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

, a native of Forcheim, in the bishopric of Bamberg, is said by some writers to have been born a Jew; but others assert that he was first a Roman Catholic, then a Jew, and lastly, a Lutheran. This, however, is certain, that he published several books containing Judaical learning, was professor of Oriental languages in the academy of Konigsburg, and died about 1652. His works are, a Commentary on the book “Jezirah, or, the Creation,” attributed to Abraham, Amsterdam, 1642, 4to; a treatise “De veritate Religionis Christianas,” Franeker, 1699; “Libra veritatis,” 1698, in which he asserts that the Chaldee paraphrase furnishes arguments against the Jews and Anti-Trinitarians; “Letters;” a German translation of the Prayers used by the Jews in their synagogues, on the first day of each year; and other works. Rittangelius maintained this paradox, that the New Testament “contains nothing hut what was taken from the Jewish antiquities.”

, an American philosopher and mathematician, was born in Pennsylvania in 1732. By the dint of genius and application, he was enabled to mingle the pursuits of science with the active employments of a farmer and watch-maker. The latter of these occupations he filled with unrivalled eminence among his countrymen. In 17t9 he was with others invited by the American Philosophical Society to observe the transit of Venus, when he particularly distinguished himself by his observations and calculations. He afterwards constructed an observatory, where he made such valuable discoveries, as tended to the general diffusion of science. After the American war, as he was a strenuous advocate for independence, he successively filled the offices of treasurer of the state of Pennsylvania, and director of the national mint; in the first of which he manifested incorruptible integrity, and in the last, the rare talent of combining theories in such a way as to produce correct practical effects. He succeeded Dr. Franklin in the office of president of the American Philosophical Society; but towards the close of his days he withdrew from public life, and spent his time in retirement. After a very severe illness, but of no long continuance, he died July 10, 1796, about the age of 64. He had the degree of LL. D. conferred upon him. To the “Transactions” of the American Philosophical Society he contributed several excellent papers, chiefly on astronomical subjects.

, a learned civilian and philologer of Germany, was the son of Balthasar Rittershusius of Brunswic, and born there Sept. 25, 1560. He was taught Greek and Latin in his own country, at the school of which his mother’s brother, Matthias Berg, was rector; and, in 1580, went to Helmstad, where he applied himself to the civil law; but without neglecting the belles lettres, which formed his most lasting pursuit. After recovering from the plague, by which he was endangered in this town, he removed to Altorf in 1584, to profit by the lectures of Gifanius, for whom he conceived a particular esteem. He began to travel in 1587, went through part of Germany, and came to Bohemia. Being afterwards at Basil in 1592, he took the degree of doctor of law, and returned to Altorf, to fill the professor’s chair, which the curators of the university had given him some time before. He had many advantageous proposals from other universities of Germany and Holland, but his attachment to Altorf would not suffer him to accept them. He died at Altorf May 25, 1613, after having married two wives, by whom he had nine children. Two of his sons, George and Nicolas, distinguished themselves in the republic of letters; and George wrote the life of his father.

He was a man of extensive learning, and perfectly skilled in the Greek and Latin tongues. He is said to have had Homer and Hesiod so well by heart, as once, in a conversation with a learned young gentleman, to have expressed all he had occasion to say in the verses of Homer. He was also a judicious critic, and wrote notes upon many ancient Greek and Latin authors, Petronius, Phacdrus, Oppian, &c. which have been inserted in the best editions of those authors. Thus Burinan, in his edition of “Phsedrus,” 1698, 8vo, has carefully inserted the entire notes of Rittershusius, whom he calls in his preface “Germanise suae quondam ornamentum, & noil minoris Gallice-decus.” He published a great number of works, sixty-six of which are enumerated by Niceron, many on civil law, but most on the belles lettres and criticism. His edition. of “Oppian,” Greek and Latin, appeared in 1657, 8vo. His son Nicholas, born at Altdorf in 1597, was also a man of learning and a jurist, and particularly applied to historical and genealogical inquiries. He studied at Helmstadt, and afterwards travelled into various countries of Europe. On his return he took a doctor’s degree in 1634, and was appointed professor of feudal law at Altdorff. He died in 167O. Nicholas edited several of his father’s works, and in 163S published an oration on “Hanno’s Periplws.” v ' He was the author of a large work, entitled “Genealggia? Jmperatorum, Regum, Ducum, Comitum, &c. ab anno 1400 ad annum 1664,” 7 vols. in 4, folio, a work of rare occurrence. Several of his letters are printed in the “Epistolse celebrium Virorum,” 1705.

, a learned French writer, was born at Laval, in the province of Perche, about 1571. He wa* brought up in the family of the count de Laval, and for. some time followed the military profession, serving in Italy and in Holland. In 1603, Henry IV. appointed him one of the gentlemen of his bed-chamber. In 1605 he entered into tSie service of the emperor against the Turks: but ori his return he devoted himself to literary and scientific studies and in 1611 he was appointed preceptor to the young king, Lewis XIII. with a pension of 3000 livres, and the title of counsellor of state. An insult he received from his royal pupil obliged him to quit his office for some time. The king had a favourite dog, who was perpetually jumping on Rivault during his giving lessons, and Rivault one day gave him a kick. The king was so incensed as to strike Riv'lult, who retired; but it appears they were soon reconciled, and by the king’s orders Rivault accompanied ma* dame Elizabeth of France as far as Bayonne, on her way to be married to the king of Spain. On his return from that voyage he died at Tours, Jan. 1616, about the age of forty-five. He is spoken of with high esteem by several of the most celebrated writers of his time, particularly by Casaubon, Scaliger, Vossius, Erpenius, and Menage. His works consist of, 1. “Les Etats,” or “The States, or a discourse concerning the privileges of the prince, the nobles, and the Third Estate, &c.” 2. “Les Elemens d'Artillerie,” Paris, 1608, 8vo, a curious and very scarce work. 3. “Archimedis Opera quae extant, Gr. et Lat. novis detnonstrationibus illdstrata,” &c. Paris, 1615, folio; and ether pieces on education, &c.

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

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

, of the same family as the preceding, but descended from a catholic branch, was born October 30, 1683, at Confolens, a small town in Poictiers. He studied philosophy under the Jacobins at Poictiers, but an escape from very imminent danger determined him to put on the Benedictine habit, which he accordingly did at Marmoutier in 1704, and took his vows therein 1705. In 1716 he was transferred to the monastery of St. Cyprian, and summoned to Paris the year following, to assist some other monks in compiling a history of illustrious men of the Benedictine order; but this project failing, Rivet turned his thoughts entirely to the literary history of France, which he had before formed a design of writing, and which employed the rest of his trfe, He was-assisted in this work by three of his brethren, Joseph Duclou, Maurice Poncet, and John Colomb, who were all his particular friends, good critics, and accurate and industrious writers. In 1723 Rivet published at Amsterdam “Le Necrologe de Port Royal des Champs,” a work of which he was very fond, and added to it a long historical preface. This publication, joined to his warm opposition to the bull Unrgenitus, from which he had appealed, obliged him to retire -iiftb the abbey of St. Vincent at Mans, the same year, where he laboured assiduously during more than thirty years to complete his “Literary History of France.” >' He published the first volume in 1733, 4to, and was finishing the ninth, which contains the first years of the 12th century, when he died, February 7, 1749, in his sixty-sixth year, worn out with intense application, austerities, and the strict and rigorous observation of his rule, from which he never departed. His history was afterwards extended to 12 volumes, to which Clemencet added a 13th. It is a very useful work, but the French literati have never thought of completing it.

, an eminent French physicist, was born at Montpellier in 1589. He studied in the university of his native place, but having failed in his examinations for his degree, he was impelled to redouble his exertiotis, and in 16 11 was admitted to the degree of doctor with great credit. In 1622 he was appointed to the professorship of medicine in the university, an office which he continued to fill with great honour until his death in 1655. Riverius published “The Institutes of Medicine,” in five books, in Latin, which went through many editions; but the work which has gained him most reputation, is a course of medicine, entitled “Praxis Medica,” of which editions were long multiplied in France, Holland, and England. It treats of most of the diseases to which the body is subject, in seventeen books, in a clear style; but in many places he appears to have borrowed copiously from Sennertus. He published also a work entitled “Observationes Medic* et Curationes insignes,” which has been frequently reprinted, and is not now without its value. These works have been collected and published together, under the title of “Opera Medica Universa,” Geneva, 1737, and Leyden, 1758, fol. Eloy observes, that a friar, Bernardin Christin, who had been a pupil of Riverius, compiled some secrets of chemistry, which he published with the name of Riverius; and although it has been clearly proved that he was not the author of these papers, yet they have been frequently printed in the collections of his works, and separately, under the title of “Arcana Riverii.”

, an eminent botanist and physician, was the son of a learned physician and critic, Andrew Bachmann, whose name in Latin became Rivinus. He was born at Leipsic in 1652. After a successful course of study he became professor of physiology and botany in his native university. He was also a member of various learned societies, and died in 1723 r aged seventyone.

The botanical system of Rivinus is founded on the roost elegant and attractive, if not the most solid and important, parts of plants. His classes are marked by the number, the regularity, or irregularity, of the petals. He could not proceed far in this path without perceiving that he made most unnatural, and, as Haller justly terms them, paradoxical, combinations. He therefore asserted, and doubtless believed, the inutility and impracticability of 4 really natural classification. This principle brought him to one right conclusion, which even the philosophical Ray did not attain, or was afraid to admit, that the old primary distribution of vegetables into trees, shrubs^ and herbs, is unscientific and erroneous.

Rivinus published, at his own expence, in 1690, his splendid illustration of the first class of his system, comprising such plants as have a monopetabus irregular 6ower. This part consists of one hundred and twenty-five plates; bub the catalogue of species is imperfect, A learned “Introductio generalis in rem hdtfbariam” is prefixed and this introductory part was, at different times, republished in a smaller form. The second part of this sumptuous work came forth in 1691, and consists of two hundred and twentyone plates, of plants with four irregular petals; into which class, by means of some contrivance, and many grains of allowance, are admitted all the papilionaceous tribe, the cruciform genus Iberis, the Euphorbia, and a few things besides. In 1699 the third part, containing flowers with five irregular petals, was given to the world. Even more liberty is taken in the assemblage of genera here than in the former class. It consists of one hundred and thirtynine plates. A fourth part, the hexapetalse irregulares, consisting of the Orchideae, was finished, but not published, before the author’s death; nor indeed have any more than a very few copies of this ever got abroad into the world, so that it constitutes one of the greatest bibliothecal rarities. With respect to utility or beauty, those who are possessed of the transcendant engravings of this favourite tribe in Haller’s History of Swiss Plants, may dispense with the figures of Rivinus. The author had prepared several supplementary plates to his work, which never came forth, and of which perhaps the only specimens are to be seen in sir Joseph Banks’s fine copy of the whole work, except two duplicate plates presented by the learned baronet to the president of the Linnaean society. There is every reason to believe that the copy in question belonged to the author himself, or to his son, as may be gathered from its manuscript additions and corrections. A complete copy, of even the three first parts of Rivinus’s book is, indeed, difficult to be met with; for several of the plates having from time to time received additions of seed-vessels, or of entire plants; the earlier impressions of such plates are consequently imperfect. The best copies are required, by fastidious collectors, to have every plate with and without the additions.

As a medical writer, Rivinus has the merit of faithful observation and description, in his treatise “de Peste Lipsiensi,” published in 1680. He wrote also on dyspepsia, on intermittent fevers, and various other subjects. He did not scruple to attack whatever practice or opinion he found established on the basis of prejudice and ignorance. In this respect his “Censura Medicamentorum officinalium” ranks very high. His commendable aim, in this work, was to clear the materiamedica of its various disgraceful incumbrances; so many of which originated in error, imposition, or superstition. His attempts have been followed up by various men of ability and authority; and it is to the united labour and good sense of such that the world is indebted for the purified and improved state of our modern pharmacopeias.

Though not a great practical anatomist, or dissector, Rivinus is said to have discovered a new salivary duct. He Jeft a son, John Augustus Rivinus, who succeeded him as professor, and under whose presidency was published a dissertation, in 1723, on “Medicinal Earths.” This gentleman died in 1725, aged thirty-three, having survived his father but two years. His premature death seems to have prevented the publication of the fourth part of his father’s great botanical work, at least for some time. Haller says, Ludwig afterwards edited the plates of the Orchidece, without any letter-press; but this publication has never come under our inspection.

, a musician of the sixteenth century, whose misconduct or misfortunes have obtained him a place in the history of Scotland, was born at Turin, but brought up in France. His father was a musician and dancing-master, and the son probably possessed those talents which served to amuse a courtly circle. He appears to have come to Scotland about 1564, when, according to most accounts, he was neither young nor handsome. The count de Merezzo brought him hither in his suite, as ambassador from Savoy to the court of the unfortunate queen Mary. Sir James Melvil, in his “Memoirs,” tells us that “the queen had three valets of her chamber who sung in three parts, and wanted a base to sing the fourth part; therefore, telling her majesty of this man, Rizzio, as one fit to make the fourth in concert, he was drawn in sometimes to sing with the rest.” He quickly, however, crept into the queen’s favour; and her French secretary happening at that time to return to his own country, Rizzio was preferred by her majesty to that office. He began to make a figure at court, and to appear as a man of weight and consequence. Nor was he careful to abate that envy which always attends such an extraordinary and rapid change of fortune. On the contrary, he seems to have done every thing to increase it; yet it was not his exorbitant power alone which exasperated the Scots; they considered him as a dangerous enemy to the protestant religion, and believed that he held for this purpose a constant correspondence with the court of Rome. His prevalence, however, was very short-lived; for, in 1566, certain nobles, with lord Darnly at their head, conspired against him, and dispatched him in the queen’s presence with fifty-six wounds. The consequences of this murder to the queen and to the nation are amply detailed in Scotch history, and have been the subject of a very fertile controversy.

As a musician, Rizzio’s instrument was the lute, which was at that time the general favourite all over Europe; and an opinion has long prevailed that he was the great improver of Scotch music, and that he composed most of the Scotch tunes which have been heard with so much pleasure for two centuries past, and are in their style to be distinguished from all other national airs. This matter, however, has been investigated both by sir John Hawkins, from records, and by Dr. Barney, from personal inquiry at Turin; and the result is, that the opinion has no foundation. Some part of Dr. Burney’s sentiments on the subject xve have already given in our account of king James I. of Scotland. It does riot, in fact, appear that Rizzio was a compeser at all; and his stay in this country not exceeding two years, with the variety of business in which he was, 'fatally for himself and his royal mistress, engaged, could have left him little leisure for study, or for undertaking the improvement of the national music.

, an ingenious young writer and medallist, the third child and second son of Edward Roberts, esq. deputy-clerk of the pells of the exchequer, was born March 13, 1789, in St. Stephen’s court, Westminster. His frame and constitution were delicate, which probably created an aversion to the usual exercises of youth, and his early pursuits evinced vivacity without levity. They were of a nature to exercise, but not to weary the faculties; and, springing from a desire for knowledge, afforded to him a perpetual variety of objects. The first radiments of education, as far as it related to habits, he acquired himself, or perhaps he imbibed them from the situation in which he was placed. In his father’s house at Ealing, the well-ordered ceconomy of time which prevails in a regular family, taught him to appreciate and to profit by the means of tranquillity thus placed within his reach. The salubrity of the air, and the extent of the grounds, which allowed him as much exercise as he wished for, contributed to the health of his body; and he had the advantage of a well-chosen collection of books, which afforded him the opportunity of indulging his taste for reading.

In the earliest periods of his life he seemed to be fully impressed with the importance and value of time, no moment of which he suffered to be unemployed. Whatever was cnrious in literature attracted his attention, but subjects of antiquity were those which he most delighted to investigate. In these his patience and perseverance were very remarkable; and though he read with eagerness and rapidity, he never neglected to note down particular circumstances, or to mark for subsequent reference such things as he could not at once completely embrace. To a natural quickness of observation was added a retentive memory, and the exercise of these was matured into an habit of attention and arrangement.^ Fortunately for Barre these endowments did not escape the eye of him who was most interested by affection and consanguinity in his welfare. His father early discovered and cultivated them. Barre, when at home, was his constant companion, and, soon after the years of infancy were passed, became his most intimate friend. Indeed it is not possible to imagine a greater degree of confidence between two persons, even of similar ages, than that which existed between this youth and his parent; and so well was it supported and understood, that Barre never for a moment lost sight of his relative situation, nor transgressed the limits of respect which filial love, even had there been no other motive, would have taught him to observe. The clearness of his perceptions, and the correctness of his understanding, secured him from anv overrated idea of his own talents, and rather added than detracted from the docility of his disposition: a docility not in him the result of feebleness, or indolence, nor tending to the obliteration of his natural character, but derived from a comparison of his own inexperience with the matured judgment of advanced life, and a just estimate and conviction of his father’s love. Barre, in this free and confidential intercourse, imbibed all the advantages which a system of perfect intimacy with one so much his superior in age and worldly experience could produce, divested as it was, by the discriminating hand of a parent, of all the evils which attend on the formation of an artificial character. It would have been of the highest gratification to his father to have retained constantly under his own eye a son so much fhe object of his care and affection, and who seemed to court all the instruction which could be bestowed on him,; but as this would have demanded leisure, and qualifications which fall to the lot of but few persons, Barre was sent in May 1797, to Dr. Home’s school at Chiswick, and in June 1799, was placed under the care of the Rev. William Goodenough, at Ealing, between whose family and that of his pupil a long intimacy and friendship had subsisted. Here he remained six years, and acquired a competent knowledge of the classics, and some share of mathematics, history, and antiquities, the study of which last had been previously familiar to him while enjoying his father’s library at home.

It was during the same time that he formed his fine collection of coins, which is now in the British museum, having been purchased by the trustees with consent of parliament. This collection was begun to be formed when Barre was very young. He accidentally saw a few Roman coins in his father’s possession, which he presently got transferred to his own. They were hoarded by him with infantine care, and esteemed by him as invaluable property. The occasional presents of friends, and such specimens as a child’s pocket-money could procure, soon increased the store, which he would display and comment upon with the air and importance of a connoisseur. As he advanced in age, however, he perceived that to form a complete and universal collection of coins was an object only in the power of individuals possessed of larger means than he could ever expect to enjoy. He therefore relinquished it in this character, and confined his attention only to those connected with his own country. His father encouraged the pursuit, as he followed it in the light of a science, which illustrated and confirmed him in his historical studies; and his name as a collector soon became known among the dealers, who did not fail to bring him whatever could be discovered most rare and curious in their line of search.

On the 11th of October, 1805, he was entered as a commoner of Christ Church at Oxford, in which house he became a student at the Christmas following, by the presentation of Dr. Hay, obtained at the request of lord Viscount Sidmouth. As he never had been separated from his fa^­mily till this period, for a week together, the distance between Ealing and Oxford appeared to him a very considerable one, and a plan of correspondence was immediately established. His earliest letters contain a picture of his mind under the influence of new impressions, and new habits, while they display his conduct as uniformly correct and praise-worthy; and he took his first degree in Nov. 1808, with great approbation. Before this time he had been a frequent correspondent in the Gentleman’s Magazine on the subject of coins, and that not superficially, but with a degree of knowledge which would have been creditable to a veteran collector. He was also invited to contribute to one of those literary journals in which personal attack is more an object than sound criticism; but we are not sorry to find that he made little progress in an employment so unsuitable to an ingenuous mind.

The career, however, of this amiable young man was destined to be short. During his residence in the last two years at Oxford, he experienced attacks which indicated that all was not right about him; but their short duration, and the extreme repugnance that he felt towards drawing attention to himself on such accounts, which made him perhaps conceal their extent, prevented the alarm which otherwise his friends and family would have entertained. In the autumn of 1807 he was seized with a haemorrhage at the nose, and not long afterwards with frequent fits of giddiness. The excitement which he underwent in 1808, while qualifying himself to take his degree, rendered him still more obnoxious to these baneful influences. Under the constant agitation of his mind, the deterioration in his health became visible by caprice of appetite, and increased nervous irritability. In the summer of that year he was seized with a cough, which, though neither violent nor frequent, never left him afterwards. His illness, however, made no rapid advances; and when he returned home after his examination, he continued to mix in the society of his friends as usual. In a visit to London in the cold and unhealthy spring of 1809, his disposition to malady was increased by accidental causes, too minute to arrest his attention; and unfortunately also at this period he was summoned to Oxford by intelligence of the fire at Christ Church, by which his rooms were damaged, and his books endangered. The season, and the business he went upon, were peculiarly unfavourable to an invalid; he was necessarily involved in a good deal of bodily agitation, in order to; ascertain and secure his property, and exposed to the air at a time when repose and seclusion were of the utmost importance to him. As the summer advanced, his disorder did not abate, though the symptoms of it were too equivocal to enable his medical attendants to give it a decided name.

He was prevailed upon, with some entreaty, to make a journey early in July to Southampton, in the company of a near relation, with whom he had ever lired on terms of affectionate intimacy, and who rejoiced in offering him such attentions as he would accept. On his return to Eaiing at the end of September, the symptoms of his disorder had not increased in violence; but the effect of its secret ravages upon him were but too visible. During the whole progress of his ailment, his mind remained unaltered in its inclinations and desires. The thirst for knowledge continued, but the exhausted state of his corporeal system opposed physical obstacles to its gratification he bore up with cheerfulness and courage against evidences of that which certainly he himself could not be ignorant of, and lamented only the languor of nervous debility which rendered him unable to pursue his favourite and wonted occupations. He died Jan. I, 1810, and was buried on the 8th in Eaiing church, where, on a tablet of white marble, is an elegant Latin inscription from the pen of his early tutor and friend, the rev Mr. Goodenough. In 1814, a volume, in 4to, of his “Letters and Miscellaneous Papers,” was published with an elegant and affectionate memoir of his life, written by his cousin Grosvenor Charles Bedford, esq,

, a puritan divine, the son of Henry Roberts of Aslake, in Yorkshire, was born there or in that county in 1609, and entered a student of Trinity college, Oxford, in 1625. In 1632 he completed his degrees in arts, and was ordained. Where he first officiated does not appear but on the breaking out of the rebellion he went to London, took the covenant, and wns appointed minister of St. Augustine’s, Watlirtg-street, in room of Ephraim Udal, ejected for his loyalty. In 1649 he was presented to the rectory of WriiHTton in Somersetshire by his patron Arthur lord Capel, son of the beheaded lord Capel. While on this living he was appointed one of the commissioners for the “ejectment of those” who were called “ignorant and insufficient ministers and schoolmasters.” At the restoration, however^ he conformed, tired out, as many other’s were, by the distractions of the contending parties, and disappointed in every hope which the encouragers of rebellion had held forth. It does not appear whether he had any additional preferment, except that of chaplain to his patron lord Capel whenhe became earl of Essex; and when thrit nobleman was lord-lieutenant, of Ireland in 1672, it is suppose. i he procured him the degree of D. D. from the university of Dublin. He died at Wriugton about the end of 1675, and most probably wasi interred in that church. He published some single sermons: “The Believer’s evidence for Eternal Life,” &c, 1649, 1655, 8vo, and the “Communicant instructed,” 1651, 8vo, often reprinted; but his principal work is entitled “Chivis Bibliorum, the Key of the Bible,” in eluding the order, names, times, penmen, occasion, scope, and principal matter of the Old and New Testament. This was first printed at London and Edinburgh, 1649, in 2 vols, 8vo, and afterwards in 4to; and the fourth edition, 1675, in folio. Wood mentions another work, “Mysterium & Medulla Bibliorum, or the Mystery and Marrow of the Bible,” 1657, 2 vols. fol. as he says, but this is doubtful, and “The True way to the Tree of Life,” 1673, 8vo.

, a learned English divine and miscellaneous writer, was descended from a reputable family, which from time immemorial possessed a considerable estate at Mutter, in tae parish of Appleby, in Westmoreland. His father was an eminent maltster; and his mother, the only daughter of Mr. Edward Stevenson, of Knipe, in the same county, cousin to Edmund Gibson, bishop of London. He was born at this latter place, August 28, 1726; but his father soon afterwards removing to Rutter, he was sent, at a proper age, to the free-school at Appleby, where he received the rudiments of classical learning under Mr. Richard Yates, a man of eminent abilities, and distinguished character in his profession. From thence, in 1746, he went to Queen’s college, Oxford, where he took his degrees in arts, with considerable reputation for his ingenuity and learning. On his receiving orders he was, for some time, curate to the celebrated Dr. Sykes, at Rayleigh in Essex, and in 1758 he was instituted to the vicarage of Herriard in Hampshire; in 1770, to the rectory of Sutton in Essex; and in 1779, to the vicarage of Horucastle in Lincolnshire, to which he wns prcseuteU by his relation, Dr> Edtnund Law, bishop of Carlisle. In 1761 he published a sermon, entitled “The subversion of ancient Kingdoms considered,” preached at St. John’s, Westminster, Feb. 13, the day appointed for a general fast. In 1772, he revised and corrected for the press Dr. Gregory Sharpens posthumous sermons; and the same year completed a new edition of Algernon Sidney’s Discourses on Government, with historical notes, in one volume quarto, at the persuasion of Thomas Hollis, esq. who highly approved his performance.

In 1775 a remarkable incident happened, which excited the public attention. A Miss Butterfield was accused of poisoning Mr. Wm. Scawen, of Wooclcote lodge in Surrey. Mr. Robertson thought her very cruelly treated, and took an active part in her defence. On this occasion, he published a letter to Mr. Sanxay, a surgeon, on whose testimony Miss Butterfield had been committed to prison; in which he very severely animadverts on the conduct and evidence of that gentleman. After she had been honourably acquitted at the assizes at Croydon, he published a second pamphlet, containing “Observations on the case of Miss Butterfield,” shewing the hardships she had sustained, and the necessity of prosecuting her right in a court of justice: that is, her claim to a considerable legacy, which Mr. Scawen had bequeathed her by a will, executed with great formality, two or three years before his death. The cause was accordingly tried in Doctors 1 Commons. But, though it was universally agreed, that this unfortunate young woman had been unjustly accused, and that Mr. Scawen had been induced, by false suggestions, to sign another testamentary paper, in which her name was not mentioned, yet no redress could be obtained, as the judge observed, “that it was the business of the court to determine the cause, according to what the testator had done; not according to what he ought to have done.”

Mr. R. is said to have been the author of a useful tract, published in 178 1, “On Culinary Poisons.” In 1782, he published an elegant little volume for the improvement of young people in reading, entitled “An Introduction to the study of Polite Literature.” This performance was mentioned as the first volume of an intended series on the same subject; but the second never appeared, owing, as it is supposed, to part of it having been reprinted in a tract, for the use of Sunday-schools, without his consent, by archdeacon Paley. In the same year he revised and published a medical work of his friend sir Clifton Wintringham, “De Morbis quibusdam Commentarii,” in one vol. 8vo; to which a second volume was afterwards added in 1791.

In 1785 he published an“Essay on Punctuation,” in 12mo. In this treatise he has illustrated a dry and unpromising subject, with a variety of elegant and entertaining examples; a fourth edition of this essay was printed in 1796. In 1788 appeared “The Parian Chronicle, or the Chronicle of the Arundelian Marbles, with a Dissertation concerning its authenticity.” The tendency of this work is to shew, that the authenticity of this famous inscription, is extremely questionable; but although we may praise the ingenuity, acuteness, and learning, of the author, we may be permitted to doubt whether he has fully established his point.

In 1795 he published a translation of Telemachus, with notes, and the life of Fenelon, in two volumes 12mo; which bears the marks of his usual elegance, taste, and learning. By a note to the dissertation on the Parian Chronicle it appears, that he was concerned in writing the Critical Review “for twenty-one years, from August 1764, to September 1785, inclusive. During this period he was the author of above 2620 articles, on theological, classical, poetical, and miscellaneous publications.”

In 1797, Mr. Robertson published “Observations on the Act for augmenting the Salaries of Curates, in four Letters to a Friend,” 8vo, written in consequence of what the author thought a disproportionate and oppressive enforcement of the curates’ act. In 1798 he published “An Essay on the Education of Young Ladies, addressed to a person of distinction,” 8vo; and the next year, “An Essay on the Nature of the English Verse, with Directions for reading Poetry,” 12mo.

Mr Robertson’s health had been considerably impaired, owing to some fits of apoplexy which attacked him about 1799. During 1801 he seemed to have, in some measure, recovered; but on Jan. 18, 1802, he was seized with violent effusion of blood, which occasioned his death, on the very next day, in the seventy-seventh year of his age. He was tall, stout, and handsome, of a ruddy complexion, prepossessing look, gentle and unassuming manner?, and exceedingly polite in conversation: he was an accomplished moral character in every sense of the word. Without violently condemning any of the Christian persuasion, he was enthusiastically devoted to the church of England; and without indulging in any illiberal animadversions on foreign governments, he was duly sensible of the unrivalled advantages and the invaluable blessings of the British Constitution. As to his domestic virtues, one of his biographers thinks he cannot exhibit a more finished picture of them than by stating what Mrs. Robertson told him, “During the forty-four years we have lived together, never, for a single night, did he desert the domestic society, to seek elsewhere for amusement!”

The literary character of Mr. Robertson would rank high among those of his contemporaries in the same line, if he had concentrated his ideas in one large and compact work. Taken, however, as it is, it will unquestionably exhibit a learned critic and philologer, and one of the most accurate writers of his age. Although he was endowed with a vigorous understanding, and enriched with an uncommonly extensive knowledge, his predominant power was memory; and his favourite study, civil and literary history. In the last-mentioned branch he had, perhaps, no superior; and perhaps too, not many among the very professed bibliographers could rival him in the science of books, authors, and literary anecdotes.

, an eminent grammarian, was, according to Bale, “Eboracensis urbis alumnus” which may mean that he was educated at York; but Wood says, he was born at or near Wakefield in that county. He was originally of Queen’s college, Oxford, but afterwards a semi -commoner of Magdalen, and succeeded the famous John Stanbridge as master of the school adjoining to that college. He took his degree of M. A. in 1525, and was elected a fellow of Magdalen. In 1532 he was collated to the prebend of Welton-Westball in the cathedral of Lincoln; in the year following to that of Sleford, and in 1534, to that of Gretton, in the same church. It seems probable, but Wood does not mention it as certain, that he took his degree of U. D. in 1539, at which time he says, Robertson was esteemed the “fas et decus Oxonite” and was treasurer of the church of Salisbury. He held also the archdeaconry of Leicester and vicarage of Wakefield, to which Brownie Willis adds the rectory of St. Laud’s, at Sherrington, Bucks.

In 1549 he was associated with other divines, ordered by Edward VIth’s council to form the new liturgy or common prayer; and thus far, as Dodd remarks, he complied with the reformers; but it does not appear that he advanced much further. In queen Mary’s reign, 1557, he was made dean of Durham, and refused a bishopric. This dignity he might have retained when Elizabeth came to the throne, or have obtained an equivalent; but he refused to take the oath of supremacy. Nothing more is known with certainty of his history, unless that he died about 1560. Among the records collected at the end of Burnet’s History of the Reformation, are, of Robertson’s, “Resolutions of some questions concerning the Sacraments,” and “Resolutions of Questions relating to Bishops and Priests.” His grammatical tracts, entitled “Annotationes in Lib. Gulielmi Lilii.de Lat. Norn, generibus,” &c. were printed together at Basil, 1542, 4to. His reputation as a correct grammarian and successful teacher was very great. Strype says, that after refusing the oath of supremacy, he began to propagate his opinions against the reformation, and was overlooked; but Willis thinks he was taken into custody.

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

Lord Hay had introduced Mn Robertson to bishop Hoadly, who mentioned him to archbishop Wake, and he was entertained with much civility by those great prelates. As he was then too young to be admitted into orders, he employed his time in London in visiting the public libraries, attending lectures, and improving himself as opportunities offered. He had the honour to be introduced to lord-chancellor King, by a very kind letter from Dr. Hort, bishop of Kilmore, and was often with his lordship. In 1727 Dr. John Hoadly, brother to the bishop of Salisbury, was nominated to the united bishoprics of Ferns and Leighlin in Ireland. Mr. Robertson was introduced to him by his brother; and, from a love of the natale solum, was desirous to go thither with him. Mr. Robertson then informed the archbishop of Canterbury of his design; and his Grace gave him a letter of recommendation to Dr. Goodwin, archbishop of Cashel, who received him in a most friendly manner, but died soon after. The first person whom Dr. Hoadly ordained, after he was consecrated bishop of Ferns, was Mr. Robertson, whose letters of deacon’s orders bear date January 14, 1727; and in February the bishop nominated him to the cure of Tullow in the county of Carlow: and here he continued till he was of age sufficient to be ordained a priest, which was done November 10, 1729; and the next day he was presented by lord Carteret, then lord-lieutenant of Ireland, to the rectory of Ravilly in the county of Carlow, and to the rectory of Kilravelo in the county of Widow; and soon after was collated to the vicarages of the said parishes by the bishop of Ferns. These were the only preferments he had till 1738, when Dr. Synge, bishop of Ferns, collated him to the vicarages of Rathmore and Straboe, and the perpetual cure of Rahil, all in the county of Carlow. These together produced art income of about 200l. a-year. But, as almost the whole lands of these parishes were employed in pasture, the tithes would have amounted to more than twice that sum if the herbage had been paid for black cattle, which was certainly due by law. Several of the clergy of Ireland had,, before him, sued for this herbage in the Court of Exchequer, and obtained decrees in their favour. Mr. Robertson, encouraged by the exhortations and examples of his brethren, commenced some suits in the Exchequer for this herbage, and succeeded in every one of them. But when he had, by this means, doubled the value of his benefices, the House of Commons in Ireland passed several severe resolutions against the clergy who had sued, or would sue, for this “nexv demand,” as they called it, which encouraged the graziers to oppose it so obstinately as to put a period to that demand. This proceeding of the Commons provoked Dean Swift to write “The Legion- Club.” Mr. Robertson soon after published a pamphlet, entitled “A Scheme for utterly abolishing the present heavy and vexatious Tax of Tithe;” the purport of which was, to pay the clergy and impropriators a tax upon the land in lieu of all tithes. This went through several editions: but nothing farther was done in it.

In 1739, lord Cathcart (though Mr. Robertson’s person quite unknown to him) sent him, by captain Prescott, a very kind message, with a proper qualification under his hand and seal, to be his chaplain.

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

, 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”

`Voyage' before you leave us; which, I confess, I am very sorry for. If you should have laid aside all thoughts of favouring the world with more of your works, it will be much disappointed, and no one in it more than your verymuch obliged humble servant, Anson.”

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.

"Mrs. A. Robinson had one sister, a very pretty accomplished woman, who married Dr. Arbuthnot’s brother. AfV ter the death of Mr. Robinson, lord Peterborough took a house near Fulham, in the neighbourhood of his own villa at Parson’s-Green, where he settled Mrs. Robinson and her mother. They never lived under the same roof till the earl, being seized with a violent fit of illness, solicited her to attend him at Mount Bevis, near Southampton, which she refused with firmness, but upon condition that, though still denied to take his name, she might be permitted to wear her wedding-ring; to which, finding her inexorable, he at length consented.

"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

to play a trick, which has been atlri- from which he might strike out whatbuted to, and perhaps really attempted ever he thought amiss, and! the sheets

by others. The good bishop sent a thus altered should be reprinted, and

lish an edition of Rochester’s poems. saw through the trick, and rejected "

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.

The following is said to be a complete list of her publications: 1. “Poems,” in two volumes, 8vo. 2. “Legitimate Sonnets, with Thoughts on Poetical Subjects, and Anecdotes of the Grecian Poetess, Sappho.” 3. “A Monody to the memory of the Queen of France.” 4. “A Monody to the memory of Sir Joshua Reynolds.” 5. “Modern Manners; a Satire, in two cantos,” 4to. 6. “The Sicilian Lover, a Tragedy, in five acts.” 7. “Sight; The Cavern of Woe; and Solitude; three Poems,” 4to. 8. A Pamphlet in vindication of the Queen of France; published without a name. 9. A Pamphlet entitled “Thoughts on the condition of Women, and the Injustice of Mental Subordination.” 10. “Vancenza, a Romance,” 2 vols. II. “The Widow,” a Novel, 2 vols. 12. “Angelina,” a Novel, 3 vols. 13. “Hubert de Sevrac,” a Romance, 3 vols. 14. “Walsingham,” a Novel, 4 vols. 15. “The false Friend,” a Novel, 4 vols. 16, “The Natural Daughter,” a Novel, 2 vols. 17. “Lyrical Tales,” 1 vol. crown 8vo. 18. “A Picture of Palermo, translated from Dr. Hager.” 19. “The Lucky Escape,” a farce, not published. 20. “Nobody,” a comedy, also not published.

Of all these, it is probable that her poems will longest continue to be read. She had in her earliest efforts of this kind adopted the false style of the Delia Crusca school, so happily ridiculed by the author of the “Baviad” and “Moeviad,” but her late productions displayed a more correct taste, and more ease and elegance of versification, with equal richness of imagination. Her “Plays” had but temporary success; and her “Novels,” although not destitute of invention, were written with too much haste for lasting reputation. She appears to have been frequently importuned by her employers to furnish the circulating libraries with novelties, when her powers both of body and mind were considerably impaired, yet she laboured with? great perseverance, and is said to have earned by her literary performances nearly the amount of her annuity.

, 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.

No primate ever sat in the see of Armagh, who watchedmore carefully over the legal rights of the church of Ireland, as the statute-book evinces. The act of the 11th and 12th of his present majesty, which secures to bishops and eccle^­siastical persons repayment by their successors of expenditures in purchasing glebes and houses, or building new houses, originated from him, and must ever endear his name to the clergy. The other acts for repairing churches, and facilitating the recovery of ecclesiastical dues, were among the many happy exertions of this primate.

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.

Rohault’s physics were written in French, but have been translated into Latin by Dr. John Clarke, with his brother Dr. Samuel Clarke’s notes, in which the Cartesian errors are corrected upon the Newtonian system. The fourth and best edition of “Rohaulti Physica,” by Clarke, is that of 1718, 8vo. He wrote also “Elémens de Mathématiques,” a “Traité de Méchanique,” and “Entretiens sur ]a Philosophic:” but these dialogues are founded and carried on upon the principles of the Cartesian philosophy, which has now no other merit than that of having corrected the errors of the ancients. Rohault died in 1675, and left behind him the character of an amiable and learned man, and an able philosopher.

His posthumous works were collected and printed in two neat little volumes, first at Paris, and then at the Hague in 1690. The contents of them are, 1. The first six books of Euclid. 2. Trigonometry. 3. Practical Geometry. 4. Fortification. 5. Mechanics. 6. Perspective. 7. Spherical Trigonometry. 8. Arithmetic.

, 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.

The works published by Rolle were, 1. “A Treatise of Algebra,” 1690, 4to. 2. “A method of resolving Indeterminate Questions in Algebra,” in 1699. Besides a great many curious pieces inserted in the Memoirs of the Academy of Sciences, as follow 1. A rule for the approximation of irrational cubes, an. 1666, vol. X. 2. A method of resolving equations of all degrees which are expressed in general terms, an. 1666, vol. X. 3. Remarks upon geometric lines, 1702 and 1703. 4. On the new system of infinity, 1703, p. 312. 5. On the inverse method of tangents, 1705, p. 25, 171, 222. 6. Method of finding the foci of geometric lines of all kinds, 1706, p. 284. 7. On curves, both geometrical and mechanical, with their radii of curvature, 1707, p. 370. 8. On the construction of equations, 1708, and 1709. 9. On the extermination of the unknown quantities in the geometrical analysis, 1709, p. 419. 10. Rules and remarks for the construction of equations, 1711, p. 86. 11. On the application of diophantine rules to geometry, 1712. 12. On a paradox in geometric effections, 1713, p. 243. 13. On geometric constructions, 1713, p. 26J, and 1714, p. 5.

, 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.

But Rolt’s chief supplies were by writing cantatas, songs, &c. for the theatres, Vauxhall, Sadler’s-wells, and other places of public resort. Of these he composed above an Jiundred, supplying, at the shortest notice, the demands of musical composers for those diurnal entertainments during many years. He also produced two dramatic pieces, viz. “Eliza,” an English opera, in three acts, 1754, an4 “Almena,” an English opera, in three acts, 1764. For Ihe former of these the music wa? composed by Dr. Arue, and for the latter by his son; and they were both performed with good success at Drury-lane theatre. In the “Biographia Dramatica” is ascribed to him another opera, “The Royal Shepherd,” 1763; but as he omitted it in a list of his works, which he drew up to accompany proposals for a subscription in October 1769, it is doubted whether that omission must be ascribed to his not being the author, or to its having been ill received by the public, as is related in “Biographia Dramatica.”

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.

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

At the time of his decease, he had projected the following: “History of the Isle of Man,” in 1 vol. afterwards published in 1773, 8vo; and “History of the British Empire in North America,” in six volumes. And after his death were published, for the benefit of his widow, “Select Pieces of the late R. Rolt (dedicated, by permission, to the Right Hon. Lady Sondes, by Mary Rolt), 1772,” small 8vo.

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.