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

, an eminent architect, was born in 1728, at the town of Kirkaldy, in Fifeshire, Scotland. He was the second son of William Adam, esq. of Maryburgh, an architect of distinguished merit. He received his education at the university of Edinburgh. The friendships which he formed in that seat of learning were with men of high literary fame, among whom were Mr. Hume, Dr. Robertson, Dr. Adam Smith, and Dr. Ferguson. As he advanced in life, he had the happiness to enjoy the friendship and intimacy of Archibald duke of Argyle, Mr. Charles Townsend, and the celebrated earl of Mansfield. To perfect his taste in the science to which he had devoted himself, he went to Italy, and there studied, for some time, the magnificent remains of antiquity which still adorn that country. He was of opinion, that the buildings of the ancients are, in architecture, what the works of nature are with respect to the other arts; serving as models for our imitation, and standards of our judgment. Scarce any monuments, however, of Grecian or Roman architecture now remain, except public buildings, The private edifices, however splendid and elegant, in which the citizens of Athens and Rome resided, have all perished: few vestiges remaining, even of those innumerable villas with which Italy was crowded, although, in erecting them, the Romans lavished the spoils and riches of the world. Mr. Adam, therefore, considered the destruction of these buildings with particular regret; some incidental allusions in the ancient poets, and occasional descriptions in their historians, conveying ideas of their magnificence, which astonish the artists of the present age. He conceived his knowledge of architecture to be imperfect, unless he should be able to add the observation of a private edifice of the ancients fo his study of their public works. He therefore formed the scheme of visiting the ruins of the emperor Dioclesian’s palace, at Spalatro, in Venetian Dalmatia. To that end, having prevailed on M. Clerisseau, a French artist, to accompany him, and engaged two draughtsmen to assist him in the execution of his design, he sailed from Venice, in June 1757, on his intended expedition, and, in five weeks, he accomplished his object with much satisfaction.

In 1762, he was appointed architect to their majesties. In 1764, he published the result of his researches at Spalatro, in one volume large folio: it was entitled, “Ruins of the Palace of the Emperor Dioclesian, at Spalatro, in Dalmatia.” It is enriched with seventy-one plates, executed in the most masterly manner. He had at this time been elected a member of the Royal and Antiquary Societies. In 1768, he resigned his office of architect to their majesties, it being incompatible with a seat in parliament, and he being this year elected representative for the county of Kinross. By this time, in conjunction with his brother James Adam, he had been much employed by the nobility and gentry, both in constructing many noble modern edifices, and in embellishing ancient mansions: and, in 1773, they first began to publish “The Works in Architecture of R. and J. Adam,” in numbers, four of which appeared before 1776, and contain descriptions of Sion House, Cane Wood, Luton Park House, and some edifices at Whitehall, Edinburgh, &c. That noble improvement of the metropolis, the Addphij will long remain an honour to the brothers; but, as a speculation, it was not so fortunate. In 1774, however, they obtained an act of Parliament to dispose of the houses by way of lottery.

The many other elegant buildings, public and private, erected in various parts of the kingdom by this ingenious architect, display a great variety of original designs. To the last moment of his life, he evinced an increasing vigour of genius, and refinement of taste: for in the space of one year preceding his death, he designed eight great public works, besides twenty-five private buildings, so various in their style, and so beautiful in their composition, that they have been allowed by the best judges, sufficient of themselves to establish his fame as an architect. His talents, too, extended beyond the line of his own profession; and in his numerous drawings in landscape, we observe a luxuriance of composition, and an effect of light and shadow, which have scarce ever been equalled.

His brother James died Oct. 20, 1794, also very eminent as an architect, of which that magnificent range of buildings called Portland-place, afford an undeniable proof. Most of his other works were executed in conjunction with his brother.

, was an architect of the 6th century, under the reign of Anastasius I. emperor of the east, who stowed many honours upon him, and admitted him into his council. He is said to have built the great wall, ordered by Anastasius, to preserve Constantinople from the inroads of the Huns, Goths, and Bulgarians. It was eighteen leagues in length, and twenty feet in breadth. He built also several edifices in Constantinople, particularly the Cbalcis in the grand palace.

, a sculptor and architect of Florence, was born in 1460, and was first distinguished for the beauty of his inlaid work, which he applied to articles of furniture, and with which he ornamented the stalls in the choir of the church of St. Maria-Novelle. He also executed the carved wooden work on the organ of the same church, and on the altar of de la Nunziata. Having been led to the study of architecture, he came to Rome to devote his attention to it, but did not give up the practice of carving, and soon had a favourable opportunity to exercise both. When Leo X. travelled in Italy, all the cities through which he passed wished to receive him with honour, and Baccio gave designs for many of the triumphal arches ordered to be erected. On his return to his country, his workshop became a sort of academy to which amateurs, artists, and strangers resorted. Raphael, then very young, and Michael Angelo are said to have been of these parties. By this means Baccio acquired great reputation, and was employed on many splendid buildings in Florence. Conjointly with Cronaca, he executed the decorations of the grand saloon of the palace, and the beautiful staircase leading to it. But his best work is to be seen in the Bartolini palace and garden. Here he shewed the first specimen of square windows surmounted by pediments, and doors ornamented by columns, a mode which although followed generally since, was much ridiculed by his countrymen as an innovation. In other palaces he executed some beautiful ornaments in wood. He preserved his vigour and reputation to a great age, dying in 1543, in his eightythird year. He left three sons, one of whom, Giuliano, inherited his skill in architecture, but designed more than he executed.

, a celebrated architect of Milan, of the sixteenth century. He was a successful student of mathematics, physics, and philosophy. Under the pontificate of Gregory XIII. there was a design at Rome to remove a vast obelisk to St. Peter’s square, and Agrippa was one of those employed in this undertaking, hitherto thought so difficult. He published the result of his plan under the title of “Trattato di trasportar la guglia in su la piazza, &i San Pietro,” Rome, 1583, 4to. His other works are, 1. “Trattato di scientia d'Arme, con un Dialogo di Filoofia,” Rome, 1553; Venice, 1568, 1604, 4to. 2. “Dialogo sopra la generatione de Venti, &c.” Rome, 1584, 4to. 3. “Dialogo del modo di mettere in Battaglia,” Rome, 1585, 4to. 4. “Nuove Invenzioni sopra il modo di Navigare,” Rome, 159$, 4to. All his works are very scarce.

, an eminent Italian artist, and one of the earliest scholars that appeared in the revival of letters, was of a noble and very ancient family at Florence, but was born at Venice in the end of the fourteenth, or beginning of the fifteenth century. Various authors have given 1398, 1400, and 1404, as the date of his birth. In his youth he was remarkable for his agility, strength, and skill in bodily exercises, and an unquenchable thirst of knowledge possessed him from his earliest years. In the learned languages he made a speedy and uncommon proficiency. At the age of twenty, he first distinguished himself by his Latin comedy entitled “Philodoxius,” copies of which he distributed among his friends, as the work of Lepidus, an ancient poet. The literati were completely deceived, and bestowed the highest applauses on a piece which they conceived to be a precious remnant of antiquity. It was written by him during the confinement of sickness, occasioned by too close an application to study, and appeared first about the year 1425, when the rage for ancient manuscripts was at its height, and Lepidus for a while took his rank with Plautus and Terence. Even in the following century, the younger Aldus Manutius having met with it in manuscript, and alike ignorant of its former appearance, and the purpose it was intended to serve, printed it at Lucca, 1588, as a precious remnant of antiquity. Alberti took orders afterwards in order to have leisure to prosecute his studies. In 1447 he was a canon of the metropolitan church of Florence, and abb of St. Savino, or of St. Ermete of Pisa. Although he became known to the world as a scholar, a painter, a sculptor, and an architect, it is to his works of architecture that he owes his principal fame. He may be regarded as one of the restorers of that art, of which he understood both the theory and practice, and which he improved by his labours as well as his writings. Succeeding to Brunelleschi, he introduced more graceful forms in the art; but some consider him notwithstanding as inferior to that celebrated architect. Alberti studied very carefully the remains of ancient architecture, which he measured himself at Rome and other parts of Italy, and has left many excellent specimens of his talents. At Florence, he completed the Pitti palace, and built that of Ruccellai, and the chapel of the same family in the church of St. Pancras; the facade of the church of Santa Maria Novella, and the choir of the church of Nunziata. Being invited to Rome by Nicholas V. he was employed on the aqueduct of PAqua Vergine, and to raise the fountain, of Trevi; but this having since been reconstructed by Clement XII. from the designs of Nicholas Salvi, no traces of Alberti’s work remain. At Mantua, he constructed several buildings, by order of Louis of Gonzaga, of which the most distinguished are the churches of St. Sebastian, and that of St. Andrew: the latter, from the grandeur and beauty of its proportions, is esteemed a model for ecclesiastical structures. But his principal work is generally acknowledged to be the church of St. Francis at Rimini.

He was a prelate of singular learning and piety, and not only a considerable writer, but an excellent architect, which occasioned his being made comptroller of the royal works and buildings, under Henry VII. He founded a school at Kingston upon Hull (Fuller says, at Beverley); and a chapel on the south side of the church in which his parents were buried. He built the beautiful and spacious hall belonging to the episcopal palace at Ely, and made great improvements in all his other palaces. Lastly, he founded Jesus college, Cambridge, for a master, six fellows, and as many scholars; which, under the patronage of his successors, the bishops of Ely, has greatly increased in buildings and revenues; and now consists of a master, sixteen fellows, and thirty scholars. He wrote several pieces, particularly “Mons perfections ad Carthusianos,” Lond. 1501, 4to; “Galli Cantus ad Confratres suos curatos in Synodo apud Barnwell, 25 Sept. 1498,” Lond. per Pynson, 1498, 4to. At the beginning is a print of the bishop preaching to the clergy, with a cock (his crest) at each side, and there is another in the first page. “Abbatia Spiritns sancti in pura conscientia, fundata,” Lond. 1531, 4to. “In Psalmos penitentiales,” in English verse. “Homilise vulgares.” “Meditationes piae.” “Spousage pf a virgin to Christ,” 1486, 4to. Bishop Alcock died Oct. 1, 1500, at his castle at Wisbech, and was buried in the middle of a sumptuous chapel, which he had built for himself at the east end of the north aile of the presbytery pf Ely cathedral, and which is a noble specimen of his skill in architecture.

, an Italian architect, who died in 1630, was born of parents so poor that in his youth he was obliged to carry bricks and mortar to the workmen; but having a natural turn for architecture, by hearing others talk, he learned all the rules of it, as well as those of geometry; and was even able to publish works in those sciences. He took great part in those famous controversies that arose concerning the three provinces, Ferrara, Bologna, and the Romagna, which were much exposed to inundations in the commencement of the seventeenth century, and published a plan for stopping their progress. Pope Clement VII. employed him to build the citadel of Ferrara, and at Mantua, Modena, Parma, and Venice, are several monuments after his designs. The only work we have seen of his on the subject of the inundations is entitled “Difesa per riparare alia sommersione del Polesine,” Ferrara, 1601, fol.

, the most celebrated architect of his time, was born at Perusia in 1500, and died in 1572. His reputation was spread over almost all Europe. He furnished France, Spain, and Germany, with plans, not only for palaces and churches, but also for public fountains and baths, in which he displayed the fertility of his genius. The plan that brought him the most honour was that of the monastery and the church of the Escurial, which was adopted in preference to all that had been presented by the most able architects of Europe. Several cities and towns of Italy are also decorated by edifices of his construction; but there is not one where so many of them are seeu as at Genoa; the cupola of the cathedral and the Grimaldi and Pallavicini palaces are by him; and it is doubtless on account of the number of these magnificent monuments, that that city has merited the name of Genoa the superb. It is said, that Alessi was likewise verv learned, and had a capacity for managing concerns of the utmost importance. Some of his works were engraven at Antwerp in 1663, from drawings made by Rubens.

, a learned physician and philosopher, of the 6th century, was born at Tralles, in Asia Minor. His father, also a physician, had five sons distinguished for their talents: the two most celebrated were Anthemius, an architect, and Alexander. The latter, after travelling for improvement into France, Spain, and Italy, took up his residence at Rome, where he acquired great reputation. He and Aretatæus may be considered as the best Greek physicians after Hippocrates. Alexander describes diseases with great exactness, and his style is elegant; but he partook of the credulity of his times, and trusted too much to amulets and nostrums. He added something, however, to the more judicious practice of the art, having been the first who prescribed opening the jugular, and the first who administered steel in substance. He is much fuller, and more exact than his predecessors in Therapeutics, and collected those remedies principally which he had found to be most effectual. Dr. Freind has given an elaborate analysis of his practice. There are various editions of his works; one in Greek, Paris, 1548, fol. corrected by Goupil, from a manuscript furnished by Duchatel, bishop of Macon and grand almoner of France. There is also an old and bad Latin translation, which Fabricius thinks must have been taken from some Arabic original, published under the title of “Alexandri iatros practica, cum expositione glossae interlinearis Jacobi de Partibus, et Simonis Januensis,” Leyden, 1504, 4to. This was retrenched by Albanus Taurinus, but without the Greek being consulted, and published at Basil, fol. 1533. Another translation, by Gouthier d'Andernac, was improved from the Greek, and has often been reprinted. Among the works of Mercurialis is a small treatise in verse, attributed to Alexander. Haller published a Latin edition of all his works, in 1772, 2 vols. 8vo, with Freind’s account of his practice. In 1734, an abridgement was published at London by Edward MiUvard, M. D. entitled “Trallianus Redivivus, or an account of Trallianus one of the Greek authors who flourished after Galen; showing that these authors are far from deserving the imputation of mere tforrtpilators,” 8vo. This was intended as a supplement to Dr. Freind’s History.

, a sculptor and architect of Bologna, was the disciple of Louis Carrache, and the friend of Dominic, who brought him to Rome, where he died in 1654. In the church of St. Peter of the Vatican is a bas-relief of his representing St. Leon before Attila, in great estimation by connoisseurs: and at Bologna is an admirable groupe of his, the beheading of St. Paul. His other works are, the statue of St. Philippa de Neri; all the fountains and decorations of the villa Pamphili, the faade of the church of St. Ignatius, and the great altar of the church of St. Nicholas Tolentine, which is a chefd'ceuvre. Algardi revived sculpture from the neglect into which it had fallen previously to his time, and became the founder of a school of eminent artists, who owe their high reputation to following his steps. Pope Innocent XI. gave him six thousand Roman crowns for the bas-relief of St. Leon, and presented him with a gold chain which he ordered him to wear all his life. His epitaph in the church of St. John and Petrona, very justly remaiks, that his works wanted nothing but age to place them on a footing with the most perfect specimens of antiquity. Milizia bestows high praise on Algardi in his “Memorie de gli architetti,” Bassan. 1785. His private character appears to have been Tery excellent.

, an architect and geometrician of the sixteenth century, was born at Carpi, in Modena. He was employed as architect by the duke of Ferrara, but applied himself principally to the art of fortification. Hia work on that subject, “Delle Fortificazioni,” divided into three books, was printed at Venice in 1570, in a most splendid form, in folio. Modern engineers have been much, indebted to him.

, a very eminent artist, was born in 1488, at Altdorffin Bavaria, and rose to be a member of the senate of Ratisbon, and architect to the town, where he died in 1578. His merit as a painter appears to have been very considerable, but much more as a designer and engraver. His works in wood and metal are as numerous as, in general, remarkable for diminutive size, though neither his conceptions nor forms were puny. The cuts of “The Passion,” “Jael and Siserah,” “Pyramus and Thisbe,” “Judah and Thamar,” if we allow for the ignorance of costume in the three last, show a sensibility of mind, and a boldness of design, which perhaps none of his German contemporaries can boast. Holbein is said to have drawn great assistance from him, evident traces of the style of Altorfer appearing in the prints of that inimitable artist, although certainly much improved.

, of the fourth century, was an architect in the service of Julian the apostate, who com?­mitted to his care the rebuilding the temple of Jerusalem, which he was forced to abandon, by fires which issued from under the earth, and rendered the place inaccessible. Eight years after, he found himself involved in an accusar tion of magic, and with a great many others condemned without proof and banished, after his goods had been confiscated. His son Hierocles, condemned to death on the same accusation, made his escape when they were leading him to execution; and the news of this happy circumstance softened the affliction of Alvpius in his banishment. He is the reputed author of a geographical work published by Godefroy, at Geneva, in Gr. and Lat. 1628, 4to, but there is no good atithority for attributing it to him.

, a celebrated architect and sculptor, was born at Florence in 1511, and was at first the scholar of Baccio Bandinelli, and then of Sansovino at Venice; but on his return to his own country, he studied with much enthusiasm the sculptures of Michael Angelo in the chapel of St. Laurence. His first works are at Pisa; for Florence he executed a Leda, and about the same time, for Naples, the three figures, large as life, on the tomb of the poet Sannazarius. Meeting with some unpleasant circumstances here, he returned to Venice, and made the colossal Neptune, which is in St. Mark’s place. At Padua he made another colossal statue, of Hercules, which is still in the Montava palace, and has been engraved. He then went to Rome to study the antique, and pope Julius III. employed him in works of sculpture in the capitol. Some time after, in conjunction withVasari, he erected the tomb of cardinal de Monti, which added very considerably to his fame. Besides these, he executed a great number of works for Rome, Florence, and other places. The porticoes of the court of the palace Pitti are by him, as well as the bridge of the Trinity, one of the finest structures that have been raised since the revival of the arts, the facade of the Roman college, and the palace Rupsoli on the Corso. This architect composed a large work, entitled “La Cita,” comprising designs for all the public edifices necessary to a great city. This book, after having passed successively through several hands, was presented some time in the eighteenth century to prince Ferdinand of Tuscany, and it is now among the collection of designs in the gallery of Florence, after having been long inquired after, and supposed to be lost. After the death of his wife, he devoted the greater part of his wealth to pious purposes, and died himself in 1592. His wife, Laura Battiferri, an Italian lady of distinguished genius and learning, was the daughter of John. Antony Battiferri, and was born at Urbino in 1513. She spent her whole life in the study of philosophy and polite literature, and is esteemed one of the best Italian poets of the sixteenth century. The principal merit of her poems, “L'Opere Toscane,” 1560, consists in a noble elevation, their being filled with excellent morals, and their breathing a spirit of piety. The academy of Intronati, at Sienna, chose her one of their members. She died in November 1589, at seventy-six years of age.

, or more properly Andrea Pisano, an eminent sculptor and architect, was born at Pisa in 1270, at a time when Arnolfo di Lapo, John de Pisa, and others, following the designs of Cimabue and Giotto, had renounced the Gothic style, and were introducing those purer models, which promised a revolution in architecture, sculpture, and painting. Andrea, entering into their ideas, had some peculiar circumstances in his favour, as at that time his countrymen, who were powerful at sea, traded with Greece, and brought thence ancient statues, bas-reliefs, and valuable marbles, which they employed in the ornament or construction of their public edifices, particularly the cathedral and the Campo Santo. By studying these, Andrea acquired a portion of that taste which was afterwards so conspicuous in Donatelio, Brunelleschi, and Ghiberti. His first attempts were so favourably received, that he was invited to Florence to execute, from the designs of Giotto, the sculptures on the facade of St. Marie del Fiore, the most magnificent edifice of that time. He began with the statue of Boniface VIII. the protector of the Florentines, which he followed by those of St. Peter, St. Paul, and other saints. In 1586, when it was determined to repair this facade upon a more modern plan, these were all removed, and when that design was not approved of, they were put up in the church and in other places, and some were deposited in the Poggio imperiale, a country-house belonging to the grand dukes of Tuscany. There was also a Madona and two angels in the church of the Misericordia, which are said to have been executed by Andrea at the same time. On the death of Arnolfo di Lapo, the republic of Florence employed Andrea in all the great works constructing in their territories. As an engineer, he built the fortifications round Florence, and the strong castle of Scarperia. During more peaceable times, he employed himself in making figures in bronze; and the Florentines, who were ambitious of rivalling the magnificence of the ancients in their temples, employed him to execute the sculpture of the gates of the baptistery, from designs by Giotto. These gates were accordingly covered with basreliefs, representing the whole history of John the Baptist. The composition is excellent, and the attitudes of the figures natural and expressive, although with some degree of stiffness, but the minute parts are executed with great skill. These gates, which were begun in 1331, were finished, polished, and gilt in eight years, and at first were placed at the principal entrance, but they were afterwards removed to one of the side entrances, where they now are, and the admirable gates of Laurent Ghiberti substituted in their room. Andrea also executed in bronze the tabernacle of San Giovanni, the has reliefs, and statues belonging to the campanile of St. Marie del Fiore, and many others. At Venice, his works are, the sculpture oa the façade of the church of St. Mark; the model of the baptistery of Pistoia, executed in 1337; and the tomb of Cino d'Angibolgi; and he was employed in many fortifications by Gaultier de Brienne, duke of Athens, during his usurpation at Florence; but Andrea did not suffer by the duke’s disgrace in 1343; and the Florentines, who looked only to his merit, admitted him a citizen of Florence, where he died in 1345, and was buried in St. Marie del Fiore. His son Nino, also a sculptor of considerable note, erected a monument to his memory.

, of Cyresthes, a Greek architect, is celebrated for having constructed at Athens the Tower of the Winds, an octagon building, on each of the sides of which was a figure, in sculpture, representing one of the winds. He named them Solanus, Eurus, Auster, Africaiius, Favonius, Corus, Septentrio, and Aquilo. On the top of this tower was a small pyramid of marble, which supported a piece of mechanism somewhat like the modern weathercock. It consisted of a brass Triton, which turned on a pivot, and pointed with its rod to the side of the tower on which was represented the wind that then happened to blow. From the bad style of the architecture of the figures, it is supposed to have been constructed posterior to the time of Pericles. Being built of large blocks of marble it has withstood the ravages of time, and the upper part only is destroyed, but the whole has sunk about twelve feet. As each of the sides had a sort of dial, it is conjectured that it formerly contained a clypsedra, or water-clock. The roof was of marble, shaped in the form of tiles, a mode which was invented by Byzes, of Naxos, in 580 B. C. It now serves as a mosque to some dervises. Spon, Wheeler, Leroi, and Stuart, have given ample descriptions of this ancient structure.

, an eminent French architect, was born at Orleans, or, according to some, at Paris, in the sixteenth century. Cardinal d'Armagnac was among the first who patronised him, and furnished him with money for the expences of his studies in Italy. The triumphal arch, which still remains at Pola in Istria, was so much admired by him, that he introduced an imitation of it in all his arches. He began the Pont Neuf, at Paris, May 30, 1578, by order of Henry III. but the civil wars prevented his finishing that great work, which was reserved for William Marchand, in the reign of Henry IV. 1604. Androuet, however, built the hotels of Carnavalet, Fermes, Bretonvilliers, Sully, Mayenne, and other palaces in Paris. In 1596, he was employed by Henry IV. to continue the gallery of the Louvre, which had been begun by order of Charles XL but this work he was qbliged to quit on account of his religion. He was a zealous protestant, of the Calvinistic church, and when the persecution arose he left France, and died in some foreign country, but where or when is not known. Androuet is not more distinguished for the practice, than the theory of his art. He wrote, 1. “Livre d' Architecture, contenant les plans et dessins de cinquante Batiments, tons differents,” 1559, fol. reprinted 1611. 2. “Second livre d' Architecture,” a continuation of the former, 1561, fol. S. “Les plus excellents Batirnents de France,” 1576, 1607, fol. 4. “Livre d' Architecture auquel sont contenues diverses ordonnances de plans et elevations de Batiments pour seigneurs et autres qui voudront batir aux champs,” 1582, fol. 5. “Les Edifices Remains,” a collection of engravings of the antiquities of Rome, from designs made on the spot, 1583, fol. 6. “Lesons de Perspective,” 1576, fol. He was also his own engraver, and etched his plates in a correct but somewhat coarse style.

, an eminent architect of the sixth century, was born at Tralles in Lydia. His father had five sons, Olympius, a lawyer, Dioscorus and Alexander, physicians, Metrodorus, a grammarian, and our Anthemius, who was an excellent mathematician, and availed himself of that science in the works which he erected. It appears likewise that he was acquainted with the more modern secrets of philosophy and chemistry, as historians inform us that he could imitate thunder and lightning, and even the shock of an earthquake, In consequence of a trifling dispute with Zeuo, his neighbour, respecting the walls or windows of their contiguous houses, in which Zeno appeared to have the advantage, Anthemius played him a trick, which is thus described: he arranged several vessels or cauldrons of water, each of them covered by the wide bottom of a leathern tube which rose to a narrow top, and was artificially conveyed among the joists and rafters of the adjacent building. A fire was kindled beneath the cauldron, and the steam of the boiling water ascended through the tubes: the house was shaken by the efforts of the imprisoned air, and the trembling inhabitants wondered that the city was unconscious of an earthquake which they felt. At another time the friends of Zeno, as they sat at table, were dazzled by the intolerable light which flashed in their eyes from the reflecting mirrors of Anthemius; they were astonished by the noise which he produced from a collision of certain minute and sonorous particles: and Zeno declared to the senate, that a mere mortal must yield to the power of an antagonist who shook the earth with the trident of Neptune, and imitated the thunder and lightning of Jove himself. But the genius of Anthemius appeared to most advantage in the erection of the new church of St. Sophia at Constantinople. This he undertook by order of the emperor Justinian, and was assisted by ten thousand workmen, whose payment, we are told, doubtless as a hint to modern surveyors, was made in fine silver, and never delayed beyond the evening. It was completed in five years, eleven months, and ten days. Gibbon has given a splendid description of this edifice, now the principal Turkish mosque, which continues to excite the fond admiration of the Greeks, and the more rational curiosity of European travellers. Anthemius died about the year 534. He is said to have written on the subject of machinery, and Dupuy, secretary to the French academy of inscriptions, published a fragment of his in 1777, on mechanics and dioptrics, in which Anthemius endeavours to explain the burning mirrors employed by Archimedes in destroying the Roman ships.

, a famous architect under Trajan and Adrian, was born at Damascus; and had the direction of that most magnificent bridge, which the former ordered to be built over the Danube, in the year 104, Adrian, who always valued himself highly upon his knowledge of arts and sciences, and hated every one of whose eminence in his profession he had reason to be jealous, conceived a very early disaffection to this artist, upon the following occasion: As Trajan was one day discoursing with Apollodorus upon the buildings he had raised at Rome, Adrian gave his judgment, but shewed himself ignorant: on which the artist, turning bluntly upon him, bid him “go paint citruls, for that he knew nothing of the subject they were talking of:” now Adrian was at that time engaged in. painting citruls (a yellow kind of cucumber), and even boasted of it. This was the first step towards the ruin of Apollodorus; which he was so far from attempting to retrieve, that he even added a new offence, and that too after Adrian was advanced to the empire. To shew Apollodorus that he had no absolute occasion for him, Adrian sent him the plan of a temple of Venus; and, though he asked his opinion, yet he did not mean to be directed by it, for the temple was actually built. Apollodorus wrote his opinion very freely, and found such essential faults with it, as the emperor could neither deny or remedy. He shewed, that it was neither high nor large enough; that the statues in it were disproportioned to its bulk; “for,” said he, “if the goddesses should have a mind to rise and go out, they could not do it.” This irritated Adrian, and prompted him to get rid of Apollodorus. He banished him at first, and at last had him put to death; without stating the true cause, of which he would have been ashamed, but under the pretext of several crimes, of which he procured him to be accused and convicted.

, descended from a family originally of Nanci in Lorraine, but long established at Paris, was born in the latter city in 1653. From his earliest years, he discovered a taste for architecture, and studying the art with eagerness, soon made very considerable progress. At the age of twenty he was sent to an academy at Rome, founded by the king of France for the education of young men of promising talents in painting, architecture, &c. He was accompanied in the voyage by the celebrated Antony Desgodets, whose measurements of the ancient Roman edifices are so well known. They embarked at Marseilles about the end of 1674, with all the impatience of youthful curiosity, but had the misfortune to be taken by an Algerine corsair, and carried into slavery. Louis XIV. no sooner heard of their disaster, than he made interest for the liberation of Desgodets and A viler, and likewise for John Foi Vaillant, the celebrated antiquary, who had been a passenger with them. Sixteen months, however, elapsed before the Algerines admitted them to be exchanged for some Turkish prisoners in the power of France. Aviler and his friends obtained their liberty, Feb. 22, 1676. During their slavery, Aviler could not conceal his art, although the admiration with which it struck the Algerines, might have afforded them a pretext for detaining one who could be so useful to them. On the contrary, he solicited employment, and had it at least there was extant some time ago, an original plan and elevation of a mosque which he made, and which was built accordingly at Tunis. On being released, however, he went to Rome, where he studied for five years with uninterrupted assiduity, and on his return to France was appointed by M. Mansart, first royal architect, to a considerable place in the board of architecture. While in this situation, iie began to collect materials for a complete course of architectural studies. His first design was to reprint an edition of Vignola, with corrections but perceiving that the explanations of the plates in that work were too short, he began to add to them remarks and illustrations in the form of commentary and, what has long rendered his work valuable, he added a complete series, in alphabetical order, of architectural definitions, which embrace every branch, direct or collateral, of the art, and which have been copied into all the subsequent French dictionaries. He prefixed also a translation of Scamozzi’s sixth book, which treats of the orders.

While Aviler remained as subordinate to Mansart, "he conceived that he could not acquire any high distinction in his profession, and therefore accepted an invitation to go to Montpeliier, where he built a magnificent triumphal arch, in honour of Louis XIV. from a design by M. D'Orbay, who was one of his friends, and had assisted him in completing his literary work. This arch was finished in 1692, and highly approved, and A viler afterwards constructed various edifices at Beziers, Nismes, Montpeliier, and at Toulouse, where he built the archiepiscopal palace. In 1693 the states of Languedoc, as a testimony of their esteem, created the title of architect to the province, a mark of distinction which induced him to reside there during life; but this was not long, as he died in -1700, when only forty-seven years of age.

The academy having nominated in 1786, commissioners to examine a plan by Poyet, architect, for a new Hotel Dieu, Bailly drew up their report in 250 pages octavo which is a valuable instance both of the professional knowledge and the humanity of the author. He proposed the erection of four different hospitals and Breteuil, who was then minister, and had great reliance on Bailly, had finally resolved on executing his plan, when the revolution of 1789 drove him from the ministry.

, was born at Turin about the year 1716. His father was an architect under don Philip Invara, the famous Sicilian, who left many specimens of his abilities in and about Turin. From this parent he appears to have received a good education, and had some little property left him, which he tells us himself he gamed away at faro by which means he was forced to have recourse to his wits, and thus turned author in spite of his teeth, as he phrases it, to keep them going. To the early part of his life we are strangers, except that we learn from himself, that he had been employed two years at Cuneo assisting at the fortifications there, but left the place a few days before the siege of it, by the combined powers of France and Spain, commenced in 1744. What became of him after this period we are not informed, except that in 1748 he was at Venice a teacher of Italian to English gentlemen. From circumstances scattered through his works, we can collect that he had travelled much had experienced some vicissitudes of fortune had encountered several difficulties and at length, with little money in his pocket, with a very imperfect knowledge of the English tongue, and without any recommendations, he bent his course towards England, where he arrived in 1750, and where he continued to reside (with a short interval) during the rest of his life.

Alexander VII. who succeeded pope Innocent X. and who had a high respect for Bernini, and was an encourager of the arts, requested him to make a design for the further decoration of St. Peter’s, which produced the celebrated circular colonnade, so appropriate to the building as to seem part of the scheme of the original architect. Ha was not, however, so successful in the composition of the pulpit of St. Peter’s, supported by colossal figures representing the four doctors of the church, which, although altered from his first model, has neither the freedom nor spirit of his other works among which may now be enumerated the Odechalchi palace, the rotunda of St. Riccio, and the noviciate of the Jesuits at Monte Cavallo.

, an eminent Spanish painter, sculptor, and architect, was born at Parades de Nava, near Valladolid. He went when young into Italy, studied under Michael Angelo, and became the friend and intimate of Andrea del Sarto, Baccio, Bandine*lli, and other celebrated artists. After having finished his education, he returned to Spain, and afforded eminent proofs of his talents in the Prado of Madrid, and the Alhambra of Grenada. The emperor Charles V. who admired his extensive and various talents, bestowed on him the order of knighthood, and appointed him gentleman of his chamber. After establishing a high reputation and a great fortune, Berruguete died at Madrid in 1545, advanced in years. In the cathedral of Toledo, is one of his finest sculptures, the Transfiguration, and some other beautiful carvings in the choir, one side of which was thus decorated by him, the other by Philip de Borgona. His style possessed much of the sublime manner of his great master, and he was justly admired by his countrymen, as being the first who introduced the true principles of the fine arts into Spain.

, an eminent French marine clock-maker, a member of the institute, of the royal society of London, and of the legion of honour, was born March 19, 1727, at Plancemont in Neufchatel. His father, who was an architect and justiciary, had destined him for the church; but the youth having had an opportunity, when only sixteen years of age, to examine the mechanism of a clock, became so fond of that study as to attend to nothing else. His father then very wisely encouraged an enthusiasm so promising, and after having employed an able workman to instruct his son in the elements of clockmaking, consented that he should go to Paris to perfect his knowledge of the art. He accordingly came to Paris in 1745, and there constructed his first specimens of marine clocks, which soon were universally approved and adopted. Bjerthoud and Peter Leroi were rival makers of these longitudinal clocks, and came very near each other, although by different methods, in the construction of them but Berthoud’s superior experience made the preference be

, painter and architect, was born at Boulogne in 1657. He studied the elements of his art under Cignani, a distinguished artist, and when this master produced his disciple to the world, his talents for architecture, for theatrical decorations, and for perspective, obtained him a good reception. The duke of Parma and the emperor gave him the title of their first painter, and loaded him with favours. Several magnificent edifices were raised after his plans. His pieces of perspective are full of taste, but there have not been wanting som critics who have censured him for having a pencil more fantastic than natural and just. He died blind in 1743, leaving two books of architecture and sons worthy of their father. It is probable that to one of them (J. Galli Bibbiena) the public is indebted for the “History of the amours of Valeria and the noble Venetian Barbarigo,” translated into French, Lausanne and Geneva, 1751. He had also a brother, an architectural painter of considerable fame.

, an eminent surveyor and architect, was born in the borough of Southwark, on the 20th of December, 1750. His father was a respectable tradesman in St. John’s parish, and his mother was a native of Spain. The whole of his grammatical education was derived from a common seminary in the neighbourhood; and at a proper age he was placed under a surveyor of no eminence, but from whom he derived very few advantages in the knowledge of his profession. However, from the natural bent of an ardent mind, he sought the acquaintance of men of genius, several of whom belonged to the Jioyal Academy. Into that academy he was admitted as a student; and in 1773 he was presented with the medal for the best drawing of the inside of St. Stephen’s church in Walbrook. This prize he bore away from many competitors and, at the delivery of it, received a high compliment to his abilities from the late sir Joshua Reynolds, the president. About the same time he entered into business for himself in Southwark, and carried it on for some years with increasing success among his private connections, when an event occurred which brought him into public notice and reputation. An act of parliament had passed in 1779, declaring, that “if any offenders convicted of crimes for which transportation had been usually inflicted, were ordered to solitary imprisonment, accompanied by well regulated labour and religious instruction, it might be the means, under providence, not only of deterring others from the commission of the like crimes, but also of reforming the individuals, and enuring them to the habits of industry.” By this act his majesty was authorised to appoint three persons to be supervisors of the buildings to be erected; and the supervisors were to fix upon any common, heath, or waste, or any other piece of ground, in Middlesex, Essex, Kent, or Surrey, on which should be erected two plain strong edifices, to be called “Penitentiary Houses” one for the confinement and employment of six hundred males, the other of three hundred females. In the same year in which the act was passed, three supervisors were appointed to carry it into execution. These were John Howard, esq George Whatley, esq. and Dr. John Fothergill. This commission however was dissolved, first by the death of Dr. Fothergill, and soon after that event by the resignation of Mr. Howard, who found it not in his power to coalesce with his remaining colleague. Another set of supervisors was therefore appointed in 1781, being sir Gilbert Elliot, bart. sir Charles Bunbury, bart. and Thomas Bowdler, esq. One of the principal objects with these gentlemen was to provide that they should be constructed in the manner most conducive to the ends of solitary confinement, useful labour, and moral reformation. Accordingly, the supervisors proposed premiums for the best plans that should be produced of the penitentiary houses intended to be erected. The highest premium was a hundred guineas, which xvas unanimously assigned to Mr. Blackburn, in the month of March 1782. This preference, as a pecuniary consideration, was a matter of little consequence. The grand advantage that was to be expected from it, with regard to Mr. Blackburn, was, that he should be employed as the architect and surveyor of the buildings proposed. And in fact he was appointed by the supervisors to that office and the plan of a penitentiary house for male offenders was accordingly arranged by him, and proper draughts were made for the use of the workmen; and a great part of the work was actually contracted for by different persons. Yet the designs of government were not carried into execution the circumstances of the times having diverted the attention of public men from this important object nor has it ever since been resumed. Nevertheless, though Mr. Blackburn might in this respect be disappointed of his just expectations, he did not lose his reward, nor was the nation deprived of the benefit arising from his ingenuity. A spirit of erecting prisons in conformity to his plans was immediately excited and many county gaols, and other structures of the same nature, were built under his inspection. Besides the completion of several prisons, Mr. Blackburn was engaged in other designs of a similar nature, when he was arrested by the hand of death, in the fortieth year of his age. He departed this life on the 28th day of October, 1790, at Preston in Lancashire, being on a journey to Scotland, whither he was going at the instance of his grace the duke of Buccleugh, and the lord provost of Glasgow, with a view to the erection of a new gaol in that city. From Preston his remains were removed to London, and interred in the burying-ground of Bunhill-fields.

He seemed now arrived at the point he always wished for, and might justly be said to enjoy “otium cum dignitate.” Freed from the attendance at the bar, and what he had still a greater aversion to, in the senate, “where (to use his own expression) amid the rage of contending parties, a man of moderation must expect to meet with no quarter from any side,” although he diligently and conscientiously atcended the duties of the high office he was now placed in, yet the leisure afforded by the legal vacations he dedicated to the private duties of life, which, as the father of a numerous family, he now found himself called upon to exercise, or to literary retirement, and the society of his friends, at his villa, called Priory-place, in Wallingford which he purchased soon after his marriage, though he had for some years before occasionally resided at it. His connection with this town, both from his office of recorder, and his more or less frequent residence there, 'from about 1750, led him to form and promote every plan which could contribute to its benefit or improvement. To his activity it stands indebted for two new turnpike roads through the town; the one opening a communication, by means of a new bridge over the Thames at Shillingford, between Oxford and Reading the other to Wantage through the vale of Berkshire. He was indeed always a great promoter of the improvement of public roads: the new western road over Botley Causeway was projected, and the plan of it entirely conducted by him. He was the more earnest in this design, not merely as a work of general utility and ornament, but as a solid improvement to the estate of a nobleman, in settling whose affairs he had been most laboriously and beneficially employed. To his architectural talents, also, his liberal disposition, his judicious zeal, and his numerous friends, Wallingford owes the rebuilding that handsome fabric, St. Peter’s church. These were his employments in retirement; in London his active mind was never idle, and when not occupied in the duties of his station, he was ever engaged in some scheme of publifc utility. The last of this kind in which, he was concerned, was the act of parliament for providing detached houses of hard labour for convicts, as a substitute for transportation. Of this scheme we have just given some account in the life of Blackburn the architect. It has been put in practice in several counties, but the question as to the beneficial effects of solitary confinement, although frequently agitated, has not been so completely decided as to obviate many objections which have been lately offered.

, a satirical wit, was born at Loretto in 1556, the son of an architect of a Roman family, about the beginning of the seventeenth century. The method he took to indulge his turn for satire, or rather plot of his publications, was the idea that Apollo, holding his courts Oh Parnassus, heard the complaints of the wholeworld, and gave judgment as the case required. He was received into the academies of Italy, where he gained great applause by his political discourses, and his elegant criticisms. The cardinals Borghese and Cajetan having declared themselves his patrons, he published his “News from Parnassus/' and” Apollo’s Secretary,“a continuation which being well received, he proceeded further, and printed his” Pietra di Paragone“wherein he attacks the court of Spain, setting forth their designs against the liberty of Italy, and inveighing particularly against themfor the tyranny they exercised in the kingdom of Naples. The Spaniards complained of him in form, and were determined at any rate to be revenged. Boccalini was frightened, and retired to Venice. Some time after he was murdered in a surprising manner. He lodged with one of his friends, who having got up early one morning, left Boccalini in bed; when a minute after four armed men entered his chamber, and gave him so many blows with bags full of sand that they left him for dead so that his friend, upon his return, found him unable to utter one word. Great search was made at Venice for the authors of this murder and though they were never discovered, yet it was universally believed that they were set to work. by the court of Spain. This story, however, has been called in question by Mazzuchelli, and seems indeed highly improbable at least it can by no means stand upon its present foundation. His attacking the court of Spain in his” Pietra di Paragone,“is said to have been the cause of his murder but another cause, if he really was murdered, must be sought, for he died, by whatever means, Nov. 10, 1613, and the” Pietra“was not published until two years after that event. It appears likewise from one of his letters, that he had kept the manuscript a profound secret, communicating it only to one confidential frienc!, to whom the above letter was written. Besides, the register of the parish in which he died, mentions that on Nov. 10, 1613, the signor Trajan Boccalini died at the age of fiftyseven, of a cholic accompanied with a fever. Apostolo Zeno, vrho mentions this circumstance in his notes on Fontanini’s” Italian Library,“adds, that in a speech publicly delivered at Venice in 1<320, in defence of Trissino, whom. Boccalini had attacked, ample mention rs made of him, who had then been dead seven years, and in terms of severe censure; but not a word was said of his assassination, which could not have then been a secret, nor could there be any reason for concealing it. If indeed he suffered in the manner reported, it formed an exact counterpart of what he records to have happened to Euclid the mathematician. Euclid had demonstrated, as a mathematical problem, that all the lines both of princes’” and private men’s thoughts meet in one centre namely, to pick money out of other men’s pockets and put it into their own and for this he was attacked by some of his hearers who beat him with sand-bags and perhaps, as a foundation for the story, some of Boccalini’s readers may have said that he ought to have been punished in the same manner. Boccal'mi’s works are: 1. “Itagguagli di Parnaso, centuria prima,” Venice, 1612, 4to. “Centuria secxinda,” ibid. 1613, 4to, neither published long enough before his death to have excited much general odium. These two parts were afterwards frequently reprinted in one volume. There is unquestionably in this work, much to make it popular, and mnch to excite hostility. His notions on government, liberty, &c. were too free for his age and country and his treatment of literary characters is frequently captious and unjust, yet the work upon the whole is amusing, and original in its plan. A third part was published by Jerome Briani, of Modena, at Venice, 165O, 8vo, and die whole was translated and published in English, tinder the inspection of Hughes the poet, 1705, lol. 2. “Pietra del Paragone politico,” Cosmopoli (Amsterdam), 1615, 4to, and often, reprinted in various sizes; that of Amsterdam, 1653, 24mo, is reckoned the best. It has been translated into Latin, French, and English, first in 1626, 4to, and afterwards in Hughes’s edition and into German. This “political touchstone” bears hard on the Spanish monarchy, and may be considered as a supplement to his “News from Parnassus.” 3. “Commentari sopra Cornelio Tacito,” Geneva, 1669, 4to, Cosmopoli (Amsterdam), 1677, 4to, and afterwards in a collection published under the title “La Bilancia politica di tutte le opere di Trajano Boccalini,” &c. with notes and observations by the chevalier Louis du May, at Castellana, 167S, 3 vols. 4to. The first two volumes of this scarce work contain the Tacitus, on which the annotator, not content with being very free in his religious opinions, takes some extraordinary liberties with the text, and therefore they were soon inserted in the Index Expurgatorius. They contain, however, many curious facts which tend to illustrate the political affairs of the time. The third volume is filled with political and historical letters, collected hy Gregorio Leti but although these are signed with Boccalini’s name, they are supposed to have been written by his son, and by the editor Leti, a man not very scrupulous in impositions of this kind. 6. “La Segretaria d'Apollo,” Amst. 1653, 24mo, a sort of continuation of the “Ragguagli,” very much in Boccalini’s manner, but most probably we owe it to the success of his acknowledged works.

, a celebrated French architect, was the son of a sculptor, and of a sister of the famous Quinault, and born at Nantes in Bretagne, May 7, 1667. He was trained under Harduin Mansard, who trusted him with conducting his greatest works. Boffrand was admitted into the French academy of architecture in 1709: many princes of Germany chose him for their architect, and raised considerable edifices upon his plans. His manner of building approached that of Palladio and there was much of grandeur in all his designs. As engineer and inspectorgeneral of the bridges and highways, he caused to be constructed a number of canals, sluices, bridges, and other mechanical works. There is of this illustrious architect a curious and useful, book, which contains the general principles of his art to which is added an account of the plans, profiles, and elevations of the principal works which he executed in France and other countries, entitled “Livre d' Architecture, &c.” fol. 1745, with seventy plates. He published also an account of the casting the bronze figure of Louis XIV. “Description de ce qui a etc” pratique pour fondre en bronze, &c." 1743, fol. with plates. In his private character, Boffrand is represented as of a noble and disinterested spirit, and of a pleasing and agreeable manner. He died at Paris, March Is, 1754, dean of the academy of architecture, first engineer and inspectorgeneral of the bridges and highways, architect and administrator of the general hospital.

, an eminent French architect, was born at Bissona in the diocese of Como in 1599, and acquired great reputation at Rome, where he was more employed than any architect of his time. A great number of his works are seen in that city, but the major part are by no means models for young artists. Thjey abound in deviations from the received rules, and other singularities; but, at the same time, we cannot fail of perceiving in them talents of a superior order, and strong marks of genius. It was in his violent efforts to outdo Bernini, whose fame he envied, that he departed from that simplicity which is the true basis of the beautiful, in order to give extravagant ornaments in that taste; which have induced some to compare his style in architecture to the literary style of Seneca or Marini. With his talents, had he studied the great masters in their greatest perfections, he would have been the first architect of his time, merely by following their track; but he unfortunately deviated into the absurdities of singularity, and has left us only to guess from the college of the Propaganda, and a few other buildings at Rome, what he might have been. Even in his own time, his false taste was decried, and it is supposed that the mortifications he met with brought on a derangement of mind, in one of the fits of which he put an end to his life in 1667. From a vain opinion of his superiority, he is said to have destroyed all his designs, before his death, lest any other architect should adopt them. There was published, however, in 1725, at Rome, in Italian and Latin, his “Description of the church of Vallicela,” which he built, with the plans and designs, and a plan of the church of Sapienza, at Rome.

, an architect, who was born in France in 1670, of protestant parents, quitted his country early in life, and went into the service of William of Orange, afterwards king of Great Britain. After the death of that prince, he attached himself to the elector of Brandenbourg, who gave him a post of captain of the guards, which did not slacken his industry in architecture. His first edifice was the arsenal at Berlin, and he afterwards signalized himself by various monuments of his art. Frederic I. being dead, Bott conciliated the favour of Frederic William, who raised him to the rank of major-general. The fortifications of Wesel, of which place he was commandant, were constructed under his direction. In 1728 he went into the service of the king of Poland, elector of Saxony, in quality of lieutenant-general and chief of the engineers. In Dresden are several edifices of his erection, where he died in 1745, with great reputation for probity, intelligence, and valour.

, a French sculptor, was the son of a sculptor and architect, and born at Chaumont in Bassigni in 1698. He was drawn by an irresistible passion for these two arts, but confined himself at length to the former. After having passed some time at Paris under the younger Coustou, and obtained the prize at the academy in 1722, he was carried to Rome at the king’s expence. Upon his return from Italy, where his talents had been greatly improved, he adorned Paris with his works: a list of them may be seen in a life of him, published in 1762, 12mo, by the count de Caylus, but some of them no longer exist, particularly his fine equestrian statue of Louis XV. formerly in the square named after that monarch. In 1744 he obtained a place in the academy; and, two years after, a professorship. He died July 17, 1762, a loss to the arts, and much lamented; for he is described as a man of great talent, disinterested spirit, and of most amiable manners. Music was his object in the hours of recreation, and his talents in this way were very considerable. Count Caylus, in his “Tableaux tires de l‘Iliade et de l’Odysse d'Homere,” mentions Bouchardon, with honour, among the tew artists who borrowed their subjects from Homer, and relates the following anecdote: “This great artist having lately read Homer in an old and detestable French translation, came one day to me, his eyes sparkling with fire, and said, * Since I have read this book, men seem to be fifteen feet high, and all nature is enlarged in my sight'.” This anecdote, however, does not give a very high idea of the education of a French artist, and a professor of the art.

, or Donato Lazzari, but celebrated under the former name, a painter and architect, was born at Castel Durante, in the territory of Urbino, irv 1444, and at Urbino studied the works of Fra Carnevale, er Corradini. His fame as an architect has nearly obliterated his memory as a painter, though many of his works remain at Milan and its district, and are repeatedly mentioned by Cesariani and Lomazzo, who observe that his style on the whole resembled that of Andrea Mantegna. He painted portraits, sacred and profane history, in distemper and in fresco. He too, like Mantegna, studied much after casts, thence perhaps the too salient lights of his flesh. Like him, he draped models in paper or glued linen, to avoid stiffness. Lomazzo, who cleaned one of his pictures in distemper, found that, like Mantegna, he made use of a viscous liquid. The public frescoes of Bramante at Milan, mentioned by Lomazzo and Scaramuccia, are either no more, or spoiled; but a considerable number of private ones still remain in certain apartments of the palaces Borri and CastiglionL In the Certosa of Pavia there is likewise a chapel said to have been painted by him: the proportions are square, and rather heavy; the faces full, the aged heads grand; the colour vivid and salient, not without some crudity. The same style prevails in a picture of his belonging to the Melzi family, representing several saints and a beautiful perspective; it recurs again in an altar-piece of the Incoronata at Lodi, a charming temple built from the design of Bramante, by Gio. Bataggio, a native of the place; but his master-piece at Milan is at the church of S. Sebastian, the patron saint, in whose style no trace of Quattrocento appears.

, an eminent Italian architect, was born at Florence in 1377. His father was a notary, and his sou for some time was apprenticed to a goldsmith, but afterwards discovered a turn for geometry, in which he was instructed by Paul Toscanelli. A journey which he happened to take to Rome gave him a taste for architecture, which he hftproved by the study of the edifices in that city, and had a very early opportunity of trying his skill. A dome was wanted for the church of St. Maria del Fiore at Florence; the ablest architects had been requested to send in their plans, and that of Brunelleschi was adopted, and carried into execution with an effect which astonished Michael Angelo himself. He was next employed by Cosmo the Great in building the abbey of Fesoli, and was afterwards solicited for the plan of a palace for Cosmo. Brunelleschi accordingly gave in a design of great magnificence, but Cosmo thought proper to prefer one more suited to the prudent economy which was then necessary for him, and Brunelleschi was so irritated that he destroyed his design. Brunelleschi afterwards built the Pitti palace, in part, and the church of St. Lorenzo in Florence almost entirely. He also gave some designs in military architecture. He is said to have been the first who attempted to restore the Grecian orders of architecture, and under his control this branch of the art attained a degree of perfection which it had not known from the time of the ancients. Brunelieschi died in 1446, greatly lamented, and was interred with sumptuous funeral honours, and Cosmo erected a monument to his memory. He is said to have employed his leisure hours in cultivating Italian poetry, and some of his burlesque verses have been printed along with those of Burchieiio: there is a separate poem, “Geta e Birna,” ascribed to him and to Domenico dal Prato, Venice, 1516, 8vo, but this seems doubtful. It is more certain that he wrote architectural descriptions of all his works, some of which are, or lately were, in Cosmo’s palace at Florence, now the residence of the noble family of Riccardi.

, a most illustrious painter, sculptor, and architect, was born in the castle of Gaprese, in Tuscany, March 6, 1474, and descended from the noble family of the counts of Canossa. At the time of his birth, his father, Lodovico di Leonardo Buonarroti Sinione, was podesta, or governor of Caprese and Chiusi, and as he had not risen above the superstitious belief in astrological predictions, so common in that age, he was probably pleased to hear that “his chikl would be a very extraordinary genius.” His biographers indeed go so far as to tell us of a prediction, that he would excel in painting, sculpture, and architecture. When of a proper age, Michel Angelo was sent to a grammar-school at Florence, where, whatever progress he might make in his books, he contracted a fondness for drawing, which at first alarmed the pride of his family, but his father at length perceiving that it was hopeless to give his mind any other direction, placed him under Domenico Ghirlanda‘io, the most eminent painter at that time in Florence, and one of the most celebrated in Italy. He was accordingly articled for three years to Ghirlanda’io, from April 1488, but is said to have reaped no benefit from his instructions, as his master soon became jealous of his talents. He rapidly, however, surpassed his contemporary students, by the force of his genius, and his study of nature; and adopted a style of drawing and design more bold and daring than Ghirlandaio had been accustomed to see practised in his school; and, from an anecdote Vasari tells, it would seem Michel Angelo soon felt himself even superior to his master. One of the pupils copying a female portrait from a drawing by Ghirlandu'io, he took a pen and made a strong outline round it on the same paper, to shew him its defects; and the superior style of the contour was as much admired as the act was considered confident and presumptuous. His great facility in copying with accuracy whatever objects were before him sometimes forced a compliment even from Ghirlandaio himself.

Near to the Sistine chapel, in the Vatican, Antonio de San Gallo built another by the order of Paul III. which is called after its founder the Paoline chapel, and the pope being solicitous to render it more honourable to his name, desired Michel Angelo would paint the walls in fresco. Although he now began to feel he was an old man, he undertook the commission, and on the sides opposite to each other painted two large pictures, representing the martyrdom of St. Peter, and the conversion of St. Paul. These pictures, he said, cost him great fatigue, and in their progress declared himself sorry to find fresco painting was not an employment for his years; he therefore petitioned his holiness that Perino del Vaga might finish the ceiling from his designs, which was to have been decorated with painting and stucco ornaments; but this part of the work was not afterwards carried into execution. The pope often consulted Michel Angelo as an architect, although Antonio de San Gallo was the architect df St. Peter’s church, and promoted to that situation by his interest when cardinal Farnese, and now employed in his private concerns. The Farnese palace in Rome was designed by San Gallo, and the building advanced by him during his life; yet Michel Angelo constructed the bold projecting cornice that surrounds the top, in conjunction with him, at the express desire of the pope. He also consulted Michel Angelo in fortifying the Borgo, and made designs for that purpose; but the discussion of this subject proved the cause of some enmity between these two rivals in the pope’s esteem. In 1546 San Gallo died, and Michel Angelo was called upon to fill his situation as architect of St. Peter’s: he at first declined that honour, but his holiness laid his commands upon him, which admitted neither of apology nor excuse; however he accepted the appointment upon those conditions, that he would receive no salary, and that it should be so expressed in the patent, as he undertook the office purely from devotional feelings; and that, as hitherto the various persons employed in all the subordinate situations had only considered their own interest to the extreme prejudice of the undertaking, he should be empowered to discharge them, and appoint others in their sjead; and lastly, that he should be permitted to make whatever alterations he chose in San Gallo’s design, or entirely supply its place with what he might consider more simple, or in a better style. To these conditions his holiness acceded, and the patent was made out accordingly: vi

As in proceeding with St. Peter’s, he had, agreeably to his patent, chosen his own workmen, and dismissed others, the latter seldom failed of exerting such malice against him as they could display with impunity; and being exasperated by disappointments, they endeavoured to represent him as an unworthy successor of San Gallo, and upon the death of Paul III. an effort was mad^ to remove him from his situation, but Julius III. who succeeded to the pontificate, was hot less favourably disposed towards him than his predecessor; however, they presented a memorial, petitioning the pope to hold a committee of architects in St. Peter’s at Rome, to convince his holiness that their accusations and complaints were not unfounded. At the head of this party was cardinal Salviati, nephew to Leo X. and cardinal Marcello Cervino, who was afterwards pope by the title of Marcellus II. Julius agreed to the investigation, and the parties appeared in his presence. The complainants stated, that the church wanted light, and the architects had previously furnished the two cardinals with a particular example to prove the basis of the general position, which was, that he had walled up a. recess for three chapels, and made only three insufficient windows; upon which the pope asked Michel Angelo. to give his reasons for having done so; he replied, “I should wish first to hear the deputies.” Cardinal Marcello immediately said for himself and cardinal Salviati, “We ourselves are the deputies.” Then said Michel Angelo, “In the part of the church alluded to, over those windows are to be placed three others.” “You never said that before,” replied the cardinal; to which he answered with some warmth: “1 am not, neither will I ever be obliged to tell your eminence, or any one else, what I ought or am disposed to do; it is your office to see that the money be provided, to take care of the thieves, and to leave the building of St. Peter’s to me.” Turning to the pope, “Holy father, you see what I gain; if these machinations to which I am exposed are not for my spiritual welfare, I lose both my labour and my time.” The pope replied, putting his hands upon his shoulders, “Do not doubt, your gain is Dpw, and will be hereafter;” and at the same time gave him assurance of his confidence and esteem. Julius prosecuted no work in architecture or sculpture without consulting him. What was done in the Vatican, or in his villa on the Flaminian way, was with Michel Angelo’s advice and superintendance. He was employed also to rebuild a bridge across the Tiber, but as his enemies artfully pretended to commiserate his advanced age, he so far fell into this new snare as to leave the bridge to be completed by an inferior artist, and in five years it was washed away by a flood, as Michel Angelo had prophesied. In 1555 his friend and patron pope Julius died, and perhaps it would have been happier for Michel Angelo if they had ended their days together, for he was now eighty-one years old, and the remainder of his life was interrupted by the caprices of four successive popes, and the intrigues under their pontificates. Under all these vexations, however, he went on by degrees with his great undertaking, and furnished designs for various inferior works, but his enemies were still restless. He now sawthat his greatest crime was that of having lived too long; and being thoroughly disgusted with the cabals, he was solicitous to resign, that his last days might not be tormented by the unprincipled exertions of a worthless faction. That he did not complain from the mere peevishness of age will appear from a statement of the last effort of his enemie.s, the most formidable of whom were the directors of the building. Their object was to make Nanni Biggio the chief architect, which they carefully concealed, and the bishop of Ferratino, who was a principal director, began the contrivance by recommending to Michel Angelo not to attend to the fatigue of his duty, owing to his advanced age, but to nominate whomever he chose to supply his place. By this contrivance Michel Angelo willingly yielded to so courteous a proposition, and appointed Daiiiello da Volterra. As soon as this was effected, it was made the basis of accusation against him, for incapacity, which left the directors the power of choosing a successor, and they immediately superseded da Volterra, by appointing Biggio in his stead. This was so palpable a trick, go untrue in principle, and so injurious in its tendency, that in justice to himself, he thought it necessary to represent it to the pope, at the same time requesting that it might be understood there was nothing he more solicited than his dismission. His holiness took up the discussion with interest, and begged he would not recede until he Vol. VII. X had made proper inquiry, and a day was immediately appointed for the directors to meet him. They only stated in general terms, that Michel Angelo was ruining the building, and that the measures they had taken were essentially necessar}*, but the pope previously sent Signor Gabrio Serbelloni to examine minutely into the affair, who was a man well qualified for that purpose. Upon this occasion he gave his testimony so circumstantially, that the whole scheme was shown in one view to originate in falsehood, and to have been fostered by malignity. Biggio was dismissed and reprimanded, and the directors apologized, acknowledging they had been misinformed, but Michel Angelo required no apology; all he desired was, that the pope should know the truth; and he would have now resigned, had not his holiness prevailed upon him to hold his situation, and made a new arrangement, that his designs might not only be strictly executed as long as he lived, but adhered to after his death.

The merits of Michel Angelo, as an artist, have been so frequently the object of discussion, that it would be impossible to examine or analyse the various opinions thsrt have been published, without extending this article to an immoderate length. Referring, therefore, to our authorities, and especially to Mr. Duppa’s elaborate “Life of Michel Angelo,” which we have followed in the preceding sketch, we shall present the following outline from Mr. Fuseli, and conclude with some interesting circumstances in the personal history of this great artist: “Sublimity of conception,” says Mr. Fuseli, “grandeur of form, and breadth of manner, are the elements of Michel Angelo’s style; by these principles he selected or rejected the objects of imitation. As painter, as sculptor, as architect, he attempted, and above any other man succeeded, to unite magnificence of plan, and endless variety of subordinate parts, with the utmost simplicity and breadth. His line is uniformly grand. Character and beauty were admitted only as far as they could be made subservient to grandeur. The child, the female, meanness, deformity, were by him indiscriminately stamped with grandeur. A beggar rose from his hand the patriarch of poverty; the hump of Jiis dwarf is impressed with dignity; his women are moulds of generation; his infants teem with the man; his men are a race of giants. This is the” Terribil Via“hinted at by Agostino Carracci. To give the most perfect ease to the most perplexing difficulty, was the exclusive power of Michel Angelo. He is the inventor of epic painting in the sublime compartments of the Sistine chapel. He has personified motion in the groupes of the Cartoon of Pisa; embodied sentiment on the monuments of St. Lorenzo; unravelled the features of meditation in his Prophets and Sibyls; and, in the Last Judgment, with every attitude that varies the human body, traced the mastertrait of every passion that sways the human heart. Neither as painter or sculptor he ever submitted to copy an individual, Julio II. only excepted, and in him he represented the reigning passion rather than the man. In painting he contented himself with a negative colour, and, as the painter of mankind, rejected all meretricious ornament. The fabric of St. Peter’s, scattered into infinity of jarring parts by his predecessors, he concentrated, suspended the cupola, and to the most complex gave the air of the most simple of edifices. Such, take him all in all, was Michel Angelo, the salt of art; sometimes he, no doubt, had moments, and perhaps periods of dereliction, deviated into manner, or perplexed the grandeur of his forms with futile and ostentatious anatomy; both met with herds of copyists, and it has been his fate to have been and still to be censured for their folly.”

, an architect of the eleventh century, was a native of the isle of Dulichio, and built the cathedral of Pisa, which still passes for one of the finest in all Italy, in the gothic style. Buschetto was a great machinist; and could move the heaviest loads with a very small force. It is marked on his tomb, “that ten girls could lift by his method, weights which a thousand yoke of oxen could not move, and a ship could scarcely carry.”

, a French physician, was born at Paris in 1722, and died in the same city in 1772, at 50 years of age. He practised medicine there with great success, and wrote, 1. “Medicine de l'esprit,” Paris, 1753, 2 vols. 12mo, in which his reasonings are not always just; but his conjectures are in general very ingenious, and may be of great service. 2. “Abdeker,” or the art of preserving beauty, 1756, 4 vols, small twelves; a romance in which the author introduces a variety of receipts and precepts for the benefit of the ladies. The true cosmetics are exercise and temperance. A translation of part of this appeared in English, but before the above date, 1754, in one vol. 12mo. 3. “Memoires sur divers sujets de medicine,” 1760, 8vo. 4. “Memoire sur Tetat actuel de la Pharmacia,” 1765, 12mo. 5. “Projet d'aneaniirla Petiteverole,” 1767, 12mo. 6. “Medicine pratique,” 3 vols. 12mo, and 1 vol. 4to. 7. “Amphitheatrum poeticum,” a poem, 1745, 4to. He also was editor of the “Journal Economique,” from 1753 to 1765, and exhibited in all his works various talents, and considerable powers of fancy as well as of science. One of his brothers, Nicolas Camus de Mezieres, was a skilful architect, and published some works on that subject particularly “Dissertations sur le bois de charpente,” Paris, 1763, 12mo. “Le Genie d'Architecture,” ibid. 1780, 8vo; “Traite de la force de bois,” 1782, 8vo; and “Le guide de reux qui veulent batir,” 2 vols. 8vo. He died July 24, 177.9. Another brother, Armand Gaston Camus, who died in 1804, was a very active agent in all the revolutionary measures of the different French assemblies, and being sent to arrest Dumourier in 1793, was delivered by him to the Austrians, and afterwards exchanged for the daughter of Louis XVI. His political conduct belongs to the history of those turbulent periods. In 1800 he was commissioned to inspect the libraries and collections of the united departments, and particularly examined the library of Brussels, which is rich in Mss. He was a man of some learning, and extensive knowledge of books; and published, 1. “Observations sur la distribution et le classement des livres d'une bibliotheque.” 2. “Memoire sur un livre Allemand,” the famous Tewrdannckhs. 3. “Memoire sur Thistoire et les procédés du Polytypage et de la Stereotype.” 4. “Rapport sur la continuation de la collection des Historiens de la France, et de celle des Chartres et Diplomes.” 5. “Notice d'un livre imprim6 a Bamberg in 1462,” a very curious memoir of a book, first described in the Magasin Hist. Litt. Bibliog. 1792. 6. “Memoire sur la collection des grands et petits voyages,” 1802, 4to. In the “Notices des Mss. de la Bibl. Nationale,” vol. VI. is an interesting memoir by him, relating to two ancient manuscript bibles, in 2 vols. fol. adorned with 5152 pictures, each of them having a Latin and French verse beautifully written and illuminated beneath.

, an eminent painter of Venice, was born in 1697, the son of one Bernardo a scene-painter. He followed the profession of his father, and acquired a wildness of conception and a readiness of hand which afterwards supplied him with ideas and dispatch for his nearly numberless smaller works. Tired of the theatre, he went young to Rome, and with great assiduity applied himself to paint views from nature and the ruins of antiquity. On his return to Venice he continued the same studies from the prospects of that city which the combination of nature and art has rendered one of the most magnificent and the most novel of Europe. Numbers of these are exact copies of the spots they represent, and hence highly interesting to those whose curiosity has not been gratified by residence in the metropolis of the Adriatic. Numbers are the compound of his own invention, graceful mixtures of modern and antique, of fancied and real beauties: such he painted for Algarotti. The most instructive and the most novel of these appears to be that view of the grand canal, in which he adopted the idea of Palladio, by substituting the Rial to for its present bridge, with the basilica of Vicenza rising in the centre, the palace Chericato and other fabrics of that great architect rounding the whole. Canaletto made use of the camera to obtain precision, but corrected its defects in the air-tints; he was the first who shewed to artists its real use and limits. He produced great effects somewhat in the manner of Tiepolo, who sometimes made his figures, and impressed a character of vigour on every object he touched: we see them in their most striking aspect. He takes picturesque liberties without extravagance, and combines his objects so congenially, that the common spectator finds nature, and the man of knowledge the art.

, or Cambiaso, called Luchetto, an eminent Genoese painter, was born at Oneglia, near Genoa, in 1527, and became a most expeditious painter, working with both his hands, by which unusual power he executed more designs, and finished more great works with his own pencil in a much shorter time than most other artists could do with several assistants. It is mentioned as a memorable circumstance in his life, that at the age of seventeen he was employed in painting the front of a house in fresco; but whilst he was commencing his work, some Florentine painters who were actually engaged, conceived him to be a mere grinder of colours, and when he took up his pallet and pencils they wished to have prevented his proceeding with it, lest he should spoil the work, but after a few strokes of his pencil they were convinced of their mistake, and respected his singular abilities. Of Cangiagi, it is remarked, that he practised three different modes of painting at three different periods of his life. His first manner was gigantic and unnatural, which he corrected in consequence of the remonstrances of his friend Alessi, the celebrated architect, for his best style, in forming which he consulted nature with attention, and digested his thoughts in sketches, before he began to paint. His third manner was distinguished by a more rapid execution, to which he recurred in order to make more ample provision for his wife and family, and had a great deal of the mannerist. His works at Genoa are very numerous, and he was employed by the king of Spain to adorn part of the Escurial.

, a Spanish artist, and styled the Michel Angelo of Spain, because he excelled in painting, sculpture, and architecture, was born in the city of Grenada in 1600, where his father, an eminent architect, educated him in his own profession, and when his instructions in this branch were completed, he applied himself to the study of sculpture, and made an uncommon progress in a very short time. He next went to Seville, and for eight months studied under Pacheco, and afterwards under Juan del Castillo, in whose academy he executed many noble paintings for the public edifices in Seville, and at the same time gave some specimens of his excellence in statuary, which were highly admired, particularly a “Madonna and Child,” in the great church of Nebriga, and two colossal figures of San Pedro and San Pablo. Count Olivarez was the means of his coming to Madrid, where he was made first royal architect, king’s painter, and preceptor to the prince, don Balthazar Carlos of Austria. Here, as architect, he projected several additional works to the palaces, some public gates to the city, and a triumphal arch erected on the entrance of Mariana, second queen to Philip IV. As a painter, he executed many celebrated compositions in the churches and palaces of Madrid. While in the height of his fame an event happened which involved him in much trouhle. Returning home one evening, he discovered his wife murdered, his house robbed, while an Italian journeyman, on whom the suspicion naturally fell, had escaped. The criminal judges held a court of inquiry, and having discovered that Cano had been jealous of this Italian, and also that he was known to be attached to another woman, they acquitted the fugitive gallant, and condemned the husband. On this he fled to Valencia, and being discovered there, took refuge in a Carthusian convent about three leagues from that city, where he seemed for a time determined upon taking the order, but afterwards was so imprudent as to return to Madrid, where he was apprehended, and ordered to be put to the torture, which he suffered without uttering 3r single word. On this the king received him again into favour, and as Cano saw there was no absolute safety but within the pale of the church, he solicited the king with that view, and was named residentiary of Grenada. The chapter objected to his nomination, but were obliged to submit, and their church profited by the appointment, many sculptures and paintings being of his donation. The last years of his life he spent in acts of devotion and charity. When he had no money to bestow in alms, which was frequently the case, he would call for paper, and give a beggar a drawing, directing him where to carry it for sale. To the Jews he bore an implacable antipathy. On his death-bed he would not receive the sacraments from a priest who attended him, because he had administered them to the converted Jews; and from another he would not accept the crucifix presented to him in his last moments, telling him it was so bungling a piece of work that he could not endure the sight of it. In this manner died Alonso Cano, at the age of seventy-six, in 1676; a circumstance, says his biographer, which shows that his ruling passion for the arts accompanied him in the article of death, superseding even religion itself in those moments when the great interests of salvation naturally must be supposed to occupy the mind to the exclusion of every other idea.

, an eminent artist, the companion of Luca Cambiaso, is commonly called il Bergamasco, in contradistinction of Gio. Bat. Castelli a Genoese, scholar of Cambiaso, and -the most celebrated miniature-painter of his time. This, born at Bergamo in 1500, and conducted to Genoa by Aurelio Buso of Crema, a scholar of Polidoro, was at his sudden departure left by him in that city. In this forlorn state, he found a Maecenas in the Pallavicini family, who assisted him, sent him to Rome, and received in him at his return an architect, sculptor, and painter not inferior to Cambiaso. At Rome, Palomino numbers him with the scholars of Michael Angelo. Whatever master he may have had, his technic principles were those of Luca; which is evident on comparison in the church of S. Matteo, where they painted together. We discover the style of Raffaello verging already to practice, but not so mannered as that which prevailed at Rome under Gregory and Sixtus. We recognize in Cambiaso a greater genius and more elegance of design, in Castello more diligence, deeper knowledge, a better colour, a colour nearer allied to the Venetian than the Roman school. It may however be supposed^ that in such fraternal harmony each assisted the other, even in those places where they acted as competitors, where each claimed his work, and distinguished it by his name. Thus at the Nunziata di Portoria, Luca on the panneis represented the final doom of the blessed and the rejected in the last judgment; whilst G. Batista on the ceiling, expressed the judge in an angelic circle, receiving the elect. His attitude and semblance speak the celestial welcome with greater energy than the adjoined capitals of the words, “Venite Benedicti.” It is a picture studied in all its parts, of a vivacity, a composition, and expression, which give to the pannels of Luca, the air of a work done by a man half asleep. Frequently he painted alone; such are the S. Jerome surrounded by monks frightened at a lion, in S. Francesco di Castello, and the crowning of St, Sebastian after martyrdom, in his own church, a picture as rich in composition as studied in execution, and superior to all praise. That a man of such powers should have been so little known in Italy, rouses equal indignation and pity, unless we suppose that his numerous works in fresco at Genoa prevented him from painting for galleries.

Count de Caylus was engaged at the same time in another enterprize, still more honourable for the Roman grandeur, and more interesting to the French nation. In, the last age, Des Godetz, under the auspices of Colbert, published the Antiquities of Rome. The work was admired by all Europe, and gave birth to that indefatigable emulation which carried able and ingenious travellers to Spalatra, Balbec, and even to the burning sands of Palmyra, in order to visit the famous ruins of so many magnificent buildings, and to present them to our view. It is this that has made us spectators of the monuments of Athens, that mother of learning, of arts, and sciences; where, in spite of the injuries of time and barbarism, so many illustrious sculptors and architects still live in the ruins of their edifices, in like manner as so many incomparable authors still breathe in the valuable fragments of their writings. The same Colbert had framed the design of engraving the Roman antiquities that are still to be seen in the southern provinces c c France. By his orders, Mignard, the architect, had made drawings of them, which count de Caylus had the good fortune to recover. He resolved to finish the work projected by Colbert, and to dedicate it to that great minister; and so much had he this glorious enterprize at heart, that he was employed in it during his last illness, and recommended it warmly to M. Mariette, by whom it was in part executed.

, a painter of Cordova, acquired fame in the sixteenth century, both in Spain and Italy. His manner approaches somewhat to that of Correggio; the same exactness in the drawing, the same force in the expression, the same vigour in the colouring. It is impossible to contemplate without emotion his picture of the Last Supper in the cathedral of Cordova; where each of the apostles presents a different character of respect and affection for their master; the Christ displays at once an air of majesty and kindness; and the Judas a false and malignant countenance. The talents of Cespedes were not confined to painting, if we may trust the enthusiasm of the Spanish authors in his behalf; he was at the same time philosopher, antiquary, sculptor, architect; an adept in the Hebrew, Greek, Latin, Arabic, and Italian languages, a great poet, and a prolific author. He died in 1608, aged upwards of seventy.

, an eminent architect, was a native of Sweden, but originally descended from the family of Chalmers in Scotland, barons of Tartas, in France. His grandfather was an opulent merchant, who supplied the armies of Charles XII. with money and military stores, and suffered considerably in his fortune by being obliged to receive the base coin issued by that monarch. This circumstance occasioned his son to reside many years in, Sweden, in order the more effectually to prosecute his pecuniary claims. The subject of this article was born in that country, and for what reason is not known, was brought over from Sweden in 1723, at the age of two years, and placed at a school at Rippon, in Yorkshire. His first entrance into life was as a supercargo to the Swedish East India company. In this capacity he made one voyage to China; and, it appears, lost no opportunity of observing what was curious in that country. At the age of eighteen, however, he quitted this profession, and with it all commercial views, to follow the bent of his inclination, which led him to design and architecture.

His first residence in London was in Poland- street, but not, as has been asserted, in the business of a carpenter. At a very early period of his life he was considered as one of the best architects and draughtsmen in Europe; and his abilities introduced him to the patronage of the late John eari of Bute, by whose interest he was appointed to be drawing master to his present majesty, then prince of Wales. The first work of consequence in which he was engaged was the villa of the late earl of Besborougb, at Roehampton, in Surry. He delivered to his lordship his plan as architect, and his estimate as surveyor, and, on being applied to afterward to know whether he would undertake to complete the building himself for the money mentioned in the estimate, he readily consented, and, in the execution of his contract, gave and received that satisfaction which seldom fails to result from the happy concurrence of professional taste and skill with the most distinguished character for punctuality and probity. His conduct on this occasion became the most honourable introduction to considerable employment among the nobility and gentry.

Such is the apology of Mr. Chambers; and it must be acknowledged, perhaps, that these gardens are laid out as well as the nature of the place would permit; but, witty regard to the ornaments and buildings, it cannot be-suf-i ficiently regretted, that a fondness for the unmeaning faU balas of Turkish and Chinese chequer- work should prevail over a taste for the beautiful models of Grecian and Roman architecture. It is yet more to be regretted that our architect proved in a subsequent publication that he was not so much constrained by the situation of the place, as impelled by an irresistible predilection for the Chinese mode of gardening.

In 1775, sir W. Chambers was appointed to conduct the building of that great national work, Somerset-place. This appointment was worth 2000l. a year to him, nor was he too liberally rewarded. The terrace behind this magnificent building is a bold effort of conception. His designs for interior arrangements were excellent, but his staircases were his master-pieces, particularly those belonging to the royal and antiquary societies. He did not live, however, to see the whole finished according to the original plan, and all intention of completing what would be truly a national honour, and a great ornament to the metropolis, seems now to be given up. Sir William, however, continued for many years in the highest rank of his profession, and besides being architect to the king, he was surveyor-general of his majesty’s board of works, treasurer of the royal academy, F. It. S. and F. S. A. and member of the royal academy of arts at Florence, and of the royal academy of architecture at Paris.

These gentlemen embarked June 9, 1764, on board a ship bound for Constantinople; and were landed at the Dardanelles on the 25th of August. Having visited the Sigean promontory, the ruins of Troas, with the islands of Tenedos and Scio they arrived at Smyrna on the 11th of September, and from that city, as their head-quarters, they made several excursions. In August 1765, they arrived at Athens where they staid till June 1766“; visiting Marathon, Eleasis, Salamis, Megara, and other places in the neighbourhood. Leaving Athens, they proceeded by the little island of Calauna, to Traszene, Epidaurus,Argos, and Corinth. Thence they visited Delphi, Patrae, Elis, and Zante and on the 31st of August they set sail for Bristol, and arrived in England November 2, following. The result of this tour was published in 1769, under the title of” Ionian Antiquities, published with permission of the society of Dilletanti. By R. Chandler, M. A. F. S. A. N. Revett, architect, and W. Pars, painter.' 7 Imp. fol. a volume which while it did honour to the society, amply justified the expectations formed of the talents employed.

About this time he published an “Epicede, or Funeral Song on prince Henry;” and when the societies of Lincoln’s Inn and the Middle Temple, in 1613, had resolved to exhibit a splendid masque at Whitehall, in honour of the nuptials of the Palsgrave and the princess Elizabeth, Chapman was employed for the poetry, and Inigo Jones for the machinery. The same year he published, in 4to, a tragedy entitled “Bussy d'Amboise his Revenge,” not acted with much applause. In 1714 he published in 4tq, “Andromeda liberata; or, the Nuptials of Perseus and Andromeda,” dedicated, in a poetical epistle, to Robert, earl of Somerset, and Frances, his countess. The same year he printed his version of the “Odyssey,” which he also dedicated to the earl of Somerset. This was soon followed, by the “Batrachomuomachy,” and the “Hymns,” and “Epigrams.” In 1616 he published in 12mo, a translation of “Musceus,” with a dedication to Inigo Jones, in which he is addressed as the most skilful and ingenious architect that England had yet seen. Mr. Warton remarks, that “there was an intimate friendship between our author and this celebrated restorer of Grecian palaces.” Chapman also published a paraphrastic translation, in verse, of Petrarch’s “Seven Penitential Psalms,” with “A xHymn to Christ upon the Cross;” “The Tragedy of Al­>phonsus, emperor of Germany” “Revenge for Honour,” a tragedy and some attribute to him the “Two Wise Men,” a comedy. He is also supposed to have translated “Hesiod,” but it does not appear to have been printed.

Cimabue was also a great architect as well as painter, and concerned in the fabric of Sancta Maria del Fior in Florence during which employment he died in 1300. He left many disciples, and among the rest Giotto, who proved an excellent master, and was his first rival. Dante mentions him in the eleventh canto of his purgatory as without a rival till Giotto appeared. Cimabue’s portrait, by Simon Sanese, was in the chapel-house of Sancta Maria Novella. It is a figure which has a lean face, a little red beard, in point; with a capuche, or monk’s hood upon his head, after the fashion of those times.

, son of Leo the Wise, was born at Constantinople in 905, and ascended the throne at the age of seven years, under the tutelage of his mother Zoe, the 11th of June 911. No sooner had he taken the reins of government in his hand, than he chastised the tyrants of Italy, took Benevento from the Lombards, and drove off, by means of money, the Turks who were pillaging the frontiers of* Epire; but he afterwards allowed himself to be entirely governed by Helena his wife, daughter of Romanus Lecapenes, grand-admiral of the empire. She sold the dignities of the church and the state, burdened the people with taxes, and exercised towards them every species of oppression, while her husband was employing his time in reading, and became as able an architect and as great a painter as he was a bad emperor. Romanus, the son of this indolent prince by his wife Helena, impatient to govern, caused poison to be mingled with some medicine prescribed to him; but Constantine, having rejected the greater part of it, survived till a year afterwards, and died Nov. 9, 959, at the age of 54, after a reign of 48 years. This prince, the patron of learning, and the friend of the learned, left behind him several works which would have done honour to a private person. The principal of them are 1 The Life of the emperor Basil ins the Macedonian, his grandfather, inserted in the collection of Allatius. It is sometimes deficient in point of truth, and savours too much of the panegyrical. 2. Two books of “Themata,” or positions of the provinces and the towns of the empire, published by father Banduri in the “Imperium Orientale,” Leipsic, 1754, folio. We have few works preferable to this for the geography of the middle ages, particularly as to the state and condition of places as they were in his time. 3. A Treatise on the Affairs of the Empire; in the above-mentioned work of Banduri, containing the origin of divers nations, their forces, their progress, their alliances, their revolutions, and the succession of their sovereigns, with other interesting particulars. 4. “De re llustica,” Cambridge, 1704, 8vo. 5. “Excerpta ex Polybio, Diodoro Siculo,” &c. Paris, 1634, 4to. 6. “Excerpta de legatis, Graec. & Lat.” 1648, fol. making a part of the Byzantine historians. 7. “De caeremoniis aulae Byzantines,” Leipsic, 1751, folio. 8. “A Body of Tactics”, 8vo.

, an eminent French architect, was born March 11, 1698, at Ivri sur Seine. He studied drawing under the celebrated Watteau, and having occasion afterwards to go into the office of M. Dulin, an architect, he made so great a progress in that art, as to be admitted a member of the academy at the age of twenty-eight. M. Contant had more business than any other architect of his time, if we may judge from the great number of buildings in which he was employed. Among these we may enumerate, the houses of M. Crozat de Tugny, and of M. Crozat de Thiers; the stables of Bissey, where he first tried those brick arches, which even to connoisseurs appear so bold and astonishing the church of Panthemont the royal palace the amphitheatre at St. Cloud; the church of Conde in Flanders La Gouvernance at Lisle the church de la Madelene, which he could not finish. He had a paralytic stroke on the right side, three years before his death; but during his illness, and unable to move his hand, he planned the church of St. Waast at Arras. This beautiful edifice has been as much admired as the church of St. Madelene. This celebrated artist died at Paris, October 1, 1777, aged 79. He left a folio volume of his system of architecture engraved.

, the eccentric son of the preceding, was born at Odcombe, in 1577. He was first educated at Westminster-school, and became a commoner of Gloucester-hall, Oxford, in 1596; where continuing about three years, he attained, by mere dint of memory, some skill in logic, and more in the Greek and Latin languages. After he had been taken home for a time, he went to London, and was received into the family of Henry prince of Wales, either as a domestic, or, according to some, as a fool, an office which in former days was filled by a person hired for the purpose. In this situation he was exposed to the wits of the court, who, finding in him a strange mixture of sense and folly, made him their whetstone; and so, says Wood, he became too much known to all the world. In 1608, he took a journey to France, Italy, Germany, &c. which lasted five months, during which he had travelled 1975 miles, more than half upon one pair of shoes, which were once only mended, and on his return were hung up in the church of Odcombe. He published his travels under this title; “Crudities hastily gobbled up in five months travels in France, Savoy, Italy, Rhetia, Helvetia, some parts of High Germany, and the Netherlands, 1611,” 4to, reprinted in 1776, 3 vols. 8vo. This work was ushered into the world by an Odcombian banquet, consisting of near 60 copies of verses, made by the best poets of that time, which, if they did not make Cory ate pass with the world for a man of great parts and learning, contributed not a little to the sale of his book. Among these poets were Ben Jonson, sir John Harrington, Inigo Jones the architect, Chapman, Donne, Drayton, &c. In the same year he published “Coryate’s Crambe, or his Colwort twice sodden, and now served in with other Macaronic dishes, as the second course of his Crudities,” 4to. In 1612, after he had taken leave of his countrymen, by an oration spoken at the cross in Odcombe, he took a long and large journey, with intention not to return till he had spent ten years in travelling. The first place he went to was Constantinople, where he made his usual desultory observations; and took from thence opportunities of viewing divers parts of Greece. In the Hellespont he took notice of the two castles Sestos and Abydos, which Mu­saeus has made famous in his poem of Hero and Leander, He saw Smyrna, from whence he found a passage to Alexandria in Egypt; and there he observed the pyramids near Grand Cairo. From thence he went to Jerusalem; and so on to the Dead Sea, to Aleppo in Syria, to Babylon in Chaldea, to the kingdom of Persia, and to Ispahan, where the king usually resided; to Seras, anciently called Shushan; to Candahor, the first province north-east under the subjection of the great mogul, and so to Lahore, the chief city but one belonging to that empire. From Lahore he went to Agra; where, being well received by the English factory, he made a halt. He staid here till he had learned the Turkish and Morisco, or Arabian languages, in which study he was always very apt, and some knowledge in the Persian and*Indostan tongues, all which were of great use to him in travelling up and down the great mogul’s dominions. In the Persian tongue he afterwards made an oration to the great mogul; and in the Indostan he had so great a command, that we are gravely told he actually silenced a laundry-woman, belonging to the English ambassador in that country, who used to scold all the day long. After he had visited several places in that part of the world, he went to Surat in East-India, where he was seized with a diarrhoea, of which he died in 1617.

John Danckilkts, of the same family, a designer and engraver, about 1654 settled at Amsterdam; but being invited into England, he went to London, where he designed for the English Juvenal, the plates engraved by Hollar. This artist also engraved some plates. Hesiiy Danckerts, his brother, was also bred an engraver, but afterwards became a landscape-painter. He was born at the Hague, but at an early age travelled into Italy, from whence he came to England. Here he enjoyed the favour of Charles II. who employed him to draw views of the British sea-ports, and royal palaces. During the disturbances which preceded the abdication of James II. he quitted England for Amsterdam, where he died soon after. The landscapes painted by this artist were numerous, anil are chiefly to be found in England. Amongst them are Views of Windsor, Plymouth, Penzance, &c. He also engraved from Vandyk, Titian, Jacopo Palma, &c. Justus Danckerts, of the same family, was a designer, engraver, and print-seller, and resided in Amsterdam. The following plates bear his name: the Portrait of Casimir, king of Poland; a ditto of William III. prince of Orange; the Harbours of Amsterdam, a set of seven pieces. One other of the name remains to be noticed, Cornelius Danckerts. The circumstance of both Milizia and Heinecken dating the birth of this architect in 1.561, and saying that he was born in Amsterdam (the very time and place of the birth of Cornelius Danckerts mentioned above), leads us to suspect some chronological error, if not, indeed, that these two artists were one and the same person. Cornelius was originally a stonemason, but afterwards applied himself to architecture. He constructed in the city of Amsterdam many public and private buildings, highlycreditable to his talents on account of their beauty and convenience, and, amongst others, three of the principal churches, the exchange, and the gate which leads to Haarlem, the most beautiful of the city. He had a son named Peter, who was born at Amsterdam in 1605, and afterwards became painter to Uladislaus, king of Poland.

, a very eminent French architect, was born at Paris in 1653, and in 1674 was commissioned by Colbert to go to Home with some other academicians, but in the voyage they had the misfortune to be taken by a pirate and carried into Algiers, where they remained for sixteen months, until redeemed by the king of France’s orders. He then went with his companions ta Rome, where he applied with singular assiduity to the survey of the ancient buildings of that metropolis. He informs us, that when he undertook to measure the antiquities of Rome, his chief intention was, to learn which of the authors jn most esteem ought to be followed, as having given the most accurate measures; but he soon found reason to be convinced that they were all extremely defective in point of precision. This fault, however, he candidly imputes not to those authors themselves, but to the workmen who had been employed in their service. To prevent his being led into the same errors, he took the measures of all the ancient structures exactly, with his own hands, and repeated the whole several times, that be might arrive at an absolute certainty; ^causing such of the buildings as were under ground to be cleared, and erecting 'adders and other machines to get at those which were elevated. When, he returned to Paris he communicated his drawings to the members of the royal academy of architecture, and Colbert recommended them to the king, who caused them to be published at his own expence, in a splendid folio volume, 1682, and allotted all the profits to the author. The plates of this work remained in the family of a connoisseur until 1779, when they were purchased of his heirs for a new edition; but before this, in 1771, Mr. Marshal published a splendid edition at London, with the descriptions in French and English. In 1776 “Le Lois des Batimens” was printed from his manuscripts. In 1680 Colbert promoted him to the office of comptroller of the royal buildings at Chamber, but in 1694 he was recalled to hold the same office at Paris. In 1699 he was made king’s architect, with a pension of 2000 livres. In 1719 he succeeded M. de la Hire as professor of architecture, and commenced a course of lectures in June of that year, which he continued with great applause and success until his death, May 20, 1728. He was a man of an amiable and estimable character in private life.

, an eminent French architect, was born at Paris, Nov. 9, 1729. He was educated by one of his uncles, and from his earliest infancy discovered an. unconquerable partiality for the study and practice of architecture, in which he afterwards became a great proficient. His chief master was Lejay, who at this period had just established a new school of the profession, and recovered it from the contempt in which it had been held from the age of Lewis XIV. In 1752 Dewailly obtained the chief architectural prize, and the privilege of studying at Rome for three years, at the expence of the nation. Upon this success, his biographer notices an action truly generous and laudable in the mind of an emulous young man. The student to whom the second prize was decreed, and whose name was Moreau, appeared extremely sorrowful. Dewailly interrogated him upon the subject of his chagrin; and learning that it proceeded from his having lost the opportunity of prosecuting his profession in Italy, he flew to the president of the architectural committee, and earnestly solicited permission that his unfortunate rival might be allowed to travel to Rome as well as himself. On an objection being adduced from the established rules “Well, well,” replied he, “I yet know a mode of reconciling every thing. I am myself allotted three years; of these I can dispose as I like; I give eighteen months of them to Moreau.” This generous sacrifice was accepted; and Dewailly was amply rewarded by the public esteem which accompanied the transaction. In most of the modern buildings of taste and magnificence in his own country, Dewailly was a party employed, and many of his designs are engraven in the Encyclopedic and in Laborde’s Description of France. He was a member of the academy of painting, as well as that of architecture; in the latter of which he was at once admitted into the higher class, without having, as is customary, passed through the inferior. Of the national institute he was a member from its establishment. He died in 1799, having been spared the affliction of beholding one of his most exquisite pieces of workmanship, the magnificent hall of the Odeon, destroyed by fire, a catastrophe which occurred but a short time after his demise.

, of the academy of Berlin, an eminent French writer, was the son of a cutler, and was bora at Langres, in 1713. The Jesuits, with whom he went through a course of study, were desirous of having him in their order, and one of his uncles designing him for a canonry which he had in his gift, made him take the tonsure. But his father, seeing that he was not inclined to be either a Jesuit or a canon, sent him to Paris to prosegute his studies. He then placed him with a lawyer, to whose instructions young Diderot paid little attention, but employed himself in general literature, which not coinciding with the views of his father, he stopped the remittance of his pecuniary allowance, and seemed for some time to have abandoned him. The talents of the young man, however, supplied him with a maintenance, and gradually made him known. He had employed his mind on physics, geometry, metaphysics, ethics, belles-lettres, from the time he began to read with reflection, and although a bold and elevated imagination seemed to give him a turn for poetry, he neglected it for the more serious sciences. He settled at an early period at Paris, where the natural eloquence which animated his conversation procured him friends and patrons. What first gave him reputation among a certain class of readers, unfortunately for France, too numerous in that country, was a little collection of “Pensees philosophiques,” reprinted afterwards under the title of “Etrennes aux esprits-forts.” This book appeared in 1746, 12mo. The adepts of the new philosophy compared it, for perspicuity, elegance, and force of diction, to the “Pensees de Pascal.” But the aim of the two authors was widely different. Pascal employed his talents, and erudition, which was profound and various, in support of the truths of religion, which Diderot attacked by all the arts of an unprincipled sophist. The “Pensées philosophiques,” however, became a toiletbook. The author was thought to be always in the right, because he always dealt in assertions. Diderot was more usefully employed in 1746, in publishing a “Dictionnaire universelle de Medecine,” with Messrs. Eidous and Toussaint, in G vols. folio. Not that this compilation, says his biographer, is without its defects in many points of view, or that it contains no superficial and inaccurate articles; but it is not without examples of deep investigation; and the work was well received. A more recent account, however, informs us that this was merely a translation of Dr. James’s Medical Dictionary, published in this country in 1743; and that Diderot was next advised to translate Chambers’ s Dictionary; but instead of acting so inferior a part, he conceived the project of a more extensive undertaking, the “Dictionnaire Encyclopedique.” So great a monument not being to be raised by a single architect, D'Alembert, the friend of Diderot, shared with him the honours and the dangers of the enterprise, in which they were promised the assistance of several literati, and a variety of artists. Diderot took upon himself alone the description of arts and trades, one of the most important parts, and most acceptable to the public. To the particulars of the several processes of the workmen, he sometimes added reflections, speculations, and principles adapted to their elucidation. Independently of the part of arts and trades, this chief of the encyclopedists furnished in the different sciences a considerable number of articles that were wanting; but even his countrymen are inclined to wish that in a work of such a vast extent, and of such general use, he had learned to compress his matter, and had been less verbose, less of the dissertator, and less inclined to digressions. He has also been censured for employing needlessly a scientific language, and for having recourse to metaphysical doctrines, frequently unintelligible, which occasioned him to be called the Lycophron. of philosophy; for having introduced a number of definitions incapable of enlightening the ignorant, and which he seems to have invented for no other purpose than to have it thought that he had great ideas, while in fact, he had not the art of expressing perspicuously and simply the ideas of others. As to the body of the work, Diderot himself agreed that the edifice wanted an entire reparation; and when two booksellers intended to give a new edition of the Encyclopedic, he thus addressed them on the subject of the faults with which it abounds: “The imperfection of this work originated in a great variety of causes. We had not time to be very scrupulous in the choice of the coadjutors. Among some excellent persons, there were others weak, indifferent, and altogether bad. Hence that motley appearance of the work, where we see the rude attempt of a school-boy by the side of a piece from the hand of a master; and a piece of nonsense next neighbour to a sublime performance. Some working for no pay, soon lost their first fervour; others badly recompensed, served us accordingly. The Encyclopedic was a gulf into which all kinds of scribblers promiscuously threw their contributions: their pieces were ill-conceived, and worse digested; good, bad, contemptible, true, false, uncertain, and always incoherent and unequal; the references that belonged to the very parts assigned to a person, were never filled up by him. A refutation is often found where we should naturally expect a proof; and there was no exact correspondence between the letter-press and the plates. To remedy this defect, recourse was had to long explications. But how many unintelligible machines, for want of letters to denote the parts!” To this sincere confession Diderot added particular details on various parts; such as proved that there were in the Encyclopedic subjects to be not only re-touched, but to be composed afresh; and this was what a new company of literati and artists undertook, but have not yet completed. The first edition, however, which had been delivering to the public from 1751 to 1767, was soon sold off, because its defects were compensated in part by many well-executed articles, and because uncommon pains were taken to recommend it to the public.

, a celebrated ancient architect of Macedonia, of whom several extraordinary things are related, lived in the 112th olympiad, or 332 B. C. Vitruvius tells us, that, when Alexander the Great had conquered all his enemies, Dinocrates, full of great conceptions, and relying upon them, went from Macedonia to the army, with a view of acquiring his notice and favour. He carried letters recommendatory to the nobles about him, who received him very graciously, and promised to introduce him to the king; but suspecting, from some delays, that they were not serious, he resolved at length to introduce himself; and for this purpose conceived the following project. He anointed his body all over with oil, and crowned his temples with poplar; then he flung a lion’s skin over his left shoulder, and put a club into his right hand. Thus accoutred, he appeared in the court, where the king was administering justice. The eyes of the people being naturally turned upon so striking a spectacle, for, in addition to his singular garb, he was tall, well proportioned, and very handsome; the king asked him, who he was? “I am,” says he, “Dinocrates the Macedonian architect, and bring to your majesty thoughts and designs that are worthy of your greatness: for I have laid out the mount Athos into the form of a man, in whose left hand I have designed the walls of a great city, and all the rivers of the mount to flow into his right, and from thence into the sea.” Alexander seemed amused with this vast project, but very wisely declined putting it in execution. He kept the architect, however, and took him into Egypt, where he employed him in marking out and building the city of Alexandria. Another memorable instance of Dinocrates’s architectonic skill is his restoring and building, in a more august and magnificent manner than before, the celebrated temple of Diana at Ephesus, after Herostratus, for the sake of immortalizing his name, had destroyed it by fire. A third instance, more extraordinary and wonderful than either of the former, is related by Pliny in his Natural History; who tells us, that he had formed a scheme, by building the dome of the temple of Arsinoe at Alexandria of loadstone, to make her image all of iron hang in the middle of it, as if it were in the air. Dinocrates probably deserves great credit as an architect, but such foolish stories as this last must be placed to the account of the credulity of the times in which Pliny wrote, and of which he largely partook.

Domenichino was made the chief architect of the apostolical palace by pope Gregory XV. for his great skill in that art. He was likewise very well versed in the theory of music, but not successful in the practice. He loved solitude; and it was observed, that, as he went along the streets, he took notice of the actions of private persons he met, and often designed something in his pocket-book. He was of a mild temper and obliging carriage, yet had the misfortune to find enemies in all places wherever he came. At Naples, particularly, he was so ill treated by those of his own profession, that, having agreed among themselves to disparage all his works, they would hardly allow him to be a tolerable master: and they were not content with having frighted him for some time from that city, but afterwards, upon his return thither, never left persecuting him, till by their tricks and vexations they had wearied him out of his life. He died in 1641, not without the suspicion of poison.

, a very skilful architect, and one of that class of geniuses who are usually said to be self-taught, was the son of a farmer in the parish of Eglwysilan, in the county of Glamorgan, where he was born in 1719. In his fifteenth year he appears to have manifested his skill in repairing the stone fences so common in that country, and executed his work with such peculiar neatness, that his talents became in great request From this humble beginning, he aspired to be a builder of houses; and his first attempt was to build a small workshop for a neighbour, in the performance of which he gave great satisfaction. He was then employed to erect a mill, which was admired by good judges as an excellent piece of masonry; and while employed on this he became first acquainted with the principles of an arch, which led him to get higher undertakings. In 1746 he undertook to build a new bridge over the river Taff, which he executed in a style superior to any thing of the kind in any part of Wales, for neatness of workmanship and elegance of design. It consisted of three arches, elegantly light intheir construction. The hewri stones were excellently well dressed, and closely jointed. But this river runs through a very deep vale, that is more than usually woody, and crowded about with mountains. It is a'lso to be considered, that many other rivers of no mean capacity, as the Crue, the Bargoed Taff, and the Cunno, besides almost numberless brooks that run through long, deep; and well-wooded vales or glens, fall into the Taffiii its progress. The descents into these vales from the mountains being in general very steep, the water in long and heavy rains collects into these rivers with great rapidity and force; raising floods that in their descriptions would appear absolutely incredible to the in. habitants of open and flat countries. Such a flood unfortunately occurred after the completion of this undertaking, which tore up the largest trees by the roots, and carried them down the river to the bridge, where the arches were not sufficiently wide to admit of their passage, and in consequence of the obstruction to the flood, a thick and strong dam, as it were, was thus formed, and the streams being unable to get any farther, rose here to a prodigious height, and carried the bridge entirely away. As Edwards had given the most ample security for the stability of the bridge during the space of seven years, he was obliged to erect another, which was of one arch, for the purpose of admitting freely under it whatever incumbrances the floods might bring down. The span or chord of this arch was one hundred and forty feet its altitude thirty-five feet; the segment of a circle whose diameter was one hundred and seventy feet. The arch was finished, but the parapets not yet erected, when such was the pressure of the unavoidable ponderous work over the haunches, that it sprung up in the middle, and the key-stones were forced out. This was a severe blow to a man who had hitherto met with nothing but misfortune in an enterprize which was to establish or ruin him in his profession. Edwards, however, engaged in it the third time; and by means of three cylindrical holes through the work over the haunches, so reduced the weight over them, that there was no longer any danger from it. These holes or cylinders rise above each other, ascending in the order of the arch, three at each end, or over each of the haunches. The diameter of the lowest is nine feet of the second, six feet and of the uppermost, three feet. They give the bridge an air of uncommon elegance. The second bridge fell in 1751. The third, which has stood ever since, was completed in 1755.

, a very ingenious and benevolent French abbé, and the extensive promoter, if not the inventor, of a method of relieving the deaf and dumb, and rendering them useful members of society, was the son of an architect, who educated him for the church. Having obtained a canonry of Troyes, by the presentation of the bishop of that diocese, he soon became intimate with the prelate Soanen, famous for his attachment to Quesnel, and his opposition to the bull Unigenitus, and coinciding in his religious opinions, shared in the persecution of which Soanen was the object, and was laid under an interdict. He was first induced to turn his thoughts towards the unhappy case of the deaf and dumb, from observing two young girls in that situation, and although some not altogether unsuccessful attempts had been made before his time, in individual cases, the abbé L'Epee soon outdid the most skilful of his predecessors, by reducing his means to a sort of system. Under his care numerous pupils acquired useful knowledge, and were enabled to hold a communication with their friends. Some of them were enabled to learn several languages; others became profound mathematicians, and others obtained academical prizes by poetical and literary works. Without other means than a moderate personal fortune, for he held no place or preferment, he defrayed the whole expences of his establishment, and always deprived himself of luxuries, and often of necessaries, that his poor pupils might not want. When the emperor Joseph II. came to Paris, he admired the institution and its founder, and asked permission to place under his care an intelligent man, who might diffuse through Germany the blessings of his labours; and he sent him a magnificent gold box with his picture. In 1780 the Russian ambassador came to offer him the compliments of his sovereign, and a considerable present. “Tell Catherine,” said L'Epee, “that I never receive gold; but that if my labours have any claim to her esteem, all I ask of her is to send me from her vast dominions one born deaf and dumb to educate.” This amiable man died in February 1790, justly regretted by his country, and was succeeded in his school by the abbé Sicard. L'Epee wrote, 1. “An Account of the Complaint and Cure of Marianne Pigalle,” 1759, 12mo. 2. “Institution des Sourds et Muets, par la voie des signes methodiques,” 1776, 12mo, reprinted in 1784, under the title “La veritable maniere d'instruire les Sourds et Muets, confirmee par une longue experience.” A translation of this was published in London, 1801, 8vo. We cannot conclude this article without adverting to the success of the methods of teaching the deaf and dumb as now practised in this country, and eminently promoted by the “Society for the Deaf and Dumb,” in their Asylum, Kent Road: few charitable foundations have been more wisely laid, more judiciously conducted, or more liberally supported.

Mr. Evelyn’s next publication was the most important of all his works: 15. “Sylva; or, a dicourse of Foresttrees, and the propagation of timber in his majesty’s dominions 5 as it was delivered in the royal society the 15th of October, 1662, Upon occasion of certain queries propounded to that illustrious assembly by the honourable the principal officers and commissioners of the navy.” To which is annexed, “Pomona, or, an appendix concerning fruit-trees, in relation to cider, the making and several ways of ordering it: published by express order of the royal society,” Lond. 1664, fol. This was the first work written by the command, and published in virtue of an order, of the royal society, signed by the lord viscount Brouncker, their president, and dedicated to the king. The second edition of it was published in 1669, with a new dedication to king Charles II. dated from Sayes-court, Aug. 24; the first paragraph of which deserves the reader’s notice. “Sir, This second edition of Sylva, after more than a thousand copies had been bought up and dispersed of the first impression, in much less than two years space (which booksellers assure us is a very extraordinary thing in volumes of this bulk), conies now again to pay its homage to your serene majesty, to whose auspices alone it owes the favourable acceptance which it has received in the world. But it is not that alone which it presumes to tell your majesty, but to acquaint you that it has been the sole occasion for furnishing your almost exhausted dominions with more, I dare say, than two millions of timber-trees, besides infinite others, which have been propagated within the three nations at the instigation and by the direction of this work; and that the author of it is able, if need require, to make it out by a competent volume of letters and acknowledgments, which are come to his hands, from several persons of the most eminent quality, many of them illustrious, and divers of them unknoun to him, in justification of what he asserts; which he the rather preserves with the more care, because they are testimonials from so many honourable persons ‘of the benefit they have received from the endeavours of the royal society, which now-a-days passes through so many censures; but she has yet your majesty for her founder and patron, and is therefore the’ less concerned, since no man of worth can lightly speak ill of an assembly v.hich your majesty has thought fit to dignify by so signal a relation to it.” The third edition, with great additions and improvements, was published in 1G79; the fourth in 1705, and the fifth in 1729, both very incorrect. In 1776 a new edition of the “Sylva” was published in 4to, by Dr. Andrew Hunter, of York, a gentleman eminently qualified for the undertaking. Under the care of this gentleman the work appeared with every possible advantage; and was enriched by the judicious editor with ample and copious notes, and adorned with a set of fine engravings. A head of Mr. Evelyn is prefixed, drawn and engraved by Battolozzi. Dr. Hunter’s edition of the Sylva has been four times reprinted. The edition of 1812 contains the deceased editor’s last corrections . 16. “A parallel of the antient architecture with the modern, in a collection of ten principal authors who have written upon the five orders, viz. Palladio and Scammozzi, Serlio and Vignola D. Barbaro and Cataneo L. B. Alberti and Viola, Bullant and De Lorme compared with one another. The three Greek orders, Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian, comprise the first part of this treatise, and the two Latin, Tuscan and Composite, the latter written in French by Roland Freart, sieur de Chambray made English for the benefit, of builders to which is added, an account of architects and architecture^ in an historical and etymological explanation of certain terms, particularly affected by architects; with Leon Baptista Alberti’s treatise of statues,” London, 1664, folio. This work, as well as the former, is dedicated to king Charles II.; and the dedication dated from Sayes-court, August 20th, contains^some curious facts. After an apology for prefixing his royal name to a translation, our author proceeds thus: “I know none, indeed, to whom I could more aptly inscribe a discourse of building, than to so royal a builder, whose august attempts have already given so great a splendour to our imperial city, and so illustrious an example to the nation It is from this contemplation, sir, that after I had, by the commands of the royal society, endeavoured the improvement of timber and the planting of trees, I have advanced to that of building, as its proper and mutual consequent, not with a presumption to incite or instruct your majesty, which were a vanity unpardonable, but, by it, to take occasion of celebrating your majesty’s great example, who use your empire and authority so worthily, as fortune seems to have consulted her reason, when she poured her favours upon you; so as I never cast my eyes on that generous designation in the epigram, Ut donem pastor K tedificem, without immediate reflection on your majesty, who seem only to value those royal advantages you have above others, that you may oblige, and that you may build. And certainly, sir, your majesty has consulted the noblest way of establishing your greatness, and of perpetuating your memory, since, while stones can preserve inscriptions, your name will be famous to posterity; and, when those materials fail, the benefits that are engraven in our hearts will outlast those of marble. It will be no paradox, but a truth, to affirm, that your majesty has already built and repaired more in three or four years, notwithstanding the difficulties and the necessity of an extraordinary ceconomy for the public concernment, than all your enemies have destroyed in twenty, nay than all your majesty’s predecessors have advanced in an hundred, as I could easily make out, not only by what your majesty has so magnificently designed and carried on at that your ancient honour of Greenwich, under the conduct of your most industrious and worthy surveyor, but in those splendid apartments and other useful reformations for security and delight about your majesty’s palace at Whitehall the chargeable covering first, then paving and reformation of Westminster-hall care and preparation for rebuilding St. Paul’s, by the impiety and iniquity of the late confusions almost dilapidated; what her majesty the queen-mother has added to her palace at Somerset-house, in a structure becoming her royal grandeur, and the due veneration of all your majesty’s subjects, for the lioirnir she has done both this your native city, and the whole nation. Nor may I here omit, what I so much desire to transmit to posterity, those noble and profitable amoenities of your majesty’s plantations, wherein you most resemble the divine architect, because your majesty has proposed in it such a pattern to your subjects, as merit their imitation and protoundest acknowledgments, in one of the most worthy and kingly improvements tbat nature is capable of. 1 know not what they talk of former ages, and of the now contemporary princes with your majesty these things are visible and should I here descend to more particulars, which yet were not foreign to the subject of this discourse, I would provoke the whole world to produce me an example parallel with your majesty, for your exact judgment and marvellous ability in all that belongs to the naval architecture, both as to its proper terms and more solid use, in which your majesty is master of one of the most noble and profitable arts that can be wished, in a prince to whom God has designed the dominion of the ocean, which renders your majesty’s empire universal; where, by exercising your royal talent and knowledge that way, you can bring even the antipodes to meet, and the poles to kiss each other; for so likewise, not in a metaphorical but natural sense, your equal and prudent government of this nation has made it good, whilst your majesty has so prosperously guided this giddy bark, through such a storm, as no hand, save your majesty’s, could touch the helm, but at the price of their temerity.” There is also another dedication to sir John Denham, knight of the bath, superintendent and surveyor of all his majesty’s buildings and works, in which there are several matters of fact worth knowing, as indeed there are in all Mr. Evelyn’s dedications; for, though no man was naturally more civil, or more capable of making a compliment handsomely, yet his merit was always conspicuous in his good manners; and he never thought that the swelling sound of a well-turned period could atone for want of sense. It appears from the dedication of the second edition of the Sylva to king Charles II. that there was a second edition of this work also in the same year, viz. 1669, as there was a third in 1697, which was the last in the author’s life-time. In this third edition, which is very much improved, “the account of Architects and Architecture,” which is an original work of Mr. Evelyn’s, and a most excellent one of its kind, is dedicated to sir Christopher Wren, surveyor to his majesty’s buildings and works; and there is in it another of those incidental passages that concern the personal history of our author. Having said in the first paragraph, that, if the whole art of building were lost, it might be found again in the noble works of that great architect, which, though a very high, is no unjust compliment, more especially, continues our author, St. Paul’s church and the Monument; he then adds, “I have named St. Paul’s, and truly not without admiration, as oft as I recall to mind, as frequently I do, the sad and deplorable condition it was in, when, after it had been made a stable of horses and a den of thieves, you, with other gentlemen and myself, were, by the late king Charles, named commissioners to survey the dilapidations, and to make report to his majesty, in order to a speedy reparation. You will not, I am sure, forget the struggle we had with some who were for patching it up any how, so the steeple might stand, instead of new-building, which it altogether needed: when, to put an end to the contest, five days after (August 27, Sept. 1666), that dreadful conflagration happened, out of whose this phoenix is risen, and was by providence designed for you. The circumstance is too remarkable, that I could not pass it over without notice. I will now add no more, but beg your pardon for this confidence of mine, after I have acquainted you that the parallel to which this was annexed being out of print, I was importuned by the bookseller to add something to a new impression, but to which I was no way inclined; till, not long since, going to St. Paul’s, to contemplate that august pile, and the progress you have made, some of your chief workmen gratefully acknowledging the assistance it had afforded them, I took this opportunity of doing myself this honour.” The fourth edition of this work, printed long after our author’s death, viz. in 1733, was in folio, as well as the rest; to which is added “The Elements of Architecture,” by sir Henry Wotton, and some other things, of which, however, hints were met with in our author’s pieces. 17. “Mwrtyj/ov Tjjj AvaiMos; that is, another part of the mystery of Jesuitism, or the new heresy of the Jesuits, publicly maintained at Paris, in the college of Clermont, the twelfth of December, 1661, declared to all the bishops of France, according to the copy printed at Paris. Together with the imaginary heresy, in three letters; with divers other particulars relating to this abominable mystery never before published in English;” Lond. 1664, 8vo. This, indeed, has not our author’s name to it; but that it is really his, and that he had reasons for not owning it more publicly, appears from a letter from him to Mr. Boyle. 18. “Kalendarium Hortense, or the gardener’s almanac, directing what he is to do monthly throughout the year, and what fruits and flowers are in prime,” Lond. 1664, 8vo. The second edition of this book, which seems to have been in folio, and bound with the Sylva and Pomona, as it was in the third edition, was dedicated to Cowley, with great compliments from our author to that poet, to whom it had been communicated before; which occasioned Cowley’s addressing to John Evelyn, esq. his mixed essay in verse and prose, entitled “The Garden.” This passed through at least nine editions. The author made many additions as long as he lived and the best was that printed by way of appendix to the fourth and last edition of the Sylva in his life-time. 19. “The history of the three late famous impostors, viz. Padre Ottotnano, pretended son and heir to the late grand signior; Mahomet Bei, a pretended prince of the Ottoman family, but, in truth, a Wallachian counterfeit: and Sabbatai Sevi, the supposed Messiah of the Jews, in the year 1666; with a brief account of the ground and occasion of tjie present war between the Turk and the Venetian: together with the cause of the final extirpation, destruction, and exile, of the Jews out of the empire of Persia,” Lond. 1668, 8vo. This piece is dedicated to Henry earl of Arlington, and the dedication is subscribed J. E. and, if Mr. Wood had seen it, he would not have said, “I know nothing yet to the contrary but this may be a translation.” The nature and value of this little piece were much better known abroad: one of the best literary journals, “Act. Eruditorum Lipsiensiutn,” A. D. 1690, p. 605, having given, though at some distance of time, a very just character of it, with this very remarkable circumstance, that the pretended Mahomet Bei was at that very juncture in the city of Leipsic. There is added, at the end of this piece, an account of the extirpation of the Jews in Persia during the reign of Shah Abbas the second, which is not so large or perfect as the rest; of which circumstance the author gives a hint, and does not press any thing farther than he is supported by authorities. He mentions a person, who, the very year that the book was published, took upon him the title of brother to the famous count Serini, and that he had the misfortune to be shipwrecked in the west of England, by which he imposed upon persons of quality, till, by unluckily calling for drink upon the road in very audible English, he discovered the cheat. He farther remarks, with regard to Sabbatai Sevi, that he was the twenty-fifth false Messiah that had attempted to impose upon the Jews, even according to their own account. 20. “Public employment and an active life preferred to solitude, in a reply to a late ingenious essay of a contrary title,” Lond. 1667, in 8vo. This was written in answer to a discourse of sir George Mackenzie’s, preferring solitude to public employment, which was at the time of its publication much admired; and, as our author apprehended this might prove an encouragement to indolence and timidity, he therefore wrote against it. We have in the Transactions of the royal society a character of this, and thie piece before mentioned, which follows the account given of the second edition of the “Sylva,” Philosoph. Trans. No. 53; and the reader will find some ingenious strictures on “Public employment, &c.” in vol. 1. of the Censura Literaria, by one who knows well how to improve solitude. 21. “An idea of the perfection of painting, demonstrated from the principles of art, and by examples conformable to the observations which Pliny and Quintilian have made upon the most celebrated pieces of the ancient painters, paralleled with some works of the most famous modern painters, Leonardo da Vinci, Raphael, Julio Romano, and N. Poussin. Written in French by Roland Freart, Sieur de Cambray, and rendered English by J. E. esquire, fellow of the royal society;” Lond. 1668, 8vo, This translation is dedicated to Henry Howard, of Norfolk, heir apparent to that dukedom and the dedication is dated from Say es-court, June the 24th, 1668, 8vo. This piece, like most of Mr. Evelyn’s works, is now become exceeding scarce. In the preface he observes, that the reader will find in this discourse divers useful, remarks, especially where the author “treats of costume, which we, continues he, have interpreted decorum, as the nearest expression our language would bear to it. And I was glad our author had reproved it in so many instances, because it not only grows daily more licentious, but even ridiculous and intolerable. But it is hoped this may universally be reformed! when our modern workmen shall consider, that neither the exactness of their design, nor skilfulness in colouring, ha.s been able to defend their greatest predecessors from just reproaches, who have been faulty in this particular. I could exemplify in many others, whom our author has omitted; and there is none but takes notice what injury it has done the fame of some of our best reputed painters, and how indecorous it is to introduce circumstances, wholly improper to the usages and genius of the places where our histories are supposed to. have beeq acted.” Mr. Evelyn then remarks, that this was not only the fault of Bassano, who would be ever bringing in his wife, children, and servants, his dog and his cat, and very kitchen-stuff, after the Paduan mode; but of the great Titian himself, Georgipn, Tintoret, and the rest; as Paulo Veronese is observed also to have done, in his story of Pharaoh’s daughter drawing Moses out of the river, attended with a guard of Swisses. Malvogius likewise, in a picture then in the king’s gallery at Whitehall, not only represents our first parents with navels upon their bellies, but has placed an artificial stone fountain, carved with imagery, in the midst of his paradise. Nor does that excellent and learned painter, Rubens, escape without censure, not only for making most of his figures of the shapes of brawny Flemings, but for other sphalmata and circumstances of the like nature, though in some he has acquitted himself to admiration, in the due observation of costume, particularly in his crucifixes, &c. Raphael Urbino was, doubtless, one of the first who reformed these inadvertencies; but it was more conspicuous in his latter than in his former pieces. “As for Michael Angelo,” continues Mr. Evelyn, “though I heartily consent with our critic in reproving that almost idolatrous veneration of his works, who hath certainly prodigiously abused the art, not only in the table this discourse arraigns him for, but several more which I have seen; yet I conceive he might have omitted some of those embittered reproaches he has reviled him with, who doubtless was one of the greatest masters of his time, and however he might succeed as to the decorum, was hardly exceeded for what he performed in sculpture and the statuary art by many even of the ancients themselves, and haply by none of the moderns: witness his Moses, Christus in Gremio, and several other figures at Rome to say nothing of his talent in architecture, and the obligation the world has to his memory, for recovering many of its most useful ornaments and members out of the neglected fragments, which lay so long buried, and for vindicating that antique and magnificent manner of building from the trifling of Goths and barbarians.” He observes next, that the usual reproach of painting has been the want of judgment in perspective, and bringing more into history than is justifiable upon one aspect, without turning the eye to each figure in particular, and multiplying the points of sight, which is a point even monsieur Freart, for all the pains he has taken to magnify that celebrated Decision of Paris, has failed in. For the knowing in that art easily perceive, that even Raphael himself has not so exactly observed it, since, instead of one, as monsieur Freart takes it to be, and as indeed it ought to have been, there are no less than four or five; as du Bosse hath well observed in his treatise of “The converted painter,” where, by the way also, he judiciously numbers amongst the faults against costume, those landscapes, grotesque figures, &c. which we frequently find abroad especially for, in our country, we have few or none of those graceful supplements of steeples painted, horizontally and vertically on the vaults and ceilings of cupolas, since we have no examples for it from the ancients, who allowed no more than a frett to the most magnificent and costly of those which they erected. But, would you know whence this universal caution in most of their works proceeded, and that the best of our modern painters and architects have succeeded better than others of that profession, it must be considered, that they were learned men, good historians, and generally skilled in the best antiquities; such were Raphael, and doubtless his scholar Julio; and, if Polydore arrived not to the glory of letters, he yet attained to a rare habit of the ancient gusto, as may be interpreted from most of his designs and paintings. Leon Baptist Alberti was skilled in all the politer parts of learning to a prodigy, and has written several curious things in the Latin tongue. We know that, of later times, Rubens was a person universally learned, as may be seen in several Latin epistles of his to the greatest scholars of his age. And Nicholas Poussin, the Frenchman, who is so much celebrated and so deservedly, did, it seems, arrive to this by his indefatigable industry “as the present famous statuary, Bernini, now living,” says Mr. Evelyn, “has also done so universal a mastery, that, not many years since, he is reported to have built a theatre at Rome, for the adornment whereof he not only cut the figures and painted the scenes, but wrote the play, and composed the music, which was all in recitative. And I am persuaded, that all this is not yet by far so much as that miracle and ornament of our age and country, Dr. Christopher Wren, were able to perform, if he were so disposed, and so encouraged, because he is master of so many admirable advantages beyond them. I alledge these examples partly to incite, and partly to shew the dignity and vast comprehension of this rare art, and that for a man to arrive to its utmost perfection, he should be almost as universal as the orator in Cicero, and the architect in Vitruvius. But, certainly, some tincture in history, the optics and anatomy, are absolutely requisite, and more, iri the opinion of our author, than to be a steady designer, and skilled in the tempering and applying of colours, which, amongst most of our modern workmen, go now for the only accomplishments of a painter.”

, a skilful painter, was descended of a good family, and born at Rome in 1634, where, being in. easy circumstances, he pursued his inclination and taste for painting. He was a faithful imitator of Peter da Cortona, whose favourite disciple he was, and to whom he came so near in his ideas, his invention, and his manner of painting, that his cielings particularly are often mistaken, for Cortona’s. Generally, however, Mr. Fuseli says, Ferri has less grace of design, less ease in his actions and draperies, and less compass of mind; but he has more solidity and carefulness of finish than his master. Though he set great prices on his works, he was in continual employ. Pope Alexander VII. had a great esteem for him; and his three successors were no less favourable to him. The great duke sent for him to Florence, and assigned him a large pension to finish the works which Cortona had left imperfect. He entered so well into the spirit of them, and acquitted himself so worthily, that the whole work seems to be of the same hand. The great duke nominated him chief of the school of Florence, in which rank he continued for a long time. Ferri returned to Rome, where he appeared a great architect as well as a good painter. Several palaces and grand altars, as St. John of the Florentines, and that of the Chiesa Nuova, were raised from his designs. He diverted himself more with drawing than painting. He was much importuned for devices, figures for breviaries, and titles of books: several of which have been engraved by Spierre and Bloemart. The pope employed him in making cartoons for the Vatican; and few men have worked in more different ways. The cupola of St. Agnes, in the palace of Navona, was his last work. The chagrin he felt in seeing the angels of Bacici, a Genoese painter, which were directly under it, the force of whose colouring made his appear too weak, is said to have been the cause of his death. One day he told Lazaro Baldi, his companion, that his cupola appeared very different on the scaffold from what it did from below, and that the angels of Bacici gave him great pain; and, falling sick soon after, he died in 1689, at the age of fifty-five.

This master had a lively imagination, and a noble taste for historical compositions. He was singularly skilled in antiquities, and in all his designs strictly observant of the costume. His pictures usually are enriched with porticos and colonnades, as he was an accomplished architect; his choice of nature was elegant, his expression animated, and his pencil delicate. His colouring was exceedingly good; and his taste of design was entirely of the Roman school, as well in regard to correctness, as to the objects which he chose to represent. In the cupola of the barefooted Carmelites at Paris, he painted, in fresco, Elijah ascending to Heaven in a Chariot of Fire, and Elisha below, with his arms extended, to catch the mantle of the Prophet. At Liege are several grand altar-pieces, among which one in St. Paul’s church describes the Conversion of that saint and in the cathedral there is another by this master, representing the Resurrection of Lazarus.

, an eminent Italian architect, but perhaps more justly celebrated for his knowledge of mechanics, was born at Mili, on the lake of Lugano, in 1543, and came to Rome in his twentieth year, to study architecture. Sixtus V. to whom his merits were known when he was cardinal Montalti, was no sooner raised to the tiara, than he made him his architect. Among other great designs for ornamenting the city of Rome, this pontiff had conceived the project of digging out and re-erecting the famous obelisk, formed of one entire piece of granite, originally from Egypt, which had formerly decorated the circus of Nero, but was now partly buried near the wall of the sacristy of St. Peter’s. For this purpose he called together the ablest artists, engineers, and mathematicians, to consider of the means by which this vast relic of Roman grandeur, which was thirty-six feet high, and weighed above a million of pounds, could be removed, and placed on its pedestal in the front of the piazza of St. Peter’s. The machinery employed by the Egyptians in preparing this obelisk, or of conveying il to Rome, were so forgotten, that even tradition preserved no probable conjecture; but the ingenuity of Fontana was completely successful. He first produced before the pope a model of the machinery to be employed, and demonstrated the practicability of the operation; and having made all the necessary erections, the obelisk was raised and safely transported to the piazza, about 150 yards distance, and placed on its pedestal amidst the acclamations of the astonished populace of Rome, on Sept. 10, 1586, the same day that the duke of Luxembourg, ambassador from Henry IV. made his entry into the city. It is said that Fontana undertook this work with the alternative of losing his head if it did not succeed, and that he had provided horses at every gate at Rome, to aid his escape, in case of any accident. Be this as it may, the pope revyarded him munificently. He created him a knight of the golden spur, gave him titles of nobility, and caused medals to be struck to his honour. To all this he added a pension of 2000 crowns, with reversion to his heirs; 3000 crowns as a gift, and all the materials employed on the undertaking, the value of which was computed at 20,000 crowns. Besides the erection of this obelisk, on which Fontana’s fame chiefly rests, he constructed three others, and built for the pope a superb palace near St. John of Lateran, and the library of the Vatican, and repaired some of the ancient monuments of art in Rome. His forte, indeed, was rather in mechanics than in original architecture, in which last he is said to have committed many mistakes; and either this, or the envy which his great enterprize created, is supposed to have raised him enemies, who at length persuaded pope Clement VIII. to dismiss him from his office of pontifical architect. In 1592, however, he was invited to Naples by the viceroy, the count Miranda, who made him royal architect and chief engineer. In that city he built the royal palace and some other considerable edifices, and died there in 1607. He published an account of the removal of the obelisk, entitled “Delia transportatione dell' Obelisco Vaticano e delle fabriche Sixto V.” Rome, 1590, fol. reprinted at Naples in 1603. He had a brother, John, who assisted him in his works at Rome, but who excelled chiefly in hydraulic machinery. He died at Rome in the year 1614.

, a French painter, the pupil of Le Brun, who suffered him to paint for him occasionally in some of his most capital works, was the son of a goldsmith, and born at Paris in 1640. He perfected his talents in Italy, and on his return was employed to paint the dome of the hotel of invalids. Louis XIV. settled upon him a pension of 1000 crowns, and he was received into the academy of painting, where he became rector and professor. His fame extended even to England, whither he was invited by the earl of Montagu, and employed by liini in decorating his magnificent house, now the British Museum, where his paintings at that time attracted universal admiration. William III. on seeing them, offered him a handsome establishment in this country; but, at the same time, the celebrated architect Mansard, wrote to him from France, that he was wanted there to co-operate with him in finishing some public buildings, and he returned to his native country, where he died in 1716. He was reckoned inimitable in his time as a colourist, and excellent both in landscape and historical painting.

, sieur de Chambrai, under which name he is classed in some biographical works, was a learned architect of the seventeenth century, and a native of Chambrai. He was connected by relationship, as well as love of the art, with Sublet des Noyers, secretary of state and superintend ant of the buildings under Louis XIII. About 1640, Freart was sent, with one of his brothers, to Italy, on an important mission to the pope, and he was also ordered to collect antiquities, &c. and engage the ablest artists to reside in France. Among the latter he brought Poussin to Paris. Freart died in iv76. He published a French translation of Da Vinci on painting, Paris, 1651, fol. and another of Palladia’s Architecture, Paris, 1650. Of this a fine edition was printed by Nicolas du Bois at the Hague in 1726, with engravings by Piea*t, but he has strangely divided the translator into two persons, asserting that Freart published one edition of Palladio, and the sieur de Chambrai another. But the work by which Freart is best known is his “Parallele de l'architecture antique avec la rooderne,” Paris, 1650, fol. reprinted by Erard in 1702. Our celebrated countryman Evelyn trans-, lated this work, as already noticed in his article (vol. Xjijl p. 435). It was much admired in France, and is still in esteem with artists.

, an eminent royal architect of France, built the palace at Choisy, and undertook the royal bridge at Paris, but died in 1686, before he had completed this work, which was finished by his son James and Frere Romain. James was born at Paris 1667, became a pupil of the celebrated Mansart, and acquired so great a reputation as to be appointed overseer- general of buildings, gardens, arts and manufactures first architect and engineer of bridges and banks through the kingdom, and knight of St. Michael. He planned the common sewer, and many public buildings, among which are the hotel de Ville, and the presidial court of Paris, &c. He died in that city 1742, leaving a son, first architect to the king, who long supported the reputation of his ancestors, and died in 1782.

, after Hippocrates prince of the Greek physicians, was a native of Pergamus in the Lesser Asia, where he was born about A. D. 131, in the reign of the emperor Adrian. His father, whose name was Nicon, was an able architect, and spared neither trouble nor expence in the education of his son. Galen studied with success all the philosophy of his time, but finally applied himself to medicine as his profession. Satyro and Peiops, two eminent physicians of his time, were his chief preceptors in that science. But his application to the works of Hippocrates contributed more than any other instruction to the eminence he attained.

Although he was extremely worldly, dextrous at a bargain, and cautious in his dealings with mankind, he became an unfortunate projector in his attempt at a rapid increase of his property. The rooms in Hanover-square, we believe, were very productive, as he let every floor and every room, not only to concerts, balls, and assemblies, but to exhibitions, lectures, and lodgers of all kinds, scarcely allowing himself a habitable apartment for his own residence. When the opera house was burned down in 1789, he advanced 30,000l. towards rebuilding it, and sent an architect to Italy to procure plans of all the great theatres of that country, out of which to choose the most eligible for the new construction; but it has been generally believed, that by some jumble of clashing interests, or chicane of law, the management was taken out of his hands, and he not only lost his power but his money. While the great theatre in the Hay market was rebuilding, sir John fitted up the opposite little theatre as a temporary opera house, but it was so small and inconvenient, that it could not contain an audience sufficient to cover his expences. The next year the Pantheon was transformed into an opera house before that in the Haymarket was finished; and the unfortunate knight of the golden spur, tired of the squabbles and accidents which happened previous to the opening of his new theatre, sold his patent, and afterwards wholly confined himself to the produce of his Hanoversquare rooms, and the exercise of his profession as a dancjng-master, to the end of his life.

, an ingenious though unsuccessful artist, who was a goldsmith in Edinburgh, deserves to be recorded for his attempt to introduce an improvement in the art of printing. The invention, first practised by Ged in 1725, was simply this. From any types of Greek or Roman, or any other character, he formed a plate for every page, or sheet, of a book, from which he printed, instead of using a type for every letter, as is done in the common way. This was first practised on blocks of wood, by the Chinese and Japanese, and pursued in the first essays of Coster, the European inventor of the present art. “This improvement,” says James Ged, the inventor’s son, “is principally considerable in three most important articles, viz. expence, correctness, beauty, and uniformity.” In July 1729, William Ged entered into partnership with William Fenner, a London stationer, who was to have half the profits, in consideration of his vancing all the money requisite. To supply this, Mr. John James, then an architect at Greenwich (who built sir Gregory Page’s house, Bloomsbury church, &c.) was taken into the scheme, and afterwards his brother, Mr. Thomas James, a letter-founder, and James Ged, the inventor’s son. In 1730, these partners applied to the university of Cambridge for printing bibles and common-prayer books by block instead of single types, and, in consequence, a lease was sealed to them April 23, 1731. In their attempt they sunk a large sum of money, and finished only two prayer-books, so that it was forced to be relinquished, and the lease was given up in 1738. Ged imputed his disappointment to the villainy of the press-men, and the illtreatment of his partners (which he specifies at large), particularly Fenner, whom John James and he were advised to prosecute, but declined it. He returned to Scotland in 1733, and had no redress. He there, however, had friends who were anxious to see a specimen of his performance; which he gave them in 1744, by an edition of Sallust. Fenner died insolvent in or before 1735, and his widow married Mr. Waugh, an apothecary, whom she survived. Her effects were sold in 1768. James Ged, the son, wearied with disappointments, engaged in the rebellion of 1745, as a captain in Perth’s regiment; and being taken at Carlisle, was condemned, but on his father’s account (by Dr. Smith’s interest with the duke of Newcastle) was pardoned, and released in 1748. He afterwards worked for some time as a journeyman, with Mr. Bettenham, and then commenced master; but being unsuccessful, he went privately to Jamaica, where his younger brother William was settled as a reputable printer. His tools, &c. he left to be shipped by a false friend, who most ungenerously detained them to try his skill himself. James died the year after he left England; as did his brother in 1767. In the above pursuit Mr. Thomas James, who died in 1738, expended much of his fortune, and suffered in his proper business; “for the printers,” says Mr. Mores, “would not employ him, because the block-printing, had it succeeded, would have been prejudicial to theirs.” Mr. William Ged died, in very indifferent circumstances, October 19, 1749, after his utensils were sent for Leith to be shipped for London, to have joined with his son James as a printer there. Thus ended his life and project, which has lately been revived both in France and England, under the name of stereotype, although its application to the printing of books has hitherto been partial, and indeed chiefly confined to such as are supposed not to admit of changes or improvements, such as Bibles, and some school-books.

, an eminent architect, was the son of Peter Gibbs of Footdeesmire, merchant in Aberdeen, and Isabel Farquhar, his second wife; he was born about the year 1674, and was educated at the grammar-school and the Marischal college of Aberdeen, where he took the degree of master of arts. Having, however, few friends, he resolved to seek his fortune abroad; and about 1694 left Aberdeen, whither he never returned. As he had always discovered a strong inclination to the mathematics, h spent some years in the service of an architect and masterbuilder in Holland. The earl of Mar happening to be in that country, about 1700, Mr. Gibbs was introduced to him. This noble lord was himself a great architect; and finding his countryman Mr. Gibbs to be a man of genius, he not only favoured him with his countenance and advice, but generously assisted him with money and recommendatory letters, in order, by travelling, to complete himself as an architect.

Thus furnished, Mr. Gibbs went from Holland to Italy, and there applied himself assiduously to the study of architecture, under the best masters. About 1710 he came to England; where he found his noble patron in the ministry, and highly in favour with the queen. Lord Mar introduced him to his friends as a gentleman of great knowledge in his profession; and an act of parliament having been passed about this time for building fifty new churches, Mr. Gibbs was employed by the trustees named in the act, and gave a specimen of his abilities, in planning and executing St. Martin’s church in the fields, St. Mary’s in the Strand, and several others. Being now entered on business, he soon became distinguished; and although his generous patron had the misfortune to be exiled from his native country, Mr. Gibbs’s merit supported him among persons of all denominations, and he was employed by persons of the best taste and greatest eminence. The liadcliffe library at Oxford, begun June 16, 1737, and finished in 1747; the King’s college, Royal library, and Senatehouse, at Cambridge; and the sumptuous and elegant monument for John Holies, duke of Newcastle, done by order and at the expence of his grace’s only child, the countess of Oxford and Mortimer, are lasting evidences of his abilities as an architect. Some years before his death, he sent to the magistrates of Aberdeen, as a testimony of his regard for the place of his nativity, a plan of St. Nicholas church, which was followed in the re-building of it, and which was probably among the last of his performances.

, an eminent painter, sculptor, and architect, was born in 1276, at a village near Florence, of parents who were plain country people. When a boy, he was sent out to keep sheep in the fields; and, having a natural inclination for design, he used to amuse himself with drawing his flock after the life upon sand, in the best manner he could. Cimabue travelling once that way, found him at this work, and thence conceived so good an opinion of his genius for painting, that he prevailed with his father to let him go to Florence, and be brought up under him. He had not applied himself long to designing, before he began to shake off the stiffness of the Grecian masters. He endeavoured to give a finer air to his heads, and more of nature to his colouring, with proper actions to his figures. He attempted likewise to draw after the life, and to express the different passions of the mind; but could not come up to the liveliness of the eyes, the tenderness of the flesh, or the strength of the muscles in naked figures. What he did, however, had not been done in, two centuries before, with any skill equal to his. Giotto’s reputation was so far extended, that pope Benedict IX. sent a gentleman of his court into Tuscany, to bring him a just report of his talents; and withal to bring him a design from each of the Florentine painters, being desirous to have some notion of their skill. When he came to Giotto, he told him of the pope’s intentions, which were to employ him in St. Peter’s church at Rome; and desired him to send some design by him to his holiness. Giotto, who was a pleasant ready man, took a sheet of white paper, and setting his arm close to his hip to keep it steady, he drew with one stroke of his pencil a circle so round and so equal, that “round as Giotto’s O” afterwards became proverbial. Then, presenting it to the gentleman, he told him smiling, that “there was a piece of design, which he might carry to his holiness.” The man replied, “I ask for a design:” Giotto answered, “Go, sir, I tell you his holiness asks nothing else of me.” The pope, who understood something of painting, easily comprehended by this, how much Giotto in strength of design excelled all the other painters of his time; and accordingly sent for him to Rome. Here he painted many pieces, and amongst the rest a ship of Mosaic work, which is over the three gates of the portico, in the entrance to St. Peter’s church, and is known to painters by the name of Giotto’s vessel. Pope Benedict was succeeded by Clement V. who transferred the papal court to Avignon; whither, likewise, Giotto was obliged to go. After some stay there, having perfectly satisfied the pope by many fine specimens of his art, he was largely rewarded, and returned to Florence full of riches and honour in 1316. He was soon invited to Padua, where he painted a new-built chapel very curiously; thence he went to Verona, and then to Ferrara. At the same time the poet Dante, hearing that Giotto was at Ferrara, and being himself then in exile at Ravenna, got him over to Ravenna, where he executed several pieces; and perhaps it might be here that he drew Dante’s picture, though the friendship between the poet and the painter was previous to this. In 1322, he was again invited abroad by Castruccio Castrucani, lord of Luca; and, after that, by Robert king of Naples. Giotto painted much at Naples, and chiefly the chapel, where the king was so pleased with him, that he used very often to go and sit by him while he was at work: for,Giotto was a man of pleasant conversation and wit. One day, it being very hot, the king said to him, “If I were you, Giotto, I would leave off working this hot weather” “and so would I, Sir,” says Giotto, “if I were you.” He returned from Naples to Rome, and from Rome to Florence, leaving monuments of his art in almost every place through which he passed. There is a picture of his in one of the churches of Florence, representing the death of the blessed Virgin, with the apostles about her: the attitudes of which story, Michael Angelo used to say, could not be better designed. Giotto, however, did not confine his genius altogether to painting: he was both a sculptor and architect. In 1327 he formed the design of a magnificent and beautiful monument for Guido Tarlati, bishop of Arezzo, who had been the head of the Ghibeline faction in Tuscany: and in 1334 he undertook the famous tower of Sancta Maria del Fiore; for which work, though it was not finished, he was made a citizen of Florence, and endowed with a considerable yearly pension. His death happened in 1336: and the city of Florence erected a marble statue over his tomb. He had the esteem and friendship of most of the excellent men of the age in which he lived and among the rest, of Dante and Petrarch. He drew, as already noticed, the picture of the former and the latter mentions him in his will, and in one of his familiar epistles.

, an eminent sculptor and architect of Paris, lived under Francis I. and Henry II. and is supposed to have designed the fronts of the old Louvre. This artist’s figures, in demi -relief, have never been surpassed; nor can any thing of that kind be more beautiful than his Fountain of the Innocents, in the street of St. Denis at Paris. The cariatides which support a tribune in the hall of the Hundred Swiss at the Louvre are no less so. Many more of his works may be seen in that city, which are the admiration of connoisseurs, and remind us of the simple and sublime beauties of the antique style; for which reason he is justly called the Corregio of sculpture.

, a celebrated physician, was born at Schoonhaven, in Holland, where his father was an eminent architect, July 30, 1641. After having laid a proper foundation for classical learning, he went to study physic at Leydtfn; in which science he made so great progress, that in 1663 he published a treatise “De Succo Pancreatico,” which did him the highest honour. Two years after he went to France, and was made M. D. at Angers; but returned to Holland the year after, and settled at Delft, where he had very extensive practice, tie married in 1672, and died Aug. 17, 1673, when he was only thirty-two years of age. He published three pieces upon the organs of generation both in men and women, upon which subject he had a very warm controversy with Swammerdam. His works, with his life prefixed, were published in 8vo, at Leyden, in 1677 and 1705; and were translated into Flemish, and published at Amsterdam in 1686.

, an historical painter, the son of a Scotch gentleman who resided many years at Chelsea, as deputy to Mr. Robert Adams, the celebrated architect, when clerk of the works to that college, was born in 1750, and sent to Italy, when very young, under the patronage of Mr. Adams. He was there some time under the tuition of Zucchi, the painter of arabesque ornaments at Rome, and although Mr. Edwards thinks he was then too young to receive any material benefit from this tour, it served at least to increase his early taste for the art, and he caught a pleasant manner of painting, much in the style of his master. When he returned to England he became a pupil in the royal academy, and by attention to his studies, acquired considerable employment. He practised in many different ways, mostly history, and frequently arabesque, of which latter kind he executed some decorations at the seat of the late earl of Bute at High Cliff, Hampshire. He sometimes painted portraits, but his manner was not well adapted to that branch, yet his portrait of Mrs. Siddons in the character of lady Randolph (now in the possession of Samuel Whitbread, esq.) was allowed to have great merit. He was much employed by the late alderman Boydell, for his Shakspeare, and by Macklin for his edition of the Bible and of the Poets. In the former his “Woman of Samaria 7 ' deserves much praise. One of his most capital works was a picture of the” Queen of Sheba entertained at a banquet by Solomon," a design for a window in Arundel castle. His manner of painting was light, airy, and pleasant, and he excelled in ornaments to which he gave a propriety, richness, and a classic air. His coloured drawings imitate the fulness of his oil-paintings with more freshness, and, without much labour, are finished with taste. He was elected associate of the royal academy Nov. 8, 1784, and royal academician, February 10, 1789. He died in the vigour though not in the bloom of life, Dec. 2, 1801, of a violent fever of only three days 1 duration, deeply lamented by his friends, and regretted by the public. He was a man of great affability and gentle manners; his politeness covered no insincerity, nor his emulation envy. He was one of the few artists we have personally known who spoke with high respect of his brethren, and was equally respected by them for his amiable temper.

, an architect of considerable note, was born in 1666, and at the age of seventeen became the scholar of sir Christopher Wren, but deviated a little from the lessons and practice of his master, at least he did not improve on them, though his knowledge in every science connected with his art, is much commended, and his character remains unblemished. He was deputysurveyor at the building of Chelsea college, clerk of the works at Greenwich, and was continued in the same posts by king William, queen Anne, and George I. at Kensington, Whitehall, and St. James’s; surveyor of all the new churches, and of Westminster-abbey, from the death of sir Christopher, and designed many that were erected in pursuance of the statute of queen Anne for building fifty new churches viz. St. Mary Wool no th, in Lombard-street; Christ church, in Spitaifields St. George, Middlesex St. Anne, Limehouse and St. George, Bloomsbury the steeple of which is a master-stroke of absurdity. It consists of an obelisk topped with the statue of George I. hugged by the royal supporters: a lion, an unicorn, and a king, on such an eminence, as Walpole observes, are very surprizing. He also rebuilt some part of All Souls’ college, Oxford, and gave the plan for a new front to the street, which may be seen in Williams’s “Oxonia,” but has never been executed. At Blenheim and Castle-Howard he was associated with Vanbrugh, and was employed in erecting a magnificent mausoleum there, when he died in March 1736, near seventy years of age. He built several mansions, particularly Easton Neston in Northamptonshire; restored a defect in Beverley minster by a machine that screwed up the fabric with extraordinary art repaired, in a judicious manner, the west end of Westminster-abbey and gave a design for the Radcliffe library at Oxford.

In 1732 he ventured to attack Mr. Pope, in a plate called “The Man of Taste,” containing a view of the gate of Burlington-house, with Pope white-washing it, and bespattering the duke of Chandos’s coach. This plate was intended as a satire on the translator of Homer, Mr. Kent tUe architect, and the earl of Burlington. It was fortunate for Hogarth that he escaped the lash of the first. Either Hogarth’s obscurity at that time was his protection, or the bard was too prudent to exasperate a painter who had already given such proof of his abilities for satire. What must he have felt who could complain of the “pictured shape” prefixed to “Gulliveriana,” “Pope Alexander’s Supremacy and Infallibility examined,” &c. by Ducket, and other pieces, had such an artist as Hogarth undertaken, to express a certain transaction recorded by Gibber?

The same year was published by Dr. Holder, “A Treatise on the natural grounds of Harmony,” in which the propagation of sound, the ratio of vibrations, their coincidence in forming consonance, sympathetic resonance, or sons harmoniyites, the difference between arithmetical, geometrical, and harmonic proportions, and the author’s opinion concerning the music of the ancients, to whom he denies the use of harmony, or music in parts, are all so ably treated, and clearly explained, that this book may be read with profit and pleasure by most practical musicians, though unacquainted with geometry, mathematics, and harmonics, or the philosophy of sound. This book is said, in the introduction, to have been drawn up chiefly for the sake and service of the gentlemen of the chapel royal, of which he was sub-dean, and in which, as well as other cathedrals to which his power extended, he is said to have been a severe disciplinarian; for, being so excellent a judge and composer himself, it is natural to suppose that he would be the less likely to tolerate neglect and ignorance in the performance of the choral service. Michael Wise, who perhaps had fallen under his lash, used to call him Mr. Snub-dean. Dr. Holder died at Amen Corner, London, Jan. 24, 1696-7, and was buried in St. Paul’s, with his wife, who was only sister to sir Christopher Wren. Dr. Holder had a considerable share in the early education of that afterwards eminent architect.

In 1687, his brother’s daughter, Mrs. Grace Hooke, who had lived with him several years, died; and he was so affected at her death, that he hardly ever recovered it, but was observed from that time to grow less active, more melancholy, and, if possible, more cynical than ever. At the same time a chancery-suit, in which he was concerned with sir John Cutler, on account of his salary for reading the Cutlerian lectures, made him very uneasy, and increased his disorder. In 1691, he was employed in forming the plan of the hospital near Hoxton, (bun Jed by Aske, alderman of London, who appointed archbishop Tillotson one of his executors; and in December the same year, Hooke was created M. D. by a warrant from that prelate. He is also said to have been the architect of Bedlam, and the College of Physicians. In July 1696, his chancerysuit for sir John Cutler’s salary was determined in his favour, to his inexpressible satisfaction. His joy on that occasion was found in his diary thus expressed “Domshlgissa that is, Deo Optimo Maximo sit honor, laus, gloria, in saecula saeculorum. Amen. I was born on this day of July, 1635, and God has given me a new birth: may I never forget his mercies to me! whilst he gives me breath may I praise him!” The same year an order was granted to him for repeating most of his experiments, at the expence of the Royal Society, upon a promise of his finishing the accounts, observations, and deductions from them, and of perfecting the description of all the instruments contrived by him, which his increasing illness and general decay rendered him unable to perform. For the two or three last years of his life he is said to have sat night and day at a table, engrossed with his inventions and studies, and never to have gone to bed, or even undressed; and in this wasting condition, and quite emaciated, he died March 3, 1702, at his lodgings in Gresham-college, and was buried in St. Helen’s church, Bishopsgate- street, his corpse being attended by all the members of the Royal Society then in London.

, an eminent antiquary, architect, and critic, was probably a native of Verona, and flourished in the sixteenth century. He was of the order of the Dominicans, but in his travels, and during his scientific labours, wore the habit of a secular priest. When at Rome, where he was first known as an architect, he began to apply to the study of classical antiquities, and made a judicious collection of inscriptions, which he dedicated to Lorenzo de Medici. He was some time at the court of the emperor Maximilian I. and thence went to France about 1500, where Louis X. appointed him royal architect. He built at Paris two bridges over the Seine, that of Notre Dame, and the little bridge. In the mean time, while he had leisure, he employed it in examining ancient manuscripts, and had the felicity to recover all the letters of Pliny the younger, and the work of Julius Obsequens on prodigies. These he arranged for publication, and sent them to Aldus Manutius, by whom they were both printed in 1508, 8vo. He also collated several other classics, and illustrated Caesar’s Commentaries by useful notes and figures, and was the first to give a design of the famous bridge which Caesar built across the Rhine. On his return to Italy, he edited the fine edition of Vitruvius, printed by Aldus in 1511, and enriched it with designs. When the famous bridge the Rialto was burnt down in 1513, he gave a magnificent design for a new one; but that of an inferior architect being preferred, he quitted Venice, and went to Rome, where, after the death of Bramante, he was employed on St. Peter’s church. His last work was the bridge over the Adige, at Verona, which he built in 1520: He died about 1530, at a very advanced age.

Among his occasional productions about this time were his translation of a “Dissertation on the Greek Comedy,” for Mrs. Lennox’s English version of Brumoy, the general conclusion of the book, and an introduction to the “World Displayed,” a collection of voyages and travels, projected by his friend Newbery. When a new bridge was about to be built over the Thames at Blackfriars, he wrote some papers against the plan of the architect, Mr. Mylne. His principal motive appears to have been his friendship for Mr. Gwyn, who had given in a plan; and probably he only cloathed Gwyn’s arguments in his own stately language. Such a contest was certainly not within his province, and he could derive little other advantage than the pleasure of serving his friend. He appeared more in character when he assisted his contemporaries with prefaces and dedications, which were very frequently solicited from him. Poor as he was at this time, he taught how dedications might be written without servile submission or flattery, and yet with all the courtesy, compliment, and elegance which a liberal mind could expect.

, a celebrated English architect, was born about 1572, in the neighbourhood of St. Paul’s, London, where his father, Mr. Ignatius Jones, was a clothworker. At a proper age, it is said, he put his son apprentice to a joiner, a business that requires some skill in drawing; and in that respect suited well with our architect’s inclination, which naturally led him to the art of designing. It is not probable, however, that he attended long to the mechanical part of his business; for we are told that he distinguished himself early by the extraordinary progress he made with his pencil, and was particularly noticed for his skill in landscape-painting, of which there is a specimen at Chiswick-house. These talents recommended him to the earl of Arundel, or, as some say, to William earl of Pembroke. It is certain, however, that at the. expence of one or other of these lords he travelled over Italy, and the politer parts of Europe; saw whatever was recommended by its antiquity or value; and from these plans formed his own observations, which, upon his return home, he perfected by study. He was no sooner at Rome, says Wai ­pole, than he found himself in his sphere, and acquired so much reputation that Christian IV. king of Denmark sent for him from Venice, which was the chief place of his residence, and where he had studied the works of Palladio, and made him his architect, but on what buildings he was employed in that country we are yet to learn. He had been some time possessed of this honourable post when that prince, whose sister Anne had married James I. made a visit to England in 1606; and our architect, being desirous to return to his native country, took that opportunity of coming home in the train of his Danish majesty. The magnificence of James’s reign, in dress, buildings, &c. furnished Jones with an opportunity of exercising his talents, which ultimately proved an honour to his country. Mr. Seward says, we know not upon what authority, that the first work he executed after his return from Italy, was the decoration of the inside of the church of St. Catharine Cree, Leadenhall-street. We know, however, that the queen appointed him her architect, presently after his arrival; and he was soon taken, in the same character, into the service of prince Henry, under Whom he discharged his trust with so much fidelity and judgment, that the king gave him the reversion of the place of surveyor-general of his majesty’s works.

The king, in his progress 1620, calling at Wilton, the seat of the earl of Pembroke, among other subjects, fell into a discourse about that surprising group of stones called Stonehenge, upon Salisbury plain, near Wilton. Our architect was immediately sent for by lord Pembroke, and received his majesty’s commands to make observations and deliver his sentiments on the origin of Stone-henge. In obedience to this command, he presently set about the work; and having, with no little pains and expence, taken an exact measurement of the whole, and diligently searched the foundation, in order to find out the original form and aspect, he proceeded to compare it with other antique buildings which he had any where seen. After much reasoning, and along series of authorities, his head being full of Rome, and Roman edifices and precedents, he concluded, that this ancient and stupendous pile must have been originally a Roman temple, dedicated to Ccelus, the senior of the heathen gods, and built after the Tuscan order; that it was built when the Romans flourished in peace and prosperity in Britain, and, probably, betwixt the time of Agricola’s government and the reign of Constantine the Great. This account he presented to his royal master in the same year, 1620, and was immediately appointed one of the commissioners for repairing St. Paul’s cathedral in London.

During this reign he gave many proofs of his genius and fancy in the pompous machinery for masques and interludes so much in vogue then. Several of these representations are still extant in the works of Chapman, Davenant, Daniel, and particularly Ben Jonson. The subject was chosen by the poet, and the speeches and songs were also of his composing; but the invention of the scenes, ornaments, and dresses of the figures, was the contrivance of Jones . And in this he acted in harmony with father Ben for a while; but, about 1614, there happened a quarrel between them, which provoked Jonson to ridicule his associate, under the character of Lantern Leatherhead, a hobby-horse seller, in his comedy of “Bartholomew Fair.” Nor did the rupture end but with Jonson’s death; a very few years before which, in 1635, he wrote a most virulent coarse satire, called “An Expostulation with Jnigo Jones;” and, afterwards, “An Epigram to a Friend;” and also a third, inscribed to “Inigo Marquis Would-be.” The quarrel not improbably took its rise from our architect’s rivalship in the king’s favour; and it is certain the poet was much censured at court for this rough usage of his rival: of which being advised by Mr. Howell, he suppressed the whole satire .

In respect to his character, we are assured, by one who knew him well, that his scientific abilities surpassed most of his age. He was a perfect master of the mathematics, and was not unacquainted with the two learned languages, Greek and Latin, especially the latter; neither was he without some turn for poetry . A copy of verses composed by him is published in the “Odcombian Banquet,” prefixed to Tom Coryate’s “Crudities,” in 1611, 4to. But his proper character was that of an architect, and the most eminent of his time on which account he is still generally styled the British Vitruvius the art of designing being little known in England till Mr. Jones, under the patronage of Charles I. and the earl of Arundel, brought it into use. This is the character given him by Mr. Webb, who was his heir; and who, being born in London, and bred in Merchant Taylors’-school, afterwards resided in Mr. Jones’s family, married his kinswoman, was instructed by him in mathematics and architecture, and designed by him for his successor in the office of surveyor-general of his majesty’s works, but was prevented by Sir John Denham. Mr. Webb published some other pieces besides his “Vindication of Stone-henge restored ;” and dying at Butleigh, his seat in Somersetshire, Oct. 24, 1672, was buried in that church. Walpole enumerates among his works which are still in part extant, the new quadrangle of St. John’s college, Oxfqrd the queen’s chapel at St. James’s the arcade of Oovent-garden and the church Gunnersbury, near Brentford Lincoln’s Inn Chapel, and one or two of the houses in Lincoln’s-inn-fields Coleshill in Berkshire, and Cobham hall in Kent; the Grange, in Hampshire; the queen’s house at Greeirwich, &c. Several other of his buildings may be seen in Campbell’s “Vitruvius Britannicus.” The principal of his designs were published by Mr. Kent in 1727, fol. as also some of his less designs in 1744, foL Others were published by Mr. Isaac Ware. Our artist left in ms. some curious notes upon Palladio’s “Architecture,” now in Worcester college, Oxford, some of which are inserted in an edition of Palladio, published at London, 1714, fol. by Mr. Leoni; which notes, he says, raise the value of the edition above all the preceding ones. His original drawings for Whitehall-palace are also in Worcester library.

In 1613 he went to Paris, where he was admitted to an interview with cardinal Perron, and with his usual frankness told the cardinal that his translation of Virgil was “nought.” About this time he commenced a quarrel with Inigo Jones, and made him the subject of his ridicule in a comedy called “Bartholomew- Fair,” acted in 1614. Jones was architect or machinist to the masques and entertainmerits for which Jon son furnished the poetry, but the particular cause of their quarrel does not appear. “Whoever,” says lord Orford, “was the aggressor, the turbulent temper of Jonson took care to be most in the wrong. Nothing exceeds the grossness of the language that he poured out, except the badness of the verses that were the vehicle. There he fully exerted all that brutal abuse which his contemporaries were willing to think wit, because they were afraid of it; and which only serves to show the arrogance of the man who presumed to satirize Jones and rival Shakspeare. With the latter, indeed, he had not the smallest pretensions to be compared, except in having sometimes written absolute nonsense. Jonsort translated the ancients, Shakspeare transfused their very soul into his writings.” If Jonson was the rival of Shakspeare, he deserves all this; but with no other claims than his (t Cataline,“and” Sejanus,“how could he for a moment fancy himself the rival of Shakspeare?” Bartholomew Fair“was succeeded by the” Devil’s an Ass,“in 1616, and by an edition of his Works in folio, in which his” Epigrams" were first printed, although they appear to have been written at various times, and some long before this period. He was now in the zenith of his fame and prosperity. Among other marks of respect, he was presented with the honorary degree of M. A. by the university of Oxford. He had been invited to this place by Dr. Corbet, senior student, and afterwards dean of Christchurch and bishop of Norwich. According to the account he gave of himself to Drummond, he was M. A. of both universities.

A few years after he became engaged in a long and vexatious lawsuit, in consequence of the neglect (to say the least of it) of an architect who professed himself to be his friend; the particulars of which it is of no importance to detail. At the conclusion of the business he shewed that his good humour had not forsaken him: and in 1787 he gave to the public the principal circumstances of his case in a performance entitled “The Distressed Poet, a seriocomic Poem, in three cantos,” 4to, with some pleasantry, and without any acrimony.

, an ingenious artist, was born in Yorkshire, in 1685, and put apprentice to a coach-painter, but, feeling the superiority of his talents, he left his master, and came up to London, where he soon proved himself worthy of encouragement and patronage. In 1710 he was sent, by the munificence of some gentlemen of his own country, to Rome, whither he accompanied Mr. Tallman. There he studied under Cavalier Luti, and in the academy gained the second prize of the second class. He also became acquainted with lord Burlington, whose sagacity discovered the rich vein of genius that had been hid even from himself; and, on their return to England in 1719, lodged him in his own house, and shewed for him all the marks of the most disinterested friendship. By his interest he was employed in various works, both as a painter in history and portrait; and yet there appear but very faint traces of that creative talent he displayed in a sister art. His portraits did not resemble the persons that sat for them. His colouring was worse than that of the most errant journeyman to the profession; and his drawing was defective, witness the hall at Wanstead, and his picture at St. Clement’s. Fie designed some of the drawings of Gay’s Fables, the prints for Spenser’s Fairy Queen, and the vignettes to the large edition of Pope’s works. In architecture, however, of the ornamental kind, he was deservedly admired he executed the temple of Venus at Stowe the earl of Leicester’s house at Holkham in Norfolk; the great hall at Mr. Pelham’s, Arlington-street; and the stair-case at lady Isabella Finch’s in Berkeley-square. Mr. Walpole considers him likewise as the inventor of modern gardening, in which it is certain that he excelled, and every thing in that branch has been since his time more natural, graceful, and pleasing. By the patronage of the dukes of Grafton and Newcastle, Mr. Pelham, and the earl of Burlington, he was made master-carpenter, architect, keeper of the pictures, and, after the death of Jervas, principal painter to the crown; the whole, including a pension of 100l. a year, which was given him for his works at Kensington, produced 600l. a year. In 1743 he was disordered in his eyes, but recovered, and in March 1748 an inflammation in his bowels put an end to his life at Burlington-house, April 12, 1748, aged sixty-three years. He was buried in lord Burlington’s vault at Chiswick.

From the preceding circumstances, gleaned from Mr. Roscoe’s elaborate account of Leo, a judgment may be formed of his character, in which, although some things may have been exaggerated by the enemies of the Romish church, enough remains uncontested to prove that he had many of the worst vices, and, when it became necessary to his aggrandizement, practised the worst crimes of his predecessors. His biographer, by embodying the history of literature and the arts in the life of Leo, one of the most pleasing and truly valuable parts of the work, has, we think, failed, in attributing much of their advancement to Leo. And indeed it has been too much a fashion to speak of the “age of Leo” as of a glorious period which his patronage created. Too much stress, perhaps, is frequently laid on patronage; and we ought to hesitate in declaring how much it has produced, when we consider how much in all ages has been produced without it. But Leo’s patronage was not general, for it excluded Ariosto and Erasmus, two of the greatest men of the age; nor was it judicious in selection, for he bestowed it on such worthless characters as Aretin and Niso, not to speak of a number of less known characters, whose merit rises no higher than that of being able to write amorous Italian sonnets, and panegyrical Latin verses. With respect to the arts, it has been justly remarked, that when he ascended the throne they were at their meridian. He found greater talents than he employed, and greater works commenced than he completed. Leonard Da Vinci, Michael Angelo, and Raffaello, performed their greatest works before the accession of Leo X.; Bramante, the architect of St. Peter’s, died in the second year of his pontificate; and Da Vinci and Michael Angelo shared none of his favours. It is from his attachment to Raflfaello that he derives his strongest claims as a patron of art; yet a part of his conduct to this great artist makes us question whether Leo had a refined taste. Raffaello made thirteen cartoons of religious subjects to complete the decoration of the hall of Constantine, and had sent them into Flanders, to be returned in worsted copies, without any care to preserve the originals, nor any inquiry made concerning them after the subjects were manufactured into tapestry. By accident, seven of these are yet to be seen in this country, and may enable us to estimate the taste of the pontiff who could so easily forget them. Yet Leo must not be deprived of the merit that justly belongs to him. He drew together the learned men of his time, and formed eminent schools, and he did much in promoting the art of printing, then of incalculable importance to literature. In these respects, and upon account of the share he had in precipitating the reformation, his short pontificate of eight years and eight months must be allowed to form one of the most interesting periods in papal history, and worthy of the illustration it has received.

Ronsard, the poet, out of envy, published a satire, or satirical sonnet, against him, under the title of “LaTruelle crosse'e,” the Trowel crosier'd. De Lorme revenged himself, by causing the garden-door of the Thuilleries, of which he was governor, to be shut against the poet; and Ronsard, with a pencil, wrote upon the gate these three words: “Fort, reverent, habe.” De Lorme, who understood little Latin, complained of this inscription, as levelled at him, to queen Catharine de Medicis, who, inquiring into the matter, was told by Ronsard, that, by a harmless irony, he had made that inscription for the architect when read in French; but that it suited him still better in Latin, these being the first words abbreviated of a Latin epigram of Ausonius, which begins thus: “Fortunam reverenter habe.” Ronsard added that he only meant that De Lorme should reflect on his primitive grovelling fortune, and not to shut the gate against the Muses. De Lorme died in 1557; leaving several books of architecture, greatly esteemed. These are, 1. “Nouvelles Inventions pour bien bastir & a petit frais,” Paris, 1561, folio, fifty-seven leaves. 2. “Ten Books of Architecture,” 1568, folio.

Mahomet pretended to receive all his revelations from the angel Gabriel, who, he said, was sent from God, on purpose to deliver them unto him. He was subject, it is said, to the falling-sickness, and whenever the fit was upon him, he pretended it to be a trance, and that then the angel Gabriel was come from God with some new revelations. These revelations he arranged in several chapters; which make up the Koran, the Bib!e of the Mahometans. The original of this book was laid up, as he taught his followers, in the archives of heaven; and the angel Gabriel brought him the copy of it, chapter by chapter, as occasion required that they should be published to the people; that is, as often as any new measure was to be pursued, any objection against him or his religion to be answered, any difficulty to be solved, any discontent among his people to be quieted, any offence to be removed, or any thing else done for the furtherance of his grand scheme, his constant recourse was to the angel Gabriel for a new revelation; and then appeared some addition to the Koran, to serve his purpose. But what perplexed him most was, that his opposers demanded to see a miracle from him; “for,” said they, “Moses, and Jesus, and the rest of the prophets, according to thy own doctrine, worked miracles to prove their mission from God; and therefore, if thou be a prophet, and greater than any that were sent before thee, as thou boastest thyself to be, do thou work the like miracles to manifest it unto us.” This objection he endeavoured to evade by several answers; all oi which amount omy to this, “that God had sent Moses and Jesus with miracles, and yet men would not be obedient to their word; and therefore he had now sent him in the last place without miracles, to force them by the power of the sword to do his will.” Hence it has become the universal doctrine of the Mahometans, that their religion is to be propagated by the sword, and that all true mussulmen are bound to fight for it. It has even been said to be a custom among them for their preachers, while they deliver their sermons, to have a drawn sword placed by them, to denote, that the doctrines they teach are to be defended and propagated by the sword Some miracles, at the same time, Mahomet is said to have wrought; as, “That he clave the moon in two; that trees went forth to meet him, &c. &c.” but those who relate them are only such as are ranked among their fabulous and legendary writers: their learned doctors renounce them all; and when they are questioned, how without miracles they can prove his mission, their common answer is, that the Koran itself is the greatest of all miracles; for that Mahomet, who was an illiterate person, who could neither write nor read, or that any man else, by human wisdom alone, should be able to compose such a book, is, they think, impossible. On this Mahomet himself also frequently insists, challenging in several places of the Koran, both men and devils, by their united skill, to compose any thing equal to it, or to any part of it. From all which they conclude, and as they think, infallibly, that this book could come from none other but God himself; and that Mahomet, from whom they received it, was his messenger to bring it unto them. That the Koran, as to style and language, is the standard of elegance in the Arabian tongue, and Uiat Mahomet was in truth what they aifirm him to have been, a rude and illiterate man, ate points agreed on all sides. A question therefore will arise among those who are not so sure that this book was brought by the angel Gabriel from heaven, by whose help it was compiled, and the imposture framed? There is the more reason to ask this, because this book itself contains so many particulars of the Jewish and Christian religions, as necessarily suppose the authors of it to have been well skilled in both; which Mahomet, who was bred an idolater, and lived so for the first forty years of his life, among a people totally illiterate, for such his tribe was by principle and profession, cannot be supposed to have been: but this is a question not so easily to be answered, because the nature of the thing required it to have been transacted very secretly. Besides this, the scene of this imposture being at least six hundred miles within the country of Arabia, amidst those barbarous nations, who all immediately embraced it, and would not permit any of another religion to live among them, it could not at that distance be so well investigated by those who were most concerned to discover the fraud. That Mahomet composed the Koran by the help of others, was a thing well known at Metca, when he first published his imposture there; and he was often reproached on that account by his opposers, as he himself more than once complains. In the twenty-fifth chapter of the Koran, has words are “They say, that the Koran is nothing but a lie of thy own invention, and others have been assisting to thee herein.” A passage in the sixteenth chapter also, particularly points at one of those who was then looked upon to have had a principal hand in this matter: “I know they will say, that a man hath taught him the Koran; but he whom they presume to have taught him is a Persian by nation, and speaketh the Persian language. But the Koran is in the Arabic tongue, full of instruction and eloquence.” The person here pointed at, was one Abdia Ben Salon, a Persian Jew, whose name he afterwards changed into Abdollah Ebn Salem, to make it correspond with the Arabic dialect; and almost all who have written of this imposture have mentioned him as the chief architect used by Mahomet in the framing of it: for he was an artful man, thoroughly skilled in all the learning of the Jews; and therefore Mahomet seems to have received from him whatsoever of the rites and customs of the Jews he has ingrafted into his religion. Besides this Jew, the impostor derived some aid from a Christian monk: and the many particulars in the Koran, relating to the Christian religion, plainly prove him to have had such an helper. He was a monk of Syria, of the sect of the Nestorians. The name which he had in his monastery, and which he has since retained among the western writers, is Sergius, though Bahira was that which he afterwards assumed in Arabia, and by which he has ever since been mentioned in the East, by all that write or speak of him. Mahomet, as it is related, became acquainted with this Bahira, in one of his journeys into Syria, either at Bostra or at Jerusalem: and receiving great satisfaction from him in many of those points in which he had desired to be informed, contracted a particular friendship with him; so that Bahira being not long after excommunicated for some great crime, and expelled his monastery, fled to Mecca to him, was entertained in his house, and became his assistant in the framing of his imposture, and continued with him ever after; till Mahomet having, as it is reported, no farther occasion for him, to secure the secret, put him to death.

He was buried in the place where he died, which was in the chamber of his best-beloved wife, at Medina. The story that Mahomet’s tomb, being of iron, is suspended in the air, under a vault of loadstones, is a mere fable; and the Mahometans laugh, when they know that the Christians relate it, as they do other stories of him, for a certain matter of fact. A king of Egypt, indeed, formerly attempted to do this, when he had a mind to procure the same advantage to a statue of his wife. “Dinocrates the architect,” says Pliny, “had begun to roof the temple of Arsinoe, at Alexandria, with loadstone, that her image, made of iron, might seem to hang there in the air.” But no such Attempt was ever made in regard to Mahomet; whose body continued in the place where he was buried, without having been moved or disturbed. They have, it is said, built over it a small chapel, joining to one of the corners of the chief mosque of that city; the first mosque which was erected to that impious superstition, Mahomet himself being, as hath been related above, the founder of it.

, a very celebrated French architect, was born in 1598, and died in 1666. The magnificent edifices raised by him at Paris and elsewhere, are so many monuments of his genius and skill in his art. His ideas of general design were esteemed noble, and his taste in ornamenting the inferior parts delicate. The principal buildings of which he was the author, are the gate of the church of the Feuillans, in the street St. Honor6; the church of les filles St. Marie, in the street of S. Antoine; the gate of the Minims in the Place Royale; a part of the Hotel de Conti; the Hotels de Bouillon, Toulouse, and Jars; besides several buildings in the provinces, which were formed on his designs. Much as he was approved by the public, he was not equally able to satisfy himself. Colbert having inspected his plans for the facades of the Louvre, was so pleased with them, that he wished to engage him in a promise not to make any subsequent alterations. Mansard refused to undertake the work on those conditions, being determined, as he said, to preserve the right of doing better than he had undertaken to do. His nephew, Jules-Hardouin Mansard, had the office of first architect, and conductor of the royal buildings, and was the designer also of many very celebrated structures.

As a divine he published only one sermon, “The Mischiefs of faction and rebellion considered,” preached at Cambridge in 1745. He is chiefly known, as an antiquary, by his valuable “History of the College of Corpus-Christi,” &.c. 1753, 4to, the most complete account ever published, of any college in either university, and upon the best plan, that which includes the lives of the principal members, as well as the foundation and progress of the college. We have been too much indebted to this work not to bear this testimony to its satisfactory information and accuracy. Mr. Masters, however, was less fortunate in prefixing to this publication a plan and elevation of the intended new building, which he claimed the merit of designing, although it really belonged to that excellent architect James Essex. Mr. Masters also published a Section and Ichnography of Pythagoras’ s school at Cambridge, with the seal of Mertoncollege, Oxford, to uhich it belongs. To the Archseologia he contributed “Remarks on Mr. Walpole’s Historic Doubts,” who answered them with no small display of vanity and arrogance; “An account of stone coffins found near Cambridge castle;” and of “an ancient painting on glass, representing the pedigree of the Stewart family.” In 1784 he published “Memoirs of the Life and Writings of the late rev. Thomas Baker, B. D. of St. John’s-college, from the papers of Dr. Zachary Grey, with a Catalogue of his ms Collections,” Cambridge, 8vo; and in 1790 “A Catalogue of the several pictures in the public library and respective colleges of the university of Cambridge,” 12mo. His last work was, “A short account of the parish of Waterbeach, in the diocese of Ely, by a late Vicar,” 1795, 8vo, with a slight sketch of Denny abbey; but of this only a small number were given as presents. Mr. Masters, from certain peculiarities of temper, appears to have been frequently at variance with his literary friends, of which instances may be found in our authorities.

, a very able French mathematician and astronomer, was born at Laon in 17 44, where his father was an architect, and at one time a man of considerable property. At an early age he discovered a strong inclination for mathematical pursuits, and while he was under the instruction of his tutors, corresponded with Lalande, whom he was desirous of assisting in his labours. In 1772, Mechain was invited to Paris, where he was employed at the depot of the marine, and assisted M. Darquier in correcting his observations. Here his merit brought him acquainted with M. Doisy, director of the depot, who gave him a more advantageous situation at Versailles. At this place he diligently observed the heavens, and, in 1774, sent to the Royal Academy of Sciences “A Memoir relative to an Eclipse of Aldebaran,” observed by him on the 15th of April. He calculated the orbit of the comet of 1774, and discovered that of 1781. In 1782, he gained the prize of the academy on the subject of the comet of 1661, the return of which was eagerly expected in 1790; and in the same year he was admitted a member of the academy, and soon selected for the superintendance of the Connoissance des Tems. In 1790, M. Mechain discoveredhis eighth comet, and communicated to the academy his observations on it, together with his calculations of its orbit. In 1792 he undertook, conjointly with M. Delambre, the labour of measuring the degrees of the meridian, for the purpose of more accurately determining the magnitude of the earth and the length of a metre. In the month of June 1792, M. Mechain set out to measure the triangles between Perpignan and Barcelona; and notwithstanding that the war occasioned a temporary suspension of his labours, he was enabled to resume and complete them during the following year. He died on the 20th of September 1805, at Castellon de la Plana, in the sixty-second year of his age. Lalande deplores his loss as that of not only one of the best French astronomers, but one of the most laborious, the most courageous, and the most robust. His last observations and calculations of the eclipse of the sun on the llth of February, are inserted in the Connoissance des Tems for the year 15; and he also published a great many in the Ephemerides of M. Bode, of Berlin, which he preferred to a former work after Lalande became its editor. A more extensive memoir of his labours may be seen in Baron von Zach’s Journal for July 1800, and Lalande’s History of Astronomy for 1804.

, a lady much and justly ceJebrated for her skill in drawing insects, flowers, and other subjects of natural history, was born at Francfort on the Maine, in 1647; being the grand-daughter and daughter of Dutch engravers of some celebrity, whose talents were continued and improved in her. She was instructed by Abraham Mignon. She married John Andriez Graff, a skilful painter and architect of Nuremberg, but the fame she had previously attached to her own name, has prevented that of her husband from being adopted. They had two children, both daughters, who were also skilful in drawing. By liberal offers from Holland, this ingenious couple were induced to settle there; but Sibylla, whose great object was the study of nature, had the courage to travel in various parts, for the sake of delineating the insects, and several other productions peculiar to each country. She ventured to take the voyage to Surinam, where she remained two years, for the express purpose of making the drawings which have since added so considerably to her fame; and, though it does not appear that there was any kind of disagreement between her and her husband, she went, if we mistake not, without him. His own occupations, probably, precluded such a journey. Madame Merian died at Amsterdam in 1717, at the age of seventy.

, an eminent architect, to whose memory Black Friars Bridge will be a lasting monument, was born at Edinburgh, Jan. 4, 1734. His father, Thomas Mylne, was an architect, and a magistrate of that city; and his family, it has been ascertained, held th office of master-masons to the kings of Scotland for five hundred year’s, till the union of the crowns of England and Scotland. Mr. Mylne was educated at Edinburgh, and travelled early in life for improvement in h;s hereditary science. At Rome he resided five years, and in September 1758, gained the first prize in the first class of architecture, adjudged by the academy of St. Luke, and was also unanimously elected a member of that body. On this occasion prince Altieri, distinguished for his knowledge of the fine arts, obtained from the pope the necessary dispensation, Mr. Mylne being a protestant. He was also elected a member of the academies of Florence and Bologna. He visited Naples, and viewed the interior of Sicily with an accuracy never before employed; and from his skill in his profession, and his classical knowledge, was enabled to illustrate several very obscure passages in Vitruvius. His fine collection of drawings, with his account of this tour, which he began to arrange for publication in 1774, but was interrupted by his numerous professional engagements, are still in the possession of his son, and will, it is hoped, at no very distant period, be given to the public. He was often heard to remark in his latter days, that in most of his observations and drawings, he had neither been anticipated by those who traversed the ground before him, nor followed by those who came after him.

After making a complete tour of Europe, which he began by going through France, and finished by returning through Switzerland and Holland, he arrived in London, with every possible testimonial of his talents, but without a friend or patron. At this time plans were requested by the city of London for constructing a bridge at Black Friars, and Mr. Mylne, among twenty others, became a candidate. It was well known that one of his rivals was befriended by lord Bute, who had then great influence, but Mr. Mylne succeeded by the impartial verdict of the judges appointed to examine the respective plans; and the first stone was laid in 1761, with a pomp becoming the vast undertaking. A writer of no common talents, in the supplement to the “Encyclopaedia Britannica,” after a very close examination of the details of this structure, pronounces it to be the most perfect of any that is upon record, and at large points out the great superiority of the centering employed by Mr. Mylne. The learned author seerns, however, to suppose that this ingenious architect made a secret of his mode of centering; but few men had a more liberal spirit, or more aversion to professional quackery of every kind, and therefore, he deposited in the British Museum, an exact model of the centering employed at Blackfriars bridge, which gives a most precise and satisfactory idea of the work. When the bridge was first proposed, Mr. Mylne engaged in a short controversy with Dr. Johnson, on the form of the arch; but they were afterwards intimate friends, and in conversation agreed in a certain sturdy independence of mind which perhaps cemented that friendship. It is much to the honour of Mr. Mylne’s accuracy, as well as integrity, that Blackfriars-bridge was completed in 1765, for the exact sum specified in his estimate, namely, one hundred and fifty-three thousand pounds. On his proposals being accepted, the city committee, in February 1760, voted him an annual salary of three hundred pounds; and his farther remuneration was to be five per cent, on the money laid out on the bridge. To obtain this, however, he hud a long struggle with the city, which he maintained with his characteristic firmness and spirit; and, in answer to a question several times put to him, with no great delicacy, uniformly declared, that what he claimed, he claimed as a matter of right, and not of favour. At length, but not until 1776, his claims were allowed; on which occasion he sent to the corporation a letter of thanks.

, a celebrated Italian architect, was born in 1518 at Vicenza in Lombardy. As soon as he had learned the principles of art from Trissino, the celebrated poet, who was his townsman, he went to Rome, and applying himself with great diligence to study the ancient monuments, he entered into the spirit of their architects, and formed his taste upon them. On his return he was employed to construct various edifices, and obtained great reputation throughout Italy, which abounds in monuments of his skill, particularly the palace Foscari, at Venice, and the Olympic theatre at Vicenza, where he died in 1580. He excelled likewise in the theory of his art, as appears by his publications, which are still in the highest reputation. His first was his treatise on architecture, “I quattro libri dell' Architettura,” Venice, 1570. This has been often reprinted, and our country has the merit of a very splendid edition, published at London in 1715, in English, Italian, and French, 2 or 3 vols. fol. This edition, published by Leoni, is enriched with the most valuable of the notes which Inigo Jones wrote on his copy of the original, now in the library of Worcester college, Oxford. A French edition of the London one was published by Nic. du Bois, at the Hague in 1726, 2 vols. fol.; and in 1740, one much enlarged in Italian and French, at Venice, 5 vols. fol. This has been more recently followed by Scamozzi’s fine edition in Italian and French, printed at Vicenza, 1776—83, 4 vols. fol. In 1730, our countryman, lord Burlington, printed an elegant work, entitled “Fabriche antiche designate da Andrea Palladio, e date in luce da Riccardo Conte de Burlington,” fol. This collection of Palladio' s designs is very scarce, as the noble editor printed only a limited number of copies for his friends. Palladio also composed a small work, entitled “Le Antichita di Roma,” not printed till after his death. He illustrated Caesar’s “Commentaries,” by annexing to Badelli’s translation of that work, a preface on the military system of the Romans, with copper-plates, designed, for the most part, by his two sons, Leonida and Orazio, who both died soon after. Palladio was modest in regard to his own merit, but he was the friend to all men of talents; his memory is highly honoured by the votaries of the fine arts; and the simplicity and purity of his taste have given, him the appellation of the Raphael of architects.

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

, a Parisian architect of the seventeenth century, and one of a family of artists, excelled in the ornaments and decorations of buildings, and wa& architect to Louis XIV. and monsieur his only brother. He planned the cascades, which are so justly admired, at the castle of St. Cloud, and built the church of the nuns of Port-royal, at Paris, in 1625. Le Pautre was received into the royal academy of sculpture, December 1, 1671, and died some years after. His “CEuvres d' Architecture” are engraved in one vol. folio, sometimes bound up in five. John le Pautre, his relation, born in 1617, at Paris, was placed with a joiner, who taught him the first rudiments of drawing; but he soon surpassed his master, and became an excellent designer, and skilful engraver. He perfectly understood all the ornamental parts of architecture, and the embellishments of country houses, such as fountains, grottos, jets-d‘eau, and every other decoration of the garden. John le Pautre was admitted a member of the royal aca<iemy of painting and sculpture April 11, 1677, and died February 2, 1682, aged sixty-five. His *’ GEuvres d' Architecture," Paris, 1751, 3 vols. fol. contains above 782 plates, which were much valued by the chevalier Bernin. Peter le Pautre, related to the two preceding, was born at Pans, March 4, 1659, and excelled so much in statuary as to be appointed sculptor to his majesty. He executed at Rome, in 1691, the beautiful gronp of <flneas and Anchises, which is in the grand walk at theThuilleries; and completed, in 1716, that of Arria and Paetus (or rather of Lucretia stabbing herself in presence of Collatinus) which Theodon had begun at Rome. Several of his other works embellish Marly. This ingenious artist was professor and perpetual director of St. Luke’s academy, and died at Paris, January 22, 1744, aged eighty-four.

, an eminent French architect, was the son of an advocate of parliament, and born at Paris, in 1613. He was bred a physician, but practised only among his relations, his friends, and the poor. He discovered early a correct taste for the sciences and fine arts; of which he acquired a consummate knowledge, without the assistance of a master, and was particularly skilled in architecture, painting, sculpture, and mechanics. He still continues to be reckoned one of the greatest architects France ever produced. Louis XIV. who had a good taste for architecture, sent for Bernini from Rome, and other architects; but Perrault was preferred to them all; and what he did at the Louvre justified this preference. The facade of that palace, which was designed by him, “is,” says Voltaire, “one of the most august monuments of architecture in the world. We sometimes,” adds he, “go a great way in search of what we have at home. There is not one of the palaces at Rome, whose entrance is comparable to this of the Louvre; for which we are obliged to Perrault, whom Boileau has attempted to turn into ridicule.” Boileau indeed went so far as to deny that Perrault was the real author of those great designs in architecture that passed for his. Perrault was involved in the quarrel his brother Charles had with Boileau, who, however, when they became reconciled, acknowledged Claude’s merit.

, a painter of history and architecture, was born in 1481, at Accajano, in the diocese of Volterra, but in the territory and a citizen of Siena. He commenced his studies as a painter at Siena; and when he had gained a competent degree of knowledge, he copied the works of the best masters, with a diligence and success that were equally extraordinary. From Siena he went to Rome, where he was employed by the pope Alexander VI. Julius II. and Leo X. in their palaces, and in several chapels and convents. He was particularly successful in painting architecture; and so completely understood the principles of chiaro-oscuro, and of perspective, that even Titian is said to have seen the effects with surprize, being hardly able to believe that what he saw was the work of the pencil, and not real architecture. His usual subjects were streets, palaces, corridors, porticoes, and the insides of magnificent apartments, which he represented with a truth that produced an absolute deception*. He received some instructions from Bramante, the architect of St. Peter’s,

, a celebrated painter, was born at Geneva in 1607, of a father who was a sculptor and architect, and who, after having passed part of his life in Italy, retired to that city. His son was designed to be a jeweller; and, by frequent employment in enamelling, acquired so fine a taste, and so precious a tone of colouring, that Bordier, who afterwards became his brother-in-law, advised him to attach himself to portrait, believing he might push his art on still to greater lengths; and though both the one and the other wanted several colours which they could not bring to bear the fire, yet they succeeded to admiration. Petitot painted the heads and hands, in which his colouring was excellent; Bordier painted the hair, the draperies, and the grounds. These two friends, agreeing in their work and their projects, set out for Italy. The long stay they made there, frequenting the best chemists, joined to a strong desire of learning, improved them in the preparation of their colours; but the completion of their success must be ascribed to a journey they afterwards made to England. There they found sir Theodore Mayerne, physician to Charles T. and a great chemist; who had by his experiments discovered the principal colours to be used for enamel, and the proper means of vitrifying them. These by their beauty surpassed all the enamelling of Venice and Limoges. Mayerne introduced Petitot, to the king, who retained him in his service, and gave him a lodging in Whitehall. Here he painted several portraits after Vandyck, in which he was guided by that excellent master, who was then in London; and his advice contributed greatly to the ability of Petitot, whose best pieces are after Vandyck. King Charles often went to see him work; as he took a pleasure both in painting and chemical experiments, to which his physician had given him a turn. Petitot painted that monarch and the whole royal family several times. The distinguished favour shewn him by that prince was only interrupted by his unhappy and tragical end. This was a terrible stroke to Petitot, who did not quit the royal family, but followed them in their flight to Paris, where he was looked on as one of their most zealous servants. During the four years that Charles II. stayed in France, he visited Petitot, and often eat with him. Then it was, that his name became eminent, and that all the court of France grew fond of being painted in enamel. When Charles II. returned to England, Louis XIV. retained Petitot in his service, gave him a pension, and a lodging in the gallery of the Louvre. These new favours, added to a considerable fortune he had already acquired, encouraged him to marry in 1661. Afterwards Bordier became his brother-in-law, and ever remained in a firm union with him: they lived together, till their families growing too numerous, obliged them to separate. Their friendship was founded on the harmony of their sentiments and their reciprocal merit, much more than a principle of interest. They had gained, as a reward for their discoveries and their labours, a million of livres, which they divided at Paris; and they continued friends without ever having a quarrel, or even a misunderstanding, in the space of fifty years.

There are two others of the name of Philo on record, but little is known of them the one, Philo Biblios, from Biblios, the place of his nativity, flourished from the reign of Nero to that of Adrian, and wrote in Greek, “De Paran d is et Deligendis Libris;” “De Urbibus;” “De claris Viris;” and “De Imperio Adriani:” but he is chiefly known as the translator of Sanchoniatho’s Phoenician history into Greek, of which a few fragments. only remain. The other, Philo of Byzantium, au architect, flourished about 300 years before the Christian sera, and wrote a treatise of machines used in war, which is printed with “Mathematici veteres,” in 1693. There is also a piece attributed to him, entitled “De septem Orbis Spectaculis,” printed at Rome in 1640.

, a very celebrated architect and engraver, was a native of Venice, but resident for the greater part of his life at Rome. The time of his hirth is not known here, but it must have been about1711. He was remarkable for a bold and free style of etching; which, in general, he drew upon the plate at once, without any, or with very little previous sketch. He worked with such rapidity and diligence, that the magnitude and number of his plates almost exceed belief; and they are executed with a spirit and genius which are altogether peculiar to hi Ib. The earliest of his works appear to have been published in 1743, and consist of designs invented by himself, in a very grand style; with views of ruins, chiefly the work of imagination, and strongly characterizing the magnificence of his ideas. These are sometimes found in a volume, collected by Bourchard, in 1750: with views of Roman antiquities, not in Rome, among which are several of Pola, in Istria. The dedication to these views is dated 1748. Considering these as forming his first work, we may enumerate the rest from a catalogue print, published by himself many years after. 2. “Antichita Romane,” or Roman Antiquities, comprised in 218 plates of atlas paper, commencing by a topographical view of ancient Rome, made out from the fragments of a most curious antique plan of that city, found in the pavement of the temple of Romulus, and now preserved in the Museum at the Capitol. These, with the descriptions in Italian, form four volumes in folio. 3. “Fasti consulares triumphalesque Romanorum, ab urbe condita, usque ad Tiherium Csesarem.” 4. “Del Castello dell' acqua Giulia, e della maniera in cui anticamente si concedevano e distribuivano le acque,” 21 folio plates. 5. “Antichita d'Albano, e di Castel Gandolfo,” 55 plates. 6. “Campus Martins Antique urbis,” with descriptions in Italian and Latin, 54 plates. 7. “Arcbi trionfali antichi, Tempi, ed Anfiteatri, esistenti in Roma, ed in altre parti d'ltalia,” 31. plates. 8. “Tro.fei d'Ottaviano Augusto,” &c. 10 plates. 0. “Delia Magnificenza ed Architettura de' Romani,” 44 plates, with above 200 pages of letter- press, in Italian and Latin. This great work appears to have been occasioned, in great measure, by some dialogues published in London in 1755, but now forgotten here, and entitled, “The Investigator.” These, containing many foolish calumnies against the ancient Romans, had been interpreted to Piranesi, and inflamed his ardent spirit to this mode of vindication. 10. “Architetture diverse,” 27 plates. 11.“Carceri d'inventione,” 16 plates, full of the most wild, but picturesque conceptions. 12. About 130 separate views of Rome, in its present state; in the grandest style of design, and the boldest manner of etching. Besides these, there is also extant, in very few hands (as it was not published, but only given to particular friends), a small work of this author, containing letters of justification to lord Charlemont; in which he assigns the reasons why he did not dedicate his Roman antiquities to that nobleman, as had been intended. Piranesi here appears extremely irritated against his lordship, and his agents, for neglect and ill-treatment; but the most curious part of the work is, that he has taken the pains to etch, in a small quarto size, and with the utmost neatness, yet with all his accustomed freedom, exact copies of the four original frontispieces, in which the name of his intended patron was to hare been immortalized: with views of the inscriptions reengraved as they now stand; as if the first inscriptions had been cut out of the stones, and the new ones inserted on small pieces let into them, as the ancients sometimes practised. In this form they still remain in his frontispieces; a peculiarity which would not be understood without this key. There are also head-pieces and tail-pieces, all full of imagination, and alluding to the matters and persons involved in the dispute. This work is dated in 1757. Piranesi was well known to most of the English artists who Studied at Rome; among others, to Mr. Mylne, the architect of Blackfriars-bridge, with whom he corresponded for several years, and for whom he engraved a fine view of that structure, in its unfinished state; representing, with precision, the parts subservient to its construction; such as the centres of the arches, &c. for the sake of preserving a memorial of them. Some of his works are dedicated to another British architect, Robert Adam; and as Piranesi was an honorary member of the Society of Antiquaries in, London, he always carefully subjoined that title to his name. He was also a member of the academy of the Arcadi, by the name of Salcindio Tiseio. as he has given it in one of his frontispieces, according to the fantastic custom of that society, of giving new names to the persons admitted. All who knew him agree that he was of a fiery and impetuous temper, but full of genius. He left a son, who has been employed in a diplomatic line. The exact time of his death we have not been able to learn; but it is supposed to have happened in or near the year 1780. Pijanesi has been accused, and not without reason, of suffering his imagination to embellish even the designs that were given as real views. He was employed, as an architect, to ornament a part of the priory of Malta, in Rome; in which place his son has erected a statue of him. It is thus mentioned by baron Stolberg, in his Travels: “Here is a fine statue of the architect Piranesi, as large as life, placed there by his son. It is the work of the living artist Angolini; and though it certainly cannot be compared with the best antiques, it still possesses real merit.” His portrait, engraved by Polanzani, in 1750, is in the style of a mutilated statue, and is very spirited. It is prefixed to some of his works.

Raphael, though possessing pre-eminent powers as a painter, had not suffered that profession alone to absorb his mind; he had studied architecture under Bramante, and in chastity of design was not inferior to that distinguished artist, who in full confidence of his abilities, recommended him as his successor, to conduct the great work of St. Peter’s, to which recommendation his holiness paid due attention. According to the pope’s brief on this occasion, dated August 1515, his salary was fixed at three hundred golden crowns, or 150l. per annum. For so important an undertaking this sum would seem to be a very inadequate remuneration but, as his biographer observes, in our own country, one hundred and sixty years subsequent to this period, sir Christopher Wren did not receive more than 200l. per annum, for the building of St. Paul’s, which included draughts, models, making estimates and contracts, examining and adjusting all bills and accounts, with constant personal superintendance, and giving instructions to the artificers in every department. St. Peter’s, which cost more than a century to complete, underwent so many changes by the various architects employed, that it would be now extremely difficult to particularize with any degree of certainty the different parts of it which were executed by Raphael. It appears, however, that it is to him we are indebted for the general plan of the church as it now exists. In 1515, Raphael went with the pope to Florence, and made a design for the facade of the church of St. Lorenzo: and, according to Vasari, he was also the architect of a magnificent house for the bishop of Troja, which still exists in the street of St. Gallo in that city; but of the different buildings designed or executed by Raphael, that on which his reputation as an artist is thought principally to rest, is the Caffarelli palace at Rome. The other buildings of Raphael still existing are, a palace for M. Giovanni Baptista dell' Aquila, opposite to the church of S. Maria della Vallicella, in Rome; a villa for cardinal Julius de Medici, afterwards pope Clement VII.; and for the prince Ghigi he built a set of stables in the Longara, and a chapel in the church of S. Maria del Popolo. This prince was a distinguished patron of Raphael, and much employed him. For him he painted in fresco, in one of the rooms of his Casino in the Longara, now called the Farnesina, a picture of Galatea drawn by dolphins, and surrounded with tritons, &c. which would appear to have been much admired and praised by his friend count Castiglione, from a letter still existing by Raphael to that nobleman, which the reader may see in our principal authority. For prince Ghigi he painted in fresco, on the spandrels of an arch in front of the Ghigi chapel in the church of S. Maria della Pace, a large allegorical subject of Sibyls delivering their prophecies for the confirmation of the revealed religion. This work was highly esteemed when finished; but is now unfortunately much injured, and parts are entirely effaced. For his Casino in the Longara, Raphael made a series of designs from Apuleius’s history of Cupid and Psyche, which were painted by himself and his scholars on a ceiling of a spacious hall. What part was painted by himself it would not be easy at this time to ascertain, as the work has suffered much by being originally exposed to the open air, as the loggia of the Vatican is at present, and by being repainted and repaired.

Raphael was not only eminent as a painter and an architect, but he was desirous to emulate the reputation of his great contemporary, Michael Angelo, in being a sculptor also. We are informed that, with his own hand he executed some statues, but one only is referred to by the anonymous author of the Milan ms. which was the statue of a child, then in the possession of Julio Romano; and of this statue there can be no doubt, as it is also recognized by count Castiglione, in a letter of the year 1523; but what became of it is not known. There is, however, in the Ghigi chapel in the church of S. Maria del Popolo, a statue of Jonah from his own model, and executed in marble, under his immediate direction, by Lorenzetto, which remains an extraordinary instance of the versatility of his powers, as this specimen of sculpture may fairly rank with the best productions of modern Rome.

, an able naval architect, was born in 1652, in Beurn, descended from the ancient house of Elisagaray in Navarre. The count de Vermandois, admiral of France, engaged his services in 1679, by a pension of a thousand crowns; and his opinion concerning the construction of ships was preferred to that of M. Duguesne, even by that gentleman himself. In consequence of this, Renau received orders to visit Brest and the other ports, that he might instruct the ship-builders, whose sons of fifteen or twenty years old he taught to build the largest ships, which had till then required the experience of twenty or thirty years. Having advised the bombardment of Algiers in 1680, he invented bomb-boats for that expedition, and the undertaking succeeded. After the admiral’s decease, M. Vauban placed M. Renau in a situation to conduct the sieges of Cadaquiers in Catalonia, of Philipsburg, Manheim, and Frankendal. In the midst of this tumultuous life he wrote his “Theorie de la manoeuvre des Vaisseaux,” which was published 1689, 8vo. The king, as a reward for M. Renau’s services, made him captain of a ship, with orders that he should have free access to, and a deliberative voice in the councils of the generals, an unlimited inspection of the navy, and authority to teach the officers any new methods of his invention; to which was added a pension of 12,000 livres. The grand master of Malta requested his assistance to defend that island against the Turks, who were expected to besiege it; but the siege not taking place, M. Renau went back to France, and on his return was appointed counsellor to the navy, and grand croix of St. Louis. He died Sept. 30, 1719. He had been admitted an honorary member of the Academy of Sciences in 1699. He has left several Letters, in answer to the objections raised by Huygens and Bernouilli against his Theory abovementioned. He was a man of reflection, read little, but thought much; and, what appears a greater singularity, he meditated more deeply when in the midst of company, where he was frequently found, than in solitude, to which he seldom retired. He was very short, almost a dwarf, but adroit, lively, witty, brave, and the best engineer which France has produced, except M. de Vauban.

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

, an architect and antiquary, was born at Paris in 1728, and was son of Julian le Roy, a celebrated mechanist, who so excelled in the art of watchmaking, that his time-pieces acquired the same celebrity in France as those of Graham in England. He died at Paris in 1759, at the age of 74, leaving four sons; of whom Julian became an eminent architect, and greatly improved the French style of architecture. He wrote, 1. “Ruines des plus beaux Monumens de la Grece,” which obtained for the author admission into the Academy of Inscriptions. This first appeared in 1758, but many errors having been pointed out by our Athenian Stuart, he published a more correct edition in 1770. 2. “Histoire de la disposition et tiesformes differentes des Temples des Chretiens;” 3. “Observations sur les Edifices des anciens Peuples. 4.” De la Marine des anciens Peuples.“5.” Les Navires des Anciens,“1783, 8vo, and in 1785, another on the same subject; which was followed, in 1796, by a memoir on cutting masts in the Pyrenees. This ingenious man died at Paris in the year 1803, at the age of seventy-five. His brother Peter was watch-maker to the king, and published memoirs for the clock-makers of Paris,” Etrennes Chronometriques,“” Treatise on the Labours of Harrison and le Roy for the Discovery of Longitude at Sea." He died in 1785. The English, on account of their numerous discoveries in this art, had enjoyed such a reputation for the excellence of their clocks and watches, that they found every where a market, in preference to any others, and tbr French themselves were obliged to come to England for their time-pieces, until Julian le Roy, the father, had the honour of removing, in part, this pre-eminence, and of transferring it to the French. He made many discoveries in the construction of repeating-clocks and watchc- in second and horizontal watches he invented an universal compass with a sight an extremely useful ar.d simple contrivance for drawing a meridional line, and finding the declination of the needle; and a new universal horizontal dial. It is to him we are indebted for the method of compensating for the effects of heat and cold in the balances of chronometers, by the unequal expansion of different metals, a discovery which has been brought by our English artists to a state of great perfection, although it had been thrown aside by the inventor’s son, Peter.

, bishop of St. David’s in the fifteenth century, was, according to Fuller, a native of Hertfordshire, and took his name from Rudborne, a village near St. Alban’s; but Wood says he was born at Rodburne in Wiltshire. He studied at Merton college, Oxford, and became one of the greatest mathematicians of his day, and an able architect. He built the gateway and fine tower of Merton college, and probably the chapel, for that seems improperly given to bishop Rede. He was so much esteemed, that Henry V. who became acquainted with him when a student at Queen’s college, afterwards appointed him his chaplain, on his going to Franc previous to the battle of Agincourt. He received some ecclesiastical preferments, as the prebend of Horton in the church of Salisbury, the living of East Deping in Lincolnshire, and the archdeaconry of Sudbury. He served the office of proctor in the university, and was elected chancellor, but Wood thinks that if he accepted this office, he did not retain it long. In 1426 he was admitted warden of Merton college, which he appears to have resigned the following year. In 1433 he was promoted to the see of St. David’s, from which the king, Henry VI. would have translated him to Ely; but Wood says, “could not effect it.” He died about 1442. The tower and chapel of Merton will long remain monuments of his skill and taste. He was also a benefactor to the first public library in Oxford. Like the majority in his day, he was an opponent of the first attempts at reformation in religion, and in 1411 was one of the commissioners for suppressing Wickliff’s doctrines and writings. He wrote, according to Bale, a “Chronicle,” and some epistles “ad Thomam Waldenem et alios.” He must be distinguished from the Thomas Rudborne, whose “Historia Major Wintoniensis” is printed by Wharton in vol. I. of his “Anglia Sacra,” who was, however, a monk of Winchester about the middle of the same century, but survived bishop Rudborne.

, a Scotch painter, was born at Edinburgh in 1736, where his father, who was an architect, probably taught him some of the principles of his art. Mr. Fuseli says he served an apprenticeship to a coachpainter, and “acquired a practice of brush, a facility of penciling, and much mechanic knowledge of colour, be^ fore he had attained any correct notions of design.” The Scotch account, on the other hand, says he was placed as an apprentice to John and Robert Norries, the former of whom was a celebrated landscape painter (no-where upon record, however,) and under his instructions Runciman made rapid improvement in the art. From 1755 he painted landscapes on his own account, and in 1760 attempted historical works. About 1766 he accompanied or soon followed his younger brother John, who had excited much livelier expectations of his abilities as an artist, to Rome; where John, who was of a delicate and consumptive habit, soon fell a victim to the climate, and his obstinate exertions in art. Alexander continued his studies under the patronage and with the support of sir James Clerk, a Scottish baronet, and gave a specimen of his abilities before his departure, in a picture of considerable size, representing Ulysses surprising Nausica at play with her maids: it exhibited, with the defects and manner of Giulio Romano in style, design, and expression, a tone, a juice, and breadth of colour, resembling Tintoretto. At his return to Scotland in 1771, Runciman was employed by his patron to decorate the hall at Pennecuik, with a series of subjects from Ossian; in the course of some years he was made master of a public institution for promoting design, and died Oct. 21, 1785. Jacob More, the landscape-painter, who died at Rome, was his pupil; and John Brown, celebrated for design, his friend. One of his capital pictures is the Ascension, an altar-piece in the episcopal chapel, Edinburgh; another a Lear, which, with his Andromeda and “Agrippina landing with the ashes of Germanicus,” are highly praised by his countrymen. Edwards mentions having seen two etchings by this artist, the one “Sigismunda weeping over the heart of Tancred;” the other riew of Edinburgh, which is executed with great spirit and taste.

, an Italian poet and historian, was born in 1521 at Rome, and was the son of James Sansovino, an eminent sculptor and celebrated architect, whose eulogy Vasari has left us. He studied the belies lettres at Venice, and took his degrees in law at Padua; but that science not suiting his taste, he devoted himself wholly to poetry, history, and polite literature, and died in 1586, at Venice, aged sixty-five, leaving more than fifty works, all written in Italian. They consist of “Poems;” notes on Boccaccio’s “Decameron, on Ariosto, Dante, &c.” translations of ancient historians and some histories written by himself, as his “Venezia descritta,” of which the best edition is that of 1663, 4to; “Istoria Universale dell' origine, guerre, ed imperio deTurchi,” 1654, 2 vols. 4to, reckoned a capital work. His “Satires” are in a collection with those of Ariosto, and others, Venice, 1560, 8vo his “Capitoli” with those of Aretino, and different writers, 1540, and 1583, 8vo to which we may add his “Cento novelle Scelte,” Venice, 1566, 4to.

, a celebrated architect, was born at Vicenza in 1550). He was educated under his father, also an able architect, and went to Venice for improvement, where afterwards, on Palladio’s death, he became the first architect, and was employed in various works, particularly the additions to the Library of St. Mark, the Olympic theatre at Vicenza, and the. new theatre at Sabbioneta. In 1615 he published in 2 vois. small folio* a work entitled “L‘ Idea- deli’ Architettura universale,”, in six books, the sixth of which, containing the five orders of architecture, is most esteemed. The French have a translation of his works, and an abridgment by Joubert. Seamozzi also published “Discorsi sopra leantichitadi Roma,”' 1583, fol. with forty plates. He died in 1616.

, a French dramatic writer, was born at Paris, June 4, 1719. Abandoned by his friends, he was, at the age of thirteen, obliged to quit his studies, in which he was little advanced, and to practise a trade for his subsistence. He was first a journeyman, and then a master mason* and architect; which businesses he conducted with uncommon probity. Natural inclination led him to cultivate literature, and particularly the drama, for which he wrote various small pieces and comic operas, the most popular of which were, “Le Deserteur;” and “Richard Coeur de Lion.”“All of them met with great success, and still continue to be performed, but the French critics think that his poetry is not written in the purest and most correct style, and that his pieces appear to more advantage on the stage than in the closet. He possessed, however, a quality of greater consequence to a dramatic writer the talent of producing stage effect. He was elected into the French academy, in consequence of the success of his” Richard Coeur de Lion," and was intimately connected with all the men of letters, and all the artists of his time. He died in May 1797, aged seventy-eight.

, an ingenious architect and machinist, was born at Florence in 1695. He rendered himself famous by his exquisite taste in architecture, and by his genius for decorations, fetes, and buildings. He was employed and rewarded by most of the princes of Europe. He was honoured in Portugal with the order of Christ. In France he was architect and painter to the King, and member of the different academies established for the advancement of these arts. He received the same titles from the kings of Britain, Spain, Poland, and from the duke of Wirtemberg; but notwithstanding these advantages, his want of economy was so great, that he left nothing behind him. He died at Paris in 1766. Paris is indebted to him for many of its ornaments. He made decorations also for the theatres of London and Dresden. The French king’s theatre, called la salle des machines, was under his management for some time. He was permitted to exhibit shows consisting of single decorations, some of which are said to have been astonishingly sublime, as his representations of St. Peter’s of Rome; the descent of JEneas into hell; the enchanted forest; and the triumph of conjugal love; the travels of Ulysses; Hero and Leander; and the conquest of the Mogul by Thamas Koulikan. He built and embellished a theatre at Chambon for Mareschal Saxe, and had the management of a great number of fetes in Paris, Vienna, London, and Lisbon. Frederick prince of Wales, too, engaged him in his service: but the death of his royal highness prevented the execution of the designs which had been projected. Among his most admired architectural performances, are the portal, and many of the interior decorations of the church of St. Sulpice, at Paris the great parish church of Coulanges in Burgundy the great altar of the metropolitan church of Sens and of the Chartreux at Lyons, &c. &c.

It is as a prelate of great munificence that Sheldon will be handed down to posterity with the highest honours. On the accession of Charles II. when the members of the university who bad been ejected by the usurping powers, be* gan to restore the ancient establishments, a design was formed of erecting some building for the acts, exercises, &c. which had formerly been performed in St. Mary’s church, with some inconvenience to the university, and some injury to the church. Certain houses were accordingly purchased, which stood on the site of the present theatre; and in 1664, Sheldon, then archbishop of Canterbury, having contributed [QOOl. the foundation-stone was laid July 26, with great solemnity before the vice chancellor, heads of houses, &c. And when no other benefactors appeared to promote the work, archbishop Sheldon munificently took upon himself the whole expence, which amounted to 12,470l. 1 \s. \\d. and gave also 2000l. to be laid out in estates for repairs, or the surplus to be applied to the establishment of a printing-house. The architect employed was the celebrated sir Christopher Wren, and the building was completed in about five years. It was one of sir Christopher’s first works, and a happy presage of the talents which he afterwards displayed in the metropolis. Nor did the archbishop’s liberality stop here. Mr. Henry Wharton has enumerated the following sums he bestowed on other public purposes: To lord Petre for the purchase of London House, the residence of the bishops of London, 5200l. He abated in his fines for the augmentation of vicarages 1680l. He gave towards the repair of St. Paul’s before the fire 2169l. 17s. lOd. and the repairs of his houses at Fulham, Lambeth, and Croydon, 4500l. To All Souls’ chapel, Trinity college chapel, Christ church, Oxford, and Lichfield cathedral, 450l. When first made bishop, the leases being all expired, he abated in his fines 17,733l. including probably the article of 1680l. above mentioned.

, an architect very famous in France, particularly for his plan of the beautiful church of St. Genevieve at Paris, was born in 1713, at Trenci near Auxerre. His family was engaged in commerce, but he very early shewed a strong disposition for the arts, and particularly for architecture. It is related of him, as of our countryman Smeaton, that, from his earliest childhood, he was more delighted by attending to workmen than any other amusement; and, like him, was so strongly directed by the bent of his genius to the profession in which he afterwards excelled, as to frustrate the wishes of his father to place him in his own business. The father of Soufflot, however, did not yield to his son’s inclination, and he was obliged to quit his home in order to indulge it. He immediately, with a small stock of money, set out for Italy, but paused at Lyons, where, by working under the artists of that place, he improved at once his knowledge and his finances. He then visited Rome and every part of Italy. Having improved himself under the best artists, and by modelling from the finest antiques, he returned to France, and for a time to Lyons, where he had made himself beloved in his former visit. He was soon employed by the magistrates of that city to build the exchange and the hospital, the latter of which edifices extended his reputation throughout France. Madame Pompadour heard of him, and having obtained for her brother the piace of director of the royal buildings, &c. engaged Sou/Hot and Cochin to attend him into Italy. Returning from that engagement, he quitted Lyons, and established himself at Paris; where he was successively comptroller of the buildings of Marli and the Tuilleries, member of the academies of architecture and painting, knight of the order of St. Michael, and lastly, superintendant of the royal buildings. With respect to the dome of his great work, the church of St. Genevieve, he met with so many contradictions, and so much opposition excited by envy, that though be had demonstrated the possibility of executing it, they threw great obstacles in his way and are thought to have shortened his life hy the severe vexation he experienced from them. After languishing for two years, in a very infirm state, he died August 29, 1780, at the age of sixtyseven.

, an eminent, though self-taught mathematician, was a native of Scotland, and son of a gardener in the service of the duke of Argyle. Neither the time nor place of his birth is exactly known, but from a ms memorandum in our possession it appears that he died in March or April 1768. The chief account of him that is extant is contained in a letter written by the celebrated chevalier Ramsay to father Castel, a Jesuit at Paris, and published in the Journal de Trevoux, p. 109. From this it appears, that when he was about eighteen years of age, his singular talents were discovered accidentally by the duke of Argyle, who found that he had been reading Newton’s Principia. The duke was surprised, entered into conversation with him, and was astonished at the force, accuracy, and candour of his answers. The instructions he had received amounted to no more than having been taught to read by a servant of the duke’s, about ten years before. “I first learned to read,” said Stone; “the masons were then at work upon your house: I went near them one day, and I saw that the architect used a rule and compasses, and that he made calculations. I inquired what might be the use of these things; and I was informed, that there was a science called arithmetic: I purchased a book of arithmetic, and I learned it. I was told there was another science called geometry: I bought the books, and I learned geometry. By reading I found that there were good books in these two sciences in Latin: I bought a dictionary, and 1 learnt Latin. I understood that there were good books of the same kind in French: I bought a dictionary, and I learned French. And this, my lord, is what I have done. It seems to me that we may learn every thing, when we know the twenty-four letters of the aipiuibet.” Delighted with this account, the duke drew him from obscurity, and placed him in a situation which enabled him to pursue his favourite objects. Stone was author and translator of several useful works 1 “A new Mathematical Dictionary, 1726, 8vo. 2.” Fluxions,“1730, 8vo. The direct method is a translation of L' Hospital’s Analyse des infiniment petits, from the French; and the inverse method was supplied by Stone himself. 3.” The Elements of Euclid," 1731, 2 vols. 8vo. This is a neat and useful edition of the Elements of Euclid, with an account of the life and writings of that mathematician, and a defence of his elements against modern objectors. 4. ' A paper in the Philosophical Transactions, vol. xli. p. 218, containing an account of two species of lines of the third order, not mentioned by sir Isaac Newton, or Mr. Sterling; and some other small productions.

, a celebrated architect and lover of classical antiquity, was born in London, in 1713. His parents resided in Creed-lane, Ludgate-street. His father, who was a mariner, was a native of Scotland, and his mother of Wales. Their circumstances were very narrow; but they were honest and worthy people, and gave their son the best education in their power. Mr. Stuart, who was the eldest of four children, was left utterly unprovided for when his father died. He exhibited, however, at a very early period of life, the dawnings of a strong imagination, splendid talents, and an ardent thirst for knowledge. By whom he was educated we have no account; but drawing and painting were his earliest occupations; and these he pursued with such industry and perseverance, that, while yet a boy, he contributed very essentially to the support of his widowed mother and her little family, by designing and painting fans for a person in the Strand. He placed one of his sisters under the care of this person as his shop-woman; and he continued, for many years, to pursue the same mode of maintaining the rest of his family. Notwithstanding the great pressure of such a charge, and the many temptations to dissipation, which are too apt to attract a young man of lively genius and extensive talents, Mr. Stuart employed the greatest part of his time in such studies as tended to perfect himself in the art he loved. He acquired a very accurate knowledge of anatomy; he became a correct draughtsman, and rendered himself master of geometry, and all the branches of the mathematics, so necessary to form the mind of a good painter: and it is no less extraordinary than true, that necessity and application were his only instructors. He has often confessed, that he was first led into the obligation of studying the Latin language, by a desire to understand what was written under prints, published after pictures of the ancient masters.

As his years increased, knowledge attended their progress: he acquired a great proficiency in the Greek language; and his unparalleled strength of mind carried him into a familiar association with most of the sciences, and principally that of architecture. His stature was of the middle size, but athletic. He possessed a robust constitution, invincible courage, and inflexible perseverance. Of this the following fact is a proof: a wen, in his forehead, had grown to an inconvenient size; and, one day, being in conversation with a surgeon, he asked him how it could be removed. The surgeon acquainted him with the length of the process; to which Mr. Stuart objected, on account of the interruption of his pursuits, and asked whether he could not cut it out, and then it would be only necessary to heal the part. The surgeon replied in the affirmative, but mentioned the very excruciating pain and danger of such an operation. Mr. Stuart, after a minute’s reflection, threw himself back in his chair, and said, “I will sit stil! do it now.” The operation was performed with success. With such qualifications, although yet almost in penury, he conceived the design of visiting Rome and Athens; but the ties of filial and fraternal affection induced him to postpone his journey, till he could insure a certain provision for his mother, and his brother and second sister. His mother died: he was soon after enabled to place his brother and sister in a situation that was likely to produce them a comfortable support; and then, with a very scanty pittance in his pocket, he set out on foot for Rome; and thus he performed the greatest part of his journey travelling through Holland, France, &c. and stopping through necessity at Paris, and several other places in his way, where, by his ingenuity as an artist, he procured some moderate supplies, towards prosecuting the rest of his journey. When arrived at Rome, he soon formed an intimate acquaintance with Mr. Nicholas Revett, an eminent painter and architect. From this gentleman Mr. Stuart first caught his ideas of that science, in which (quitting the profession of a painter) he afterward made such a conspicuous figure. During his residence at Rome, he studied architecture and fortification; and in 1748 they jointly circulated “Proposals for publishing an authentic description of Athens, &c.” For that purpose, they quitted Rome in March 1750, but did not reach Athens till March 1751, where, in about two months, they were met by Mr. Wood and Mr. Dawkins, whose admiration of his great qualities and wonderful perseverance secured to him their patronage. Dawkins was glad to encourage a brother in scientific investigation, who possessed equal ardour with himself, but very unequal resources for prosecuting those inquiries in which they were both engaged; having at the same time so much similarity of disposition, and ardour of pursuit. During his residence at Athens Mr. Stuart became a master of architecture and fortification; and having no limits to which his mind would be restricted, he engaged in the army of the queen of Hungary, where he served a campaign voluntarily, as chief engineer. On his return to Athens, he applied himself more closely to make drawings, and take the exact measurements of the Athenian architecture. He left Athens in 1755, still accompanied by his friend Revett; and after visiting Thessalonica, Smyrna, and the islands of the Archipelago, arrived in England in the beginning of 1755. The result of their classical labours was the appearance, in 1762, of the first volume in folio of “The Antiquities of Athens measured and delineated, by James Stuart, F. R. S. and S.A. and Nicholas Revett, painters and architects.” This work is a very valuable acquisition to the lovers of antiquities and the fine arts, and is a proper companion to the noble descriptions of Palmyra and Balhec, by Mr. Dawkins and Mr. Wood, by whom the two artists were early encouraged in the prosecution of a design so worthy of the most distinguished patronage. To this work, and the long walk which the author performed to compose it, he has been indebted for the name of the Athenian Stuart, universally decreed to him by the learned of this country.

In the science of fortification, Sturmius acquired great fame. The celebrated general Coehorn was of opinion that no man understood the subject better, and that he only wanted to have the conduct of some siege in order to prove himself one of the ablest engineers of the age. In 1711 he left Francfort, for the honourable offices of counsellor of the chamber of finances, and director of the buildings at the court of Frederick William duke of Mecklenburgh. There he built the palace of Neustadt on the Elde, which is acknowledged to be in a good taste, but it excited envy, and the duke having too easily listened to the prejudiced reports of some about him, Sturmius left his situation in 1713, and went to Hamburgh, where he employed some time in writing. While there he accepted the office of the duke of Brunswick to enter his service as first architect at Blanckenburgh, but did not enjoy that situation long. He died June 6, 1719, in the fiftieth year of his age. His mathematical and architectural works, not mentioned, were very numerous, but being mostly in the Germa-n language, are but little known. He also acquired reputation as a theologian, and had a controversy with certain Lutheran divines, in which persuasion he was originally bred up, on their peculiar notions respecting the Lord’s supper.

From Bologna he went to Loretto, and in the church there built and ornamented a‘ chapel with stuccos and paintings; from thence he was called to Ancona to operate in the churches of S. Agostino and Ciriaco, in the last of which he painted a Christ highly relieved and larger than life; the Merchants 7 hall received its stuccos and paintings from his band. He superintended the fortifications of tha place as military architect, about 1560; and two years afterwards came to Pavia, where, by the order of cardinal Borromeo, he constructed the palace of the Sapienza; he then visited Milan, built the temple of S. Fidele, and before 1570 was elected architect of the cathedral. After disencumbering the dome of numerous empty gothic monuments, sepulchral urns, and trophies, and embellishing it in their stead with various elegant chapels and ’a majestic choir; Pellegrino was commissioned by Berardino Martirano, a Spaniard in the confidence of Philip II. to prepare designs and plans for the Escurial. He followed them himself to Spain in 1586, and superintended that enormous fabric as architect and painter, during nine years , when, satiated with glory, riches, and honours, he returned to Milan, where he died at an advanced age, and was buried in a tomb which he had selected for himself and his descendants in the dome. The precise year of his death is disputed, but his demise may safely be placed under the pontificate of Clement VIII. and some think about 1592.

Pellegrino had a brother, Domenico Tibaldi, who was his scholar, and acquired celebrity as an architect and an engraver at Bologna that he was a painter of merit we are told by his epitaph in the church dell' Annunciata, but epitaphs are doubtful authorities, and of Domenico there is not even a portrait remaining. In engraving he was the master of Agostino Caracci.

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

At what time Vanbrugh began to be an architect by profession, we do not find mentioned. His principal buildings are Blenheim Castle- Howard, in Yorkshire; Eastberry, in Dorsetshire; King’s Weston, near Bristol; Easton-Neston, in Northamptonshire; Mr. Buncombe’s, in Yorkshire; and the opera-house; to which we may indeed add his most tasteless pile, St. John’s church, in Westminster; but neither want of taste nor of grandeur of conception can be justly attributed to sir John’s greatest works, Blenheim and Castle-Howard. Walpole says, " However partial the court was to Vanbrugh, every body was not so blind to his defects. Swift ridiculed both his own diminutive house at Whitehall, and the stupendous pile at Blenheim. Of the first he says,

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

our imagination, with which the artist is more concerned than will; absolute truth.“”To speak of Vanbrugh,“adds sir Joshua,” in the language of 'a painter, he had originality of invention; he understood light and shadow, and had great skill in composition. To support his principal object, he produced his second and third groupes or masses. He perfectly understood in his art, what is the most difficult in ours, the conduct of the back-ground, by which the design and invention are set off to the greatest advantage. What the back-ground is in painting, in architecture is the real ground on which the building is erected; and no architect took greater care that his work should not appear crude and hard, that is, that it did not abruptly start out of the ground without expectation or preparation. This is a tribute which a painter owes to an architect who composed like a painter, and was defrauded of the due reward of his merit by the wits of his time, who did not understand the principles of composition in poetry better than he, and who knew little or nothing of what he understood perfectly, the general ruling principles of architecture and painting. Vanbrugh’s fate was that of the great Perrault. Both were the objects of the petulant sarcasms of factious men of letters, and both have left some of the fairest monuments which, to this day, decorate their several countries; the fagade of the Louvre; Blenheim, and Castle Howard."

, a celebrated French mathematician and priest, was born at Caen in 1654. He was the son of an architect in middling circumstances, but had a college education, being intended for the church. Having accidentally met with a copy of Euclid’s Elements, he was inclined to study it, and this led him to the works of Des Cartes, which confirmed his taste for geometry, and he even abridged himself of the necessaries of life to purchase books which treated on this science. What contributed to heighten this passion in him was, that he studied in private: for his relations observing that the books he studied were not such as were commonly used by others, strongly opposed his application to them; and as there was a necessity for his being an ecclesiastic, he continued his theological studies, yet not entirely sacrificing his favourite subject to them. At this time the Abbé St. Pierre, who studied philosophy in the same college, became acquainted with him. A taste in common for rational subjects, whether physics or metaphysics, and continued disputations, formed the bonds of their friendship, and they became mutually serviceable to each other in their studies. The abbe, to enjoy Varignon’s company with greater ease, lodged in the same house with him; and being in time more sensible of his merit, he resolved to give him a fortune, that he might fully pursue his inclination. Out of only 18 hundred livres a year, which he had himself, he conferred 300 of them upon Varignon; and when determined to go to Paris to study philosophy, he settled there in 1686, with M. Varignon, in the suburbs of St. Jacques. There each studied in his own way; the abbé applying himself to the study of men, manners, and the principles of government whilst Varignon was wholly occupied with the mathematics. Fontenelie, who was their countryman, often went to see them, sometimes spending two or three days with them. They had also room for a couple of visitors, who came from the same province. “We joined together,” says Fontenelle, “with the greatest pleasure. We were young, full of the first ardour for knowledge, strongly united, and, what we were not then perhaps disposed to think so great a happiness, little known. Varignon, who had a strong constitution, at least in his youth, spent whole days in study, without any amusement or recreation, except walking sometimes in fine weather. I' have heard him say, that in studying after supper, as he usually did, he was often surprised to hear the clock strike two in the morning; and was much pleased that four hours rest were sufficient to refresh him. He did not leave his studies with that heaviness which they usually create; nor with that weariness that a long application might occasion. He left off gay and lively, filled with pleasure, and impatient to renew it. In speaking of mathematics, he would laugh so freely, that it seemed as if he had studied for diversion. No condition was so much to be envied as his; his life was a continual enjoyment, delighting in quietness.” In the solitary suburb of St. Jacques, he formed however a connection with many other learned men; as Du Hamel, Du Verney, De la Hire, &c. Du Verney often asked his assistance in those parts of anatomy connected with mechanics: they examined together the positions of the muscles, and their directions; hence Varignon learned a good deal of anatomy from Du Verney, which he repaid by the application of mathematical reasoning to that subject. At length, in 1687, Varignon made himself known to the public by a “Treatise on New Mechanics,” dedicated to the Academy of Sciences. His thoughts on this subject were, in effect, quite new. He discovered truths, and laid open their sources. In this work, he demonstrated the necessity of an equilibrium, in such cases as it happens in, though the cause of it is not exactly known. This discovery Varignon made by the theory of compound motions, and his treatise was greatly admired by the mathematicians, and procured the author two considerable places, the one of geometrician in the Academy of Sciences, the other of professor of mathematics in the college of Mazarine, to which he was the first person raised.

, an eminent architect and writer on the subject, was the son of Clement Barozzio, of one of the best families of Milan, but who being ruined by the civil wars, retired to Vignola, a small town in the marquisate of that name, situated in the territory of Bologna. It was there that his son, the subject of this article, was born, Oct. 1, 1507, and became afterwards generally known by the name of his native place. His father dying when he was almost in his infancy, and leaving him little provision, he wished to have recourse to painting; and having some knowledge of the first principles of the art, he went to Bologna to be farther instructed, but soon changed his mind, and determined to confine himself to architecture and perspective. He was no sooner known in this profession, than several persons applied to him for designs for buildings, and he executed some for the governor of Bologna, which were very much admired. On such occasions, in order to see the effect of what he laid down, he had models made in wood by Damien de Bergamo, a Dominican, who excelled in that species of ingenuity, and used to express, by means of coloured woods, every kind of material to be used in the building.

In order to acquire a greater knowledge of the principles of architecture, Vignola went to Rome, and at first returned to painting fora maintenance; but not reaping much profit, abandoned that art a second time, and procured employment as a draughtsman from Melighini, of Ferrara, then architect to pope Paul III. and who had established a school of architecture at Rome. Yignola was afterwards employed to make drawings, for the use of this academy, of the ancient edifices of the city, from which he derived great advantage in his studies. While here, about 1537, or J 540, he met with Primaticcio, who was employed by Francis I. king of France, to purchase antiques (See Primaticcio); and Vignola was of so much service in making casts for him, that Primaticcio engaged him to go with him to France. There Vignola assisted that celebrated artist in all his works, and particularly in making the bronze casts which are at Fontainebleau. He also made various architectural designs for the king, who was prevented from having them executed, by the wars in which France was then involved. After a residence of about two years, he was invited to Bologna, to undertake the new church of St. Petronius, and his design was allowed the preference, and highly approved by Julio Romano, the celebrated painter, and Christopher Lombard, the architect. At Minerbio, near Bologna, he built a magnificent palace for count Isolani, and in Bologna the house of Achilles Bocchi. The portico of the exchange in that city is also of his designing, but it was not built until 1562, in the pontificate of Pius IV. His most useful work at Bologna was the canal of Navilio, which he constructed with great skill for the space of a league. But happening to be ill rewarded for this undertaking, he went to Placentia, where he gave a design for the duke of Parma’s palace, which was executed by his son Hyacinth, who was now able to assist him in his various works. He afterwards built several churches and chapels in various parts of Italy, which it is unnecessary to specify. These, it is supposed, he had finished before his return to Rome in 1550, where Vasari presented him to pope Julius III. who appointed him his architect. While at Rome, he was employed in various works, both of grandeur and utility, the last of which, and reckoned his finest work, was the magnificent palace or castle of Caprarola, so well described and illustrated by plates in his works.

In his latter days, he succeeded Michael Angelo as architect of St. Peter’s, and was strongly solicited by Philip II. to assist in building the Escurial; but his age, and his numerous employments, prevented his accepting the offer. The only interval between this and his death, was employed in a commission from Gregory XIII. to settle the limits between the territories of the church, and those of the duke of Tuscany; on his return he was seized with a fever, which proved fatal, July 7, 1575, in his sixty-sixth year. He was solemnly interred in the church of St. Mary of the Rotunda.

Da Vinci now set up for himself; and executed many pictures at Florence of great credit, and the universality of his genius soon appeared. He had a perfect knowledge of the theory of his art. He was, by far, the best anatomist and physiologist of his time, the first who raised a spirit for anatomical study, and gave it credit, and certainly the first man we know of who introduced the practice of making anatomical drawings. His first attempt, according to Vasari, was a book of the anatomy of a horse; he afterwards applied with more diligence to the human anatomy, in which study he reciprocally received and communicated assistance to Marc. Antonio della Torra, an excellent philosopher, who then read lectures in Pavia, and wrote upon this subject. For him Da Vinci made a book of studies, drawn with red chalk, and touched with a pen, with great diligence, of such subjects as he had himself dissected: where he made all the bones, and to those he joined, in their order, all the nerves, and covered them with the muscles. And concerning those, from part to part, he wrote remarks in letters of an ugly form, which are written by the left hand, backwards, and not to be understood but by those who know the method of reading them. These very drawings and writings are now in his majesty’s collection of drawings. After inspecting them some years ago, Dr. Hunter expressed his full persuasion that Da Vinci was the best anatomist, at that time, in the world , Lionardo was also well skilled in optics and geometry, almost every branch of literature, and the arts. He was a good architect, an able carver, and extremely well versed in the mechanics: he had a fine voice, and understood music, and both played and sang with taste and skill. Having also the advantage of a well-formed person, he excelled in all the manly exercises. He understood the management of a horse, and took delight in appearing well mounted: and he was very dextrous in the use of arms’. His behaviour also was polite, and his conversation so engaging, that no man ever partook of it without pleasure, or left it without regret.

After Lionardo had been labouring some years for the service of Milan, in quality of architect and engineer, he was requested by the duke to adorn it by his paintings; and be painted, among other things, his celebrated “Last Supper.”. Francis I. was so charmed with this, that, finding it impracticable to have it removed into France, he ordered a copy to be taken, which was placed at St. Germains; while the original, being painted in oil, and upon a wall not sufficiently secured from moisture, has been defaced long ago. The wars of Italy began how to interrupt him; and his friend and patron duke Lewis being defeated and carried prisoner to France, the academy was destroyed, the professors dispersed, and the arts effectually banished out of Milan. In 14^9, the year before duke Lewis’s defeat, Lionardo, be'ing at Milan, was desired, by the priucipals of the place, to contrive some new device for the entertainment of Lewis XII. of France, who was just then ready to make his entrance into that city. Lionardo consented; and accordingly made a very curious automaton of the figure of a lion, whose inside was so well furnished with machinery, that it marched out to meet the king; made a stand when it came before him; reared up its hinder legs; and, opening his breast, presented a scutcheon, with fleurs-de-lis quartered upon it.

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

, was a celebrated Roman architect, of whom however nothing is known but what is to be collected from his ten books “Do Ardiitectura,” still extant. In the preface to the sixth book he informs us that he was carefully educated by his parents, and instructed in the whole circle of arts and sciences; a circumstance which he speaks of with much gratitude, laying it down as certain, that no man can be a complete arr chitect, without some knowledge and skill in everyone of" them. And in the preface to the first book he informs us that he was known to Julius Cicsar that he was afterwards recommended by Octavia to her brother Augustus Cæsar, and that he was so favoured and provided for by this emperor, as to be out of all fear of poverty as long as he might live.

The Architecture of Vitruvius has been often printed: first at Rome, about 1486. There is a very excellent edition of Amsterdam in 1649, and of late there have been two very fine ones, that by Augustus Rode, Berlin, 1800, 4to, and 'that by Schneider, at Leipsic, 1808, 4 vols. 8vo. The finest manuscript of Vitruvius is in the library at Franeker. Perrault also, the celebrated French architect, gave an excellent French translation of the same, and added notes and figures: the first edition of which was published at Paris in 1673, and the second, much improved, in 1684. There are also various Italian translations. Mr. William Newton, an ingenious architect, and late surveyor to the works at Greenwich hospital, published in 1780 1791, 2 vols. fol. curious commentaries on Vitruvius, illustrated with figures; to which is added a description, with figures, of the military machines used by the ancients.

His biographers have celebrated his piety, temper, and humanity. Besides the foundation of Magdalen-college, of which an ample detail is given in our authorities, he astablished a free-school in his native town, and was a benefactor to Eton college, Winchester cathedral, and other places. In these labours, while his munificent spirit induced him to hire the ablest artists, he displayed himself very considerable talents as an architect. Leland was informed that the greatest part of the buildings of Eton college were raised under his direction, and at his expence. In 1478 we find him overseer of the buildings at Windsor, an office formerly held by his great predecessor Wykeham, and it was from that place he sent workmen to complete the Divinity-school of Oxford.

Except a small pamphlet on the disputes, in 1768, between the four managers of Covent- garden theatre, the “Epistle to Dr. Thomson” was the last of our author’s detached publications. The lesser pieces to be found in his works, were occasional trirles written for the theatres or public gardens. He was now in easy, if not affluent circumstances. By the interest of lord Le Despenser, he got the place of deputy- treasurer of the chamber, worth 800l. and held it to his death. On this acquisition, he purchased a cottage on Twickenham common, and from a design of his friend Isaac Ware, the architect, at a small expence improved it into an elegant villa. Here, according to sir John Hawkins, he was visited by very few of the inhabitants of that classical spot, but his house was open to all his London acquaintance Hogarth, Lambert, and Hayman, painters; Isaac Ware, Beard, and Havard, &c. In such company principally, he passed the remainder of his days, suffering the memory of his poetry and politics to. decay gradually. His death happened at his lodgings in Henrietta-street, Covent-garden, Dec. So, 1774. For some time previous to this event he lingered under a severe illness, during which he employed himself in burning all his manuscripts. Among these were the originals of many occasional pieces of poetry, written for the amusement of his friends, some of which had prohably been published without his name, and cannot now be distinguished. His Works were published in an elegant quarto volume (in 1777) by Capt. Edward Thompson, who prefixed memoirs of his life, in which however there is very little that had not been published in the Annual Register of 1775. The character Thompson gives of him is an overstrained panegyric, inconsistent in itself, and more so when compared with some facts which he had not the sense to conceal, nor the virtue to censure.

A Dutch physician, named Schelhammer, in a book “De Auditu,” printed at Leyden in 1684, took occasion to animadvert upon a passage in Dr. Willis’s book “de Anima Brutorum,” printed in 1672; and in such a manner as reflected not only upon his skill, but also upon his integrity. But Dr. Derham observes, “that this is a severe and unjust censure of our truly-famous countryman, a man of known probity, who hath manifested himself to have been as curious and sagacious an anatomist, as great a philosopher, and as learned and skilful a physician as any of his censurers; and his reputation for veracity and integrity was no less than any of theirs too.” It remains to be noticed, that his “Cerebri Anatome” had an elegant copy of verses written in it by Mr. Phillip Fell, and the drawings for the plates were done by his friend Dr. Christopher Wren, the celebrated architect.

, an artist and antiquary of great taste and talents, was born August 21, 1739, at Twickenham, in the house afterwards the residence of Richard Owen Cambridge, esq. He was educated at Eton school, from which he went to Christ’s-college, Cambridge, but took no degree. He returned from an extensive tour through France, Italy, Istria, and Switzerland, in 1769; and soon after married the honourable Charlotte De Grey, sister to the lord Walsingham; by whom he has left no issue. In all which is usually comprehended under the denomination of Belles Lettres, Mr. Windham may claim a place among the most learned men of his time. To an indefatigable diligence in the pursuit of knowledge, he joined a judgment clear, penetrating, and unbiassed, and a memory uncommonly retentive and accurate. An ardent love for truth, a perfect freedom from prejudice, jealousy, and affectation, an entire readiness to impart his various and copious information, united with a singular modesty and simplicity, marked his conversation and manners. Few men had a more critical knowledge of the Greek and Latin languages, or a deeper feeling for the beauties of style and sentiment in the classic writers; but in his minute and comprehensive acquaintance with every thing in them illustrative of human life and manners, especially all that relates to the fine arts, he scarcely had an equal. The history of art in the middle ages, and every circumstance relative to the revival of literature and the arts, from the fourteenth century to the present time, were equally familiar to him; and his acquaintance with the language of modern Italy was surpassed by few. He had very particularly studied the antiquities of his own country, and was eminently skilled in the history of English architecture. His pencil, as a draftsman from nature, was exquisite. His portraits of mere natural scenery were peculiarly spirited and free, and his drawings of architecture and antiquities most faithful and elegant. During his residence at Rome, he studied and measured the remains of ancient architecture there, particularly the baths, with a precision which would have done honour to the most able professional architect. His numerous plans and sections of them he gave to Mr. Cameron, and they are engraved in his great work on the Roman baths. To this work he also furnished a very considerable and valuable part of the letter-press. He also drew up the greater portion of the letter-press of the second volume of the “Ionian Antiquities,” published by the society of Dilettanti; and Mr. Stuart received material assistance from him in the second volume of his Athens. In his own name he published very little. His accuracy of mind rendered it difficult to him to please himself; and, careless of the fame of an author, he was better content that his friends should profit by his labours, than that the public should know the superiority of his own acquirements. He had been long a fellow of the Royal and Antiquarian Societies; and in the latter, was for many years of the council, and one of the committee for the publication of the Cathedrals of England. He more than once declined the honourable office of vice-president. Of the society of Dilettanti he was one of the oldest members; and to his zeal it was principally owing that the publications of that society were continued, after a suspension of many years. Mr. Windham died at Earsham-house, Norfolk, Sept. 21, 181U. In private life, he was the most amiable of men. Benevolent, generous, cheerful, without caprice, above envy, his temper was the unclouded sun-shine of virtue and sense. If his extreme modesty and simplicity of character prevented his striking at the first acquaintance, every hour endeared him to those who had the happiness of his intimacy. In every relation of life he was exemplary. A kind husband, a firm friend, a generous landlord, an indulgent master.

, a learned and illustrious English architect and mathematician, was nephew to bishop Wren, and the son of Dr. Christopher Wren, who was fellow of St. John’s college, Oxford, afterwards chaplain to Charles I. and rector of Knoyle in Wiltshire; made dean of Windsor in 1635, and presented to the rectory of Hasely in Oxfordshire in 1638; and died at Blechindon, in the same county, 1658, at the house of Mr. William Holder, rector of that parish, who had married his daughter. He was a man well skilled in all the branches of the mathematics, and had a great hand in forming the genius of his only son Christopher.' In the state papers of Edward, earl of Clarendon, vol.1, p. 270, is an estimate of a building to be erected for her majesty by dean Wren. He did another important service to his country. After the chapel of St. George and the treasury belonging to it had been plundered by the republicans, he sedulously exerted himself in recovering as many of the records as could be procured, and was so successful as to redeem the three registers distinguished by the names of the Black, Blue, and lied, which were carefully preserved by him till his death. They were afterwards committed to the custody of his son, who, soon after the restoration, delivered them to Dr. Bruno Ryves, dean of Windsor.

Among his other eminent accomplishments, he had gained so considerable a skill in architecture, that he was sent for the same year from Oxford, by order of Charles II. to assist sir John Denham, surveyor-general of his majesty’s works. In 1663, he was chosen 'fellow of the Royal Society; being one of those who were first appointed by the council after the grant of their charter. Not long after, it being expected that the king would make the society a visit, the lord Brounker, president, by a letter desired the advice of Dr. Wren, who was then at Oxford, concerning the experiments which might be most proper for his majesty’s entertainment: to whom the doctor recommended principally the Torricellian experiment, and the weatherneedle, as being not bare amusements, but useful, and likewise neat in the operation, and attended with little incumbrance. Dr. Wren did great honour to this illustrious body, by many curious and useful discoveries in astronomy, natural philosophy, and other sciences, related in the “History of the Royal Society” where the author Sprat, who was a member of it, has inserted them from the registers and other books of the society to 1665. Among other of his productions there enumerated is a lunar globe, representing not only the spots and various degrees of whiteness upon the surface, but the hills, eminences, and cavities; and not only so, but it is turned to the light, shewing all the lunar phases, with the various appearances that happen from the shadows of the mountains and valleys; The lunar globe was formed, not merely at the request of the Royal Society, but likewise by the command of Charles II. whose pleasure, for the prosecuting and perfecting of it was signified by a letter under the joint hands of sir Robert Moray and sir Paul Neile, dated from Whitehall, the 17th of May, 1661, and directed to Dr. Wren, Savilian professor at Oxford. His majesty received the globe with satisfaction, and ordered it to be placed among the curiosities of his cabinet. Another of these productions is a tract on the doctrine of motion that arises from the impact between two bodies, illustrated by experiments. And a third is, the history of the seasons, as to the temperature, weather, productions, diseases, &c. &c. For which purpose he contrived many curious machines, several of which kept their own registers, tracing out the lines of variations, so that a person might know what changes the weather had undergone in his absence: as wind-gages, thermometers, barometers, hygrometers, rain- gages, &c. &c. He made also great additions to the new discoveries on pendulums; and among other things shewed, that there may be produced a natural standard for measure from the pendulum for common use. He invented many ways to make astronomical observations more easy and accurate, He fitted and hung quadrants, sextants, and radii more commodiously than formerly: he made two telescopes to open with a joint like a sector, by which observers may infallibly take a distance to half minutes, &c. He made many sorts of retes, screws, and other devices, for improving telescopes to take small distances, and apparent diameters, to seconds. He made apertures for taking in more or less light, as the observer pleases, by opening and shutting, the better to fit glasses for crepusculine observations. He added much to the theory of dioptrics; much to the manufacture of grinding good glasses. He attempted, and not without success, the making of glasses of other forms than spherical. He exactly measured and delineated the spheres of the hamoura of the eye, the proportions of which to one another were only guessed at before: a discussion shewing the reasons why we see objects erect, and that reflection conduces as much to vision as refraction. He displayed a natural and easy theory of refractions, which exactly answered every experiment. He fully demonstrated all dioptrics in a few propositions, shewing not only, as in Kepler’s Dioptrics, the common properties of glasses, but the proportions by which the individual rays cut the axis, and each other, upon which the charges of the telescopes, or the proportion of the eye-glasses and apertures, are demonstrably discovered. He made constant observations on Saturn, and a true theory of that planet, before the printed discourse by Huygens, on that subject, appeared. He made maps of the Pleiades and other telescopic stars: and proposed methods to determine the great question as to the earth’s motion or rest, by the small stars about the pole to be seen in large telescopes. In navigation he made many improvements. He framed a magnetical terella, which he placed in the midst of a plane board with a hole, into which the terella is half immersed, till it be like a globe with the poles in the horizon the plane is then dusted over with steel filings from a sieve the dust, by the magnetical virtue, becomes immediately figured intofurrows that. bend like a sort of helix, proceeding as it were out at one pole, and returning in it by the other; the whole plane becoming figured like the circles of a planisphere. It being a question in his time among the problems of navigation, to what mechanical powers sailing against the wind was reducible; he shewed it to be a wedge: and he demonstrated, how a transient force upon an oblique plane would cause the motion of the plane against the first mover: and he made an instrument mechanically producing the same effect, and shewed the reason of sailing on all winds. The geometrical mechanism of rowing, he shewed to be a lever on a moving or cedent fulcrum: for this end, he made instruments and experiments, to find the resistance to motion in a liquid medium; with other things that are the necessary elements for laying down the geometry of sailing, swimming, rowing, flying, and constructing of ships. He invented a very speedy and curious way of etching. He started many things towards the emendation of waterworks. He likewise made some instruments for respiration, and for straining the breath from fuliginous vapours, to try whether the same breath, so purified, will serve again. He was the first inventor of drawing pictures by microscopical glasses. He found out perpetual, or at least long-lived lamps, for keeping a perpetual regular heat, in order to various uses, as hatching of eggs and insects, production of plants, chemical preparations, imitating nature in producing fossils anji minerals, keeping the motion of watches equal, for the longitude and astronomical uses. He was the first author of the anatomical experiment of injecting liquor into the veins of animals. By this operation, divers creatures were immediately purged, vomited, intoxicated, killed, or revived, according to the quality of the liquor injected. Hence arose many other new experiments, particularly that of transfusing blood, which has been prosecuted in sundry curious instances. Such is a short account of the principal discoveries which Dr. Wren presented, or suggested, to the Royal Society, or were improved by him. We now return to his progress as an architect.

In 1665, he went over to France, where he not onljr surveyed all the buildings of note in Paris, and made excursions to other places, but took particular notice of what was most remarkable in every branch of mechanics, and contracted acquaintance with all the considerable virtuosi*. Upon his return home, he was appointed architect and one of the commissioners for the reparation of St. Paul’s cathedral; as appears from Mr. Evelyn’s dedication to him of “The Account of Architects and Architecture,” 1706, folio, where we have the following account. “I have named St. Paul’s, and truly not without admiration, as oft as I recall to mind, as I frequently do, the sad and deplorable condition it was in; when, after it had been made a stable of horses, and a den of thieves, you, with other gentlemen and myself, were by the late king Charles named to survey the dilapidations, and to make report to his majesty, in order to a speedy reparation. You will not, as I am sure, forget the struggle we had with some who were for patching it up any how, so the steeple might stand, instead of new building; when, to put an end to the contest, five days after, that dreadful conflagration happened, out of whose ashes this phoenix is risen, and was by providence designed for you.” Within a few days after the fire, which began Sept. 2, 1666, he drew a plan for a new city, of which Oldenburg, the secretary of the Royal Society, gave an account to Mr. Boyle. “Dr. Wren,” says he, “has drawn a model for a new city, and presented it to the king, who produced it himself before his council, and manifested much approbation of it. I was yesterday morning with the doctor, and saw the model, which methiriks does so well provide for security, conveniency, and beauty, that I can see nothing wanting as to these three main articles: but whether it has consulted with the populousness of a great city, and whether reasons of state would, have that consulted with, is a qusere with me,” &c. The execution of this noble design was unhappily prevented by

Upon the decease of sir John Denham, in March 1688, he succeeded him in the office of surveyor-general of his majesty’s works. The theatre at Oxford will be a lasting monument of his great abilities as an architect; which curious work was finished by him in 1669. As in this structure the admirable contrivance of the flat roof, being eighty feet over one way, and seventy the other, without any arched work or pillars to support it, is particularly remarkable, it has been both largely described, and likewise delineated, by the ingenious Dr. Plott, in his “Natural History of Oxfordshire.” But the conflagration of the city of London gave him many opportunities afterwards of employing his genius in that way; when, besides the works of the crown, which continued under his care, the cathedral of St. Paul, the parochial churches, and other public structures, which had been destroyed by that dreadful calamity, were rebuilt from his designs, and under his direction; in the management of which affair he was assisted in the measurements and laying out of private property by the ingenious Mr. Robert Hooke. The variety of business in which he was by this means engaged requiring his constant attendance and concern, he resigned his Savilian professorship at Oxford in 1673; and the year following he, received from the king the honour of knighthood. He was one of the commissioners who, at the motion of sir Jonas Moore, surveyor-general of the ordnance, had been appointed by his majesty to find a proper place for erecting a royal observatory; and he proposed Greenwich, which was approved of. On Aug. 10, 1675, the foundation of the building was laid; which, when finished under the direction of sir Jonas, with the advice and assistance of sir Christopher, was furnished with the best instruments for making astronomical observations; aud Mr. Flamsted was constituted his majesty’s first professor there.

About this time he married the daughter of sir Thomas Coghill, of Belchington, in Oxfordshire, by whom he had one son of his own name; and, she dying soon after, he married, a daughter of William lord Fitzwilliam, baron of Lifford in Ireland, by whom he had a son and a daughter In 1680, he was chosen president of the Royal Society; afterwards appointed architect and commissioner of Chelsea-college; and, in 1684, principal officer or comptroller of the works in the castle of Windsor. He sat twice in parliament, as a representative for two different boroughs; first, for Piympton in Devonshire in 1685, and again in 1700 for Melcomb-Regis in Dorsetshire. He was employed in erecting a great variety of churches and public edifices, when the country met with an indelible disgrace in a court intrigue, in consequence of which, in April 1718, his patent for royal works was superseded, when this venerable and illustrious man had reached his eighty- sixth year, after half a century spent in a continued, active, and laborious service to the crown and the public. Walpole has well said that “the length of his life enriched the reigns of several princes, and disgraced the last of them.” Until this time he lived in a house in Scotland-yard, adjoining to Whitehall; but, after his removal from that place in 1718, he dwelt occasionally in St. James’s-street, Westminster. He died Feb. 25, 1723, aged ninety -one, and was interred with great solemnity in St Paul’s cathedral, in the vault under the south wing of the choir, near the east end. Upon a flat stone, covering the single vault, which contains his body, is a plain English inscription and another inscription upon the side of a pillar, in these terms

As to his person, he was of low stature, and thin; but, by temperance and skilful management, for he was not unacquainted with anatomy and physic, he enjoyed a good state of health to a very unusual length of life. He was modest, devout, strictly virtuous, and very communicative of what he knew. Besides his peculiar eminence as an architect, his learning and knowledge were very extensive in all the arts and sciences, and especially in the mathematics. Mr. Hooke, who was intimately acquainted with him, and very able to make a just estimate of his abilities, has comprised his character in these few but comprehensive words: “I must affirm,” says he, “that since the time of Archimedes, there scarcely ever has met in one man, in so great a perfection, such a mechanical hand, and so philosophical a mind.” And a greater than Hooke, even the illustrious and immortal Newton, whose signet stamps an indelible character, speaks thus of him, with other eminent men: “D. Christophorus Wrennus, Eques Auratus, Johannes Wallisius, S. T. D. et D. Christianus Hugenius, hujus aetatis Geometrarum facile principes.” Mr. Evelyn, in the dedication referred to above, tells him, that “he inscribed his book with his name, partly through an ambition of publickly declaring the great esteem I have ever had,” says he, “of your virtues and accomplishments, not only in the art of building, but through all the learned cycle of the most useful knowledge and abstruser sciences, as well as of the most polite and shining; all which is so justly to be allowed you, that you need no panegyric, or other history, to eternize them, than the greatest city of the universe, which you have rebuilt and beautified, and are still improving: witness the churches, the royal courts, stately halls, magazines, palaces, and other public structures; besides that you have built of great and magnificent in both the universities, at Chelsea, and in the country; and are now advancing of the royal Marine-hospital at Greenwich: all of them so many trophies of your skill and industry, and conducted with that success, that, if the whole art of building were lost, it might be recovered and found again in St. Paul’s, the historical pillar, and those other monuments of your happy talent and extraordinary genius.”

Sir Christopher Wren never printed any thing himself; but several of his works have been published by others: some in the “Philosophical Transactions,” and some by Dr. Wallis and other friends; while some are still remaining in manuscript, and several volumes of his designs are in the library of All Souls college. The title of one of them is, “Delineationes novae fabricae templi Paulinijuxta tertiam propositionem et ex sententia regis Caroli II. sub private sigillo expresses 14 Maii, ann. 1678.” By this it appears that he floated very much in his designs for St. Paul’s. One of them is very much like that of San Gallo for St. Peter’s at Rome. In another, the dome is crowned with a pine-apple, and it is curious to observe how every design for the present beautiful dome excels the other. The favourite design, however, of the great architect himself was not taken.

, an eminent modern architect, was born at Burton, in the county of Stafford, about 1743, of a respectable family, which is now become perfectly patriarchal in its numerous and extensive branches. His education, till the age of fourteen, was such as a country town afforded, but having at that period, exhibited a fondness for architectural design, though in humble and rude atlempts, his friends had the happiness to succeed in introducing him into the suite of lord Bagot, then about to depart for Rome as the ambassador of Great Britain at the Ecclesiastical States. That genius which first budded spontaneously in its own obscure, native territory, could hardly fail to shoot forth in strength and beauty when transplanted to the classic and congenial soil of Italy. Amid the architectural glories of the West, the fallen temples of the World’s fallen mistress, our young student stored up that transcendant knowledge of the rules of his profession, and that exquisite taste for the developement of those rules, which, in after-years, placed him without a professional rival in his own country. Brilliant, quick, and intuitive, a2 was his genius, he was never remiss in investigating and making himself master of the details and practical causes by which the great effective results of architecture are produced. He has been heard frequently to state that he measured with his own hand every part of the dome of St. Peter’s, and this too at the imminent danger of his life, being under the necessity of lying on his back on a ladder slung horizontally, without cradle or side-rail, over a frightful void of 300 feet. From Rome he departed for Venice, where he remained above two years a pupil of the celebrated Viscentini, an architect and painter. Under this master he acquired a very unusual perfection in architectural painting; and he has executed a few, and but a few, paintings in that line, which equal any by Panini. At the unripe age of twenty, when few young men have even commenced their pupilage to a profession of so much science and taste, Mr. Wyatt arrived in London with a taste formed by the finest models of ancient Rome, and the instruction of the best living masters in Italy. To him then nothing was wanting but an opportunity to call forth his powers into action, nor was that long withheld. He was employed to build the Pantheon in Oxford-street, a specimen of architecture which attracted the attention and commanded the admiration of all persons of taste in Europe, by its grandeur of symmetry, and its lavish but tasteful richness of decoration. Never, perhaps, was so high a reputation in the arts obtained by a first effort. Applications now poured in upon Mr. Wyatt, not only from all parts of England, Ireland, and Scotland, but also from the Continent. The empress of Russia, that investigator and patron of talent in all departments, desirous to possess the architect of the Pantheon, and to exercise his genius in a projected palace, offered him (through her ambassador at London) a carte blanche, as to remuneration, if he would settle at St. Petersburg; but he was recommended by his friends to decline the offer of the munificent Catherine. From this period it may well be supposed that he ranked foremost in his profession, and executed most of the important and costly works of architecture which were undertaken. On the death of sir William Chambers he received the most flattering and substantial proof of the king’s great estimation, by being appointed surveyor-general to the Board of Works, which was followed by appointments to almost all the important offices connected with his profession in the government departments; and a dispute having arisen in the Royal Academy, which induced Mr. West to relinquish the president’s chair, Mr. Wyatt was elected, and reluctantly obeyed his majesty’s command to accept the vacant office, which he restored to Mr. West the ensuing year. From the building of the Pantheon to the period of his death, this classical architect erected or embellished some of the most considerable mansions, palaces, and other buildings, in the United Kingdom; among which are, the palace at Kew, Fonthili abbey, Hanworth church, House of Lords, Henry the Seventh’s chapel, Windsor castle, Buistrode, Doddington hall, Cashiobury, Ashridge hall, &c. &c. The writer of his life says, that although Mr. Wyatt was educated a Roman architect, and made his grand and successful debut in England in that character, yet his genius was not to be bounded in a single sphere, and it afterwards revived in this country the long- forgotten beauties of Gothic architecture. It is, however, a more general opinion that Mr. Wyatt was far from successful either in his original attempts, or in his restorations of the pure Gothic.

If we consider the importance of the undertaking begun at Oxford, and connected with a similar plan at Winchester, it will not appear surprising that he should, during the greater part of the reign of Richard II. have been disposed to bestow his whole attention on objects so dear to his heart. What he projected was certainly sufficient for the attention of any one man, and enough to immortalize the greatest. The design, bishop Lowth has eloquently expressed, was noble, uniform, and complete. “It was no less than to provide for the perpetual maintenance and instruction of two hundred scholars, to afford them a liberal support, and to lead them through a perfect course of education, fcom the first elements of letters, through the whole circle of the sciences; from the lowest class of grammatical learning to the highest degrees in the several faculties.” A design so enlarged, so comprehensive, so munificent, had not yet been conceived by the most illustrious of our English founders. In bringing it to perfection, we have not only to admire the generosity which supplied the means (for opulence may sometimes be liberal at a small expense), but that grasp of mind which at once planned and executed all that can be conceived most difficult in such a vast undertaking, and which enabled him to shine with equal lustre as benefactor, legislator, and architect, and give a lesson and example which could never be exceeded by the wisest of his posterity.