he could not easily repress.

At length, in 1608, when he was in his thirty-first year, the cardinal Andrew Peretti took him into his service, as secretary, and with him he lived near twenty years, that is, until the cardinal’s death, in 1628. Rossi tells us in one of his letters that he accepted this situation much against his will, and remained in it only because he could obtain no other; and complain* of the little care the cardinal took to promote his dependents, and his general want of liberality towards them. His residence here, however, appears to have cured him of all his ambition, and he resolved for the future to devote himself to study only. From this time accordingly, he was employed in perusing the scriptures and the fathers, and in the composition of his various works; and that he might be enabled to enjoy all this in quiet, he went to a retired part of Rome, where he afterwards built a small church dedicated to St. Mary. In some of his works he styles himself a Roman citizen, and a commissary of the water of Marana; but, according to one of his letters to Fabio Chjgi, afterwards pope Alexander VIL, he neither knew what the duty of that office was, what this water of Marana was, where it came from, whither it flowed, or what benefit the people of Rome derived from it, except that he had been told it turned some mills. There was, however, an annual salary annexed, which he found not inconvenient. He died Nov. 15, 1647, and was interred in the church which he built for the use of the hermits of the congregation of Peter of Pisa, whom also he made his heirs. His first publication is entitled< Eudemiae libri Decem/* Cologne (Leyden), 1645. To this, which is a bitter satire on the corrupt manners of the Romans, he prefixed his assumed name of Janus Nicius Erythraeus. His other works consist of “Dialogues,” religious tracts, orations, and letters; but that for which he is most known is his “Pinacotheca imaginum illustrjum doctrinse vcl ingenii laude virorum, qui uuctore superstite diem suum ohierunt,” in three parts, Cologn, 1643—1648, reprinted at Leipsic in 1692, and in 1729. As containing many particulars of contemporary history, this is a work necessary to be consulted, but it contains more opinions than facts, and his criticisms are often injudicious.

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

, a learned ecclesiastical antiquary, was born at Utrecht in 1569, and entered the society of the Jesuits at Doway in Flanders, when he was twenty years of age. His taste led him to examine the libraries of the monasteries in that city, until he was called to be professor of philosophy and divinity, first at Doway, and afterwards at Antwerp, where he attained very considerable reputation. He died in 1629, at the age of sixty. He published, in 1607, “Fasti Sanctorum quorum Vitae in Belgicis Bibliothecis Man use rip tee asservantur,” which he intended as a specimen of a larger work, and which was the prelude of the immense collection by Bollandus and others, under the title of “Acjta Sanctorum.” He was author of many other works, among which is “An Account of the Hermits of Egypt and Palestine,” “An Ecclesiastical History from the time of Christ to pope Urban VIII.” 2 vols. folio; and “The History of the Belgic Church.” In none of these did he ever rise above the prejudices of his order, but shewed himself the zealous advocate of superstition and credulity, while he treated those who differed from him with very little respect.

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

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

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

Mr. Scott of Crown-street, Westminster, had a sketch of Roubiliac’s head, in oil, by himself, which he painted ft little before his death. The late Edward Bridgen, esq. had an excellent model of a monument for general Wolfe, by Roubiliac, which was his last work, and was intended to have been executed in marble for Westminster-abbey. The design is said to have been far preferable to that now in the abbey. Lord Chesterfield used to assert, that Roubiliac only was a statuary, and all the rest were stone-cutters. Roubiliac had a turn for poetry, and wrote some satires in French verse.

, a very conspicuous racter during the republican state of England, descended from an ancient family in Devonshire, was the younger son of sir Anthony Rons, knight, by Elizabeth, his first wife, daughter of Thomas Southcote, gent. He was born at Halton, in Cornwall, in 1570, and entered a commoner of Broadgate-hall, now Pembroke-college, Oxford, where he took a bachelor’s degree in arts. He afterwards studied the law, and there is a report that he took orders, and preached at Saltash; but for this there was probably no other foundation than what his works afforded, which would not have disgraced many of the divines of that period. It is evident that he had studied religious controversy with, more attention than laymen usually bestow on such subjects. His destination, however, was to make a figure in political history. In the first parliament called by Charles I, he was returned for Truro in Cornwall, for Tregony in the third, and for Truro again in the 15th and 16th of that reign; in all which he proved one of the most zealous enemies to the established church, and a vehement declaimer. against what he termed innovations and abuses both in church and state, and particularly against Arminianism, which was also the subject of some of his works. He was one of the few laymen appointed by the Commons to sit in the Assembly of Divines at Westminster. In the parliament called in 1653, he was one of the representatives for Devonshire, and at that time was first chosen chairman, and then speaker for a month; but continued, during the whole sitting, to forward Cromwell’s plans. He procured a vote, that Cromwell, Lambert, Harrison, Disbrowe, and Tomlinson, should sit in that house as members; and afterr wards proposed, that the parliament should resign the govertment into Cromwell’s hands, with the title of Protector. His original intention was to form the English commonwealth after the model of the Jewish; but as a theocracy was rejected, he made the above proposal in favour of Cromwell, whom he affected to look upon as a compound of the characters of Moses and Joshua. In gratitude for this, he was declared one of Jus highness’ s privy-council. In 1656, he was returned one of the members for Cornwall; and in the year following was seated in the House of Lords. He had been made provost of Eton in 1643, and had a college- lease, which together were worth 1200l. per annum. He died at Acton, near London, Jan, 7, 1659, and was buried with great pomp at Eton, and a standard-­pennon, with other things relating to a baron, were erected over his grave, but these were taken away at the Restoration. We have omitted to notice, that he was principal trier and approver of public preachers, and a commissioner for the ejectment of “scandalous and ignorant ministers.” He founded three fellowships in Pembroke college, and bequeathed other property to pious uses. Lord Clarendon and other contemporaries undervalue his abilities, which certainly did not appear to much advantage in parliament, where his speeches were rude, vulgar, and enthusiastic, both in style and sentiment, yet perhaps not the worse adapted to the understandings of his hearers. Wood has given a long catalogue of his writings, the principal of which relating to subjects of religions controversy, or general piety, were collected in a folio printed at London in 1657, under the title of “The Works of Francis Rous, esq. or treatises and meditations dedicated to the saints, and to the excellent throughout the three nations.” This has Faithorne’s fine print from the picture in Pembroke college. He published also, a tract, “The Lawfulness of obeying the present Government,” 1649, 4to, and “Mel la Patrum,” a thick octavo, 1650, containing what may he termed the beauties of the fathers of the first three centuries; “Jnteriora regni Dei,” 1665, 12mo, and a translation of the Psalms into English metre, printed in 1645, by order of the House of Commons. His son Francis was a young physician of great talents, but died early in life in 1643. When at Merton college, he was distinguished for classical attainments, and published a work on Greek antiquities, “Archaeologiae Atticae libri tres,” Oxon. 1637, which Wood says went through several impressions.

, usually called the antiquary of Warwick, was born in that town, and educated there until fit for the university. He then went to Oxford, and studied at Baliol college, where he took his master’s degree in arts, and became soon afterwards a canon of Osney. English antiquities became early his favourite pursuit, and he had all the zeal, if not all the judgment of a true antiquary. Besides examining closely into the written records in both universities, he travelled over the greater part of the kingdom to acquire information on the spot where memorable events occurred, or any memorials were preserved. He then took np his residence at Guy-ClifTe in Warwickshire, when* he had a possession granted him either by the earls of Warwick or by Edward IV, and died Jan. 14, 1491. He wrote much on the civil and ecclesiastical antiquities of Warwick, and a history of our kings, which is extant in the Cotton library, and that of Bene't college, Cambridge, and was published by Hearne in 1716. In this are many collections relative to the antiquities of our universities. There is a noble ms. of his history of the earls of Warwick in the Bodleian library, with drawings of the several earls, their coats of arms, &c.

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

The pictures of this master are not frequently to be purchased; and when they are, their estimation is high. He was a man of probity, piety, and benevolence; and at his death he bequeathed the greatest part of his substance to relieve those in England who, like himself, were refugees on account of the French persecution.

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

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

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

At Boudry, accidentally meeting a Greek bishop, Archimandrite of Jerusalem, who was making a collection in Europe to repair the holy sepulchre, our adventurer was prevailed upon to accompany him as his secretary and interpreter and, in consequence, travelled, alms’-gathering, through Switzerland; harangued the senate of Berne, &c. but at Soleure, the French ambassador, the marquis de Bonac, having made him discover who he was, detained him in his service, without allowing him even to take leave of his “poor Archimandrite,” and sent him (as he desired) to Paris, to travel with the nephew of M. Goddard, a Swiss colonel in the French service. This fortnight’s journey was the happiest time of his life. In his ideas of the magnificence of Paris, Versailles, &c. he greatly mistook. He was also much flattered, and little served. Colonel Goddard’s proposals being very inadequate to his expectations, he was advised to decline accepting them. Hearing that his dear “Mama” had been gone two months to Savoy, Turin, or Switzerland, he determined to follow her; and, on the road, sent by the post a paper of satirical verses, to the old avaricious colonel, the only satire that he ever wrote. At Lyons he visited mademoiselle du Chatelet, a friend of madam de Warens; but whether that lady was gone to Savoy or Piedmont, she could not inform him. She urged him, however, to stay at Lyons, till she wrote and had an answer, an offer which he accepted, although his purse was almost exhausted, and he was often reduced to lie in the streets, yet without concern or apprehension, choosing rather to pay for bread than a lodging. At length, M. Rolichon, an Antonian, accidentally hearing him sing in the street a cantata of Batistin, employed him some days in copying music, fed him well, and gave him a crown, which, he owns, he little deserved, his transcripts were so incorrect and faulty. And, soon after, he heard news of “Mama,” who was at Chambery, and received money to enable him to join her. He found her constant and affectionate, ana 1 she immediately introduced him to the intendant, who had provided him the place of a secretary to the commissioners appointed by the king to make a general survey of the country, a place which, though not very lucrative, afforded him an honourable maintenance for the first time in his life. This happened in 1732, he being then near 21. He lodged with “Mama,” in whose affection, however, he had a formidable rival in her steward, Claude Anetj yet they all lived together on the best terms. The succeeding eight or nine years, viz. till 1741, when he set out for Paris, had few or no events. His taste for music made him resign his employment for that of teaching that science; and several of his young female scholars (all charming) he describes and introduces to his readers. To alienate him from other seducers, at length his “Mama” (he says) proposed to him being his mistress, and became so; yet sadness and sorrow embittered his delights, and, from the maternal light in which he had been accustomed to view this philosophical lady, who sinned, he adds, more through error than from passion, he deemed himself incestuous. And let it be remembered that she had a husband, and had had many other gallants. Such is his “good-hearted” heroine, the Aspasia of his Socrates, as he calls tier, and such was he. This is another of his “Confessions.” Thus madam de Warens, Rousseau, and Anet, lived together in the most perfect union, till a pleurisy deprived him of the latter. In consequence of the loss of this good manager, all her affairs were soon in the utmost disorder, though JohnJames succeeded to the stewardship, and though he pawned his own credit to support hers. Determining now to compose, and for that purpose, first to learn, music, he applied to the abbe Ulancnard, organist of the cathedral of Besanc,on. But, just as they were going to begin, he heard that his portmanteau, with all his cloaths, was seized at Rousses, a French custom-house on the borders of Switzerland, because he had accidentally, in a new waistcoat-pocket, a Jansenist parody of the first scene of Racine’s “Mithridates,” of which he had not read ten lines. This loss made him return to Chambery, totally disappointed, and resolved, in future, to attach himself solely to “Mama,” who, by degrees, reinstated his wardrobe. And still cotitin, ing to study Rameau, he succeeded, at last, in some compositions, which were much approved by good judges, and thus did not lose his scholars. From this aera he dates his connexion with his old friend Gauffeconrt, an amiable man. since dead, and M. d Conzie, a Savoyard gentleman, then living. The extra* ityatn-e of his mistr* ss, in spite of all his remonstrances, made? uim absent himself from her, which increased their ex pe ices, but at the same time procured him many respectable friends, whom he name.-. His uncle Bernard was now dead in Carolina, whither he went in oruer to build Charles-tow1, as na* his cousin, in the service of tue king of Prussia. His health at this time visibly, but unaccountably, declined. “The sword cut the scabbard.” Besides his disorderly passions, his illness was partly occasioned by the tury vv:tn union he studied chess, shutting hunself up, for that purpose, whole days and nights, till he looked like a corpse, and partly by his concern and anxiety for madam de Warens, who by her maternal care and attention saved his life. Being ordered by her to drink milk in the country, he prevailed on her to accompany him, and, aoout the end of the summer of 1736, they settled at Charmett- j s, near the gate of Chambery, but solitary and retired, in a house whose situation he describes with rapture. “Moments dear and regretted.” However, not being able to bear milk, having recourse to water, which almost killed him, and leaving off wine, he lost his appetite, and had a violent nervous affection, which, at the end of some weeks, left him with a beating of his arteries, and tingling in his ears, which have lasted from that time to the present, 30 years after; and, from being a good sleeper, he became sleepless, and constantly short-breathed. “This accident, which might have destroyed his body, only destroyed his passions, and produced a happy effect on his soul.” “Mama” too, he says, was religious; yet, though she believed in purgatory, she did not believe in hell. The summer passed amidst their garden, their pigeons, their cows, &c. theauiumn in their vintage and their fruit-gathering; and in the winter they returned, as from exile, to town. Not thinking that he should live till spring, he did not stir out, nor see any one but madam de Warens and M. Salomon, their physician, an honest man, and a great Cartesian, whose conversation was better than all his prescriptions. In short, John-James studied hard, recovered, went abroad, saw all his acquaintance again, and, to his great surprise and joy, beheld the buds of the spring, and went with his mistress again to Charmettes. There, being soon fatigued with digging in the garden, he divided his time between the pigeon-house (so taming those timid birds as to induce them to perch on his arms and head), bee-hives, and books of science, beginning with philosophy, and proceeding to elementary geometry, Latin (to him, who had no memory, the most difficult), history, geography, and astronomy. One night, as he was observing the stars in his garden, with a planisphere, a candle secured in a pai), a telescope, &c. dressed in a flapped hat, and a wadded pet-en-V air of “Mama’s,” he was taken by some peasants for a conjurer. In future, he observed without a light, and consulted his planisphere at home. The writings of Port-royal and of the Oratory had now made him half a Jansenist. But his confessor and another Jesuit set his mind at ease, and he had recourse to several ridiculous expedients to know whether he was in a state of salvation. In the mean time, their rural felicity continued, and, contrary to his advice, madam de Warens became by degrees a great farmer, of which he foresaw ruin must be the consequence.

In the ensuing winter he received some music from Italy, and, being now of age, it was agreed that he should go in the spring to Geneva, to demand the remains of his mother’s fortune. He went accordingly, and his father came also to Geneva, undisturbed, his affair being now buried in oblivion. No difficulty was occasioned by our author’s change of religion; his brother’s death not being legally proved, he could not claim his share, and therefore readily left it to contribute towards the maintenance of his father, who enjoyed it as long as be lived. At length he received his money, turned part of it into livres, and flew with the rest to “Mama,*' who received it without affectation, and employed most of it for his use. His health, however, decayed visibly, and he was again horribly oppressed with the vapours. At length his researches into anatomy made him suspect that his disorder was a polypus in the heart. Salomon seemed struck with the same idea. And having heard that M Fizes, of Montpellier, had cured such a polypus, he went immediately to consult him, assisted by the supply from Geneva. But two ladies, whom he met at Moirans, especially the elder, Mad. N. at once banished his fever, his vapours, his polypus, and all his palpitations, except those which she herself had excited, and would not cure. Without knowing a word of English, he here thought proper to pass for an Englishman and a Jacobite, and called himself Mr Budding. Leaving the other lady at Romans, with madam N. and an old sick marquis, he travelled slowly and agreeably to Saint Marcellin, Valence, Montelimar (before which the marquis left them), and at length, after having agreed to pass the winter together, these lovers (for such they became) parted with mutual regret. Filled with the ideas of madam N. and her daughter, whom she idolised, he mused from Pont St. Esprit to Remoulin. He visited Pont-du Card, the first work of the Romans that he had seen, and the Arena of Nimes, a work still more magnificent; in all these journeys forgetting that he was ill till he arrived at Montpellier. From abundant precaution he boarded with an Irish physician, named Fitz- Moris, and consulted M. Fizes, as madam N, had advised him. Finding that the doctors Jcnew nothing of his disorder, and only endeavoured to amuse him and make him” swallow his own money,“he left Montpellier at the end of November, after six weeks or two months stay, leaving twelve louis there for no purpose, save for a course of anatomy, just begun under M. Fitz-Moris, but which the horrible stench of dissected bodies rendered insupportable. Whether he should return to” Mama,“or go (as he had promised) to madam N. was now the question. Reason, however, here turned the scale. At Pont St. Esprit he burnt his direction, and took the road to Chambery,” for the first time in his life indebted to his studies, preferring his duty to pleasure, and deserving his own esteem.“At his return to madam de Warens, he found his place supplied by a young man of the Pays de Vaud, named Vintzenried, a journeyman barber, whom he paints in the most disgusting colours. This name not being noble enough, he changed it for that of M. de Courtilles, by which he was afterwards known at Chambery, and in Maurienne, where he married. He being every thing in the house, and Rousseau nothing, all his pleasures vanished like a dream, and at length he determined to quit this abode, once so dear, to which his” Mama" readily consented. And being invited to educate the children of M. de Maiby, grand provost of Lyons, he set out for that city, without regretting a separation of which the sole idea would formerly have been painful as death to them both. Unqualified for a preceptor, both by temper and manners, and much disgusted with his treatment by the provost, he quitted his family in about a year; and sighing for madam de Warens, flew once more to throw himself at her feet. She received him with good nature, but he could not recover the past. His former happiness, he found, was dead for ever. He continued there, however, still foreseeing her approaching ruin, and the seizure of her person; and to retrieve her affairs, forming castles in the air, and having made an improvement (as he thought) in musical notes, from which he had great expectations, he sold nis books, and set out for Paris, to communicate his scheme to tht academy.