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

Dr. Rutty died April 27, 1775; and after his death were published “Observations on the London and Edinburgh Dispensatories, with an account of the various subjects of the Materia Medica, not contained in either of those works,” 1776, 12mo. In this Dr. Rutty contends, but with no great force of argument, or proof from their efficacy, that several medicines were improperly omitted in the above dispensatories. “Materia Medica Antiqua et Nova, repurgata et illustrata; sive de Medicamentorum simplicium officinalium facultatibus tractatus,” 4to. On this compilation he had bestowed forty years, and calls it “the principal work of his life,” but it has not acquired the same estimation with the faculty. Besides being unnecessarily prolix, there are many symptoms of credulity in the efficacy of certain medicines, which does no honour to the regular practitioner. The last of this author’s works which appeared, was his “Spiritual Diary and Soliloquies,” 1776, 2 vols. 8vo, one of the most extraordinary of those books which have been published under the title of “Confessions.” It is scarcely possible, however, to read it or characterize it with gravity, being a series of pious meditations perpetually interrupted with records of too much whiskey, piggish or swinish eating, and ill temper. Had his friends been left to their own judgment, this strange farrago had never appeared; but by a clause in his will, his executors were obliged to publish it. Nor, after all, does it exhibit a real character of the man; who, we are assured by his friends (in the preface), was correct and temperute in his conduct and mode of living, a man of great benevolence, and a very useful, as he certainly was a very learned physician.

, a celebrated anatomist and physician, was born at the Hague, in the month of March 1638, where his father was commissary of the States-general. Being sent to the university of Leyden, he devoted himself to the study of anatomy, botany, and chemistry, especially to the practical investigation of these sciences, having conceived an early bias to the profession of medicine. He repaired also to Franeker, for the farther pursuit of his studies; but received the degree of doctor at Leyden, in 1664. Even during his pupilage at Leyden, he was applied to by Sylvius and Van Home, to assist them in combating the vanity of Bilsius, who came thither to exhibit his boasted method of preserving dead bodies.

After taking his degree, Ruysch returned to the Hague, where he married, and began practice. In 1665 he published his treatise on the lacteal and lymphatic vessels, which contained the result of his inquiries while engaged in the dispute with Bilsiu*. In this work he does not deny that the existence of valves in the lymphatic had been noticed before, but he claims the honour of having first demonstrated them, and taught the method of discovering them. This ingenious tract immediately procured him reputation; and he was invited the year after to the chair of anatomy at Amsterdam; an invitation which he gl-adly accepted; and anatomy, both human and comparative, henceforth constituted the principal object of his life: he spared neither time, labour, nor expence, for the attainment of his purposes; he was almost continually employed in dissection, and not only examined with the most minute exactness every organ of the human body, but devised means by which to facilitate the detection and demonstration of the different parts, and to preserve and exhibit them thus demonstrated. If he were not the discoverer of the use of injections, for the display of vascular and other structure, he contributed, together with the suggestions of De Graaf and Swammerdam, by his own ingenuity and industry, to introduce that important practice among anatomists. His collection of injected bodies is described, indeed, as marvellous; the 6nest tissue of capillary vessels being filled with the coloured fluids, so as to represent the freshness of youth, and to imitate sleep rather than death. In this way he had preserved foetuses in regular gradation, as well as young and adult subjects, and innumerable animals of all sorts and countries. His museum, indeed, both in the extent, variety, and arrangement of its contents, became ultimately the most magnificent that any private individual had ever accumulated, and was the resort of visitors of every description; generals, ambassadors, princes, and even kings, were happy in the opportunity of examining it. The czar Peter, in his journey through Holland in 1698, frequently dined at the frugal table of Ruysch, in order to spend whole days in his cabinet; and in 1717, on his return to Holland, the czar purchased it of him for 30,000 florins, and sent it to Petersburg. The indefatigable anatomist immediately commenced the labour of supplying its place by a new collection.

In the course of his investigations Ruysch became the anthor of some discoveries, which, however, were not all unknown toother anatomists; for his fault was a neglect of reading, and therefore he sometimes gave as new what other writers had described. Among other parts which he investigated minutely, were the pulmonary circulation (in which he claims the discovery of the bronchial artery), the, structure of the ear, of the brain, of the lymphatic and glandular system.

Ruysch was appointed professor of physic in 1685, a post which he filled with honour and reputation until 1728, when he unhappily broke his thigh by a fall in his chamber. He was also nominated superintendant of the mid wives at Amsterdam, in the exercise of which office he introduced some improvements. He was a member of the royal society of London, and of the academy of sciences of Paris, having succeeded sir Isaa Newton in the latter body in 1727. In the same year he had the misfortune to lose his son, Henry Ruysch, also doctor of physic, who, like himself, was an able practitioner, well skilled in anatomy and botany, and was supposed to have materially assisted him in his publications, inventions, and experiments. This loss deprived him of his best assistance in completing the second collection of rarities, which he was occupied in making. His youngest daughter, however, who was still unmarried, and had been initiated into all the mysteries of his anatomical experiments, was fully qualified to assist him, and he proceeded with his new museum, retaining his general health until the commencement of 1731, when he was carried off by a fever, in the ninety-third year of his age.

Ruysch was the author of many publications, several of which were controversial; for his want of reading, and consequent differences with some of the learned of his profession, led him into frequent disputes. It becomes, however, unnecessary to repeat the titles of them as separately published, since the whole were published at Amsterdam in 1721, under the title of “Opera omnia Anatomico-Medico-Chirurgica, and again in 1735, 5 vols. 4to, which is the most complete edition. His son, Henry Ruysch, published” Theatrum universale omnium animalium," 1718, 2 vols. fol.

, a celebrated landscape-painter of Holland, was born at Haerlem in 1636; and, though it is not known by what artist he was instructed, yet it is affirmed that some of his productions, when he was only twelve years of age, surprised the best painters. Nature was his principal instructor as well as his guide; for he studied her incessantly. The trees, skies, waters, and grounds, of which his subjects were composed, were all sketched upon the spot, just as they allured his eye, or delighted his imagination. His general subjects were, views of the banks of rivers hilly ground, with natural cascades; a country, interspersed with cottages and huts solemn scenes of woods and groves, with roads through them windmills and watermills but he rarely painted any subject without a river, brook, or pool of water, which he expressed with all possible truth and transparency. He likewise particularly excelled in representing torrents, and impetuous falls of water; in which subjects the foam on one part, and the pellucid appearance of the water in another, were described with wonderful force and grandeur. Sir Joshua Reynolds says there is a clearness in his landscapes scarce seen in those of any other painter. Most of the collections in England are adorned with some of the works of this master. He died in 1681, aged forty-five.

He had a brother, Solomon Ruysdaal, who was born at Haerlem in 1616, and was also a painter of landscapes, but in every respect far inferior to Jacob. The best commendation given him by the writers on this subject is, that he was a cold imitator of Schoeft and Van Goyen, and although his pictures have somewhat that is plausible, sufficient to engage the attention of those who are prejudiced in favour of the name of Ruysdaal, yet, to persons of true judgment and taste, they are in no great estimation; and the eye is disgusted with too predominant a tint of yellow, which is diffused through the whole. He rendered himself, however, considerable, by having discovered the art of imitating variegated marbles with surprising exactness; and he gave to his compositions an appearance so curiously similar to the real marble, that it was scarce possible to discern any difference, either in the weight, the colour, or the lustre of the polish. He died in 1670.

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

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

, a learned critic, of the seventeenth century, was professor of history at Leyden. He was born in 1640, and after studying, probably at that university, he visited England, France, and Italy, and was every Tvhere esteemed for his talents and address. On his return to Holland he followed the profession of the law for some time at the Hague, but having little inclination for either the study or practice of it, he accepted the professorship of history at Leyden, and became an honour to the university. His lectures were much crowded, and he added to the reputation they procured him by his publications, particularly his edition of Tacitus, which Dr. Harwood pronounces “a very correct and excellent one.” It consists of 2 vols. 12mo, printed at Leyden in 1687, the first containing the text of Tacitus, the second Rycke’s notes, which are very valuable, and illustrate many passages that had escaped the notice or sagacity of his predecessors. He published also a curious dissertation “De primis Italian coionis, et de adventu JEneze in Italiam,” the subject of which was to refute the opinion of Bochart, who maintained that/neas had never seen Italy. He wrote another dissertation on giants, in which he collected all that had been written on those remarkable beings; an “Oratio de Palingenesia literarum in terris nostris,” published by Krieghius, at Jena in 1703; and published some other critical works. He died in 1690. Many of his letters are in the posthumous works of Francius.

, sieur de Malesais, a native of Marcigny, in JViaconois, was gentleman in ordinary of the king’s bedchamber, and knight of the holy sepulchre, in the 17th century. He resided a long time at Constantinople in his majesty’s service, was French consul in Egypt, learnt the Turkish and Arabic languages, and died soon after his return to France. His works are, “A Turkish Grammar,” in Latin, Paris, 1630, 4to; A French “Translation of the Koran,” 1649, 12mo, reprinted at Amsterdam, 1770, 2 vols. 12mo, but this work is not esteemed, the author having injudiciously blended the reveries of the Mahometan commentators with the text of Mahomet; A French translation of “Gulistan, or the empire of the Roses,” written by Sadi, chief of the Persian poets, Paris, 1634, 8vo. Gentius has translated the same book into Latin, under the title of “Rosarium poeticum.”

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

, an eminent engraver, was born in London in the year 1732. His genius for the fine arts manifested itself at an early period of his life, and he was accordingly placed under Ravenet. At the expiration of his engagement he was patronized by his godfather sir Watkin Williams Wynne, and went to Paris, where, for five years, under the guidance of Boucher, who at that time led the fashion in art, he applied with great assiduity to the study of drawing, but did not neglect to improve himself also in the practical part of engraving. From the designs of this principal misleader of the taste of France, Ryland engraved several plates, of which the principal and probably the best engraving he ever performed, is rather a large work, of which the subject is “Jupiter and Leda.” In this he has displayed great power as an engraver in lines. The print has a fine transparent tone; he has tempered the flimsy touchiness of the French taste with a portion of Ravenet’s solidity; the soft firmness of flesh is ably characterized in the figure of Leda, and the delicacy of the swan, and various textures of the surrounding objects, are rendered with much feeling and judicious subserviency to the principal parts. Such other proofs did he give of his abilities, as to obtain an honorary gold medal, which entitled him to pursue his studies at the academy in Rome, which he afterwards did with great success. From Boucher, however, he acquired a false taste, which diverted his talents from the mark at which he was evidently and successfully aiming when he produced his “Jupiter and Leda;” and this error was heightened by the fashion of stippling which he learned in France, and introduced, with his own modifications, into England. Ryland employed stippling, so as rather to imitate such drawings as are stumped than such as are hatched with chalk, by which means he softened down all energy of style, and has left posterity to regret the voluntary emasculation of the powers he had manifested in his “Jupiter and Leda.”

Soon after his return to England, he, however, engraved in lines a portrait of the queen, after Coates, and that portrait of his majesty, after Allan Ramsay, which Strange, from a misunderstanding, either with the earl of Bute or Ramsay, had declined, but they possess neither the vigour nor taste of his “Jupiter and Leda.” From this time he was appointed engraver to the king, and received an annual salary.

His subsequent engravings, in the chalk manner, are chiefly after Angelica Kauffman, and consist of four halfsheet circles, of which the subjects are, “Juno obtaining the Cestus of Venus,” “A Sacrifice to Pan,” “Cupid bound,” and “Cupid asleep;” “Queen Eleanor sucking the poison from the wounded Edward I.” (an excellent engraving of the kind); “Lady Elizabeth Grey soliciting the restoration of her Lands;” “Maria,” from Sterne’s Sentimental Journey, and “Patience,” both upright ovals; also “King John ratifying Magna Charta.” The last plate being left, by Ryland’s unfortunate death, in an unfinished state, was afterwards completed by Bartolozzi. This artist also engraved in lines, “Antiochus and Stratonice,” from, Pietro de Cortona, and “The first Interview between Edgar and Elfrida,” from Angelica Kauffman, both large plates.

Ryland’s engravings in the novel manner were, for the most part, printed in red, and this manner of engraving soon obtained the name of “the red chalk manner,” and was run after with avidity by the public. With so much heedless anxiety was it pursued, that people never stopped to consider whether even red chalk or stumped drawings themselves, of which these prints were professed imitations, were so good representations of nature, or afforded a means so happy and efficient of transfusing the soul of painting, as the art which previously existed of engraving in lines, and which was then exercised in high perfection by Bartolozzi, Strange, Vivares, and Woollet it was enough that it was new and red Ryland and novelty led the way, and fashion and the print-sellers followed.

, an antiquary and critic, was born in the North of England, and educated at the grammar-school of Northallerton, whence he was admitted a scholar at Sidney college, Cambridge. On quitting the university, he became a member of Gray’s-inn; and in 1692 succeeded Mr. Shadwell as historiographer to king William III. He rendered himself known first as a writer for the stage, by his production of “Edgar,” a tragedy, in 1673, which excited little approbation or inquiry until he became the author of “A View of the Tragedies of the last age,” which occasioned those admirable remarks by Dryden, preserved in the preface to Mr. Colman’s edition of “Beaumont and Fletcher,” and since by Dr. Johnson in his “Life of Dryden.” Rymer was a man of considerable learning, and a lover of poetry; but had few requisites for the character of a critic; and was indeed almost totally disqualified for it, by want of candour and the liberties he took with Shakspeare, in his “View of the Tragedies of the last age,” drew upon him the severity of every admirer of that poet. His own talents for dramatic poetry were extremely inferior to those of the persons whose writings he has with so much rigour attacked, as appears very evidently by his tragedy of “Edgar.” But, although we cannot subscribe either to his fame or his judgment as a poet or critic, it cannot be denied that he was a very useful compiler of records, and his “Fœdera” will ever entitle his memory to respect. While collecting this great work, he employed himself, like a royal historiographer, as one of his biographers says, in detecting the falsehood, and ascertaining the truth of history. In 1702, he published his first letter to bishop Nicolson, in which he endeavours to free king Robert III. of Scotland, beyond all dispute, from the imputation of bastardy. He soon after published his second letter to bishop Nicolson, “containing an historical deduction of the alliances between France and Scotland; whereby the pretended old league with Charlemagne is disproved, and the true old league is ascertained.”

It was in king William’s councils that it was first determined to print, by authority, the public conventions of Great Britain with other powers; and Mr. Rymer being selected as the editor, a warrant, empowering him to search the public repositories for this great design, was granted Aug. 26, 1693. Mr. Rymer then undertook the work, which he entitled “Fœdera;” the first volume was published in 1704, and in 1707, Mr. Robert Sanderson was appointed his assistant, the warrant being renewed for that purpose. Mr. Rymer lived to publish fifteen folio volumes of this work and from his collections a sixteenth was published by Sanderson, who, by a warrant dated Feb. 15, 1717, was continued the sole conductor of this laborious undertaking, and completed it in twenty volumes, the last of which appeared in 1735. This Sanderson, who was usher of the court of chancery, clerk of the chapel of the rolls, and fellow of the society of antiquaries, died Dec. 25, 1741.

Mr. Rymer died Dec. 14, 1713, and was buried in the parish church of St. Clement Danes. Some specimens of his poetry are preserved in the first volume of Mr. Nichols’s “Select Collection of Miscellany Poems,” 1780. After his death was published, in 1714, a small treatise by him “Of the antiquity, power, and decay of Parliaments” and in the same year, “Some translations from Greek, Latin, and Italian poets, with other verses and songs, never before printed,” which, not being sufficient to make a volume in 12mo, were published in a collection called “ Curious Amusements, by a gentleman of Pembroke-hall in Cambridge.”

As historiographer, the “Fœdera” were not the only labours of Ryiner. He left an unpublished collection, relating to the government and history of England, from 1115 to 1698, in fifty-eight volumes, now in the British Museum. The “Fœdera” was abridged by Rapin in French in Le Clerc’s “Bibliotheque,” and a translation of it published in English by Stephen Whatley, in 1731, 4 vols. 8vo. What is more remarkable, an edition of the whole of the original was printed at the Hague, in 1749, in 10 very large volumes, folio.

, a very eminent sculptor, was born in 1694, at Antwerp. His father was a landscape-painter, and had been in England, but quitted it with Largilliere, and went to Paris, where he married, and returning to Brussels and Antwerp, died in the latter in 1726, at the age of eighty. Michael, his son, arrived here in 1720, and after modelling some small figures in clay, to show his skill, succeeded so well in a bust of the earl of Nottingham, that he began to be employed on large works, particularly monuments, in which his art and industry gave general satisfaction. His models were thoroughly studied, and ably executed; and as a sculptor capable of furnishing statues was now found, our taste in monuments improved, which till Rysbrach’s time had depended more on masonry and marbles than statuary, on which he taught the age to depend for its best ornaments; and although he is too fond of pyramids for back-grounds, his figures are well disposed, simple and great.

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

Mr. Rysbrach, who had by no means raised a fortune equal to his deserts, before his death made a public sale of his remaining works and models, to which he added a Jarge collection of his own historic drawings, conceived and executed in the true taste of the great Italian masters. Another sale followed his death, which happened Jan. 8, 1770. He had two brothers, Peter Andreas, and G. Rysl>rach, who painted fish, dead fowls, and landscape, with Considerable merit, particularly the elder, who was born it Paris in 1690, and died in England of a consumption in 1743. He must be distinguished from another landscape painter of the seventeenth century of the same name, who was a native of Antwerp.

, related to sir Thomas Ryves, mentioned in the next article, a loyal divine and celebrated preacher, was born in Dorsetshire, and educated at New college, Oxford, of which he became one of the clerks in 1610, and was afterwards, in 1616, appointed one of the chaplains of Magdalen college. Having taken his degrees in arts, he attained great reputation as a preacher, and was made vicar of Stanwell, in Middlesex, rector of St. Martin’s Vintry, in London, chaplain to king Charles I. and in 1639, doctor in divinity. When the rebellion broke out, he was sequestered and plundered. At the restoration of king Charles II. he had the deanry of Windsor conferred on him, with the rectory of Acton, in Middlesex, and was made secretary to the garter. He died July 13, 1677. His works are, “Mercurius Rusticus; or, the Country’s Complaint, recounting the sad events of this unparalleled War,” &c. These Mercuries begin August 22, 1642. “Mercurius Rusticus, the 2d part, giving an account of Sacrileges, in and upon Cathedrals,” &c. When the war was ended, all these Mercuries were reprinted in 8vo, in 1646 and 1647, with an addition of the papers following: 1. “A general Bill of Mortality of the Clergy of London, &c. or a brief Martyrology and Catalogue of the learned and religious Ministers of the City of London, who have been imprisoned, plundered,” &c. 2. “Q,uerela Cantabrigiensis or, a Remonstrance by way of Apology for the banished Members of the flourishing University of Cambridge.” 3. “Micro-Chronicon or, a brief Chronology of the Time and Place of the Battles, Sieges, Conflicts, and other remarkable passages, which have happened betwixt his Majesty and the Parliament,” &c. 4. “A Catalogue of all, or most part of the Lords, Knights, Commanders, and Persons of Quality, slain or executed by Law Martial, from the beginning of this unnatural War to March 25, 1647.” And here we may observe, that the edition of 1647 has more in it than that of 1646. Dr. Ryves has likewise printed several occasional sermons, and is said to have assisted in the celebrated Polyglot Bible.

, son of John Ryves of Damery Court, or, as Fuller says, of Little Langton, in Dorsetshire, was born in the latter end of the XVIth century, ' and was educated at Winchester-school, whence he was admitted of New college, Oxford, in 1596, became fellow in 1598, and applying himself to the study of the civil law, commenced doctor in that faculty in 1610. He was a celebrated, civilian in doctors’ commons and the court of admiralty, and when he had established his fame in England, was, in 1618, preferred to be one of the masters in chancery, and judge of the faculties and prerogative court in Ireland, where he was held in equal esteem for his knowledge in the laws. Upon king Charles I. coming to the crown, he was made his advocate, and knighted: and, when the rebellion broke out, he was very firm to the royal cause, and although advanced in life, engaged in several battles, and received several wounds in his majesty’s service. He was one of the assistants to the king at the treaty of peace in the Isle of Wight. Sir Thomas Ryves was not only a very eminent civilian, and a good common lawyer, but likewise very accomplished in polite learning; and, particularly, wrote in Latin with unusual delicacy and correctness. He died in 1651, and was buried in St. Clement Danes, near Temple Bar, London. His works are, 1. “The Vicar’s Plea; or, a competency of Means due to Vicars out of the several parishes, notwithstanding their impropriations.” This book is written with a great deal of learning and strength of argument. 2. “iiegiminis Anglicani in Hibernia Defensio, adversus Analecien, lib. 3,” London, 1624, 4to. This was the answer to a book called “Analecta Sacra,” supposed to be written by David Roth, titular bishop of Ossory, a good antiquary, according to Usher, but a bigoted Roman catholic, if the author of this work. Sir Thomas Ryves’s object is, to vindicate the conduct of the Irish government as far as respects the Roman catholics, and his book includes much curious information respecting the state of opinions at that time. 3. “Jmperatoris Justiniani defensio adversus Alemannum,” Lond. 1626, 12mo. Alemanni had taken great liberties with the character of Justinian in his edition of Procopius, which our civilian thought it his duty to censure. 4. “Historia Navalis,” Lond. 162!), 12mo, enlarged afterwards into two publications, “Historiae Navalis antiquae libri quatuor,” ibid. 1633, 8vo, and “Historian Navalis mediae libri tres,” ibid. 1640, 8vo.

, a learned Portuguese Jesuit, was born in 1530, at Conde, in the province of Douro, and entered the society in 1545. After the usual course of studies, he taught at Coimbra, Rome, and other places, and was considered as an excellent preacher and interpreter of the scriptures, on which last account he was employed, by pope Pius V. on a new edition of the Bible. He died at Arona, in the Milanese, Dec 30, 1596, in the sixty-sixth year of his age. His chief works are “Scholia in quatuor Evangelia,” Antwerp and Cologn, 1596, 4to; and “Notationes in totam s cram Scripturam,” &c. Antwerp, 1598, 4to reprinted, with other scholi or notes, by Mariana and Tirini. Dupin says, that of all the Commentaries upon the scriptures there is nothing more concise and useful than the notes of our author, whose sole object, he adds, is to give the literalest use in a few words and in an intelligible manner. De Sa was the author of another work, which, although a very small volume, is said to have employed him for forty years: it is entitled “Aphorismi Confessariorum,” printed first at Venice, 1595, 12mo, and afterwards frequently reprinted in various places. Dupin calls it a moral work it seems rather a set of rules for confessors in cases of conscience and Lavocat tells us it contains some dangerous positions respecting both morals and the authority of kings. It underwent so many corrections and emendations before the pope would license it, that it did not appea- until the year before the author died. The French translations of it have many castrations.

, or Saadias the Excellent, a learned rabbi, the chief of the academy of the Jews, was born at Pithom in Egypt, about the year 892. In the year 927, he was invited by David Ben- Chair, the prince of the captivity, to preside over the academy at Sora, near Babylon, where one of his first objects was to explode the doctrine ofthe transmigration of souls, which was very prevalent, even among the Jews. But having refused to subscribe to a new regulation, which appeared to him to be repugnant to the Jewish laws, a breach arose between David and Saadias, which after some years was made up, and Saadias was restored to his professorship, in which he continued with great reputation till his death, in the year 942. His principal works are, “Sepher Haemunah,” or a treatise concerning the Jewish articles of faith, in ten chapters; but we have only a translation of it from the original Arabic into Hebrew, which was printed at Constantinople in 1647, and often reprinted. “A Commentary on the Book Jezira,” printed, with other Commentaries on that book, at Mantua, in 1592; “An Arabic translation of the whole Old Testament,” of whjch the Pentateuch is inserted in Jay’s and Walton’s Polyglotts, accompanied with the Latin version of Gabriel Sionita; “A Commentary on the Song of Songs,” in Hebrew, printed at Prague in 1609, 4to “A Commentary on Daniel,” likewise in Hebrew, inserted in the great rabbinical bibles of Venice and Basil “A Commentary on Job,” in Arabic, the ms. of which is in the Bodleian library at Oxford and a commentary on illicit alliances, mentioned by Aben Efra.

, a Spanish political and moral writer, was born May 6, 1584, at Algezares, in the kingdom of Murcia, and studied at Salamanca. In 1606, he went to Rome as secretary to the cardinal Gaspar de Borgia, who was appointed Spanish ambassador to the pope, and assisted in the conclaves of 1621 and 1623, held for the election of the popes Gregory XV. and Urban VIII. For these services Saavedra was rewarded with a canonry in the church of St. James, although he had never taken priest’s orders. Some time after he was appointed agent from the court of Spain at Rome, and his conduct in this office acquired him general esteem. In 1636, he assisted at the electoral congress held there, in which Ferdinand III. was chosen king of the Romans. He afterwards was present at eight diets held in Swisserland, and lastly at the general diet of the empire at Ratisbonne, where he appeared in quality of plenipotentiary of the circle and of the house of Burgundy. After being employed in some other diplomatic affairs, he returned to Madrid in 1646, and was appointed master of ceremonies in the introduction of ambassadors; but he did not enjoy this honour long, as he died Aug. 24, 1648. In his public character he rendered the state very important services, and, as a writer, is ranked among those who have contributed to polish and enrich the Spanish language. The Spanish critics, who place him among their classics, say he wrote Spanish as Tacitus wrote Latin. He has long been known, even in this country, by his “Emblems,” which were published in 2 vols. 8vo, in the early part of the last century. These politico-moral instructions for a Christian prince, were first printed in 1640, 4to, under the title of “Idea de un Principe Politico* Christiano representada en cien empress,” and reprinted at Milan in 1642; they were afterwards translated into Latin, and published under the title of “Symbola Christiano-Politica,” and have often been reprinted in various sizes in France, Italy, and Holland. He wrote also “Corona Gotica, Castellana, y Austriaca politicamente illustrada,” 1646, 4to, which was to have consisted of three parts, but he lived to complete one only: the rest was by Nunez de Castro; and “Respublica Literaria,” published in 1670, 8vo. Of this work an English translation was published by I. E. in 1727. It is a kind of vision, giving a satirical account of the republic of letters, not unlike the manner of Swift. The French have a translation of it, so late as 1770.

, a learned French Benedictine, was born at Poictiers in 1682, and died at Rheims M^rch 24, 1742. He spent twenty years of his life in preparing for the press a valuable edition of all the Latin versions of the Scriptures, collected together, and united in one point of view. It consists of three volumes, folio; but he lived only to print one volume; the others were completed by La Rue, also a Benedictine of St. Maur. The title is 61 Bibliorum Sacrorum LatinaB Versiones antiquse seu Vetus Italica, et ceterae quaecumque in codicibus Mss. et antiquorum libris reperiri potuerunt," Rheims, 1743 1749.

, a very eminent French surgeon, was born at Paris in October 1732, and after studying there, acquired the first rank in his profession, and in every situation which he filled, his knowledge, skill, and success, were equally conspicuous. He became censor-royal of the academy of sciences, professor and demonstrator of the surgical schools, secretary of correspondence, surgeon-major of the hospital of invalids, and a member of the institute. His education had been more liberal and comprehensive than usual. He not only was an excellent Greek and Latin scholar, but was well acquainted with the English, Italian, and German languages. Besides his public courses of lectures on anatomy and surgery, he instructed many private pupils, not only of his own country, but those of foreign nations who were attracted to Paris by his fame as a teacher, and were delighted with his unaffected politeness and candour. In his latter days Bonaparte appointed him one of his consulting surgeons, and he was one of the first on whom he bestowed the cross of the legion of honour. Sabatier died at Paris July 21, 1811. He retained his faculties to the last, but we are told became ashamed of his bodily weakness. “Hide me,” he said to his wife and son, “from the world, that you may be the only witnesses of this decay to which I must submit.” A little before his death he said to his son, “Contemplate the state into which I am fallen, and learn to die.” His humane attention to his patients was a distinguished feature in his character. During any painful operation he used to say, “Weep! weep! the more you express a sense of your sufferings, the more anxious I shall be to shorten them.”

, a learned French writer, was born at Condom, Oct. 31, 1735, and after making great proficiency in his studies among the fathers of the oratory in that city, went to Orleans, where he was employed as a private tutor. In 1762, he was invited to the college of Chalons-sur-Marne, where he taught the third and fourth classes for sixteen years, which gave him a title to the pension of an emeritus. His literary reputation took its rise principally from his essay on the temporal power of the popes, which gained the prize of the academy of Prussia. He was then about twenty-eight years old; but had before this addressed a curious paper on the limits of the empire of Charlemagne to the academy of Belles Lettres at Paris. He was the principal means of founding the academy of Chalons, procured a charter for it, and acted as secretary for thirty years. Such was his reputation that he had the honour to correspond with some of the royal personages of Europe, and was in particular much esteemed by the kings of Prussia and Sweden; nor was he less in favour with Choiseul, the French minister, who encouraged his taste for study. It does not appear, however, that his riches increased with his reputation, and this occasioned his projecting a paper-manufactory in Holland, which ended like some of the schemes of ingenious men; Sabbathier was ruined, and his successors made a fortune. He died in a village near Chalon, March 11, 1807, in his seventysecond year.

He published, 1. “Essai historique-critique sur l'origine de la puissance temporelle des Papcs,” Chalons, 1764, 12mo, reprinted the following-year. 2. “Le Manuel des Enfans,” ibid. 1769, 12mo, a collection of maxims from Plutarch’s lives. 3. “Recueii de Dissertations sur divers sujets de l'histoire de France,” ibid. 1778, 12mo. 4. “Les Mceurs, coutumes et usages des anciens peuples, pour servir a l'education de la jeunesse,” ibid. 1770, 3 vols. 12mo. Of this entertaining work, a translation was published in 1775, 2 vols. 8vo, by the late Rev. Percival Stockdale. 5. “Dictionnaire pour Tintelligencedes auteurs classiques Grecs et Latins, tant sacrés que profanes, contenant la geographic, Thistoire, la fable, et les andquite*s,” ibid. 1766 1790, 36 vols. 8vo, and 2 volumes of plates. Voluminous as this work is, the troubles which followed the revolution obliged the author to leave it incomplete; but the manuscript of the concluding volumes is said to be in a state for publication. It is an elaborate collection, very useful for consultation, but not always correct, and contains many articles which increase the bulk rattier than the value. A judicious selection, it is thought, would supersede any publication of the kind in France.

, known likewise by the name of Andrea da Salerno, is the first artist that deserves notice, of the Neapolitan school. He is supposed to have been born about 1480. Enamoured of the style of Pietro Perugino, who had painted an Assumption of the Virgin in the dome of Naples, he set out for Perugia to become his pupil; but hearing at an inn on the road some painters extol the works of Raphael in the Vatican, he altered his mine!, went to Rome, and entered that master’s school. His stay there was short, for the death of his father obliged him to return home against his will in 1513; he returned, however, a new man. It is said that he painted with Raphael at the Pace, and in the Vatican, and that he copied Jiis pictures well: he certainly emulated his manner with success. Compared with his fellow-scholars, if he falls short of Julio, he soars above Raphael del Colle and the rest of that sphere. He had correctness and selection of attitude and features, depth of shade, perhaps too much sharpness in the marking of the muscles, a broad style of folding in his draperies, and a colour which even now maintains its freshness. Of his numerous works at Naples mentioned in the catalogue of his pictures, the altarpieces at S. Maria delle Grazie deserve perhaps preference; for his fn scoes there and elsewhere, extolled by the writers as miracles of art, are now, the greater part, destroyed. He painted likewise at Salerno, Gaeta, and other places of the kingdom, for churches and private collections, where his Madonnas often rival those of Raphael. This distinguished artist died in 1545.

, called Lorenzin di Bologna, was one of the most genteel and most delicate painters of his age. He has been often mistaken for a scholar of Raphael, from the resemblance of his Holy Families in style of design and colour to those of that master, though the colour be always weaker. He likewise painted Madonnas and angels in cabinet- pictures, which seem of Parmigiano nor are his altar-pieces different the most celebrated is that of S. Michele at S. Giacomo, engraved by Agostino Caracci, and recommended to his school as a model of graceful elegance. He excelled in fresco; correct in design, copious in invention, equal to every subject, and yet, what surprises, rapid. Such were the talents that procured him employ, not only in many patrician families of his own province, but a call to Rome under the pontificate of Gregorio XIII. where, according to Baglioni, he pleased much, especially in his naked figures, a branch he had not much cultivated at Bologna. The stories of St. Paul in the Capella Paolina, Faith triumphant over Infidelity in the Sala regia, and various other subjects in the galleries and loggie of the Vatican, are the works of Sabbatini, always done in competition with the best masters, and always with applause: hence among the great concourse of masters who at that time thronged for precedence in Rome, he was selected to superintend the different departments of the Vatican in which office he died in the vigour of life, 1577.

, whose proper name was Marcus Antonius Coccius, or vernacularly Marcantonio Coccio, an Italian historian and critic, was born in 1436, in the campagna of Rome, on the confines of the ancient country of the Sabines, from which circumstance he took the name of Sabellicus. He was a scholar of Pomponius Letus’s, and in 1475, was appointed professor of eloquence at Udino, to which office he was likewise appointed at Venice, in 1484-. Some time after, when the plague obliged him to retire to Verona, he composed, within the space of fifteen months, his Latin history of Venice, in thirty- three books, whiqh were published in 1487, entitled “Rerum Venetiarum ab urbe condita,” folio, a most beautiful specimen of early printing, of which there was a copy on vellum, in the Pinelli library. The republic of Venice was so pleased with this work as to decree the author a pension of 200 sequins; and Sabellicus, out of gratitude, added four books to his history, which, however, remain in manuscript. He published also “A Description of Venice,” in three books a “Dialogue on the Venetian Magistrates” and two poems in honour of the republic. The most considerable of his other works is his rhapsody of histories: “Rhapsodiae Historiarum Enneades,” in ten Euneads, each containing nine books, and comprizing a general history from the creation to the year 1503. The first edition published at Venice in 1498, folio, contained only seven Enneads; but the second, in Io04, had the addition of three more, bringing the history down to the above date. Although there is little, either in matter or manner, to recommend tins work, or many others of its kind, to a modern reader, it brought the author both reward and reputation. His other works are discourses, moral, philosophical, and historical, with many Latin poems; the whole printed in four volumes, folio, at Basil in 1560. There is a scarce edition of his “Epistolæ familiares, necnon Orationes et Poemata,” Venice, 1502, folio. Sabellicus likewise wrote commentaries on Pimy the naturalist, Valerius Maximus, Livy, Horace, Justin, Florus, and some other classics, whi< h are to be found in Gruter’s “Thesaurus.” He died at Venice in 1506. Whatever reputation he might gain by his history of Venice, he allows himself that he too often made use of authors on whom not much reliance was to be placed; and it is certain that he did not at all consult, or seem to know the existence of, the annals of the doge Andrew Dandolo, which furnish the most authentic, as well as ancient, account of the early times of the republic.

, a Lybian, known in ecclesiastical history as the head of the sect called Sabellians, lived in the third century, and was born at Ptolemais, and was a disciple of Noetus. He reduced the three persons in the Trinity to three states, or relations, or rather reduced the whole Trinity to the one person of the Father; making the Word and Holy Spirit to be the only emanations or functions thereof. Epiphanius tells us, that the God of the Sabellians, whom they called the Father, resembled the Son, and was a mere subtraction, whereof the Son was the illuminative virtue or quality, and the Holy Ghost the warming virtue. This sect had many followers in Mesopotamia and Rome; but their doctrines are so obscurely -expressed, as to create doubts as to what they really were. It is certain, however, that they were condemned by the Trinitarians, and therefore Lardner, and his followers, seem pleased to add Sabellius to the scanty list of Unitarians of the early ages

, whose family name was Schalter, one of the best Latin poets of his time, was born in the electorate of Brandenburg in 1508; and, at fifteen, sent to Wittemberg, where he was privately instructed by Melancthon, in whose house he lived. He had a great ambitioft: to excel and an enthusiastic regard for what was excellent, especially in Latin poetry and although the specimens ht^ studied made him somewhat diffident of his powers, he ventured to submit to the public, in his twenty-second year, a poem, entitled “Res Gestse Csesarum Germanorum,” which spread his reputation all over Germany, and made all the princes, who had any regard for polite literature, his friends and patrons. Afterwards he travelled into Italy, where he contracted an acquaintance with Bembus and other learned men; and, on his return visited Erasmus at Friburg, when that great man was in the last stage of life. In 1536, he married Melancthon’s eldest daughter, at Wittemberg, to whom he was engaged before his journey into Italy. She was only fourteen, but very handsome, and understood Latin well and Sabinus always lived happily with her but he had several altercations with Melancthon, because he wanted to raise himself to civil employments; and did not relish the humility of Melancthon, who confined himself to literary pursuits, and would be at no trouble to advance his children. This misunderstanding occasioned Sabinus to remove into Prussia in 1543, with his wife, who afterwards died at Konigsberg in 1547. He settled, for some little time, at Francfort upon the Oder, and was made professor of the belles lettres by the appointment of the elector of Brandenburg; and was afterwards promoted to be rector of the new university of Konigsberg, which was opened in 1544. His eloquence and learning brought him to the knowledge of Charles V. who ennobled him, and he was also employed on some embassies, particularly by the elector of Brandenburg into Italy, where he seems to have contracted an illness, of which he died in 1560, the same year in which Melancthon died. His Latin poems were published at Leipsic in 1558 and 1597, the latter with additions and letters. He published some other works, less known, which are enumerated by Niceron.

, an Italian poet, but better known as a writer of novels, was born at Florence about 1335, of an ancient family, some branches of which had held employments of great trust and dignity in the republic. While young he composed some amatory verses, in imitation of Petrarch, but with a turn of thought and style peculiar to himself, and he was frequently employed in drawing up poetical inscriptions for public monuments, &c. in which sentiments of morality and a love of liberty were expected to be introduced. Some of these are still extant, but are perhaps more to be praised for the subject than the style. Sacchetti, when more advanced in life, filled several offices of the magistracy both at Florence and different parts of Tuscany, and formed an acquaintance with the most eminent men of his time, by whom he was highly respected. He suffered much, however, during the civil contests of his country. He is supposed to have died about the beginning of the fifteenth century. Very little of his poetry has been published. He is principally known by his “Novels,” an excellent edition of which was published at Florence in 1724, 2 vols. 8vo, by Bottari, who has prefixed an account of his life. These tales are in the manner of Boccaccio, but shorter, more lively, and in general more decent.

, an illustrious Italian painter, the son of a painter, was born at Rome in 1601, or as some writers say, in 1594. He learned the principles of his art under his father, but became afterwards the disciple of Francesco Albano, and made such advances, that, under twelve years of age, he carried the prize, in the academy of St. Luke, from all his much older competitors. With this badge of honour, they gave him the nickname of Andreuccio, to denote the diminutive figure he then made, being a boy; and which he long retained. His application to the works of Polidoro da Caravaggio and Raphael, and the antique marbles, together with his studies under Albano, and his copying after Correggio, and others, the best Lombard masters, were the several steps by which he raised himself to extraordinary perfection in historical composition The three first gave him his correctness and elegance of design; and the last made him the best colourist of all the Roman school. His works are not very numerous, o ving io the infirmities which attended his latter years; and especially the gout, which occasioned frequent and long interruptions to his labours. He was likewise slow and fastididus, and wished to rest his fame more upon the quality than quantity of his performances. His first patrons were the cardinals Antonio Barberini and del Morte, the protector of the academy of painting. He became afterwards a great favourite of Urban VIII. and drew an admirable portrait of him. Several of the public edifices at Rome are ^embellished with his works, some of which have been ranked among the most admired productions of art in that capital. Such are his celebrated picture of the Death of St. Anne, in the church of S. Carlo a Catinari; the Angel appearing to St. Joseph, the principal altar-piece in S. Giuseppe a Capo le Case; and his St. Andrea, in the Quirinal. But his most distinguished performance is his famous picture of S/Romualdo, formerly in the church dedicated to that saint, now in the gallery of the Louvre. This admirable production was considered one of the four finest pictures at Rome, where Sacchi died in 1668.

, a very distinguished musician in the last century, was born at Naples May 11, 1735, according to one account, but Dr. Burney says 1727. He was educated in the conservatorio of St. Onofrio, under Durante, and made rapid progress in the science, attaching himself principally to the violin, on which he became a most accomplished performer. He afterwards resided at Rome eight years; and at Venice, where he remained four years, he was appointed master of the conservatorio of the Ospidaletto. It was here where he first composed for the church, but always kept his sacred and secular style of composition separate and distinct. His ecclesiastical compositions are not only learned, solemn, and abounding with fine effects, but clothed in the richest and most pure harmony. His reputation increasing, he visited, by invitation, some of the courts of Germany, and among others those of Brunswick and Wittemberg, where he succeeded the celebrated Jomelli; and after having composed for all the great theatres in Italy and Germany with increasing success, he came to England in 1772, and here supported the high reputation he had acquired on the continent. His operas of the “Cid” and “Tamerlane” were equal, says Dr. Burney, if not superior, to any musical dramas we have heard in any part of Europe. He remained, however, too long in England for his fame and fortune. The first was injured by cabals, and by what ought to have increased it, the number of his works; and the second by inactivity and want of economy.

He refused several engagements which were offered him from Russia, Portugal, and even France, but this last he at length accepted, in hopes of an establishment for life. A-ccordingly he went thither in 1781, but it is manifest in the operas that he composed for Paris, that he worked for singers of mean abilities; which, besides the airs being set to French words, prevented their circulation in the rest of Europe, which his other vocal productions in his own language had constantly done. At Paris, however, he was almost adored, but returned the following year to London, where he only augmented his debts and embarrassments; so that, in 1784, he took a final leave of this country, and settled at Paris, where he not only obtained a pension from the queen of France, but the theatrical pension, in consequence of three successful pieces. This graceful, elegant, and judicious composer died, at Paris, October 8, 1786.

All Sacchini’s operas are replete with elegant airs, beautiful accompanied recitatives, and orchestral effects, without the least appearance of labour or study. It was seemingly by small means that he produced the greatest effects. He interested the audience more by a happy, graceful, and touching melody, than by a laboured and extraneous modulation. His accompaniments always brilliant and ingenious, without being loaded and confused, assist the expression of the vocal part, and are often picturesque. Each of the dramas he composed in this country was so entire, so masterly, yet so new and natural, that there was nothing left for criticism to censure, though innumerable beauties to point out and admire. He had a taste so exquisite, and so totally free from pedantry, that he was frequently new without effort; never thinking of himself or his fame for any particular excellence, but totally occupied with the ideas of the poet, and the propriety, consistency, and effect of the whole drama. His accompaniments, though always rich and ingenious, never call off attention from the voice, but by a constant transparency, the principal melody is rendered distinguishable through all the contrivance of imitative and picturesque design in the instruments.

Sacchini’s private character was that of a generous and benevolent man, somewhat too imprudent in the indulgence of charitable feelings, but a steady friend, an affectionate relation, and a kind master.

, a celebrated Jesuit, was born in 1570, in the diocese of Perugia. He was professor of rhetoric at Rome during several years, and secretary to his general, Vitelleschi, seven years. He died December 26, 1625, aged 55. His principal works are, “A Continuation of the History of the Jesuits* Society,” begun by Orlandino. Of this Sacchini wrote the 2d, 3d, 4th, and 5th parts or volumes, fol. 1620 1661. An addition to the fifth part was made by Jouvency, and the whole completed by Julius Cordara. Perfect copies are very rarely to be met with. Sacchini was also the author of a small book judiciously written and much esteemed, entitled “De ratione Libros cum profectu legendi,” 12mo, at the end of which is a discourse, “De vitanda Librorum moribus noxiorum lectione,” which father Sacchini delivered at Rome in his rhetorical school in 1603.

, D. D. a man whose history affords a very striking example of the folly of party spirit, was the son of Joshua Sacheverell of Marlborough, clerk, who died rector of St. Peter’s church in Marlborough, leaving a numerous family in very low circumstances. By a letter to him from his uncle, in 1711, it appears that he had a brother named Thomas, and a sister Susannah. Henry was put to school at Marlborough, at the charge of Mr. Edward Hearst, an apothecary, who, being his godfather, adopted him as his son. Hearst’s widow put him afterwards to^Magdalen-college, Oxford, where he became demy in 1687, at the age of 15. Here he soon distinguished himself by a regular observation of the duties of the house, by his compositions, good manners, and genteel behaviour; qualifications which recommended him to that society, of which he became fellow, and, as public tutor, had the care of the education of most of the young gentlemen of quality and fortune that were admitted of the college. In this station he had the care of the education of a great many persons eminent for their learning and abilities; and was contemporary and chamberfellow with Addison, and one of his chief intimates till the time of his famous trial. Mr. Addison’s “Account of the greatest English' Poets,” dated April 4, 1694, in a farewell-poem to the Muses on his intending to enter into holy orders, was inscribed <c to Mr. Henry Sacheverell,“his then dearest friend and colleague. Much has been said by Sacheverell’s enemies of his ingratitude to his relations, and of his turbulent behaviour at Oxford; but these appear to have been groundless calumnies, circulated only by the spirit of party. In his younger years he wrote some excellent Latin poems, besides several in the second and third volumes of the” Mus as Anglicanae,“ascribed to his pupils; and there is a good one of some length in the second volume, under his own name (transcribed from the Oxford collection, on queen Mary’s death, 1695). He took the degree of M. A. May 16, 1696; B. D. Feb. 4, 1707; D. D. July 1, 1708. His first preferment was Cannock, or Cank, in the county of Stafford. He was appointed preacher of St. Saviour’s, Southwark, in 1705; and while in this station preached his famous sermons (at Derby, Aug. 14, 1709; and at St. Paul’s, Nov. 9, in the same year) and in one of them was supposed to point at lord Godolphin, under the name of Volpone. It has been suggested, that to this circumstance, as much as to the doctrines contained in his sermons, he was indebted for his prosecution, and eventually for his preferment. Being impeached by the House of Commons, his trial began Feb. 27, 1709-10; and continued until the 23d of March: when he was sentenced to a suspension from preaching for three years, and his two sermons ordered to be burnt. This prosecution, however, overthrew the ministry, and laid the foundation of his fortune. To sir Simon Harcourt, who was counsel for him, he presented a silver bason gilt, with an elegant inscription, written probably by his friend Dr. Alterbury. Dr. Sacheverell, during his suspension, made a kind of triumphal progress through various parts of the kingdom; during which period he was collated to a living near Shrewsbury; and, in the same month that his suspension ended, had the valuable rectory of St. Andrew’s, Holborn, given him by the queen, April 13, 1713. At that time his reputation was so high, that he was enabled to sell the first sermon preached after his sentence expired (on Palm Sunday) for the sum of 100l.; and upwards of 40,000 copies, it is said, were soon sold. We find by Swift’s Journal to Stella, Jan. 22, 1711-12, that he had also interest enough with the ministry to provide very amply for one of his brothers; yet, as the dean had said before, Aug. 24, 1711,” they hated and affected to despise him.“A considerable estate at Callow in Derbyshire was soon after left to him by his kinsman George Sacheverell, esq. In 1716, he prefixed a dedication to” Fifteen Discourses, occasionally delivered before the university of Oxford, by W. Adams, M. A. late student of Christ-church, and rector of Staunton upon Wye, in Oxfordshire.“After this publication, we hear little of him, except by quarrels with his parishioners. He died June 5, 1724; and, by his will, bequeathed to Bp. Atterbury, then in exile, who was supposed to have penned for him the defence he made before the House of Peers, the sum of 500l. The duchess of Maryborough describes Sacheverell as” an ignorant impudent incendiary; a man who was the scorn even of those who made use of him as a tool.“And Bp. Burnet says,” He was a bold insolent man, wiih a very small measure of religion, virtue, learning, or good sense; but he resolved to force himself into popularity and preferment, by the most petulant railings at dissenters and low-church men, in several sermons and libels, written without either chasteness of style or liveliness of expression." Whatever his character, it is evident that he owed every thing to an injudicious prosecution, which defeated the purposes of those who instituted it, and for many years continued those prejudices in the public mind, which a wiser administration w r ould have been anxious to dispel.

, lord Buckhurst and earl of Dorset, an eminent statesman and poet, was born at Withyam in Sussex, in 1527. He was the son of sir Richard Sackville, who died in 1566, by Winifred Brydges (afterwards marchioness of Winchester), and grandson of John Sackville, esq. who died in 1557, by Anne Boleyne, sister of sir Thomas Boleyne, earl of Wiltshire and great grandson of Richard Sackviiie, esq. who died in 1524, by Isabel, daughter of John Digges, of Digues 1 s place in Barham, Kent, of a family which for many succeeding generations produced men of learning and genius. He was first of the university of Oxford, and, as it is supposed, of Hart-hall, now Hertford-college; but taking no degree there, he removed to Cambridge, where he commenced master of arts, and afterwards was a student of the Inner Temple. At both universities he became celebrated both as a Latin and English poet, and carried the same taste and talents to the Temple, where he wrote his tragedy of “Gorboduc,” which was exhibited in the great hall by the students of that society, as part of a Christmas entertainment, and afterwards before queen Elizabeth at Whitehall^ Jan. 18, 1561. It was surreptitiously printed in 1563, under the title of “The Tragedy of Gorboduc,” 4to; but a correct edition under the inspection of the authors (for he was assisted by Thomas Norton), appeared in 1571, entitled “The Tragedie of Ferrex and Porrex.” Another edition appeared in 1569, notwithstanding which, for many years it had so feompletely disappeared, that Dryden and Oldham, in the reign of Charles II. do not appear to have seen it, though they pretended to criticise it; and even Wood knew just as little of it, as is plain from his telling us that it was written in old English rhyme. Pope took a fancy to retrieve this play from oblivion, and Spence being employed to set it off with all possible advantage, it was printed pompously in 1736, 8vo, with a preface by the editor. Spence, speaking of his lordship as a poet, declares, that “the dawn of our English poetry was in Chaucer’s time, but that it shone out in him too bright all at once to last long. The succeeding age was dark and overcast. There was indeed some glimmerings of genius again in Henry VIII's time but our poetry had never what could be called a fair settled day-light till towards the end of queen Elizabeth’s reign. It was between these two periods, that lord Buckhurst wrote; after the earl of Surrey, and before Spenser.” Warton’s opinion of this tragedy is not very favourable. He thinks it never was a favourite with our ancestors, and fell into oblivion on account of the nakedness anil uninteresting nature of the plot, the tedious length of the speeches, the want of discrimination of character, and almost a total absence of pathetic or critical situations. Yet he allows that the language of “Gorboduc” has great merit and perspicuity, and that it is entirely free from the tumid phraseology of a subsequent age of play-writing.

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

Having by these productions established the reputation of being the best poet in his time, he laid down his pen, and assumed the character of the statesman, in which he also became very eminent. He found leisure, however, to make the tour of France and Italy; and was on some account or other in prison at Rome, when the news arrived of his father sir Richard Sackville’s death in 1566. Upon this, he obtained his release,‘ returned home, ente’red into the possession of a vast inheritance, and soon after was promoted to the peerage by the title of lord Buckhurst. He enjoyed this accession of honour and fortune too liberally for a while, but soon saw his error. Some attribute his being reclaimed to' the queen,- but others say, that the indignity of being kept in waiting by an alderman, of whom he had occasion to 1 borrow money, made so deep an impression oft him,“ibat he resolved from that moment to be an eeconomisi. By the queen he was received into particalar favour, and employed in many very important affairs- In 1587 he was sent ambassador to the United Provinces’,” upon 1 their complaints against the earl of Leicester 'j and y though he discharged that nice and hazardous trust with- great integrity, yet the favourite prevailed with his mistress to call him home, and confine him to his house for nine Or ten months; which command lord Buckhurst is said to have submitted to so obsequiously, than in all the time he never would endure, openly or secretly, by day or by night, to see either wife or child. His enemy, however, dying, her majesty’s favour returned to him more strongly than ever. He was made knight of the garter in 1590; and chancellor of Oxford in 1591, by the queen’s special interposition. In 1589 he was joined with the treasurer Burleigh in negotiating a peace with Spain; and, upon the death of Burleigh the same year, succeeded him in his office; by virtue of which he became in a manner prime minister, and as such exerted himself vigorously for the public good and her majesty’s safety.

Upon the death of Elizabeth, the administration of the kingdom devolving on him with other counsellors, they unanimously proclaimed king James; and that king renewed his patent of lord high-treasurer for life; before his arrival in England, and even before his lordship waited on his majesty. In March 1604 he was created earl of Dorset. tie was one of those whom his majesty consulted and confided in upon all occasions; and he lived in the highest esteem and reputation, without any extraordinary decay of health, till 1607. Then he was seized at his house at tlorsley, in Surrey, with a disorder, which reduced him so, that his life was despaired of. At this crisis, the king sent him a gold ring enamelled black, set with twenty diamonds; and this message, that “his majesty wished him a speedy and perfect recovery, with all happy and good success, and that he might live as long as the diamonds of that ring did endure, and in token thereof required him to wear it, and keep it for his sake.” He recovered this illness to all appearance but soon after; as he was attending at the council-table, he dropped down, and immediately expired. This sudden death, which happened April 19, 1608, was occasioned by a particular kind of dropsy on. the brain. He was interred with great solemnity in Westminster-abbey; his funeral sermon being preached by his chaplain Dr. Abbot, afterwards abp. of Canterbury. Sit Robert Naunton writes of him in the following terms “They much comoiend his elocution, but more the excellency of his pen. He was a scholar, and a person of quick dispatch; faculties that yet run in the blood: and they say of him, that his secretaries did little for him by way of inditement, wherein they could seldom please him, he was so facete and choice in his phrase and style. I find not that he was any ways inured in the factions of the court, which were all his time strong, and in every man’s note; the Howards and the Cecils on the one part, my lord of Essex; &c. on the other part for he held the staff of the treasury fast in his hand, which once in a year made them all beholden to him. And the truth is, as he was a wise man and a stout, he had no reason to be a partaker; for he stood sure in blood atid grace, and was wholly intentive to the queen’s services and such were his abilities, that she received assiduous proofs of his sufficiency and it has been thought, that she might have mure cunning instruments, but none of a more strong judgment and confidence in his ways, which are symptoms of magnanimity and fidelity.” Lord Orford says, that “iew first ministers have left so fair a character, and that hU family disdained the office of an apology for it, against some little cavils, which spreta exolescunt; si irascare, agnita videntur.”

Several of his letters are printed in the Cabala; besides which there is a Latin letter of his to Dr. Bartholomew Clerke, prefixed to that author’s Latin translation from the Italian of Castiglione’s “Courtier,” entitled, “De Curiali sive Aulico,” first printed at London about 1571. This he wrote while envoy at Paris. Indeed his early taste and learning never forsook him, but appeared in the exercise of his more formal political functions. He was, says Warton, frequently disgusted at the pedantry and official barbarity of style, in which the public letters and instruments were usually framed. Even in the decisions and pleadings of the Star-chamber court, he practised and encouraged an unaccustomed style of eloquent and graceful oratory.

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

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

“He was a man,” says Dr. Johnson, “whose elegance and judgment were universally confessed, and whose bounty to the learned and witty was generally known. To the indulgent affection of the public, lord Rochester bore ample testimony in this remark: ‘ I know not how it is, but lord Buckhurst may do what he will, yet is never in the wrong.’ If such a man attempted poetry, we cannot wonder that his works were praised. Dryden, whom, if Prior tells truth, he distinguished by his beneficence, and who lavished his blandishments on those who are not known to have so well deserved them, undertaking to produce authors of our own country superior to those of antiquity, says, c I would instance your Lordship in satire, and Shakspeare in tragedy.' Would it be imagined thai, of this rival to antiquity, all the satires were little personal invectives, and that his longest composition was a song of eleven stanzas The blame, however, of this exaggerated praise falls on the encomiast, not upon the author; whose performances are, what they pretend to be, the effusions of a man of wit; gay, vigorous, and airy. His verses to Howard shew great fertility of mind; and his Dorinda” has been imitated by Pope.

, one of the promoters of the reformation, was born in 1534, at the castle of Chabot in the Maconais, and was descended of a noble and ancient family of the Forez. His father dying when he was very young, the care of his education devolved on his mother, who sent him to Paris, where he first was initiated in the principles of the Protestant religion. These he afterwards became better acquainted with at Thoulouse and Geneva, when introduced to Calvin and Beza. On the death of an uncle he was recalled home, and again sent to Paris, in consequence of a contest respecting the will of that uncle, who had left considerable property. While here, becoming more attached to the cause of the reformation, he was induced to study divinity, instead of law, for which he had been originally intended; and such was his progress and the promising appearance of his talents and zeal, that at the age of twenty, he was invited to preach to the congregation of the reformed at Paris. Their assembling, however, was attended with great danger; and, in 1557, when they met to celebrate the sacrament, about 150 were apprehended and thrown into prison, their pastors only escaping. The priests having circulated various scandalous reports of this meeting, which the judges found to be false, Sadeel was employed by his brethren in drawing up a vindication of them. Next year he was himself taken up, and imprisoned, but the king of Navarre, who had often been one of his hearers, immediately sent to the officers to release him, as being one of his own suite, and when they refused, went in person to the prison, complained of the affront, and released Sadeel. It nor, how^ ever, being thought safe for him to remain at this crisis in Paris, he retired for some time to Orleans, and when the danger seemed to be over, returned again, and drew up a Confession of Faith, first proposed in a synod of the reformed clergy of France, held at Paris, which was presented to the king by the famous admiral Coligni. The king dying soon after, and the queen and the family of Guise renewing with more fury than ever the persecution of the reformed, Sadeel was obliged again to leave the metropolis, which, however, he continued occasionally to visit when it could be done without danger.

In 1562, he presided at a national synod at Orleans, and then went to Berne, and finally to Geneva, where he was associated with the ministers of that place. Henry IV. who had a great respect for him, gave him an invitation to his court, which, after some hesitation, from his aversion to public life, he accepted, and was chaplain at the battle of Courtray, and had the charge of a mission to the pro^ testant princes of Germany; but unable at length to bear the fatigues of a military life, which he was obliged to pass with his royal benefactor, he retired to Geneva in 1589, and resumed his functions as a preacher, and undertook the professorship of Hebrew until his death, Feb. 23, 1591, Besides his sermons, which were highly popular and persuasive, he aided the cause of reformation by taking an active part in the controversies which arose out of it, and by writings of the practical kind. One French biographef tells us that Sadeel was an assumed name, but in all other authorities, we find him called by that name only with the addition of Chandæus, which alluded to his ancestors, who were barons of Chandieu. Accordingly his works are entitled “Antonii Sadeelis Chandaei, nobilissimi viri, opera theologica,” Geneva, 1592, folio; reprinted 1593, 4to; and 1599 and 1615, folio. They consist, among others, of the following treatises published sepa-r rately, “De verbo Dei scripto,” Gen, 1592. “De vera peccatorum remissione,” ibid. 1591. “De unico Christi sacerdotio et sacrincio,” ibid. 1692. “De spirituali et sacramentali manducatione Corporis Christi;” two treatises, ibid. 1596. “Posnaniensium assertionum refutatio,” ibid. 1596. “Refutatio libelli Claudii de Sainctes, intitulati, Examen doctrinae Calvinianae et Bezanae de ccena Domini,” ibid. 1592. He wrote also, in French, “Histoire des persecutions et des martyrs de Peglise de Paris, depuis Fan 1557, jusqu'au regne de Charles IX.” printed at Lyons, in 1563, 8vo, under the name of Zamariel. He wrote also “Metamorphose de Ronsard en pretre,” in verse, part of a controversy he had with that writer, who in his work on the troubles during the minority of Charles IX. had attributed them to the reformers. His life, by James Lectius, was prefixed to his works, and published separately at Geneva in 1593, 8vo. The substance of it is given in our first authority.

, or Sadee, a celebrated Persian poet and moralist, was born in 1175, at Sheeraz, or Schiraz, the capiai of Persia, and was educated at Damascus, but quitted his country when it was desolated by the Turks, and commenced his travels. He was afterwards taken prisoner, and condemned to work at the fortifications of Tripoli. While in this deplorable state, he was redeemed by a merchant of Aleppo, who had so much regard for him as to give him his daughter in marriage, with a dowry of one hundred sequins. This lady, however, being an intolerable scold, proved the plague of his life, and gave him that unfavourable opinion of the sex which appears occasionally in his works. During one of their altercations she reproached him with the favours her family had conferred: “Are not you the man my father bought for \en pieces of gold?” “Yes,” answered Sadi, “and he sold me again for an hundred sequins?”

We find few other particulars of his life, during which he appears to have been admired for his wise sayings and his wit. He is said to have lived an hundred and twenty years, that is, to the year 1295, but different dates are assigned, some making him born in 1193, and die in 1312. He composed such a variety of works in prose and verse, Arabic and Persian, as to fill two large folio volumes, which were printed at Calcutta, in 1795. It was not, however, merely as a poet, that he acquired fame, but as a philosopher and a moralist. His works are quoted by the Persians on the daily and hourly occurrences of life; and his tomb, adjoining the city where he was born, is still visited with veneration. “Yet,” says sir William Ouseley, speaking of this author’s works, “I shall not here suppress that there is attributed to Sadi a short collection of poetical compositions, inculcating lessons of the grossest sensuality;” and even his most moral work, called “Gulistan,” or “Garden of Flowers,” is by no means immaculate. Mr. Gladwin also, to whom we owe an excellent translation of it, published at Calcutta, 1806, in 4to, with the original Persian, has been obliged to omit or disguise a few passages, which, he says, “although not offensive to the coarse ideas of native readers, could not possibly be translated without transgressing the bounds of decency.”

This work has been long known in Europe by the edition and translation published by the learned Gentius, under the title of “Rosarium politicum, sive amoenum sortis humanae Theatrum, Per4ce et Lat.” Amst. 1651, fol. There was also a French traii&Jation by P. du Ryer, 1634, 8vo, and another by d'Alegre, in 1704, 12mo, since which the abbe Gaudin gave a preferable translation, first in 1789, under the title of “Essai historique sur la legislation de la Perse,” and afterwards by the more appropriate title of “Gulistan, ou l'empire des roses,” 1791, 8vo. The English public was in some degree made acquainted with this work by a publication by Stephen Sullivan, esq. entitled “Select Fables from Gulistan, or the Bed of Roses, translated from the original Persian of Sadi,” 1774, 12 mo. These are chiefly of a political tendency, recommending justice and humanity to princes. Mr. Qiadwjn’s includes the whole, and is a valuable contribution to our knowledge of Persian manners and morals. Sadi’s other works are entitled “Bostan, or the Garden of Flowers,” which is in verse, and “Molamaat;” in Arabic, sparks, rays, or specimens. We may add, that Olearius published the “GuJistan,” in German, with plates, in 1634, fol. under the title of “Persianischer Rosenthal.”

, an English writer, descended of an ancient family in Shropshire, was born in 1615, and admitted pensioner of Emanuel college, in Cambridge, Nov. I 3, 1630, where he became eminent for his knowledge in the Hebrew and Oriental languages. After having taken his degrees at the usual periods, that of M. A. in 1638, in x which year he was chosen fellow of his college, he removed to Lincoln’s-Inn; where he made a considerable progress in the study of the law, and was admitted one of the masters in ordinary in the court of chancery, June 1, 1644, and was likewise one of the two masters of requests. In 1649, he was chosen town-clerk of London, and published in the same year in 4to, a work with this title, “Rights of the Kingdom: or, Customs of our Ancestors, touching the duty, power, election, or succession, of our kings and parliaments, our true liberty, due allegiance, three estates, their legislative power, original, judicial, and executive, the militia; freely discussed through the British, Saxon, Norman, laws and histories.” It was reprinted in 1682, and has always been valued by lawyers and others. He was greatly esteemed by Oliver Cromwell; who, by a letter from Cork, of Dec. 1, 1649, offered him the place of chief justice of Munster in Ireland, with a salary of 1000l. per annum; but this he excused himself from accepting. In August 1650, he was made master of Magdalen college, in Cambridge, upon the removal of Dr. Rainbow, who again succeeded Sadler after the restoration. In 1653, he was chosen member of parliament for Cambridge. In 1655, by warrant of Cromwell, pursuant to an ordinance for better regulating and limiting the jurisdiction of the high court of chancery, he was continued a master in chancery, when their number was reduced to six only. It was by his interest, that the Jews obtained the privilege of building a synagogue in 'London. In 1658, he was, chosen member of parliament for Yarmouth; and in December of the year following, appointed first commissioner, under the great seal, with Taylor, Whitelock, and others, for the probate of wills. In 1660, he published in 4-to, his “Olbia The New Island lately discovered. With its religion, rites of worship, laws, customs, government, characters, and language with education of their children in their sciences, arts, and manufactures with other things remarkable by a Christian pilgrim driven by tempest from Civita Vecchia, or some other parts about ftome, through the straights into the Atlantic ocean. The first part.” Of this work, which appears to be a kind of fiction, Dr. John Worthiugton, in a letter to Mr. Samuel Hartlib, dated April i, 1661, says, “Is the second part of Olbu like to come out shortly? Jt is said to treat of the religion, worship, laws, customs, manner of education, &c. of that place. The design promiseth much variety.”

Soon after the restoration, he lost all his employments, by virtue of an act of parliament 13 Caroli II, “for the well-governing and regulating of corporations:” his conscience not permitting him to take or subscribe the oath and declaration there required, in which it was declared, that “it was not lawful, upon any pretence whatever, to take arms against the king;” an obedience so absolute, that he thought it not due to any earthly power, though he had never engaged, or in any manner acied, against the late king. In the fire of London, 1666, his house in Salisbury-court, which he built at the expense of 5000l. and several other of his houses in London were destroyed; and, soon after, his mansion-house in Shropshire had the same fate. He was also now deprived of Vauxhall on the river Thames, and other estates which he had purchase,!, being crown lands, and of a considerable estate in the Fens in Bedford Level, without any recompence. These misfortunes and several others coming upon him, he retired to his manor and seat of Warmwell in Dorsetshire, which he had obtained with his wife; where he lived in a private manner, and died in April 1674, aged fifty-nine, Thomas Sadler, esq. deputy to lord Walpole, clerk of the pells, who contributed the above account to the editors of the General Dictionary, and Daniel Sadler, chief clerk in the Old Annuity office, were his grandsons. Walker says he was informed that Mr. Sadler was a very insignificant man, and Calamy tells us that a clergyman of the church of England gave him this character, “We accounted him, not only a general scholar, and an accomplished gentleman, but also a person of great piety; though it must be owned he was not always right in his head.”

, an eminent English statesman, was born in 1507, at Hackney, in Middlesex. He was the son of Henry Sadler, who, though a gentleman by birth, and possessed of a fair inheritance, seems to have been steward or surveyor to the proprietor of the manor of Gillney, near Great Hadham, in Essex. Ralph in early life gained a situation in the family of Thomas Cromwell, earl of Essex, and by him was introduced to the notice of Henry VIII. who took him into his service, but at what time is not very clear. He was employed in the great work of dissolving the religious houses, and had his full share of the spoil. In 1537, he commenced a long course of diplomatic services, byan embassy to Scotland, whose monarch was then absent in France. The objects of his mission were to greet the queen dowager, to strengthen the English interests in the councils of regency which then governed Scotland, and to discover the probable consequences of the intimate union of Scotland with France. Having collected such information as he could procure on these topics, he returned in the beginning of the following year, but went again to Scotland soon after, ostensibly to maintain a good correspondence between the two crowns, but really, as appears from his state-papers, to detach the king of Scotland from the councils of cardinal Beaton, who was at the head of the party most in the interest of France. He was instructed also to direct the king’s attention to the overgrown possessions of the church as a source of revenue, and to persuade him to imitate his uncle Henry VHIth’s conduct to the see of Rome, and to make common cause with England against France. In all this, however, he appears to have failed, or at least to have left Scotland without having materially succeeded in any part of his. mission.

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

When the war with Scotland was renewed, sir Ralph so distinguished himself at the battle of Pinkie, that he was on the field raised to the degree of knight banneret; but we hear nothing more of him during the reign of Edward VI. except that in a grant, dated the 4th of that king’s reign, he is termed master of the great wardrobe. In Mary’s reigo, although he appears to have been in her favour, he retired to his estate at Hackney, and resigned the office of knight of the hamper,;-.nich had been conferred on him by Henry VIII. On the accession of Elizab^th, he again appeared at court, was called to the privy council, and retained to his death a great portion of the esteem of that princess. He was a member of her first parliament, as one of the knights of the shire for the county of Hertford, and continued to be a representative of the people during the greater part, if not the whole, of her reign. When queen Elizabeth thought proper to favour the cause of the reformation in Scotland, and to support the nobility who were for it against Mary, sir Ralph Sadler was her principal agent, and so negotiated as to prepare the way for Elizabeth’s great influence in the affairs of Scotland. He was also concerned in the subsequent measures which led to the death of queen Mary, and was appointed her keeper in the castle of Tutbury; but such was Elizabeth’s jealousy of this unfortunate princess, that even Sadler’s watchfulness became liable to her suspicions, and on one occasion, a very heavy complaint was made against him, that he had permitted Mary to accompany him to some distance from the castle of Tutbury, to enjoy the sport of hawking. Sir Ralph had been hitherto so subservient to his royal mistress, in all her measures, and perhaps in some which he could not altogether approve, that this complaint gave him great uneasiness, and he answered it rather by an expostulation than an apology. He admitted that he had sent for his hawks and falconers to divert " the miserable life'- which he passed at Tutbury, and that he had been unable to resist the solicitation of the prisoner, to permit her to see a sport in which she greatly delighted. But he adds; that this was under the strictest precautions for security of her person; and he declares to the secretary Cecil, that rather than continue a charge which subjected him to such misconstruction, were it not more for fear of offending the queen than dread of the punishment, he would abandon his present charge on coitdition of surrendering himself prisoner to the Tower for all the days of his life, and concludes that he is so weary of this life, that death itself would make him more happy. Elizabeth so far complied with his intimation as to commit Mary to a new keeper, but she did not withdraw her confidence from sir Ralph in other matters, and after the execution of Mary, employed him to go to the court of James VI. to dissuade him from entertaining thoughts of a war with England on his mother’s account, to which there was reason to think he might have been excited. In this sir Ralph had little difficulty in succeeding, partly from James’s love of ease, and partly from the prospect he had of succeeding peaceably to the throne of England. This was the last time sir Ralph Sadler was employed in the public service, for soon after his return from Scotland, he died at his lordship of Standon, March 30, 1587, in the eightieth year of his age, and was buried in the church of Standon, where his monument was decorated with the king of Scotland’s standard, which he took in the battle of Musselburgh. He left behind him twenty-two manors, several parsonages, and other great portions of land, in the several counties of Hertford, Gloucester, Warwick, Buckingham, and Worcester. He married Margaret Mitchell, a laundress in the family of his first patron, Thomas Cromwell, earl of Essex, in the life-time, though in the absence, of her husband, Matthew Barre, a tradesman in London, presumed to be dead at that time, and he afterwards procured an act of parliament, 37 Henry VIII. for the legitimation of the children by her, who were three sons, and four daughters; Anne, married to sir George Horsey of Digswell, knight; Mary, to Thomas Bollys aliter Bowles Wallington, esq. Jane, toEdward Baesh, of Stanstead, esq. (which three gentlemen appear to have been sheriffs of the county of Hertford, 14, 18, and 13 Eliz.); and Dorothy, to Edward EIryngton of Berstall, in the county of Bucks, esq. The sons were, Thomas, Edward, and Henry. Thomas succeeded to Standon, was sheriff of the county 29 and 37 Eliz. was knighted, and entertained king James there two nights on his way to Scotland. He had issue, Ralph and Gertrude married to Walter the first lord Aston of the kingdom of Scotland; Ralph, his son, dying without issue, was succeeded in his lordship of Standon and other estates in the county of Hertford, by Walter, the second lord Aston, eldest surviving son of his sister Gertrude lady Aston. The burying-place of the family is in tire chancel of the church at Standon. Against the south wall is a monument for sir Ralph Sadler, with the effigies of himself in armour, and of his three sons and four daughters,' and three inscriptions, in Latin verse, in English verse, and in English prose against the north wall i& another for sir Thomas, with the effigies of himself in armour, his lady, son and daughter, and an epitaph in Ertglish prose. There are also several inscriptions for various persons of the Aston family.

The transactions of sir Ralph Sadler’s most memorable embassies are recorded in “Letters and Negociations of Sir Ralph Sadler,” &c. printed at Edinburgh, 1720, 8vo, from Mss. in the advocates’ library; but a more complete collective was recently published of his “State papers and Letters,” from Mss. in the possession of Arthur Clifford, esq. a descendant, 1809, in 2 vols. 4to, with a life by Walter Scott, esq. to which we are principally indebted for the preceding account. From this valuable and interesting publication the character of sir Ralph Sadler will be estimated according to the views the reader has been accustomed to take of the measures of the reigns in which he lived; and on this account his character will probably be more highly esteemed in England than in Scotland. That he should have preserved the favour of four such discordant sovereigns as Henry, Edward, Mary, and Elizabeth, is extraordinary, but not a solitary instance.

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

, a polite and learned Italian, was born at Modena in 1477, and was the son of an eminent civilian, who, afterwards becoming a professor at Ferrara, took him along with him, and educated him with great care. He acquired a masterly knowledge in the Latin and Greek early, and then applied himself to philosophy and eloquence; taking Aristotle and Cicero for his guides, whom he considered as the first masters in these branches. He also cultivated Latin poetry, in which he displayed a very high degree of classical purity. Going to Rome under the pontificate of Alexander VI. when he was about twentytwo, he was taken into the family of cardinal Caraffa, who loved men of letters; and, upon the death of this cardinal in 1511, passed into that of Frederic Fregosa, archbishop of Salerno, where he found Peter Bembus, and contracted an intimacy with him. When Leo X. ascended the papal throne in 1513, he chose Bembus and Sadolet for his secretaries men extremely qualified for the office, as both of them wrote with great elegance and facility and soon after made Sadolet bishop of Carpentras, near Avignon. Upon the death of Leo, in 1521, he went to his diocese, and resided there during the pontificate of Adrian VI.; but Clement VII. was no sooner seated in the chair, in 1523, than he recalled him to Rome. Sadolet submitted to his boliness, but oh condition that he should return to his diocese at the end of three years. Paul III. who succeeded Clement VII. in 1534, called him to Rome again; made him a cardinal in 1536, and employed him in many important embassies and negotiations. Sadolet, at length, grown too old to perform the duties of his bishopric, went no more from Rome; but spent the remainder of his days there in repose and study. He died in 1547, not without poison, as some have imagined; because he corresponded too familiarly with the Protestants, and testified much regard for some of their doctors. It is true, he had written in 1539 a Latin letter to the senate and people of Geneva, with a view of reducing them to an obedience to the pope; and had addressed himself to the Calvinists, with the affectionate appellation of “Charissimi in Christo Fratres;” but this proceeded entirely from his moderate and peaceable temper and courteous disposition. He was a sincere adherent to the Romish church, but without bigotry. The liberality of sentiment he displayed in his commentary on the epistle of St. Paul to the Romans incurred the censure of the Roman court.

Sadolet in his younger days was somewhat gay, but reformed his manners very strictly afterwards, and became a man of great virtue and goodness. He was, like other scholars of his time, a close imitator of Cicero in his prose works, and of Virgil in his poetry. In the best of his Latin poems, his “Curtius,” he is allowed to have adorned a dignified subject with numbers equally chaste, spirited, and harmonious. His works consist of epistles, dissertations, orations, poems, and commentaries upon some parts of holy writ. They have been printed oftentimes separately and were first collected and published together, in a large 8vo volume, at Mentz, in 1607 but a more complete and excellent edition was published at Verona, in 1737, 4 vols. 4to. All his contemporaries have spoken of him in the highest terms; Erasmus particularly, who calls him “eximium setatis suse decus.”

, a celebrated Icelandic writer, was the son of a priest named Sigfus, and was born about the middle of the eleventh century, between 1050 and 1060. He travelled at a very early period into Italy and Germany, in order to improve himself in knowledge, and for a considerable time his countrymen were not at all aware ipf what had become of him. At length Jonas, the son of Ogmund, who was afterwards a bishop, found him at Paris, and carried him back to Iceland. Here he took the order of priesthood, and succeeded his father as priest of Odda, He also established a school, and contributed with others to induce the Icelanders to pay tithes, and took a considerable part with regard to the formation of the ecclesiastical code of laws. He died in 1133 or 1135, being about eighty years of age. At the age of seventy he wrote a History of Norway, from the time of Harold Haarfager to that of Magnus the Good. He is generally allowed the merit of having collected the poetical Edda, by which means he preserved these curious and valuable remains of the ancient Scandinavian mythology, poetry, and morality, from being lost. They were printed at Copenhagen, 1787, 4to, with a Latin translation, the editors of which, in their preface, give a full account of the supposed authors, and the claim of Saemund to be considered as the principal collector.

, the first of French novelists, was born, according to one of his biographers, in 1677, at Ruys, in Britanny; or, according to another, in 1668, at Vannes. At the age of twenty-five he came to Paris, with a view to study philosophy. His talents, although they did not display themselves very early, proved to be equally brilliant and solid. He made himself first known by a paraphrastic translation of the “Letters of Aristsenetus,” which he published in two small volumes. He then travelled through Spain, and applied to the study of the Spanish language, customs, and writers, from whom he adopted plots and fables, and transfused them into his native tongue with great facility and success. His works of this kind are, “Guzman D'Alfarache” the “Bachelor of Salamanca;” “Gil Bias;” “New Adventures of Don Quixote,” originally written by Avellaneda; “The Devil on two Sticks,” as it is called in our translation, in French “Le Diable boiteux,” and some others of less note. Of the “Devil on two Sticks,” we are told that the first edition had amazing success, and the second sold with still greater rapidity. Two noblemen coming to the bookseller’s, found only one single copy remaining, which each was for purchasing: and the dispute grew so warm, that they were going to decide it by the sword, had not the bookseller interposed. He was also distinguished for some dramatic pieces, of which “Crispin,” and “Turcaret,” both comedies, were the most successful, and allowed to fall very little short of the genius of Moliere. “Turcaret,” which was first played in 1709, has been praised by the French critics, as comprehending a dialogue just and natural, characters drawn with peculiar fidelity, and a well-conducted plot. He composed also many pieces for the comic opera, which, if somewhat deficient in invention, were in general sprightly, and enriched with borrowed fancies very happily adapted to the genius of the French theatre.

When a favourite with the town, he appears to have presumed a little on that circumstance. It was his custom to read his plays in certain fashionable circles, before they were publicly represented. On one of those occasions, when engaged to read a piece at the duchess de Bouillon’s, an unexpected affair detained him until a considerable time after the appointed hour. The duchess, on his entrance, began to reproach him, but with pleasantry, for his having made the company lose two hours in waiting for him. “If I have made them lose them,” said Le Sage, “nothing can be more easy than to recover them. I will not read my play,” and immediately took his leave, nor could any invitation induce him to visit the duchess a second time.

He had several children, the eldest of whom was long a distinguished actor on the French stage, under the name of Montmenil, and amidst all the temptations of a theatrical life, was a man of irreproachable character. He died suddenly while partaking of the pleasures of the chase, Sept. 8, 1743, and his death was a loss to the public, and particularly to his father, who was now grown old, and had been poorly rewarded by the age which he contributed so often to entertain. He was likewise at this time very deaf, and obliged to have recourse to an ear-trumpet, which he used in a manner that bespoke the old humourist. It was his practice to take it out of his pocket when he had reason to think that his company was composed of men of genius, but he very gravely replaced it, when he found that they were of an inferior stamp.

This infirmity, however, depriving him of the pleasures of society, he left Paris for Boulogne-sur-mer, in the cathedral of which one of his sons held a canonry: and although of an advanced age, Le Sage left the metropolis of taste, literature, and gaiety, with considerable regret. He did not enjoy his retirement long, being cut off by a severe illness, Nov. 17, 1747, in his eightieth year. He was interred at Boulogne, with the following epitaph:

His character is said to have been truly amiable, and his conduct strictly moral and correct, free from ambition, and one who courted fortune no farther than was necessary to enjoy the pleasures and quiet of a literary life.

Of all his works, his “Gil Bias” is by far the most popular, and deservedly ranks very high among the productions of historical fancy. It has been, we believe, translated into every European language, and received in all nations, as a faithful portrait of human nature. Few books have been so frequently quoted, as affording happy illustrations of general manners, and of the common caprices and infirmities incident to man. Le Sage, says Dr. Moore, proves himself to have been intimately acquainted with human nature. And as the moral tendency of the character of Gil Bias has been sometimes questioned, the same author very properly remarks that he never intended that character as a model of imitation. His object seems to have been to exhibit men as they are, not as they ought to be: for this purpose he chooses a youth of no extraordinary talents, and without steady principles, open to be duped by knavery, and perverted by example. He sends him like a spaniel, through the open fields, the coveru, the giddy heights, and latent tracts of life, to raise the game at which he wishes to shoot; and few moral huntsmen ever afforded more entertaining sport.

The popularity of this novel, which equals that of almost any of our own most favourite productions, may afford a lesson to the writers of fiction, who are ambitious that their works may live. Had Le Sage drawn those extravagant and distorted characters which are so common in the novels published within the last twenty years, he could not have expected that they would outlive the novelty of a first perusal; but, depicting nature, and nature only, as he found her in men of all ranks and stations, he knew that what would please now would please for ever, and that he was speaking a language that would be understood in every spot of the globe. The artifices of refined and highly polished society may introduce variations and disguises which give an air of novelty to the actions of men; but original manners and caprices, such as Le Sage has described, will perhaps at all times be acknowledged to be just, natural, and faithful, whether we apply the test of selfexamination, or have recourse to the more easy practice of remarking the conduct of those with whom we associate.

, a bishop of the old episcopal church of Scotland, a man of great learning and worth, and an able controversial writer in defence of the church to which he belonged, was born in 1652. He was the son of captain Sage, a gentleman of Fifeshire in Scotland, and an officer of merit in lord Duffus’s regiment, who fought on the side of the royalists when Monk stormed Dundee in 1651. Although, like many other royalists, he was scantily rewarded for his services, he was able to give his son a liberal education at school, and at the university of St. Andrew’s, where he took his degree of master of arts in 1672. He passed some years afterwards as schoolmaster of the parishes of Bingry in Fifeshire, and of Tippermoor in Perthshire, and as private tutor to the sons of a gentleman of fortune, whom he attended at school, and accompanied to the university of St. Andrew’s. In 1684, when his pupils left him, he removed from St. Andrew’s, and when uncertain what course to pursue, was recommended to archbishop Rose, who gave him priest’s orders, and advised him to officiate at Glasgow. Here he continued to display his talents till the revolution in 1688, when the presbyterian form of church government was established, and then went to Edinburgh. He preached in this city a while, but refusing to take the oaths of allegiance, was obliged to desist, and found an asylum in the house of sir William Bruce, the sheriff of Kinross, who approved his principles, and admired his virtues. Returning to Edinburgh in 1695, where he appears to have written some defences of the church to which he belonged, he was observed, and obliged again to retire. At length he found a safe retreat with the countess of Callendar, who employed him as chaplain, and tutor to her sons, and afterwards he lived with sir John Steuart of Garntully as chaplain, until Jan. 25, 1705, when he was consecrated a bishop. In the following year his health began to decay, and after trying the waters of Bath, in 1709, and change of air in other places, without much benefit, he died at Edinburgh June 7, 1711.

Bishop Sage was a man profoundly skilled in all the ancient languages, which gave him an eminent advantage over his adversaries, the most distinguished of whom was Mr. Gilbert Rule, principal of the college of Edinburgh, who, with much zeal, and no mean abilities, was overmatched by the superior learning and historical knowledge of his antagonist. Sage wrote the second and third letters, concerning the persecution of the episcopal clergy in Scotland, which were printed at London, in 1689, the rev. Thomas Morer having written the first, and professor Monro the fourth. 2. “An account of the late establishment of Presbyterian Government by the parliament of Scotland in 1690,” Lond. 1693. 3. “The fundamental charter of Presbytery,' 7 ibid. 1695. 4.” The principles of the Cyprianic age with regard to episcopal power and jurisdiction,“ibid. 1695. 5.” A Vindication“of the preceding, ibid. 1701. 6.” Some remarks on a Letter from a gentleman in the city, to a minister in the country, on Mr. David Williamson’s sermon before the General Assembly,“Edin. 1703. 7.” A brief examination of some things in Mr. Meldrum’s sermon, preached May 16, 1703, against a toleration to those of the episcopal persuasion,“ibid. 1703. 8.” The reasonableness of a toleration of those of the Episcopal persuasion inquired into purely on church principles,“ibid. 1704. 9.” The Life of Gawin Douglas,“bishop of Dunkeld, prefixed to Ruddiman’s edition of” Douglas’s Virgil,“1710. 10.” An Introduction to Drummond’s History of the Five James’s," Edin. 1711, with notes by Ruddiman, who always spoke highly of Sage as a scholar and companion.

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

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

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

, a French poet, was born at Roan in Normandy in 1594. In the epistle dedicatory to the third part of his works, he tells us, that his father commanded a squadron of ships in the service of Elizabeth queen of England for twenty-two years, and that he was for three years prisoner in the Black Tower at Constantinople. He mentions also, that two brothers of his had been killed in an engagement against the Turks. His own life was spent in a continual succession of travels, which were of no advantage to his fortune. There are miscellaneous poems of this author, the greatest part of which are of the comic or burlesque, and the amatory kind. The first volume was printed at Paris in 1627, the second in 1643, and the third in 1649, and they have been reprinted several times. “Solitude, an ode,” which is one of the first of them, is his best piece in the opinion of Mr. Boileau. In 1650 he published “Stances sur la grossesse de la reine de Pologne et de Suede.” In 1654 he printed his “Moise sauve”, idylle heroique,“Leyden which had at first many admirers: Chapelain called it a speaking picture but it has not preserved its reputation. St. A main wrote also a very devout piece, entitled” Stances a M. Corneille, sur son imitation de Jesus Christ," Paris, 1656. Mr. Brossette says that he wrote also a poem upon the moon, in which he introduced a compliment to Lewis XIV. upon his skill in swimming, an amusement he often took when young in the river Seine; but the king’s dislike to this poem is said to have affected the author to such a degree, that he did not survive it long. He died in 1661, aged sixty-seven. He was admitted a member of the French academy, when first founded by cardinal Richelieu, in 1633; and Mr. Pelisson informs us, that, in 1637, at his own desire, he was excused from the obligation of making a speech in his turn, on condition that he would compile the comic part of the dictionary which the academy had undertaken, and collect the burlesque terms. This was a task well suited to him; for it appears by his writings that he was extremely conversant in these terms, of which he seems to have made a complete collection from the markets and other places where the lower people resort.

, doctor of the Sorbonne, and one of the greatest ornaments of Christianity which appeared in the Romish communion in the thirteenth century, had his name from St. Amour in Franche Compte, where he was born about the commencement of that century. The zeal which he showed against the new institution of mendicant friars, both in his sermons, and as theological professor, induced the university of Paris to make choice of him to defend their interests against the Dominicans and Franciscans, who wished to engross the power and influence of the university to themselves. In 1255, the debate was brought before the pope Alexander IV. who, with intolerable arrogance, ordered the university not only to restore the Dominicans to their former station, but also to grant them as many professorships as they should require. The magistrates of Paris, at first, were disposed to protect the university; but the terror of the papal edicts reduced them at length to silence; and not only the Dominicans, but also the Franciscans, assumed whatever power they pleased in that famous seminary, and knew no other restrictions than what the pope imposed upon them. St. Amour, however, wrote several treatises against the mendicant orders, and particularly, in 1255, or 1256, his famous book, “Perils des derniers temps,” concerning the “perils of the latter days,” in which he maintained that St. Paul’s prophecy of the latter times (2 Tim. iii. 1.) was fulfilling in the abominations of the* friars, and laid down thirty-nine marks of false teachers.

Some years before the pope had decided in favour of the mendicants, a fanatical book under the title of an “Introduction to the Everlasting Gospel” was published by a Franciscan, who exalted St. Francis above Jesus Christ, and arrogated to his order the glory of reforming mankind by a new gospel. The universal ferment, excited by this impious book, obliged Alexander IV. to suppress it, but he ordered it to be burnt in secret, being willing to spare the reputation of the mendicants. The university of Paris, however, insisted upon a public condemnation of the book; and Alexander, great as he was in power, was obliged to submit. He then took revenge by condemning St. Amour’s work to be burnt, and the author to be banished from France. St. Amour retired to his native place, and was not permitted to return to Paris until the pontificate of Clement IV. He died at Paris in 1272. His works were published there in 1632, 4to. He was a man of learning and correct manners, of great zeal, and, in the opinion of a late writer, wanted only a more favourable soil, in which he might bring to maturity the fruits of those protestant principles, the seeds of which he nourished in his breast.

, an anatomist, well known in this country on account of the imposture of the Rabbit-woman, and for various eccentricities of conduct, was a native of Switzerland, but, on coming over to England, was placed by some friends under a surgeon of eminence, in which profession he became skilful. He, for a time, read public lectures on anatomy, and obtained considerable reputation; which was ruined by the part he took in the affair of Mary Tofts, as well as by many other irregularities of character. He died in 1776, after having been for many years the subject of more curiosity and conversation than any of his contemporaries, though without any extraordinary talents, or claims to distinction. They who are curious to know more of his character may have their curiosity gratified in the “Anecdotes of Hogarth” by Nichols.

, an English lawyer and law-writer of the sixteenth century, is supposed to have been born at Skilton, near Coventry, in Warwickshire, and educated for some time at Oxford, whence he removed to the Inner Temple for the study of the law. After being admitted to the bar, he became an eminent counsellor, and we should suppose a very popular one, as he frequently refused or returned his fees. What he got by honourable practice and some paternal estate, he expended in the purchase of books, and gathered a very fine library, which was all the property he left to his heirs. Besides his legal knowledge, he was conversant in philosophy and the divinity of the times, and wrote on the latter subject with so much freedom as to render his sentiments suspected, for which reason Bale has given him a very advantageous character. He is commended too for his piety, and pious ordering of his family, to whom he read every night a chapter in the Bible, and expounded it. He died Sept. 28, 1540, and not 1539, as Bale states. He was buried in the church of St. Alphage, within CrL'pp legate, London. It appears by his will that he was a considerable benefactor to Skiiton church, where his father sir Henry St. German, knt. and his mother lie buried, and to that of Laleford. St. German has immortalized his name by his valuable and well-known work, which bears the title of “The Doctor and Student, or Dialogues between a doctor of divinity, and a student in the laws of England, concerning the grounds of those laws,” first printed by Rastell, in Latin, 1523, 12mo, and reprinted in 1528. Mr. Bridgman enumerates above twenty editions which followed, the last in 1787, 8vo, with questions and cases concerning the equity of the law, corrected and improved by William Muchall, or Murchall. On the subject of this celebrated work, Mr. Hargrave (in his Law Tracts, 32 I), has published from a ms. in the Cotton library, “A Replication of a Serjaunte at the Laws of England, to certayne pointes alleaged by a student of the said lawes of England, in a Dialogue in Englishe, between a doctor of divinity and the said student;” and a little “Treatise concerning writs of Subpoena.” Two other tracts are attributed by Ames to St. German, though they bear the name of Thomas Godfrey, viz. “A Treatise concerning the power of the Clergy and of the lawes of the Realme,” 12mo, no date and “A Treatise concernynge divers of the Constitucyons provyncyall and legantines,” 12mo, no date. Tanner attributes to him “A Treatise concerning the division between the Spiritualitie and the Temporaltie,” printed by Redman without date; and this seems to be the same work as “The Pacyfyer of the division between the Spiritualitie aod Temporaltie,” printed by Berthelet, which being remarkable for impartiality and temperate language, was pointed out to sir Thomas More, as an example for him to follow in his controversial writings. This incited sir Thomas to publish “An Apologye made by him, anno 1533, after he had gevhi over th' office of lord chancellor of Englande,” printed by Rastell, 1533, 12mo. St. German was also probably the author of “Newe addicions treating most specially of the power of the Parlyament concernynge the Spiritualitie and the Spiritual Jurisdiction,” 1531, 12mo, now reprinted in all the modern editions of the “Doctor and Student.” He had a controversy with sir Thomas More, which produced “Salem and Bizance, being a dialogue between two Englishmen, one called Salem, and the other Bizance,” 1533, 8vo. This was written in answer to More’s “Apologye” above mentioned and sir Thomas replied in the “Debellation of Salem and Bizance,” by Rastell, in 1533, 8vo.

, lord viscount Bolingbroke, an eminent statesman and writer, was descended from an ancient and noble family, and born, as all his biographers say, in 1672, but it appears by the register of Battersea parish that he was baptised Oct. 10, 1678. His father, sir Henry St. John, son of sir Walter St. John, died at Battersea, his family-seat, July 3, 1708, in his eighty- seventh year his mother was lady Mary, second daughter and coheiress of Robert Rich, earl of Warwick. He was bred up, with great care, under the inspection of his grandfather, as well as his father, who neglected no means to cultivate his mind. It was once noticed in parliament that he was educated in dissenting principles, and it is very certain that the first director of his studies was the famous Daniel Burgess, who, with all his oddities (See Burgess) was frequently employed as tutor to the sons of men of rank. Goldsmith seems desirous to impute Bolingbroke’s infidelity to this divine, and to his being obliged to read Manton’s Sermons on the 119th Psalm but such an opinion is as dangerous as it is absurd. From Burgess or Manton, he could have imbibed only a higher reverence for religion than was to be expected from a lively youth; and as to the disgust he felt, to which his biographer seems inclined to trace his infidelity, it is probable that a boy would not have entertained much less dislike to a voluminous history of England, if obliged to read it when he wished to be idle. But, whatever instruction he might receive from his first tutors, it is very certain, that he had a regular and liberal education. He was sent to Eton, where he had for his companion and rival sir Robert Waipole. “The parts of Mr. St. John,” says Coxe, “were more lively and brilliant, those of Walpole more steady and solid. Walpole was industrious and diligent, because his talents required application; St. John was negligent, because his quickness of apprehension rendered labour less necessary.” These characteristics prevailed in both throughout life. From Eton Mr. St. John was removed to Christ-church, Oxford, where he made a shining figure as a polite scholar, and when he left the university, he was considered as a youth highly accomplished for public life. His person was agreeable, and he had a dignity mixed with sweetness in his looks, and a manner very prepossessing, and, as some of his contemporaries said, irresistible. He had much acuteness, great judgment, and a prodigious memory. Whatever he read he retained so as to make it entirely his own; but in youth, he was not in general much given either to reading or reflection. With great parts, he had, as it usually happens, great passions which hurried him into those indiscretions and follies that distinguish the libertine. He does not, however, appear to have been without his serious moments, nor always unwilling to listen to the voice of conscience. “There has been something always,” says he, “ready to whisper in my ear, while I ran the course of pleasure and of business, * Solve senescentem mature sanus equum;‘ < and while ’tis well, release thy aged horse.' But my genius, unlike the demon of Socrates, whispered so softly, that very often I heard him not, in the hurry of those passions with which I was transported. Some calmer hours there were in them I hearkened to him. Reflection had often its turn and the love of study and the desire of knowledge have never quite abandoned me. I am not, therefore, entirely unprepared for the life I will lead; and it is not without reason that I promise myself more satisfaction in the latter part of it than I ever knew in the former.”

As these youthful extravagances involved him in discredit, his parents were very desirous to reclaim him. With this view, when in his twenty-second year, they married him to the daughter and coheiress of sir Henry Winchecomb of Bucklebury, in the county of Berks, bart.; and upon this marriage a large settlement was made, which proved very serviceable to him in his old age, though a great part of what his lady brought was taken from him, in consequence of his attainder. The union in other respects was not much to his liking. The same year he was elected for the borough of Wotton-Basset, and sat in the fifth parliament of king William, which met Feb. 10, 1700; and in which Robert Harley, esq. afterwards earl of Oxford, was chosen for the first time speaker. Of this short parliament, which ended June 24, 1701, the business was the impeachment of the king’s ministers, who were concerned in the conclusion of the two partition-treaties; and, Mr. St. John siding with the majority, who were then considered as tories, ought to be looked upon as commencing his political career in that character. He sat also in the next, which was the last parliament in the reign of William, and the first in that of Anne. He was charged, so early as 1710, with having voted this year against the succession in the House of Hanover; but this he has peremptorily denied, because in 1701 a bill was brought into parliament, by sir Charles Hedges and himself, entitled tt A Bill ibr the farther security of his majesty’s person, and the succession of the crown in the Protestant line, and extinguishing the hopes of the pretended prince of Wales, and all other pretenders, and their open and secret abettors." In July 1702, upon the dissolution of the second parliament, the queen making a tour from Windsor to Bath, by way of Oxford, Mr. St. John attended her; and, at that university, with several persons of the highest distinction, had the degree of doctor of laws conferred upon him.

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

Upon the calling of a new parliament in November, he was chosen knight of the shire for the county of Berks, and also burgess for Wotton-Basset; but made his election for the former. He appeared now upon a scene of action, which called forth all his abilities. He sustained almost the whole weight of the business of the peace of Utrecht, which however he was not supposed to negotiate to the advantage of his country: and therefore had an ample share of the censure bestowed on that treaty ever since. The real state of the case is, that “the two parties,” as he himself owns, “were become factions in the strict sense of the word.” He was of that which prevailed for peace, against those who delighted in war for this was the language of the times and, a peace being resolved on by the English ministers at all risks, it is no wonder if it was made with less advantage to the nation. He owns this, yet justifies the peace in general: “Though it was a duty,” says he, “that we owed to our country, to deliver her from the necessity of bearing any longer so unequal a part in so unnecessary a war, yet was there some degree of merit in performing it. I think so strongly in this manner, I am so incorrigible, that, if I could be placed in the same circumstances again, I woflld take the same resolution, and act the same part. Age and experience might enable me to act with more ability and greater skill; but all I have suffered since the death of the queen should not hinder me from acting. Notwithstanding this, I shall not be surprised if you think that the peace of Utrecht was not answerable to the success of the war, nor to the efforts made in it. I think so myself; and have always owned, even when it was making and made, that I thought so. Since we had committed a successful folly, we ought to have reaped more advantage from it than we did.”

In July 1712, he was created baron St. John of LediardTregoze in Wiltshire, and viscount Bolingbroke; and was also, the same year, appointed lord-lieutenant of the county of Essex. But these honours not coming up to the measure of his ambition, he meditated supplanting Harley, flow earl of Oxford, who had offended him, even in the matter of the peerage. Paulet St. John, the last earl of Bolingbroke, died the 5th of October preceding his creation and the earldom became extinct by his decease, and this honour had been promised to him but, his presence in the House of Commons being so necessary at that time, Harley prevailed upon him to remain ther<5 during that session; with an assurance, that his rank should be preserved for him. But, when he expected the old title should have been renewed in his favour, he received only that of viscount; which he resented as an intended affront on the part of Harley, who had got an earldom for himself. “I continued,” says Bolingbroke, “in the House of Commons during that important session which preceded the peace; and which, by the spirit shewn through the whole course of it, and by the resolutions taken in it, rendered the conclusion of the treaties practicable. After this, I was dragged into the House of Lords in such a manner as to make my promotion a punishment, not a reward; and was there left to defend the treaties alone. It would not have been hard,” continues he, “to have forced the earl of Oxford to use me better. His good intentions began to be very much doubted of: the truth is, no opinion of his sincerity had ever taken root in the party; and, which was worse for a man in his station, the opinion of his capacity began to fall apace. 1 began in my heart to renounce the friendship which, till that time, 1 had preserved inviolable for Oxford. I was not aware of all his treachery, nor of the base and little means which he employed then, and continued to employ afterwards, to ruin me in the opinion of the queen, and every where else. I saw, however, that he had nofriencUhip for any body; and that, with respect to me, instead of having the ability to render that merit, which I endeavoured to acquire, an addition of strength to himself, it became the object of his jealousy, and a reason for undermining me.” There was also another transaction, which passed not long after lord Bolingbroke’s being raised to the peerage, and which aggravated his animosity to that minister. In a few weeks after his return from France, her majesty bestowed the vacant ribbons of the order of the garter upon the dukes Hamilton, Beaufort, and Kent, and the earls Powlet, Oxford, and Strafford. Bolingbroke thought himself here again ill used, having an ambition, as the minister well knew, to receive such an instance as this was of his mistress’s grace and favour. Indignant at all these circumstances, we are told that Bolingbroke, when the treasurer’s staff was taken from Oxford, expressed his joy by entertaining that very day, July 7, 1714, at dinner, the generals Stanhope, Cadogan, and Palmer, sir William Wyndham. Mr. Craggs, and other gentlemen. Oxford said upon his going out, that “some of them would smart for it;” and Bolingbroke was far from being insensible of the danger to which he stood exposed yet he was not without hopes still of securing himself, by making his court to the whigs and it is certain, that a little before this he had proposed to bring iri a bill to the House of Lords, to make it treason to enlist soldiers for the Pretender, which was passed into an act. Soon, however, after the accession of king George I. in

1714, the seals were taken from him, and all the papers in his office secured. During the short session of parliament at this juncture, he applied himself with his usual industry and vigour to keep up the spirits of the friends to the late administration, without omitting any proper occasion of testifying his respect and duty to his majesty, by assisting in settling the civil list, and other necessary points. But, when after the meeting of the new parliament, his danger became more imminent, he withdrew privately to France, in March 1715. It is said, by the continuator of Rapin’s history, that his heart began to fail him as soon as he heard that Prior was landed at Dover, aud had promised to reveal all he knew. Accordingly that evening his lordship, who had the night before appeared at the play-house in Drury-lane, and bespoke another play for the next night, and subscribed to a new opera that was to be acted some time after, went off to Dover in disguise, as a servant to Le Vigne, one of the French king’s messengers. His lordship, however, ahiays affirmed that he took this step upon certain and repeated informations, that a resolution was taken, by the men in power, not only to prosecute, but to pursue him to the scaffold.

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

In the mean time, his new engagements with the Pretender were so unsuccessful as to bring on him a similar disgrace; for the year 1715 was scarcely expired, when the seals and papers of his new secretary’s office were demanded, and given up; and this was soon followed by an accusation branched into seven articles, in which he was impeached of treachery, incapacity, and neglect. Thus discarded, he turned his thoughts once more to a reconciliation with his country, and in a short time, by that characteristic activity with which he prosecuted all his designs, he procured, through the mediation of the earl of Stair, then the British ambassador at the French court, a promise of pardon, upon certain conditions, from the king, who, in July 1716, created his father baron of Battersea and viscount St. John. In the mean time these vicissitudes had thrown him into a state of reflection; and this produced, by way of relief, a “Consolatio Philosophica,” which he wrote the same year, under the title of “Reflections upon Exile.” In this piece he has drawn the picture of his own exile; which, being represented as a violence, proceeding solely from the malice of his persecutors, to one who had served his country with ability and integrity, is by the magic of his pen converted not only into a tolerable, but what appears to be an honourable, station. He had also this year written several letters, in answer to the charge brought against him by the Pretender and his adherents, which were printed at London in 1735, 8vo, together with answers to them by Mr. James Murray, afterwards made earl of Dunbar by the Pretender; but, being then immediately suppressed, are reprinted in “Tindal’s Continuation of Rapin’s History of England” The following year, he drew up a vindication of his whole conduct with respect to the tories, in the form of a letter to sir William Wyndham, which was printed in 1753, 8vo. It is written with the utmost elegance and address, and abounds with interesting and entertaining anecdote’s.

His first lauy being dead, he espoused about this time, 1716, a second of great merit and accomplishments, niece to madam de Maintenon, and widow of the marquis de Villette; with whom he had a very large fortune, encumbered, however, with a long and troublesome law-suit. In. the company and conversation of this lady, be passed his time in France, sometimes in the country, and sometimes at the capital, till 1723; when the king was pleased to grant him a full and free pardon. Upon the first nonce of this favour, the expectation of which had been the governing principle of his political conduct for several years, he returned to his native country. It is observable, that bishop Atterbury was banished at this very juncture; and happening, on his being set ashore at Calais, to hear that lord Bolingbroke was there, he said, “Then I am exchanged” His lordship having obtained, about two years after his return, ao act of parliament to restore him to his family-intjeriiancr, and to enable him to possess any purchase he should make, chose a seat of lord Tankerville, at Dawley near L'xbriJge Hi Middlesex; where he settled with his lady, and gratified his taste by improving it into a most elegant villa. Here he amused himself with rural employ ments, and with corresponding and conversing with Pope, Swift, and other friends but was by no means satisfied within for he was yet no more than a mere titular lord, and stood excluded from a seat in the House of Peers. Inflamed with this taint that yet remained in his blood, he entered again, in 172^, upon the public sta^e; and, disavowing all obligations to the minister Walpole, to whose secret enmity he iiMpuied his not having received the full effects of the royal merty intended, he embarked in the opposition, and distinguished himself by a multitude of pieces, written during me short remainder of that reign, and for some years under the following, with great boldness against the measures that were then pursued. Besides his papers in the “Craftsman,” which were the most popular in that celebrated collection, he published several pamphlets, which were afterwards reprinted in the second edition of his “Political Tracts,” and in the authorized edition of his works.

Having carried on his part of the siege against the minister with inimitable spirit for ten years, he laid down his pen, owing to a disagreement with his principal coadjutors; and, in 1735, retired to France, with a full resolution never to engage more in public business. Swift, who knew that this retreat was the effect of disdain, vexation, and disappointment, that his lordship’s passions ran high, and that his attainder' unreversed still tingled in his veins, concluded him certainly gone once more to the Pretender, as his enemies gave out; but he was rebuked for this by Pope, who assured him, that it was absolutely untrue in every circumstance, that he had fixed in a very agreeable retirement near Fontainbleau, and made it his whole business vacare liter is. He had now passed the 60th year of his age; and through a greater variety of scenes, both of pleasure and business, than any of his contemporaries. He had gone as far towards reinstating himself in the full possession of his former honours as great parts and great application could go; and seemed at last to think, that the door was finally shut against him. He had not been long in his retreat, when he began p a course of “Letters on the study and use of History,” for the use of lord Cornbury, to whom they are addressed. They were published in 1752; and, though they are drawn up, as all his works are, in an elegant and masterly style, and abound with just reflections, yet, on account of some freedoms taken with ecclesiastical history, they exposed him to much censure. Subjoined to these letters are, his piece “upon Exile,” and a letter to lord Bathurst “on the true use of study and Retirement.”

Upon the death of his father, who lived to be extremely old, he settled at Battersea, the ancient seat of the family, where he passed the remainder of his life. His age, his genius, perfected by long experience and much reflection, gave him a superiority over most of his contemporaries, which his works have not altogether preserved. Pope and Swift, however, were among his most ardent admirers; and it is well known, that the former received from him the materials for his “Essay on Man.” Yet, even in this retirement, he did not neglect the consideration of public affairs; for, after the conclusion of the war in 1747, upon measures being taken which did not agree with his notions of political prudence, he began “Some Reflections on the present state of the nation, principally with regard to her taxes and debts, and on the causes and consequences of them:” but he did not finish them. In 1749, came out his “Letters on the spirit of Patriotism, on the idea of a Patriot King, and on the state of parties at the accession of king George I:” with a preface in which Pope’s conduct, with regard to that piece, is represented as an inexcusable act of treachery to him. Of this subject we have already taken sufficient notice in our accounts of Mallet and Pope, Bolingbroke was now approaching his end. For some time a cancerous humour in his face had made considerable progress, and he was persuaded to apply an empirical remedy, which exposed him to the most excruciating tortures. Lord Chesterfield saw him, for the last time, the day before these tortures be^an. Bolingbroke, when they parted, embraced his old friend with tenderness, and said “God, who placed me here, will do what he pleases with me hereafter, and he knows best what to do. May he bless you” About a fortnight after he died, at his house at Battersea, Nov. 15, 1751, nearU eighty years old, if the date usually assigned to his birth be correct. His corpse was interred with tiiose of his ancestors in that church, where there is a marble monument erected to his memory.

His lordship’s estate and honours descended to his nephew; the care and profits of his manuscripts he left to Mallet, who published them, together with his works already printed, in 1754, 5 vls. 4to. They may be divided into, political anil philosophical w-jrks: the former of which have been mentioned already, and consist of “Letters upon History,” “Letter to Wyndham,” “Letters on Patriotism,” and papers in the “Craiisman;” which had been separately printed in 3 vols. 8vo, under the title of “Dissertation upon Parties,” “Remarks on the History of England,” and “Political Tracts.” His philosophical works consist of, “The substance of some letters written originally in French about 1720 to Mr. de Pouilly letter occasioned by one of abp. Tillotson’s sermons and letters or essays addressed to Alexander Pope, esq.” As Mallet had published an 8vo edition of the “Letters on History,” and the “Letter to Wyndham,” before the 4to edition of the works came out, he afterwards published separately the philosophical writings, 5 vols. 8vo. These essays, addressed to Pope, on philosophy and religion, contain many things which deny or ridicule the great truths of revelation; and, on this account, not only exposed the deceased author to the just animadversions of several writers, but occasioned also a presentment of his works by the grand jury of Westminster; but the saie of them was very slow, and of late years they are perhaps still less consulted. An edition, however, was published in 1809, in 8 vols. 8vo, with many additions, from subsequent authorities, to the life of Bolingbroke, which was written by Dr. Goldsmith. Some time before this, a valuable collection of lord Bolingbroke’s political correspondence was published in 4to, and 4 vols. 8vo, by the rev. Gilbert Parke, which contains much information respecting the memorable peace of Utrecht. His character has been drawn by various able pens, by Chesterfield, Mrs. Cot.kburn, Ruffhead (under the guidance of Warburton), lord Walpole, Horace Walpole, lord Orrery, &c. c. and although they differ in some points, coincide in proving that lord Bolingbroke was considered by all as a politician of an important class; that those who have been at most pains to dt fame him as an enemy, would have been very desirous to secure him as a friend, and that they uiay be credited in every thing sooner than in their affecting to undervalue his talents. Ambition and immorality constitute the great objections to his public and private character. His infidt- 1 principles were not much known before his death, except to his friends. Like Chesterfield and Hume, he left something behind him worse than he had produced in his life-time, and subjected himself to accusations to which he could no longer reply. In his character since, he has suffered equally by the just resentment of piety, and by the unforgiving prejudices of party; and an impartial history of his Conduct and opinions is perhaps yet a desideratum.

, formerly a member of the French academy, was born in Nancy, Dec. 16, 1717, of a family of Lorrain. He was educated among the Jesuits at the college of Pont-a-Mousson, but in early life entered into the army, which he quitted at the peace of Aix-ia-Chapelle in 1748, and joined the gay party assembled by Stanislaus, king of Poland, at Luneville. There he became an admirer of Madame de Chatelet, who returned his attachment. He was afterwards intimate with, and the egregious flatterer of Voltaire, It is not said what part he took in the revolution, but he escaped its dangers, and died ai Pans Feb 9, 1805. He was a man of genius, but his steps in the literary career were rather slow, and incommensurate with the activity of his genius; for his first poetical nork, “Les Fe>es de l‘Amour et de l’Hymen,” a theatrical performance, was published about 1760, when he was already turned, of forty years of age. His poem entitled “Lt-s quaires parties du jour” appeared in 1764, and soon ranked him among the greatest poets of his age. The composition was acknowledged to possess novelty in the descriptions, interest in the details, and elegance in the style; although, on the other side, it was charged with coldness, w,nu or unity, and monotonous episodes. The same year he published his “Essai sur le luxe,” 8vo. His next, and justly celebrated, poetical performance, “Les Saisons,” which was published in 1769, raised him to the highest decree of reputation. It was generally admitted that he exhibited here a large share of ingenuity and invention, by introducing pastoral poetry into a composition of a different sort, making it still preserve its native simplicity, and yet associate naturally with more elevated subjects. An additional merit was discovered, with regard to this elegant wurk, in the motive of the author as his professed design was to inspire the great proprietors of land with an inclination to live on tneir manors, and contribute to the happiness of the cultivators.

In 1772, he published his “Fables Orientales,” which did little either to increase or to diminish his poetical fame: and many years after he;*roduced his “Consolation de la Vieiliesse,” a proof that his talents had suffered no diminution from age or infirmity. The last publication -of Saint Lambert is a philosophical work in prose. It appeared in 1798, in 3 vols. bvo, under the title of “Catechisme Universel.” It was intended to exhibit a system of morals grounded on human nature; and the favourite object of the author was to confute the doctrine of a moral sense, which has been supported by many eminent metaphysician*, ever since the writings of Shaftesbury and of Hutcheson. This work was justly denominated by some French critics, alluding to the age of the author, Le soir d'un beau jour (the evening of a beautiful day) He wrote also some articles for the Encyclopedic, and many fugitive pieces in the literary journals.

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

Scevole’s second and third sons, Scevole and Lewis, were born in 1571. They were twin-brothers, of the same temper, genius, and studies; with this difference only, that Scevole continued a layman, and married, wuile Lewis embraced the ecclesiastical state. They spent their lives together in perfect union, and were occupied in the same labours. They were both counsellors to the king, and historiographers of France. They were both interred at St. Severin in Paris, in the same grave though Scevole died in 1650, and Lewis did not die till 1656. They distinguished themselves by their knowledge, and in conjunction composed the “Galiia Christiana, seu series omnium Episc. &c. Francis,” of which there is an edition in 13 vols. folio, 17 15 1786, but three more volumes are yet necessary to complete it. Besides these, there were Denis, Peter Scevole, Abel Lewis, and Claude, de Sainte-Marthe, all men of learning, and who distinguished themselves by various publications; but their works are not of a nature to make a particular enumeration of them necessary here.

, an ingenious French writer, was born at Auxerre in 1697. The only information we have of his earlv life is restricted to a notice of the affection which subsisted between him and his twin-brother M. de la Curne. It appears that he devoted himself to researches into the language and antiquities of his country, and was admitted a member of the French academy, and that of inscriptions. In all his labours he was assisted by his brother, who lived with him, and was his inseparable associate in his studies, and even in his amusements. St. Palaye died in 1781. La Harpe has published some spirited verses which he addressed in his eightieth year to a lady who had embroidered a waistcoat for him; but he is chiefly known as an author by “Memoires sur PAncienne Chevalerie,” 3 vols. 12mo, in which he paints in very lively colours the manners and customs of that institution. Mrs. Dobson published an English translation of this in 1784. After his decease the abbe Millot drew up, from his papers, “L'Histoire des Troubadours,” in 3 vols. 12mo. St. Palaye had meditated on an “Universal French Glossary,” which was to be more copious than that of Du Cange, and left two works in manuscript, one a history of the variations that have taken place in the French language, the other a Dictionary of French antiquities.

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

, a French moral and political writer, was born in 1658, of a noble family, at Saint-Pierre in Normandy. He studied at the college of Caen, and was brought up to the church, and obtained some preferment; but was more distinguished for his political knowledge. Previous to his appearing in political life, he wrote some observations on philosophical grammar, in consequence of which he was admitted a member of the academy in 1695. His political fame induced the cardinal Polignac to take him with him to the conferences for the peace of Utrecht; and here he appears to have announced one of his favourite projects, the establishment of a kind of European diet, in order to secure a perpetual peace, which cardinal Fleury received with good humour, but saw at once its practical difficulties. Such indeed was the case with most of the schemes he published in his works, which are now nearly forgotten. He certainly, however, had the merit of discovering the defects of the government of Louis XIV. and pleaded the cause of a more free constitution with much boldness. One of his best works was “A Memorial on the establishment of a proportional Taille,” which is said to have meliorated the state of taxation in France. He d,ied in 1743, aged eightyfive. After the death of Louis XIV. he published some of his spirited sentiments of that monarch in a pamphlet entitled “La Polysvnodie,” or the plurality of councils, for which he was excelled the French academy, Fontenelle only giving a vote in his favour. An edition of his works was published in H-.li md, 1744. 18 vols. 12mo.

, a polite French writer, was the son of a counsellor to the senate of Chamberri in Savoy, where he was born, but it is not mentioned in what year. He came very young to France, was some time a disciple of Jvi. de Varillas, and afterwards distinguished himself at Paris by several ingenious productions. In 1675, he returned to Chamrberri, and went thence to England with the duchess of Mazarin; but soon after came back to Paris, where he lived a long time, without title or dignity, intent upon literary pursuits. He returned a second time to Charnberri in 1692, and died there the same year, advanced in years, but not in the best circumstances. He was a man of great parts and penetration, a lover of the sciences, and particularly fond of history, which he wished to have studied, not as a bare recital of facts and speeches, but as a picture of human nature philosophically contemplated. He wrote a piece, with this view, “De l‘Usage de l’Histoire,” Paris, 1672, 12mo, which is full of sensible and judicious reflections. In 1674, he published “Conjuration des Espagnols contre la Republique de Venise en 1618,” 12mo, in a style which Voltaire compares to that of Sallust; but what he gained in reputation by this, he is said to have lost by his “La Vie de Jésus Christ,” published four years after. He wrote many other things: some to illustrate the Roman history, which he had made his particular study some upon subjects of philosophy, politics, and morals and notes upon the first two books of Tully’s “Letters to Atticus,” of which he made a French translation. A neat edition of his works was published at the Hague in 1722, in 5 vols. 12mo, without the letters to Atticus; which, however, were printed in the edition of Paris, 1745, in 3 vols. 4to, and six 12ino.

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

, a learned writer in the sixteenth century, born at Utrecht, was successively minister of several churches in Holland, and lastly at the Hague, where he died in 1694. His most known and valuable works are, “Otia Theologica,” 4to, containing dissertations on different subjects, from the Old and New Testament “Concionator Sacer,” 12mo; and <c De Libris varioque eorum usu et abusu," Amsterdam, 1668, 12mo.

, a learned Englishman, who died at London in 1736, was a man who did much service to the republic of letters, but of his private history we have no account. He had a hand in the “Universal History,” and executed the cosmogony and a part of the history following. He was also engaged in other publications; but his capital work is “The Koran, commonly called the Alcoran of Mohammed, translated into English immediately from the original Arabic; with explanatory notes taken from the most approved commentators. To which is prefixed, a preliminary Discourse,” 1734, 4to. The preliminary discourse consists of 186 pages, and is divided into eight sections, which treat of the following particulars: Sect. 1. “Of the Arabs before Mohammed, or, as they express it, in the * time of ignorance' their history, religion, learning, and customs.” Sect. 2. “Of the state of Christianity, particularly of the Eastern Churches, and of Judaism, at the time of Mohamrrved’s appearance; and of the methods taken by him for establishing his religion, and the circumstances which concurred thereto.” Sect. 3. “Of the Koran itself, the peculiarities of that book, the manner of its being written and published, and the general design of it.” &ect. 4. “Of the doctrines and positive precepts of the Koran, which relate to faith and religious duties.” Sect. 5, “Or certain negative precepts in the Koran.” Sect. 6. “Of the institutions of the Koran in civil affairs.” Sect. 7. “Of the months commanded by the Koran to be kept sacred, and of the setting apart of Friday for the especial service of God.” Sect. 8. “Of the principal sects among the Mohammedans; and of those who have pretended to prophesy among the Arabs in or since the time of Mohammed.” This preliminary discourse, as should seem, might deserve to be published separately from the Koran. Mr. Sale was also one of the members of the society for the encouragement of learning, begun in 1736, but as he died in that year, could not have enjoyed the promised advantages of it. He was one of the authors of the “General Dictionary,” to which we so often refer, which includes a translation of Bayle, 10 vols. folio. Mr. Sale left a son, who was fellow of New college, Oxford, where he took his degree of M. A. in 1756. He was afterwards a fellow of Winchester college, in 1765, and died a short time after.

, a learned Jesuit of Avignon, where he was born in 1557, entered into that society in 1578, and became a noted tutor. He was afterwards made rector of the college of Besancon, and died at Paris Jan. 23, 1640, in the eighty-third year of his age. He wrote some pious tracts, but is principally known for his “Annals of the Old Testament,” published in 1618 24, b vols. folio. As this work appeared too voluminous for general use, M. de Sponde, bishop of Pamiers, requested leave to publish an abridgment in the manner of his abridgment of Baronius; but Salian, conscious how much originals suffer by abridgments, refused this request with much politeness; and when induced at last to make an abridgment himself, contrived to do it in such a manner as to render the original almost indispensable to his readers.

, one of the greatest ornaments of the twelfth century, was born at Old Sarum, whence he derived the name of Sarisburiensis, about 1116. After he had gone through a course of education in England, he went to the university of Paris in 1136, and attended upon the lectures of Abelard and other masters, with such industry and success, that he acquired an uncommon share of knowledge both in philosophy and letters. At an early period of life, his poverty obliged him to undertake the office of preceptor; yet amidst engagements of this kind, he found leisure to acquire a competent knowledge of dialectics, physics, and morals, as well as an acquaintance with the Greek, and (what was at that time a rare accomplishment) with the Hebrew, languages. He may justly be ranked among the first scholars of his age. After many years had elapsed, he resolved to revisit the companions of his early studies on Mount St. Genevieve, in order to confer with them on the topics on which they had formerlydisputed. His account of this visit affords a striking picture of the philosophical character of this age. “I found them,” says he, “the same men, and in the same place; nor had they advanced a single step towards resolving our antient questions, nor added a single proposition, however small, to their stock of knowledge. Whence I inferred, what indeed it was easy to collect, that dialectic studies, however useful they may be when connected with other branches of learning, are in themselves barren and useless.” Speaking in another place of the philosophers of his time, he complains, that they collected auditors solely for the ostentation of science, and designedly rendered their discourses obscure, that they might appear loaded with the mysteries of wisdom; and that though all professed to follow Aristotle, they were so ignorant of his true doctrine, that in attempting to explain his meaning, they often advanced a Platonic notion, or some erroneous tenet equally distant from the true system of Aristotle and of Plato. From these observations, and from many similar passages to be found in his writings, it appears, that John of Salisbury was aware of the trifling character both of the philosophy and the philosophers of his age; owing, probably, to the uncommon share of good sense which he possessed, as well as to the unusual extent and variety of his learning. Throughout his writings there are evident traces of a fruitful genius, of sound understanding, of various erudition, and, with due allowance for the age in which he lived, of correct taste.

At his return into England, after his first visit to Paris, he studied the civil law under Vacarius, who taught with, great applause at Oxford in 1149. Embracing the monastic life at Canterbury, he became the chief confidant of two successive archbishops of that see, Theobald and Thomas a Becket. To the last of these he dedicated his celebrated work “Polycraticon, or De nugis curialium, et vestigiis philosophorum,” a very curious and valuable monument of the literature of his times. Although he did not approve some part of the conduct of Becket, he submitted to Henry the Second’s sentence of banishment, and remained in exile for seven years, rather than give up the party of the archbishop, which was the condition on which he might have been permitted to return. In negotiating Becket' s affairs, he performed no less than ten journeys into Italy. In one of these journeys, he obtained familiar intercourse with pope Adrian IV. his countryman, who having asked him what the world said of him and of the Roman church, John returned such an answer as might have been expected from the boldest of the reformers in the sixteenth century, telling his holiness, among other things, that the world said, “the pope himself was a burthen to Christendom which is scarcely to be borne.” The whole of this curious dialogue may be seen in the work above mentioned.

At length he was permitted to return to England in 1171 and was a spectator of the murder of his friend Becket, from whom he endeavoured to ward off one of the b-lows, and received it on his arm, which was seriously hurt. In 1172 he was promoted to the French bishopric of Chartres, in the province of Sens, which he held ten years, dying in 1182. He composed many other works besides the “Polycraticon,” which is written in a plain concise style, and is an excellent treatise upon the employments, occupations, duties, virtues, and vices, of great men, and contains a number of moral reflections, passages from authors, examples, apologues, pieces of history, and common-places. His familiar acquaintance with the classics appears, not only from the happy facility of his language, but from the many citations of the purest Roman authors, with which his works are perpetually interspersed. Montfaucon says, that some part of the supplement to Petronius, published as a genuine and valuable discovery a few years ago, but since supposed to be spurious, is quoted in the “Polycraticon.” It was published at Paris in 1513, and at Leyden in 1595, 8vo and a French translation of it, entitled “Les Vanitez de la Cour,” at Paris, 1640, in 4to with a life of the author prefixed. Among his other works are a volume of “Letters,” published at Paris in 1611, for which his style seems best adapted, and his correspondents were some of the first personages of the age. Their contents, as detailing important occurrences, are interesting, and their turn of expression sometimes elegant. Another of his works was a learned defence of grammar, rhetoric, and logic, against one whom he calls Cornificius, which contains a most curious account of the state of these sciences at this period.

, a Welsh antiquary, was born of an ancient family in Denbighshire, and studied for some time at Oxford, whence he removed to Thaives-lnn, London. Here he applied to the law, but does not appear to have risen to any eminence, as Wood speaks of him as living, in his latter days in the house of a bookseller in St. Paul’s church-yard. His principal object appears to have been the cultivation of the Welsh Janguage, and the translation into it of the Bible, &c. It would appear that queen Elizabeth gave him a patent, for seven years, for printing in Welsh the Bible, CommonPrayer, and “Administration of tjie Sacraments.” “He compiled” A Dictionary in English and Welsh,“Lond. 1547, 4to.” A Little Treatise of the English pronunciation of the Letters.“” A plain and familiar introduction“to the same, Lond. 1550, 4to.” 'Battery of the Pope’s Bottereulx, commonly called the High-Altar,“ibid. 1550, 8vo.” The Laws of Howell Dha.“” A Welsh Rhetorick," revised, enlarged, &c. by Henry Perry, B. D. The period of his death is uncertain, but he was living in 1567.

, an ingenious and laborious writer, was born at the Hague in 1694. His father was receiver-general of Walloon Flanders, and of an ancient and considerable family. He was educated with great care, and sent at a proper age to Leyden; where he studied history under Perizonius, philosophy under Bernard, and law under Voetius and Noodt. Having finished his academical studies with honour, he returned to his parents at the Hague, and was admitted an advocate in the court of Holland. After the peace of Utrecht in 1713 r he went to France; and spent some time at Paris in visiting libraries, and in cultivating friendships with learned men. In 1716, he was made counsellor to the princess of Nassau; and, the year after, commissary of the finances of the States General. He went again to France in 1717; and two years after to England, where he was elected fellow of the Royal Society, in the list of which he is called “Auditor-Surveyor of the Bank of Holland.” He was author of several publications, which shewed parts, learning, and industry; and without doubt would, if he had lived, have been of great use and ornament to the republic of letters; but, catching the small-pox, he died in 1723, in his thirtieth year.

He was for some time editor of the “Literary Journal,” which began at the Hague in 1713. His part consists of four volumes, 1715 1717. The continuation was by Desmolets and Gouget. In 1714, he published “L'Eloge de PYvresse,” a piece of much spirit and gaiety in 1715, “Histoire de Pierre de Montmaur,” 2 vols. 8vo, a collection of all the pieces written against that singular character. In 1716, “Commentaires sur les Epitres d'Ovide par M. de Meziriac,” with a discourse upon the life and works of Meziriac; the same year, “Poesies de M. de la Monnoye;” in 1716, 1718, 1719, “Novus Thesaurus Antiquitatum Romanarum,” a Supplement to Graevius’s collection, in 3 vols. folio; in 1718, “Huetii de rebus ad cum pertinentibus Commentarius,” with a preface written by himself. About the time of his death he was engaged in writing “A History of the United Provinces from 1609, to the conclusion of the peace of Munster in 1648,” which was published at the Hague in 1728, with this title, “Essai d‘une Histoire des Provinces Unies pour I’ann^e 1621, ou la Treve finit, et le Guerre recommence avec PEspagne,” 4to.

, a French writer, the first projector of literary journals, was descended from an ancient and noble family, and born at Paris in 1626. During his education, he gave no proofs of precocious talent, and afforded little hope of much progress in letters or science. But this seems to have been the effect rather of indolence than incapacity, for he afterwards became an accomplished Greek and Latin scholar, and maintained public theses in philosophy with the greatest a'pplause. He then studied the law, and was admitted a counsellor in the parliament of Paris in 1652. This, however, did not seem so much to his taste as general inquiries into literary history and knowledge, and desultory reading. It is said that he occasionally perused all kinds of books, made curious researches, and kept a person always near him to take down his reflections, and to make abstracts. In 1664, he formed the project of the “Journal des Scavans;” and, the year following, began to publish it under the name of Sieur de Hedouviile, which was that of his valet de chambre; but the severity of his censures gave offence to many who were able to make reprisals. Menage’s “Amcenitates Juris Civilis” was one of the first of those works which fell under Sallo’s cognizance, and his mode of treating it provoked Menage to return his abuse with equal severity in his preface to the works of Malherbe, printed in 1666. Charles Patin’s “Introduction a la connoissance des M^dailles” was another work with which he made free, and incurred a severe retaliation. This warfare soon proved too much for his courage; and therefore, after having published his third journal, he turned the work over to the Abbé Gallois, who dropped all criticism, and merely gave titles and extracts. The plan, however, in one shape or other, was soon adopted in most parts of Europe, and continues until this day, whether with real advantage to literature, has never been fully discussed. Voltaire, after mentioning Sallo as the inventor of this kind of writing, says, with a justice applicable in our own days, that Sallo’s attempt “was afterwards dishonoured by other journals, which were published at the desire of avaricious booksellers, and written by obscure men. who filled them with erroneous extracts, follies, and lies. Things,” he adds, “are come to that pass, that praise and censure are all made a public traffic, especially in periodical papers; and letters have fallen into disgrace by the management and conduct of these infamous scribblers.” On the other hand, the advantages arising from such journals, when under the management of men of candour and independence, will scarcely admit of a doubt. Sallo died in 1669; and, although he published a piece or two of his own, yet is now remembered only for his plan of a literary journal, or review.

, an eminent Roman historian, was born at Amiternum in 86 B. C. The rank of his ancestors is uncertain, but from some circumstances. in his writings, it is not improbable that his family was plebeian. Having passed his more early years at his native town, he was removed to Rome, where he had the advantage of profiting by the lessons of Atticus Praetextatus, surnarned Philologus, a grammarian and rhetorician of great celebrity. Under this teacher he applied -to learning with diligence, and made uncommon progress. It appears, that he had turned his thoughts in his younger days to the writing of history, for which he had unquestionably great talents; but, as he himself intimates in his preface to the history of Catiline’s conspiracy, he was diverted from this pursuit by the workings of ambition. His early lift; too, appears to have been stained by vice, which the gross enormities of his more advanced years render highly probable. In this respect he has found an able advocate in his late learned translator and commentator; but although Dr. Steuart’s researches have removed some part of the reproaches of ancient authors, enough remains to shew that Sallust partook largely of the corruption of the age in which he lived, and added to it by his own example. The story of his having been detected in an adulterous intercourse with the wife of Milo, who, after a severe whipping, made him pay a handsome sum of money, may rest upon little authority, or may be altogether discarded as a fiction, but the general conduct of Sallust shows that the noble sentiments in his works had no influence on his conduct.

He appears to have been advanced to the office of quaestor in the year of Rome 693, and in 701 was made tribune of the people. It was now that he employed all the arts of faction to inflame the minds of the people against Milo, the murderer of Clodius; and those biographers who admit the fact of his being disgraced by Milo, as we have above related, impute to him motives of revenge only; and he was equally industrious in raising a clamour against Cicero, in order to deter him from pleading Milo’s cause. In 703 he was expelled the senate by the then censors, Appius Claudius and Calphurnius Piso, on account of his profligacy, but restored in the following year by Julius Caesar, and was likewise made quaestor, an office which he employed in accumulating riches by every corrupt measure. During Caesar’s second dictatorship he was made praetor, and when Caesar went into Africa with part of his army, he took Sallust with him, who performed some important services, in return for which Caesar made him governor of Numidia. It is here that his public character appears most atrocious and indefensible. He seems to have considered this province as a fund destined to the improvement of his private fortune, and plundered it in the most iRhuman manner. In vain did the oppressed Numidians exclaim against his rapacity, and commence a prosecution against him. His wealth was a sufficient guard against the arm of justice, and by sharing with Csesar a part of the spoils, he easily baffled all inquiry into his provincial administration. On his return, laden with this wealth, he purchased a country house at Tivoli, and one of the noblest dwellings in Rome on the Quirinal mount, with beautiful gardens, which to this day are called the gardens of Sallust. In this situation it is supposed that he wrote his account of “Catiline’s conspiracy,” and the “Jugurthine war,” and that larger history, the loss of which there is so much reason to deplore. He died at the age of fifty-one, B. C. 35. Having no children of his owfl, his ample possessions passed to the grandson of his sister; and the family flourished, with undiminished splendour, to a late sera of the Roman empire.

Whatever objections may be made to Sallust’s character as a man, he has ever been justly admired as a historian. He is equally perspicuous and instructive: his style is clear and nervous, his descriptions, reflections, speeches, and characters, all shew the hand of a master. But his partiality may he hlamed with equal justice, and even some of his most virtuous sentiments and bitter invectives against corruption in public men may be traced rather to party spirit, than to a genuine abhorrence of corruption, which, indeed, in one who had practised it so extensively, could not be expected, unless the result of a penitence we no where read of. His attachment to Caesar, and his disrespect for Cicero, are two glaring defects in his merit as a faithful historian.

Of Sallust there are many excellent editions. His works were first printed at Venice, in 1470, and reprinted thirty times before the conclusion of that century, but these editions are of great rarity. The best of the more modern are the Aldus of 1521, 8vo, the Variorum of 1690, 8vo, Wasse’s excellent edition, printed at Cambridge in 1710, 4to; Cortius’s edition, 1724, 4to; Havercamp’s, 1742, 2 vols. 4to; the prize edition of Edinburgh, 1755, 12mo; the Bipont, 1779, 8vo that very accurate one by Mr. Homer, Lond. 1789, 8vo and one by Harles, 1799, 8vo. The late Dr. Rose of Chiswick, published a very correct translation of Sallust in 1751, 8vo, with Cicero’s Four Orations against Catiline; and more recently Sallust has found a translator, and an acute and learned commentator and advocate, in Heury Steuart, LL.D. F.R. S. and S. A.E. who published in 1806, in 2 vols. 4to, “The Works of Sallust. To which are prefixed, two Essays on the Life, literary character, and writings of the historian with notes historical, biographical, and critical.”

, one of the most learned men of the seventeenth century, and whom Baillet has with great propriety classed among his “Enfant celebres par les etudes,” was born at Semur-en-Auxois, in Burgundy. His family was ancient and noble, and his father, an eminent lawyer, and a member of the parliament of Burgundy, wasa man of worth and learning. Respecting the time of his birth, all his biographers differ. Peter Burman, who has compared their differences, justly thinks it very strange that so many persons who were his contemporaries and knew him intimately, should not have ascertained the exact dates either of his birth or death. The former, however, we presume may be fixed either in 1593 or 1594. He was educated at first solely by his father, who taught him Latin and Greek with astonishing success. At the age of ten he was able to translate Pindar very correctly, and wrote Greek and Latin verses. At the age of eleven, his father wished to send him for farther education to the Jesuits’ college at Dijon, not to board there, but to attend lessons twice a day, and improve them at his lodgings. In this scheme, however, he was disappointed. His mother, who was a protestant, had not only inspired Claude with a hatred of the Jesuits, but encouraged him to write satires against the order, which he did both in Greek and Latin, and entertained indeed throughout life the same aversion to them. Having refused therefore to comply with his father’s request m this respect, his mothef proposed to send him to Paris, where her secret wish was that he should be confirmed in her religion. This being complied with, he soon formed an acquaintance with Casaubon and some other learned men in that metropolis, who were astonished to find such talents and erudition in a mere boy. During his residence here he conversed much with the clergy of the reformed church, and being at length determined to make an open avowal of his attachment to protestantism, he asked leave of his father to go to Heidelberg, partly that he might apply to the study of the law, but principally that he might be more at his freedom in religious matters. Baillet calls this a trick of his new preceptors, who wished to persuade Salmasius’s father that Paris, with respect to the study of the law, was not equal to Heidelberg, where was the celebrated Denis Godefroi, and an excellent library.

Salmasius’s father hesitated long about this proposition. As yet he did not know that his son was so far gone in a change of religion, but still did not choose that he should be sent to a place which swarmed with protestants. He therefore wished his son would prefer Toulouse, where were at that time some eminent law professors; but“Claude refused, and some unpleasant correspondence took place between the father and the son, as appears by the words in which the former at last granted his permission” Go then, I wish to show how much more I am of an indulgent father than you are of an obedient son." The son indeed in this manifested a little of that conceit and arrogarice which appeared in many instances in his future life, and unmoved by the kindness he had just received, refused to travel by the way of Dijon, as his fatter desired, but joined some merchants who were going to Francfort fair, and arrived at Heidelberg in Oct. 1606, or rather 1607, when he was only in his fourteenth year. Whatever may be thought of his temper, we need no other proof that he was one of the most extraordinary youths of this age that the world ever knew, than the letters addressed to him at this time by Jungerman and others on topics of philology. They afford an idea of his erudition, says Burman, which could only be heightened by the production of his answers.

To Heidelberg he brought letters of recommendation, from Casaubon, which introduced him to Godefroi, Gruter, and Lingelsheim, and his uncommon merit soon improved this into an intimacy. Under Godefroi he applied to the study of civil law with that intenseness with which he applied to every thing, but as he now had an opportunity of indulging his taste for the belles lettres, and was admitted to make researches among the treasures of the Palatine library, he spent much of his time here, abridging himself even of sleep. By such extraordinary diligence, he accumulated a vast fund of general knowledge, but in some measure injured his health, and brought on an illness which lasted above a year, and from which he recovered with difficulty.

With an insatiable thirst for knowledge, Salmasius had an early and stro'ng passion for fame. He commenced author when between sixteen and seventeen years of age, by publishing an edition of “Nili, archiepiscopi Thessalonicensis, de primatu papae llomani, libri duo, item Barlaam monachus, cum interpretatione Latina: Cl. Salmasii opera et studio, cum ejusdemin utrumque notis,” Hanover, 1608, and Heidelberg, 1608 and 1612, 8vo. By this publication against the authority of the pope, he seemed determined to make a more publit avowal of his sentiments than he had yet done, and to shew his zeal for the protestants, by consecrating his first labours as an author to their service. In 1609 appeared his edition of “Florus,” printed at Paris, 8vo, and dedicated to Gruter, whose notes are given along with those of Sahnasius. This was reprinted in 1636, and in 1638, to which last he added “Lucii Ampelii libellus inemorialis ad Macrinum,” which had never before appeared. In 1610, he returned home and was admitted an advocate, but had no intention to follow that profession, and preferred literature an 1 criticism as the sole employment of his life, and derived the highest reputation that erudition can confer. Such was his reputation, that he began to be courted by foreign princes and universities. The Venetians thought his residence among them would be such an honour, that they offered him a prodigious stipend; and with this condition, that he should not be obliged to read lectures above three times a year. We are told, that our university of Oxford made some attempts to get him over into England; and it is certain, that the pope made similar overtures, though Salmasius had not only deserted his religion, and renounced his authority, but had actually written against the papacy itself. He withstood, however, all these solicitations; but at last, in 1632, complied with an invitation from Holland, 'and went with his wife, whom he had married in 1621, to Leyden. He did not go there to be professor, or honorary professor; but, as Vorstius in his “Funeral Oration” expresses it, tc to honour the university by his name, his writings, and his presence."

Upon the death of his father, in 1640, he returned for a time into France; and, on going to Paris, was much caressed by cardinal Richelieu, who used all possible means to detain him, and even offered him his own terms; but could not prevail. The obligation he had to the States of Holland, the love of freedom and independence, and the necessity of a privileged place, in order to publish such things as he was then meditating, were the reasons which enabled him to withstand the cardinal. Salmasius also refused the large pension, which the cardinal offered him, to write his history, because in such a work he thought he must either give offence, or advance many things contrary to his own principles, and to truth, While he was in Burgundy to settle family affairs, the cardinal died, and was succeeded by Mazarin, who, upon our author’s return to Paris, honoured him with the same solicitations as his predecessor had done. Salmasius, however, declined his offers, and after about three years absence, returned to Holland: whence, though attempts were afterwards made to draw him back to France, it does not appear that he ever entertained the least thought of removing. In the summer of 1650, he went to Sweden, to pay queen Christina a visit, with whom he continued till the summer following. The reception and treatment he met with, as it is described by the writer of his life, is very characteristic of that extraordinary patroness of learned men. “She performed for him all offices,” says he, “which could have been expected even from an equal. She ordered him to choose apartments in her palace, for the sake of having him with her, * ut lateri adhaereret,' whenever she would But Sal^ masius was almost always ill while he stayed in Sweden, the climate being more than his constitution could bear: at which seasons the queen would come to the side of his bed, hold long discourses with him upon subjects of the highest concern, and, without any soul present, but with the doors all shut, would mend his fire, and do other necessary offices for him.” She soon, however, changed her mind with regard to Salmasius, and praised his antagonist Milton, with whom his celebrated controversy had now begun. After the murder of Charles I Charles II., now in Holland, employed Salmasius to write a defence of his father and of monarchy. Salmasius, says Johnson, was at this time a man of skill in languages, knowledge of antiquity, and sagacity of emendatory criticism, almost exceeding all hope of human attainment; and having, by excessive praises, been confirmed in great confidence of himself, though he probably had not much considered the principles of society or the rights of government, undertook the employment without distrust of his own qualifications, and, as his expedition in writing was wonderful, produced in 1649 his “Defensio Regia pro Carolo I. ad Serenissimum Magnae Britannise Regem Carolum II. filium natu majorem, hseredem et successorem legitimum. Sumptibus Regiis, anno 1649.” Milton, as we have noticed in his life, was employed, by the Powers then prevailing, to answer this book of Salmasius, and to obviate the prejudices which the reputation of his great abilities and learning might raise against their cause; and he accordingly published in 1651, a Latin work, entitled “Defensio pro Populo Anglicano contra Claudii Salmasii Defensionem Regiam.” Of these two works Hobbes declared himself unable to decide whose language was best, or whose arguments were worst, he might have added, or who was most to blame for scurrility and personal abuse. Dr. Johnson remarks, that Salmasius had been so long not only the monarch, but the tyrant of literature, that almost all mankind were delighted to find him defied and insulted by a new name, not yet considered as any one’s rival. There is no proof, however, that Salrnasius’s general reputation suffered much from a contest in which he had not employed the powers which he was acknowledged to possess. His misfortune was to treat of subjects which he had not much studied, and any repulse to a man so accustomed to admiration, must have been very galling. He therefore prepared reply to Milton, but did not live to finish' it, nor did it appear until published by his son in the year of the restoration, when the subject, in England at least, was no longer fit for discussion. He died at the Spa, Sept. 3, 1653, in consequence of an imprudent use of the waters; but as he had reproached Milton with losing his eyes in their contest, Milton delighted himself with the belief that he had shortened Salmasius’s life. Nothing, however, can be more absurd, if any credit is to be given to the account which Salmasius’s biographer, Clement, gives of his feeble constitution, and long illness.

Salmasius, Dr. Johnson has observed, was not only the monarch, but the tyrant of literature, and it must be allowed that although he had few, if any equals, in extent of erudition, and therefore little cause of jealousy, he was impatient of contradiction, and arrogant and supercilious to those who differed from him in opinion. But he must have had qualities to balance these imperfections, before he could have attained the very high character given by the most learned men of his age, by Casaubon, by Huetius, by Gronovius, by Scioppius, by our Selden, by Grotius, Gruter, Balzac, Menage, Sarravius, Vorstius, &c. &c. &c. Those who have critically examined his writings attribute the imperfections occasionally to be found in them to the hasty manner in which he wrote; and a certain hurry and impetuosity of temper when he took up any subject which engaged his attention. Gronovius seems to think that he was sometimes overwhelmed with the vastness of his erudition, and knew not how to restrain his pen. Hence, Gronovius adds, we find so many contradictions in his works, for he employed no amanuensis, and was averse to the task of revision.

Of his numerous works, we may notice as the most valuable, 1. “Amici, ad amicum, de suburbicariis regiohibus et ecclesiis suburbicariis, epistola,” 1619, 8vo, reprinted more correctly at the end of his epistles in 1656. This was written in consequence of a dispute between Godefroi and father Sirmond. 2. “Historic Augustse scriptores sex,” Paris, 1620, fol. 3. “Sept. Florentis Tertulliani liber de Pallio,” ibid. 1622, 8vo, and Leyden, 1656, 8vo. This involved him in a controversy with Denis Petau, to whom he published two answers. 4. “Pliniani exercitationes in Caii Julii Solini Polyhist.” &c. ibid. 1629, 2 vols, fol. and Utrecht, 1689, which last edition has another work edited by Saumaise, “De homonymis Hiles iatricae exercitationes ineditae,” &c. 5. “De Usuris,” Leyden, 1638, 8vo. 6. “Notae in pervigilium Veneris,” ibid. 1638, 12nio. 7. “De modo usurarum,” ibid. 1639, 8vo. 8. “Dissertatio de fcenore trapezitico, in tres libros divisa,” ibid, 1640. 9. “Simplicii commentarius in Enchiridion Epicteti,” &c. ibid. 164-0, 4to, and Utrecht, 1711. 10. “Achillis Tatii Alexandrini Eroticon de Clitophontis et Leucippes amoribus, libri octo,” ibid. 1640, 12mo. 11. “Interpretatio Hippocratis aphorismi 69, sect. iv. de calculo,” &c. ibid. 1640, 8vo. 12. “De Hellenistica: commentarius controversiam de lingua hellenistica decidens, et plenissime pertractans origines et dialecticos Graecae lingua?,” Leyden, 1645. 13. " Observationes in jus Atticum et Romanum,' 1 ibid. 1645, 8vo, &c. &c. with many ortiers on various subjects of philosophy, law, and criticism. A collection of his letters was published soon after his death by Antony Clement, 4to, with a life of the author, but many others are to be found in various collections.

, a learned doctor and librarian of the house and society of the Sorbonne, was born of an opulent family at Paris, in 1677. He was well acquainted with the learned languages, particularly Hebrew, possessed great literary knowledge, and discovered much affection for young persons who were fond of study, encouraging them by his example and advice, and taking pleasure in lending them his books. He died suddenly at his country house, at Chaillot, near Paris, Sept. 9, 1736, aged fiftynine. He published a very useful work illustrative of a part of ecclesiastical history, entitled “Traite de Petude des Conciles,” with an account of the principal authors and works, best editions, &c. upon the subject of councils, Paris, 1724, 4to. This has been translated into German, and printed at Leipsic, in 1729. He intended also to have given a supplement to “Father Labbe’s Collection of Councils,” and an “Index Sorbonicus,” or alphabetical library, in which was to be given, under the names of the respective authors, their acts, lives, chronicles, histories, books, treatises, bulls, &c. but did not live to complete either.

, an English antiquary, was the son of the rev. Thomas Salmon, M. A. rector of Mepsall in Bedfordshire, by a daughter of the notorious Serjeant Bradshaw. He was admitted of Bene‘t college, Cambridge, June 11, 1690, where his tutors were dean Moss and archdeacon Lunn, and took the degree of LL. B. in 1695. Soon after he went into orders, and was for some time curate of Westmill in Hertfordshire; but, although he had taken the oaths to king William, he had so many scruples against taking them to his successor, queen Anne, that he became contented to resign the clerical profession, and with it a living of 140l. per annum ’offered him in Suffolk. He then applied himself to the study of physic, which he practised first at St. Ives in Huntingdonshire, and afterwards at Bishops Stortford, in the county of Hertford. His leisure time appears to have been employed in studying the history and antiquities of his country, on which subjects he published, 1. “A Survey of the Roman Antiquities in the Midland Counties in England,” 1726, 8vo. 2. “A Survey of the Roman Stations in Britain, according to the Roman Itinerary,” 1721, 8vo. 3. “The History of Hertfordshire, describing the county and its ancient monuments, particularly the Roman, with the characters of those that have been the chief possessors of the lands, and an account of the most memorable occurrences,” 1728, folio. This was designed as a continuation of Chauncey’s History, and was dedicated to the earl of Hertford. 4. “The Lives of the English Bishops from the Restoration to the Revolution, fit to be opposed to the Aspersions of some late Writers of Secret History,” 1733, a work which we have occasionally found very useful, although the author’s prejudices, in some instances, appear rather strong. 5. “A Survey of the Roman Stations in England,” 1731, (an improved edition probably of the first two works above mentioned) 2 vols. 8vo. C. “The Antiquities of Surrey, collected from the most ancient records, and dedicated to Sir John Evelyn, bart. with some Account of the Present State and Natural History of the County,” 1736, 8vo. 7. “The History and Antiquities of Essex, from the Collections of Mr. Strangeman,” in folio, with some notes and additions of his own; but death put a stop to this work, when he had gone through about two thirds of the county, so that the hundreds of Chelmsford, Hinkford, Lexden, Tendring, and Thurstable, were left unfinished.

Mr. Salmon died April 2, 1742, leaving three daughters. His elder brother, Thomas, honoured with the name of the historiographer, is said to have died in 1743, but must have been living some years after this, when he published his account of Cambridge, &c. Mr. Cole says, “he was brought up to no learned profession, yet had no small turn for writing, as his many productions shew, most of which were written when he resided at Cambridge, where at last he kept a coffee-house, but not having sufficient custom, removed to London.” He told Mr. Cole that he had been much at sea, and had resided in both Indies for some time. His best known publication, and that is not much known now, is his “Modern History, or Present State of all Nations,” published in many volumes, 8vo, about 1731, &c. and re-published, if we mistake not,' in 3 vols. folio, from which it was afterwards abridged in 2 vols. and long continued to be published under various fictitious names. He wrote also “Considerations on the bill for a general naturalization, as it may conduce to the improvement of our manufactures and traffic, and to the strengthening or endangering of the constitution, exemplified in the revolutions that have happened in this kingdom, by inviting over foreigners to settle among us. With an Inquiry into the nature of the British constitution, and the freedom or servitude of the lower class of people, in the several changes it has undergone,” Lond. 1748, 8vo. “The Foreigner’s Companion through the universities of Oxford and Cambridge, and the adjacent counties, describing the several colleges and other public buildings, with an account of their respective founders, benefactors, bishops, and other eminent men educated in them,” ibid. 1748, 8vo. This title we give from Cole, as we have not seen the work. Previously to this, Mr. Salmon intended to write “The present state of the Universities, and of the five adjacent counties of Cambridge, Huntingdon, Bedford, Bucks, and Oxford,” but published only the first volume, 1744, 8vo, which contains the history of Oxford, county and university. To this are added some shrewd remarks on university education, and a college life, with the expences attending it. In the preface he speaks of a “General Description of England, and particularly of London the metropolis,” in 2 Vols. which he had published. His name is also to a “Geographical Grammar,” an “Examination of Burnet’s History of his own Times,” and other works. The “New Historic cal account of St. George for England, and the original of this order,” Lond. 1704, is ascribed by Mr. Gough to Mr. Thomas Salmon, the father, who, it may now be mentioned, was distinguished as a musical theorist, and wrote “An Essay to the Advancement of Music, by casting away the Perplexity of different Cliffs; and uniting all sorts of Music, Lute, Viols, Violins, Organ, Harpsichord, Voice, &c. in one universal Character, by Thomas Salmon, A. IVL of Trinity College, Oxfo/d,” London, 1672. This book, says Dr. Burney, “is well written, and, though very illiberally treated by Lock, Play ford, and some Other professors, contains nothing that is either absurd or impracticable; iior could we discover any solid objection to its doctrines being adopted, besides the effect it would have upon ol*d music, by soon rendering it unintelligible. At present the tenor clef alone is thought an insuperable difficulty in our country, by dilettanti performers on the harpsichord; but if Salmon’s simple and easy musical alphabet were chiefly in use, the bass clef would likewise be soon rendered as obsolete and difficult as the tenor; so that two parts or clefs out of three, in present use, would become unintelligible.”

, a learned English divine, was the eldest son of Dr. Samuel Salter, prebendary of Norwich, and archdeacon of Norfolk, by Anne-Penelope, the daughter of Dr. John Jeffery, archdeacon of Norwich. He was educated for some time in the free-school of that city, whence he removed to that of the Charter-house, and was admitted of Bene't-college, Cambridge, June 30, 1730, under the tuition of Mr. Charles Skottowe. Soon after his taking the degree of B. A. in 1733, he was chosen into a fellowship, and took his master’s degree in 1737. His natural and acquired abilities recommended him to sir Philip Yorke, then lord-chief-jqstice of the King’s-bench, and afterwards earl of Hardwicke, for the instruction of his eldest son the second earl, who, with three of his brothers, in compliment to abp. Herring, was educated at that college. As soon as that eminent lawyer was made Jordehancellor, he appointed Mr. Salter his domestic chaplain, and gave him a prebend in the church of Gloucester, which he afterwards exchanged for one in that of Norwich. About the time of his quitting Cambridge, he was one of the writers in the “Athenian Letters.” Soon after the chancellor gave Mr. Salter the rectory of Burton Goggles, in the county of Lincoln, in 1740; where he went to reside soon after, and, marrying Miss Seeker, a relation of the then bishop of Oxford, continued there till 1750, when he was nominated minister of Great Yarmouth by the dean and chapter of Norwich. Here he performed the duties of that large parish with great diligence, till his promotion to the preachership at the Charter-house in January 1754, some time before which (in July, 1751), abp. Herring had honoured him with the degree of D. D. at Lambeth. In 1756, he was presented by the lord-chancellor to the rectory of St. Bartholomew near the Royal Exchange, which was the last ecclesiastical preferment he obtained; but in Nov. 1761, he succeeded Dr. Bearcroft as master of the Charter-house, who had been his predecessor in the preachership. While he was a member of Bene't college, he printed Greek Pindaric odes on the nuptials of the princes of Orange and Wales, and a copy of Latin verses on the death of queen Caroline. Besides a sermon preached on occasion of a music-meeting at Gloucester, another before the lord-mayor, Sept. 2, 1740, on the anniversary of the fire of London, a third before the sons of the clergy, 1755, which was much noticed at the time, and underwent several alterations before it was printed; and one before the House of Commons, Jan. 30, 1762; he published “A complete Collection of Sermons and Tracts” of his grandfather Dr. Jeffery, 1751, in 2 vols. 8vo, with his life prefixed, and a new edition of “Moral and Religious Aphorisms,” by Dr. Whichcote, with large additions of some letters that passed between him and Dr. Tuckney, “concerning the Use of Reason in Religion,” &c. and a biograpiiical preface, 1751, 8vo. To these may be added, “Some Queries relative to the Jews, occasioned by a late sermon,” with some other papers occasioned by the “Queries,” published the same year. In 1773 jmd 1774, he revised through the press seven of the celebrated “Letters of Ben Mordecai;” written by the rev. Henry Taylor, of Crawley in Hants. In 1776, Dr. Salter printed for private use, “The first 106 lines of the First Book of the Iliad; nearly as written in Homer’s Time and Country;” and printed also in that year, “Extract from the Statutes of the House, and Orders of the Governors, respecting the Pensioners or poor Brethren” (of the Charterhouse), a large single sheet in folio; in 1777, he corrected the proof-sheets of Bentley’s “Dissertation on Phalaris;” and not long before his death, which happened May 2, 1773, he printed also an inscription to the memory of his parents, an account of all which may be seen in the “Anecdotes of Bowyer.” Dr. Salter was buried, by his own express direction, in the most private manner, in the common burial-ground belonging to the brethren of the Charter-house.

In the discussion of philological subjects, Dr. Salter proved himself a very accurate Greek scholar; his reading was universal, and extended through the whole circle of ancient literature; he was acquainted with the poets, historians, orators, philosophers, and critics, of Greece and Rome; his memory was naturally tenacious, and it had acquired great artificial powers, it such an expression be allowable, by using no notes when he delivered his sermons. To extempore preaching he had accustomed himself for a long course of years. So retentive indeed were his faculties, that, till a few years before his death, he could quote long passages from almost every author whose works he had perused, even with a -critical exactness. Nor were his studies confined to the writers of antiquity; he was equally conversant with English literature, and with the languages and productions of the learned and ingenious in various parts of Europe. In his earlier life he had been acquainted with Bentley, and cherished his memory with profound fespect. He preserved many anecdotes of this great critic, which were published from his papers by our learned English printer, Bowyer.

, or Salvianus, an elegant and beautiful writer, was one of those who are usually called fathers of the church, and began to be distinguished about 440. The time and place of his birth cannot be settled with any exactness. Some have supposed him to have been an African, but without any reasonable foundation: while others have concluded, with more probability, that he was a Gaul, from his calling Gallia his “solum patrium;” though perhaps this may prove no more than that his family came from that country. His editor Baluzius infers from his first epistle, that he was born at Cologne in Germany; and it is known, that he lived a long time at Triers, where he married a wife who was an heathen, but whom he easily brought over to the faith. He removed from Triers into the province of Vienne, and afterwards became a priest of Marseilles. Some have said, that he was a bishop; but this is a mistake, which arose, as Baluzius very well conjectures, from this corrupt passage in Gennadius, “Homilias scripsit Episcopus multas:” whereas it should be read “Episcopis” instead of “Episcopus,” it being known that he did actually compose many homilies or sermons for the use of some bishops. He died very old towards the end of the fifth century, after writing and publishing a great many works; of which, however, nothing remains but eight books “De Providentia Dei” four books “Adverstis avaritiam, praesertim Clericorum et Sacerdotum” and nine epistles. The best edition of these pieces is that of Paris 1663, in 8vo, with the notes of Baluzius; re-printed elegantly in 1669, 8vo. The “Commonitorium” of Vincentius Lirinensis is published with it, with notes also by Baluzius.

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

A restless habit, and a disposition to rove, led Salviati to accept an invitation to France, from the cardinal de Lorraine in the name of Francis I., then engaged in constructing and adorning his palace at Fontainebleau; and during his stay here, he painted a fine picture for the church of the Celestines at Paris, of the taking down from the Cross. He soon after returned to Italy, where the turbulence of his temper and his continual disputes with his brethren shortened his days. Such continual agitation of mind brought on a fever, of which he died in 1563, at the age of fifty-three.

, a learned Italian, was born at Florence in 1654, where he afterwards became professor, of Greek, which he understood critically. He has the credit of having contributed much to the promotion of good taste in Italy, chiefly by his translations, which comprize the Iliad and Odyssey of Homer; Hesiod Theocritus; Anacreon and many of the minor poets and epigrammatists: the Clouds and Plutus of Aristophanes parts of Horace and Ovid; Persius part of the Book of Job and the Lamentations; Boileau’s“Art Poetique;” Addison’s “Cato” and “Letters from Italy,” and other pieces. All these are literally translated, which obliged him to introduce into the Tuscan language a multitude of new compound terms. He wrote also “Sonnets and other original Poems,” 4to; “Tuscan prose,” 1715, 2 vols. 4to “A hundred Academical Discourses” “A funeral Oration for Antonio Magliabecchi,” and other works. Jie died in 1729. The Salvinia, in botany, was so named in compliment to him, but of his botanical talents we have no information. Salvini also belonged to the academy of De la Crusca, and was particularly instrumental in the completion of that cer lebrated Dictionary. He had a younger brother, a canon of Florence, who died at an advanced age in 1751. He was also a distinguished man of letters, and published a work, entitled “Fasti cqnsolari delfe' Academia Fiorentina,” and the Lives of Magalotti and Migliorucci.

, an eminent physician, and one of the most learned writers in the sixteenth century, was born in 1531, at Tirnau in Hungary. He visited the universities of Germany, Italy, and France, and applied with almost equal success to the study of medicine, the belles lettres, poetry, history, and antiquities. His learning and reputation introduced him with great advantage at the courts of the emperors Maximilian Ji. and Rodolphus II. to whom he became counsellor and historiographer. Sambucus died of an apoplexy at Vienna in Austria, June 13, 1584, aged fifty-three, leaving an excellent “History of Hungary,” in the German histories published by Schardius; “Lives of the Roman Emperors;” Latin translations of “Hesiod, Theophylacr, and part of Plato, Ovid, and Thucydides” f Commentaries pn Horace’s Art of Poetry“notes on several Greek and Latin authors” Icones m'edicorum,“Antwerp, 1603, fol.;” Emblemata," Antwerp, 1576, 16to. and several other works in verse and prose.

, an eminent puritan divine, was, according to Strype, born at Playford in Suffolk, and was a fellow of Pembroke hall, Cambridge. Wood says he was born in 1517, without specifying where; but adds, that he was educated ac Oxford, which seems most probable, as that university was the scene of much of his future life; He appears to have imbibed the principles of the reformation at a very early period, and became such an acute reasoner that Wood informs us he was the means of converting John Bradford, the famous martyr. He began likewise very early to entertain those prejudices against the hahits which occasioned so much mischief in the church, and which were confirmed in him, and many others, by. associating with the Geneva reformers during their exile in the time of queen Mary. He was ordained by archbishop Cranmer and bishop Ridley, who, at his request, dispensed with the habits, to which now, and ever after, he attached the idea of idolatry. He was chaplain in the army of lord Russel in his expedition against the Scots. In 1551, he was preferred to the rectory of Allhallows, Bread-street, London, which he resigned in 1553, and the year following to the deanery of Chichester. During the reign of Edward VI. he was accounted one of the* ablrst and most useful preachers in confirming the people in the doctrines of the reformation. On the accession of queen Mary he concealed himself for some time; but having been active in collecting money for the support of poor scholars in the two universities, narrowly escaped beingapprehended, and was obliged to go abroad, where he resided chiefly at Strasburgh, with the other English exiles, and had some hand in the Geneva translation of the Bible.

On the accession of queen Elizabeth he returned home, not only confirmed in his aversion to the habits, but with a dislike, it would appear, to the whole of the hierarchy, and refused the bishopric of Norwich because dissatisfied with the nature of the office. He continued, however, to preach, particularly at Paul’s cross, where his wonderful memory and eloquence were very much admired; and in September 1560 he was made a prebendary of Durham. In Michaelmas-term 1561, he was instalied clean of Christ-church, Oxford. On this occasion some members of that society, who recommended him for the situation, said, that “it was very doubtful, whether there was a better man, a greater linguist, a more complete scholar, or a more profound divine;” and it is certain that for some years he and Dr. Lawrence Humphrey were the only protestant preachers at Oxford of any celebrity. In 1562, he resigned his prebend of Durham, and became so open and zealous in his invectives against the habits, that after considerable forbearance, he was cited, with Dr. Humphrey, before the high commission court at Lambeth, and Sampson was Deprived of his deanery, and for some time imprisoned. Notwithstanding his nonconformity, however, he was presented, in 1568, to the mastership of Wigston-hospitaJ, at Leicester, and had likewise, according to Wood, a prebend in St. Paul’s. He went to reside at Leicester, and continued there until his death, April 9, 1589. He mar-? ried bishop Latimer’s niece, by whom he had two sons, John and Nathaniel, who erected a monument to his memory, with a Latin inscription, in the chapel of the hospital at Leicester, where he was buried. His works are tew 1. “Letter to the professors of Christ’s Gospel, in the parish of Allhallows in Breadstreet,” Strasburgb, 1554, 8vo, which is reprinted in the appendix to Strype’s “Ecclesiastical Memorials,” vol. III. 2. “A Warning to take heed pf ‘Fowler’s Psalter’,” Loud. 1576 and 1578, 8vo. This was a popish psalter published by John Fowler, once a Fellow of New-college, Oxford, but who went abroad, turned printer, and printed the popish controversial works for some years. 3, ' Brief Collection of the Church and Ceremonies thereof,“Lond. 1581, 8vo. 4.” Prayers and Meditations Apostolike; gathered and framed out of the Epistles of the Apostles,“&c. ibid. 1592, J6mo. He was also editor of two sermons of his friend John Bradford, on repentance and the Lord’s-supper, Lond. 1574, 1581, and, 1589, 8vo. Baker ascribes to him, a translation of” a Sermon of John Chrysostome, of Pacience, of the end of the world, and the last judgment,“1550, 8vo; and of” An Homelye of the Resurrection of Christ," by John Brentius, 1550, 8vo. Other works, or papers in which he was concerned, may be seen in pur authorities.

, a learned Jesuit of France, was born at Rouen in 1676. He taught polite literature with distinguished reputation at Caen, where he contracted an intimate friendship with Huet, bishop of Avranche. A taste for poetry is said to have been the principal bond of their union. He afterwards professed rhetoric at Paris; and was for some time charged with the education of the prince of Conti. He was librarian to the king when he died, September 2 I, 1733. He published separately various Latin poems, which are reckoned among the purest of modern times; and also published them in a collected form, “ Carnumim libri quatuor,” Paris, 1715, 12mo, and various theses and philological dissertations but is best known by his translation of the works of Horace with notes a work which has been very well received. The satires and epistles are ably translated; but the odes are rather weakened by a languid paraphrase than a version answerable to the original. His notes are learned, and many of them very useful for understanding his author; but there are also marks of a falsely delicate and fastidious taste, not uncommon among French critics. The best editions of his Horace are those of Paris, 1728, 2 vols. 4to, and 1756, 3 vols. 12mo.

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

, or Sanctius Brocensis, an eminent classical scholar of the sixteenth century, was born at Las Brocas, in the province of Estremaduras in Spain, in 1523. His principal residence appears to have been at Salamanca, where he was professor of rhetoric, and taught Greek and Latin with the highest reputation, derived from the originality of his criticisms and remarks on the classics. Justus Lipsius, Scioppius, and others, seem at a loss for language to express their admiration of his talents and learning. Lipsius bestows the epithets “divine” and “admirable;” and Scioppius says he ought to be considered as “com munis literatorum omnium pater et doctor.” Sanchez died in 1600, in the seventy-seventh year of his age. He published a great many works on subjects of classical criticism, and was the editor of Persius, Pomponius Mela, Politian’s “Sylvan,” Alciat’s emblems, Virgil’s Bucolics, and Horace’s Art of Poetry, He published also two Greek grammars, and some other pieces on grammar and rhetoric; but the work which has perpetuated his reputation is his “Minerva, de causis linguae Latinse,” Salamanca, 1587, 8vo, which was often reprinted. In more modem times, an edition was published at Amsterdam, in 1754, or 1761, 8vo, with a supplement by Scioppius, and notes by Perizonjus. This was reprinted with farther improvements by Scheidius, at Utrecht, in 1795, 8vo and again by Bauer, at Leipsic, in 1804, 2 vols. 8vo.

, a learned Jesuit, was born at Cifuentes, in New Castile, about 1553. According to the practice of the society, with such young men as have distinguished themselves in their studies, he was appointed to teach the learned languages and the belles lettres in the Jesuits’ colleges at Oropesa, Madrid, and other places, and was at last chosen professor of divinity at Alcala. Here he spent thirteen years in commenting on the Scriptures, the result of which he published in various volumes in folio, at different times. Jt is perhaps no inconsiderable proof of their merit that Poole has made frequent references to them in his “Synopsis Criticorum.” He died in 1628.

, a learned Spanish ecclesiastic, was born at Vigo in Gallicia in 1740. After the preparatory studies of divinity, &c. he entered into the church, and obtained a canonry in the cathedral of St. James, and was likewise appointed professor of divinity in that city. His fame procured him admission into many learned societies, and he became one of the most celebrated preachers of the last century, nor was he less admired for his benevolence. He obtained the honourable title of the father of the unfortunate, among whom he spent the whole profits of his canonry, and at his death in 1806, left no more than was barely sufficient to defray the expences of his funeral. The leisure he could spare from his professional duties was employed in the study of the ecclesiastical history of his country, which produced several works that are highly esteemed in Spain. Some of them were written in Latin, and some probably in Spanish, but our authority does not specify which. Among them are, 1. “Summa theologize sacrse,” Madrid, 1789, 4 jrols. 4to. 2. “Annales sacri,” ibid. 1784, 2 vols. 8vo. 3. ^History of the church of Africa,“ibid. 1784, 8vo, a work abounding in learned research. 4.” A treatise on Toleration in matters of Religion,“ibid. 1783, 3 vols. 4to, rather a singular subject for a Spanish divine. 5.” An essay on the eloquence of the pulpit in Spain,“ibid. 1778, 8vo. This is a history of sacred oratory in that country in various ages, with the names of those who were the best models of it. The restoration of a true taste in this species of eloquence he attributes to his countrymen becoming acquainted with the works of those eminent French preachers Bossuet, Massillon, Bourdaloue, &c. 6.” A collection of his Sermons,“ibid. 3 vols. 4to. These were much admired in Spain, and were the same year translated into Italian, and printed at Venice in 4 vols. 4to. 7.” A paper read in the Patriotic Society of Madrid in 1782, on the means of encouraging industry in Gallicia," ibid. 1782, 8vo. This being his native country, Dr. Sanchez had long laboured to introduce habits of industry, and had influence enough to procure a repeal of some oppressive laws which retarded an object of so much importance.

, a Spanish prelate, admired for his writings in the fifteenth century, was born at Santa Maria de Nieva, in the diocese of Segovia, in 1404. After being instructed in classical learning, and having studied the canon law for ten years at Salamanca, he was honoured with the degree of doctor in that faculty; but afterwards embraced the eqclesiasUca! profession, received priest’s orders, and was made successively archdeacon of Trevino in the diocese of largos, dean of Leon and dean of Seville. The first preferment he held twenty years, the second seven, and the third two years. Ahout 1440, John II. king of Castille, appointed him envoy to the emperor Frederick III. and he was also afterwards employed in similar commissions or embassies to other crowned heads. When Calixtus III. became pope, Henry IV. king of Castille, sent him to congratulate his holiness, which occasioned him to take up his residence at Rome. In all his embassies, he made harangues to the different princes to whom he was sent, which are still preserved in ms. in the Vatican library. On the accession of pope Paul II. he made Sanchez governor of the castle of St. Angelo, and keeper of the jewels and treasures of the Roman church, and afterwards promoted him to the bishoprics of Zamora, Calahorra, and Palencia. These last appointments, however, were little more than sinecures, as he never quitted Rome, and employed what time he could spare from his official duties in that city in composing a great many works, of which a list of twenty-nine may be seen in our authorities. He died at Rome Oct. 4, 1470$ and was interred in the church of St. James of Spain. Although so voluminous a writer, by far the greater part of his works remain in ms. in the Vatican and other libraries ) we know of three only which were published, 1. his history of Spain, “Historiae Hispanise partes quatuor.” This Marchand seems to think was published separately, but it was added to the “Hispania Illustrata” of Bel and Schott, published at Francfort in 1579, and again in 1603. 2. “Speculum vitse humaoce, in quo de omnibus omnium vitte ordinum ac conditionum commodis ac incommodis tractatur,' r Rome, 1468, folio, which, with three subsequent editions, is accurately described in the” Bibliotheca Speuceriana.“This work contains so many severe reflections on the clergy of the author’s time, that some protestant writers have been disposed to consider him as a brother in disguise. It is certainly singular that he could hazard so much pointed censure in such an age. 3.” Epistola de expugnatione Nigroponti>,“folio, without date, but probably before the author’s death. A copy of this likewise occurs in the” Bibl. Spenceriana." Those who are desirous of farther information respecting Sanchez or his works may be amply gratified in Marchand, who has a prolix article on the subject.

, a learned Spaniard, and librarian to the king, was born in 1730, and distinguished himself by his researches into the literary history pf his country, and by some editions of its ablest authors, which he illustrated with very valuable notes. Our authority, however, conveys very little information respecting his personal history or his works, and does not even mention the concern he had in the new and much improved edition of Antonio’s “Bibl. Hispana.” He died at Madrid in 1798. His most celebrated work is his “Collection of Castiliian poetry anterior to the fifteenth century, to which are prefixed memoirs of the first marquis of Santillane, and a letter addressed to the constable of Portugal, on the origin of Spanish poetry,” Madrid, 1779 1782, 5 vols. 8vo. This history is now preferred to that of father Sarmiento, which formerly enjoyed such reputation. Sanchez also wrote “An Apology for Cervantes,” in answer to a letter published in the Madrid Courier; and “A Letter to Don Joseph Berni, on his defence of Peter the Cruel,” ibid. 1778, 8vo.

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

Such was the man whose species philosophers and anatomists have endeavoured to degrade as a deterioration of the human; and such was the man whom Fuller, with a benevolence and quaintness of phrase peculiarly his own, accounted “God’s image, though cut in ebony.” To the harsh definition of the naturalist, oppressions political and legislative were once added, but the abolition of the slave trade has now swept away every engine of that tyranny. Sancho left a widow, who is, we believe, since dead; and a son, who carried on the business of a bookseller for some years, and died very lately.

* The first edition was patronized originally written with a view to pubiiby a subscription not known since the cation. She declared, therefore, “that days of the Spectator. The work was no such idea was ever expressed by published for the benefit of the author’s Mr. Sancho; and that not a single letfamily, by Miss Crewe, an amiable ter was printed from any duplicate young lady, to whom many of the let- preserved by himself, but all were co!­ter< are addressed, and who is since lected from the various friends 10 whom married to John Phillips, esq. surgeon they were addressed.” Her reasons of the household to the Prince of Wales, for publishing them were “the desire From the profits of the first edition, and of shewing that an untutored African a sum paid by the booksellers for li- may possess abilities equal to an Euberty to print a second edition, Mrs. ropean and the still superior motive Sancho, we are well assured, received of wishing to serve his worthy family, more than 500l. The editor did not And she was happy,” she declared, venture to give them to the public till “in publicly acknowledging phe had she had obviated an objection which not found the world inattentive to the had been suggested, that they were voice of obscure merit.” and of great reputation for diligence and faithfulness. He is said to have collected out of the most authentic records he could procure, the “Antiquities of Phoenicia,” with the help of some memoirs which came from Hierombaal, [Hierobaal, or Gideon,] a priest of the God Jeuo or Jao. He wrote several things also relating to the Jews. These “Antiquities of the Phoenicians,” Philo-Byblius, in the same Phoenicia, in the days of Adrian, translated into Greek; and Athenseus soon afterward reckoned him among the Phoenician writers. A large and noble fragment of this workj Eusebius has given us, verbatim, in his first book of “Evangelical Preparation,” cap. ix. x. and has produced the strong attestation of Porphyry, the most learned heathen of that age, to its authenticity. Upon these authorities, many learned men have concluded that the genuine writings of Sanchoniathon were translated by Philo-Byblius, and that Sanchoniathon derived a great part of his information from the books of Moses, nay, some have supposed that Thoth, called by the Greeks, Hermes, and by the Romans, Mercury, was only another name for Moses; but the inconsistencies, chiefly chronological* which the learned have detected in these accounts, and especially the silence of the ancients concerning this historian, who, if he had deserved the character given him by Porphyry > could not have been entirely over-looked, create a just ground of suspicion, either against Porphyry or PhiloByblius. It seems most probable, that Philo-Byblius fabricated the work from the ancient cosmogonies, pretending to have translated it from the Phoenician, in order to provide the Gentiles with an account of the origin of the world, which might be set in opposition to that of Moses. Eusebius and Theodoret, indeed, who, like the rest of the fathers, were too credulous in matters of this kind, and after them some eminent modern writers, have imagined, that they have discovered a resemblance between Sanchoniathon’s account of the formation of the world and that of Moses. But an accurate examination of the doctrine of Sanchoniathon, as it appears in the fragment preserved by Eusebius, will convince the unprejudiced reader, that the Phoenician philosophy, if indeed it be Phoenician, is directly opposite to the Mosaic. Sanchoniathon teaches, that, from the necessary energy of an eternal principle, active but without intelligence, upon an eternal passive chsiptic mass, or Mot, arose the visible world; a doctrine, of which there are some appearances in the ancient cosmogonies, and which was not without its patrons among the Greeks. It is therefore not unreasonable to conjecture, that the work was forged in opposition to the Jewish cosmogony, and that this was the circumstance which rendered it so acceptable to Porphyry. Such is the opinion of Brucker on this history; and Dodwell and Dupin, the former in an express treatise, have also endeavoured to invalidate its authenticity.

, an eminent English prelate, was born at Fresingfield, in Suffolk, Jan. 30, 1616, and educated in grammar-learning at St. Edmund’s Bury, where he was equally remarkable for diligent application to his studies, and a pious disposition. In July 1634, he was sent to Emanuel college in Cambridge, where he became very accomplished in all branches of literature, took his degree of B. A. in 1637, and that of M. A. in 1641, and was in 1642 chosen fellow of his college. His favourite studies were theology, criticism, history, and poetry, but in all his acquirements he was humble and unostentatious. In 1648 he took the degree of B. D. It is supposed he never subscribed the covenant^ and that this was connived at, because he continued unmolested in his fellowship till 1649; at which time, refusing the engagement, he was ejected. Upon this he went abroad, and became acquainted with the most considerable of the loyal English exiles; and, it is said, he was at Rome when Charles II. was restored. He immediately returned to England, and was made chaplain to Cosin, bishop of Durham, who collated him to the rectory of Houghton-le-Spring, and to the ninth prebend of Durham in March 1661. In the same year he assisted in reviewing the Liturgy, particularly in rectifying the Kalendar and Rubric. In 1662 he was created, by mandamus, D. D. at Cambridge, and elected master of Emanuel college, which he governed with great prudence. In 1664 he was promoted to the deanery of York, which although he held but a few months, he expended on the buildings about 200l. more than he had received. Upon the death of Dr. John Barwick he was removed to the deanery of St. Paul’s; soon after which, he resigned the mastership of Emanuel college, and the rectory of Houghton. On his coming to St. Paul’s he set himself most diligently to repair that cathedral, which had suffered greatly from the savage zeal of the republican fanatics in the civil wars, till the dreadful fire in 1666 suggested the more noble undertaking of rebuilding it. Towards this he gave 1400l. besides what he procured by his interest and solicitations among his private friends, and in parliament, where he obtained the act for laying a duty on coals for the rebuilding of the cathedral. He also rebuilt the deanery, and improved the revenues of it. In Oct. 1668, he was admitted archdeacon of Canterbury, on the king’s presentation, which he resigned in 1670. He was also prolocutor of the lower house of convocation; and was in that station when Charles II. in 1677, advanced him, contrary to his knowledge or inclination, to the archiepiscopal see of Canterbury. In 1678 he published some useful directions concerning letters testimonial to candidates for holy orders. He was himself very conscientious in the admission to orders or the disposal of livings, always preferring men of approved abilities, great learning, and exemplary life. He attended king Charles upon his death-bed, and made a very weighty exhortation to him, in which he is said to have used a good deal of freedom. In 1686 he was named the first in James I I.'s commission for ecclesiastical affairs; but be refused to act in it. About the same time he suspended Wood, bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, for residing out of and neglecting his diocese. As one of the governors of the Charter-house, he refused to admit as pensioner in that hospital Andrew Popham, a papist, although he came with a nomination from the court. In June 1688, he joined with six of his brethren the bishops in the famous petition to king James, in which they gave their reasons why they could not cause his declaration for liberty of conscience to be read in churches. For this petition, which the court called a libel, they were committed to the Tower; and, being tried for a misdemeanor on the 29th, were acquitted, to the great joy of the nation. This year the archbishop projected the vain expedient of a comprehension with the protestant dissenters. We have the following account of this in the speech of Dr. W. Wake, bishop of Lincoln, in the house of lords, March 17, 1710, at the opening of the second article of the impeachment against Dr. Sacheverell. “The person,” says he, “who 6rst concerted this design was the late most reverend Dr. Sancroft, then archbishop of Canterbury. The time was towards the end of that unhappy reign of king James II. Then, when we were in the height of our labours, defending the Church of England against the assaults of popery, and thought of nothing else, that wise prelate foreseeing some such revolution as soon after was happily brought about, began to consider how utterly unprepared they had been at the restoration of king Charles II. to settle many things to the advantage of the Church, and what happy opportunity had been lost for want of such a previous care, as he was therefore desirous should now be taken, for the better and more perfect establishment of it. It was visible to all the nation, that the more moderate dissenters were generally so well satisfied with that stand which our divines had made agaiust popery, and the many unanswerable treatises they had published in confutation of it, as to express an unusual readiness to come in to us. And it was therefore thought worth the while, when they were deliberating about those other matters, to consider at the same time what might be done to gain them without doing any prejudice to ourselves. The scheme was laid out, and the several parts of it were committed, not only with the approbation, but by the direction of that great prelate, to such of our divines, as were thought the most proper to he intrusted with it. His grace took one part to himself; another was committed to a then pious and reverend dean (Dr. Patrick), afterwards a bishop of our church. The reviewing of the daily service of our Liturgy, and the Communion Book, was referred to a select number of excellent persons, two of which (archbishop Sharp, and Dr. Moore) are at this time upon our bench and I am sure will bear witness to the truth of my relation. The design was in short this: to improve, and, if possible, to inforce our discipline to review and enlarge our Liturgy, by correcting of some things, by adding of others and if it should be thought adviseable by authority, when this matter should come to be legally considered, first in convocation, then in parliament, by leaving some few ceremonies, confessed to be indifferent in their natures as indifferent in their usage, so as not to be necessarily observed by those who made a scruple of them, till they should be able to overcome either their weaknesses or prejudices, and be willing to comply with them.” In October, accompanied with eight of his- brethren the bishops, Sancroft waited upon the king, who had desired the assistance of their counsels; and advised him, among other things, to annul the ecclesiastical commission, to desist from the exercise of a dispensing power, and to call a free and regular parliament. A few days after, though earnestly pressed by his majesty, he refused to sign a declaration of abhorrence of the prince of Orange’s invasion. In December, on king James’s withdrawing himself, he is said to have signed, and concurred with the lords spiritual and temporal, in a declaration to the prince of Orange, for a free parliament, security of our laws, liberties, properties, and of the church of England in particular, with a due indulgence to protestant dissenters. But in a declaration signed by him Nov. 3, 1688, he says that “he never gave the prince any invitation by word, writing, or otherwise;” it must therefore have been in consequence of the abdication that he joined with the lords in the above declaration. Yet when the prince came to St. James’s, the archbishop neither went to wait on him, though he had once agreed to it, nor did he even send any message. He absented himself likewise from the convention, for which he is severely censured by Burnet, who calls him “a poor-spirited and fearful man, that acted a very mean part in all this great transaction. He resolved,” says he, “neither to act for, nor against, the king’s interest; which, considering his higli post, was thought very unbecoming. For, if he thought, as by his behaviour afterwards it seems he did, that the nation was running into treason, rebellion, and perjury, it was a strange thing to see one who was at the head of the church to sit silent all the while that this was in debate, and not once so much as declare his opinion, by speaking, voting, or protesting, not to mention the other ecclesiastical methods that certainly be.came his character.”

After William and Mary were settled on the throne, he and seven other bishops refused to own the established government, from a conscientious regard to the allegiance they had sworn to king James. Refusing likewise to take the oaths appointed by act of parliament, he and they were suspended Aug. 1, 1689, and deprived the 1st of Feb. following. On the nomination of Dr. Tillotson to this see, April 23, 1691, our archbishop received an order, from the then queen Mary, May 20, to leave Lambethhouse within ten days. But he, resolving not to stir till ejected by law, was cited to appear before the barons of the exchequer on the first day of Trinity-term, June 12, 1691, to answer a writ of intrusion; when he appeared by his attorney; but, avoiding to put in any plea, as the case stood, judgment passed against him, in the form of law, June 23, and the same evening he took boat in Lambethbridge, and went to a private house in Palsgrave-headcourt, near the Temple. Thence, on Aug. 5, 1691, he retired to Fresingfield (the place of his birth, and the estate [50l. a year] and residence of his ancestors above three hundred years), where he lived in a very private manner, till, being seized with an intermitting fever, Aug. 26, 1693, he died on Friday morning, Nov. 24, and was buried very privately, as he himself had ordered, in Fresingfield churchyard. Soon after, a tomb was erected over his grave, with an inscription composed by himself; on the right side of which there is an account of his age and dying-day in Latin; on the left, the following English: “William Sancroft, born in this parish, afterwards by the providence of God archbishop of Canterbury, at last deprived of all, which he could not keep with a good conscience, returned hither to end his life, and professeth here at the foot of his tomb, that, as naked he came forth, so naked he must return: the Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away (as the Lord pleases, so things come to pass), blessed be the name of the Lord.” The character Burnet has given of him is not an amiable one, nor in some respects a true one, yet he allows, what none could deny, that archbishop Sancroft was a good man. He bestowed great sums of money in charity and endowments, and was particularly bountiful to Emanuel college in Cambridge: and he certainly gave the strongest instance possible of sincerity, in sacrificing the highest dignity to what he thought truth and honesty; and although his opposition both to James II. and William III. may appear rather irreconcileable, we have the testimony of those who knew him best, that he did every thing in the integrity of his heart.

Though of considerable abilities and uncommon learning, he published but very little. The first thing was a Latin dialogue, composed jointly by himself and some of his friends, between a preacher and a thief condemned to the gallows; and is entitled, 1. “Fur Prædestinatus sive, dialogismus inter quendam Ordinis proedicantium Calvinistam etFurem ad laqueum damnatum habitus,” &c. 1651, 12mo. It was levelled at the then-prevailing doctrine of predestination. An edition was published in 18 13; and a translation in the following year, by the rev. Robert Boucher Nickolls, dean of Middleham, with an application to the case of R. Kendall executed at Northampton Aug. 13, 1813. 2. “Modern Politics, taken from Machiavel, Borgia, and other modern authors, by an eye-witness,” 3652, 12mo. 3. “Three Sermons,” afterwards re-printed together in 1694, 8vo. 4. He published bishop Andrews’s “Defence of the vulgar Translation of the Bible,” with a preface of his own. 5. He drew up some offices for Jan. 3O, and May 29. 6. “Nineteen familiar Letters of his to Mr. (afterwards sir Henry) North, of Mildenhall, bart. both before, but principally after, his deprivation, for refusing to take the oaths to king William III. and his retirement to the place of his nativity in Suffolk, found among the papers of the said sir Henry North, never before published,” were printed in 1757, 8vo. In this small collection of the archbishop’s “Familiar Letters,” none of which were probably ever designed to be made public, his talents for epistolary writing appear to great advantage. He left behind him a multitude of' papers and coUections in ms. which upon his decease came into his nephew’s hands; after whose death they were purchased by bishop Tanner for eighty guineas, who gave them, with the rest of his manuscripts, to the Bodleian library. From these the Rev. John Gutch, of Oxford, published in 1781, 2 vols. 8vo, various “Miscellaneous Tracts relating to the History and Antiquities of England and Ireland,” &c.

, or Santorius, an ingenious physician, was born in 1561, at Capo dTstria, a town on the borders of the gulf of Trieste. He studied medicine and took his degree at Padua, and then settled at Venice as a practitioner, where he had considerable success. In 1611 he was recalled to Padua, and appointed professor of the theory of medicine in that university; an office which he held with great credit for the space of thirteen years, until his reputation occasioning his being frequently sent for to Venice by the people of distinction in that city, he resigned his chair in order to dedicate all his time to medical practice. His resignation was accepted, but the salary continued; and with this testimony of the public esteem, he removed and settled finally at Venice, where he died in 1636, aged seventy-five. He was buried in the cloisters, and a statue of marble raised to his memory.

Sanctorius was the first who directed the attention of physicians to the importance of insensible perspiration in the animal ceconomy, concerning which he had gone through a long course of experiments upon himself. For these he constructed a kind of statical chair; by means of which, after weighing the aliments he took in, and the sensible secretions and discharges, he was enabled to determine with wonderful exactness the weight or quantity of insensible perspiration, as well as what kind of food or drink increased and diminished it. On these experiments he erected a curious system, which was long admired by the faculty. It was divulged first at Venice in 1614, under the title of “Ars de Statica Medicina,” comprehended in seven sections of aphorisms; and was often reprinted at different places, with corrections and additions by the author. It was translated into French, and published at Paris 1722; and we had next an English version of it, with large explanations, by Dr. Quincy; to the third edition of which in 1723, and perhaps to the former, is added, “Dr. James Keil’s Medicina Statica Britannica. with comparative remarks and explanations; as also physico-medical essays on agues, fevers, on elastic fibre, the gout, the leprosy, king’s-­evil, venereal diseases, by Dr. Quincy.”

Sanctorius unquestionably conferred a benefit on medical science, by directing the observation of medical men to the functions of the skin but unfortunately, the doctrines were extended much too far and, coinciding with the mechanical principles, which were coming into vogue after the discovery of the circulation, as well as with the chemical notions, which were not yet exploded, they contributed to complete the establishment of the humoral pathology, under the shackles of which the practice of medicine continued almost to our own times. Sanctorius was also the author of several inventions. Besides his statical chair, he invented an instrument for measuring the force of the pulse; and several new instruments of surgery. He was the first physician who attempted to measure the heat of the skin by a thermometer, in different diseases, and at different periods of thesanie disease; and it is to his credit that he was an avowed enemy to empirics and empirical nostrums, as well as to all occult remedies.

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

About 1753 Mr. Sandby, and several members of an academy who met at what had previously been Roubilliac’s workshop, in St. Martin’s-lane, wishing to extend their plan, and establish a society on a broader basis, held several meetings for the purpose of making new regulations, &c. Concerning these regulations it may naturally be supposed there were variety of opinions, but Hogarth, who was one of the members, and who deservedly held a very high rank in the arts, disapproved of the whole scheme, and wished the society to remain as it then was. He thought that enlarging the number of students would induce a crowd of young men to quit more profitable pursuits, neglect what might be more suitable to their talents, and introduce to the practice of the arts more professors than the arts would support. This naturally involved him in many disputes with his brother artists, and as these disputes were not always conducted with philosophic calmness, the satirist sometimes said things that his opponents deemed rather too severe for the occasion. On the publication of his “Analysis of Beauty” they recriminated, with interest. Among the prints which were then published to ridicule his system, line of beauty, &c. are six or eight, that from the manner in which they are conceived, and the uncommon spirit with which they are etched, carry more than probable marks of the burin of Mr. Sandby, who was then a very young man, but afterwards declared, that if he had been more intimately acquainted with Mr. Hogarth’s merit, he would on no account have drawn a line which might tend to his dispraise.

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

Mr. Sandby died at his house at Paddington Nov. 7, 1809, in the seventy-seventh year of his age. He contributed much to the reputation of the English school of landscape painting, and in many of his exquisite delineations, uniting fidelity with taste, the beautiful scenery for which this island is so eminently distinguished, is displayed as in a mirror. For force, clearness, and transparency, it may very truly be said that his paintings in water colours have not yet been equalled; the views of castles, ruins, bridges, &c. which are frequently introduced, will remain monuments to the honour of the arts, the artists, and the country, when the originals from which they are designed are mouldered into dust.

, from whom a religious sect is generally named, was born at Perth in Scotland in 1723. Being intended for one of the learned professions, he studied for two years at the university of Edinburgh, but at the expiration of that time married, and his fortune being- small, entered into the linen trade at Perth, whence he removed to Dundee, and afterwards to Edinburgh. The lady he married was the daughter of the rev. John Glass (See Glass), who founded the sect, at that time called from him Gtassitcs; and Mr. Sandeman, who was now an elder in one of Glass’s churches, or congregations, and had imbibed all his opinions, published a series of letters addressed to Mr. Hervey, occasioned by that author’s “Therou and Aspasio,” in which he endeavours to shew that his notion of faith is contradictory to the scripture account of it, and could only serve to lead men, professedly holding the doctrines commonly called Calvinistic, to establish their own righteousness upon their frames, inward feelings, and various acts of faith. In these letters Mr. Sandeman attempts to prove, that faith is neither more nor less than a simple assent to the divine testimony concerning Jesus Christ, recorded in the New Testament; and he maintains, that the word faith, or belief, is constantlyused by the apostles to signify what is denoted by it in common discourse, viz. a persuasion of the truth of any proposition, and that there is no difference between believing any common testimony, and believing the apostolic testimony, except that which results from the nature of the testimony itself. This led the way to a controversy, among Calvin ists in Scotland, concerning the nature of justifying faith and those who adopted Mr. Sandeman’s; notion of it, and who took the denomination of Sandemanians, formed themselves into church order, in strict fellowship with the church of Scotland, but holding no kind of communion with other churches. The chief opinions and practices in which this sect differs from others, are, their weekly administration of the Lord’s Supper; their lovefeasts, of which every member is not only allowed but required to partake, and which consist of their dining together at each other’s houses in the interval between the morning and afternoon service: their kiss of charity used on this occasion, at the admission of a new member, and at other times, when they deem it to be necessary or proper; their weekly collection before the Lord’s Supper for the support of the poor, and defraying other expences mutual exhortation abstinence from blood and things strangled washing each other’s feet, the precept concerning which, as well as other precepts, they understand literally community of goods so far as that every one is to consider all that he has in his possession and power as liable to the calls of the poor and church, and the unlawfulness of laying up treasures on earth, by setting them apart for any distant, future, and uncertain use. They allow of public and private diversions so far as they are not connected with circumstances really sinful; but apprehending a lot to be sacred, disapprove of playing at cards, dice, &c They maintain a plurality of elders, pastors, or bishops, in each church, and the necessity of the presence of two elders in every act of discipline, and at the administration of the Lord’s Supper. In the choice of these elders, want of learning, and engagements in trade, &c. are no sufficient objection; but second marriages disqualify for the office; and they are ordained by prayer and fasting, imposition of hands, and giving the right hand of fellowship. In their discipline they are strict and severe, and think themselves obliged to separate from the communion and worship of all such religious societies as appear to them not to profess the simple truth for their only ground of hope, and who do not walk in obedience to it. We shall only add, that in every church transaction, they esteem unanimity to be absolutely necessary.

In 1758 Mr. Sandeman commenced a correspondence with Mr. Samuel Pike of London, an independent minister; and in 1760 came himself to London, and preached in various places, attracting the crowds that usually follow novelties. While here he received an invitation to go to America, with which he complied in 1764, and continued there propagating his doctrines and discipline in various places, particularly in New-England, until the political disputes arose between Great Britain and the colonies, when he became very obnoxious by taking the part of the former. He did not live, however, to witness the unhappy consequences of that contest, but died at Danbury, April 2, 1771, aged fifty-three. His sect, although not numerous, still exists, but under various modifications, in Scotland; and there are a few branches of it in England, and one in Paul’s Alley, Barbican, London. Mr. Sandeman, besides his “Letters on Theron and Aspasio,” published his correspondence with Mr. Pike “Thoughts on Christianity” “The sign of the prophet Jonah” “The honour of marriage, opposed to all Impurities;” and “On Solomon’s Song.”

, a Roman catholic writer of considerable fame, and one of the principal champions of popery in the sixteenth century, was born about 1527, at Charlewood in Surrey, and educated at Winchester school, whence he removed to New college, Oxford. Here he studied chiefly canon law, and was made fellow of his college in 1548, and in 1550, or 1551, took the degree of bachelor of laws. When queen Mary came to the throne, he had the offer of being Latin secretary to her majesty, which he declined for the sake of a studious, academical life, and remained at Oxford during the whole of her reign. In 1557 he was one of the professors of canon law, and read what were called the “shaggling lectures,” i. e. lectures not endowed, until the accession of queen Elizabeth, when his principles induced him to quit England. He arrived at Rome about the latter end of 1560, and studying divinity, became doctor in that faculty, and was ordained priest by Dr. Thomas Goldwell, bishop of St. Asaph, who at that time resided in the English hospital at Rome. Soon after, cardinal Hosius, president of the council of Trent, hearing of his abilities, took him into his family, and made use of him, as his theologal, in the council. When the council broke up, Dr. Sanders accompanied the cardinal to Poland, Prussia, and Lithuania, where he was instrumental in settling the discipline of the Romish church; but his zeal disposing him to think most of his native country, he returned to Flanders, and was kindly entertained by sir Francis Englefield, formerly privy-counsellor to queen Mary, and then in great favour with the court of Spain; through whose hands a great part of those charitable collections passed, which his catholic majesty ordered for the subsistence of the English popish exiles. Sanders was appointed his assistant, and being settled at Louvaine, together with his mother and sister, he lived there twelve years, and performed many charitable offices to his indigent countrymen. Much of this time he employed in writing in defence of popery against Jewell, Nowell, and other eminent protestant divines.

Some years after, having received an invitation from the pope, he took a journey to Rome, whence he was sent as nuncio to the popish bishops and clergy in Ireland, and landed there in 1579. At this time Gerald Fitzgerald, earl of Desmond, was in arms, as he pretended, in defence of the liberties and religion of his country; but in 1583 his party was routed and himself killed. The part Sanders took in this rebellion is variously represented. Camden says that he was sent over purposely to encourage Desmond, and that several companies of Spanish soldiers went over with him, and that when their army was routed, he fled to the woods, and died of hunger. All that the catholics deuy in this account, is, that Sanders was sent purposely i but this they deny very feebly. With regard to the manner of Sanders’s death, Dodd seems inclined to prefer Wood’s account, who says that he died of a dysentery, and Dodd likewise adopts the report of Rushton and Pits, who say that he died at the latter end of 1580, or the beginning of 1581, because this was long before Desmond’s defeat, and consequently dissolves in some measure the supposed connection between him and Sanders. Dodd, however, who is generally impartial, allows that several catholics, his contemporaries, were of opinion that he was engaged in the Spanish interest against queen Elizabeth; and his writings prove that he maintained a deposing power both in the church and people, where religion was in danger. He was, according to all accounts, a man of abilities, and was considered as the most acute adversary for the re-establishment of popery in England, which his party could boast of. He had, however, to contend with men of equal ability, who exposed his want of veracity as well as of argument, and few of his works have survived the times in which they were written. Among them are, 1. “The Supper of our Lord, &c.” a defence of the real presence, being what he calls “A confutation of Jewel’s Apology, as also of Alexander Newel’s challenge,” Louvain, in 1566, 1567, 4to. 2. “Treatise of the Images of Christ and his Saints; being a confutation of Mr. Jewel’s reply upon that subject,” ibid. 1567, 8vo.- 3. “The Rock of the Church/ 1 eoncerning the primacy of St. Peter, ibid. 1566, 1567, St. Omer’s, 1624, 8vo.' 4.” A brief treatise on Usury,“ibid. 1566. 5.” De Visibili monarchia Ecclesia,“ibid. 1571, folio, Antwerp, 1581, Wiceburg, 1592. 6.” De origine et progressu Schismatis Anglicani,“Colon. 1585, 8vo, reprinted at other places in 1586, 1588, and 1590, and translated into French in 1673, with some tracts on the tenets of his church, which seem not of the controversial kind. Mo’st of the former were answered by English divines of eminence, particularly his large volume” De visibili monarchia ecclesise," by Dering, Clerk, and others, of whose answers an account may J>e seen in Strype’s Life of Parker. That on the English schism is refuted, as to his more important assertions, in the appendix to Burnet’s History of the Reformation, vol. II.

, an English writer, whose history may not be unuseful, was a native of Scotland, and born in, or near, Breadalbane, about 1727. He was by business a comb-maker; but not being successful in trade, and having some talents, some education, and a good memory, he commenced a hackney writer, and in that capacity produced some works which have been relished by the lower class of readers. When he came to London is uncertain; but, having travelled over most of the northern parts of these kingdoms, he compiled, from his own survey and the information of books, an itinerary, entitled “The Complete English Traveller,” folio. It was published in numbers, with the fictitious name of Spencer, professedly on the plan of Fuller’s Worthies, with biographical notices of the most eminent men of each county. As the dealers in this kind of publications thought it too good a thing to be lost, it has been republished, depriving Mr. Spencer of his rights, and giving them to three fictitious gentlemen, Mr. Burlington for England, Mr. Murray for Scotland, and Mr. Llewellyn for Wales. He also compiled, about 1764, a work in 5 or 6 vols. 8vo, with cuts, entitled “The Newgate Calendar, or Memoirs of those unfortunate culprits who fall a sacrifice to the injured laws of their country, and thereby make their exit at Tyburn.” He was some time engaged with lord Lyttelton, in assisting his lordship to compile his “History of Henry II.;” and Dr. Johnson, in his life of that poetical nobleman, introduces this circumstance in no very honourable manner. “When time,” says he, “brought the history to a third edition, Reid (the former corrector) was either dead or discharged; and the superintendence of typography and punctuation was committed to a man originally a conjb-maker, but then known by the style of Doctor Sanders. Something uncommon was probably expected, and something uncommon was at last done; for to the doctor’s edition is appended, what the world had hardly seen before, a list of errors of nineteen pages. 7 ' His most considerable work was his” Gaffer Greybeard,“an illiberal piece, in 4 vols. 12mo, in which the characters of the most eminent dissenting divines, his contemporaries, are very freely handled. He had, perhaps suffered either by the contempt or the reproof of some of that persuasion, and therefore endeavoured to revenge himself on the whole, ridiculing, in particular, Dr. Gill under the name of Dr. Half-pint, and Dr. Gibbons under that of Dr. Hymn-maker. He was also the author of the notes to a Bible published weekly under the name of the rev. Henry Southwell: for this he received about twentyfive or twenty-six shillings per week, while Dr. Southwell, the pseudo-commentator, received one hundred guineas for the use of his name, he having no other recommendation to the public, by which he might merit a posthumous memory, than his livings. Dr. Sanders also compiled” Letter-writers,“” Histories of England,“and other works of the paste and scissors kind but his” Roman History," written in a series of letters from a nobleman to his son, in 2 vols. 12mo, has some merit. Towards the latter end of his days he projected a general chronology of all nations, and had already printed some sheets of the work, under the patronage of lord Hawke, when a disorder upon his lungs put a period to his existence, March 19, 1783. He was much indebted to the munificence of Mr. Granville Sharp. More particulars of this man’s history and of the secrets of Bible-making may be seen in our authority.

, an eminent English bishop, was descended from an ancient family, and was the youngest son of Robert Sanderson, of Gilthwaite-hall, Yorkshire, by Elizabeth, one of the daughters of Richard Carr, of Butterthwaite-hall, in the parish of Ecclesfield. He was born at Rotherham, in Yorkshire, Sept. 19, 1587, and educated in the grammar-school there, where he made so uncommon a progress in the languages, that, at thirteen, he was sent to Lincoln college in Oxford. Soon after taking his degree of B. A. his tutor told Dr. Kilbie, the rector, that his “pupil Sanderson had a metaphysical brain, and a matchless memory, and that he thought he had improved or made the last so by an art of his own invention.” While at college, he generally spent eleven hours a day in study, chiefly of philosophy and the classics. In 1606 he was chosen fellow, and in July 1608, completed his degree of M. A. In November of the same year, he was elected logic reader, and re-elected in Nov. 1609. His lectures on this subject were published in 1615, and ran through several editions. In 1613, 1614, and 1616, he served the office of sub-rector, and in the latter of those years, that of proctor. In 1611, he was ordained deacon and priest by Dr. King, bishop of London, and took the degree of bachelor of divinity in 1617. In 1618, he was presented by his cousin sir Nicolas Sanderson, lord viscount Castleton, to the rectory of Wybberton, near Boston, in Lincolnshire, but resigned it the year following on account of the unhealthiness of its situation; and about the same time was collated to the rectory of Boothby-Paniiell, or Paynel, in the same county, which he enjoyed above forty years. Having now quitted his fellowship, he married Anne, the daughter of Henry Nelson, B. D. rector of Haugham in the county of Lincoln; and soon after was made a prebendary of Southwell, as he was also of Lincoln in 1629. He continued to attend to his parochial duties in a very exemplary manner, and particularly laboured much to reconcile differences, and prevent law-suits both in his parish, and in the neighbourhood. He also often visited sick and disconsolate families, giving advice and often pecuniary assistance, or obtaining the latter by applications to persons of opulence. He was often called upon to preach at assizes and visitations; but his practice of reading his sermons, as it was then not very common, raised some prejudice against him. Walton observes, that notwithstanding he had an extraordinary memory, he had such an innate bashfulness and sense of fear, as to render it of little use in the delivery of his sermons. It was remarked, when his sermons were printed in 1632, that “the best sermons that were ever read, were never preached.” At the beginning of the reign of Charles I. he was chosen one of the clerks in convocation for the diocese of Lincoln; and Laud, then bishop of London, having recommended him to that king as a man excellently skilled in casuistical learning, he was appointed chaplain to his majesty in 1631. When he became known to the king, his majesty put many cases of conscience to him, and received from him solutions which gave him so great satisfaction, that at the end of his month’s attendance, which was in November, the king told him, that “he should long for next November; for he resolved to have more inward acquaintance with him, when the month and he returned.” The king indeed was never absent from his sermons, and used to say, that “he carried his ears to hear other preachers, but his conscience to hear Mr. Sanderson.” In 1633 he obtained, through the earl of Rutland’s interest, the rectory of Muston, in Leicestershire, which he held eight years. In Aug. 1636, when the court was entertained at Oxford, he was,‘ among others, created D. D. In 1642, he was proposed by both Houses of parliament to king Charles, who was then at Oxford, to be one of their trustees for the settling of church affairs, and approved by the king: but that treaty came to nothing. The same year, his majesty appointed him regius professor of divinity at Oxford, with the canonry of Christ church annexed: but the national calamities hindered him from entering on it till 1646, and then he did not hold it undisturbed much more than a year. In 1643, he was nominated by the parliament one of the assembly of divines, but never sat among them neither did he take the covenant or engagement, so that his living was sequestered but, so great was his reputation for piety and learning, that he was not deprived of it. He had the’ chief hand in drawing up “The Reasons of the university of Oxford against the solemn League and Covenant, the Negative Oath, and the Ordinances concerning Discipline and Worship:” and, when the parliament had sent proposals to the king for a peace in church and state, his majesty desired, that Dr. Sanderson, with the doctors Hammond, Sheldon, and Morley, should attend him, and advise him how far he might with a good conscience comply with those proposals. This request was rejected by the presbyterian party; but, it being complied with afterwards by the independents, when his majesty was at Hampton-court, and in the isle of Wight, in 1647 and 1648, those divines attended him there. Dr. Sanderson often preached before him, and had many public and private conferences with him, to his majesty’s great satisfaction. The king also desired him, at Hampton-court, since the parliament had proposed the abolishing of episcopal government as inconsistent with monarchy, that he would consider of it, and declare his judgment; and what he wrote upon that subject was afterwards printed in 1661, 8vo, under this title, “Episcopacy, as established by law in England, not prejudicial to Regal power.” At Sanderson’s taking leave of his majesty in this his last attendance on him, the king requested him to apply himself to the writing of “Cases of Conscience;” to which his answer was, that “he was now grown old, and unfit to write cases of conscience.” But the king told him plainly, “it was the simplest thing he ever heard from him; for, no young man was fit to be a judge, or write cases of conscience.” Upon this occasion, Walton relates the following anecdote: that in one of these conferences the king told Sanderson, or one of them that then waited with him, that “the remembrance of two errors did much afflict him, which were, his assent to the earl of Stafford’s death, and the abolishing of episcopacy in Scotland; and that, if God ever restored him to the peaceable possession of his crown, he would demonstrate his repentance by a public confession and a voluntary penance, by walking barefoot from the Tower of London, or Whitehall, to St. Paul’s church, and would desire the people to intercede with God for his pardon.” In 1643, Dr. Sanderson was ejected from his professorship and canonry in Oxford by the parliamentary visitors, and retired to his living of Boothby-Pannel. Soon after, he was taken prisoner, and carried to Lincoln, to be exchanged for one Clarke, a puritan divine, and minister of Alington, who had been made prisoner by the king’s party. He was, however, soon released upon articles, one of which was, that the sequestration of his living should be recalled; by which means he enjoyed a moderate subsistence for himself, wife, and children, till the restoration. But, though the articles imported also, that he should live undisturbed, yet he was far from bein^r either quiet or safe, being once wounded, and several times plundered; and the outrage of the soldiers was such, that they not only came into his church, and disturbed him when reading prayers, but even forced the common prayer book from him, and tore it to pieces. During this retirement, he received a visit from Dr. Hammond, who wanted to discourse with him upon some points disputed between the Caivinists and Arminians; and he was often applied to for resolution in cases of conscience, several letters upon which subjects were afterwards printed*. In 1658, the hon, Robert Boyle sent him a present of 50l.; his circumstances, as of most of the royalists at that time, being very low. Boyle had read his lectures “De juramenti obligatione,” published the preceding year, with great satisfaction; and asked Barlow, afterwards bishop of Lincoln, if he thought Sanderson could be induced to write cases of conscience, provided he had an honorary pension allowed, to supply him with books and an amanuensis But Sanderson told Barlow, “that, if any future tract of his could bring any benefit to mankind, he would readily set about it without a pension.” Upon this, Boyle sent the above present by the hands of Barlow; and Sanderson presently revised, finished, and published, his book “De obligatione conscientiae,” which, as well as

suade him to trust to his excellent my sermon, and know, that neither

memory, and not to read his sermons, you, nor any man I'mug, shall ever

periment, and having on the Sunday book." Hammond replied, Good

gone through a third part, he became his sense of the great timidity and

disordered, incoherent, and almost ba-shfulness of his temper, and thought

f Aubrey says, "When I was a fresh- he hesitated so much, and repeated so

man and heard him read his first lee- often, that at the time of reading, he

In Aug. 1660, upon the restoration, he was restored to his professorship and canonry; and soon after, at the recommendation of Sheldon, raised to the bishopric of Lincoln, and consecrated Oct. 28. He enjoyed his new dignity but about two years and a quarter: during which time he did all the good in his power, by repairing the palace at Bugden, augmenting poor vicarages, &c. notwithstanding he was old, and had a family; and when his friends suggested a little more attention to them, he replied, that he left them to God, yet hoped he should be able at his death to give them a competency. He died Jan. 29, 1662-3, in his seventy-sixth year; and was buried in the chancel at Bugden, in the plainest and least expensive manner, according to his own directions. Dr. Sanderson was in his person moderately tall, of a healthy constitution, of a mild, cheerful, and even temper, and very abstemious. In his behaviour, he was affable, civil, and obliging, but not ceremonious. He was a man of great piety, modesty, learning and abilities, but not of such universal reading as might be supposed. Being asked by a friend, what books he studied most, when he laid the foundation of his great learning, he answered, that “he declined to read many books, but what he did read were well chosen, and read often; and added, that they were chiefly three, Aristotle’s ‘ Rhetoric,’ Aquinas’s ‘ Secunda Secunclse/ and Tully, but especially his ’ Offices,' which he had not read over less than twenty times, and could even in his old age recite without book.” He told him also, the learned civilian Dr. Zoucb had written “Elementa Jurisprudentioe,” which he thought he could also say without book, and that no wise man could read it too often. Besides his great knowledge in the fathers, schoolmen, and casuistical and controversial divinity, he was exactly versed in ancient and modern history, was a good antiquary, and indefatigable searcher into records, and well acquainted with heraldry and genealogies; of which last subject he left 20 vols. in ms. now in the library of sir Joseph Banks. The worthiest and most learned of his contemporaries speak of him in the most respectful terms: “That staid and well-weighed man Dr. Sanderson,” says Hammond, “conceives all things deliberately, dwells upon them discretely, discerns things that differ exactly, passeth his judgment rationally, and expresses it aptly, clearly, and honestly.” The moral character of this great and good man, Mr. Granger observes, has lately been rashly and feebly attacked by the author of the “Confessional,” and as ably defended by the author of “A Dialogue between Isaac Walton and Homologistes,” 1768. Every enemy to church government has been, for the same reason, an enemy to bishop Sanderson and every other prelate; but the uprightness and integrity of his heart, as a casuist, was never before called in question by any man who was not an entire stranger to his character. He saw and deplored, and did his utmost, honestly and rationally, to remedy the complicated ills of anarchy in church and state; when il every man projected and reformed, and did what was right in his own eyes. No image can better express such a condition, than that of a dead animal in a state of putrefaction, when, instead of one noble creature, as it was, when life held it together, there are ten thousand little nauseous reptiles growing out of it, every one crawling in a path of its own."

We shall now give some account of his writings, which, for good sense, clear reasoning, and manly style, have always been much esteemed. In 1615, he published, 1. “Logicse Artis Compendium,” as we have already mentioned. In 1671 appeared, as a posthumous work, his “Physicae scientiss compendium,” printed at Oxford. 2. “Sermons,” preached and printed at different times, amounting to the number of thirty-six, 1681, folio; with the author’s life by Walton prefixed. 3. “Nine Cases of Conscience resolved;” published at different times, but first collected in 1678, 8vo. The last of these nine cases is “Of the use of the Liturgy,” the very same tract which was published by Walton in his Life of Sanderson, 1678, under the title of “Bishop Sanderson’s judgment concerning submission to Usurpers.” In this tract is given a full account of the manner in which Dr. Sanderson conducted himself, in performing the service of the church, in the times of the usurpation. 4. “De Juramenti Obligatione,” 1647, 8vo; reprinted several times since, with, 5. “De Obligatione Conscientiae.” This last was first printed, as we have said, at the request of Mr. Boyle, and dedicated to him; tfye former, viz. “De Juramenti Obligatione,” was translated into English by Charles I., during his confinement in the Isle of Wight, and printed at London in 1655, 8vo; and of both there is an English translation, entitled “Prelections on the Nature and Obligation of promissory oaths and of conscience,” London, 1722, 3 vols. 8vo, 6, “Censure of Mr. Antony Ascham his book of the Confusions and Revolutions of Government,” 1649, 8vo. This Ascham was the rump parliament’s agent at Madrid, and was murdered there by some English royalists. 7. “Episcopacy, as established by Law in England, not prejudicial to the Regal Power,' 7 1661, mentioned before. 8.” Pax Ecciesiae about Predestination, or theFive Points;“printed at the end of his Life by Walton, 8vo. Our bishop seems at first to have been a strict Calvinist in those points: for in 1632, when twelve of hissermons were printed together, the reader may observe in the margin some accusations of Arminius for false doctrine; but in consequence of his conferences with Dr. Hammond, he relaxed from the rigid sense, as appears by some letters that passed between them, and which are printed in Hammond’s works. 9.” Discourse concerning the Church in these particulars: first, concerning the visibility of the true Church; secondly, concerning the Church of Rome,“&c. 1688 published by Dr. William Asheton, from a ms copy, which he had from Mr. Pullen, the bishop’s domestic chaplain. 10. A large preface to a book of Usher’s, written at the special command of Charles I. and entitled,” The Power communicated by God to the Prince, and the Obedience required of the Subject,“&c. 1661, 4to, and 1633, 8vo. 11. A prefatory Discourse, in defence of Usher and his writings, prefixed to a collection of learned treatises, entitled,” Clavi Trabales; or, nails fastened by some great masters of atsemblies, confirming the king’s supremacy, the subjects’ duty, and church government by bishops,“1661, 4to. 12.” Prophecies concerning the return of Popery,“inserted in a book entitled” Fair Warning, the second part,“London, 1663. This volume contains also several extracts from the writings of Whitgift and Hooker, and was published with a view to oppose the sectaries, who were said to be opening a door at which popery would certainly enter. 13.” The preface to the Book of Common Prayer,“beginning with these words,” It hath been the wisdom of the church.“14.” Ectvo/X^, seu Explanatio Juramenti,“&c. inserted in the” Excerpta e corpore statutorum Univ. Oxon.“p. 194. It was written to explain the oath of obligation to observe the penal statutes. 15.” Articles of Visitation and Inquiry concerning matters ecclesiastical,“&c. Lotid. 1662, 4to. Dr. Sanderson and Dr. Hammond were jointly concerned in a work entitled” A pacific discourse of God’s grace and decrees,“and published by the latter in 1660. In the preface to the Polygiott, Dr. Bryan Walton has classed Dr. Sanderson among those of his much honoured friends who assisted him in that noble work. Peck, in the second volume of his” Desiderata Curiosa,“has published the” History and Antiquities of the Cathedral Church of the Blessed Virgin St. Mary at Lincoln: containing an exact copy of all the ancient monumental inscriptions there, in number 163, as they stood in 1641, most of which were soon after torn up, or otherways defaced. Collected by Robert Sanderson, S.T. P. afterwards lord bishop of that church, and compared with and corrected by sir William DugdaleVMS survey."

, an antiquary of considerable note, was a younger son of Christopher Sanderson, a justice of the peace for the county palatine of Durham, who had suffered for his attachment to the Stuart family during the civil war. He was born July 27, 1660, at Egglestonhall, in that county, and entered a student of St. John’s college, Cambridge, under the tuition of Dr. Baker, April 7, 1683. He remained in the university several years, and was contemporary with the celebrated Matthew Prior. Removing to London, he afterwards turned his attention to the law, and was appointed clerk of the rolls, in the Rolls chapel. He contributed largely to the compilation of Rymer’s Fcedera, and was exclusively concerned in arranging the three concluding volumes, from 18 to 20, which he successively dedicated to kings George I. and II. (See Rymer.)

In 1704 he published a translation of “Original Letters from William III. whilst Prince of Orange, to Charles II., Lord Arlington, and others, with an Account of the Prince’s Reception at Middleburgh, and his Speech on that occasion;” dedicating the book to lord Woodstock. He also wrote “A History of Henry V.” in the way of annals, in nine volumes, of which the first four have been lost, and the others still remain in manuscript amongst his papers. In 1714 he became a candidate for the place of historiographer to queen Anne, and received a very handsome offer of assistance from Matthew Prior, at that time ambassador to the court of France. His success, however, was prevented by the change of ministry which succeeded on the queen’s death. On the 28th of November, 1726, he was appointed usher of the high court of chancery, by sir Joseph Jekyll, the master of the rolls. He succeeded, in 1727, by the death of an elder brother, to a considerable landed property in Cumberland, the north riding of Yorkshire, and Durham. After this, though he continued chiefly to reside in London, he occasionally visited his country seat at Armathwaite castle, a mansion pleasantly situated on the banks of the Eden, about ten miles from Carlisle. He was married four times; for the last time to Elizabeth Hickes of London, when he had completed his 70th year. He died Dee. 25, 1741, at his house in Chancery-lane, in the 79th year of his age, and was buried in Red-Lion-Fields. He was a devout man, well read in divinity, attached to the forms of the church of England, and very regular in his attention to public and private worship. He was slightly acquainted with the Hebrew language, and conversant in the Greek, Latin, Spanish, Italian, and French. He made a choice collection of books in various languages, and left behind him several volumes of Mss. relating chiefly to history, and the court of chancery, and including a transcript of Thurloe’s State Papers. He kept a diary, in which he noted down, with minute attention, the slightest occurrences of his life. As he left no issue, his estates d^cended, on the death of his last wife, in 1753, to the family of Margaret, his eldest sister, married to Henry Milbourne, of Newcastle-upon-Tyne; whose great grandson, William Henry Milbourne, was high sheriff of Cumberland in 1794.

, an eminent topographer and antiquary, was born at Antwerp, in Sept. 1586. He was first taught Latin at Oudenarde, and pursued his classical studies at the Jesuits’ college in Ghent. He then studied philosophy at Douay, and in 1609 obtained the degree of master of arts. After some stay in his native country, he entered on a course of theology at Louvain, which he completed at Douay, and in 1619, or 1621, took the degree of doctor in that faculty. Being ordained priest, he officiated for several years in various churches in the diocese of Ghent, was remarkably zealous in the conversion of heretics, i. e. protestants, and particularly contended much with the anabaptists, who were numerous in that quarter. Having, however, rendered himself obnoxious to the Hollanders, by some services in which he was employed by the king of Spain, their resentment made him glad to enter into the service of cardinal Aiphonso de la Cueva, who was then in the Netherlands, and made him his almoner and secretary. Some time after, by the cardinal’s interest, he was made canon of Ipres (not of Tournay, as father Labbe asserts) and finally theologal of Terouanne. He died in 1664, in the seventy-eighth year of his age, at Afflingham, an abbey of Brabant in the diocese of Mechlin, and was interred there, with a pious inscription over his grave, written by himself.

The long list of his works shews that his life was not spent in indolence. Some of these of the religious kind we shall omit. The principal, which respected literature, or the biography and history of the Netherlands, were, 1. “Dissertatio parsenetica pro instituto bibliothecae publics Gandavensis,” Ghent, 1619, 4to. 2. “Poematum libri tres,” ibid. 1621, 8vo. 3. “Panegyricus in laudem B. Thomse de Villanova,” ibid. 1623, 4to. 4. “Encomium S. Isidori,” Antwerp, 1623, 8vo. 5. “De Scriptoribus Flandrise, libri tres,” ibid. 1624, 4to. 6. “De Gandavensibus eruditionis fama claris,” ibid. 1624, 4to. 7. “De Brugensibus eruditionis fama claris,” ibid. 1624, 4to. 8. “Hagiologium Flandrise,” &c. ibid. 1625, 4to, and with additions, at Lisle, 1639. 9. “Elogia Cardinalium sanctitate, doctrina, et armis illustrium,” Louvain, 1625, 4to. 10. “Gandavium, sive rerum Gandavensium libri sex,” Brussels, 1627, 4to. 11. “De claris sanctitate et eruditione Antoniis,” Louvain, 1627, 4to. 12. “Bibliotheca Belgica manuscripta,” 2 parts or volumes, Lisle, 1641 and

1643, 4to. 13. “Flandria Illustrata,” Cologne, 1641 and

1644, 2 vols. fol. a most superb book, well known to the collectors of foreign history and topography. There is an edition published at the Hague in 1730, 3 vols. fol. but the original is preferred on account of the superior beauty of the engravings. 14. “Chorographia sacra Brabantia, sive celebrium aliquot in ea provincia ecclesiarum et ccenobiorum descriptio,” Brussels and Antwerp, 1659, 2 vols. fol. 1669. This is a still more splendid work than the former, and of much more rare occurrence in a complete state, very few copies of the second volume being in existence. The reason assigned is, that the entire impression of the second volume was suppressed as soon as completed, and remained in the warehouse of a bookseller at Brussels until 1695, in which year that city was bombarded by the French, and all the copies, except a few in the possession of the author’s friends, perished by fire. This likewise was reprinted at the Hague in 3 vols. fol. 1726 27, but with different plates, and of course this edition is not so highly esteemed. Sanders wrote other topographical works, which appear to remain in ms.

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

, an Italian ecclesiastical historian, was born June 31, 1692, and became, by the interest of his bishop, cardinal Rezzonico, who was afterwards pope Clement XIII. librarian and professor of ecclesiastical history at Padua, where he died, Feb. 23, 1751, in the fiftynrnth year of his age. He is known principally by his “Vitae Pontificum Romanorum,” Ferrara, 174-8, reprinted under the title of “Basis Historic Ecclesiasticae.” He also wrote “Historic Familiae Sacne;”. “HistoriaS. S. Apostolorum;” “Disputationes XX ex Historia Ecclesiastica ad Vitas Pontificum Romanorum,” and “Dissertations,” in defence of the “Historic Familiie Sacrae,” which father Serry had attacked.

, or, Van Den Sand, a Socinian writer, was born at Konigsburg in the year 1644. After becoming an ecclesiastic, he went to Amsterdam, where he died in 1680, aged only thirty-six. He published various works, among which are, 1. “Nucleus Historiae Ecclesiasticae,” 1669, in 2 vols. 8vo, reprinted at Cologne, in 1676: and in London in 1681. 2. “Tractatus de Origine Animae, 167 1.” 3. “Notae et Observationes in G. J. Vossium de Historicis Latinis,” 1677, a work of considerable learning. 4. “Centuria Epigrammatum” 5. “Interpretation es paracloxae IV. Evangeliorum” 6. “Confessio Fidei de Deo Patre, Filio, et Spiritu Saricto, secunduia Scripturam;” “Scriptura Sacrac Trinitatis Revelatrix.” But the only work now much known, which was publibhed after his death, is his “Bibliotheca Anti-Trinitariorum,” Freistadt, 1684, 12mo, containing an account of the lives and writings of Socinian authors, and some tracts giving many particulars of the history of the Polish Socinians.

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

, a very eminent English prelate, the third son of William Sandys, esq. and Margaret his wife, descended from the ancient barons of Kendal, was born near Hawkshead, in Furness Fells, Lancashire, in 1519. The same neighbourhood, and almost the same year, gave birth to two other luminaries of the reformation, Edmund Grindal and Bernard Gilpin. Mr. Sandys’s late biographer conjectures, that he was educated at the school of Furness Abbey, whence he was removed to St. John’s-college, Cambridge, in 1532 or 1533, where he had for his contemporaries Redmayn and Lever, both great lights of the reformation, beside others of inferior name, who continued in the hour of trial so true to their principles, that, according to Mr. Baker, the learned historian of that house, “probably more fellows were, in queen Mary’s reign, ejected from St. John’s than from any other society in either university.” Several years now elapsed of Sandys’s life, during which in matters of religion men knew not how to act or what to believe; but, though the nation was at this time under severe restraints with respect to external conduct, inquiry was still at work jin secret: the corruptions of the old religion became better understood, the Scriptures were universally studied, and every impediment being removed with the capricious tyranny of Henry VIII., protestantism, with little variation from its present establishment in England, became the religion of the state.

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

He then left the university, amidst the insults of his enemies, and the tears of his friends, who reasonably anticipated a worse fate than that which befel him. On his arrival in London, he was ordered to be confined in the Tower, where the yeomen of the guard took from him every thing which he had been permitted to bring from Cambridge; but his faithful servant, Quintin Swainton, brought after him a Bible, some shirts and other necessaries. The Bible being no prize for plunderers, was sent in, but every thing else was stolen by the warders. Here, after remaining three weeks, solitary and ill accommodated in a vile lodging, he was removed to a better apartment, called the Nun’s Bower (a name now forgotten in that gloomy mansion), where he had the comfort of Mr. John Bradford’s company. In this apartment they remained twenty-nine weeks, during which time the mildness yet earnestness of their persuasions wrought on their keeper, a bigoted catholic, till he became a sincere protestant, "a son begotten in bonds/' so that when mass was celebrated in the chapel of the Tower, instead of compelling his prisoners to attend, the converted gaoler frequently brought up a service-book of Edward VI. with bread and wine, and Sandys administered the sacrament in both kinds to himself and the other two.

Here they continued until their apartments being wanted for the persons concerned in Wyat’s conspiracy, they were removed to the Marshalsea. On their way there they found the people’s minds greatly changed. Popery, unmasked and triumphant, had already shewn its nature again, and general disgust had followed the short burst of joy which had attended the queen’s accession. Sandys walked along the streets attended by his keeper: and as he was generally known, the people prayed that God would comfort him, and strengthen him in the truth. Struck with these appearances of popularity, the keeper of the Marshalsea said, “These vain people would set you forward to the fire: but you are as vain as they, if you, being a young man, will prefer your own conceit before the judgment of so many worthy prelates, and so many grave and learned men as are in this realm. If you persist, you shall find me as strict a keeper, as one that utterly misliketh your religion.” Dr. Sandys nobly replied, “My years, indeed, are few, and my learning is small but it is enough to know Christ crucified and who seeth not the blasphemies of popery hath learned nothing. T have read in Scripture of godly and courteous keepers, God make you like one of them; if not, I trust he will give me strength and patience to bear your hard dealing with* me.” The keeper then asked, “Are you resolved to stand to your religion” “Yes,” said Dr. Sandys, “by God’s grace.” “1 love you the better, therefore,” said the keeper, " I did but tempt you: every favour which I can show, you shall be sure of: nay, if you die at a stake, I shall be happy to die with you.' 7 And from that day such was the confidence which this good man reposed in Sandys, that many times he permitted him to walk alone in the fields; nor would he ever suffer him to be fettered, like the other prisoners. He lodged him also in the best chamber of the house, and often permitted his wife to visit him. Great resort was here made to Dr. Sandys for his edifying discourses, and much money was offered him, but he would accept of none. Here too the communion was celebrated three or four times by himself and his companions, of whom Saunders, afterwards the martyr, was one, to many communicants.

After nine weeks confinement in the Marshalsea, he was set at liberty, by the intercession of sir Thomas Holcroft, knight-marshal. This, however, was not accomplished without much difficulty, and so intent was Gardiner, bishop of Winchester, on bringing Sandys to the stake, that it required some management on the part of sir Thomas before he could succeed; and no sooner was Sandys liberated than Gardiner, being told that he had set at liberty one of the greatest heretics in the kingdom, procured orders to be issued to all the constables of London to search for, and apprehend him. In Sandys* s final escape, as related by his late biographer, the hand of Providence was strikingly visible. While he was in the Tower, wanting a pair of new hose, a tailor was sent for, who, not being permitted to measure him, had made them too long, and While he was now concealed at the house of one Hurleston, a skinner in Cornhill, he sent them, as Hurleston’s own, to a tailor to be shortened. This happened to be honest Benjamin the maker, a good protestant, who immediately recognized his own handy work, and required to be shown, to the house where Dr. Sandys was, that he might speak with him for his good. At midnight he was admitted, and informed Dr. Sandys, that all the constables of the city, of whom he himself was one, were employed to apprehend him, thai it was well known that his servant had provided two geldings, and that he meant to ride out at Aldgate tomorrow. “But,” said he, “follow my advice, and, by God’s grace, you shall escape. Let your man walk all the day to-morrow in the street where your horses are stabled, booted and prepared for a journey. The servant of the man of the house shall take the horses to Bethnalgreen. The man himself shall follow, and be booted as if he meant to ride. About eight in the morning I will be with you, and here we will break our fast. It is both term and parliament time, and the street by that hour will be full of people; we will then go forth look wildly, and, if you meet your own brother in the street, do not shun, but outface him, and assure him that you know him not.” Dr. Sand3's accordingly complied, and came out at the appointed hour, clothed in all respects as a layman and a gentleman. Benjamin carried him through bye-lanes to Moorgate, where the horses were ready, and Hurleston as his man. That night he rode to his father-in-law’s house, but had not been there two hours, when intelligence was brought, that two of, the guard had been dispatched to apprehend him, and would be there that night. He was then immediately conducted to the house of a farmer near the sea-side, where he remained two days and two nights in a solitary chamber. Afterwards he removed to the house of one James Mower, a ship-master, near Milton-shore, where was a fleet of merchant-men awaiting a wind for Flanders. While he was there, Mower gathered a congregation of forty or fifty seamen, to whom he gave an exhortation, with which they were so much delighted, that they promised to defend him at the expence of their lives. On Sunday May 6, he embarked in the. same vessel with Dr. Coxe, afterwards bishop of Ely, and the ship was yet in sight, when two of the guard arrived on the shore to apprehend Dr. Sandys.

His danger was not even yet entirely over, for on hi arrival at Antwerp, he received intelligence that king Philip of Spain had sent to apprehend him, on which he escaped to the territory of Cleve, from thence to Augsburgh, where he remained fourteen days, and then removed to Strasburgh. Here he took up his abode for the present, and here unquestionably spent the most gloomy portion of his life. His own health was at this time deeply, injured; he fell sick of a flux (the usual concomitant of hardships and afflictions), which continued without abatement for nine months; his only child died of the plague; and his beloved wife, who had found means to follow him about a year after his flight from England, expired of a consumption, in his arms. In addition to his sorrows, the disputes concerning church discipline broke out among the English exiles, on which several of his friends left the place. After his wife’s death, he went to Zurich, where he was entertained by Peter Martyr, but, his biographer thinks, the time did not permit him to receive any deep tincture either as to doctrine or discipline from Geneva or its neighbours. Within rive weeks the news of queen Mary’s death arrived; and after being joyfully feasted by Bullinger, and the other ministers of the Swiss churches, he returned to Strasburgh, where he preached; after which Grindal and he set out for their native country together, and arrived in London on the day of queen Elizabeth’s coronation.

Dr. Sandys was now somewhat less than forty years old, in the vigour of his mental faculties and with recruited bodily strength. The first public scene on which he appeared was the great disputation between the leading divines of the protestant and popish side, in which, if his talent for debate bore any proportion to his faculty of preaching, he must have borne a very conspicuous part. On the 21st of December, 1559, he was consecrated by archbishop Parker to the see of Worcester. Browne Willis has most unjustly accused our prelate of having enriched his family out of the lands of this see; on the contrary, he transmitted it to his successor, exactly as he found it, that is, saddled with the conditions of an exchange which the crown had by statute a right to make. He accepted it onthese conditions, and what he was never seized of, it was impossible for him to alienate. After all, this was scarcely a matter sufficient to excite Browne Willis’s superstitious reverence,- for the rental of the manors taken away was no more than 193l. 125. 8f^. per ann. and that of the spiritualities given in exchange 194l.

At Worcester began the inquietudes and vexations which pursued bishop Sandys through his latter days. The papists in his diocese hated him, and he was at no pains to conciliate them. At Hartlebury, in particular, it was his misfortune to have for his neighbour sir John Browne, a bigoted papist, who took every opportunity to insult the bishop, and to deride his wife (for he had by this time married Cecily, sister of sir Thomas Wilford), by calling her " My Lady‘,’ 7 a style which in the novelty of their situation, some of the bishop’s wives really pretended to; so that in conclusion a great affray took place between the bishop’s servants and those of the knight, in which several were wounded on both sides. At Worcester Dr. Sandys remained till 1570, when on the translation of his friend Grindal to York, he succeeded him in the see of London, a station for which he was eminently qualified by his talents as a preacher, and as a governor. During this period, he had interest to procure for his kinsman Gilpin, a nomination to the bishopric of Carlisle, but Gilpin refused it. At London, Dr. Sandys sat six years, when he was translated to York, on the removal of Grindal to Canterbury.

Years were now coming upon him, and a numerous family demanded a provision; but as it was a new and unpopular thing to see the prelates of the church abandoning their cathedrals and palaces, and retiring to obscure manor-houses on their estates, in order to accumulate fortunes for their children, an abundant portion of obloquy fell upon Sandys, who seldom lived at York, and not very magnificently at Southwell. Yet he visited his diocese regularly, and preached occasionally in his cathedral with great energy and effect. In 1577, during a metropolitical visitation, he came in his progress to Durham, the bishopric of which was then vacant, but was refused admittance by Whittingham, the puritan dean. The archbishop, however, with his wonted firmness proceeded to excommunication. The issue of this contest will come to be noticed in our account of Whittingham. In the month of May 1582, being once more in a progress through his dipcese, a diar bolical attempt was made to blast his character. He happened to lie at an inn in Doncaster; whertf, through the contrivance of sir Robert Stapleton, and other enemies, the inn-keeper’s wife was put to bed to him at midnight when he was asleep. On this, according to agreement, the inn-keeper rushed into the room, waked the archbishop with his noise, and offered a drawn dagger to his breast, pretending to avenge the injury. Immediately sir Robert Stapleton came in, as if called from his chamber by the inn-keeper; and putting on the appearance of a friend, as indeed he had formerly been, and as the archbishop then thought him, advised his grace to make the matter up, laying before him many perils and dangers to his name and the credit of religion that might ensue, if, being one against so many, he should offer to stir in such a cause; and persuading him, that, notwithstanding his innocency, which the archbishop earnestly protested, and Stapleton then acknowledged, it were better to stop the mouths of needy persons than to bring his name into doubtful question. With this advice, Sandys unwarily complied; but, afterwards discovering sir Robert’s malice and treacherous dissimulation, he ventured, in confidence of his own innocency, to be the means himself of bringing the whole cause to examination before the council in the star-chamber. The result of this was, that he was declared entirely innocent of the wicked slanders and imputations raised against him; and that sir Robert Stapleton and his accomplices were first imprisoned, and then fined in a most severe manner. This affair is related at large by sir John Harrington, a contemporary writer; and by Le Neve, who gives a fuller account of it, from an exemplification of the decree, made in the star-chamber, 8 May, 25 Eliz. preserved in the Harieian library.

Of the decline of archbishop Sandys’ s age, and of the particular disorder which brought him to his grave, no circumstances are recorded. He died at Southwell, July 10, 1588, in the sixty-ninth year of his age, and was buried in the collegiate church of that place. He was the first English bishop who, by his prudence or parsimony, laid the foundation of a fortune in his family, which has justified their subsequent advancement to a peerage. With his father’s savings, the manor of Ombersley, in Worcestershire, was purchased by sir Samuel Sandys, the eldest son, whose descendants, since ennobled by the family name, still remain in possession of that fair and ample domain. There also the archbishop’s portrait, together with that of Cicely his second wife, is still preserved. She survived to 1610, and has a monument at Woodham Ferrers, in Essex, where she died.

Dr. Whitaker, whose late life of archbishop Sandys we have irs general followed, as the result of much research and reflection, observes that after all the deductions which truth and impartiality require, it will still remain incontestable, that Sandys was a man of a clear and vigorous understanding, of a taste, in comparison, above that of the former age or the next, and, what is more, of his own: that he was a sincere Christian, a patient sufferer, an indefatigable preacher, an intrepid and active ecclesiastical magistrate. W r hat was his deportment in private life, we are no where told. On the other hand, it cannot be denied, that the man who after his advancement to the episcopal order, in three successive stations, either, kindled the flames of discord, or never extinguished them, who quarrelled alike with protestants and papists, with his successor in one see (Aylmer) and with his dean in another, who in his first two dioceses treated the clergy with a harshness which called for the interposition of the metropolitan, and who drew upon himself from two gentlemen of the country, the extremity of violence and outrage, must have been lamentably defective in Christian meekness and forbearance *. In every instance, indeed, he had met with great provocation, and in the last the treatment he received was atrocious; but such wounds are never gratuitously in-, flicted, and rarely till after a series of irritations on both sides. In doctrinal points his biographer attempts, by various extracts from his sermons, to prove archbishop Sandys less inclined to Calvinism than some of his contem­* We know not if Mr. Lodge has be. easy elegance of a courtier trith as

stowed the same attention on the con- imichlpiety, meekness, and benevolence,

prelate’s conduct happily united the p. 222. poraries. On the other hand Dr. Whitaker asserts the clear, systematic, and purely evangelical thread of doctrine which runs through the whole of his sermons, namely, salvation through Christ alone, justification by faith in him, eanctification through his holy Spirit, and lastly, the fruits of faith, produced through the agency of the same Spirit, and exemplified in every branch cf duty to God, our neighbour and ourselves. These “Sermons” were first printed almost immediately after the archbishop’s decease, and again in 1613, in a quarto volume, containing twenty- two, but have lately become so scarce that Dr. Whitaker undertook a new edition, with a life prefixed, which was published in 1812, 8vo. The archbishop was also concerned in the translation of the Bible begun in 1565, and the portion which fell to his lot was the books of Kings and Chronicles. Several of his letters and other papers are inserted in Strype’s Anna*ls and Lives of Parker and Whitgift, and in Burnet’s History of the Reformation, Fox'Jj Acts, &c.

, second son of the preceding, was born in Worcestershire about 1561, and admitted of Corpus-Christi-college, Oxford, at sixteen, under the celebrated Hooker. After taking his degree of B. A. he was made probationer-fellow in 1579, and was collated in 15S1 to a prebend in the church of York. He then completed his degree of M. A. and travelled into foreign countries, and at his return was esteemed for learning, virtue, and prudence. He appears afterwards to have studied the law. While he was at Paris, he drew up a tract, under the title of “Europae Speculum,” which he finished in 15b>9; an imperfect copy of which was published without the author’s name or consent, in 1605, and was soon followed by another impression. But the author, after he had used all means to suppress these erroneous copies, and to punish the printers of them, at length caused a true copy to be published, a little before his death, in 1629, 4to, under this title “Europae Speculum or a- view or survey of the state of religion in the western parts of the world. Wherein the Romane religion, and the pregnant policies of the church of Rome to support the same, are notably displayed; with some other memorable discoveries and memorations. Never before till now published according to the author’s original copie. Muituin diuque desideratum.” Hagae Comitis, 1629. To this edition was a preface, which has been omitted in the latter editions though some passages of it were printed in that of 1637, 4to. It was also reprinted in 1673, and translated both into Italian and French,

In May 1602, he resigned his prebend, and in May 1603, received the honour of knighthood from James I.; who afterwards employed him in several affairs of great trust and importance. Fuller tells us, that he was dextrous in the management of such things, constant in par^ liament as the speaker himself, and esteemed by all as an. excellent patriot, “faithful to his country,” says Wood, 66 without any falseness to his prince.“It appears, -however, that for some opposition to the court in the parliament of 1621, he was committed with Selden to the custody of the sheriff of London in June that year, and detained above a month which was highly resented by the House of Commons, as a breach of their privileges but, sir George Calvert, secretary of state, declaring, that neither Sandys nor Selden had been imprisoned for any parliamentary matter, a stop was put to the dispute. Sir Edwin was treasurer to the undertakers of the western plantations. He died in October 1629, and was interred at Northborne in Kent; where be had a seat and estate, granted him by James I. for some services done at that king’s accession to the throne. A monument, now in a mutilated state, was jerected to his memory, but without any inscription. He bequeathed 1500l. to the university of Oxford, for the endowment of a metaphysical lecture. He left five sons, all of whom, except one, adhered to the parliament during the civil wars. Henry, the eldest, died without issue. Edwin, the second, was the well known parliamentary colonel, of whose outrages much may be read in the publications of the times, and who, receiving a mortal wound at the battle of Worcester, in 1642, retired to Northborne to die, leaving the estate to his son sir Richard, who was killed by the accidental explosion of his fowling-piece in 1663. His son, sir Richard, was created a baronet in 1684, and dying in 1726, without male issue, was the last of the family who lived at Northborne, where the mansion remained many years deserted, and at length was pulled down. There was one sir Edwin Sandys, who published, as Wood informs us,” Sacred Hymns, consisting of fifty select Psalms of David," set to be sung in five parts by Rot bert Taylor, and printed at London, 1615, in 4to; but whether this version was done By our author, or by another, of botii his names, of Ladmers in Buckinghamshire, is uncertain.