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

, an eminent historical painter, was born at Modena in 1512, and was the scholar of Antonio Beggarelli, a Modenese sculptor, whose models Correggio is said to have often made use of for his works. Little is known of his progress at Modena, except that, in partnership with his fellow-scholar Alberto Fontana, he painted the pannels of the Butchers hall in that place; and at the age of thirty-five, for the church of the Benedictines, the celebrated picture of the martyrdom of St. Peter and St. Paul, now in the Dresden gallery: with some fresco paintings, drawn from Ariosto and Virgil, in the palace Scandiano. Of his works at Bologna, tradition has left a very distinguished account, though little or nothing exists of them now but the large symbolic picture in the Via di St. Mamolo; a nativity of Christ, under the portico of the Leoni palace; and four conversation pieces and concertos, of exquisite taste, in the Academical Institute, which have been engraved. Notwithstanding the innate vigour, the genial facility, and independent style of this artist, he owes his fame, in a great measure, to his coalition with Francisco Primaticcio, and to his happy execution of the designs of that great master, particularly the frescoes he painted in the galleries and apartments at Fountainbleau. These, however, being destroyed in 1738, to make room for a new fabric, nothing remains but a few pictures of the history of Alexander. Some of the others were engraved. The period of his death is not known .

After having rambled for many years, he probably returned to England; for, in 1701, he published at London a collection of songs in several languages, with a dedication to king William. Towards the end of queen Anne’s reign he was at Cambridge with his lute, but met with little encouragement. How long he lived afterwards is not known. This artist is said to have possessed some secrets, by which he preserved the natural tone of his voice to an extreme old age.

, an eminent painter, was born at Cologne, in 1556, of a good family. He discovered a taste for his art from his earliest years, and at the age of eleven, painted a portrait with such success, as to induce his parents to encourage his studies. After having been for some time taught by a very indifferent painter, he became the disciple of de Georges, or Jerrigh, a good portrait-painter, with whom he remained six years; and afterwards improved himself by studying and copying the works of Spranger. In his twenty-second year he went to Italy, and was introduced at Venice to a Flemish artist, named Gaspard Reims. This man no sooner learned that Van Achen was a German, than he recommended him to an Italian who courted necessitous artists that he might make, a trade of their labours. With him Van Achen made some copies, but, being unable to forget the reception which Reims had given him, he painted his own portrait, and sent it to him. Reims was so struck with the performance, that he apologized to Van Achen, took him into his house, and preserved the portrait all his life with great veneration. At Venice, he acquired the Venetian art of colouring, and thence went to Rome to improve his design, but never quitted the mannered forms of Spranger. His best performances at Rome were a Nativity for the church of the Jesuits, and a portrait of Madona Venusta, a celebrated performer on the lute. His talents, however, and polite accomplishments, recommended him to several of the greatest princes of Europe, and particularly to the elector of Bavaria, and the emperor Rodolph, by both of whom he was patronized and honoured. He was one of that set of artists who, in the lapse of the sixteenth century, captivated Germany and its princes by the introduction of a new style, or rather manner, grossly compounded from the principles of the Florentine and Venetian schools. He died at Prague in 1621.

, brother of the preceding, and likewise an eminent artist, was born at Nancy, March 22, 1705. He studied under his father at Paris, and in 1726 went to Rome. Two years after he gained one of the prizes of the academy of St. Luke. At this time his brother, the subject of the preceding article, and Francis, a younger brother, were at Rome, and assisted each other in their labours. After a residence of nine years, he returned to Paris, and with some opposition was admitted into the academy, where he exhibited his model of “Prometheus,” but did not execute it until long after. Next year he executed the “martyrdom of St. Victoria,” a bas-­relief in bronze, for the royal chapel at Versailles. For some time he assisted his brother in “the Neptune;” but, a disagreement occurring, quitted this, and employed himself at the hotel Soubise, the chamber of accounts, and the abbey of St. Dennis. He was a candidate for the mausoleum of the cardinal de Fleury, and the public adjudged him the prize; but Lemoyne was employed. The tomb of the queen of Poland, wife of Stanislaus, is esteemed one of his best works. His Prometheus was finished in 1763, and the king of Prussia offered him 30,000 franks for it; but Adam said it was executed for his master, and no longer his own property. He died March 27, 1778, in his 75th year. His merits as a sculptor have been thought equal to those of his brother. It is said to have been his constant prayer that he might be neither the first northe last in his art, but attain an honourable middle rank, as the surest way to avoid jealousy on the one hand, or contempt on the other; and his last biographer thinks his prayer was heard. The younger brother, Francis-Gaspard, exercised his profession as a sculptor for some years with considerable reputation, and obtained a prize from the French academy, but no important works of his are mentioned; he died at Paris in 1759.

, 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.

Mr. Aikman, having prosecuted his studies for somt time in Britain, found that to complete them it would be necessary to go into Italy, to form his taste on the fine models of antiquity, which there alone can be found in abundance. And as he perceived that the profession he was to follow, could not permit him to manage properly his paternal estate, situated in a remote place near Arbroath in the county of For far in Scotland, he thought proper to sell it, and settle all family claims upon him, that he might be at full liberty to pursue his studies. In the year 1707 he went to Italy, and having resided chiefly at Rome for three years, and taken instructions from, and formed an acquaintance with the principal artists of that period, he chose to gratify his curiosity by travelling into Turkey. He went first to Constantinople, and from thence to Smyrna. There he became acquainted with all the British gentlemen of the factory; who wished him to forsake the pencil, and to join them in the Turkey trade: but, that scheme not tuking place, he went once more to Rome, and pursued his former studies there, till the year 1712, when he returned to his native country: he now followed his profession of painting for some time, applauded by the discerning few; though the public, too poor at that period to be able to purchase valuable pictures, were unable to give adequate encouragement to his superior merit. John duke of Argyll, who equally admired the artist and esteemed the man, regretting that such talents should be lost, at length prevailed on Mr. Aikman to move with all his family to London, in the year 1723, thinking this the only theatre in Britain where his talents could be properly displayed. Under the auspices of this nobleman, he formed habits of intimacy with the first artists, particularly with sir Godfrey Kneller, whose studies and dispositions of mind were very congenial to his own.

In his style of painting Mr. Aikman seems to have aimed at imitating nature in her pleasing simplicity: his lights are soft, his shades mellow, and his colouring mild and harmonious. His touches have neither the force nor harshness of Rubens; nor does he seem, like Reynolds, ever to have aimed at adorning his portraits with the elegance of adventitious graces. His mind, tranquil and serene, delighted rather to wander with Thomson in the enchanting fields of Tempe, than to burst, with Michael Angelo, into the ruder scenes of the terrible and the sublime. His compositions are distinguished by a placid tranquillity and ease rather than a striking brilliancy of effect: and his portraits may be more readily mistaken for those of Kneller than any other eminent artist; not only because of the general resemblance in the dresses, which were those of the times, they being contemporaries, but also for the manner of working, and the similarity and bland mellowness of their tints.

Our countryman, sir Robert Strange, gives this character of Albano’s paintings: “The pictures of Albano are exceedingly agreeable. His subjects are in general of the poetical kind. We may be almost sure of finding, in any picture of this master, beautiful figures of women; and children, who seem as if they had been nourished by the Graces. This artist, bred in the school of the Carracci, could not fail being an agreeable painter; and if he was not always successful in expressing the stronger passions of the soul, he knew how to touch and flatter the senses, by offering to his spectators the most pleasing and delightful images; where reigns with decency, an agreeable, and if I may be allowed the expression, even a voluptuous pleasure. What contributes to render his works inestimable, is a pencil whose freshness of colour and delicacy of touch is admirable: but he may be reprehended with overfinishing many of his pictures.” This eminent artist engraved three of his pictures: “The Three Maries at the Sepulchre; A Holy Family, with Angels; and another Holy Family.” Albani’s pictures of the “Four Elements,” formerly in the palace of the king of Sardinia, at Turin, and now in Paris, are of extraordinary beauty, and well preserved. The design is excellent, the draperies perfectly elegant, the colouring lovely, and the whole very correct. The composition is perhaps a little too dissipated, but that is a circumstance frequently observed in his works. His pictures were formerly in most of the palaces of Europe, but the greatest assemblage, we believe, is now at Paris. At Burghley house, are some fine tapestries from his designs; and there were probably some of his pictures in king Charles the First’s collection, as that prince once invited him to England.

, otherwise called Ridolfo Fioraventi, a celebrated mechanic, born at Bologna, lived in the 15th century. Astonishing performances are ascribed to this artist. In 1455 he transported, at Bologna, the campanile of St. Mary del Tempis, with all its bells, to the distance of 35 paces. In the town of Cento he righted that of the church of St. Blaise, which was got five feet and a half out of its perpendicular. Being invited to Hungary, he rebuilt several bridges on the Danube, and constructed many other works, with which the reigning sovereign was so highly satisfied, that he created him a chevalier, and allowed him to coin money with the impress of his own bust. He was likewise employed by Ivan Vassillievitch, grand duke of Russia, in the construction of several churches.

, a painter of some distinction, but whose reputation is chiefly established by his engravings, was born in 1552 atBorgo S. Sepolcbro, from which he derived one of his names. From his father, Michele Alberti, he learned the first rudiments of historical painting, in which art he made very considerable progress. His greatest works are in fresco at Rome; and he also painted in oil, and combined some thought with much practice. From whose instructions he became an engraver is uncertain, but his best style of execution seems evidently to have been founded on the prints of C. Cort and Agostino Caracci, though in his friezes and other slighter plates he owed much to the works of Francesco Villemena. The engravings of Alberti are never very highly finished, or powerful in effect. The lights are scattered and left untinted, as well upon the distances, as upon the principal figures of the fore-ground, which destroys the harmony, and, prevents the proper gradation of the objects. The drawing of the naked parts of the figure, in the works of this artist, is rarely incorrect: the extremities are well marked, and the characters of the heads generally very expressive: but his draperies are apt to be rather stitf and hard. His prints may be considered as very extraordinary efforts of a great genius, whilst the art was as yet at some considerable distance from perfection. The number of plates, great and small, engraved by this artist, amounts to nearly one hundred and eighty, of which seventy-five are from his own compositions, the rest from Michael Angelo Buonaroti, Raphael, Polidoro, Andrea del Sarto, &c. The “Miracle of St. Philip Benizzo” is one of the most excellent. Alberti died in 1615.

, 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.

, a celebrated artist, was born at Zoust in Westphalia, in 1502; but we have no account of his family, nor are we quite certain of his Christian name, some calling him Henry, and some Albert. It is said, that he went to Nuremberg, and studied under Albert Durer, as he copied his style. As a painter, he attained considerable fame: the principal part of his works are in the churches and convents of Germany. Des Piles mentions a “Nativity” by him, which he accounts worthy of the admiration of the curious. He is, however, chiefly known by his engravings; and as, like many of the ancient engravers, particularly of Germany, he applied himself chiefly to the engraving of small plates, he has been classed by French authors among those they call little masters, and in this class he claims the first rank. The mechanical part of his engraving is extremely neat, and executed entirely with the graver. The light parts upon his flesh he has often rendered very soft and clear, by the addition of small long dots, which he has judiciously interspersed. His drawing of the naked figure, which he seems very fond of introducing, is much correcter than is usually found among the old German masters; and much less of that stiff taste, so common to them, appears in his best works. But Florent le Comte’s observation is certainly very just, that his men figures are far more correct than his women. His heads are very expressive in general, and his other extremities well marked, but sometimes rather heavy. But as his prints are very numerous, amounting, according to abbe de Marolles, to no less than 350, they cannot be supposed to be all equal; it is, therefore, necessary to see many of his prints, before any adequate judgment can be formed. The first collection of them was formed by the burgomaster Six, but to this many additions were made by Mariette, to the amount of 390 pieces, comprising many duplicates with differences. This collection was sold in France, in 1805, for 660 francs. He died at Soest, in 1558, in very poor circumstances,

, born at Rome, died in 1600, was not less skilful in the exercise of the pencil than that of the graver. Of all his productions the most curious is the St. Christopher, which he painted in fresco in the great church of Seville, in Spain. The calf of each leg in this colossal figure is an ell in thickness; but the whole has a majestic appearance. Simple and modest in his character, this artist was always the first to do justice to his competitors for fame, and particularly to Louis de Vargas, whose Adam and Eve he generously preferred to his own St. Christopher, although the latter, from its grandeur of character and effect, was at that time very much admired. He had been a pupil of Michael Angelo, and was thought to have caught much of the sublime manner of that illustrious artist. He returned to Rome some time before his death, assigning as a reason that his talents could not be wanted in a country (Spain) that had produced such an artist as Louis de Vargas.

Algarottihad also studied the fine arts, and produced many excellent specimens of painting and engraving. In particular he designed and engraved several plates of heads in groupes, one of which, containing thirteen in the antique style, is dated Feb. 15, 1744. He travelled likewise over Italy, with a painter and draftsman in his suite; and what he has published on the arts discovers extensive knowledge and taste. Frederick II. who had become acquainted with his talents when prince-royal, no sooner mounted the throne, than he invited him to Berlin. Algarotti was then in London, and, complying with his majesty’s wish, remained at Berlin many years. Frederick conferred on him the title of count of the kingdom of Prussia, with reversion to his brother and descendants. He made him also his chamberlain, and knight of the order of Merit, bestowing on him at the same time many valuable presents, and other marks of his esteem; and after Algarotti left Berlin, the king corresponded with him for twenty-five years. The king of Poland, Augustus III. also had him for some time at his court, and gave him the title of privy-­counselloir of war. Nor was he held in less esteem by the sovereigns of Italy, particularly pope Benedict XIV. the duke of Savoy, and the duke of Parma. The excellence of his character, the purity of his morals, his elegant manners, and the eclat which surrounds a rich amateur of the arts, contributed to his celebrity perhaps as much as the superiority of his talents, and his acknowledged taste. Wherever he travelled he was respected equally by the rich, and the learned, by men of letters, by artists, and by men of the world. The climate of Germany having sensibly injured his health, he returned first to Venice, and afterwards to Bologna, where he had determined to reside, but his disorder, a consumption of the lungs, gained ground rapidly, and put an end to his life, at Pisa, March 3, 1764. He is said to have met death with composure, or, as his biographer terms it, with philosophical resignation. In his latter days he passed his mornings with Maurino (the artist who used to accompany him in his travels), engaged in the study of painting, architecture, and the fine arts. After dinner he had his works read to him, then printing at Leghorn, and revised and corrected the sheets: in the evening he had a musical party. The epitaph he wrote for himself is taken from Horace’s non omnis moriar, and contains only the few words, “Hicjacet Fr. Algarottus non omnis” The king of Prussia was at the expense of a magnificent monument in the Campo Santo of Pisa; on which, in addition to the inscription which Algarotti wrote, he ordered the following, “Algarotto Ovidii emulo, Newtoni discipulo, Fredericus rex,” and Algarotti’s heirs added only “Fredericus Magnus.” The works of Algarotti were published at Leghorn, 1765, 4 vols. 8vo; at Berlin, 1772, 8 vols. 8vo; and at Venice, 17 vols. 8vo, 1791--1794. This last, the most complete and correct edition, is ornamented with vignettes, the greater part of which were taken from the author’s designs. These volumes contain 1. Memoirs of his life and writings, and his poetry. 2. An analysis of the Newtonian system. 3. Pieces on architecture, painting, the opera, essays on vario is languages, on history, philology, on Des Cartes, Horace, &c. 4 and 5. Essays on the military art, and on the writers on that subject. 6. His travels in Russia, preceded by an Essay on the metals of that empire: the congress of Cytherea, the life of Pallavicini, the Italian poet; and a humorous piece against the abuse of learning. 7. Thoughts on different subjects of philosophy and philology. 8. Letters on painting and architecture. 9 and 10. Letters on the sciences. 11 to 16. His correspondence, not before published, with the literati of Italy, England, and France. 17. An unfinished critical essay on the triumvirate of Crassus, Pompey, and Gassar. Among his correspondents we find the names of the Italians, Manfredi and Zanotti, his first masters, Fabri of Bologna, Metastasio, Frugoni, Bettinelli, Frisi the celebrated mathematician and physician, Mazzuchelli, Paradisi, &c.; the Prussians, Frederic II. several princes of the same family, and Form ey, &c.; the English, lords Chesterfield and Hervey, Mr. Hollis, lady Montague, &c.; jand the French, Voltaire, Maupercuis, du Chastellet, mad. du Boccage,; &c. His Essays on painting, on the opera, his Letters to lord Hervey and the marquis Maffei, and his Letters, military and political, have been translated and published in English. His biographers have generally handed down his character without a blemish; aiui Fabroni, on whom ive mostly rely, is equally lavish in his praises. Wiule we take his personal merits from these authorities, we have evident proof from his works that he was an universal scholar, and wrote with facility and originality on every subject he took in hand. They present a greater variety of reading and thought than almost any scholar of the eighteenth century; but they are not without redundancy, and sometimes affectation. His fame is said to be fixed on a more solid basis in his own country, than in those where he has been viewed only througn the medium of translations.

, 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.

, a painter of Nuremberg, of the sixteenth century, was the disciple of the younger Holbein, and a successful imitator of his manner. His designs were correct, the disposition of the figures admirable, and the perspective excellent, nor was he deficient in colouring. His chief reputation rests on a composition of the history of Joseph, which he described in twelve pictures. He also painted a portrait of the emperor Charles V. which that monarch, according to the testimony of Sandrart, accounted equal to any of the portraits of him painted by Titian; and to express his high approbation of that performance, he not only paid the artist three times as much as he expected, with a liberality truly royal, but he honoured him also with a rich chain of gold and a medal. There are several of his pictures in the royal gallery of Munich. The abbé Marolles, and, after him, Florent le Comte mention Amberger, as an engraver, without specifying his works; but Basan tells us, that he engraved in wood several prints, from his own compositions. He died in 1550.

, an artist and an author, was a Franciscan of Gallipoli, in the kingdom of Naples, and prior of his order at Jerusalem. During a residence of five years there, he made drawings and wrote descriptions of that city and neighbourhood; and on his return to Italy, published a magnificent volume, entitled “Trattato delle Piante e immagini de' sacri edifizi di Terra Santa,” Rome, 1620. The plates were engraved by the celebrated Callot.

, a painter and engraver, was born at Zurich, June 1539. His youth and studies are involved in obscurity, and the first notice we have of him is in 1560, when he went to Nuremberg, where he was admitted a burgess, and where he died in 1591. Here he began in designs on wood, paper, and copper, that career of incessant and persevering exertion which over-ran all Germany. History, allegory, emblem, sciences, trades, arts, professions, rural sports, heraldry, portrait, fashions, were all served in their turns, and often served so well, that his inventions may still be consulted by the artist with advantage. He painted with great brilliancy on glass. His drawings hatched with the pen, or washed, have Italian characteristics of style and execution.

, an eminent engraver, was a native of Mantua; for which reason he frequently added to his name or monogram Intagliat, Mantuano, which has led some to mistake him for Andrew Mantegna. Others called him Andreassi; and others, from a resemblance in their monograms, have confounded him with Altdorfer. The time of his birth does not appear; but he died in 1623, at a very advanced age. He engraved in wood only, in a peculiar style, distinguished by the name of chiaro-scuro, which is performed with two, three, or more blocks of wood, according to the number of tints required, and these are stamped upon the paper one after another, so as to produce the effect of a washed drawing; but the invention was not his, Hugo da Carpi & Antonio da Trento having preceded him. He carried, however, the mechanical part of the work to a far greater degree of perfection, and we often find in his prints a correct and determined outline. His great merit as an artist is acknowledged by all who are conversant in prints; and his drawing is excellent, executed with great spirit, and in a very masterly style. The heads of his figures, though slight, are characteristic and expressive; and he has displayed great judgment in the management of his various tints. His works are justly considered as admirable transcripts from the sketches of many of the greatest painters.

To this high character it is with regret we add, that it is sometimes difficult to distinguish his prints, from a circumstance that reflects no great honour on him. He procured many other engravings, the works of different masters, and sold the impressions with his own name, after effacing the name of the true artist, to substitute his own with more security. Such are the tricks which artists are sometimes tempted to practise, when they exchange their more honourable employment and rank for that of dealer.

, da Fiesole, so called from the place where he was born, in 1387. He was at first the disciple of Giottino, but afterwards became a Dominican friar, and in that station was as much admired for his piety as his painting. His devout manner procured him the name of Angelico, or the angelic painter, and it is said that he never took up his pencil without a prayer, and had his eyes filled with tears when representing the sufferings of our Saviour. Nicholas V. employed him in his chapel, to paint historical subjects on a large scale, and prevailed on him soon after to decorate several books with miniature paintings. Although there are in his best paintings considerable defects, yet he was a most skilful instructor, and his amiable temper procured him many scholars. He always painted religious subjects; and it is given as a proof of his extraordinary humility, that he refused the Archbishopric of Florence when tendered to him by Nicholas V. as the reward of his talents. With respect to the objections made to his pictures, we are farther told, that he purposely left some great fault in them, lest his self-love might be too much flattered by the praises that would have been bestowed; a practice, however absurd in an artist, not unsuitable to monkish ideas of mortification. He died in 1443.

, the sons of a mechanic in the town of Eu in Normandy, became very eminent for their skill in sculpture; and after pursuing their studies at Rome, embellished Paris with many of their best works. Of these, Francis executed the^ altar of Val de Grace, the fine marble crucifix of the high altar of the Sorbonne, the mausoleum of cardinal de Berulle in the church of St. Honorius; and especially that of the duke of Montmorenci at Moulins, and the four figures on the tomb of the duke de Longueville at Paris; the figure of Prudence is esteemed a chef-d'ouvre of graceful expression, This artist is said to have exercised his art in England, but we do not find him noticed by Walpole. He died at Paris in 1699, in the 95th year of his age. Michael, who was the younger brother, born in 1612, executed the tomb of the grand prior of Souvre, the ornaments on the gate of St. Dennis, the figures on the front gate of Val-de-grace, Amphitrite, &c. He assisted his brother likewise in some of his works, and died in 1686, aged 74. They were both buried at St. Koch, where they are honoured with an epitaph.

, a Venetian engraver, is said to have acquired so much precision and delicacy in executing small objects, that Michael Angelo, in whose time he appears to have flourished, considered him as having attained the very perfection of his art; he principally engraved medals; and his engravings of the medals of Henry II. king of France, and of pope Paul III. which has on the reverse, Alexander the Great kneeling before the high priest of Jerusalem, are greatly valued by connoisseurs. Strutt mentions another Anichini, an Italian artist, who flourished about 1655, who appears to have been an engraver of some note; but we have no account of his life.

To this account of Apelles, taken principally from Bayle, it may be necessary to add the opinion of a very superior critic, who observes, that “The name of Apelles in Pliny is the synonime of unrivalled and unattainable excellence, but the enumeration of his works points out the modiiication which we ought to apply to that superiority: it neither comprises exclusive sublimity of invention, the most acute discrimination of character, the widest sphere of comprehension, the most judicious and best balanced composition, nor the deepest pathos of expression: his great prerogative consisted more in the unison than in the extent of his powers: he knew better what he could do, what ought to be done, at what point he could arrive, and what lay beyond his reach, than any other artist. Grace of conception and refinement of taste were his elements, and went hand in hand with grace of execution and taste in finish, powerful and seldom possessed singly, irresistible when united: that he built both on the firm basis of the former system, not on its subversion, his well-known contest of lines with Protogenes, not a legendary tale, but a well-attested fact, irrefragably proves; what those lines were, drawn with nearly miraculous subtlety in different colours, one upon the other, or rather within each other, it would be equally unavailing and useless to inquire; but the corollaries we may deduce from the contest, are obviously these: that the schools of Greece recognized all one elemental principle; that acuteness and fidelity of eye and obedience of hand form precision, precision proportion, proportion beauty: that it is the `little more or less’ imperceptible to vulgar eyes, which constitutes grace, and establishes the superiority of one artist over another; that the knowledge of the degrees of things, or taste, presupposes a perfect knowledge of the things themselves: that colour, grace, and taste, are ornaments, not substitutes of form, expression, and character, and when they usurp that title, degenerate into splendid faults. Such were the principles on which Apelles formed his Venus, or rather the personification of the birthday of love, the wonder of art, the despair of artists; whose outline baffled every attempt at emendation, whilst imitation shrunk from the purity, the force, the brilliancy, the evanescent gradations of her tints.”

, 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.

, an eminent historian, who wrote the Roman history in the Greek language, flourished under the reigns of Trajan and Adrian about the year 123 A. D. and speaks of the destruction of Jerusalem, as of an event that happened in his time. He was born of a good family in Alexandria, from whence he went to Rome, and there distinguished himself so much at the bar, that he was chosen one of the procurators of the emperor, and the government of a province was committed to him. He wrote the Roman history in a very peculiar method; not compiling it in a continued series, after the manner of Livy, but giving distinct histories of all the nations that had been conquered by the Romans, and placing every thing relative to those nations in one connected and uninterrupted narrative. It was divided into three volumes, which contained twenty-four books, or twenty-two according to Charles Stephens, Volaterranus, and Sigonius. Photius tells us, there were nine books concerning the civil wars, though there are but five now extant. This performance has been charged with many errors and imperfections; but Photius is of opinion, he wrote with the utmost regard to truth, and has shewn greater knowledge of military affairs than any of the historians, and depicts battles and other great events with the skill of an artist. But his chief talent (continues that author) is displayed in his orations, in which he produces a strong effect on the passions, either in animating the resolution of the slow, or repressing the impetuosity of the precipitate. In the preface he gives a general description of the Roman empire.

, a celebrated painter, was born at Geneva, May 18, 1668. He was originally educated for the church, but his inclination soon led him to painting, in which he made a rapid progress. He painted miniature with success, and when he came to Paris in 1688, he obtained the favour of the duke of Orleans, who chose him for an instructor in the art, and gave him an apartment at St. Cloud, that he might be with him more frequently. He was likewise highly favoured by the princess Palatine, the duke’s mother, who presented him with her own picture set with diamonds; and also gave him recommendatory letters to the court of Great Britain, particularly to the princess of Wales, afterwards queen Caroline. Her portrait was universally admired, and celebrated by several of the poets; and, at his return to Paris, he was loaded with presents, among which were many medals of gold. Having copied a Leda, perhaps the famous Leda of Corregio, destroyed by the bigotry of the regent’s son, all Paris was struck with the performance. The due de la Force gave 12,000 livres for it, but being a sufferer, by the Missisippi (probably before the picture was paid for) restored it to the artist with 4,000 livres for the use of it. In 1721, Arlaud brought this masterpiece to London, and sold a copy of it for 600l. sterling, but would not part with the original. While in England he received many medals as presents, which are still in the library of Geneva. But Leda was again condemned to be the victim of devotion.

, a very ingenious mechanic of London, who introduced several improvements in the mechanism of time-keepers, for which he received premiums from the Board of Longitude. He was the inventor of the expansion balance, and of the present detached escapement, and the first artist who ever applied the gold cylindrical spring to the balance of a time-piece. He died in the fifty-fifth year of his age, at Well-hall, near Eltham in Kent, August 25, 1799. The following publications may be consulted for an account of his improvements: “An account kept during thirteen months in the Royal Observatory at Greenwich, of the going of a Pocket Chronometer, made on a new construction by John Arnold, having his new-invented balance spring, and a compensation for the effects of heat and cold in the balance. Published by permission of the Board of Longitude,” 4to, 1780. lf A Letter from Mr. Christian Meyer, astronomer to the elector Palatine, to Mr. N. N. on the going of a new Pendulum Clock, made by Mr. John Arnold, and set up in the elector’s observatory at Manheim, translated from the German,“4to, 1781.” On the Longitude; in a letter to the Commissioners of that Board; containing remarks on the accounts given of a Clock at Manheim, and tlaat of a Pocket Chronometer at Greenwich; both made by Mr. John Arnold,“4to, 1781.” An Answer from John Arnold to an anonymous letter on the Longitude, 4to, 1782.

, an eminent philosopher, chemist, and antiquary, of the seventeenth century, and founder of the noble museum at Oxford, which still bears his name, was the only son of Mr. Simon Ashmole, of the city of Litchfield, in Staffordshire, sadler, by Anne, the daughter of Mr. Anthony Boyer, of Coventry, in Warwickshire, woollen-draper. He was born May 23, 1617, and during his early r education in grammar, was taught music, in which he made such proficiency as to become a chorister in the cathedral at Litchfield. When he had attained the age of sixteen he was taken into the family of James Paget, esq. a baron of the exchequer, who had married his mother’s sister, and as his father died in 1634, leaving little provision for him, he continued for some years in the Paget family, during which time he made considerable progress in the law, and spent his leisure hours in perfecting himself in music and other polite accomplishments. In March 1638, he married Eleanor, daughter of Mr. Peter Manwaring, of Smallwood, in the county Palatine of Chester, and in Michaelmas term the same year, became a solicitor in Chancery. On February 11, 1641, he was sworn an attorney of the court of common pleas, and on December 5th, in the same year, his wife died suddenly, of whom he has left us a very natural and affectionate memorial. The rebellion coming on, he retired from London, being always a zealous and steady loyalist, and on May 9, 1645, became one of the gentlemen of the ordnance in the garrison at Oxford, whence he removed to Worcester, where he was commissioner, receiver, and register of the excise, and soon after captain in the lord Ashley’s regiment, and comptroller of the ordnance. In the midst of all this business he entered himself of Brazen-Nose college, in Oxford, and applied himself vigorously to the sciences, but especially natural philosophy, mathematics, and astronomy; and his intimate acquaintance with Mr. (afterwards sir George) Wharton, seduced him into the absurd mysteries of astrology, which was in those days in great credit. In the month of July, 1646, he lost his mother, who had always been a kind parent to him, and for whom he had a very pious regard. On October 16th, the same year, be was elected a brother of the ancient and honourable society of Free and Accepted Masons, which he looked upon as a high honour, and has therefore given us a particular account of the lodge established at Warrington in Lancashire and in some of his manuscripts, there are very valuable collections relating to the history of the free masons. The king’s affairs being now grown desperate, Mr. Ashmole withdrew himself, after the surrender of the garrison of Worcester, into Cheshire, where he continued till the end of October, and then came up to London, where he became acquainted with Mr. (afterwards sir Jonas) Moore, William Lilly, and John Booker, esteemed the greatest astrologers in 'the world, by whom he was caressed, instructed, and received into their fraternity, which then made a very considerable figure, as appeared by the great resort of persons of distinction to their annual feast, of which Mr. Ashmole was afterwards elected steward. Jn 1647 he retired to Englefield, in Berkshire, where he pursued his studies very closely, and having so fair an opportunity, and the advantage of some very able masters, he cultivated the science of botany. Here, as appears from his own remarks, he enjoyed in privacy the sweetest moments of his life, the sensation of which perhaps was quickened, by his just idea of the melancholy state of the times. It was in this retreat that he became acquainted with Mary, sole daughter of sir William Forster, of Aldermarston, in the county of Berks, bart. who was first married to sir Edward Stafford, then to one Mr. Hamlyn, and lastly to sir Thomas Mainwaring, knt recorder of Reading, and one of the masters in chancery and an attachment took place but Mr. Humphrey Stafford, her second son, had such a dislike to the measure, that when Mr. Ashmole happened to be very ill, he broke into his chamber, and if not prevented, would have murdered him. In the latter end of 1648, lady Mainwaring conveyed to him her estate at Bradfield, which was soon after sequestered on account of Mr. Ashmole’s loyalty but the interest he had with William Lilly, and some others of that party, enabled him to get that sequestration taken off. On the sixteenth of November, 1649, he married lady Mainwaring, and settled in London, where his house became the receptacle of the most learned and ingenious persons that flourished at that time. It was by their conversation, that Mr. Ashmole, who hud been more fortunate in worldly affairs than most scholars are, and who had been always a curious collector of manuscripts, was induced to publish a treatise written by Dr. Arthur Dee, relating to the Philosopher’s stone, together with another tract on the same subject, by an unknown author. These accordingly appeared in the year following but Mr. Ashmole was so cautious, or rather modest, as to publish them by a fictitious name. He at the same time addressed himself to a work of greater consequence, a complete collection of the works of such English chemists, as had till then remained in ms. which cost him a great deal of labour, and for the embellishment of which he spared no expence, causing the cuts that were necessary, to be engraved at his own house in Black-Friars, by Mr. Vaughan, who was then the most eminent artist in that department in England. He imbibed this affection for chemistry from his intimate acquaintance with Mr. William Backhouse, of Swallowfield in the county of Berks, who was reputed an adept, and whom, from his free communication of chemical secrets, Mr. Ashmole was wont to call father, agreeably to the custom which had long prevailed among the lovers of that art, improperly, however, called chemistry for it really was the old superstition of alchemy. He likewise employed a part of his time in acquiring the art of engraving seuls, casting in sand, and the mystery of a working goldsmith. But all this time, his great work of publishing the ancient English writers in chemistry went on and finding that a competent knowlege of the Hebrew was absolutely necessary for understanding and explaining such authors as had written on the Hermetic science, he had recourse to rabbi Solomon Frank, by whom he was taught the rudiments of Hebrew, which he found very useful to him in his studies. At length, towards the close of the year 1652, his “Theatrum Chymicum Britannicum” appeared, which gained him great reputation in the learned world, as it shewed him to be a man of a most studious disposition, indefatigable application, and of wonderful accuracy in his compositions. It served also to extend his acquaintance considerably, and among others the celebrated Mr. Seiden took notice of him in the year 1653, encouraged his studies, and lived in great friendship with him to the day of his death. He was likewise very intimate with Mr. Oughtred, the mathematician, and with Dr. Wharton, a physician of great racter and experience. His marriage with lady -Main-waring, however, involved him in abundance of law-suits with other people, and at last produced a dispute between themselves, which came to a hearing on October 8, 1657, in the court of chancery, where serjeant Maynard having observed, that in eight hundred sheets of depositions taken on the part of the lady, there was not so much as a bad word proved against Mr. Ashrnole, her bill was dismissed, and she delivered back to her husband. He had now for some time addicted himself to the study of antiquity and records, which recommended him to the intimate acquaintance of Mr. (afterwards sir William) Dugdale, whom about this time he attended in his survey of the Fens, and was very useful to him in 'that excellent undertaking. Mr. Ashmole himself soon after took the pains to trace the Roman road, which in Antoninus’s Itinerary is called Bennevanna, from Weeden to Litchfield, of which he gave Mr. Dugdale an account, in a letter addressed to him upon that subject. It is very probable, that after his studies had thus taken a new turn, he lost somewhat of his relish for chemistry, since he discontinued the Theatrum Chemicum, which, according to his first design, was to have consisted of several volumes yet he still retained such a remembrance of it, as induced him to part civilly with the sons of art, by publishing a treatise in prose on the philosopher’s stone, to which he prefixed an admirable preface, in which he wishes to apologize for taking leave of these fooleries. In the spring of the year 1658, our author began to collect materials for his history of the order of the garter, which he afterwards lived to finish, and thereby rendered both the order and himself immortal, the just reward of the prodigious pains he took in searching records in the Tower, and elsewhere, comparing them with each other, and obtaining such lights as were requisite to render so perplexed a subject clear, and to reduce all the circumstances of such a vast body of history into their proper order. In September following he made a journey to Oxford, where he was extremely well received, and where he undertook to make a full and distinct description of the coins given to the public library by archbishop Laud, which was of great use to him in the works which he afterwards composed. He had lodged and boarded sometimes at a house in South Lambeth, kept by Mr. John Tradescant, whose father and himself hud been physic-gardeners there for many years, and had collected avast number of curiosities, which, after mature deliberation, Mr. Tradescant and his wife determined to bestow on Mr. Ashmole, and accordingly sealed and delivered a deed of gift for that purpose, on December 16, 1659. On the restoration of king Charles II. Mr. Ashmole was Dearly introduced into the presence and favour of his majesty, and on June 18, 1660, which was the second time he had the honour of discoursing with the king, he graciously bestowed upon him the place of Windsor herald. A few days after, he was appointed by the king to make a description of his medals, and had them delivered into his hands, and king Henry VHIth’s closet assigned for his use, being also allowed his diet at court. On August 21st, in the same year, he presented the three books which he had published, to his majesty, who, as he both loved and understood chemistry, received them very graciously. On September 3, he had a warrant signed for the office of commissioner of the excise, in consequence of a letter written by his majesty’s express command, to the earl of Southampton, then lord high-treasurer, by Mr. Se^ cretary Morris. About this time, a commission was granted to him as incidental to the care of the king’s medals, to examine the famous, or rather infamous, Hugh Peters, about the contents of the royal library which had fallen into his hands, and which was very carefully and punctually executed, but to very little purpose. On November 2d, he was called to the bar in Middle-Temple hall, and January 15, 1661, he was admitted a fellow of the Royal Society. On February 9th following, the king signed a warrant for constituting him secretary of Surinam in the West Indies. In the beginning of the year 1662, he was appointed one of the commissioners for recovering the king’s goods, and about the same time he sent a set of services and anthems to the cathedral church of Litchfield, in memory of his having been once a chorister there, and he gave afterwards twenty pounds towards repairing the cathedral. On June 27, 1664, the White Office was opened, of which he was appointed a commissioner. On Feb. 17, 1665, sir Edward By she sealed his deputation for visiting Berkshire, which visitation he began on the llth of March following, and on June 9, 1668, he was appointed by the lords commissioners of the treasury, accomptant-general, and country accomptant in the excise. His second wife, lady Main waring, dying, April 1, in the same year, he soon after married Mrs. Elizabeth Dugdale, daughter to his good friend sir William Dugdale, kht. garter king at arms, in Lincoln’s-inn chapel, on Novembers. The university of Oxford, in consideration of the many favours they had received from Mr. Ashmole, created him doctor of physic by diploma, July 19, 1669, which was presented to him on the 3d of November following, by Dr. Yates, principal of Brazen-Nose college, in the name of the university. He was now courted and esteemed by the greatest people in the kingdom, both in point of title and merit, who frequently did him the honour to visit him at his chambers in the Temple, and whenever he went his summer progress, he had the same respect paid him in the country, especially at his 'native town of Litchfield, to which when he came, he was splendidly entertained by the corporation. On May 8, 1672, he presented his laborious work on the most noble order of the garter, to his most gracious master king Charles II. who not only received it with great civility and kindness, but soon after granted to our author, as a mark of his approbation of the work, and of his personal esteem for him, a privy seal for 400 pounds out of the custom of paper. This was his greatest undertaking, and had he published nothing else, would have preserved his memory, as it certainly is in its kind one of the most valuable books in our language. On January 29, 1675, he resigned his office of Windsor herald, which by his procurement, was bestowed on his brother Dugdale, It was with great reluctancy that the earl marshal parted with him, and it was not long after, that he bestowed on him the character of being the best officer in his office. On the death of sir Edward Walker, garter king at arms, Feb_ 20, 1677, the king and the duke of Norfolk, as earl marshal, contested the right of disposing of his place, on which Mr. Ashmole was consulted, who declared in favour of the king, but with so much prudence and discretion as not to give any umbrage to the earl marshal. He afterwards himself refused this high office, which was conferred on his father-in-law sir -William Dugdale, for whom he employed his utmost interest. About the close of 1677, a proposal was made to Mr. Ashmole to become a candidate for the city of Litchfield, but finding himself poorly supported by the very persons who would have encouraged him to stand, he withdrew his pretensions. On the 26th of January, 1679, about ten in the morning, a fire began in the Middle Temple, in the next chambers to Mr. Aslimole’s,- by which he lost a library he had been collecting thirty-three years; but his Mss. escaped, by their being at his house in South Lambeth. He likewise lost a collection of 9000 coins, ancient and modern but his more valuable collection of gold medals were likewise preserved by being at Lambeth his vast repository of seals, charters, and other antiquities and curiosities, perished also in the flames. In 1683, the university of Oxford having finished a noble repository near the theatre, Mr. Ashmole sent thither that great collection of rarities which he had received from the Tradescants before-mentioned, together with such additions as he had made to them; and to this valuable benefaction he afterwards added that of his Mss. and library, which still remain a monument of his generous love to learning in general, and to the university of Oxford in particular. In the beginning of the year 1685, he was invited by the magistrates, and by the dean of Litchfield, to represent that corporation in parliament but upon king James’s intimating to him, by the lord Dartmouth, that he would take it kindly if he would resign his interest to Mr. Levvson, he instantly complied.

Of the personal history of this artist very little is known. He married at Lyons in 1645, the daughter of a merchant of Antwerp, who happened accidentally to be in that place, and died at Amsterdam in 1660, in the fiftieth year of his age. Perelle has engraved some of his landscapes, and of his Italian ruins.

, an artist, more indebted to fortune than genius, for the distinction he obtained, was born at Wemm in Shropshire, where his father practised physic. When of an age to assume a profession, he was sent to London, and placed as a pupil under Mr. Hudson. He afterwards visited Rome, and was there about the same time with sir Joshua Reynolds. After returning to England, he resided some months at a friend’s house in London, and went thence to Dublin, where he practised as a painter for three years, and with such success as to acquire 3000l. On his return, he accidentally bemame acquainted with the opulent widow of sir William Daniel, whom he married, and eventually got possession of the Duckenfield estate, valued at 5000l. per annum. He then bought Schomberg house in Pall-mall, which he divided into three houses, inhabiting the centre house himself, now Mr. Payne’s. Towards his latter days, he began to repent of having passed much of his life in dissipation and by a transition not very uncommon, dreaded being reduced to want. He died at his house, Duckenfield-lodge, Cheshire, Nov. 14, 1787, and was buried at the church of that village. As an artist, his talents were by no means of an inferior class, particularly in portrait painting but he had not much delight in his profession, and when he obtained a fortune, practised no longer.

, a French Jesuit and painter, attached to the mission to Pekin, was born at Dole, in Tranche-Comté, July 31, 1702, and at first took lessons in painting, and made considerable proficiency under his father, who was an artist. He then went to Rome, under the patronage of the marquis de Brossa, and on his return, painted some pictures at Lyons, which procured him great reputation. In his thirtieth year he entered among the Jesuits, in the humble character of a lay- brother, and some, years afterwards, when the missionaries of Pekin demanded the services of a painter, he obtained the appointment, and went to China about the end of 1737. He had no sooner arrived at Pekin than he offered the emperor a painting of the Adoration of the Kings, with which the emperor was so much pleased that he ordered it to be placed in his interior apartment. Notwithstanding this promising outset, he underwent many mortifications, in being obliged to comply with the bad taste of the Chinese in what paintings he executed for them, and was so teazed by the emperor himself, that, in order to please him, he was obliged to take lessons from the Chinese artists but finding that a compliance with their instructions must spoil his performances, and injure his reputation, he declined painting for his majesty. Ddring the years, however, from 1753 to 1760, distinguished by many victories gained by the emperor Kien Long, he had frequent orders for battlepieces, &c. which he executed so much to the satisfaction of that monarch, that he created him a mandarin, and when Attiret refused to accept it, the minister of state told him he should have the revenues, although he declined the honour. The missionaries speak in the highest terms of his talents, modesty, and piety. He died at Pekin, Dec. 8, 1768, and the emperor defrayed the expences of his funeral the large pictures he painted for the emperor are in the palace, but never shown the missionaries can exhibit only one picture, “The Guardian Angel,” which is in the chapel of the Neophites, in the French missionary church at Pekin. There is nothing of Attiret' s in print, except a letter in the “Recueil des Lettres Edifiantes,” vol. XXVII. which was translated by the late Rev. Joseph Spence, under his assumed name of sir Harry Beaumont, entitled “A particular account of the emperor of China’s gardens near Pekin, in a letter from father Attiret, a French missionary, now employed by that emperor to paint the apartments in those gardens, to his friend at Paris,” London, 1752, 8vo.

, the first of this famijy who is mentioned as an artist, was born in 1592, and died in 1677. He was the son of Louis Audran, an officer belonging to the wolf-hunters, in the reign of Henry IV. of France. Claude appears to have become an engraver rather late in life, and his prints, which are but few, are not held in much estimation. Yet, though he acquired no great reputation by his own works, it was no small honour to be father to three great artists, Germain, Claude, and Gerard, the last of whom has immortalized the name of the family.

, is generally believed to have been brother of the preceding Claude, but others have asserted that he was cousin-german to him only. It is, however, universally agreed that he was born at Paris in 1594. In his infancy he discovered much taste, and an apt disposition for the arts; and, to perfect himself in engraving, of which he appears to have been chiefly fond, he went to Rome, where he produced several prints that did him great honour. What master he studied under at Rome cannot easily be determined. The style he adopted is very like that of Cornelius Bloemart, but still neater Mr. Strutt thinks that the prints of Lucas Kilian and of the Sadelers may have laid the first foundation on which he built. On his return to his own country, he settled at Paris, where he died in 1674, without having ever been married. The abbé Marolles, who always speaks of this artist with great praise, attributes one hundred and thirty prints to him amongst which, the “Annunciation,” from Annibale Caracci, and the “Assumption,” from Domenichino, are the most esteemed.

, the most celebrated artist of the family, was the third son of the first-mentioned Claude Audran, and born at Lyons in 1640. He learned from his father the first principles of designing and engraving following the example of his brother, he went to Paris, where his genius soon began to manifest itself and his reputation brought him to the knowledge of Le Brun, who employed him to engrave the “Battle of Constantine,” and the “Triumph” of that emperor, and for these works he obtained apartments at the Gobelins. At Rome, where he went for improvement, he is said to have studied under Carlo Maratti, in order to perfect himself in drawing and in that city, where he resided three years, he engraved several fine plates among; the rest the portrait of pope Clement IX. M. Colbert, a great encourager of the arts, was so struck with the beauty of Audran’s works, whilst he resided at Rome, that he persuaded Louis XIV. to recall him. On his return, he applied himself assiduously to engraving, and was appointed engraver to the king, From whom he received liberal encouragement. In 1681, he was named counsellor of the royal academy and died at Paris in 1703. He had been married, but left no male issue behind him.

Mr. Strutt considers Gerard Audran as the greatest engraver, without any exception, that ever existed in the historical line, an opinion, which, he thinks, a careful examination of “The Battles of Alexander” alone, will justify. His great excellency, above that of any other engraver, was, that though he drew admirably himself, yet he contracted no manner of his own but transcribed on copper simply, with great truth and spirit, the style of the master, whose pictures he copied. On viewing his prints, we lose sight of the engraver, and naturally say,* it is Le Brun, it is Poussin, &c. “This sublime artist,” says the Abbe Fontenai, borrowing chiefly from M. Basan, “far from conceiving that a servile arrangement of strokes, and the too frequently cold and affected clearness of the graver, were the great essentials of historical engraving, gave worth to his works by a bold mixture of free hatchings and dots, placed together apparently without order, but with an inimitable degree of taste and has left to posterity most admirable examples of the style in which grand compositions ought to be treated. His greatest works, which have not a very flattering appearance to the ignorant eye, are the admiration of true connoisseurs, and persons of real taste. He acquired the most profound knowledge of the art by the constant attention and study which he bestowed upon the science of design, and the frequent use he made of painting from nature. He always knew how to penetrate into the genius of the painter he copied from and often improved upon, and sometimes even surpassed him.” Mr. Strutt has given a list of his principal engravings, divided into four classes, to which we refer the reader.

, the third son of Germain Audran, was also born at Lyons, in 1667, and after having received instructions from his father, went to Paris, to study the art of engraving under his uncle Gerard. At the age of twenty years, the genius of this great artist began to display itself in a surprising manner: and his future success was such, that in 1707, he obtained the title of engraver to the king, and had a pension allowed him by his majesty, with apartments in the Gobelins and the following year he was made a member of the royal academy. He was eighty years of age before he quitted the graver and near ninety in 1756, when he died at his apartments, assigned him by the king. He left three sons behind him, one of whom, Benoit, was also an engraver, and died in 1735, but very inferior to his uncle of the same name.

, a Spanish statesman and writer, was born in 1731, at Barbanales, near Balbastro in Aragon. An early enthusiasm for the fine arts procured him the friendship of the celebrated artist Mengs, who was first painter to the king of Spain. After the death of Charles III. A zara constructed, in honour of his memory, a temple, in an antique form, in the church of St. James, which, although not faultless, discovered very considerable talents and taste in architecture. He was, however, soon employed in political concerns, and was sent to Rome, under the pontificate of Clement XIII. as ecclesiastical agent at the chancery of Rome. He was afterwards attached to the Spanish embassy, and took a very active part in various important negociations between the courts of Spain and Rome. In 1796 he was employed in a more difficult undertaking, to solicit the clemency of the conqueror of Italy in behalf of Rome, where the French nation had been insulted, and he at least acquired the esteem of general Buonaparte. About the same time he became acquainted with Joseph Bonaparte, then French ambassador at Rome. Being afterwards sent to Paris, in a diplomatic character, he was favourably received, and found some relief from the recollection that he had left behind him his valued friends, his fine library, and museum of paintings and antiques. During this mission he experienced alternate favour and disgrace, being recalled by his court, exiled to Barcelona, and sent again to Paris with the rank of ambassador. His health, however, was now much impaired, and when he was indulging the hope of being able to return to Italy, and pass the rest of his time in the enjoyment of his friends and favourite pursuits, his constitution suddenly gave way, and he expired January 26, 1797. He left a very considerable fortune in furniture, pictures, busts, &c. but appears to have lost his other property. He translated, 1. Middleton’s life of Cicero, and some fragments of Pliny and Seneca, under the title of “Historia della Vida di M. T. Ciceroni,” Madrid, 1790, 4 vols. 4to and also published, 2. “Introduzione alia storia naturale e alia Geografia fisica di Spagna,” Parma, 1784, 2 vols. 8vo. 3. “Opere di Antonio-Raffaele Mengs,” Parma, by Bodoni, 1780, 2 vols. 4to, of which a copious account may be seen in the Monthly Review, vol. LXV. 1781. This was afterwards translated into English, and published 1796, 2 vols. 8vo.

, an eminent Dutch painter, was born at Haerlem, Feb. 20, 1633, and at a very early age placed under the care of his uncle Piemans, who painted in the manner of Velvet Bruegfcel, and soon inspired his nephew with a taste for the art. Baan afterwards studied under Bakker at Amsterdam, with whom he practised assiduously every particular from which he could receive improvement, spending the whole day at the pencil, and the evenings in designing. At that time the works of Vandyck and Rembrandt were in great vogue, and after much consideration he appears td have leaned towards an imitation of Vandyck, whom, some thought, he equalled. Houbraken says he xvas invited by Charles II. to come to England, where he made portraits of the king, queen,- and principal nobility at court, and was much admired for the elegance of his attitudes, and for his clear, natural, and lively tone of colouring. After continuing some time in England, he went to the Hague, and there painted a noble portrait of the duke of Zell, for which he received a thousand Hungarian ducats, amounting to near 500l. He then painted for the, duke of Tuscany, who placed his portrait among those of other famous painters in the Florence gallery. When Louis XIV. was at Utrecht, he sent for him, but Baan declined the invitation for political reasons. This did not lessen him, however, in the opinion of that monarch, who frequently consulted him on the purchase of pictures. These, marks of distinction, and his fame as a painter, created him. many enemies, one of whom, an artist of Friesland, formed the execrable design of assassinating him, and came to Amsterdam for that purpose. After being long disappointed in an opportunity in the streets, he asked permission to see Baan’s paintings, and while the latter was showing them, drew a poignard to stab him, but a friend of Baan’s, who happened to enter the room at the instant, laid hold of his arm the villain, however, escaped, and could not afterwards be found. Baan was of an amiable disposition, Son­cial and obliging. He died at Amsterdam in 1702.

, son of the above, was born at the Hague in 1673, learned the art of painting from his father, and became very early an artist of distinction. In 1693 he came to England, and painted several excellent portraits for the nobility, particularly one of the duke of Gloucester. He was much solicited to remain in England, but had predetermined to visit Rome, where, and at Florence, his talents procured him great fame, and much money, the latter of which he had not the prudence to keep. His pictures are excellently handled, and he approached near to the merit of his father in portraits, and in other branches of the art he probably would have far surpassed him, if he had appropriated more of his time to his studies, and had not died at so early a period of life. He only reached his twenty- seventh year.

, a painter, born at Antwerp in 1530, learned the principles of painting from his father, who was a much inferior artist. After his father’s death, he lived in the house of Jacomo Palermo, a dealer in pictures, who avariciously took care to keep him incessantly employed, and sent his paintings to Paris to be disposed of, where they were much admired. He had a clean light manner of pencilling, and a tint of colour that was extremely agreeable. The judicious were very eager to purchase them at high prices, of which, however, the poor artist was not suffered to avail himself; and although his merit was universally allowed, Palermo took care that his name and his circumstances should not be known. He died in this obscure and depressed condition in 1560, only 30 years old.

In 1773, he presented to the Society forthe encouragement of arts, two statues in plaster, which by a vote of that society, were directed to be placed in their great room, and he received on the same occasion their gold medal. His first work in sculpture is in Christ Church college, already mentioned the first figures he executed in marble, are at the duke of Richmond’s at Goodwood and his first monument was that of Mrs. Withers, in St. Mary’s, Worcester. In 1777, he was employed to prepare a model of a monument to be erected in Guy’s hospital, South wark, to the memory of the founder. It was this work that chiefly recommended him to the execution of lord Chatham’s monument in Guildhall. His other works, about this period, were the monument of Mrs. Draper; a marble statue of Mars, for lord Yarborough two groupes for the top of Somerset-house the monument of lord Halifax in Westminster abbey the statue of judge Blackstone for All Souls college, Oxford, and that of Henry VI. for the Anti-chapel at Eton. It is not our intention, however, nor would our limits permit, to enumerate all the works executed by this artist, within twenty years after he attained his just and high fame. There are few of our cathedrals or puhlic edifices without some specimen of his skill, but it would be unpardonable to omit one of his grandest efforts, the monument of lord Chatham, in Westminster abbey, which was begun in 1778, and finished in 1783. It is alone a proof of the excellence he had attained, without the aid of foreign travel and observation and how various that excellence was, may be further proved from the bronze gfoupe in the square in Somersetplace the monuments of lady Miller at Bath of lord Rodney at Jamaica of lord Heathfield at Buckland of the earl and countess of Effingham at Jamaica of Howard and Johnson in St. Paul’s, &c. c.

In almost the vigour of life, and when his fame was at its height, this artist was suddenly attacked with an inflammation in his bowels, so violent and remediless, as to occasion his death, Aug. 7, 1799, in the 59th year of his age. He left two sons and three daughters by his first wife, and three sons by his last. His second son, John, became the inheritor of a considerable part of his property, and has already fully proved himself the legitimate successor to his talents.

Mr. Bacon’s private characfer is entitled to much praise. He vyas a man of unfeigned piety and extensive benevolence. Prosperity had not corrupted him, although it appeared to superficial observers that he was cautious in matters of expence, which they were apt to impute to motives which never entered into his mind. The want of education, he supplied by useful reading, and without the more ostensible attainments of a scholar, his conversation as far as it regarded common life and common topics, had none of those deficiencies which academical education is supposed to supply. In his temper, the irritability of the artist was corrected by much meekness and forbearance, and he had that noble candour which never denies just praise to a rival or contemporary. With respect to his attainments in his profession, they might be said to be all his own. Having arrived at the highest rank of English artists in sculpture, he lias amply proved that foreign travel confers a merit which is rather useful than necessarv a distinction which will not be misunderstood by those who know to what caprices the success of modern artists is often indebted.

, a Roman artist, was born about 1573, and acquired the rudiments of art from Francesco Morelli, a Florentine, but formed himself on better masters feeble in design and expression, he is distinguished by chiaroscuro, and a colpur which approaches that of Cigoli his praised picture of the Resuscitation of Tabitha, is lost, but his frescoes in the Vatican and the Capella Paolina at S. Maria Maggiore, still remain to give an idea of his powers. He lived long, employed and ennobled by pontiffs and princes but owes the perpetuity of his name perhaps more to his “Lives of Painters, Sculptors, and Architects,” than to great technie eminence. That work was entitled “Le Vite de' Pittori, Scultori, ed Architetti dal 1572 al 1642,” Rome, 1642, and again in 1649, 4to. It forms a continuation of Vasari’s Lives. Baglioni died about the time of publication.

Strutt says of this engraver, that although the clearness of his strokes, and the depth of colour which he produced, are far beyond any production prior to his own, yet he did not draw well, and on this account his prints want that freedom, correctness and harmony, which a perfect knowledge of drawing generally produces. With all their beauty, they appear heavy and the flesh is not sufficiently distinguished, by the style of engraving, from the other parts of the figure but has a cold silvery effect. This observation must be supposed to refer only to his figures. The two large plates (above mentioned) which he did from Vernet, one representing a storm, the other a calm, must ever be considered as very astonishing exertions of the artist. These are too well known, and too much admired, to need any farther culogium and were never equalled, until they were surpassed by a countryman of ours (YVoollett). Let any one look at the Niobe, the Ceyx and Alcyone, &c. from Wilson, and a very moderate share of judgment will be necessary to turn the balance in favour of the latter.

, an artist, was born at Antwerp, in 15GO, and was a disciple of Adam Van Oort; but he quitted that master, to acquire a better taste of design and composition, by pursuing his studies at Rome, where he resided for a considerable time. He copied the antiques, he attended to the works of the most memorable modern artists and at his return to his own country, the visible improvement of his taste recommended him to the favour and esteem of the ablest judges of the art. He distinguished himself by a good manner of designing, and his works are admitted into the cabinets of the curious, among those of the principal painters. He particularly excelled in the naked, and gave to his figures truth, roundness, and correctness of outline. Several fine portraits of his hand are at the Hague among which there is one adorned with allegorical figures of Widom and Justice. All the historical subjects painted by Van Balen have merit. His designs of the Deluge, of Moses striking the Rock, and the drowning of Pharaoh, are grand and noble compositions. Houbraken observes, that Van Balen, with great judgment, hath introduced the Israelites in a clear light in the back ground, but the Egyptians in a strong shadow in the fore ground, which had a very fine effect the figures being well designed, the attitudes and draperies well chosen, and the number of the figures being very considerable. Of this master’s hand also the Judgment of Paris is accounted a masterly performance in which the figure of Venus is so elegantly designed, so full of life, and so round, that it seems to stand forth from the surface. The landscapes and back grounds of the pictures composed by Van Balen, were generally painted by the Velvet Brueghel. Van Balen was the first master of Vandyck. He died in 1672. His son, John Van Balen, was born at Antwerp, in 1611, and derived his knowledge of the art, and his fine taste of drawing and design, from his father but, as soon as he had made a competent progress, he travelled to Rome, and lived for several years in that and other cities of Italy. There he acquired a good taste for design, though he was sometimes incorrect his particular merit was shewn in naked figures of boys, cupidfi, nymphs bathing or hunting, of which subjects he painted a considerable number, and he procured both praise and riches by his landscapes and histories. His pictures were well handled, his trees touched wiih spirit, and his herbage and verdure looked natural and lively. The carnations of his figures were clear and fresh, his colouring in general was transparent, and the airs of his heads were in the manner of Albano.

, born at Paris, in 1615, was the son of a goldsmith, and became a goldsmith himself. He began to be known in the time of cardinal Richelieu, who bought of him four large silver basons, on which Ballin, hardly 19 years old, had curiously represented the four ages of the world. The cardinal, who was never weary of admiring these masterpieces of workmanship, employed him to make four vases, from the antique, to match with the basons. Ballin brought ins art to the summit of perfection. He executed for Louis XIV. silver tables, girandoles, sophas, lustres, vases, &c. But that monarch was obliged to convert them all into money, to supply the expences of the tedious war that was terminated by the peace of Ryswic. Several works by this great artist are still, or were formerly, at Paris, at St. Denys, and at Pontoise, of singular beauty and delicacy. On the death of Varin, being appointed to the direction of the dies for striking medals and counters, he shewed in these littte works the same taste he had displayed in the larger. To the beauties of the antique he added the graces of the moderns. He died the 22d of Jan. 1678, at the age of 63. He had scarcely ever been out of Paris and gave a proof that foreign travel is not always necessary in order to excel in the fine arts. Launoi, a kinsman of Ballin by marriage, an excellent goldsmith, and an expert designer, made drawings of almost all the works of his relation, previous to the sale of them, by Louis XIV.

Finding, at length, that it was impossible on the Continent to meet with that patronage which, with just ambition, he aspired to, he determined on returning to his native country from which, however, he was soon after again enticed, by very favourable prospects held out to him by the court of Russia, whither he repaired, taking with him the above-mentioned figure of Cupid, which was purchased by the empress Catherine, and placed in a temple constructed for the purpose in her gardens at Czarscozelo. After a residence of nearly two years, in a climate which proved very destructive to his health, an,d disappointed in his hopes, he returned to his family in England, there to wait the tide of favour, which was not long in turning its course towards him. In that branch which the profession of a sculptor chiefly embraces, that of monumental subjects, there is not so much scope for fancy and variety, as in the productions of an historical painter, but whenever an opportunity offered of deviating from the established rules usually adopted in these cases, our artist did not omit to avail himself of it, of which there is a striking instance in a monument to the memory of a daughter of sir Brooke Boothby, in Ashbourne church. The first great work which was to have been executed by Mr. Banks, on his return from Petersburg, was a colossal statue of Achilles bewailing the loss of Brise'is on the sea shore, for col. Johnes, of Hafod, in Cardiganshire but, as it was likely to be a work of immense labour and expence, other smaller things were undertaken for the same distinguished gentleman, some of which unfortunately perished in the conflagration which destroyed his unique abode of classic taste and elegance, in 1807. Various events afterwards combined to prevent the completion of this magnificent statue, in marble and since Mr. Banks’ s death, it has been presented, by his family, to the British institution in Pall Mall, where it forms a grand and simple ornament to the entrance-hall. The exterior of tnat building, which was originally the Shakspeare gallery, is also a specimen of our artist’s varied talents the whole front of it having been designed by him, as well as the beautiful groupe of figures over the entrance, which are allusive to its original destination. In the latter years of Mr. Banks’s career, his monument for sir Eyre Coote in Westminster abbey, and those in St. Paul’s to the memory of the captains (Hutt, Westcott, and Rundle Burges), who fell in some of our great naval victories, are the most conspicuous and, as they are within the reach of general observation, may be duly appreciated by persons of taste. Mr. Banks’ s election to be one of the members of the royal academy took place not long after after his return from Russia. On this occasion, he presented that body with a piece of sculpture, representing one of the fallen Titans, which is placed among the deposits in the council chamber of that institution, and is a striking example of the knowledge he possessed in anatomy, which enabled him to execute a subject of this nature with as much correctness and energy, as the elegance of his taste led him to represent tender and pathetic subjects with that peculiar delicacy and feeling which so eminently characterize his works.

, who was also surnamed Monnoyer, a painter of some note, who resided many years in England, was born at Lisle, in Flanders, in 1635. He was brought up at Antwerp, where his business was 'history painting but finding that his genius more strongly inclined him to the painting of flowers, he applied his talents, and in that branch became one of the greatest masters. When Le Brim had undertaken to paint the palace of Versailles, he employed Baptist to do the flower part, in which he displayed great excellence. The duke of Montague being then ambassador in France, and observing the merit of Baptist’s performances, invited him over into England, and employed him, in conjunction with La Fosse and Rousseau, to embellish Montague house, which is now the British museum and contains many of the finest productions of Baptist. “His pictures (says Mr. Pilkington in his Dictionary of Painters) are not so exquisitely finished as those of Van Huysum, but his composition and colouring are in a bolder style. His flowers have generally a remarkable freedom and looseness, as well in the disposition, as in pencilling together with a tone of colouring, that is lively, admirable, and nature itself. The disposition of his objects is surp'risingly elegant and beautiful and in that respect his compositions are easily known, and as easily distinguished from the performances of others.” A celebrated performance of this artist is a looking-glass preserved in Kensington palace, which he decorated with a garland of flowers, for queen Mary and it is mentioned as a remarkable circumstance, that her majesty sat by him during the greatest part of the time that he was employed ia painting it. He painted, for the duke of Ormond, six pictures of East India birds, after nature, which were in that nobleman’s collection at Kilkenny in Ireland, and afterwards came into the possession “of Mr. Pilkington. He died in Pall Mall, in the year 1699. There is a print of Baptist, from a painting of sir Godfrey Kneller, in Mr. Walpole’s” Anecdotes." He had a son, named Anthony Baptist, who also painted flowers and, in the style and manner of his father, had great merit. There was also another painter known by the name of John Baptist, whose surname was Caspars, and who was commonly called Lely’s Baptist. He was born at Antwerp, and was a disciple of Thomas Willebores Boschaert. During the civil war he came to England, and entered into the service of general Lambert; but after the restoration he was employed by sir Peter Lely, to paint the attitudes and draperies of his portraits. He was engaged in the same business under Riley and sir Godfrey Kneller. The portrait of Charles II. in Painters’ Hall, and another of the same prince, with mathematical instruments, in the hall of St. Bartholomew’s Hospital, were painted by this Baptist, who died in 1691, and was buried at St. James’s.

, was an English artist of the last century, but known rather as a copyist than an original painter. He painted a picture of the celebrated Dr. Ward relieving his sick and lame patients, from which there is a print dated 1748-9, which appears to be the work of Baron. There is also a mezzotinto of admiral Vernon, from a picture by Bard well in 1744. At what time he died is not known, but it is probable that he was living in 1773, as a second edition of his treatise was published in that year. Whatever his merits as a painter, he certainly thought himself qualified to give instructions in the practical part of the art, and published a quarto pamphlet of sixty-four pages, entitled the “Practice of Painting and Perspective made easy,” 1756, which was elaborately but severely criticised in the Monthly Review. Mr. Edwards’s opinion is, that the instructions, so far as they relate to the process of painting, are the best that have yet been published, and many young artists at that time found them useful but the perspective of the work does not deserve equal praise, as no part is properly explained, and some of the figures are false. The principal part of Bard well’s pamphlet was re-published in 1795, 8vo. as an original publication.

, an artist of great ingenuity, deserves notice as having contributed to “the harmless stock of public pleasure,” although the particulars of his early life may not be interesting. He was the inventor and patentee of the now well-known species of exhibition called a Panorama, by which bird’s-eye views of large cities anti other interesting subjects, taken from a tower, or some other elevated situation, and painted in distemper round the wall of a circular building, produce a very striking effect, and a greater resemblance to reality than was ever before invented, a strong light being thrown on the painting, whilst the place from whence it proceeds is concealed. The deception is also aided by the picture having no frame or apparent boundary. The first picture of this kind was a view of Edinburgh, exhibited to the public in that city by Mr. Barker, in 1788, and in the following year in London, where it did not attract much attention nor was the invention popular, until Mr. Barker named his exhibition a Panorama, a compound word which was not ill contrived to excite curiosity. The first view, under this new title, was one of London from the top of the Albion Mills, which Mr. Barker exhibited at a house in Castle-street, Leicester Fields and although this was confined, Tor want of room, to a half circle, he was soon patronised and encouraged by the liberal praises of sir Joshua Reynolds and other eminent artists. Soon after, partly by means of a subscription, Mr. Barker was enabled to build a large and commodious house in Leicester Fields, calculated to give his exhibition every advantage. Since that time, "views of Dublin, Paris, Constantinople, Cairo, and other cities, with some of the most remarkable sea-fights of the present eventful war, have been exhibited with the greatest success. A more rational, or in many respects a more useful, public exhibition, it would be difficult to conceive. Mr. Barker died in April 1806, at his house in West-square, Southwark, leaving two sons, one of whom continues the exhibition in Leicester-square, with all his father’s skill.

, an eminent Italian artist, was born at Urbino, in 1528, and was the disciple of Battista Venetiano, by whom he was carefully instructed in the principles of painting, but he derived his knowledge of perspective from his uncle Bartolomeo Genga. Under those preceptors he practised assiduously, till he was in his twentieth year; and then visited Rome, where, under the patronage of cardinal della Rovere, he pursued his studies incessantly, and proved one of the most graceful painters of his time. At his return to his native city Urbino, he painted several pictures which procured him great applause; but that of a St. Margaret raised his reputation to the highest pitch, and induced pope Pius IV. to invite him to Home, where he employed him in the decorations of his palace of Belvedere, in conjunction with Federigo Zucchero. He excelled equally in history and portrait, but his genius inclined him more particularly to the painting of religious subjects; and his works sufficiently evince, that the utmost of his ambition was to imitate Correggio in his colouring, and Raphael in his manner of designing. But Correggio has somewhat so natural, so grand, so unaffectedly graceful, that Baroccio was far inferior to him, although perhaps more correct in the outlines. Sir Joshua Reynolds, who thought him, upon the whole, one of Correggio’s most successful imitators, says, that sometimes in endeavouring at cleanness or brilliancy of tint, he overshot the mark, and falls under the criticism that was made on an ancient painter, that his figures looked as if they fed upon roses. It is, however, singular to see colours of such variety coalesce so sweetly under his pencil, that perhaps no music reaches the ear with purer harmony, than his pictures the eye; an effect produced, in a great measure, by his attention to chiaroscuro, which he may be said to have introduced to the schools of Lower Italy, and which to obtain he rarely painted any historical figure without having either modelled it in wax, or placed some of his disciples in such attitudes as he wished to represent, it is sajd that when young, he was attempted to be poisoned at a dinner &ivc.5i by some of his rival artists, and that although he escaped with his life, he continued long in an infirm state. He must, however, have completely recovered from this attack, as his life was prolonged to the advanced age of eighty-four. He died at Urbino in 1612. Baroccio was also an engraver from some of his own compositions, and his plates, although slight, and not well managed, with respect to the mechanical part of the workmanship, are nevertheless most admirable, on account of the expression, and excellent drawing, which is discovered in them. His heads are very beautiful and characteristic; and the other extremities of his figures finely marked. Amidst all the difficulties he appears to have met with, in biting his plates with the aquafortis, after he had etched them, and his unskilfulness in handling-the graver, to harmonize and finish them, the hand of the master appears so evident, that the beauties we discover in them far overbalance the defects.

, an English artist of considerable fame, was the eldest son of John Barry and Julian Roerden, and was born in Cork, Oct. 11, 1741. His father was a builder, and in the latter part of his life a coasting trader between England and Ireland. James was at first destined to this last business, but as he disliked it, his father suffered him to pursue his inclination, which led him to drawing and reading. His early education he received in the schools at Cork, where he betrayed some symptoms of that peculiar frame of mind which became more conspicuous in his maturer years. His studies were desultory, directed by no regular plan, yet he accumulated a considerable stock of knowledge. As his mother was a zealous Roman Catholic, he fell into the company of some priests, who recommended the study of polemical divinity, and probably all of one class, for this ended in his becoming a staunch Roman Catholic. Although the rude beginnings of his art cannot be traced, there is reason to ^hink that at the age of seventeen he had attempted oil-painting, and between the ages of seventeen and twenty-two he executed a picture, the subject “St. Patrick landing on the sea-coast of Cashell,” which he exhibited in Dublin. This procured him some reputation, and, what was afterwards of much importance, the acquaintance of the illustrious Edmund Burke. During his stay in Dublin, he probably continued to cultivate his art, but no particular work can now be discovered. After a residence of seven or eight months in Dublin, an opportunity offered of accompanying some part of Mr. Burke' s family to London, which he eagerly embraced. This took place in 1764, and on his arrival, Mr. Burke recommended nim to his friends, and procured for him his first employment, that of copying in oil drawings by the Athenian Stuart. In 1765, Mr. Burke and his other friends furnished him with the means of visiting Italy, where he surveyed the noble monuments of art then in that country, with the eye of an acute, and often very just critic, but where, at the same time, his residence was rendered uncomfortable by those unhappy irregularities of temper, which, more or less, obscured all his prospects in life.

When a design was formed of decorating St. Paul’s cathedral with the works of our most eminent painters and sculptors, Barry was to have been employed, and his subject was “The Jews rejecting Christ, when Pilate entreats his release,” but the scheme was discouraged, and its probable success can now be only a subject of speculation. In 1775, he appeared as an author, in a publication entitled, an “Inquiry into the real and imaginary obstructions to the acquisition of the arts in England,” in answer to Winckleman. In this treatise there are some fanciful opinions, but upon the whole it is the best and most dispassionate of all the productions of his pen, and a masterly defence of the capabilities of English artists under proper encouragement; and it contains many just remarks on that state of public taste which is favourable to the perfection of the art. The same train of ideas has been since pursued by Mr. Shee, in his poetical works; an artist, whose productions of the pencil, great and superior as they are, suggest a doubt whether if he had been a writer, and only a writer, he would not have been the first man of his age, in the philosophy of the art, in exquisite fancy and taste, and that variety of imagery and illustration which belongs only to poets of the higher class.

After the scheme of decorating St. Paul’s had been given up, it was proposed to employ the same artists in decorating the great room in the Adelphi, belonging to the society of arts, but this was refused by the artists themselves, probably because they were to be remunerated in equal shares, by an exhibition of the pictures. We cannot much wonder at their declining a scheme, which promised to reduce them to this kind of level, and would indeed imply an equality in every other respect. Three years afterwards, however, in 1777, Mr. Barry undertook the whole, and his offer was accepted. It would have been singular, indeed, if such an offer had been rejected, as his labour was to be gratuitous. He has been heard to say, that at the time of his undertaking this work, he had only sixteen shillings in his pocket; and that in the prosecution of his labour, he was often after painting all day obliged to sketch or engrave at night some design for the print-sellers, which was to supply him with the means of his frugal subsistence. He has recorded some of his prints as done at this time, such as his Job, dedicated to Mr. Burke; birth of Venus; Polemon; head of lord Chatham; king Lear, &c. Of his terms with the society, we know only that the choice of subjects was allowed him, and the society was to defray the expence of canvas, colours, and models. In the course of his labours, however, he found that he had been somewhat too disinterested, and wrote a letter to sir George Saville, soliciting such a subscription among the friends of the society as might amount to 100l. a year. He computed that he should finish the whole in two years, and pay back the 200l. to the subscribers by means of an exhibition; but he very candidly added, that if the exhibition should produce nothing, the subscribers would Jose their money. This subscription did not take effect, and the work employed him seven years; at the end of which, the society granted him two exhibitions, and at different periods voted him fifty guineas, their gold medal, and again 200 guineas, and a seat among them. Of this great undertaking, a series of six pictures, representing the progress of society, and civilization among mankind, it has been said “that it surpasses any work which has been executed within these two centuries, and considering the difficulties with which the artist had to struggle, any that is now extant.” As the production of one man, it is undoubtedly entitled to high praise, but it has all Barry’s defects in drawing and colouring, defects the more remarkable, because in his printed correspondence and lectures, his theory on these subjects is accurate and unexceptionable. These pictures were afterwards engraved, but what they produced is not known. In 1792, however, he deposited 700/, in the funds, and to this wealth he never afterwards made any great addition, for he never possessed more than 60l. a year from the funds, a sum barely sufficient to pay the rent and other charges of his house, but as his domestic oeconomy was of the meanest kind, this sum was probably not insufficient.

Soon after this event, the earl of Buchan set on foot a subscription, which amounted to about 1000l. with which his friends purchased an annuity for his life; but his oeath prevented his reaping any benefit from this design. The manner of his death is thus related by his biographer: 44 On the evening of Thurday, Feb. 6, 1806, he was seized as he entered the house where he usually dint-d, with the cold fit of a pleuritic fever, of so intense a degree, that all his faculties were suspended, and he unable to articulate or move. Some cordial was administered to him, and on his coming a little to himself, he was taken in a coach to the door of his own house, which, the keyhole being plugged with dirt and pebbles, as had been often done before, by the malice, or perhaps the roguery of boys in the neighbourhood, it was impossible to open. The night being dark, and he shivering under the progress of his disease, hisfriends thought it advisable to drive away without loss of time to the hospitable mansion of Mr. Bononni. By the kindness of that good family, a bed was procured in a neighbouring house, to which he was immediately conveyed. Here he desired to be left, and locked himself up, unfortunately, for forty hours, without the least medical assistance. What took place in the mean time, he could give but little account of, as he represented himself to be delirious, and only recollected his being tortured with a burning pain in his side, and with difficulty of breathing. In this short time was the deathblow given, which, by the prompt and timely aid of copious bleedings, might have been averted; but without this aid, such had been the re-action of the hot fit succeeding the rigours, and the violence of the inflammation on the pleura, that an effusion of lymph had ' taken place, as appeared afterwards upon dissection. In the afternoon of Saturday, Feb. 8, he rose and crawled forth to relate his complaint to the writer of this account. He was pale, breathless, and tottering, as he entered the room, with a dull pain in his side, a cough short and incessant, and a pulse quick and feeble. Succeeding remedies proved of little avail. With exacerbations and remissions of fever, he lingered to the 22d of February, when he expired." His remains, after lying in state in the great room of the society of arts, Acielphi, was interred in St. Paul’s cathedral, with solemnity, and the attendance of many of his friends and admirers, among whom was not one artist.

For Barry’s character we may refer to an elaborate article by his biographer. To us it appears that with unquestionable talents, original genius, and strong enthusiasm for his art, he was never able to accomplish what he projected, or to practise all that he professed. Few men appear to have had more correct notions of the principles of art, or to have departed more frequently from them. His ambition during life was to excel no less as a literary theorist, than as a practical artist, and it must be allowed that in both characters he has left specimens sufficient to rank him very high in the English school. Where he has failed in either, we should be inclined to attribute it to the peculiar frame of his mind, which, in his early as well as mature years, appears to have been deficient in soundness: alternately agitated by conceit or flattery; and irritated by contradiction, however gentle, and suspicion, however groundless. This was still more striking to every one conversant in mental derangement, when he exhibited at last, that most common of all symptoms, a dread of plots and conspiracies. This went so far at one time, that when robbed, as he said, of a sum of money, he exculpated common thieves and housebreakers, and attributed the theft to his brother artists, jealous of his reputation; yet the money was afterwards found where he had deposited it. The same unhappy malady may account for his many personal eccentricities of conduct, over which a veil may now be thrown. Nor is it necessary to specify his literary publications, as they were all collected in two volumes 4to, published in 1809, under the title of “The Works of James Barry,” with a life, from which the present sketch has been principally taken.

His person was tall, and of good proportion, and the structure of his frame seemed well adapted to support the vigorous exertions of his mind. Houdon, an artist of merit, has finished an excellent bust of him. “He leaves,” says his biographer, “each of his relations a father to bewail, his friends an irreparable loss to regret, the learned of all countries an example to follow, and the men of all times a model to imitate.”

, an eminent English engraver, son of Isaac Basire, who was an engraver and printer, was born Oct. 6, 1730; and bred from infancy to his father’s profession, which he practised with great reputation for sixty years. He studied under the direction of Mr. Richard Dalton; was with him at Rome made several drawings from the pictures of Raphael, &c. at the time that Mr. Stuart, Mr. Brand Hollis, and sir Joshua Reynolds, were there. He was appointed engraver to the society of antiquaries about 1760; and to the royal society about 1770. As a specimen of his numerous works, it may be sufficient to refer to the beautiful plates of the “Vetusta Monumenta,” published by the society of antiquaries, and to Mr. Cough’s truly valuable “Sepulchral Monuments.” With the author of that splendid work he was most deservedly a favourite. When he had formed the plan, and hesitated on actually committing it to the press, Mr. Gough says, “Mr. Basire’s specimens of drawing and engraving gave me so much satisfaction, that it was impossible to resist the impulse of carrying such a design into execution.” The royal portraits and other beautiful plates in the “Sepulchral Monuments” fully justified the idea which the author had entertained of his engraver’s talents; and are handsomely acknowledged by Mr. Gough. The Plate of “Le Champ de Drap d'Or” was finished in 1774; a plate so large, that paper was obliged to be made on purpose, which to this time is called “antiquarian paper. Besides the numerous plates which he engraved for the societies, he was engaged in a great number of public and private works, which bear witness to the fidelity of his burin. He engraved the portraits of Fielding and Hogarth in 1762; earl Camden, in 1766, after sir Joshua Reynolds; Pylades and Orestes, 1770, from a picture by West; portraits of the Rev. John Watson, and sir George Warren’s family; portraits also of dean Swift, and Dr. Parnell, 1774; sir James Burrow, 1780; Mr. Bowyer, 1782; portraits also of Dr. Munro, Mr. Gray, Mr. Thonxpson, Lady Stanhope, Sir George Savile, Bishop Hoadly, Rev. Dr. Pegge, Mr. Price, AlgernonSydney, Andrew Marvell, William Camden, William Brereton,1790,&c. &c.; Captain Cook’s portrait, and other plates, for his First and Second Voyages a great number of plates for Stuart’s Athens (which are well drawn). In another branch of his art, the Maps for general Roy’s” Roman Antiquities in Britain“are particularly excellent. He married, first, Anne Beaupuy; and, secondly, Isabella Turner. He died Sept. 6, 1802, in his seventy-third year, and was buried in the vault under Pentonville chapel. The ingenuity and integrity of this able artist are inherited by his eldest son, of whose works it may be enough to mention only the” Cathedrals," published by the society of antiquaries, from the exquisite drawings by Mr. John Carter. A third James Basirc, born in 1796, has already given several proofs of superior excellence in the arts of drawing and engraving.

, one of the greatest painters of the last century, was born Feb. 5, 1708, at Lucca. His father, a goldsmith, devoted him to that art, to which he had but little inclination. It afforded him, however, occasion to exercise himself in drawing, and to exhibit his excellent talent for painting, and the first specimen of his skill which attracted notice was a golden cup of exquisite workmanship, which he executed so satisfactorily, that his capacity was thought to be far superior to the trade of a goldsmith: and, at the instance of his godfather Alexander Q,uinigi, several patriotic noblemen agreed to send him to the Roman academy of painting, at their common expence. We are told that until he had reached his seventh year, he was and deformed, and had not the power to turn his. head on either side without moving his whole body, and that throughout life his appearance was such as bespoke no extraordinary genius. When his friends took charge of his education as an artist, father Diversi, of the order of Philippines, and the abbe Fatinelli, envoy at Rome from the republic of Lucca, to whom he was recommended, took him to Sebastian Concha and Augustine Masucci, who were at that time the most renowned masters of the Roman school, that he might make choice of one of them for his tutor and guide. But the antiques, and Raphael’s works, from the very first, made so strong an impression on his mind, that he chose rather to avoid the modern manner, and form himself entirely on the old. The sensibility with which nature had endowed him, made him feel that there could be but one true manner in the practice of the art, and that none of the modern, which depart so far from the antique, could be the right. Accordingly, rejecting the advice of his masters, he devoted himself to the study of the antiques and the works of Raphael d'Urbino. How diligent he was in this practice is seen in the heads still in being, which he copied from the Dispute on the Sacrament, a copy of the school of Athens, painted in oil and not quite finished, and the various commissions he received from foreigners for drawings of the best originals.

Batoni' s habitation was not only the chief residence of the Genius of painting at Rome, but her sister Music dwelt there in equal state. His amiable daughter Rufina, who was at too early an age snatched away by death, was one of the completest judges of vocal music in all Italy; and no person of quality came to Rome, who was not equally desirous of seeing the paintings of Batoni, and of hearing his daughters sing. Among these were also the grand duke of Russia and his duchess. He here saw an unfinished portrait of a nobleman belonging to his suite, which pleased him so much, that he gave him orders to paint his own. But, as the departure of the illustrious travellers was so very near, he set his hand to the work on the spot. In the few moments that were delightfully employed by the imperial guest in hearing the songs of the painter’s daughter, the artist himself was busy in sketching his picture with so striking a likeness, that the grand duchess too spared so much time from her urgent affairs in the last days of her stay, as to have her picture drawn.

This high character of Ratoni, which we have considerably abridged from the last edition of this dictionary, was taken from Boni’s Eloge in a German Journal, and although we have endeavoured to keep down the enthusiasm of our predecessor, yet perhaps even now the article is disproportioned to the merit of the object, and to our scale of lives. It is therefore necessary to subjoin Mr. Fuseli’s opinion, which seems moderated by taste and judgment. Mr. Fuseli says, that Batoni “was not a very learned artist, nor did he supply his want of knowledge by deep reflection. His works do not bear the appearance of an attentive study of the antique, or of the works of Raphael and the other great masters of Italy: but nature seemed to have destined him for a painter, and he followed her impulse. He was not wanting either in his delineation of character, in accuracy, or in pleasing representation; and if he had not a grand conception, he at least knew how to describe well what he had conceived. He would have been, in any age, reckoned a very estimable painter; at the time in which he lived, he certainly shone conspicuously. His name is known throughout Europe, and his works are every where in estimation. Men^s, who was a more learned man, was his rival; but, less favoured by nature, if he enjoyed a higher reputation, he owed it less perhaps to any real superiority, than to the commendations of Winkelman.”

, a French dramatic writer of modern celebrity, was born at Paris, Jan. 24, 1732. His father was a watchmaker, and at the age of twenty-one himself invented an improvement in watchmaking, which being contested by an eminent artist, was decided in favour of young Beaumarchais by the academy of sciences. Being passionately fond of music, and especially of the harp, he introduced some improvements in this instrument, which, with his excellent performance, gained him admittance to Mesdames, the daughters of Louis XV. to give them lessons, and this was the origin of his fortune. He lost two wives successively, and then gained three considerable law-suits. The papers which he published concerning each of these causes, excited great attention. He had also an affair of honour with a duke, in consequence of which he was sent to Fort L‘Eve’que. He was afterwards employed in some political transactions by the ministers Maurepas and Vergennes. He supported the scheme for the caisse d'escompte, or bank of discount, which he vainly thought to have made a rival to that of England: but he was more successful, although after much opposition, in procuring the adoption of a scheme for a fire-pump to supply the city of Paris with water. A plan, also, concerning poor women, was executed at Lyons, and gained him the thanks of the merchants of that city. After the death of Voltaire, he purchased the whole of his manuscripts, and not being able to print them in France, established a press at Kell, where they were printed in a very magnificent manner with Baskerville’s types.

, an ingenious artist and antiquary, was the son of a respectable attorney in the West Riding of Yorkshire. He was early apprenticed as a housepainter to Mr. George Fleming of Wakefield, from whom he derived his skill in drawing and limning, as well as imbibed a love for the study of antiquities. To these he added heraldic and genealogical knowledge, to all which he applied himself, in his leisure hours, with such unwearied diligence, that his collection, together with the works of his own hands, became at length very considerable. Scarcely any object arrested his curiosity, particucularly if an antique, of which he did not make a drawing, and scarcely a church or a ruin in the vicinities of the places of his abode, that he did not preserve either in pencil or water-colours. Some years before his death he obtained a patent for a species of hardened crayons, which would bear the knife, and carry a point like a pencil; and about the same time he was elected a fellow of the Society of Antiquaries of London. But what contributed most to make him known to those who were unacquainted with him in any other branch, was his extensive information respecting genealogical subjects, in consequence of which he frequently had the arrangement of the pedigrees of some of the first families, which he was enabled to execute from visitation books, and other authentic documents, which fell into his hands. Few men possessed more intelligence respecting the antiquity and descents of the principal families in the inland adjacent counties, and of various others more remote from him. It is much to his credit, likewise, that his industry in collecting could only be exceeded by his willingness to impart any information which he had received. Mr. Beck with died Feb. 17, 1786. Previous to his death, he had compiled “A Walk in and about the city of York,” an the plan of Mr. Gostling’s “Walk in and about the city of Canterbury,” but we have not heard that it has been published.

, an artist, the son of Peter Begyn, a sculptor, was born at Haerlem, in 1620, and was the disciple of Adrian Ostade. If he did not equal his master, he was at least the best of his disciples. He set out in his profession with credit, and proceeded in it for some years with sufficient success; but he grew too fond of a dissipated life, and at last his morals were so depraved, that his father, after many ineffectual remonstrances, disowned him. For this reason he cast off his father’s name, and assumed that of Bega; his early pictures being marked with the former, and his latter works with the other. He had a fine pencil, and a transparent colour; and his performances are placed among the works of the best artists. He took the plague from a woman with whom he was deeply enamoured and he shewed so much sincerity of affection, that, notwithstanding the expostulations of all his friends and physicians, he would attend her to the last moments of her life, and imbibed from her the same fatal distemper, of which he died in a few days after her, Aug. 27, 1664. He is also classed among engravers, having etched several drolleries, and a set of thirty-four prints, representing alehouse scenes, &c.

, an engraver of Nuremberg, who flourished about the middle of the sixteenth century, was either instructed, or became an imitator of Henry Aldegrever, and Albert Durer, and like them, engraved on wood as well as copper, and also etched some few plates; but these last, by far the most indifferent, are also the smallest part of his works. If his style of engraving be not original, it is at least an excellent and spirited imitation of that which was adopted by the preceding masters of the country in which he resided. His pictures, for he was a painter, as well as his engravings, were held in such high estimation, that the poets of that age celebrated him in their poems, calling him in Latin, Bohemus. He was certainly a man of much genius, and possessed great fertility of invention. But the Gothic taste which so generally prevailed in Germany at this time, is much too prevalent in his works. His draperies are stiff, and loaded with a multiplicity of short, inelegant folds. His drawing of the naked figure, which he is fond of introducing, though mannered, is often very correct, and sometimes masterly. His heads, and the other extremities of his figures, are carefully determined, and often possess much merit. Of his numerous works, the following may be mentioned as specimens; on wood, a set of prints for a book entitled “Biblicae Histories artinciossissimce depictae,” Francfort, 1537; and on copper, “History of the creation and fall of man:” “The labours of Hercules:” “The virtues and vices,” &c. He had a brother, Bartholomew Beham, who resided principally at Rome. He was also an engraver, and from such of his prints as have been ascertained, which is somewhat difficult, he appears to have been a very excellent artist, and one of the superior scholars of Marc Antonio, whose style of engraving he imitated with great success. His drawing is correct and masterly; his beads are characteristic, and the other extremities of his figures well marked.

, an artist, was born at Ravensburgh in Suabia, in 1665, and was taught the first rudiments of his art by his father, who was a mathematician, and practised painting only for his amusement, and explained the principles of it to his son. By an assiduous practice for some years, Beisch proved a good artist, and was employed at the court of Munich, to paint the battles which the elector Maximilian Emanuel had fought in Hungary. While the elector was absent on some of his expeditions, Beisch embraced that opportunity to visit Italy, and took the most effectual methods for his improvement, by studying and copying those celebrated spots which have always claimed general admiration. He had three different manners: his first, before his journey to Italy, was true, but too dark; his second had more clearness and more truth; and his last, still more clear, was likewise weaker than all. The scenes of his landscapes, however, are agreeably chosen, and very picturesque: his touch is light, tender, and full of spirit; and his style of composition frequently resembled that of Gaspar Poussin, or Salvator Rosa. Solimene, a superior artist, did not disdain to copy some of Beisch' s landscapes. This artist died in 1748, aged eighty-three.

, an eminent engraver, was born at Florence in 1610. His father was a goldsmith, and instructed his son in the same business; but while, for the purposes of his trade, he was learning to draw, some of Callot’s prints, which he had accidentally seen, gave a turn to his disposition, and he prevailed on his father to allow him to learn engraving. His first master, Canta Gallina, had also been the master of Callot, and our young pupil, after contenting himself for some time with an imitation of Callot, struck out a manner of his own, equally, if not more remarkable for freedom and spirit. In 1642 he went to Paris, where he formed an acquaintance with Israel Sylvestre, then newly returned from Rome, and was much employed by the uncle of that artist. Some time after, cardinal Richelieu engaged him to go to Arras, to make drawings of the siege, &c. of that town by the royal army, which he engraved at his return. From a considerable residence at Paris he returned to Florence, where the grand duke gave him a pension, and appointed him to instruct his son, the prince Cosmo, in the art of design; but his progress in his profession had been for some time much impeded by continual head-aches, which at last terminated his life in 1664. Without entering into the dispute so frequently agitated, respecting the comparative merits of De la Bella and Callot, it may be affirmed that De la Bella drew very correctly, and with great taste. His works manifest much genius and fertility of invention. The fire and animation which appears in them compensates for their lightness; and some degree of slightness seems pardonable in an artist who is said to have engraved no less than fourteen hundred plates.

, an eminent artist, was the son of Giacopo Bellini, also an artist, and born at Venice, 1421. He was instructed by his father in the art of painting in distemper as well as in oil. He was accounted the most knowing of any artist in his time, and was employed by the doge to paint the hall of the great council; and for others of the nobility he executed several noble works. His reputation was at that time so extensive, that it reached the Ottoman court; and the emperor Mahomet II. having seen some of his performances, invited him to Constantinople, received him with great respect, sat to him for his portrait, and engaged him there for some time, giving him many rich presents, and many marks of his regard. But the emperor having ordered the head of a slave to be cut off before the face of Gentile, to convince him of an incorrectness in a picture of the decollation of St. John, he was so affected, and so terrified at the sight, that he never enjoyed peace of mind till he obtained leave to return to his own country. Mahomet, to do him honour, put a gold chain about his neck, and wrote to the senate of Venice in his favour, which at his return procured him a pension for life, and the honourable distinction of the order of St. Mark. Vasari mentions a Sea-fight, painted by this master, which had extraordinary merit, in the variety of the figures, the truth of the expressions, the great propriety of the attitudes, the perspective distances of the vessels, and the grandeur of the composition. He died 1501.

, also a landscape painter, and probably an ancestor of the preceding, was born at Utrecht in 1630, and was one of the best scholars of Herman Sachtleven, or Zaftleven. For improvement he afterwards visited Rome, and sketched every beautiful scene that occurred to him as he travelled in the neighbourhood of Rome, and particularly about Tivoli, by wnich means he furnished himself with excellent materials for his future compositions. He then settled at Nuremberg, where his principal works were long to be seen, and where he died Nov. 10, 1708. His colouring is lively and natural, if not sometimes a little too green; but his figures, and the boats, barges, and other vessels, which he always introduces on the rivers, or stationed near the banks, are well designed, and touched with spirit. His trees, indeed, are somewhat stiff and formal; but in general his pictures have a pleasing effect, as the distances are conducted with judgment, and every part handled in a masterly manner. The lights and shadows of his landscapes are distributed with singular skill; and his skies are usually clear, warm, and natural. His son John George, who died in 1723, was also an artist of some eminence, especially for his battle-pieces.

, an eminent artist, was born at Haerlem, in 1624, and was taught the first principles of painting by his father, Peter Van Haerlem, an artist of very mean abilities, whose subjects were fish, confectionary, vases of silver, and other objects of still life; but he afterwards had the good fortune to have some of the best masters of that time for his instructors, and successively was the disciple of Grebber, Vangoyen, Mojaart, Jan Wils, and Weeninx. He had an easy expeditious manner of painting, and an inexpressible variety and beauty in the choice of sites for his landscapes, executing them with a surprising degree of neatness and truth. He possessed a clearness and strength of judgment, and a wonderful power and ease in expressing his ideas; and although his subjects were of the lower kind, yet his choice of nature was judicious, and he gave to every subject as much of beauty and elegance as it would admit. The leafing of his trees is exquisitely and freely touched; his skies are clear; and his clouds float lightly, as if supported by air. The distinguishing characters of the pictures of Berchem, are the breadth and just distribution of the lights the grandeur of his masses of light and shadow; the natural ease and simplicity in the attitudes of his figures, expressing their several characters; the just degradation of his distances; the brilliancy and harmony, as well as the transparency, of his colouring; the correctness and true perspective of his design; and the elegance of his composition: and, where any of those marks are wanting, no authority ought to be sufficient to ascribe any picture to him. He painted every part of his subjects so extremely well, as to render it difficult to determine in which he excelled most; his trees, buildings, waters, rocks, hills, cattle, and figures, being all equally admirable.

, a French artist, who practised in England, was born in France, in 1659, and at the age of fifteen was placed under the care of La Fosse, with whom his improvement was so considerable, that in three years he was qualified to be employed in one of the royal palaces. In 1681 he went to England, where he worked under Rambour, a French painter of architecture; and afterwards he was engaged in different works for several of the English nobility. The ceiling in the chapel of Trinity college, in Oxford, was painted by this master; he also painted the staircase at the duke of Schomberg’s in London, and the summer-house at Ranelagh. His drawings in the academy were much approved but towards the latter part of his life, he only painted small pieces in the historical style, for which the subjects were taken from fabulous history; -ind his last performance was a Bacchanalian, to which he affixed his name the very day before he died, in 1720.

, an Italian poetess, was born April 15, 1703, and appeared from her infancy capable of making a figure in the literary world. Her father, although of a genteel family of Piedmont, was ruined by various misfortunes, and at length setup a shoemaker’s shop in Venice, where he acquired some property. His daughter Louisa, one of a numerous family, discovered first a taste for embroidery, then for drawing and painting, in which she was instructed by the celebrated female artist Rosalba Camera; nor did she make less progress in literature, philosophy, and languages. She learned French of her father, and Latin under an excellent master, and in the course of this study she translated some of the comedies of Terence. Having conceived a particular taste for dramatic poetry, she received some instructions from Apostolo Zeno. As soon as her talents were known, places both lucrative and honourable were offei'ed to her at Rome, Poland, Spain, and Milan, but she would not quit Venice, her native country, and continued her studies until the age of thirty-five, when she married count Gaspard Gozzi, a noble Venetian, known in the literary world for his Italian dramas and other works. She lived with him very happily, and bore five children, whom she educated with great care. The time of her death is not mentioned. Her principal works are, 1. “Agide re di Sparta,” a musical drama, Venice, 1725, 12mo. 2. “LaTeba,” a tragedy, ibid. 1728, 8vo. 3. “L'Elenia,” musical drama, ibid. 1730, 12mo. 4. “Le Avventure del poeta,” comedy, ibid. 1730, 8vo. 5. “Elettra,” tragedy, ibid. 1743, 12mo. 6. “La Bradamante,” musical drama, ibid. 1747, 12mo. 7. “Le Commedie di Terenzio tradotto in versi sciolti,” ibid. 1733, 8vo. 8. Translations from Racine and other dramatic poets of France. 9. “Componimenti poetici dc-lle piu illustri rimatrici d'ogni secolo,” ibid. 1726, 12mo. Many of her sonnets and lesser pieces appeared from time to time in various collections.

One of Bernini’s first works was a portrait in marble of the prelate Montajo, a likeness so striking, that it was said to be Montajo petrified. He afterwards made busts of the pope, some of the cardinals, and some large figures after nature; a St. Laurence, a groupe of ^neas and Anchises, and David about to sling the stone at Goliath, of which our great artist sir Joshua Reynolds observes, that Bernini has given a very mean expression to David, representing him as biting his under lip, which is far from being a general expression, and still farther from being dignified but Bernini, who was as yet young, might have seen it in one or two instances, and mistook accident for generality. He was but in his eighteenth year when he executed his Apollo and Daphne, a work, from which, as sir Joshua remarks, the world justly expected he would rival the best productions of ancient Greece, but this was not ultimately the case. We are told, however, that when, about the close of his life, he surveyed this groupe, he allowed that since that time he had made very little progress. In truth his style was now more pure, and had less of manner in it than afterwards.

It would be perhaps tedious to enumerate all the productions of Bernini’s genius at this time, but the following are the principal the Barberini palace the campanile of Su Peter the model of the tomb of the countess Matilda, which was executed by his pupils and that of his benefactor pope Urban VIII. When his reputation reached England, Charles I. was desirous of having a bust of himself by an artist of such eminence, and sent him three portraits by Vandyke of different positions. By this means Bernini was enabled to make an excellent likeness, with which the king was so pleased that he took from his finger a diamond ring valued at six thousand crowns, and sent it to Bernini to adorn the hand that could perform such wonders. About the same time an Englishman came to Italy, and had his bust executed by our artist, for which he also paid six thousand crowns. The bust of Charles I. was originally placed in Greenwich hospital, but is now in Westminster hall, in a circular recess over the stairs, leading to the chancellor’s chamber, between the court of chancery and that of the king’s bench, yet it is doubted whether this be really Bernini’s celebrated bust, or only one taken from it. Vertue was of opinion that the bust now existing was of an earlier date, and that Bernini’s was 'destroyed during the civil war.

In 1644, cardinal Mazarin, who had known Bernini at Rome, endeavoured, but in vain, to induce him to visit France, and offered him, on the part of Louis XIV. places to the value of 12,000 crowns. Yet he was not happy at home. When Urban VIII. his steady patron, died, and Innocent X. succeeded, envy at his superior talents and high favour with the pontiff, began to appear. The campanile which he had constructed for St. Peter’s, over the portico, which it appeared was not on a secure foundation, threatened to fall, and immediately it was industriously reported that the weight of the campanile would endanger the portico, and perhaps even the dome itself. Although all this was exaggerated, it became necessary to remove the campanile, and the enemies of Bernini triumphed, while the pope, prejudiced against him, deprived him of one part of his labours, and allowed the rest to be suspended. In the mean time he executed for the church of St. Mary the fine groupe of St. Theresa and the angel, one of his most admired works; and became at length a favourite with the pope by a stratagem of his holiness’s nephew. The pope, having an intention of building a new fountain in the piazza. Navona, consulted all the artists of Rome, with the exception of Bernini, whom he affected to forget but his nephew prince Ludovisi having procured a model from our artist, contrived to shew it to the pope, who was so much struck with it, as to receive Bernini into favour, and appoint him to the work, which he executed with his usual taste. About the same time he built the palace of Monte Citorio.

Although he had refused to come to France, Louis XIV. was still desirous to avail himself of his talents, as well as to pay him a compliment, by consulting him on the restoration of the Louvre. His minister, Colbert, accordingly sent him the plans of that palace, and requested him to put upon paper “some of those admirable thoughts which were so familiar to him.” Bernini immediately made a sketch for the new building, which afforded so much satisfaction to the king, that he wrote to inform him of the very great desire he had to see, and become acquainted, with so illustrious a character, provided this did not interfere with his engagements to the pope, or his personal convenience. Such condescension our artist could no longer resist; and although now in his sixty-eighth year, departed from Rome, in 1665, with one of his sons, two of his pupils, and a numerous suite. No artist ever travelled with so much pomp or pleasure. All the princes through whose dominions he passed loaded him with presents. In France he was received and complimented by the magistrates at the gates of each city, and that even at Lyons, where it was customary to restrict such a compliment to princes of the blood only. As he approached Paris, the king’s maitre d'hotel was sent to meet him, with instructions to do the honours of receiving him and conducting him every where. This gentleman, M. de Chautelon, was so sensible of the importance of his commission, that he wrote a joutnal of all his proceedings while in company with Bernini, a curious work still preserved in manuscript. On his arrival, our artist was conducted to a hotel prepared for him, and where Colbert visited him as representative of the king, to whom he was afterwards introduced at St. Germains, received with great honour, had a long conversation with the king, and, as well as his son, was admitted to the minister’s table.

Bernini now began his operations on the Louvre, but he did not see, as has been reported, Perrault’s celebrated colonnade, the design of which was not presented to the king until after his departure, nor was it finished until live years after, so that the surprize with which it is said to have struck him, and the liberal praise he bestowed upon it, to which Voltaire has given currency in his poems, are founded on a mistake. During Bernini’s five months residence at Paris, he laid the foundation, from his own design, of the colonnade of the Louvre, which was to join it to the Tuileries by a gallery but as this could have been executed only by destroying all that had been already built, Perrault’s plan was afterwards^adopted: In the mean time, he made a bust of Louis XIV. who frequently sat to him, and took pleasure in his conversation, which sometimes appears to have been rather familiar. One day after his majesty had sat a whole hour, the artist, delighted with so great an honour, exclaimed “A miracle a great monarch, young, and a Frenchman, has sat quiet for an hour” Another time, wishing to see more of the king’s forehead, he put back the curis of hair which covered the place, and said, “Your majesty can shew your face to all the world;” and the courtiers, always intent upon some frivolous compliment, made a fashion of this disposition of the hair, which they called “la coeffure a la Bernin”

Bernini, however, was not wholly reconciled to his errand here. The“great work for which he came was not carried on after his designs, and he is said to have met with some disgust, which inclined him to return to Rome. Accordingly, on pretence that the pope required his presence, he took leave of the king, who made him a present of ten thousand crowns, and settled a pension on him of two thousand, and another of four hundred on his son. The expenses of his return were also defrayed by his majesty, who, with a view to immortalize the visit, caused a medal to be struck, with a portrait of the artist, and on the reverse the muses of his art, with this inscription,” Singularis in singulis, in omnibus unicus." Before his departure, Bernini engaged to make an equestrian statue of Louis XIV. in marble, and of colossal proportion, which he finished in four years but whether from its having no resemblance of the king, or from some fault found with the composition, it was, soon after its arrival, changed into Curtius leaping into the gulph, and is now in the gardens at Versailles.

As an artist, although he must ever stand high, yet his reputation did not increase with his years. He was of opinion that in order to be distinguished, the artist must place himself above all rules, and strike out a new path for himself, and this he certainly did in some degree, but his success was neither uniform nor permanent. But his own confessions, when at the close of life he reviewed his works, are sufficient to silence all criticism. He then discovered that in endeavouring to remove from his mind the restraint of rules, and all imitation of the antique and of nature, he fell into a manner; that he mistook facility of execution for the inspiration of genius, and that in endeavouring to heighten the expression of the graceful, he became affected, and encumbered beauty with a superfluity of ornament. In the mean time, however, the vast influence of his name produced many imitators, and his merit, great as it may still be seen in his existing works, was rather unfavourable to the advancement of the arts. v - The memoirs of Charles Perrault, published in 1759, contain many curious particulars of Bernini.

Da Cortona, an eminent artist, was born at Cortona, in 1596, and according to some writers, was a disciple of Andrea Commodi, though others affirm that he was the disciple of JBaccio C'iarpi and Argenville says, he was successively the disciple of both. He went young to Rome, and applied himself diligently to study the antiques, the works of Raphael, Buonaroti, and Polidoro by which he so improved his taste and his hand, that he distinguished himself in a degree superior to any of the artists of his time. And it seemed astonishing that two such noble designs as were the Rape of the Sabines, and the Battle of Alexander, which he painted in the Palazzo Sacchetti, conld be the product of so young an artist, when it was observed, that for invention, disposition, elevation of thought, and an excellent tone of colour, they were equal to the performances of the best masters. He worked with remarkable ease and freedom; his figures are admirably grouped; his distribution is elegant; and the Chiaroscuro is judiciously observed. Nothing can be more grand than his ornaments and where landscape is introduced, it is designed in a superior taste and through his whole compositions there appears an uncommon grace. But De Piles observes, that it was not such a grace as was the portion of Raphael and Correggio but a general grace, consisting rather in a habit of making the airs of his heads always agreeable, than in a choice of expressions suitable to each subject. By the best judges it seems to be agreed, that although this master was frequently incorrect though not always judicious in his expressions though irregular in his draperies, and apt to design his figures too short and too heavy yet, by the magnificence of his composition, the delicate airs of his faces, the grandeur of his decorations, and the astonishing suavity and gracefulness of the whole together, he must be allowed to have been the mo-t agreeable mannerist that any age hath produced. He had an eye for colour; but his colouring in fresco is far superior to what he performed in oil nor do his easel pictures appear as finished as might be expected from so great a master, when compared what what he painted in a larger size. Some of the most capital works of Pietro, in fresco, are in the Barberini palace at Rome, and the Palazzo Pitti at Florence. Of his oil-pictures, perhaps none excels the altar-piece of Ananias healing St. Paul, in the church of the Concezione at Rome. Alexander VII. created him knight of the golden spur. The grand duke Ferdinand II. also conferred on him several marks of his esteem. That prince one day admiring the figure of a child weeping, which he had just painted, he only gave it one touch of the pencil, and it appeared laughing then, with another touch, he put it in its former state “Prince,” said Berretini, “you see how easily children laugh and cry.” He was so laborious, that the gout, with which he was tormented, did not prevent him rrom working but his sedentary life, in conjunction with his extreme application, augmented that cruel disease, of which he died in 1669.

, an ingenious Scotch artist, was one of those who owe more to nature than to instruction of his parentage we have no account, but he appears to have been born about 1730, and at the usual time bound apprentice to Mr. Proctor, a seal engraver in Edinburgh. How long he remained with him is uncertain, but for some years after he began business for himself, he pursued the same branch with his teacher. At this time, however, his designs were so elegant, and his mode of cutting so clean and sharp, as soon to make' him be taken notice of as a superior artist. At length by constantly studying and admiring the style of the antique entaglios, he resolved to attempt something of that sort himself; and the subject he chose was a head of sir Isaac Newton, which he executed in a style of such superior excellence, as astonished all who had an opportunity of observing it. But as he was a man of the most unaffected modesty, and as this head was given to a friend in a retired situation in life, it was known only to a few in the private circle of his acquaintance; and for many years was scarcely ever seen by any one who could justly appreciate its merit. Owing to these circumstances, Mr. Berry was permitted to waste his time, during the best part of his life, in cutting heraldic seals, for which he found a much greater demand than for fine heads, at such a price as could indemnify him for the time that was necessarily spent in bringing works of such superior excellence to perfection. He often told the writer of this account, that though some gentlemen pressed him very much to make fine heads for them, yet he always found that, when he gave in his bill for an article of that kind, though he had charged perhaps not more than half the money that he could have earned in the same time at his ordinary work, they always seemed to think the price too high, which made him exceedingly averse to employment of that sort.

Besides the heads above named, he also executed some full length figures both of men and other animals, in a style of superior elegance. But that attention to the interests of a numerous family, which a man of sound principles, as Mr. Berry was, could never allow him to lose sight of, made him forego these amusing exertions, for the more lucrative, though less pleasing employment, of cutting heraldic seals, which may be said to have been his constant employment from morning to night, for forty years together, with an assiduity that has few examples in modern times. In this department, he was without dispute the first artist of his time but even here, that modesty which was so peculiarly his own, and that invariable desire to give full perfection to every thing he put out of his hands, prevented him from drawing such emoluments from his labours as they deserved. Of this the following anecdote will serve as an illustration, and as an additional testimony of his very great skill. A certain noble duke, when he succeeded to his estate, was desirous of having a seal cut with his arms, &.c. properly blazoned upon it. But as there were no less than thirty-two compartments in the shield, which was of necessity confined to a very small space, so as to leave room for the supporters, and other ornaments, within the compass of a seal of an ordinary size, he found it a matter of great difficulty to get it executed. Though a native of Scotland himself, the duke never expected to find a man of the first-rate eminence in Edinburgh but applied to the most eminent seal-engravers in London and Paris, all of whom declined it as a thing beyond their power. At this time Berry, of whom he had scarcely heard, was mentioned to him in such a manner that he went to him, accompanied by a friend, and found him, as usual, sitting at his wheel. Without introducing the duke, the gentleman showed Berry an impression of a seal that the duchess dowager had got cut a good many years before by a Jew in London, who was dead before the duke thought of his seal, and which had been shewn to the others as a pattern, asking him if he would ciu a seal the same with that. After examining it a little, Mr. Berry answered readily that he would. The duke, pleased and astonished at the same time, cried out, “Will you, indeed” Mr. Berry, who thought this implied some sort of doubt of his abilities, was a little piqued at it; and turning round to the duke, whom he had never seen before, nor knew; “Yes (said he,) sir; if I do not make a better seal than this, I shall take no payment for it.” The dukej highly pleased, left the pattern with Mr. Berry, and went away. The pattern seal contained, indeed, the various devices on the thirty-two compartments, distinctlyenough to be seen, but none of the colours were expressed. Mr. Berry, in a proper time, finished the seal; on which the figures were not only done with superior elegance, but the colours on every part so distinctly marked, that a painter could delineate the whole, or a herald blazon it, with the most perfect accuracy. For this extraordinary exertion of talents, he charged no more than thirty- two guineas, though the pattern seal had cost seventy-five. Thus it was, that, notwithstanding he possessed talents of the most superior kind, and assiduity almost unequalled, observing at all times a strict economy in his family, Mr. Berry died at last, in circumstances that were not affluent, on the 3d of June, 1783, in the 53d year of his age, leaving a numerous family of children. Besides his eminence as an artist, he was distinguished by the integrity of his moral character, and the strict principles of honour which on all occasions influenced his conduct.

fiven to his workmanship. They had both deposited the escription of their clocks with the secretary of the academy of sciences, sealed up, more than ten years before Harrison’s clocks were proved. Berthoud went twice to London, when the inquiries were making concerning Harrison’s invention, but returned each time without being able to satisfy his curiosity and therefore, his biographer adds, owes nothing to the English artist. Berthoud’s works, which are numerous, all relate to the principles of his art. 1. “Essay sur THorlogerie,” 1763, 2 vols. 4to. reprinted 1786. 2. “Eclaircissements sur l'invention des nouvelles machines proposees pour la determination des longitudes en mer, par la mesure du tempe,” Paris, 1773, 4to. 3. “Traite des horologes marines,” 1773, 4to. Of this the reader will find a very ample criticism and analysis in vols. L. and LI. of the Monthly' Review, and an examination of Berthoud’s pretensions to superiority, compared with the prior attempts of Hooke and Harrison. 4. “De la mesure du temps,” a supplement to the preceding, 1787, 4to. 5. “Les longitudes par la mesure du temps,” 1775, 4to. 6. “La mesure du temps appliquee a la navigation,” 1782, 4to. 7. “Histoire de la mesure du temps par les horologes,” 1802, 2 vols. 4to. 8. “L'Art de conduire et de regler les pendules et les montres.” This, although mentioned last, was his first publication in 1760, and has often been reprinted. He wrote also some articles on his particular branch in the French Encyclopedia. Berthoud, by means of a regular and temperate system, preserved his faculties to the last. He died of a dropsy in the chest, June 20, 1807, at his house at Groslay, in the canton of Montmorency. His nephew, Louis, his scholar and the heir of his talents, carries on the business of marine-clock making with equal success, and is said to have brought these machines to a superior degree of exactness.

an English divine, received his education at Eton, of which seminary he was a distinguished ornament; was elected from thence to King’s college, Cambridge, in 1728, of which he became a fellow in 1731; was some time bursar, and by the provost and fellows, when senior fellow, was presented to the living of Greenford in Middlesex. He was also one of the Whitehall preachers. In 1771 the provost and fellows of Eton elected him to a vacant fellowship in that society. So unexceptionable was his life, that he may truly be said to have made no enemy in the progress of it. His fortune was not large, yet his liberality kept more than equal pace with it, and pointed out objects to which it was impossible for his nature to resist lending his assistance. In his lifetime he gave 2,000l. for the better maintaining the botanical garden at Cambridge, thereby encouraging a study which did peculiar honour to his taste, and materially benefited mankind. So humane was his disposition, that in 1780 he founded and endowed a charity school in his own parish and this most nobly in his life-time, when avarice might have forbid it, or the fear of want might have excepted against it. Having previously built a school-house, he gave, by a deed in chancery, the sum of 1600l. bankstock, of which he appropriated 30l. a-year to a master and mistress to instruct thirty boys and girls thirty shillings for coals for the school and the remainder of the interest, except 10l. to clothe such aged men and women as should frequently attend the sacrament, is appropriated to clothe the children, buy books, and keep the school in repair. As in his life he indicated the most extensive liberality, so at his death he exhibited a lasting record of his gratitude. Impressed with the highest sense of the muni-! ficence of the royal founder of Eton, within whose walls he had imbibed the first seeds of education, he by his will directed a statue of marble, in honour of Henry VI. to be erected at the expence of 700l. And, in Order infallibly to carry his purpose into execution, he contracted a few months before his death with Mr. Bacon. This statue was accordingly executed by that excellent artist, and is in the chapel, with the inscription “Posuit Edvardus Betham, collegii hujusce socius.” The founder holds a model of Eton college in his hand. Mr. Bethatn also gave a bust of the king to the college library, and placed some ancient painted glass in the chancel windows of his church at Greenford. He died in 1783.

, 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 ingenious artist, was born at Liere, in Brabant, in 1594, and at first learned the rudiments of the art from Wouter Abts, afterwards became the disciple of Rodolph Schoof, a painter of considerable reputation at that time at Paris, and when he had practised under that master for a sufficient time to form his hand, he sought to obtain still greater improvement by travelling to Rome and there he spent six years in studying the works of the best masters, devoting his whole time to his profession. His industry was then rewarded with proportionable success; for he found encouragement among the most honourable persons at Rome, and in every part of Italy. His penciling was so exceedingly neat, and his touch and colouring so very delicate, that he was frequently employed to paint on jasper, agate, porphyry, and other precious materials, His master-piece is St. Eloi, in the principal church at Liere. The time of his death is Mot known his son, Cornelius de Bie, wrote the lives of the painters, &c. under the title “Guide Cabinet, &c.” in Flemish verse, with their portraits.

, a female artist, on whose singular talents Descamps has bestowed a long article, was born at Amsterdam, Nov. 17, 1650. Her genius first showed itself in wax models of fruit, &c. beautifully coloured she then engraved with diamond on crystal and glass, ftodVopied paintings in coloured silks, but at last devoted her whole time to cutting paper, in which she excelled. Whatever others produced in a print by a graver, she effected by a pair of scissars. In this way she executed all kinds of subjects landscapes, sea-pieces, animals, flowers, &c. and even portraits, in which the resemblance was preserved in a striking degree. This new art of expressing representations of objects upon white paper became the object of universal curiosity, and the artist was encouraged by all the courts of Europe. The elector Palatine offered her a thousand florins (about an hundred guineas) for three little pieces, which she refused. The empress of Germany gave her orders for a trophy with the arms of the emperor Leopold I. In this piece were crowns supported by eagles, and round the borders garlands of flowers, and other ornaments relative to the subject, for which she received four thousand florins. She also cut the portrait of the emperor, which in Descamps’ time was preserved in the emperor’s cabinet at Vienna. Her works were all in a correct and beautiful style. She died Dec. 28, 1715.

, the youngest son of Abraham, was born in 1603, at Utrecht. The first principles of drawing and painting he learned from his father but his natural inclination for the 'art of engraving was so powerful, that he applied himself wholly to the pursuit of it. He first studied under Crispin de Pass, an engraver much more famous for the neatness than the good taste of his works. Not satisfied with what he learned from this artist, he went to Rome, in order to profit by studying the works of the greatest masters and in that city (where the far greater part of his engravings were made) he died in a very advanced age. “The manner of engraving adopted by this excellent artist, appears to me (says Mr. Strutt) to be not only quite original, but the source from which we may trace that style in which the greatest and best French masters excelled; those, I mean, who worked with the graver only. He covered the lights upon his distances, and the other parts of his piates whicn required tinting, with great care. The lights, whether on the distant hills, trees, buildings, or figures, in the engravings prior to his time, had been left quite clear, and by so many white spots scattered in various parts of the same design, the harmony was destroyed, the subject confused, and the principal figures prevented from relieving with any striking effect. By this judicious improvement, Bloemart gave to his prints a more clear and finished appearance than all the laboured neatness even of Jerome Wierix had been able to produce. He drew correctly but from his style of engraving, which was executed entirely with the graver, the extremities of his figures are heavy, and his heads are not always equally beautiful or expressive. With respect to the mechanical part of the work, few indeed have excelled him, either in clearness or freedom of execution. His great fault, however, is want of variety. The naked parts of his figures, the ch-aperies, and the back-ground, are equally neat, and engraved precisely in the same manner. Hence the effect is flat and the flesh, for want of sufficient distinction, appears cold and silvery. His works are justly held in high estimation. They are very numerous, and many of them difficult to be procured.”

, was an artist of whose life we have very few particulars, till he was known at Rome, in the year 1716, being at that time painter to count Martinetz and his reputation, as a good painter of portrait in miniature, was well established in Italy. By the solicitation of Overbeke, he was induced to go to Amsterdam, and in that city was employed to paint small portraits for bracelets, rings, and snuff-boxes and although they were painted in water-colours, yet the colouring was as lively and as natural as if they had been painted in oil. However, as he found his sight much impaired by the minuteness of his work, he discontinued water-colour painting, and attempted the use of oil, with a reasonable degree of success. After he had resided for some years in the Low Countries, he went to England, and set up a new method of printing mezzotinto plates in colours so as to imitate the pictures of which they were copies. In this manner he executed in England several large plates, from pictures of the greatest masters, and disposed of the prints by lottery. But those who obtained the prizes (Mr. Strutt says) appear not to have held them in any very great estimation. “The prints,” he adds, “certainly possess some merit, exclusive of their novelty; but, in general, the colours are flat and dirty the effect is neither striking nor judiciously managed and the drawing is frequently very incorrect, especially in the extremities of his figures.” Mr. Pilkington speaks of them with greater approbation “The artist,” he says, “imitated his models with so much skill, such exact resemblance, such correctness of outline, such similarity of colour and expression, that at first they amazed every beholder who viewed them at a proper distance and many of those prints are still extant, which are much esteemed by persons of good taste.” And Mr. Wai pole observes, that some heads, coloured progressively, according to their several gradations, bear witness to the success and beauty of his invention. He had another merit to the public, with which few inventors begin; for he communicated his secret in a thin quarto, entitled “Coloritto, or the harmony of colouring in painting reduced to mechanical practice, under easy precepts and infallible rules.” His method was performed by several mezzotinto plates for one piece, each expressing different shades and parts of the piece in different colours. He was not, however, it is said, the original inventor of that manner of managing colours, but took it from Lastman and others, who, with, much greater regularity of morals, equal capacities, and more discreet conduct, had before undertaken it without success. Le Blond, whose head was continually full of schemes, next set on foot a project for copying the cartoons of Raphael in tapestry, and made drawings from the pictures for that purpose. Houses were built and looms erected at the Mulberry Ground at Chelsea but the expences being too great, or the contributions not equal to the first expectations, the scheme was suddenly defeated, and Le Blond disappeared, to the no small dissatisfaction of those who were engaged with him. From hence he went to Paris, where, Basan informs us, he was in the year 1737; and in that city he died, 1740, in an hospital. Le Blond was also author of a treatise, in French, on ideal beauty. It was published in 1732, and has since been translated into English.

, an artist who flourished about 1496-, is among the Cremonese, what Griilandajo, Mantegna, Vannucci, Francia, arc in their respective schools the best modern among the ancients, and the best ancient among the moderns. He was the master of Garofalo before his journey to Rome in 1500. The birth of the Madonna with other histories of her life, and that of the Saviour in the frieze of the Dnotno at Cremona, are works of Boccaccino. The style is partly original, partly approaches that of Pietro Perugino less co-ordinate in composition, less agreeable in the airs of the heads, weaker in chiaroscuro hut richer in drapery, more varied in colour, more spirited in attitudes, and perhaps not less harmonious or pleasing in landscape and architecture. His great defect is the short and stumpy appearance which an immoderate load of drapery often gives to his figures. It is probable that he was at Rome, as Vasari pretends that he there reviled the works of Michael Angelo and what followed, as related by the same historian, admits of too much doubt to deserve attention. He died, according to Vasari, in 1518, aged fifty-eight. His son, Ca.Millo Boccaccino, was born at Cremona, in 1511, where he received the first instructions in the art of painting from his father and for some time he was obliged to conform himself to the -style and manner of his instructor. But he determined to quit that hard dry manner of colouring, to which he had been accustomed, and by degrees assumed a style of colour equally remarkable for its suavity and strength. The best remaining specimens of his art are in the church of St. Sigismondo, at Cremona; where, among the Four Evangelists, the figure of St. John, bent upwards in contrast with the arched vault, in boldness of foreshortening and truth of perspective, emulates the style of Correggio. He died very young, at a time when there was a great expectation of his arriving at very high perfection, in 1546.

, called Clememtone from the vast size of his figure, a distinguished history and portrait painter, was born at Genoa in 1620, and was the disciple of Bernardo Strozzi, an artist of good reputation but he found in himself so strong an ambition to arrive at excellence in his profession, that he left Genoa, and went to Rome and Florence, where he became familiar with Castiglione, there to explore that true sublimity of style, which can only be obtained by a judicious observation of the ancient sculptures and the works of the celebrated modern artists. By the guidance of an excellent genius, and also by a most industrious application to design, he discovered the art of uniting and blending the antique and modern gusto in a style that at once exhibited both gracefulness and strength. His style is more correct and more ideal than that of his master, though inferior in truth of colour. Most of the works of this master (except his portraits, which were lively, natural, and graceful) are in the chapels of Genoa, Pisa, and other cities of Italy, but particularly in Pisa, where is the best of his works, a St. Sebastian in the Certosa.

, an admirable engraver, was the brother of the preceding. The time of his birth and of his death, and the name of the master he studied under, are equally unknown. Bolswert, like his brother, worked entirely with the graver. His general character as an an artist is well drawn by Basan, who says: “We have a large number of prints, which are held in great esteem, by this artist, from various masters; but especially from Rubens, whose pictures he has copied with all possible knowledge, taste, and great effect. The freedom with which this excellent artist handled the graver, the picturesque roughness of etching, which he could imitate without any other assisting instrument, and the ability he possessed of distinguishing the different masses of colours, have always been admired by the connoisseurs, and give him a place in the number of those celebrated engravers whose prints ought to be considered as models by all historical engravers, who are desirous of rendering their works as useful as they are agreeable, and of acquiring a reputation as lasting as it is justly merited.” He drew excellently, and without any manner of his own; for his prints are the exact transcripts of the pictures he engraved from. His best works, though not always equally neat or finished, are always beautiful, and manifest the hand of the master. Sometimes we find his engravings are in a bold, free, open style; as the Brazen Serpent; the Marriage of the Virgin, &c. from Rubens. At other times they are very neat, and sweetly finished; as, the Crowning with Thorns, and the Crucifixion, &c. from Vandyck. Mr. Strutt observes, that his boldest engravings are from Rubens, and his neatest from Vandyck and Jordan. How greatly Bolswert varied his manner of engraving appears from some prints, which, like the greater part of those of his brother Boetius, bear great resemblance to the free engravings of the Bloemarts, and to those of Frederic Bloemart especially; and form a part of the plates for a large folio volume entitled “Academic de l'Espée,” by Girard Thibault of Antwerp, where it was published A.D. 1628; and to these he signs his name “Scheltius,” and sometimes “Schelderic Bolswert,” adding the word Bruxelle. His works are pretty numerous, and his name is usually affixed to his plates in this manner: “S. A. Bolswert.”

, an eminent artist, was born at Ferra.ra in 1569, and died in 1632. He was the scholar of Bastaruolo, and the rival of Scarsellino, whose suavity of manner he attempted to eclipse by energy and grandeur. He studied at Bologna, for that purpose, the Carracci; at Rome, with nature and the antique, perhaps the Roman style; at Venice, Paolo, and at Parma, Corregio. In compositions of a few figures only, he resembles Lod. Carracci sometimes to a degree of delusion; but in works of numerous grouping, such as the “Feast of Herod,” and the “Nuptials of Cana,” at Ferrara, and chiefly in the “Supper of Ahasuerus,” at Ravenna, he rivals in abundance and arrangement the ornamental style of Paolo. At St. Maria in Vado at Ferrara, his science in Corregiesque fore-shortening and forcible effects of chiaroscuro, fixed and astonished the eye of Guercino. His cabinet pictures possess a high degree of finish. That such powers should not hitherto have procured Bonone an adequate degree of celebrity in the annals of painting, proves only, that no felicity of imitation can ever raise its possessors to the honours of originality and invention.

, an Italian artist, was born at Trevigi, in 1513, and at eight years of age was conducted to Venice, where he was carefully educated by one of his relations. At a proper age he was placed as a disciple with Titian, under whom he made so happy a progress, that he did not continue with him many years; especially as he observed that Titian was not so communicative as he wished, or indeed had just reason to expect, and he lamented that Giorgione was not then alive to instruct him, because he preferred the manner of that master to all others. However, to the utmost of his power, he studied and imitated the style of Giorgione, and very soon rose into such reputation, that he was appointed to paint a picture in the church of St. Nicholas, when he was only eighteen years of age. Some time after he received an invitation to Vincenza, to adorn a gallery with paintings in fresco, part of which had been formerly enriched by the hand of Titian, with a design representing the “Judgment of Solomon.” Bordone engaged in the undertaking with an inward satisfaction, as his work was to be contrasted with the work of his master; and he composed the history of “Noah and his Sons,” which he finished with his utmost care; nor was it esteemed inferior to the work of Titian, both performances seeming to have been the product of one pencil. He likewise finished several considerable works at Venice and Trevigi, and in each city painted many portraits of the nobility and persons of distinction. But, in the year 1538, he entered into the service of Francis I. of France, and added continually to his reputation, by every historical subject and portrait which he finished, as they were excellently designed, and had a charming tone of colour to recommend them. On his quitting France, he visited the principal cities of Italy, and left a number of memorable works, as monuments of his extraordinary abilities. His colouring has all the appearance of nature, nor can any thing be more lively or more admired than the portraits of Bordone. Several of them are still preserved in the Palazzo Pitti, at Florence, of which the colouring is excessively clear, fresh, and truly beautiful. He died in 1588 according to Vasari, but in 1578 according to Felibien and Argenville.

, an artist of singular taste, was born at Bois-le-Duc. He seemed to have a peculiar pleasure in painting spectres, devils, and enchantments: and although he possessed considerable powers as a painter, both in freedom of touch and strength of colouring, his pictures rather excite a horror mixed with admiration than any degree of real delight. Among the singular objects which he chose, there is one which represents the Saviour delivering the Patriarchs from hell. The fire and flames are painted with great truth. Judas in the attempt of slyly escaping with the Saints, is seized in the neck by the devils, who are going to hang him up in the air. A most remarkable painting of this master’s hand, among several others in the Escurial, is an allegory of the pleasures of the flesh: in which he represents the principal figure in a carriage drawn by monstrous imaginary forms, preceded by demons, and roll owed by death. As to his manner, it was less still than tnat of most of the painters of his time; and his draperies were in a better taste, more simple, and with less sameness, than any of his contemporaries. He painted on a white ground, which he so managed as to give a degree of transparence to his colours, and the appearance of more warmth. He laid on his colours lightly, and so placed them, even at the first touch of his pencil, as to give them their proper effect, without disturbing them: and his touch was full of spirit. Bos was also an engraver, and, as Strutt thinks, the first artist who attempted to engrave in the grotesque style. His engravings have that stiffness which so strongly characterises the works of the early German masters, and prove that he possessed a great fertility of invention, though perhaps but little judgment. He died in 1500.

, an artist, was born at Bois-le-Duc, and having been carefully instructed in the art of painting by the artists of his native city, he applied himself entirely to study after nature, and rendered himself very eminent for truth of colouring and neatness of handling. His favourite subjects were flowers and curious plants, which he usually represented as grouped in glasses, or vases of chrystal, half filled with water, and gave them so lively a look of nature, that it seemed scarcely possible to express them with greater truth or delicacy. In representing the drops of dew on the leaves of his subjects, he executed them with uncommon tnnsparence, and embellished his subjects with butterflies, bees, wasps, and other insects, which, Sandrart says, were superior to any thing of that kind performed by his contemporary artists. He likewise painted portraits with very great success.

, an artist, was born at Antwerp, in 1675, and was placed under the care of one Thomas, whose subjects were apartments with figures, in the manner of Teniers; and he decorated the insides of those apartments with bustos, vases, pictures, and other curiosities, which sort of subjects were at that time in great request. Bosch studied the same manner of painting, and with great success; but the connoisseurs and his friends advised him to employ his pencil on subjects of a more elegant and elevated kind; because it seemed a little absurd, to see apartments designed with so much magnificence, and so richly ornamented, occupied by persons so mean and vulgar in their appearance as the figures generally represented. Bosch profited by the advice, and soon acquired a different style of design and elegance in his composition, which afforded more pleasure to the eye, and more value to his productions. He also painted portraits with a great deal of reputation, particularly a portrait of the duke of Marlborough on horseback, which gained him all the applause that he could possibly desire. The horse was painted by Van Bloemen. His paintings rose to a most extravagant price, and were at that time more dear than those of Teniers or Ostade. Some of his works have true merit, being very good in the composition and design, and also in respect of the colouring; and the forms of his figures were more elegant than most of his contemporaries. His subjects were judiciously chosen, and for the most part they were sculptors or painters, surrounded with pictures or bustos of marble, brass, or plaster, to which he gave abundance of variety, and a great degree of truth. His pencil is light, his touch spirited, and his figures are dressed in the mode of the time. However, notwithstanding he possessed so much merit, as is generally and justly ascribed to him, his works cannot enter into competition with those of Ostade or Teniers; nor is he now esteemed as he formerly had been, even by hi own countrymen. He died of excess, in 1715.

, were two eminent Dutch painters and engravers; John was born at Utrecht, in 1610, and was the disciple of Abraham Bloemart, who at the same time instructed Andrew; but to perfect themselves in a good taste of design, they went together to Rome, and resided there for a great many years. The genius of John directed him to the study of landscape, in which he rose almost to the highest perfection, making the style of Claude Lorraine his model; and by many his works are mentioned in competition even with those of Claude. The warmth of his skies, the judicious and regular receding of the objects, and the sweetness of his distances, afford the eye a degree of pleasure, superior to what we feel on viewing the works of almost any other artist. John and Andrew had very different talents, and each of them were admirable in their different way. The former excelled in landscape, the latter inserted the figures, which he designed in the manner of Bamboccio; and those figures are always so well adapted, that every picture seemed only the work of one master. The works of these associate brothers are justly admired through all Europe; they are universally sought for, and purchased at very large prices. Most of his pictures are, for size, between two and five feet long; but in those that are smaller, there is exquisite neatness. They generally express the sunny light of the morning, breaking out from behind woods, hills, or mountains, and diffusing a warm glow over the skies, trees, and the whole face of nature; or else a sun-set, with a lovely tinge in the clouds, every object beautifully partaking of a proper degree of natural illumination. And it is to be observed, that even the different hours of the day are perceptible in his landscapes, from the propriety of the tints which he uses. By some connoisseurs he is censured for having too much of the tawny in his colouring, and that the leafings of his trees are too yellow, approaching to saffron; but this is not a general fault in his pictures, though some of them, accidentally, may justly be liable to that criticism, for he corrected that fault; and many of his pictures are no more tinged with those colours, than truth and beautiful nature will justify; and his colouring obtained for him the distinction which he still possesses, of being called Both of Italy.

, 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.

, a very celebrated French painter, was born at Montpellier in 1616. His father, who was a glass-painter, gave him the first instructions in his art. When only seven years old, one of his uncles brought him to Paris, and placed him with a very indifferent painter, whose defects, however, were supplied by young Bourdon’s natural genius. Returning to Bourdeaux at the age of fourteen, he painted the cieling of a neighbouring chateau, and then went to Toulouse. Finding here no employment, he went into the army; but his captain, a man of some taste, judging that he would one day excel in his profession as an artist, gave him his discharge. He was eighteen when he went to Italy, and became acquainted with Claude Lorrain, whose manner, as well as that of Saccbi, Caravagio, and Bamboccio, he imitated with great success. After a residence of three years here, he happened to have a difference with a painter, who threatened to inform against him as a Calvinist, and Bourdon immediately set out for Venice, and thence to France. At the age of twenty-seven he painted his famous Crucifixion of St. Peter for the church of Notre Dame at Paris, which could not fail to raise his reputation. Du Guernier, a miniature painter, much employed at court, and whose sister he married, assisted him with his advice, and procured him work. But the civil wars interrupting the progress of the fine arts, in 1652 he went to Sweden, where queen Christina appointed him her first painter. While employed on many works for her, chiefly portraits, she mentioned to him one day some pictures which the king her father had found when he took Prague; these had till now remained unpacked, and she desired Bourdon to examine them. Bourdon reported favourably of them, particularly of some by Corregio, on which the queen requested he would accept them as a present from her. Bourdon, with corresponding liberality and disinterestedness, represented that they were some of the finest paintings in Europe, and that her majesty ought never to part with them, as a fit collection for a crowned head. The queen accordingly kept them, and took them with her to Rome when she abdicated the throne. After her death, the heirs of Don Livio Odeschalchi, who had purchased them, sold them to the regent duke of Orleans; and they afterwards made part of the fine collection known in this country by the name of the Orleans Collection.

, knight of the Polish order of Merit, and an artist of distinguished reputation, was the descendant of a considerable family in Switzerland, but was born in London in 1756. His early destination was the army, under the patronage of lord Heathfield, who was his father’s - friend but having been instructedwhi|p a child in the rudiments of painting, by a foreigner of inconsiderable merit as a horse-painter, he became so attached to the study, as soon to relinquish the military profession, and devote himself wholly to the pencil. For this purpose he was placed under the tuition of Loutherbourg, and having, from his connexions and acquaintance, access to many of the most distinguished collections, he soon acquired considerable reputation by his landscapes and sea-pieces. In 1776, he travelled through Italy, France, and Holland, where his correct knowledge of the language of each country, added to the politeness of his address, and the pleasures of his conversation, procured him an introduction to the best society, and most valuable repositories of the arts on the continent. At his return to England, he exhibited several specimens of his studies at the royal academy, which obtained him reputation and patronage. In 1791 he was appointed painter to the king of Poland, whose brother, the prince primate, had been much pleased with his performances during his residence in this country; and at the same time he received the honour of knighthood of the order of Merit, which was afterwards confirmed by his present majesty, who, in 1794, appointed him landscapepainter to the king. Previous to this he had, in 1792, been elected a member of the royal academy. Some time before his death, by the will of the late Noel Desenfans, esq. an eminent picture-dealer, he became possessed of sufficient property to render a laborious application to his profession no longer necessary, and from that time he lived in the circle of his friends, highly respected for his talents and agreeable manners. He died Jan. 8, 1811, at his house in Portland- street, bequeathing his fine collection of pictures, and his fortune, to Dirlwich college. According to the terms of his will, he leaves the whole of these pictures, besides 10,000l. to keep them in due preservation, and 2,000/ for the purpose of repairing the gallery ki the college for their reception. He also bequeathed legacies of lOOOl. each to the master of the college, and to the chaplain and the fellows of the college are to be the residuary legatees, and are to possess, for its advantage, all the rest of his property, of every denomination. Most part of this will, however, does not take effect until after the death of Mrs. Desenfans, the widow of his benefactor; and after that event he directs that the body of the late Noel Desenfans, which is now deposited in a sarcophagus within a mausoleum in a chapel, attached to his late house in Charlotte-street, Portland-place, shall be removed, together with his own body (which has, by his desire, been deposited in the same mausoleum), and entombed in a sarcophagus, to be "placed in the chapel of Dulwich college. So singular a will, with respect at least to the place chosen for this collection, excited much surprise. The following circumstances, however, which have been communicated by an intimate friend of the testator, may in some measure account for it. After sir Francis became possessed of the Desenfans collection, by the owner’s friendly will in his favour, he wished to purchase the fee simple of his fine house in Charlotte-street, enlarge it, and endow it as a perpetual repository for the collection, easily accessible to the public, and particularly to students as a school of art; but unluckily, his landlord, a nobleman lately deceased, refused his consent, although he afterwards expressed an inclination to grant it, when too late. Sir Francis then conceived the design of hequeathing the collection to the British Museum, but did not execute it, from a fear that the pictures might not be kept entire and unmixed, he being told that it was in the power of the trustees to dispose of what might appear superfluous or inferior. Such was his respect for his deceased friend, that his only ambition was to discover a place where the collection might be kept together, and known in perpetuum, not as his, but as the Desenfans Collection. By whom Dulwich college, an hospital for poor men and women, remote from the residence of artists and men of taste, was suggested, we know not. It was a place sir Francis had probably never before seen; but, having once visited it, and been informed that his terms might be complied with there, without risk of alteration, he disposed of his property as we have related.

As an artist, sir Francis may be placed in the second rank. He was a close imitator of Loutherbourg. His conception of his subject, as well as the grouping of his figures, was happy, and in conformity with nature; but he was often defective in his finishing, and so much a mannerist in his colouring, that his paintings may be recognized by a very distant glance.

, a liberal patron of the arts, and an honour to his country, was born at Stanton in Shropshire, Jan. 19, 1719. His grandfather was the rev. John Boydell, D. D. vicar of Ashbourne, and rector of Mapleton in Derbyshire, whose son Josiah married Mary Milnes, eldest daughter of Samuel Milnes, esq. of Ash-house near Turnditch, Derbyshire, Jan. 22, 1718. Dr. Boydell was an excellent scholar, and for some time superintended the education of his grandson, intending him for the church, but dying in 1731, the youth was brought up by hisfatlver, a land-surveyor, who very naturally intended him for his own profession, and as a taste for drawing generally discovers itself very early, he might probably foresee great advantages from his son’s possessing this talent. Fortunately, however, for young Boydell, and for the arts, a trifling accident gave a more decided direction to his mind, and led him to aim at higher efforts in the art than the mere mechanism of ground-plans and outlines. This was no other than the sight of a print by Toms, a very indifferent artist, of sir John Glynne’s seat and the old castle attached to it, in “Baddeley’s Views of different Country Seats.” An exact delineation of a building that he had so often contemplated, afforded him pleasure, and excited some reflections which gave a new turn to his ambition. Considering it as an engraving, and from the copper of which might be taken an almost indefinite number of impressions, he determined to quit the pen, and take up the graver, as an instrument which would enable him to disseminate whatever work he could produce, in so much wider a circle. This resolution was no sooner made, than it was put in execution; for, with that spirit and perseverance which he manifested in every succeeding scene of life, he, at twenty-one years of age, walked up to the metropolis, and bound himself apprentice for seven years to Mr. Toms, the engraver of the print which had so forcibly attracted his attention. These, and accidents equally trifling, sometimes attract men of strong minds into the path that leads direct to fame, and have been generally considered as proving that they were born with some peculiar genius for some peculiar study. Sir J. Reynolds had the first fondness for his art excited by the perusal of “Richardson’s Treatise on Painting” and Mr. Boydell was induced to learn the art of engraving, by a coarse print of a coarse artist, representing a mis-shapen gothic castle.

His conduct during his apprenticeship was eminently assiduous. Eager to attain all possible knowledge of an art on which his mind was bent, and of every thing that could be useful to him, and^impelled by an industry that seemed inherent in his nature, he, whenever he could, attended the academy in St. Martin’s-lane to perfect himself in drawing; his leisure hours in the evening were devoted to the study of perspective, and to the learning of French without the aid of a master. After very steadily pursuing his business for six years, and finding himself a better artist than his teacher, he bought from Mr. Toms the last year of his apprenticeship, and became his own master. In 1745 or 1746 he published six small landscapes, designed and engraved by himself. This publication, from his having in most of the views chosen a situation in which a bridge formed part of the scenery, was entitled “The Bridge book,” and sold for a shilling. Small as this sum was, he sometimes spoke with apparent pleasure of a silversmith in Duke’s-court, St. Martin’s lane, having sold so many, that when he settled his annual account, he thought it would be civil to take a silver pint mug in part of payment, and this mug he retained until his dying day. He afterwards designed and engraved many other views, generally of places in and about London, and published the greater part of them at the low price of one shilling each. But even at this early period he was so much alive to fame, that after having passed several months in copying an historical sketch of Coriolanus by Sebastian Concha, he so much disliked his own engraving, that he cut the plate to pieces. Besides these, he engraved many prints from Brocking, Berchem, Salvator ilosa, &c. The manner in which many of them are executed, is highly respectable; and, being done at a time when the artist had much other business to attend to, displays an industry rarely to be paralleled, and proves that had he devoted all his time to engraving, he wcmld have ranked high in the profession. His facility of execution, and unconquerable perseverance, having thus enabled him to complete one hundred and fifty-two prints, tie collected the whole in one port-folio, and published it at fi,ve guineas. He modestly allowed that he himself had not at that time arrived at any eminence in the art of engraving, and that those prints are now chiefly valuable from a comparison of them with the improved state of the art within the last fifty years. In fact, there were at that time no eminent engravers in England, and Mr. Boydell saw the necessity of forcing the art by stimulating men of genius with suitable rewards. With the profits of the folio volume of prints above-mentioned, he' was enabled to pay very liberally the best artists of his time, and thus presented the world with English engravings from the works of the greatest masters. The encouragement that he experienced from the public was equal to the spirit and patriotism of his undertaking, and soon laid the foundation of an ample fortune. He used to observe, that he believed the book we have alluded to was the first that had ever made a lord mayor of London; and that when the smallness of the work was compared with what had followed, it would impress all young men with the truth of what he had often held out to them, “that industry, patience, and perseverance, if united to moderate talents, are certain to surmount all difficulties.” Mr. Boydell, though he never himself made any great progress as an engraver, was certainly the greatest encourager of the art that this country ever knew. The arts were at the time he began, at a very low ebb in this country. Wotton’s portraits of hounds ^nd horses, grooms and squires, with a distant view of the dog-kennel and stable; and Hudson’s portraits of gentlemen in great coats and jockey caps, were in high repute. Inferior prints from poor originals were almost the only works our English artists were thought capable of performing; and, mortifying as it must be to acknowledge it, yet it must be admitted, that (with the exception of the inimitable Hogarth, and two or three others) the generality of them were not qualified for much better things. The powers of the artists were, however, equal to the taste of a great majority of their customers; and the few people of the higher order who had a relish for better productions, indulged it in the purchase of Italian and Flemish pictures and French prints; for which, even at th?t time, the empire was drained of immense sums of money. To check this destructive fashion, Mr. Boydell sought for an English engraver who could equal, it not excel them; and jn Woollett he found one. The Temple of Apollo, from Claude, and two premium pictures from the Smiths of Chichester, were amongst the first large works which this excellent artist engraved; but the Niobe and the Phaeton, from Wilson, established his fame. For the first of them the alderman agreed to give the engraver fifty guineas, and when it was completed paid him a hundred. The second, the artist agreed to engrave for fifty guineas, and the alderman paid him one hundred and twenty. The two prints were published by subscription, at five shillings each. Proof prints were not at that time considered as having any particular value; the few that were taken off to examine the progress of the plate were delivered to such subscribers as chose to have them, at the subscription price. Several of these have since that time been sold at public auctions, at ten and eleven guineas each. By these and similar publications he had the satisfaction to see in his own time the beneficial effects of his exertions. We have before observed, that previous to his establishing a continental correspondence for the exportation of prints, immense sums were annually sent out of the country for the purchase of those that were engraved abroad; but he changed the course of the current, and for many of the later years of his life, the balance of the print-trade with the continent was very much in favour of Great Britain.

"You will excuse, I am sure, my clear Sir, some warmth in an old man on this subject, when I inform you that this unhappy revolution has cut tip by the roots that revenue from the continent which, enabled me to undertake such considerable works in this country. At the same time, as I am laying my case fairly before you, it should not be disguised, that my natural enthusiasm for promoting the fine arts (perhaps buoyed up by success) made me improvident. For had I laid by but ten pounds out of every hundred pounds my -plates produced, I should not now have had occasion to trouble my friends, or appeal to the public; but, on the contrary, I flew with impatience to employ some new artist, with the whole gains of my former undertakings. I see too late my error; for I have thereby decreased my ready money, and increased my stock of copper-plates to such a size, that ait the print-sellers in Europe could not purchase it, especially at these times, so unfavourable to the arts.

, third earl of Burlington and fourth earl of Cork, another branch of the illustrious family of Boyle, was born on the 25th of April, 1695; and was married on the 21st of March, 1720-1, to the lady Dorothy Savile, the eldest of the two daughters and co-heirs of William Savile, marquis of Halifax. By this lady he had three daughters, the youngest of whom, Charlotte, alone survived him. She was married to the duke of Devonshire, and was mother to the late duke, and grandmother to the present. On the 18th of June, 1730, the earl of Burlington was installed one of the knights’ companions of the most noble order of the garter; and in June 1731, he was constituted captain of the band of gentlemen pensioners. In 1732, being at the city of York, the lord mayor, aldermen, and corporation, sent a deputation to return their thanks to him for the favour he had done them in building their assembly-room, and for his other benefactions to the city, and to beg his acceptance of the freedom of it; which was, accordingly, presented to him in a gold box. In 1733, he resigned his place of captain of the band of pensioners. After this he lived retired, employing himself in adorning his gardens at Chiswick, and in constructing several pieces of architecture. Never, says lord Orford, were protection and great wealth more generously and more judiciously diffused than by this great person, who had every quality of a genius and artist, except envy. Though his own designs were more chaste and classic than Kent’s, he entertained him in his house till his death, and was more studious to extend his friend’s fame than his own. Nor was his munificence confined to himself, and his own houses and gardens. He spent great sums in contributing to public works, and was known to choose that the expence should fall on himself, rather than that his country should be deprived of some beautiful edifices. His enthusiasm for the works of Inigo Jones was so active, that he repaired the church of Covent-garden, because it was the production of that great master, and purchased a gate-way of his at Beaufort-garden in Chelsea, and transported the identical stones to Chiswick with religious attachment. With the same zeal for pure architecture, he assisted Kent in publishing the designs for Whitehall, and gave a beautiful edition of the antique baths from the drawings of Palladio, whose papers he procured with great cost. Besides his works on his own estate at Lanesborough in Yorkshire, he new fronted his house in Piccadilly, built by his father^ and added the grand colonnade within the court. It is recorded that his father being asked, why he built his house so far out of town? replied, because he was determined to have no building beyond him. This is now in the heart of that part of the town. Our nobility formerly wished for town-houses, and not for town-neighbourhoods, but the latter being now obtruded upon them is probably the cause of their paying so little attention to the keep of their London-palaces. Bedford-house has been levelled to the ground some years, and Burlington-house is likewise said to be doomed to destruction.

His talents, however, being more strongly 'turned for architecture, he devoted himself to it with great success. His first patron, after his arrival at Rome, was cardinal Oliver Carafta, for whom he designed and completed the choir in the convent of the Frati della pace. This specimen of his talents recommended him to the notice of Alexander VI. in whose service he executed many designs. Under Julius II. he was employed as superintendant of his buildings, in accomplishing the grand project of joining the Belvidere with the Vatican, by means of two galleries extended across a valley. In 1504 he accompanied pope Julius to Bologna, and was engaged in fortifying the town; and during the war of Mirandola, he had several opportunities of exercising his talents in the military art. After his return to Rome, he adorned the city with many fine buildings; and at length undertook to demolish the cathedral of St. Peter’s, and to supply its place with another edifice suited to the capital of the Christian world. His plan for this purpose was adopted; and before the death of the pope, in 1513, the new structure was advanced as far as the entablature; and at the time of his own death, in 1514, the four great arches for the support of the dome were erected. The original design was abandoned by the architects who succeeded him, not without injury to the structure; but the prosecution of the work was entrusted with Michael Angelo, who praised his plan, and conformed as much as possible to his ideas. Bramante was no less estimable for his general character than for his extraordinary talents as an artist. Obliging in his disposition, he took pleasure in encouraging young persons of the profession; and he invited the celebrated Raphael, who was his cousin, to Rome, instructed him in architecture, and procured for him employment in the Vatican. He was also skilled in poetry and music, and composed extemporaneously for his harp. To him is ascribed the invention of constructing arches by casting in wooden moulds a mixture of lime, marble dust, and water, supposed to be a revival of the stucco of the antients. His poetical works were printed at Milan, in 1756. The knowledge and practice of the art of engraving may also be added to his other accomplishments. This art he probably acquired at Milan, and his execution of it exactly resembles the style of Andrea Mantegna, that is, with the strokes running from one corner of the plate to the other, without any crossing. He died in 1514.

, considered in the Helvetic school as an artist of the first rank, was born at Basil, in 1661. He acquired the knowledge of design by studying and copying some good punis which were in the possession of his father; and from the appearapce of his having a strong natural talent, he was placed as a disciple with Caspar Meyer. When he quitted Basil, he went to Paris, and had the good fortune to be received into the school of Le Brun and the variety of works in which that eminent master was employed, proved an excellent means of instruction to the young artist. He so pleased Le Brun by the progress he made, that he was intrusted with several designs, under the immediate inspection of that great painter; but the particular respect and preference shewn by the master to the disciple, excited the envy and jealousy of others to such a degree, as might have been attended with unhappy consequences, if Brandmulier had not retired to his own country; though not before he had obtained the prize in the royal academy at Paris. He excelled in history and portrait, and his genius resembled that of Le Brun; his subjects being full of fire, and treated with elevation and grandeur. His design is correct, and his expression animated and just. He had a good method of colouring, laying on each mass in so proper a manner as to avoid breaking or torturing his tints; which made his colours retain their original beauty and strength without fading. He was fond of painting portraits in an historical style, and was generally commended for the resemblance of the persons who were his mpdels, and the agreeable taste in his compositions. He died in 1691, aged only thirty.

, of Nizza, an artist who flourished from 1483 to 1513, may be considered as the founder of the primitive Ligurian school Genoa and its states still possess many of his works. Though inferior in taste to the best contemporaries of other schools, meagre in design, and attached to gilding, he yields to none in characteristic beauty of heads, and a vivacity of colour, which has defied time. The folds of his draperies are natural, his composition has propriety, his attitudes spirit, his plans are uncommon. He possesses an originality which clears him from all suspicion of imitation, or deference to another school; all this is to be understood of small proportions, for on large dimensions it does not appear that he ever ventured. The most praised of his relics are a “Murder of the Innocents” at St. Agostino; and a “St. John,” in the oratory of the Madonna di Savona.

, a painter of history, landscape, and conversations, was born at Antwerp in 1683, and instructed by his father Alexander Van Breda, who was much esteemed as an artist, with whom he continued, profiting by good example and advice, till he was 18 years of age. Having established his reputation in Holland, he accompanied Rysbrack the sculptor to London, where he was highly esteemed and obtained considerable patronage, and particularly that of the earl of Derwentwater, who was beheaded for rebellion in 1715. In London he was much employed by the court and nobility, and was hardly able to supply the demands for his performances. From London, after a residence of five years, he returned to Antwerp, much enriched; and in 1746, when Louis XIV. visited that city, he honoured this master by purchasing four of his pictures; viz. “Christ at the sea of Tiberias,” “Christ performing miracles,” and “two landscapes.” He certainly approached nearer to those great masters whose manner he imitated, Brueghel and Wouwermans, than any other artist of his time. His landscapes are in the style and taste of the former; and his conversations, historical figures, fairs, and battles, are in the manner of the latter. He died in 1750.

, called Cavalier, a painter of landscapes, was born at Antsverp in 1677, and remained under the instruction of old Rysbrack, the landscape painter, for three years, after which period he became, in consequence of his close application, competent to commence the practice of his art. Having been diverted from his purpose of visiting Italy by the encouraging reception which he met with at Francfort and Nuremberg, he spent two years with his brother, Francis Breydel, at the court of Hesse-Cassel; and afterwards went to Amsterdam, where he copied several views of the Rhine, from the designs of Griffier, and thus improved his colouring, pencilling, and taste of design, so that the works of this artist may be regarded as his second and best school. At length he settled at Ghent, where his performances were much admired; but he was reduced by extravagance to the necessity of earning money expeditiously, and to multiply pictures much inferior in design and execution to others which had been produced by his pencil. His health declined towards the close of his life; and his performances during the intervals of ease which he enjoyed, amidst recurring paroxysms of the gout, wanted the spirit, delicate finishing, and firmness of touch, of his better days. Whilst the ideas and style of Griftier were his models, his pictures, principally views of the Rhine, were well designed, neatly executed, and excellently coloured. But he changed this manner, in order to imitate Velvet Breughel, whose works were universally admired, and selected for his subjects battles, sieges, and encampments. He often copied the prints of Vandermeulen; but afterwards composed very readily in this style, without borrowing from any other artist. His best pictures are full of spirit, his touch is firm, and well adapted to his style, and his design is correct. Some of them appear too laboured, but others are full of harmony. He died in 1744.

, an artist of whom very few particulars are mentioned; the most material are, that he was born at Antwerp, in 1550, and learned the rudiments of his art in that city; that he went to study at Rome, and in a very few years manifested so much merit in landscape and history, that Pope Gregory XIII. employed him to work in the Vatican, and allowed him an honourable pension as long as he lived. He died in 1584, aged thirtyfive.

, an excellent artist, brother to Matthew Brill, was born at Antwerp, in 1554, but bred to the profession of painting under Daniel Voltelmans. From the time of his quitting that master till he went to Italy, his manner was rather stiff, his pictures had a predominant brown and yellow tinge, and his design and colouring were equally indifferent. But when he visited his brother Matthew at Rome, and saw the works of Titian and Caracci, he altered his Flemish manner entirely, and fixed upon a style that was abundantly pleasing, with a charming tone of colour. The pension and employment which his brother possessed at the Vatican were conferred upon Paul; and he so far surpassed him, that he daily rose in his reputation, till he was considered as the first in his profession. Annibal Caracci generally painted the figures in his landscapes, and by that means increased their value to a very high degree. His manner of painting is true, sweet, and tender; the touchings of his trees are firm, and yet delicate; his scenery, his situations, and distances, are admirable, most of them being taken from nature; and the masses of his light and shadow are strong, and very judicious; though, in some of his small easel-pictures, he may be sometimes accounted rather too green, or at least more greenish than could be wished. It is remarked of him, that, in the latter part of his life, his landscapes were always of a small size; but they are beautiful and exquisitely finished, and frequently he painted them on copper. The genuine works of this eminent master are now rarely to be met with, especially those of the larger size, and they afford prices that are extremely high in every part of Europe. Sandrart observes, that in his time the pictures of Paul Brill were eagerly coveted in all countries where the polite arts are encouraged; that abundance of purchasers appeared at the public sales, ambitious to possess them; and that very large sums of money were given for them whenever they could be procured. And it seems that their intrinsic value is not diminished, since, a very few years ago, one of the landscapes of this master sold in Holland for 160l. and another, at an auction in London, for 120 guineas or upwards, and yet they were deemed to be cheaply purchased. He died in 1626, aged seventytwo.

, a celebrated painter, according to some, was born at Oudenarde, in Flanders, or according to others, at Haerlem, in Holland, in 1608. His parents were of the poorer sort. His mother sold to the country people bonnets and handkerchiefs, on which Adrian, when almost in infancy, used to paint flowers and birds, and while thus employed, was discovered by Francis Hals, an eminent artist, who, charmed with the ease and taste he displayed in his art, proposed to take him as an apprentice, and Brouwer did not long hesitate about accepting such an dffer. His master soon discovered his superior talents, and separated him from his companions, that he might profit the better by him, locked him up in a garret, and compelled him to work, while he nearly starved him, but some pieces he painted by stealth, which probably irritated his jailor to be more watchful of him. By the advice, however, of Adrian Van Ostade, one of his companions, he contrived to make his escape, and took refuge in a church. There, almost naked, and not knowing where to go, he was recognised by some person, who brought him back to his master, and by means of a suit of clothes and some caresses, effected a temporary reconciliation; but being again subjected to the same mercenary and tyrannical usage, he made his escape a second time, and went to Amsterdam, where he had the happiness to find that his name was well known, and that his works bore a great price. A picture dealer with whom he lodged, gave him an hundred ducatoons for a painting representing gamesters, admirably executed, which Brouwer, who had never possessed so much money, spent in a tavern in the course of ten days. He then returned to his employer, and when asked what he had done with his money, answered that he had got rid of it, that he might be more at leisure; and this unfortunate propensity to alternate work and extravagance marked the whole of his future life, and involved him in many ridiculous adventures and embarrassments unworthy of a man of genius. As soon as ‘he had finished any piece, he offered it for sale; and if it did not produce a stipulated price, he burnt it, and began another with greater care. Possessing a vein of low humour, and engaging, both sober and drunk, in many droll adventures, he removed from Amsterdam to Antwerp, where he was arrested as a spy, and committed to prison. This circumstance introduced him to an acquaintance with the duke d’Aremberg, who, having observed his genius, by some slight sketches drawn with black lead while in custody, requested Rubens to furnish him with materials for painting. Brouwer chose for his subject a groupe of soldiers playing at cards in a corner of the prison; and when the picture was finished, the duke himself was astonished, and Rubens, when he saw it, offered for it the sum of 600 guilders. The duke, however, retained it, and gave the painter a much larger sum. Upon this, Rubens procured his release, and received him into his house; but, uninfluenced by gratitude to his benefactor, he stole away, and returned to the scenes of low debauch, to which he had been formerly accustomed. Being reduced to the necessity of flying from justice, he took refuge in France; and, having wandered through several towns, he was at length constrained by indigence to return to Antwerp, where he was taken ill, and obliged to seek relief in an hospital; and in this asylum of self-procured poverty and distress he died in his 32d year. Rubens lamented his death, and procured for him an honourable interment in the church of the Carmelites.

, a Scotch artist, the son of a goldsmith and watchmaker, was born in 1752 at Edinburgh, and was early destined to take up the profession of a painter. He travelled into Italy in 1771, and durmg the course of ten years residence there, the pencil and crayon were ever in his hand, and the sublime thoughts of Raphael and Michael Angelo ever in his imagination. By continual practice he obtained a correctness and elegance of contour, rarely surpassed by any British artist, but he unfortunately neglected the mechanism of the pallet till his taste was so refined that Titian, and Murillo, and Correggio made his heart to sink within him when he touched the canvass. When he attempted to lay in his colours, the admirable correctness of his contour was lost, and he had not self-sufficiency to persevere till it should be recovered in that tender evanescent outline which is so difficult to be attained even by the most eminent painters. At Rome he met with sir William Young and Mr. Townley; who, pleased with some very beautiful drawings done by him in pen and ink, took him with them, as a draftsman, into Sicily. Of the antiquities of this celebrated island he took several very fine views in pen and ink, exquisitely finished, yet still preserving the character and spirit of the buildings he intended to represent. He returned some years afterwards from Italy to his native town, where he was much beloved and esteemed, his conversation being extremely acute and entertaining on most subjects, but peculiarly so on those of art; and his knowledge of music 'being very great, and his taste in it extremely just and refined. Lord Monboddo gave him a general invitation to his elegant and convivial table, and employed him ip, making several drawings in pencil for him. Mr. Brown, however, in 1786, came to London, and was caressed by scholars and men of taste in that metropolis, where he was very much employed as a painter of small portraits in black lead pencil, which were always correctly drawn, and exhibited, with a picturesque fidelity, the features and character of the person who sat to him.:

Mr. Brown was not only known as an exquisite drafts.­man, he was also a good philosopher, a sound scholar, and endowed with a just and refined taste in all the liberal and polite arts, and a man of consummate worth and integrity. Soon after his death his “Letters on the Poetry and Music of the Italian Opera,” 12mo, were published. They were originally written to his friend lord Monboddo, who wished to have Mr. Brown’s opinion on those subjects, which have so intimate a connection with his work on the Origin and Progress of Language; and who was so pleased with the style and observations contained in them, that he wrote an introduction, which was published with them, in one volume, 12mo, 1789, for the benefit of his widow. The letters, written with great elegance and perspicuity, are certainly the production of a strong and fervid mind, acquainted with the subject; and must be useful to most of the frequenters of the Italian opera, by enabling them to understand the reasons on which the pleasure they receive at that musical performance is founded, a knowledge in which they are generally very deficient. Not being written for publication, they have that spirit and simplicity which every man of genius diffuses through any subject which he communicates in confidence, and which he is but too apt to refine away when he sits down to compose a work for the public. Lord Monboddo, in the fourth volume of the Origin and Progress of Language, speaking of Mr. Brown, says, “The account that I have given of the Italian language is taken from one who resided above ten years in Italy; and who, besides understanding the language perfectly, is more learned in the Italian arts of painting, sculpture, music, and poetry, than any man I ever met with. His natural good taste he has improved by the study of the monuments of ancient art, to be seen at Rome and Florence; and as beauty in all the arts is pretty much the same, consisting of grandeur and simplicity, variety, decorum, and a suitableness to the subject, I think he is a good judge of language, and of writing, as well as of painting, sculpture, and music.” A very well-written character in Latin, by an advocate of Edinburgh, is appended to the Letters. Mr. Brown left behind him several very highly-finished portraits in pencil, and many very exquisite sketches in pencil and in pen and ink, which he had taken of persons and of places in Italy; particularly a book of studies of heads, taken from the life, an inestimable treasure to any history painter, as a common-place book for his pictures, the heads it contained being all of them Italian ones, of great expression, or of high character. He was so enraptured with his art, and so assiduous in the pursuit of it, that he suffered no countenance of beauty, grace, dignity, or expression, to pass him unnoticed; and to be enabled to possess merely a sketch for himself, of any subject that struck his fancy, he would make a present of a high-finished drawing to the person who permitted his head to be taken by him. The characteristics of his hancl were delicacy, correctness, and taste, as the drawings he made from many of Mr. Townley’s best statues very plainly evince. Of his mind, the leading features were acuteness, liberality, and sensibility, joined to a character firm, vigorous, and energetic. The last efforts of this ingenious artist were employed in making two very exquisite drawings, the one from Mr. Townley’s celebrated bust of Homer, the other from a fine original bust of Pope, supposed to have been the work of Rysbrac. From these drawings two very beautiful engravings have been made by Mr. Bartolozzi and his pupil Mr. Bovi. After some stay in London, his health, which had never been robust, yielded to extraordinary application, and he was forced to try a seavoyage, and return on a visit to Edinburgh, to settle his father’s affairs, who was then dead, having been some time before in a state of imbecility. On the passage from London to Leith, he was somehow neglected as he lay sick on his hammock, and was on the point of death when he arrived at Leith. With much difficulty he was brought up to Edinburgh, and laid in the bed of his friend Runciman, the artist, who had died not long before in the same place. Here he died, Sept. 5, 1787. His portrait with Runciman, disputing about a passage in Shakspeare’s Tempest, is in the gallery at Dryburgh abbey. This was the joint production of Brown and Runciman before the death of the latter in 1784.

Mr. Browne’s application to the law did not prevent his occasionally indulging himself in the exercise of his poetical talents. It was not long after his settlement at Lincoln’s-inn that he wrote his poem on “Design and Beauty,” addressed to Highmore the painter, for whom he had a great friendship. In this, one of the longest of his poems, he shews an extensive knowledge of the Platonic philosophy; and pursues, through the whole, the idea of beauty advanced by that philosophy. By design is here meant, in a large and extensive sense, that power of genius which enables the real artist to collect together his scattered ideas, to range them in proper order, and to form a regular plan before he attempts to exhibit any work in architecture, painting, or poetry. He wrote several other poetical pieces during the interval between his fixing at LincolnVinn and his marriage one of the mostpleasing and popular of which was his “Pipe of Tobacco,” an imitation of Gibber, Ambrose Philips, Thomson, Young, Pope, and Swift, who were then all living; the peculiar manner of these several writers is admirably hit off by our author, who evidently possessed an excellent imitative genius. Indeed, nothing but a nice spirit of discrimination, and a happy talent at various composition, could have enabled him to have succeeded so well as he hath done in the “Pipe of Tobacco.” The imitation of Ambrose Philips was not written by our poet, but by an ingenious friend, the late Dr. John Hoaclly, chancellor of the diocese of Winchester, and second son of -the bishop. Dr. Hoadlyy however, acknowledged that his little imitation was altered so much for the better by Mr. Browne, that he fairly made it his own.

His concern in the winotrade gave him an opportunity of travelling over a considerable part of Spain, Portugal, and the Netherlands, but hearing of his father’s death in 1758, he returned to England, and in 1761 withdrew entirely from the wine-trade. He now, from his observation while in Spain, suggested to the prime minister, Mr. Pitt, afterwards lord Chatham, the practicability of a successful expedition against Ferrol, in Galicia, where the Spaniards had a considerable harbour, and generally stationed a part of their navy; but various circumstances, of which perhaps Mr. Pitt’s resignation was the principal, prevented this enterprise from being attempted. Disappointed in this, he resolved to return to his native country, and pass his time as a private gentleman, cultivating his paternal estate. One of the new ministers, however, lord Halifax, diverted him from this design, and suggested Africa to him as a proper field for enterprize and discovery; and that he might go under the protection of a public character, it was proposed to send him as consul to Algiers. Bruce acceded to these proposals, and left England in the end of June 1762. He passed through France and Italy, and carried with him from the latter country an artist to assist him in his drawings. For his subsequent adventures, his travels into Abyssinia, and his discovery of the sources of the Nile, &c. we must refer to his published travels. He returned to his native country in 1773, and in 1776, he married a daughter of Thomas Dundas of Fingask, esq. by whom he had three children, two of whom, a son and daughter, are still living. After he settled at Kinnaird, his time was chiefly spent in managing his estate, in preparing his travels for the press, and other literary occupations; and he was preparing a second edition of his Travels, when death prevented the execution of/ his design. On Saturday, April 26, 1794, having entertained some company at Kinnaird, as he was going down stairs about eight o'clock in the evening, to hand a lady into a carriage, his foot slipt, and he fell from a considerable height. He was taken up in a state of insensibility, and expired early next morning. Mr. Bruce’s figure was above the common size; his limbs athletic, but well proportioned; his complexion sanguine; his countenance manly and good-tempered; and his manners easy and polite. The whole outward man was such as to announce a character well calculated to contend with the many difficulties and trying occasions, which so extraordinary a journey could not but have thrown in his way. His internal characters, the features of his understanding and disposition, seem in a great measure to have corresponded with these outward lineaments. As a country gentleman, though not without a tincture of haughtiness, he exhibited the elegance of a man of fashion, and the hospitality of a Briton. His personal accomplishments fitted him, in a superior manner, for the undertakings in which he engaged. His constitution was robust, and he had inured himself to every kind of fatigue and exercise. In mental accomplishments he equalled, if not surpassed, the generality of travellers. His memory was excellent, and his understanding vigorous and well cultivated. He understood French, Italian, Spanish, and Portuguese, the two first of which he spoke and wrote with facility. Besides Greek and Latin, which he read well, though not critically, he knew the Hebrew, Chaldee, and Syriac; and, in the latter part of his life, compared several portions of the scriptures in those related dialects. He read and spoke with ease, Arabic, Ethiopic, and Amharic. Necessity made him acquainted with these last, and impressed them deeply on his mind. He had applied, during the greatest part of his life, to the study of astronomy, and other practical branches of mathematical learning.

, the younger, and sometimes Called " Hellish Brueghel 17 froni the nature of his subjects, was the son of the preceding artist, born at Brussels, and became the disciple of Gelles Coningsloo. His compositions rather excite disgust than satisfaction; and his human figures, though freely pencilled, and not ill coloured, are not much more elegant than those of the infernal kind. In his historical subjects he generally introduced witches and devils; such as Orpheus charming Pluto and Proserpine to procure the deliverance of Eurydice, surrounded with horrible forms and appearances; Saul and the Witchof Endor; or St. Anthony’s temptations. He is also enumerated by Strutt among the engravers. He died 1642.

, known, from his favourite dress, by the name of Velvet Brueghel, or Feuweeler, was the son of Peter Brueghel the old, and consequently brother to the preceding. He was born at Brussels, in 1560, and was instructed, probably by his father, and by other artists; but, whoever were his instructors, he acquired an eminence in every art of painting; in colouring, in design, and in pencilling, far superior to that of his father, and of all his contemporaries in his style. He began with painting flowers and fruit, which he executed with admirable skill; and then proceeded to landscapes, sea-ports, and markets, in which he introduced a number of small figures, surprisingly exact and correctly drawn. At Cologne, where he resided for some time, he gained an extraordinary reputation; and his pictures were well known and admired in Italy, in which country he spent some time. He died, according to the most probable accounts, in 1625. That the industry of this artist must have been singular, sufficiently appears from the number and variety of his pictures, and the exquisite neatness and delicacy of their execution. It has been lamented, however, by connoisseurs, that his distances are overcharged with a bluish tinge. Brueghel often decorated the pictures of his friends with small figures, thus greatly enhancing their value; he was employed in painting flowers, fruits, animals, and landscape scenery, in the pieces of history-paintings; and in this way Rubens made occasional use of his pencil. He sometimes joined this master in larger works, which have been much admired; and particularly in a “Vertumnus and Pomona,” a picture three feet high and four broad, highly commended by Houbraken, and sold at Amsterdam for above 2SOl. sterling; and “a Terrestrial Paradise,” painted for Charles I. king of England. In the gallery of the archiepiscopal palace at Milan, there is an admirable landscape of Brueghel, representing a desert, in which Giovanna Battista Crespi painted the figure of St. Jerom; and among a great number preserved in the Ambrosian library in that city, there is an oval picture of the Virgin, painted by Rubens, which is encompassed by a garland of flowers admirably executed by Brueghel. Most considerable cabinets possess specimens of the art of this master. Some small engravings of landscapes, &c. are also ascribed to Brueghel.

, an illustrious French painter, was of Scottish extraction, and born in 1619. His father was a statuary by profession. At three years of age it is reported that he drew figures with charcoal; and at twelve he drew the picture of his uncle so well, that it still passes for a fine piece. His father being employed in the gardens at Seguier, and having brought his son along with him, the chancellor of that name took a liking to him, and placed him with Simon Vouet, an eminent painter, who was greatly surprised at young Le Brun’s amazing proficiency. He was afterwards sent to Fontainbleau, to take copies of some of Raphael’s pieces. The chancellor sent him next to Italy, and supported him there for six years. Le Brun, on his return, met with the celebrated Poussin, by whose conversation he greatly improved himself in his art, and contracted a friendship with him which lasted as long as their lives. Cardinal Mazarin, a good judge of painting, took great notice of Le Brun, and often sat by him while he was at work. A painting of St. Stephen, which he finished in 1651, raised his reputation to the highest pitch. Soon after this, the king, upon the representation of M. Colbert, made him his first painter, and conferred on him the order of St. Michael. His majesty employed two hours every day in looking over him, whilst he was painting the family of Darius at Fontainbleau. About 1662, be began his five large pieces of the history of Alexander the Great, in which he is said to have set the actions of that conqueror in a more glorious light than Quintus Curtius in his history. He procured several advantages for the royal academy of painting and sculpture at Paris, and formed the plan of another for the students of his own nation at Rome. There was scarce any thing done for the advancement of the fine arts in which he was not consulted. It was through the interest of M. Colbert that the king gave him the direction of all his works? and particularly of his royal manufactory at the Gobelins, where he had a handsome house, with a genteel salary assigned to him. He was also made director and chancellor of the royal academy, and shewed the greatest zeal to encourage the fine arts in France. He possessed in a great degree that enthusiasm which animates the efforts, and increases the raptures of the artist. Some one said before him of his fine picture of the Magdalen, “that the contrite penitent was really weeping.” “That, 7 * said he,” is perhaps all that you can see; I hear her sigh.“He was endowed with a vast inventive genius, which extended itself to arts of every kind. He was well acquainted with the history and manners of all nations. Besides his extraordinary talents, his behaviour was so genteel, and his address Sq pleasing, that he attracted the regard and affection of the whole court of France: where, by the places and pensions conferred on him by the king, he made a very considerable figure. He died at his house in. the Gobelins in 1690, leaving a wife, but no children. He was author of a curious treatise of” Physiognomy“and of another of the” Characters of the Passions."

, an eminent engraver, was born in 1528, at Leige, but resided chiefly at Francfort, where he carried on a considerable commerce in prints. It does not appear to what master he owed his instructions in the art, but the works of Sebast Beham were certainly of great service to him. He copied many of the plates engraved by that artist, and seems to have principally formed his taste from them. He worked almost entirely with the graver, and seldom called in the assistance of the point. He acquired a neat, free style of engraving, well adapted to small subjects in which many figures were to be represented, as funeral parades, processions, &c. which he executed in a charming manner. He also drew very correctly. His heads, in general, are spirited and expressive, and the other extremities of his figures well-marked. His backgrounds, though frequently very slight, are touched with a masterly hand. He died, as his sons inform us (in the third part of Boissard’s collection of portraits), March 27, 1598. The two first parts of that collection were engraved by De Brye, assisted by his sons, who afterwards continued it.

When about this time Lorenzo de Medici established a school for the advancement of sculpture, in a garden in Florence, under the superintendence of Bertoldo, Lorenzo requested Ghirlandaio to permit any of his scholars to study there, who were desirous of drawing from the antique, and from that time the Medici garden became the favourite school of Michel Angelo. No sooner had he entered upon his studies here, than seeing a student modelling some figures in clay, he felt an emulation to do the same; und Lorenzo, who frequently visited the gardens, observing his progress, encouraged him with expressions of ap^ probation. He was, not long after, desirous to try his skill in marble, and being particularly interested in a mutilated old head, or rather a mask representing a laughingFaun, he chose it for his original. Although this was hig first essay in sculpture, he finished it in a few days, supplying what was imperfect in the original, and making some other additions. Lorenzo visiting his garden as usual, found Michel Angelo polishing his mask, and thought it an extraordinary work for so young an artist; yet jestingly remarked, “You have restored to the old Faun all his teeth, but don't you know that a man of such an age has generally some wanting?” Upon this observation, the moment Lorenzo departed, Michel Angelo broke a tooth from the upper jaw, and drilled a hole in the gum to represent its having fallen out.

To this little circumstance Michel Angelo, who was now between fifteen and sixteen years old, owed the patronage of Lorenzo, who adopted him into his. family, provided him with a room, and eVery accommodation in the palace, treated him as his own son, and introduced him to men of rank and genius. Among others he formed an intimacy with Politiano, who resided under the same roof, and soon became warmly attached to his interests. At his recommendation he executed a basso-relievo in marble, the subject of which was the battle of the Centaurs, of which it is sufficient praise, that it stood approved in the riper judgment of Michel Angelo himself, who, although not indulgent to his own productions, did not hesitate on seeing it, even in the decline of life, to express his regret that he had not entirely devoted himself to sculpture. In 1492, death deprived him of the patronage of Lorenzo, which, however, was in some measure continued to him by Lorenzo’s successor, a man of corrupt and vitiated taste, of whose discrimination in merit we have this notable proof that he boasted of two extraordinary persons in his house, Michel Angelo, and a Spanish footman who could out -run u horse. Michel Angelo, however, prosecuted his studies, and produced some fine specimens of art, until the tranquillity of Florence was disturbed by the haughty and pusillanimous conduct of his patron, Piero de Medici, when he thought proper to retire to Bologna to avoid the impending evils. Here he was invited into the house of Aldovrandi, a Bolognese gentleman, and one of the sixteen constituting the government, and during his stay executed two statues in marble for the church of St. Domenico. After remaining with this hospitable friend somewhat more than a year, the affairs of Florence being tranquillized, he returned home to his father’s house, pursued his profession, and produced a statue of a sleeping Cupid, that advanced his reputation, but not without the aid of some trick. He was advised by a friend to stain the marble so as to give it the appearance of an antique, and in this state it was sent to Rome to an agent who pretended to have dug it up in a vineyard, and sold to cardinal St. Giorgio for two hundred ducats. What rendered this imposition unnecessary to Michel Angelo' s fame, was, that on the discovery of the real artist, he received the most flattering praises, and was invited to Rome, as the proper theatre for the exercise of his talents. At Rome he made several statues, which placed him in an enviable rank among his contemporaries, and a cartoon of St. Francis receiving the stigmata, painted in distemper for St. Pietro in Montorio; and while he executed these commissions both with credit and profit to himself, he was also indefatigable by observation and study to improve and elevate his style.

The work was begun, but before it had proceeded far, Michel Angelo met with some affront from the servants of the papal palace, who were jealous of his favour with the pope, and not being admitted to his holiness when he came on business, set off from Rome for Florence. As soon as this was known, couriers were dispatched after him, but, as he had got beyond the pope’s territories, they could not use force, and only obtained of Michel Angelo a letter to the pope explaining the cause of his departure. But after some time, and the intercession of friends, Michel Angelo consented to return to Rome, where, to his great disappointment, he found that the pope had changed his mind, and instead of completing the monument, had determined to decorate with pictures the ceilings and walls of the Sistine chapel, in honour of the memory of his uncle Sixtus IV. The walls of this chapel were already ornamented with historical paintings by various masters, but these were now to be effaced, and the entire chapel to be painted by Michel Angelo, so as to correspond in its parts, and make one uniform whole. Michel Angelo was diffident of his powers in fresco-painting, and recommended Raffaello, but the pope was peremptory, and our artist obliged to yield. He accordingly prepared the cartoons, and endeavoured to engage persons experienced in frescopainting, but being disappointed in the first specimen of their abilities, he determined himself to try how far he could overcome the difficulties which made it necessary for him to seek their aid, and succeeded in painting the ceiling to the astonishment and admiration even of his enemies. For the description of this stupendous monument of human genius, we must refer to our authority, but the circumstance not the least remarkable, was, that the whole was completed in twenty months, and on AllSaints-Day, 1512, the chapel was opened, and the pope officiated at high mass to a crowded and admiring audience. Michel Angelo next applied himself to make designs for other pictures for the sides of the chapel, to complete the original plan: but on Feb. 21, 1513, the pope died, and to ^Michel Angelo his loss was not supplied. The old paintings still remain on the walls of this chapel.

Julius II. was succeeded by the celebrated Leo X. who professed the same warmth of attachment, and the same zeal to promote the talents of Michel Angelo. But we have already seen that the attachment of this great artist’s patrons was mixed with a degree of caprice which reduced him often to a state of servitude. Michel Angelo had received instructions to construct a monument for Julius II. on a lesser scale than the mausoleum which we have already mentioned. This Leo X. immediately interrupted, by insisting on his going to Florence to build the fagade of the church of S. Lorenzo, which remained unfinished from the time of his grandfather Cosmo de Medici, and Michel Angelo, after in vain pleading the engagement he was under, was obliged to comply. Nor was this all. While at Carrara, ordering the necessary marble, he received a letter from Leo desiring him to go to Pietra Santa, where his holiness had been told there was marble equal to that of Carrara. Michel Angelo obeyed, and reported that the marble was of an inferior quality, and that there was no means of conveying it to Fldrence without making a road of many miles to the sea, through mountains, and over marshes, &c. The pope, however, flattered with the prospect of procuring marble* from a territory which he could at any time call his own, ordered him to proceed, the result of which was that the talents of this great man were buried in those mountains, and his time consumed during the whole reign of Leo X. (above eight years) in little other than raising stone out of a quarry, and making a road to convey it to the sea. At the death of Leo the fagade of S. Lorenzo was not advanced beyond its foundation, and the time of Michel Angelo had been consumed in making a road, in seeing that five columns were made at the quarry of Pietra Santa, in conducting them to the sea-side, and in transporting one of them to Florence this employment, with occasionally making some models in wax, and some trifling designs for the interior of a room in the Medici palace, appears to have been all the benefit. that was derived from his talents during the whole of this pontificate.

During the pontificate of Adrian VI. who succeeded Leo, the facade of S. Lorenzo was altogether laid aside, and Michel Angelo endeavoured to resume his labours on the monument of Julius II. for which the heirs of Julius were impatient, and threatened to make the artist accounjt for the monies received in the pontificate of Julius. He found a friend, however, in the cardinal Giuliano de Medici, who commissioned him to build a library and new sacristy to the church of S. Lorenzo, to serve as a mausoleum for the Medici family; and also to execute monuments to the memory of the dukes Giuliano and Lorenzo, to be placed in it; and these works took up the whole Of Michel Angelo’s attention during the short pontificate of Adrian VI. which lasted only twenty months, ending Sept. 14, 1523. During the first part of the pontificate of his successor Clement VII. formerly Giuliano de Medici, Michel Angelo went on with the chapel and library of S. Lorenzo, which Giuliano had ordered, and executed a statue of Christ, of the size of nature, to be placed on an altar in the church of Santa Maria Sopra Minerva, at Rome, and which is still in that church, but on a pedestal at the entrance of the choir. During the wars which succeeded, we find him employing his talents on works of fortification at Florence, when besieged by the prince of Orange, but hearing of some treacherous plans to undermine the republic, he withdrew secretly to Ferrara, and thence to Venice. Being, however, solicited by persons high in office not to abandon the post committed to his charge, he returned, and resumed his situation, until the city surrendered to the pope, when he was obliged to secrete himself in an obscure retreat. The pope having by a public manifesto given him assurances, that if he would discover himself he should not be molested, qn condition that he would furnish the two monuments in St. Lorenzo, already begun, Michel Angelo, on this, with little respect for the persons his genius was to commemorate, and with less affection for his employer, hastened to complete his labour; not with any ardour of sentiment, but as a task which was the price of his liberty.

Tranquillity being restored in Italy, Michel Angelo was again called upon by the duke of Urbino, to complete the monument of Julius II, agreeable to the last design, and was again interrupted by the pope, who wished to employ him at Florence, and Afterwards ordered him to paint the two end walls of the Sistine chapel. Our artist being unable openly to oppose the will of the pope, procrastinated the work as much as possible, and while he was engaged in making a cartoon for the chapel, secretly employed as much of his time as circumstances would allow, in forwarding the monument to Julius II. But this was again interrupted by the next pope, Paul III. although at length, after much riegociation, and after changing the design three times, he was permitted to complete, his task, which was placed, not in St. Peter’s, as originally intended, but in the church of S. Pietro, in Vincoli.

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.”

In his professional labours he continued to study to the end of his life, but never was satisfied with any thing he did: when he saw any imperfection that might have been avoided, he easily became disgusted, rather preferring to commence his undertaking entirely anew than attempt an emendation. With this operating principle in his mind he completed few works in sculpture. Lomazzo tells an anecdote, that cardinal Farnese one day found Michel Angelo, when an old man, walking alone in the Colosseum, and expressed his surprize at rinding him solitary amidst the ruins; to which he replied, “I yet go to school that I may continue to learn something.” Whether the anecdote be correctly true or not, it is evident he entertained this feeling, for there is still remaining a design by him, of an old man with a long beard in a child’s go-cart, and an hour-glass before him; emblematical of the last stage of life, and on a scroll over his head, Anchora Inparo, denoting that no state of bodily decay or approximation to death was incompatible with intellectual improvement. An outline of this, as well as of many of the principal works of Michel Angelo, is given in his Life by Mr. Duppa, who concludes the best and most ample account of any artist in our language, with remarking that although Michel Angelo’s high-minded philosophy made him often regardless of rank and dignity, and his knowledge of human nature in one view concentrated the plausible motives and the inconsistent professions of men, yet he was not morose in his disposition, nor cynical in his habits. Those who knew him well esteemed him most, and those who were worthy of his friendship knew how to value it. The worthless flatterers of powerful ignorance, and the cunning, who at all times trust to the pervading influence of folly, feared and hated him. He was impetuous in the highest degree when he felt the slightest attack upon his integrity, and hasty in his decisions, which gave him an air of irascibility; but to all who were in need of assistance from his fortune or his talents he exercised a princely liberality; and to those of honourable worth, however low their station, he was kind and benevolent, he sympathized with their distresses, nor ever refused assistance to lessen the weight of oppression. In the catholic faith of his ancestors he was a sincere Christian, and enjoyed its beneficent influence; he was not theoretically one man, and practically another; nor was his piety ever subservient to caprice or personal convenience; his religion was not as a staff he leaned upon, but the prop by which he was supported.

, an eminent landscape engraver, was born in 1742, and educated under an uncle, who engraved heraldry on plate; but young Byrne having succeeded in a landscape after Wilson, which obtained a premium from the society for the encouragement of arts, it was regarded as the precursor of talent of a superior order, and he was sent to Paris, at that time the chief seminary in Europe for the study of engraving. There he studied successively under Aliamet and Wille: from the former of whom he imbibed the leading traits of that style of engraving which he afterwards adopted as his own r under the latter he engraved a large plate of a storm after Vernet; but the manual dexterity of Wille was alien to his mind, and probably contributed not rnuch to his improvement, although he alw r ays spoke of Wille’s instructions with respect. When he returned to England, the success of Woollett, as a landscape engraver, had set the fashion in that department of the art; but Byrne, disdaining to copy what he did not feel, or perhaps scorning the infiuence of fashion in art, preserved the independence of his style; and continued to study, and to recommend to his pupils*, nature, Vivares, and the best examples of the French school. His larger performances are after Zuccarelli and Both: but his principal works (containing probably his best engraving) are the “Antiquities of Great Britain,” after Hearne; a set of “Views of the Lakes,” after Farringdon; and Smith’s “Scenery of Italy.” His chief excellence consisting in his aerial perspective, and the general effect of his chiaroscuro, he was more agreeably and more beneficially employed, in finishing than in etching, and hence he generally worked in conjunction with his pupils, who were in his later years his own sons and daughters. His manners were unassuming; his professional industry unremitting; and his moral character exemplary. This ingenious artist died at his house in Great Titchfield street, Sept. 24, 1805.

, an artist, knqwn by the name of Moncalvo, from his long abode in that place, was born in 1568 at Montebone, in Montferrat, and marks perhaps the brightest data of Piemontese art, though with less celebrity than merit, for no traces appear of his education: had he been a scholar of the Caracci, his first essays in fresco would have been made at Bologna, not at the stationary chapels of Monte Crea; his style of design would resemble that of Annibale more than the ideal line of Raffaello, or Andrea del Sarto, or Parmigiano; and his landscape have Jess of Paul Brill. His numerous small Madonnas breathe the spirit of the Roman and Florentine school, and one in the royal palace of Torino seems to have issued from the hands of Andrea, if we except the colour, which, though graceful and delicate, has more of the weakness that marked the tints of Sabbatini and the predecessors of the Caracci. The powers of Moncalvo were not, however, coiir fined to soft subjects: the contrary appears in the church of the Conventuals at that place in numerous instances, and still more in a chapel of S. Domenico at Chieri, where the Resuscitation of Lazarus, and the Multiplication of the Loaves, two collateral altar-pieces, vie with each other in pathetic imagery, legitimate composition, energy of expression and attitude, and correctness of design. He was assisted by several scholars of no very eminent note, but N. Sacchi of Casale, in energy of varied expression and decision of pencil, perhaps excelled the master. His two daughters i< raneesca and Orsola Caccia became, under his tuition, apt associates of his labours in fresco, a practice else unknown to female hands; they drew from the father the structure of bodies, but not their animation; and such was the similarity of their execution, that to avoid confusion, Francesca, the younger, marked her performances with a small bird, whilst Orsola distinguished her own by a flower; she founded the Conservatory of the Ursuliiies at Moncalvo, where, and at Casale, she left altar-pieces and numerous cabinet-pictures, touched in the manner of Paul Brill, and strewn with flowers; A holy family in that taste is among the rich collection of the palace Natta. Caccia died about 1625.

, a celebrated artist, called Paul Veronese, the great master of what is called the ornamental style, was born at Verona in 1530, and was the disciple of Antonio adile. When young, in concurrence with Batista del Moro, Domenico Brusasorci, and Paol Farinato, he painted at the summons of cardinal Ercole Gonzaga, in the cathedral of Mantua, and left no doubt of his superiority in the. contest. He then went to Venice, and with the procurator Grimani to Rome, where, from the frescos of M. Angelo and Raffael, he acquired the idea of that breadth which distinguishes him in all his allegorical and mythologic pictures; and though the simplicity inseparable from real grandeur vras not a principle to be courted by him who aimed at captivating the debauched Venetian eye, he gave proofs, that, if he did not adopt, he had a sense for its beauties. The Apotheosis of Venice in the ducal palace, in magnificence of combination, loftiness, splendor, variety, offers in one picture the principles and the elemental beauties of his style. It was, however, less to this work, than to his Cene, or convivial compositions, that Paolo owed his celebrity. He painted four at Venice, for four refectories of convents, all of enormous dimensions and equal copiousness of invention. The first, with the Nuptials of Cana, once in the refectory of*St. Giorgio Maggiore, now in the Louvre, and known by numerous copies, is thirty palms long, comprizes 130 figures, with a number of distinguished portraits; and yet was painted, says Lanzi, for no more than ninety ducats. The second, better preserved, was painted for the convent of S. Giovanni and Paolo, and represents the call of St. Matthew; it is chiefly praised for the character of the heads, which Ricci copied for his studies at an advanced age. The third, at St. Sebastian, is the Feast of Simon, which is likewise the subject of the fourth, painted for the refectory o/ the Servi, but sent to Lewis XIV. and placed at Versailles. This, perhaps, is the master-piece of the four, though placed in an unfavourable light, and greatly injured by neglect, and the dampness of the place.

This great artist was highly esteemed by all the principal men of his time; and so much admired by the great masters, as well his contemporaries as those who succeeded him, that Titian himself used to say, he was the ornament of his profession. And Guido Reni being asked, which of the masters his predecessors he would choose to be, were it in his power, after Raphael and Corregio, named Paul Veronese, whom he always called his Paolino. He died of a fever at Venice in 1588, and had a tomb and a statue of brass erected in the church of St. Sebastian.

, called IL Cremonese, an eminent artist of Ferrara, where he was born about 1600, studied and imitated, beyond all others, the tones of Titian, and carried the illusion to such a degree, that his half-figures, bacchanals, and small histories, entered the best galleries of Rome and Bologna as originals: nor is he easily discovered by the best eye or taste, but from the admission of some more modern conceit, or carelessness of execution. That he possessed talents superior to what mere mimickry can confer, is evident from his St. Mark, in the church of S. Benedetto at Ferrara, a majestic, correct, expressive figure, girt by a profusion of volumes, whose picturesque arrangement and truth of touch procured him the name of the Book-Painter (Pittor da' Libri). Immediately after the execution of this work, some say that he disappeared, and was heard of no more: whilst others, with less probability of conjecture, extend the date of his death to 1660.

When he arrived at Rome, he learned to design and engrave first with Giulio Parigii, and afterwards with Philip Thomassin of Troyes in Champagne, who had settled in that city; but this latter having a beautiful wife, who paid some marked attentions to Callot, a disagreement took place, and our young artist removed to Florence, where the great duke employed him with several other excellent workmen. Callot at that time began to design in miniature, and had so happy a genius for it, that he became incomparable in that way. He quitted his graver, and used aquafortis, because this was both the quickest way of working, and gave more strength and spirit to the performance, After the great duke’s death, he began to think of returning to his own country; and about that time, prince Charles, coming through Florence, and being uncommonly struck with some of his curious pieces, persuaded Callot to go along with him to Lorrain, and promised him a good salary from his father-in-law Henry, the reigning duke. Callot attended him, and had a considerable pension settled upon him; and, being in his 32d year, he took a wife, who was a woman of family. His reputation was now spread all over Europe, and the infanta of Spain sent for him to Brussels, when the marquis of Spinola was laying siege to Breda, that he might first draw, and afterwards, engrave, as he did, the s:ege of that town. He went to France in 1628, when Louis XIII. made him design and engrave the siege of Rochelle and the isle of Roe*. Aftec he had been amply recompensed by that monarch, he returned to Nancy; where he continued to follow the business of engraving so assiduously, that he is said to have left 1500 pieces of his own an incredible number for so short a life as his! When the duke of Orleans, Gaston of France, withdrew into Lorrain, he made him engrave several silver stamps, and went to his house two hours every day to learn to draw. In 1031, when the king of France had reduced Nancy, he sent for Callot to engrave that new conquest, as he had done Rochelle; hut Callot begged to be excused, because that being a Lorrainer he could not do any thing so much against the honour of his prince and country. The king was not displeased at his answer, but said, “The duke of Lorrain was very happy in having such faithful and affectionate subjects.” Some of the courtiers insinuated, that he ought to be forced to do it; to which Callot, when it was told him, replied with great firmness, “That he would sooner disable his right hand than be obliged to do any thing against his honour.” The king then, instead of forcing him, endeavoured to draw him into France, by offering to settle upon him a pension of 3000 livres; to which Callot answered, “That he could not leave his country and birth-place, but that there he would always be ready to serve his majesty.” Nevertheless, when he afterwards found the ill condition Lorrain was reduced to by the taking of Nancy, he projected a scheme of returning with his wife to Florence; but was hindered from executing it by his death, which happened on the 28th of March, 1636, when he was only 43 years of age. He was buried in the cloister of the cordeliers at Nancy, where his ancestors lay; and had an epitaph inscribed upon a piece of black marble, on which was engraved a half portrait of himself. He left an excellent moral character behind him, and died with the universal esteem of men of taste.

This artist engraved in several styles; the first of which was an imitation of his master Canta Gallina. He afterwards worked altogether with the graver; but without success. His next style was the mixture of the point and the graver, with coarse broad hatchings in the shadows. But his best manner, is that which appears to have been executed with the greatest freedom, by which he has- expressed, as we may say, with a single stroke, variety of character, and correctness of design. He is said to have been the first who used hard varnish in etching, which has been found much superior to that which was before adopted. The fertility of invention, and the vast variety, found in the works of this excellent artist, are astonishing. It could Jiarclly have been supposed possible to combine so great a number of figures together as he has done, and to vary the attitudes, without forced contrast, so that all of them, whether single figures or groupes, may be easily distinguished from each other, even in the masses of shadow; more especially when it is considered that they are often exceedingly minute. On a cursory view of some of his most admired pieces, the whole appears confused, and without harmony; but a careful examination discovers the richness, the beauty, the taste, and the judgment which are bestowed on the disposition of the figures, the management of the groupes, and the variety and propriety of the attitudes. The works of this master are very numerous and various. In representation of all the varieties of human life, from beggars and peasants to knights and nobles, he excelled; characterising all with the nicest touches of nature. Of his subjects, many are of the most painful and shocking kind, such as public executions, the miseries of war, and the like; many are grotesque and fanciful, and exhibit a strong imagination. Among his most admired prints, Strutt enumerates: “The Murder of the InnocentSjJ' of which that engraved at Florence is most rare; a fine impression of it being found with difficulty;” The Marriage of Cana in Galilee,“from Paolo Veronese;” The Passion of Christ,“the first impressions of which are very scarce” St. John in the island of Palma;“” The Temptation of St. Anthony;“”The Punishments,“exhibiting the execution of several criminals;” The Miseries of War;“” The great Pair of Florence;“The little Fair,” otherwise called “The Players at Benti,” one of the scarcest of Callot’s prints;“” The Tilting, or the New Street at Nancy;“The Garden of Nancy;” “View of the Pont Neuf;” “View of the Louvre;” and “Four Landscapes.”

, an artist, was born at Antwerp in 1553, and first painted landscapes, having accustomed himself to retire to groves and fields, to study such scenes and objects after nature, as might be useful to him in that branch of his profession. But being desirous to obtain a better manner of designing figures, to adorn his landscapes, he determined to travel to Italy. In his journey he stopped at Bologna, where he unexpectedly met with many inducements to detain him in that city for some time; and became the disciple of Prospero Fontana, who had every qualification requisite for the improvement of his pupils, as well by his precepts as his performances. In such a situation Calvart applied himself diligently to his studies, not only carefully examining, but also copying the works of Coreggio and Parmigiano; and when he afterwards quitted the school of Fontana, he placed himself with Lorenzo Sabattini, with whom fie travelled to Rome, where he perfected himself in design, in perspective, architecture, and anatomy. At his return from Rome to Bologna, which city he now considered as the place of his nativity, he there opened an academy; and his style of colour procured him a large number of disciples, among whom were some of the first rank for genius; he is celebrated as the first instructor of Guido, Albano, and Domenichino, as well as of several other excellent painters. He died in 1619. In the Palazzo Ranuzzi, at Bologna, there is a fine picture by Calvart, representing two hermits, which is correctly designed, beautifully coloured, and delicately pencilled and in the Pembroke collection, at Wilton, there is a Nativity painted by him.

, an artist, remarkable for longevity as well as skill, a native of Genoa, was a son of Agostino Calvi, one of the most tolerable painters and reformers of the old style, and was with Pantaleo Calvi, his eldest brother, among the first pupils, of Perino del Vaga. Pantaleo was content to ^end his assistance and his name to Lazzaro, without pretending to share the praise due to his numerous ornamental works at Genova, Monaco, and Napoli; among which, none excels the facade of the palace Doria (now Spinola) with prisoners in various attitudes, and stories in colour and chiaroscuro, considered as a school of design and models of taste. In the palace Pallavicini‘al Zerbino they represented the story commonly called the Continence of Scipio, and a variety of naked figures, which, in the opinion of Mengs himself, might be adjudged to Penno. Whether or not he assisted them with his hand,* as he had with his cartoons, is matter of doubt: certain it is, that Lazzaro, giddy with self-conceit, fell into excesses unknown to other artists, if we except Corenzio. At the least appearance of rival merit, jealousy and avidity prompU ed him to have recourse to the blackest arts. Of Giacomo Bargone he rid himself by poison, and’ others he depressed by the clamour of hired ruffians. Such were his cabals when he painted the Birth of John the Baptist in the chapel Centurioni, in concurrence with Andrea Semini and Luca Cambiaso, which, though one of his best works and most in the style of his master, fell short of the powers of Luca, to whom prince Doria gave the preference in the ample commission of the frescos for the church of S. Matteo. This so enraged Calvi that he turned sailor, and touched no brush for twenty years: he returned at last to the art, and continued in practice to his eighty-fifth year, but with diminished powers: his works of that period are cold, laboured, and bear the stamp of age. The death of Pantaleo still farther depressed him, and the only remaining mark of his vigour was to have protracted life to one hundred and five years. He died at that very uncommon age in 1606, or 1607, leaving only a daughter, whom he had married to an opulent gentleman. Whatever his talents, we see nothing but what is -atrocious in his personal character.

In 1736 he was sent, in company with messieurs Clairaut, Maupertuis, and Monnier, upon the celebrated expedition, to measure a degree at the north polar circle; in which he rendered himself highly useful, not only as a mathema~= tician, but also as a mechanician and an artist, branches, for which he had a remarkable talent. In 1741 Camus had the honour to be appointed pensioner geometrician in the academy; and the same year he invented a gauging-rod and sliding-rule proper at once to gauge all sorts of casks, and to calculate their contents. About the year 1747 he was named examiner of the schools of artillery and engineers; and, in 1756, one of the eight mathematicians appointed to examine by a new measurement, the base which had formerly been measured by Picard, between. Villejuive and Juvisi; an operation in which his ingenuity and exactness were of great utility. In 1765 M. Camus was elected a fellow of the royal society. of London; and died the 4th of May 1768, in the sixty -ninth year o.f his age; being succeeded by the celebrated d'Alembert in his office of geometrician in the French academy; and leaving behind him a great number of manuscript treatises on various branches of the mathematics. The works published by M. Camus are, 1. “Course of Mathematics for the use of -the Engineers,” 4 vols. 8vo. 2. “Elements of Mechanics.” 3. “Elements of Arithmetic.” And his memoirs printed in the volumes of the academy are, 1. “Of accelerated motions by living forces,” vol. for 1728. 2. 4< Solution of a geometrical problem of M. Cramer,“1732. 3.” On the figure of the teeth and pinions in Clocks,“1733. 4.” On the action of a musket-ball, piercing a pretty thick piece of wood, without communicating any considerable velocity to it,“1738. 5.” On the best manner of employing Buckets for raising Water,“1739. 6.” A problem in Statics,“1740. 7.” On an Instrument for gauging of vessels,“1741. 8.” On the Standard of the Ell measure,“1746. 9.” On the Tangents of points common to several branches of the same curve,“1747. 10.” On the operations in measuring the distance between the centres of the pyramids of Villejuive and Juvisi, to discover the best measure of the degree about Paris,“1754. 11.” On the Masting of Ships;“Prize Tom. II. 12.” The Manner of working Oars;“Mach. torn. II. 13.” A Machine for moving many Colters at once;" Mach. torn. II.

, was an artist, whose real name was De Witte (or White), although Sandrart calls him Candido, as also does De Piles, on account of that name being inscribed on some of the prints engraved after the designs of this artist. Some authors affirm that he was born at Munich; but Descamps asserts, that he was born at Bruges, in Flanders, in 1548, although he probably might have resided for several years at Munich, and perhaps have died there. He painted with equal success in fresco and in oil, and had an excellent genius for modelling. He worked in conjunction with Vasari at the pope’s palace in Rome, and was also employed at Florence by the grand duke; ia both places affording competent proofs of his skill, and gaining reputation; till at last he was taken into the service of the elector Maximilian of Bavaria, and spent the remainder of his life in the court of that prince. Several prints are published by Sadeler, after his designs and paintings particularly the Hermits, and the Four Doctors of the Church.

, 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.

In his early days, as he was of a noble family, he disdained to accept pay for his productions, declaring that he worked for fame and practice, and that he considered himself as yet so imperfect in his art, that he could not in conscience admit of any recompence. As he advanced, however, he had no scruple in accepting the just reward of his merit; and the following anecdote, related by Mr. Cumberland, will show his spirit in asserting what was his due. A counsellor of Grenada having refused to pay the sum of one hundred pistoles for an image of St. Antony of Padua, which Cano had made for him, he dashed the saint into pieces on the pavement of his academy, while the counsellor was reckoning up how many pistoles per day Cano had earned whilst the work was in hand. “You have been twenty-five days carving this image of St. Antony,” said the counsellor, “and the purchase-money demanded being one hundred, you have rated your labour at the exorbitant price of four pistoles per day, whilst I, who am a counseller, and your superior, do not make half your profits by my talents.” “Wretch” cried the enraged artist, “to talk to me of your talents I have been fifty years learning to make this statue in twenty-five days” and so saying, flung it with the utmost violence upon the pavement. The affrighted counsellor escaped out of the house in terror. For this profanation, however, of the image of a saint, he was suspended from his function by the chapter of Grenada, and was not restored by the king until he had finished a magnificent crucifix, which the queen had ordered, but which he had long neglected.

Meanwhile Hannibal continued working in the Farnese gallery at Rome; and, after inconceivable pains and care, finished the paintings in the perfection they are in at present. He hoped that the cardinal would have rewarded him in some proportion to the excellence of his work, and to the time it took him up, which was eight years; but he was disappointed. The cardinal, influenced by an ignorant Spaniard his domestic, gave him but a little above 200 pounds. When the money was brought him, he was so surprised at the injustice done him, that he could not speak a word to the person who brought it. This confirmed him in a melancholy which his temper naturally inclined to, and made him resolve never more to touch his pencil; and this resolution he had undoubtedly kept, if his necessities had not compelled him to break it. It is said that his melancholy gained so much upon him that at certain times it deprived him of the right use of his senses. It did not, however, put a stop to his amours; and his debauches at Naples, whither he had retired for the recovery of his health, brought a distemper upon him, of which he died at forty-nine years of age. As in his life he had imitated Raphael in his works, so he seems to have copied that great master in the cause and manner of his death. His veneration for Raphael was indeed so great, that it was his death- bed request to be buried in the same tomb with him which was accordingly done in the pantheon or rotunda at Rome. There are extant several prints of the blessed Virgin, and of other subjects, etched by the hand of this incomparable artist. He is said to have been a friendly, plain, honest, and open-hearted man; very com^ municative to his scholars, and so extremely kind to them, that he generally kept his money in the same box with his colours, where they might have recourse to either as they had occasion.

Annibale Caracci, superior to his cousin and brother in power of execution and academic prowess, was inferior to either in taste and sensibility and judgment: of this the best proof that can be adduced is his master-work, that on which he rests his fame, the Farnese gallery; a work whose ^uniform vigour of execution nothing can equal but its imbecility and incongruity of conception: if impropriety of ornament were to be fixed by definition, the subjects of that gallery might be quoted as the most decisive instances: the artist may admire the splendor, the exuberance, the concentration of powers, displayed by Annibale Caracci, but the man of sense must lament their misapplication in the Farnese gallery.

It was difficult to be upon good terms with him. He was naturally quarrelsome, despised every one, and found no performances good but his own. A man of this temper could not be long without enemies. Some business that he had at Milan obliged him to leave this city, and make a journey to Venice, where he adopted Giorgioni’s manner. His stay here was but short, and he repaired to Rome. He was in such poor circumstances, that he was forced by necessity to work for Josehino, who gave him fruit and flowers to paint. This department was not that wherein he excelled; he therefore left Josehino, to go and paint large figures for Prospero, a painter of grotesque. Prospero every where sounded his praise, and made considerable profit by his works. A picture, the gamester, that Caravagio had painted, so highly pleased the cardinal del Monte, that, having bought it, he requested to see the artist, and kept him in his palace, where he caused him to paint several pieces for the pavilion in his garden.

Caravagio’s life was one continued series of misfortunes: he did not dare to go home to his country; on all hands he saw himself proscribed; he had scarcely a friend in the world, and died, quite destitute, on the common road. He usually went very ill clothed; he lived, without the ordinary accommodations, in any alehouse that would harbour him; and, once, when ho had not wherewith to pay his reckoning, he painted the sign for the alehouse, which, some time afterwards, was sold for a considerable sum. For many years the canvas of a portrait served him for a table-cloth at his dinner. Mr. Fuseli observes of this great artist, that he established a style of his own, in which energy and truth were to recover the rights supplanted by variety and manner. Of this style, the model, or what the Italians call “il vero,” dictated the forms, from which to deviate, or which to improve, was equally high treason against the art, or matter of derision in the eye of Caravagio. But to forms thus indiscriminately picked from the dregs of the street, he contrived to give energy and interest, by ideal light and shade. So novel a combination, substantiated by powers so decisive, could not fail to draw after it a number of followers. The great excellence of Caravagio consisted in truth of colour: he penetrated the substance of the thing before him, whether still life, fruit, flowers or flesh. His tints are few, but true, with little help from cinnabar or azure. Hence Hannibal Caracci declared, that he did not paint, but grind flesh. (Che costui macinava carne.)

, another eminent artist, was born in 1492, at Caravaggio jn the Milanese; from a labourer he became an assistant of Raphael in the works of the Vatican, and acquired supreme celebrity for unrivalled felicity in imitating the antique basso-relievos with a power little, if at all, inferior to that of the ancients themselves. These admirable works he executed in chiaroscuro. He was the inventor of a style which rose and perished with him. His design was without manner, compact, correct. He had the art of transposing himself into the times of which he represented the transactions, the costume, and rites: nothing modern swims on his works. Koine once abounded in friezes, facades, supraportas, painted by him and jVIaturino of Florence his companion, of which, to the irreparable detriment of the art, scarcely a fragment remains, if we except the Fable of Niobe, left in ruins by time and the rage of barbarians. This, one of his most classic labours, once decorated the outside of the Maschera d'Oro. All the compensation we have for these losses are the prints of Cherubino Albevti, and Henry Golzius, who engraved his Gods, the Niobe, and the Brennus; beside the etchings of Santes Bartoli and Gallestruzzi.

, an eminent painter of history, was a native of Genoa, and having prosecuted the study of his art at Rome, and in the school of Passignano at Florence, he became one of the most fertile, original, and seducing machinists of Italy. The most splendid works of this artist, and of his brother John, are the frescoes of the cathedral del Guastato at Genoa, which exhibit a wonderful effect of colouring. He survived his brother 50 years, and distinguished himself by this novel style in the churches and collections of Liguria and Lombardy. It is not easy to conceive why a painter should not have acquired greater celebrity, who united with so many opportunities so many diverging powers; who had equal felicity in oil and fresco, colour and design, velocity and correctness, and had incessant employment, and unrivalled diligence and perseverance. After a prolonged life of 86 years, he died in 1680.

, an artist, who was born at Ferrara, in 1501, became a disciple of Garofalo, and proved the best artist of all those who studied in that academy; but when he quitted that master, he devoted his whole time, thoughts, and attention, to study the works of Correggio, and to copy them with a critical care and observation. Jn that labour he spent several years at Parma, Modena, and other cities of Italy, where the best works of that exquisite painter were preserved. He succeeded to admiration, and acquired such an excellence in the imitation of Correggio’s style, and copying his pictures, that many paintings finished by him were taken for originals, and were eagerly purchased by the connoisseurs of that time. Nor is it improbable, that several of the paintings of Girolamo da Carpi pass at this day for the genuine works of Correggio. He died in 1556.

, an eminent female artist, was born at Chiozza, in 1675, and having shown an early taste for painting, her father placed her with an artist from whom she learned to paint in oil, but she afterwards practised, and carried crayon-painting to a high degree of perfection. Orlandi celebrates her miniatures. Her crayon painting arrives not seldom at the strength of pictures in oil. Her portraits, spread over all Europe, are as elegant and graceful in conception and attitude, as fresh, neat, and alluring in colour. Her Madonnas, and other sacred subjects, rise from grace to dignity, and even majesty. Equal and incessant application deprived her of sight during the last ten years of her life. She died at the advanced age of eighty-two, in 1757.

, an artist who from the place of his nativity was called Pontormo, had great natural ingenuity, and was in his earliest works admired by Raphael and Michel Angelo. He had had a few lessons from Lionardo da Vinci; after him from Albertinelli made some progress under Pier di Cosimo; and finished by entering the school of Andrea del Sarto, whose jealousy and ungenerous treatment, from a scholar, soon turned him into a rival. With such talents he became the victim of inconstancy, roaming from style to style. The Certosa of Florence exhibits specimens of the three different manners commonly ascribed to him. The first is correct in design, vigorous in colour, and approaches the style of Andrea del Sarto. The second, with good drawing combines a languid tone, and became the model of Bronzino and the subsequent epoch. The third is a downright imitation of Albert Durer, aod at present can only be found in some histories from the Passion in the cloister of that monastery, which are neither more nor less than copies from the prints of Albert. To these, perhaps, a fourth manner might be added, if the frescos of the General Deluge and Universal Judgment, on which he spent eleven years in S. Lorenzo, and his last work, had not been whitewashed, with the tacit acquiescence of all contemporary artists. In this labour he strove to emulate Michel Angelo, and to exemplify, like him, anatomic skill, which was then becoming the favourite pursuit of Florentine art. He died in 1558, aged sixty-five.

, a painter, was born at Paris in 1676, where he also died in the month of June 1754. He had for masters in his art Houasse, and afterwards Bon Boullogne. He obtained the grand prize of painting in 1699, and was received member of the academy in 1704. Cases may be considered as one of the first painters of the French school. His drawing is correct, and in the grand style, his compositions bear marks of genius; he excels in draperies, and possesses a knowledge of the chiaroscuro to a very high degree. His strokes are mellow, and his pencil brilliant. There is much freshness in his tints. This famous artist worked with great industry; but his performances are not all of equal beauty. Towards the latter end of his life, the coldness of age and the weakness of his organs, occasioned him to produce pictures which betray the decline of his powers. Some of his works may be seen at Paris, in the church of Notre Dame, in the college of Jesuits, at the house of charity, at the petit St. Antoine, at the chapel of la Jussienne, at the abbey of St. Martin, and particularly at St. Germain-des. Prs, where he has represented the lives of St. Germain and of St. Vincent. A holy family at St. Louis de Versailles, is much admired, and is one of his best productions. Cases mostly excelled in pictures with horses. The king of Prussia has two fine pieces by this painter, which have been compared for their execution with the works of Correggio. The celebrated Le Moine was a scholar of Cases.

, eminent in an art of the greatest consequence to literature, that of letter-founding, was born in 1692, in the part of the town of Hales-Owen which is situated in Shropshire. Though he justly attained the character of being the Coryphaeus in letter-founding, he was not brought up to the business; and it is observed by Mr. Mores, that this handiwork is so concealed among the artificers of it, that he could not discover that any one had taught it to another; but every person who had used it had acquired it by his own ingenuity. Mr. Caslon served a regular apprenticeship to an engraver of ornaments on gun-barrels, and, after the expiration of his term, carried on this trade in Vine-street, near the Minories. He did not, however, solely confine his ingenuity to that instrument, but employed himself likewise in making tools for the book-binders, and for the chasing of silver plate. Whilst he was engaged in this business, the elder Mr. Bowyer accidentally saw in a bookseller’s shop, the lettering of a book uncommonly neat; and inquiring who the artist was by whom the letters were made, was thence induced to seek an acquaintance with Mr. Caslon. Not long after, Mr. Bowyer took Mr. Caslon to Mr. James’s foundery, in Bartholomew-close. Caslon had never before that time seen any part of the business; and being asked by his friend if he thought he could undertake to cut types, he requested a single day to consider the matter, and then replied that he had no doubt but he could. Upon this answer, Mr. Bowyer, Mr. Bettenham, and Mr. Watts, then eminent printers, had such a confidence in his abilities, that they lent him 500l. to begin the undertaking, and he applied himself to it with equal assiduity and success. In 1720, the society for promoting Christian knowledge, in consequence of a representation from Mr. Solomon Negri, a native of Damascus, in Syria, who was well skilled in the Oriental tongues, and had been professor of Arabic, in places of note, deemed it expedient to print, for the use of the eastern churches, the NVw Testament and Psalter in the Arabic language. These were intended for the benefit of the poor Christians in Palestine, Syria, Mesopotamia, Arabia, and vEgypt, the constitution of which countries did not permit the exercise of the art of printing. Upon this occasion, Mr. Caslon was pitched upon to cut the fount; in his specimens of which he distinguished it by the name of English Arabic. After he had finished this fount, he cut the letters of his own name in pica Roman, and placed them at the bottom of one of the Arabic specimens. The name being seen by Mr. Palmer (the reputed author of a history of printing, which was, in fact, written by Psalmanaazar), he advised our artist to cut the whole fount of pica. This was accordingly done, and the performance exceeded the letter of the other founders of the time. But Mr. Palmer, whose circumstances required credit with those whose business would have been hurt by Mr. Caslon’s superior execution, repented of the advice he had given him, and endeavoured to discourage him from any farther progress. Mr. Caslon, being justly disgusted at such treatment, applied to Mr. Bowyer, under whose inspection he cut, in 1722, the beautiful fount of English which was used in printing Selden’s works, and the Coptic types that were employed in Dr. Wilkins’s edition of the Pentateuch. Under the farther encouragement of Mr. Bowyer, Mr. Bettenham, and Mr. Watts, he proceeded with vigour in his employment, and Mr. Bowyer was always acknowledged by him to be his master, from whom he had learned his art. In letter-founding he arrived at length to such perfection, that he not only relieved his country from the necessity of importing types from Holland, but in the beauty and elegance of those made by him, he so far exceeded the productions of the best artificers, that his workmanship was frequently exported to the continent. Indeed, it may with great justice and confidence be asserted, that a more? beautiful specimen than his is not to be found in any part of the world. Mr. Caslon’s first foundery was in a small house in Helmet-row, Old-street. He afterwards removed into Ironmonger-row; and about 1735, into Chiswell-street, where his foundery became, in process of time, the most capital one that exists in this or in foreign countries. Having acquired opulence in the course of his employment, he was put into the commission of the peace for the county of Middlesex. Towards the latter end of his life, his eldest son, William, being in partnership with him, he retired in a great measure from the active execution of business. His last country residence was at Bethnal-green, where he died Jan. 23, 1766, aged seventy-four. He was interred in the church-yard of St. Luke, Middlesex, in which parish all his different founderies were situated, and where they are still carried on by one of his descendants, under the firm of Caslon and Cattierwood. Mr. Caslon was universally esteemed as a fist-rate artist, a tender master, and an nonest, friendly, and benevolent man and sir John Hawkins has particularly celebrated his hospitality, his social qualities, and his love of music.

, called Nicoletto, a Venetian, artist, was born at Venice in 1659, and was the eldest son, and disciple of John Francis Cassana, a Genoese, who had been taught the art of painting by Bernardino Strozzi, and under his direction became an eminent portraiupainter; and the grand duke of Tuscany invited him to his court, where he painted the portraits of that prince and the princess Violante his consort. Of the historical subjects painted by this master while he resided at Florence, perhaps the most considerable was the Conspiracy of Catiline it consisted of nine figures as large as life, down to the knees; and the two principal figures were represented, as with one hand joined in the presence of their companions, and in their other hand holding a cup of blood. Nicoletto was invited to England, with strong assurances of a generous reception; and on his arrival, painted the portrait of queen Anne, in which he succeeded so happily, that the queen distinguished him by many marks of favour and of honour; but he had not the happiness to enjoy his good fortune for any length of time, dying in London, universally regretted, in the year 1713. He had a younger brother, G. Augustine Cassana, who, though a good portrait- painter, preferred the representation of animals and various fruits his pictures of that class are frequent in the collections of Italy, and sometimes ascribed to Castiglione. He had a sister, Maria Vittoria Cassana, who painted images of devotion for private amateurs, and died at Venice in the beginning of the last century.

, an artist, born at Antwerp in 16S4, painted birds and flowers with some success, and in 1726, he published twelve plates of birds and fowls which he had designed and etched himself. He had been settled in England many years, when he retired in 1735 to Tooting, to design for callico-printers. He died at Richmond, May 16, 1749.

, 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.

This artist passed the last years of his life at Madrid, as painter to the court. After his death in 1570, or, as some say 1580, Luca Cambiaso was sent for to finish the larger historic subjects; but the ornamental parts and the grotesques interspersed with figures remained to his two sons^ Fabrizio and Granello, whom he had carried with him to Spain as his assistants. Palomino, and the writers on the Escurial, enumerate these works, with praise of their variety, singularity, and beauty of colour.

, called Grechktto, an admired artist, was born at Genoa, in 161h, and in that city was at Hrst a disciple of Battisca Pagi, and afterwards studied in the academy of Joan Andrea de Ferrara; but his principal improvement was derived from the instructions of Vandyck, who at that time came to reside in Genoa. He formed to himself a very grand manner of design in every branch of his art, and succeeded equally well in all; in sacred and profane history, landscape, cattle, and portrait; executing every one of them with an equal degree of truth, freedom, and spirit. But, although his genius was so universal, his predominant turn was to rural scenes and pastoral subjects, markets, and animals, in which he had no superior. He had great readiness of invention, a bold and noble tint of colouring, and abundance of nature in all his compositions. His drawing is elegant, and generally correct, his touch judicious, and his pencil free and firm. And still to add to his accomplishments, he had a thorough knowledge of the chiaroscuro, which he very happily applied through all his works. In a chapel of St. Luke’s church at Genoa, is an excellent picture by this master. The composition and design are good, the heads of the figures extremely fine, the draperies well chosen and judiciously cast, the animals lively and correct; and the manner through the whole is grand, and yet delicate; though it must be observed, that the colouring is a little too red. In the Palazzo Brignole* is a grand composition, the figures being eighteen or twenty inches high, which is admirably finished, though perhaps a little too dark. And at the Palazzo Caregha, in the same city, is an historical picture of Rachel concealing the Teraphim from Luba*i, in which the figures and animals are exceedingly fine.

The etchings of this celebrated artist, which are numerous, are spirited, free, and full of taste; and their effect is, in general, powerful and pleasing. Among his most estimable plates, Strutt reckons the following, all from his own compositions viz. “Animals coming to the ark” “Laban searching for his gods in the tent of Jacob;” “The angel appearing to Joseph in a dream” “The nativity of our Saviour;” “The flight into Egypt;” “The resurrection of Lazarus;” “Diogenes with his lanthorn;” “A magician with several animals;” “The little melancholy;” “A ruin with a vase, and two men, one of them pointing to a tomb” two “Rural subjects, with fawns and satyrs;” and two “Sets of heads.”

, a Spanish painter, was born at Cordova, in 1603, and after the death of his father, Augustine Castillo, whose disciple he was, repaired to Seville for the purpose of improving himself in the school of Francis Zurbaran. Being returned to his native country, he acquired great reputation by his works; which was so well established, that even at this day no one is considered as a man of taste who does not possess some piece by this great artist. He treated history, landscape, and portrait, with equal success. His drawing is excellent; but his colouring is deficient in graces and taste. It is said, that, on his return to Seville, he was seized with such a fit of jealousy at seeing the pictures of the young Murello of a freshness and colouring much superior to his, that he died of vexation shortly after his return to Cordova, in 1667. He once marked one of his pictures with the whimsical inscription: “Non pinxit Alfaro,” to ridicule the vanity of that pupil, noted as the most conceited artist of his day, who nerer suffered a picture to escape his hand without stamping it with the words “Alfaro pinxit.” The best works of Castillo are at Cordova.

In 1736, he established at Rouen a public school of surgery and anatomy, built an ample theatre at his own expence, and gave lectures for ten or twelve years gratis, at the end of which time he received a pension from the king. From this school, in the course of time, arose a literary association, which is now the academy of Rouen, and of which he was many years secretary; and the parliament, to testify their respect for the zeal and patriotism he had displayed, allowed him a pension of 1000 livres for some years. In 1739, he published a dissertation on solvents for the stone, and particularly on that sold in this country by Mrs. Stephens, which was once thought infallible. In December of that year, he was admitted a corresponding member of the royal academy of sciences at Paris, to whose memoirs he had contributed many curious papers; and in 1740, a similar honour was paid to him by the Royal Society of London. About the same time, he refused the most liberal offers made him to remove to Paris; his attachment to the city of Rou^n, and the regard paid him by all classes there, inducing him to prefer residing among them. In 1741 the academy of Madrid elected him one of their body; and the year following he exhibited another proof of his attachment to the promotion of science, by establishing a school for design at Rouen, for which purpose he accommodated M. Descarnp, a Flemish artist, with the use of his amphitheatre. In 1746 he began a course of experimental philosophy at Rouen, which he continued as well as his ordinary lectures on surgery and anatomy; and in 1749 he founded three anatomical prizes. In this last year^ he published various papers on the operation for the stone in the female subject; and in 1750> his love for the arts and sciences induced him to publish an energetic refutation of Rousseau’s famous discourse which had received the prize of the academy of Dijon* In the course of his progress he was honoured by admission into most of the learned societies in Europe, and contributed papers to their various memoirs.

The independence of Cam Tartary, however, soon occasioned an open rupture between the Turkish and Russian parties; and in 1778 it produced a declaration of war. From the measures that were pursued, it sufficiently appeared, that the ambition of the empress would not be satisfied till she had gained entire possession of that peninsula. Her intrigues in the neighbouring courts of Denmark and Sweden tended to render these powers little more than dependencies on her crown; however, in 1780 her influence over them was employed in establishing the famous “armed neutrality,” the purpose of which was to protect the commercial rights of neutral states, then continually violated by the belligerent powers, and particularly by England, which availed itself of its superiority at sea, in preventing France and Spain from receiving naval stores from the Baltic. In this year Catherine had an interview at Mohilow with the emperor of Germany, Joseph II. and they travelled together in familiar intercourse into Russia; the prince of Prussia (afterwards Frederic William II.) also visited her court; and it was customary for the neighbouring princes to make visits of policy or curiosity to Petersburgh, where they were always treated with extraordinary magnificence. In 1782, Catherine, with a view of affording an asylum to the proscribed order of Jesuits, and probably imagining that all the Jesuits of Europe and America would bring into White Russia their treasures and their industry, erected a Roman catholic archbishopric at Mohilow, for the spiritual government of her subjects of that persuasion, and also gave him a Jesuit coadjutor. But the spoils of Paraguay never found their way to Mohilow. This year was marked by an event which indicated Catherine’s respect for the memory of Peter the Great, whom she affected to imitate: it was the erection at Petersburgh of his famous equestrian statue, which was executed by Stephen Falconet of Paris. This, artist conceived the design of having for the pedestal of his statue a huge and rugged rock, in order to indicate to posterity, whence the heroic legislator had set out and what obstacles he surmounted. This rock, the height of which from the horizontal line was 21 feet by 42 in length, and 34 in breadth, was conveyed, with great labour, from a bay on the gulf of Finland to Petersburgh, through the distance of 11 versts, or about 41,250 English feet. On the side next the senate it has this Latin inscription, which is in a style of sublime and proud simplicity: “Petro primo, Catharina secunda;” “Catherine the second to Peter the first.”

, an historical artist, was born at Sassuolo, near Modena, in 1580, and was educated in the academy of the Caracci, where he learned design; but he frequently attended the schools of Baldi and Passerotti, to study after the naked. Yet to acquire a proper knowledge of colouring, he visited Venice, and carefully examined the productions of Titian; and at. his return to his own country, the best judges of the art of painting were much pleased with his works, as they seemed to possess an agreeable mixture of the style of the Caracci, and the tints of Titian. For some time, at Bologna, the works of Cavedone were esteemed equal to the compositions of Annibale; and it is recorded, that in the king of Spain’s chapel there is a “Visitation of the Virgin,” which Rubens, Velasquez, and Michel Angelo Colonna, supposed to be the performance of Annibale Caracci, although it was really the work of Cavedone; nor could there be a more honourable testimony in favour of this master. His best manner was strong and free, and the tints of his colouring were natural and beautiful; but by those who have judiciously considered his works, it is observed that this painter had three different manners at three different periods of his life that of the first was excellent the second but indifferent and his last was feeble, and miserably ba.d. for, in the latter part of his life he was depressed by sickness and extreme poverty; and a few years before his death, he received a violent shock by the fall of a scaffold, while he was painting; and his unhappiness was completed by the death of his only son, who had given strong proofs of a promising genius.

At Bologna, in the church of St. Salvadore, are several very capital performances of Cavedone. The “Prophets” and the “Four Doctors of the Church” are extremely good, and have an agreeable effect; and in a chapel belonging to the church of St. Paul, are some excellent paintings of his, very much in the manner of Caravaggirc as to the colouring, and the heads of the figures arc in a fine style. But one of his best performances is in the church of the Mendicants in Bologna, in which he represents Petronius and another saint on their knees, in the lower part of the picture, and the virgin and child in the clouds attended by angels. The virgin is in a grand taste of design; the composition is excellent; tho colouring in some parts resembles Titian, and in others the touch and manner of Guido; the heads are exceedingly fine; the draperies nobly executed, in that style which is particularly admired in Guido; the shadowings shew all the force of Caravaggk) and the whole is finished with great freedom of hand, and a masterly pencil. If there be any thing which might be liable to censure, it is the drapery of the virgin, which appears rather heavy, and is not so happily disposed as all the other parts of the composition. This artist died in 1660.

, a Spanish artist, the son of Patrizio Caxes, of Arezzo, who settled in Spain, was born at Madrid in 1577, and learned the art of his father, with whom he was employed by Philip III. in the palace del Pardd. Their chief work in the queen’s gallery there, was the story of “Joseph and Potiphar’s wife,” which perished with many other works of art in the fire which consumed that palace. The father died in 1625, before which his son had attained high favour and eminence. The excellence of his frescos in the Sala d' Udienza procured him the favour of Philip III. who appointed him painter to the court in 1612. He soon after painted one of the principal altar-pieces for the church de la Merced at Madrid; and in 1615, various pictures in company with Vinzenzio Caoducho in the cathedral of Toledo and elsewhere. Though, his pencil, in common^with his contemporaries, was chiefly devoted to church legends, he found means to paint the “History of Agamemnon” in the Alcazar at Madrid. His scholars were, Luis Fernandez of Madrid, who painted the life of S. Ramori in the cloisters of La Merced Calzada, a celebrated series; Juan de Arnau of Barcellona; and Don Pedro de Valpuesta of Burgo de Osma, a young man of education, who probably would have excelled his fellow-scholars, had he not entered the church, in which he arrived at the dignity of licentiate. Caxes died in 1642.

He shunned honours, but wasdesirous of being admitted into the number of the honorary members of the royal academy of inscriptions and belles-lettres: he accordingly was admitted in 1742, and then it was that he seemed to have found the place which nature designed for him. The study of literature now became his ruling passion, to which he consecrated his time and his fortune; he even renounced his pleasures, to give himself up wholly to that of making some discovery in the vast field of antiquity. But he confined himself generally to the sphere of the arts. In consequence of his researches, says his eulogist, we know how the Egyptians embalmed their mummies, and converted the papyrus into leaves fit for receiving writing. He shows us how that patient and indefatigable people laboured for years at rocks of granite; we see the most enormous masses floating along the Nile for hundreds of leagues, and, by the efforts of an art almost as powerful as nature, advancing by land to the place destined for their reception. His knowledge of drawing enabled him to explain many passages in Pliny, which were obscure to those who were unacquainted with that art. He has developed, in several memoirs, those expressive and profound strokes which that wonderful author has employed, with an energetic brevity, to paint the talents of celebrated painters and sculptors. In Pausanias he found the pencil of Polygnotus, and the composition of those famous pieces of painting wherewith that illustrious artist decorated the portico oi Delphos. He rebuilt the theatre of Curio, and, under the <iirecvion of Pliny, shewed again that astonishing machine, and presented us with the view of the whole Roman people moving round upon a pivot. The rival of the most celebrated architects of Greece, without any other assistance than a passage of the same Pliny, he ventured to build anew the magnificent tomb of Mausolus, and to give to that wo-icier of the world its original ornaments and proportions.

, a celebrated sculptor and engraver of Florence, was born in 1500, and intended to be trained to music but, at fifteen years of age, bound himself, contrary to his father’s inclinations, apprentice to a jeweller and goldsmith, under whom he made such a progress, as presently to rival the most skilful in the business. He had also a turn for other arts: and in particular an early taste for drawing and designing, which he afterwards cultivated. Nor did he neglect music, but must have excelled in some degree in it; for, assisting at a concert before Clement VII. that pope took him into his service, in the double capacity of goldsmith and musician. He applied himself also to seal-engraving; learned to make curious damaskeenings of steel and silver on Turkish daggers, &c. and was very ingenious in medals and rings. But Cellini excelled in arms, as well as in arts; and Clement VII. valued him as much for his bravery as for his skill in his profession. When the duke of Bourbon laid siege to Rome, and the city was taken and plundered, the pope committed the castle of St. Angelo to Cellini; who defended it like a man bred to arms, and did not suffer it to surrender but by c?.pitulation. Meanwhile, Cellini was one of those great wits, wh'o may truly be said to have bordered upon madness; he was of a desultory, capricious, unequal humour, which involved him perpetually in adventures that often threatened to prove fatal to him. He travelled among the cities of Italy, but chiefly resided at Rome where he was sometimes in favour with the great, and sometimes out. He consorted with all the first artists in their several ways, with Michael Angelo, Julio Romano, &c. Finding himself at length upon ill terms in Italy, he formed a resolution of going to France; and, passing from Rome through Florence, Bologna, and Venice, he arrived at Padua, where he was most kindly received by, and made some stay with, the famous Pietro Bembo. From Padua he travelled through Swisserland, visited Geneva in his way to Lyons, and, after resting a few days in this last city, arrived safe at Paris. He met with a gracious reception from Francis I. who would have taken him into his service; but, conceiving a dislike to France from a sudden illness he fell into there, he returned to Italy. He was scarcely arrived, when, being accused of having robbed the castle of St. Angelo of a great treasure at the time that Rome was sacked by the Spaniards, he was arrested and sent prisoner thither. When set at liberty, after many hardships and difficulties, he entered into the service of the French king, and set out with the cardinal of Ferrara for Paris: where when they arrived, being highly disgusted at the cardinal’s proposing what he thought an inconsiderable salary, he abruptly undertook a pilgrimage to Jerusalem. He was, however, pursued and brought back to the king, who settled a handsome salary upon him, assigned him a house to work in at Paris, and granted him shortly after a naturalization. But here, getting as usual into scrapes and quarrels, and particularly having offended madame d'Estampes, the king’s mistress, he was exposed to endless troubles and persecutions; with which at length being wearied out, he obtained the king’s permission to return to Italy, and went to Florence; where he was kindly received by Cosmo de Medici, the grand duke, and engaged himself in his service. Here again, disgusted with some of the duke’s servants (for he could not accommodate himself to, or agree with, any body), he took a trip to Venice, where he was greatly caressed by Titian, Sansovino, and other ingenious artists; but, after a short stay, returned to Florence, and resumed his business. He died in 1570. His life was translated into English by Dr. Nugent, and published in 1771, 2 vols. 8vo, with this title: “The Life of Benevenuto Cellini, a Florentine artist; containing a variety of curious and interesting particulars relative to painting, sculpture, and architecture, and the history of his own time.” The original, written in the Tuscan language, lay in manuscript above a century and a half. Though it was read with the greatest pleasure by the learned of Italy, no man was hardy enough, during this long period, to introduce to the world a book, in which the successors of St. Peter were handled so roughly; a narrative, where artists and sovereign princes, cardinals and courtezans, ministers of state and mechanics, are treated with equal impartiality. At length, in 1730, an enterprising Neapolitan, encouraged by Dr. Antonio Cocchi, one of the politest scholars in Europe, published it in one vol. 4to, but it soon was prohibited, and became scarce. According to his own account, Cellini was at once a man of pleasure and a slave to superstition; a despiser of vulgar notions, and a believer in magical incantations; a fighter of duels, and a composer of divine sonnets; an ardent lover of truth, and a retailer of visionary fancies; an admirer of papal power, and a hater of popes; art offender against the laws, with a strong reliance on divine providence. Such heterogeneous mixtures, however, generally form an amusing book, and Cellini’s life is amusing and interesting in a very high degree. It must not, however, be omitted, that Cellini published two treatises on the subject of his art, “Duo trattati, uno intorno alle oito principal! arti dell* oreficiera, Paltro in materia dell* arte della scoltura,” &c. 1568, 4to.

, an artist born in 1556, was one of the masters whose principles were respected by the school of the Caracci. From him Tiarini learnt the practice of fresco ^ his works contain the germ of Guido’s elegance. Indeed they are not easily distinguished from Guide’s earlier performances. He seldom dares; follows nature, fond of her best forms, and as shy to supply her with ideal ones; his draperies are broad, his attitudes considerate; his tints have more suavity than strength. Such are the altar-pieces at S. Jacopo and at S. Martino, works which Guido is said to have often spent whole hours in contemplating. In fresco he is more vigorous, and treats copious subjects with equal judgment, variety, and power of execution thus he treated the History of Æneas, in the palace Favi, and with still greater felicity the Transactions of Clement VIII. on the arch of Forli, which, though exposed to the air for so many years, retains all the vivacity of its tints. He was esteemed by the Caracci, and generally loved by the professors for his honesty of character and attachment to the art. To his exertions chiefly is ascribed the secession of the painters in 1595, from cutlers, chasers, and sadlers, with whom they had been incorporated for some centuries. And though at the formation of their new society he could not rid them of the cotton-workers’ body (Bambagiai), he established their precedence and superiority of rank. Cesi died in 1627.

The “Epistle to Hogarth” which followed, was occasioned by that artist’s having taken some liberties in his political engravings, with the characters of the earls Temple and Chatham. The only revenge he now took was a paltry print representing Churchill as a Russian bear, but whether this preceded or followed the “Epistle” is not quite clear. The parties had been once intimate, and Churchill paid due reverence to the talents of Hogarth, but in his present humour he stuck at nothing which could vex and irritate. Hogarth died soon after, and some of Churchill’s friends asserted, with malicious satisfaction, that the poem had accelerated that event. Mr. Nichols, in his copious life of Hogarth, starts some reasonable doubts on this subject.

, an eminent artist, was born at Bologna (some say at Rome) in 1628, and was taught his ait by Giovanni Battista Cairo Casalasco; and afterwards became the disciple of Albano, in whose school he appeared with promising and superior talents, but although these, while he studied with Albano, were exceedingly admired, yet, to improve himself still farther in correctness of design, and also in the force and relief of his figures, he studied Raphael, Annibale Caracci, Caravaggio, Correggio, and Guido; and combined something of each in a manner of his own. He is accounted very happy in his taste of composition, and excellent in the disposition of his figures; but a judicious writer says, that he was censured for bestowing too much labour on the finishing of his pictures, which considerably diminished their spirit; and also for affecting too great a strength of colouring, so as to give his figures too much relief, and make them appear as if not united with their grounds. However well or ill-founded these observations may be, yet through all Europe he is deservedly admired for the force and delicacy of his pencil, for the great correctness of his design, for a distinguished elegance in his compositions, and also for the mellowness which he gave to his colours. The draperies of his figures are in general easy and free; his expression of the passions is judicious and natural; and there appears a remarkable grace in every one of his figures.

, an eminent artist, claimed by the English school, from England being so long the theatre of his art, was born at Pistoia, about the year 1727. He received his first instructions from an English artist of the name of Heckford (who had settled in that city), and afterwards went under the tuition of Gabbiani, by the study of whose works he became a vigorous designer. Italy possesses few of his pictures, but Lanzi mentions two, painted for the abbey of St. Michele, in Pelago, in the neighbourhood of Pistoia; the one of St. Tesauro, the other of Gregory VII. In 1750 he went to Rome, where he had much employment, but chiefly in drawing; and in August 1755 came to England with Mr. Wilton and sir William Chambers, who were then returning from the continent. His reputation having preceded him, he was patronized by lord Tilney, and the late duke of Richmond, and other noblemen. When, in 1758, the duke of Richmond opened the gallery at his house in Privy- garden as a school of art, Wilton and Cipriani were appointed to visit the students the former giving them instructions in sculpture, and the latter in painting; but this scheme was soon discontinued. At the foundation of the Royal Academy, Cipriani was chosen one of the founders, and was also employed to make the design for the diploma, which is given to the academicians and associates at their admission. For this work, which he executed with great taste and elegance, the president and council presented him with a silver cup, “as an acknowledgment for the assistance the academy received from his great abilities in his profession.” The original drawing of this diploma was purchased at the marquis of Lansdowne’s sale of pictures, drawings, &c. in 1806 for thirty-one guineas by Mr. G. Baker.

, properly Claude Gele'I;, an inimitable landscape painter, was born at Lorraine in 1600, and served an apprenticeship to the trade of a pastry-cook. In the early part of his life he shewed no symptoms of- that astonishing genius, which in his more advanced years attracted the admiration of the world. He was very little indebted to any master for instruction, except Agostino Tassi, who had been a disciple of Paul Bril, and with great labour taught Claude some of the rules of perspective, and the method of preparing his colours. But although at first be could with difficulty comprehend the rudiments y of the art, yet in the progress of his instructions his rnind seemed to expand; his ideas improved; his imagination became more lively; and with wonderful eagerness he applied himself to his studies. During these he explored the true principles of painting, by an incessant examination of nature, usually studying in the open fields, where he very frequently continued frofn sun-rise till the dusk of the evening. There he sketched whatever he thought beautiful or striking; and every curious tinge of light, on all kinds of objects, he marked in his sketches with a similar colour; from which he gave his landscapes such an appearance of nature and truth, as has rarely been discovered in any artist that ever painted in that style. Sandrart relates, that Claude used to explain to him, as they walked through the fields, the causes of the different appearances of the same prospect at different hours of the day, from the reflections or refractions of light, from dews or vapours, in the evening or morning, with all the precision of a philosopher.

, an artist of very considerable talents, of the fifteenth century, who practised in England, was born at Rostock, and retained in the service of Christian IV. king of Denmark; but the excellence of his genius prompted him to the search of better models than he found in that northern climate. He travelled into Italy, and remained there four years, where he probably acquired a taste for the beautiful and ornamental grotesque, in which he afterwards shone. At Venice he became known to sir Henry Wotton, and sir Robert Anstruther recommended him to prince Charles, afterwards Charles I. He arrived in England, while the prince was in Spain, but notwithstanding was graciously received by king James, who mentions that circumstance in a Latin letter (preserved in Fuller’s Worthies) which he wrote to the king of Denmark, desiring leave to detain Cleyn in England, though with a permission to return first to Copenhagen and finish a work he had begun there, and promising to pay the expence of his journey. The request being granted, Cleyn returned to London, and appears to have been first employed in jdesigns for sir Francis Crane’s manufactory of tapestry at Mortlack, by which those works were carried to singular perfection. Five of the celebrated cartoons were also sent thither to be copied by him in tapestry. He had an annuity of 100l. which he held until the rebellion, and enjoyed very high reputation by his paintings at Somerset house, and the houses of several of the nobility. There is still extant a beautiful chamber adorned by him at Holland house, with a ceiling in grotesque, and small compartments on the chimneys, in the style and not unworthy of Parmegiano. Lord Orford mentions other works by his hand, and he also made designs for engravers. This ingenious artist, whom Evelyn records as a man of piety also, died in 1658.

, justly celebrated for his astonishing miniatures and illuminations in missals and other religious books, was born in Sclavonia in the year 1498. He was originally educated for the church, and took orders, but was afterwards suffered to relinquish the sacerdotal habit by a dispensation from the pope. Soon after the age of eighteen, his love of painting prompted him to travel to Rome, where he was taken into the service of the cardinal Grimani, by whom he was, for the space of three years, employed in making careful pen-drawings from the finest medals. He afterwards became the scholar of Julio Romano, and made considerable advancement in oil-painting; but his master, perceiving the extraordinary talent which he evinced for miniature, succeeded in persuading him to apply himself entirely to that branch of the art; and' it may with justice be said, that we owe to the sagacity of Julio Romano, and the unexampled assiduity of Clovio, the most exquisite and delicately finished performances of that kind in the known world; since he not only far surpassed all who went before him, but to this day stands unrivalled, by all those who have since attempted to walk in his footsteps. In addition to the instruction which our artist received from the favourite scholar of Raffaele, he derived great benefit from the works of Buonarotti, many of which he copied in a most beautiful and finished manner; and he afterwards reaped great advantage from the friendship and experience of Girolamo da 1 Libri, a miniature painter of great note at Verona: the result of all these studies was a style of drawing, partaking of the purity of the Roman, and the grandeur of the Florentine school; united, not unfrequently, to the rich colouring of Titian or the ambient hue of Correggio.

, son of the preceding artist, was born at Paris in 1715, and, assisted by the instructions of his father, and his mother Louise Madeleine Hortemels, became an engraver of considerable celebrity. In 1749, he travelled to Italy with the marquis de Marigny, and after his return, was in 1752 made a member of the royal academy of Paris, and, in the sequel, appointed secretary and historian to that society. In addition to these honours, he was made a knight of the order of St. Michael, and keeper of the king’s drawings. Of his works, then extremely numerous, Mr. Jombert published a catalogue in 1770. He died April 29, 1790, after having published some works connected with his profession, as, 1. “Lettres sur les Peintures d'Herculaneum,” 1751, 12mo. 2. “Dissertation sur l'effet de la lumiere et des ombres, relativement a la peinture,” 1757, 12mo. 3. “Voyage d‘ltalie, ou Recueil d’ observations sur les ouvrages d‘architecture, de peinture, et de sculpture, que l’on voit dans les principales villes d'ltalie,” Lausanne, 1773, 3 vols. 8vo. 4. “Les Mysotechniques aux enfers,” 1763, 12mo. 5. “Lettres sur les Vies de Slodz et de Deshays,” 1765, 12mo. 6. “Projet d'une salle de spectacle,” 1765, 12mo. Cochin gave the design for the monument of the mareschal D'Harcourt, executed by Pigal, which is now in the French museum.

, a Scotch artist, was born Dec. 12, 1738, at Strathaven in Clydesdale, Having early shewn a genius in design, he was put as a scholar to the academy ofpainting in the college of Glasgow in 1754 then chiefly under the inspection of those eminent printers Messrs. Robert and Andrew Fonlis. After some time spent there, he went to Italy about the end of 1764, where he studied for five years, mostly at Rome, under the celebrated Mr. Gavin Hamilton; since which time he followed his profession in Glasgow, with honour and advantage to himself, and satisfaction to his friends. In portrait painting of a large size he excelled, and in miniature and other sizes he had great merit; his drawing was correct, and he seldom failed of producing a most striking likeness. In history, some pieces done by him are now in Glasgow, particularly “Daedalus and Icarus,” “Diana and Endymion,” both essay pieces executed at Rome, that would do credit to any pencil; yet, from an unusual modesty and diffidence, he never could be prevailed upon to put his name to his works. A dutiful attachment to an aged mother and other relations fixed him in Glasgow: ambition with him was no ruling passion, nor was he eager after riches; but a natural philanthropic disposition, and an assiduity to please, were conspicuous traits of his character. By permission 1 of the lord provost and magistrates, he was buried in the choir of the cathedral church, where a neat marble is erected to his memory, with this inscription “In memory of Mr. William Cochran, portrait painter in Glasgow, who died October 23, 1785, aged 47 years. The works of his pencil and this marble bear record of an eminent artist, and a virtuous man.”

, an engraver and print-seller of Antwerp, of the sixteenth century, is said to have received the first instructions in his art, in the place of his nativity; after which he repaired to Italy to complete his studies. He contributed not a little, by his assiduity, and the facility of his graver, to the numberless sets of prints of sacred stones, huntings, landscapes, flowers, fish, &c. with which the states of Germany and Flanders were at that time inundated. Many of these are apparently from his own designs, and others from Martin de Vos, Theodore Bernard, P. Breughel, John Stradanus, Hans Bol, and other masters. His style of engraving is at the same time masterly and neat, and his knowledge of drawing appears to have been considerable; but his prints partake of the defects of his contemporaries, his masses of light and shade being too much scattered, and too equally powerful. The following are amongst his numerous performances. The “Life of Christ in 36 small prints.” “The twelve months, small circles from H. Bol.” “The women of Israel chanting the psalm of praise, after the destruction of the Egyptians in the Red Sea.” This artist flourished according to Strutt and Heinecken about 1530 1550. His son, Hans or John, was an excellent draughtsman and engraver. He studied some time in Rome, and afterwards settled in his native place, Antwerp, where he assisted his father in most of his great works; and afterwards published a prodigious number of prints of his own, nowise inferior to those of Adrian. The works attributed by some to one Herman Coblent, are, by Heinecken, supposed to be by this master. His prints, according to Strutt, are dated from 1555 to 1622, so that he must have lived to a great age. We shall only notice the following amongst his numerous performances “The Life of St. Francis in 16 prints lengthways, surrounded by grotesque borders.” “Time and Truth,” a small upright print beautifully engraved, from J. Stradanus “The Last Judgment,” a large print, encompassed with small stories of the life of Christ. M. Heinecken mentions a print by an artist, who signs himself William Collaert, and supposes him the son of John Collaert.

, a very popular artist, was born at Gaeta in 1676. He studied under Solimene, and by persevering practice soon became an able machinist. At little less than forty, the desire of seeing Rome prompted him to visit that city, where he became once more a student, and spent five years in drawing after the antique and the masters of design: but his hand, debauched by manner, refused to obey his mind, till wearied by hopeless fatigue, he followed the advice of the sculptor le Gros, and returned to his former practice, though not without considerable improvements, and nearer to Pietro da Cortona than his master. He had fertile brains, a rapid pencil, and a colour which at first sight fascinated every eye by its splendor, contrast, and the delicacy of its flesh tints. His dispatch was equal to his employment, and there is scarcely a collection of any consequence without its Conca. He was courted by sovereigns and princes, and pope Clement XI. made him a cavaliere at a full assembly of the academicians of St. Luke. He died, far advanced in age, in 1764. Sir Robert Strange, in whose possession was a Virgin and Child," by Conca, observes that, with all his defects, he was a great painter, and must be regarded as one of the last efforts which this expiring art made in Italy.

, of Ripa Transona, the most obscure of modern artists, though a biographer of some celebrity, owes that and a place here to his connexion with Michael Angelo, whose life he published in 1553. If we believe Vasari, his imbecility was at least equal to his assiduity in study and desire of excelling, which were extreme. No work of his exists in painting or in sculpture. Hence Gori, the modern editor of his book, is at a loss to decide on his claim to either, though from the qualities of the writer, and the familiarity of M. Angelo, he surmises that Condivi must have had merit as an artist. From the last no conclusion can be formed; the attachment of M. Angelo, seldom founded in congeniality, was the attachment of the strong to the weak, it was protection; it extended to Antonio Mini of Florence, another obscure scholar of his, to Giuliano Bugiardini, to Jacopo L'Indaco: all men unable to penetrate the grand motives of his art, and more astonished at the excrescences of his learning in design, than elevated by his genius. Condivi intended to publish a system of rules and precepts on design, dictated by Michael Angelo, a work, if ever he did compose it, now perhaps irretrievably lost; from that, had destiny granted it to us, we might probably have formed a better notion of his powers as an artist, than we can from a biographic account, of which simplicity and truth constitute the principal merit. Condivi published this life, consisting of fifty pages, under the title “Vita de Michelagnolo Buonarroti, raccolta per Ascanio Condivi da la Ilipa Transone. In Roma appresso Antonio Blado Stampatore Canierale nel M. D. LIII. alii XVI. di Luglio.” According to Beyero, in his “Memoriae Historico-criticae, lib. rariorum,” this is one of the scarcest books in Europe. In 1746, Gori republished it in folio, and as it was originally published ten years before the death of Michael Angelo, continued it to that period. Gori’s work is a small folio, printed at Florence, 1746.

, 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.

an English artist, was born in 1642. Having a taste for historical painting, he travelled to Italy for the purpose of improving himself in this branch of the art, and studied under Sulvator Rosa; but, on his return to England, met with so little encouragement, that for many years he remained in want and obscurity, and at last was obliged to fly for a murder which he committed on a person who courted one of his mistresses. On his return, when this affair was forgot, his talents gained him notice, and he was employed by king William to repair his cartoons; he likewise finished the equestrian portrait of Charles II. at Chelsea college, painted the choir of New College chapel, Oxford, as it stood before the late repairs, and the staircase at Ranelagh house, besides many other works mentioned by lord Orford. He is also said to have tried portrait painting, but to have given it up, disgusted with the caprices of those who sat to him. He died 18th Nov. 1700.

, an eminent English painter, was born in London in 1609, and bred under the care and discipline of Mr. Hoskins, his uncle: but derived the most considerable advantages from his observations on the works of Van Dyck, insomuch that he was commonly styled the Van Dyck in miniature. His pencil was generally confined to ahead only; and indeed below that part he was not always so successful as could be wished. But for a face, and all the dependencies of it, namely the graceful and becoming air, the strength, relievo, and noble spirit, the softness and tender liveliness of flesh and blood, and the looseness and gentle management of the hair, his talent was so extraordinary, that, for the honour of our nation, it may without vanity be affirmed, he was at least equal to the most famous Italians; and that hardly any one of his predecessors has ever been able to shew so much perfection in so narrow a compass. The high prices of his works, and the great esteem in which they were held at Rome, Venice, and in France, were abundant proofs of their great worth, and extended the fame of this master throughout Europe. He so far exceeded his master and uncle Hoskins, that the latter became jealous of him; and finding that the court was better pleased with his nephew’s performances than with his, he took him into partnership with him, but his jealousy increasing, he dissolved it; leaving our artist to set up for himself, and to carry, as he did, most of the business of that time before him. He drew Charles II. and his queen, the duchess of Cleveland, the duke of York, and most of the court: but the two most famous pieces of his were those of Oliver Cromwell, and of one Swingfield. The French king offered Iso/, for the former, but was refused; and Cooper carrying the latter with him to France, it was much admired there, and introduced him into the favour of that court. *He likewise did several large limnings in an unusual size for the court of England; for which his widow received a pension during her life from the crown. This widow was sister to the mother of the celebrated Pope. Answerable to Cooper’s abilities in painting, was his skill in music; and he was reckoned one of the best lutenists, as well as the most excellent limner, of his time. He spent several years of his life abroad, was personally acquainted with the greatest men of France, Holland, and his own country, and by his works was universally known in all parts of Europe. He died at London May 5, 1612, aged 63, and was buried in Pancras church in the fields; where there is a fine marble monument set over him, with a Latin inscription.

, an esteemed painter of portraits and conversations, was born at Antwerp in 1618, and was a disciple of the old David Ryckaert, under whose direction he applied himself diligently to cultivate those promising talents which he possessed, not only by practising the best rules administered to him by his instructor, but also by studying nature with singular attention. He was a great admirer of Vandyck; and fixing on the manner of that great artist as his model, had the happiness of so far succeeding, that next to him he was esteemed equal to any other painter of his time. In the school of Ryckaert, he had been accustomed to paint conversations, and he frequently composed subjects of fancy, like Teniers, Ostade, and his master; and by that habit he introduced a very agreeable style of portrait-painting in a kind of historical conversations, which seemed much more acceptable to persons of taste than the general manner of painting portraits, and procured him great reputation and riches. In that way he composed several fine pictures for Charles I. and likewise several for the archduke Leopold and the prince of Orange; which latter prince, as a mark of respect, presented Coques with a rich gold chain, and a gold medal, on which the bust of that prince was impressed. He died in 1634. He had an excellent pencil; his portraits were well designed, with easy natural attitudes; he disposed the figures in his composition so as to avoid confusion and embarrassment; he gave an extraordinary clearness of colour to his heads and hands; and his touch was free, firm, and broad a circumstance very uncommon in works of a small size.

, an artist, was born about 1558 in Greece, and after studying five years under Tintoretto, about 1590, fixed himself at Naples. He had received from nature a fertility of ideas and a celerity of hand, which made him perhaps equal to his master in the dispatch of works as numerous as complicated; he alone performed the task of four industrious painters. When he chose to bridle his enthusiasm, he may be compared with Tintoretlo; he is inferior to few in design, and has inventions, motions, airs of heads, which the Venetians themselves, though they were perpetually before their eyes, could never equal. His powers of imitation he proved by the large picture of the “Crowd miraculously fed,” painted in forty days for the refectory of the Benedictines. In general his method resembles that of Cesare d'Arpino, and when he conforms to the Venetian manner, he still preserves a character of his own, especially in his glories, which he hems in with showery clouds and darkness. He painted little in oil, though possessed of great energy and union of colour. The rage of gain carried him to large works in fresco, which he arranged with much felicity of the whole; copious, various, resolute, and even finished in the parts, and correct, if roused by the concurrence of some able rival, Such he was at the Certosa in the chapel of St. Gennaro, when he had Caracciolo for his competitor. For other churches he sometimes painted sdfcred subjects in small proportions, much commended by Dominici. This artist died in 1643.

From want of curiosity or of resolution, or from want of patronage, Corregio never visited Rome, but remained his whole life at Parma, where the art of painting was little esteemed, and of consequence poorly rewarded. This concurrence of unfavourable circumstances occasioned at last his premature death, at the age of forty. He was employed to paint the cupola of the cathedral at Parma, the subject of which is an “Assumption of the Virgin;” and having executed it in a manner that has long been the admiration of every person of good taste, for the grandeur of design, and especially for the boldness of the fore-shortenings (an art which he first and at once brought to the utmost perfection), he went to receive his payment. The canons of the church, either through ignorance or baseness, found fault with his work; and although the price originally agreed upon had been very moderate, they aU ledged that it was far above the merit of the artist, and forced him to accept of the paltry sum of 200 livres; which, to add to the indignity, they paid him in copper money. To carry home this unworthy load to his indigent wife and children, poor Corregio had to travel six or eight miles from Parma. The weight of his burden, the heat of the weather, and his chagrin at this treatment, threw him into a pleurisy, which in three days put an end to his life and his misfortunes in 1534.

Dufresnoy says of this artist, that he “struck out certain natural and unaffected graces for his Madonnas, his saints, and little children, which were peculiar to himself. His manner, design, and execution, are all very great, but yet without correctness. He had a most free and delightful pencil; and it is to be acknowledged, that he painted with a strength, relief, sweetness, and vivacity of colouring, which nothing ever exceeded. He understood how to distribute his lights in such a manner, as was wholly peculiar to himself, which gave a great force and great roundness to his figures. This manner consists in extending a large light, and then making it lose itself insensibly in the dark shadowings, which he placed out of the masses: and those give them this relief, without our being able to perceive from whence proceeds so much effect, and so vast a pleasure to the sight. It appears that in this part the rest of the Lombard school copied him. He had no great choice of graceful attitudes, or distribution of beautiful groupes. His design often appears lame, and his positions not well chosen: the look of his figures is often unpleasing; but his manner of designing heads, hands, feet, and other parts, is very great, and well deserves our imitation. In the conduct and finishing of a picture he has done wonders; for he painted with so much union, that his greatest works seem to have been finished in the compass of one day, and appear as if we saw them in a looking-glass. His landscape is equally beautiful with his figures.”

, a celebrated engraver, was born at Hoorn in Holland in 1536. After having learned the-first principles of drawing and engraving, he went to Italy to complete his studies, and visited all the places famous for the works of the great masters. At Venice he was courteously received by Titian; and engraved several plates from the pictures of that admirable painter. He at last settled at Rome, where he died, 1578, aged forty -two. According to Basan, he was the best engraver with the burin or graver only that Holland ever produced. “We find in his prints,” adds he, “correctness of drawing, and an exquisite taste.” He praises also the taste and lightness of touch with which he engraved landscapes, and that without the assistance of the point. It is no small honour to this artist, that Agostino Carracci was his scholar, and imitated his style of engraving rather than that of any other master. His engravings are very numerous (151 according to abbe Marolles), and by no means uncommon.

, an English artist, was one of the founders of the Royal Academy, he and three others (Moser, West, and Chambers) being the only persons who signed the petition presented to his Majesty, to solicit that establishment. He was the son of an apothecary, who resided in Cork-street, Burlington-gardens, and was born in 1726. He was the pupil of Knapton, but in the sequel much excelled his master. He was particularly eminent for his portraits in crayons, in which branch of the art he surpassed all his predecessors; though it must be confessed that he owed something of his excellence to the study of the portraits of Rosalba. He also painted with considerable ability in oil colours; and at one time Hogarth declared him to be superior to sir Joshua Reynolds; an opinion, however, which must have arisen from some prejudice, for sir Joshua had then produced some of his best portraits. But though those of Cotes deserve not this high character, they were very pleasing, well finished, coloured with great spirit, and, by the aid of Mr. Toms’s draperies (who generally supplied him with these), were justly ranked with the best portraits of the time. Yet his greatest excellence was in crayons, which were much improved under his hands, both in their preparation and application. Lord Orford says, that his pictures of the queen holding the princess royal, then an infant, in her lap; of his own wife; of Polly Jones, a woman of pleasure; of Mr. Obryen, the comedian; of Mrs. Child, of Osterley-park; and of Miss Wilton, afterwards lady Chambers; are portraits which, if they yield to Rosalba’s in softness, excel hers in vivacity and invention.

, an eminent French artist, and the earliest historical painter France produced, was born at Souci near Sens, in 1530, and studied the fine arts so strenuously in his youth, that he became profoundly learned, especially in the mathematics. Painting on glass being very much in vogue in those days, he applied himself more to that than to the drawing of pictures. Several fine performances of his are to be seen in the churches of the neighbourhood of Sens, and some in Paris; particularly in St. Gervase’s church, where, on the windows of the choir, he painted the martyrdom of St. Laurence, the history of the Samaritan woman, and that of the paralytic. There are several of his pictures in the city of Sens; as also some portraits. But the chief of his works, and that which is most esteemed, is his picture of the Last Judgment, in the sacristy of the Minims at Bois de Vincennes, which was graved by Peter de Tode, a Fleming, a good designer. This picture shews the fruitfulness of Cousin’s genius, by the numbers of the figures that enter into the composition; yet is somewhat wanting in elegance of design.

, sculptor in ordinary to the French king, was born at Lyons in 1658, and died at Paris the 1st of May, 1733, aged 75, member of the royal academy of painting and sculpture. He went to Italy as pensionary of the king. It was there he produced his fine statue of the emperor Commodus, represented under the character of Hercules, forming one of the ornaments of the gardens of Versailles. On his return to France, he decorated Paris, Versailles, and Marly, with several pieces of exquisite workmanship. The groupe at the back of the high-altar of Notre Dame de Paris is by him, as well as the two groupes ut Marly, representing two horses tamed by grooms. A fop, who gave himself airs as a great connoisseur, thought fit to say to the artist, while he was employed on this his last grand work: “But this bridle, methinks, should be tighter.” “What pity, sir,” replied Coustou, “you did not come in a moment sooner! you would have seen the bridle just as you would have it; but these horses are so tender-mouthed, that it could not continue so for the twinkling of an eye.” In all his productions he displays an eleyated genius; with a judicious and delicate taste, a fine selection, a chaste design, natural, pathetic and noble attitudes; and his draperies are rich, elegant, and mellow. His brother William was director of the royal academy of painting and sculpture, and died at Paris the 22d of February, 1746, at the age of 69. Although he had not much less merit in the number and perfection of his works, he was not always esteemed so highly as he deserved.

, an artist, was born at Mechlin in 1497, and received the first notions of painting, when he was very young, from Bernard Van Orlay of Brussels but quitting- his own country, he travelled to Rome, and there had the good fortune to become a disciple of Raphael. He studied and worked under the direction of that superior genius, for several years; and in that school acquired the taste of design and colouring peculiar to his master, as also the power of imitating his exquisite manner so far, as to be qualified to design his own female figures with a great deal of grace and elegance. He had, however, no great invention, nor did he possess a liveliness of imagination; and therefore, when he left Rome, to return to Jns native country, he took care to carry along with him a considerable number of the designs of Raphael, and other eminent masters of Italy, which he did not scruple to make use of afterwards in his own compositions. By that means he gained a temporary reputation, and his pictures were wonderfully admired through the Low Countries; but when Jerom Cock returned from Rome, and brought with him into Flanders, the “School of Athens,” designed by Raphael, and other designs of the most famous Italian artists, they were no sooner made public, than the plagiarism of Coxis was discovered, and his reputation proportionably decreased.

was admitted into the academy of painting in his twentieth year, where he had already executed several pictures of great merit; his son, who was born at Paris in 1694, and to whom he left his name, his talents, his knowledge, and virtues, enjoyed the same good fortune. in his 2ist year: he was first painter to the duke of Orleans, and in 1747 to the king. Though his peronal qualities and endowments had already made him a welcome guest with the princes and great men of the court, yet this last appointment increased his reputation; and the first use he made of his consequence, was to induce M. de Tourathem, who had fortitude of mind sufficient for such a sacrifice, to decline the title of a protector of the academy, which hitherto had always been connected with the office of superintendant of the buildings, in order that the academy of painting, like all the rest, might be under the immediate protection of the king. He also erected a preparatory school, at Paris, for the y^ung pupils, who went to Rome, where they studied history, and exercised themselves under able masters. To him likewise the public were indebted for the exhibition of the pictures in the Luxembourg gallery. Like all men of genius, he had his enviers and rivals; but his rivals were his friends, his modesty drew them to him, and he never refused them his esteem. His place as first painter to the king brought him to court, and made him more intimately acquainted with the queen and the dauphin. The queen often gave him, work to do, which chiefly consisted in pictures of the saints and other objects of devotion. On her return from Metz, finding over her chimney a picture which he had privately executed, representing France in the attitude of returning thanks to heaven for the deliverance of the king, she was so moved, that she exclaimed, “No one but my friend Coypel is capable of such. a piece of gallantry!” The dauphin had frequently private conversations with him. He himself executed the drawing for the last work of Coypel, the “Sultan in his seraglio.” His table was always strewed with the manuscripts of this artist, which he intended to publish at his own expence. The death of the author prevented his design, and on hearing of the event, the prince said publicly at supper: “I have in one year lost three of my friends!”

Coypel seems to have exerted himself more for others than for himself; he was a good master, a good relation, a good friend, and a man of veracity. His father disinherited him in favour of his sister by a second marriage, and tJie son did the same in regard to his brother, by depriving him of all benefit from the inheritance of Bidautt. Coypel was author of several theatrical performances, the rehearsals of which were attended by crowds of people, not for the sake of feeding his vanity with an artificial applause, but from friendly participation, and the conviction of their intrinsic noerit. Most of them were performed at the private theatre of madame Marchand, and in the Mazarine college, for which they were expressly composed. The well-known “Don Quixote” is by him. Coypel also wrote several dissertations on the art of painting, and academical lectures, which latter are in print. He even wrote the life of his father, which excels no less by the delicate manner in which he criticises his father, than by the modesty with which he speaks of himself. His acquaintance was very much sought after. One proof of this is in the prodigious heaps of letters that were found after his death. He was particularly the favourite of a small coterie, where talents, knowledge, and good humour were cherished, unmixed with jealousy, pride, and licentiousness. In the number of its membevs were Mess. Caylus, Helvetius, Mirabeau, Mariveaux, inad lle Quinaut, madtime Marchand, and several more. They met alternately at the apartments of each other, and sat down to a supper which, by a law of the society, was not to cost more than fifteen livres. Coypel was remarkable for his liberal spirit. He caused a house that had been thrown clown by an inundation to be rebuilt at his own expence on a far more convenient and handsome plan, without the impoverished owner’s ever knowing to whom he was indebted for the bounty. He annually laid by 2000 livres of his revenue for works of charity, and requested the duke of Orleans to employ the expence of the coach which that prince kept for him in alms to the poor. The duke of Orleans had an uncommon value for him. The duke could not bear a warm room, but when Coypel came to him, he always ordered a rousing fire to be made up, “for,” said he, “he is chilly<” This same prince composed a poem, shewed it to the artist, and asked him, whether he should have it printed? Coypel was honest enough to say, “No:” and the duke tore it, and threw it into the fire.

A similar anecdote of the duke of Orleans the regent, and Antony Coypei the father, deserves to be related here by way of conclusion. The regent knew that Coypel, on account of some disgusts, was intending to accept of an invitation to England. He therefore drove to his lodgings one morning, in a fiacre, quite alone, without any attendants, and had him called down: “Come into the carriage,” said he to the artist, who was quite disconcerted at this visit; “let us go and take a drive together: you are. chagrined I want to try whether I cannot put you in a good humour,” and this jaunt made Coypel at once forget both England and his chagrin. The subject of this memoir died in 1752, in the 58th year of his age.

, an ingenious French sculptor, born at Lyons, in 1640, died chancellor and regent of the academy of painting and sculpture in 1720. Versailles boasts his best works, except the figure of that great minister, M. Colbert, on his tomb, in the church of S. Eustache; the two groupes of Renown, and Mercury, in the Thuilleries; and the player on the flute, in the same garden. The Neptune and Amphytrite, at Marly, with many very fine busts, are the chief works of this artist, who was endowed with a most fruitful imagination, and an admirable execution.

, a Russian by birth, was a landscape painter in London, but chiefly practised as a drawing-master. He taught in a way that was new and peculiar, and which appears to have been adopted from the hint given by Leonardo da Vinci, who recommends selecting the ideas of landscape from the stains of an old plaster wall, and his method of composing his drawings may be considered as an improvement upon the advice of Da Vinci. His process was to dash out, upon several pieces of paper, a number of accidental large blots and loose flourishes, from which he selected forms, and sometimes produced very grand ideas; but they were in general too indefinite in their execution, and unpleasing in their colour. He published a small tract upon this method of composing landscapes, in which he has demonstrated his process. He also published some other works, the most considerable of which was a folio, entitled “The Principles of Beauty relative to the Human Head,” 1778, French and English, a very ingenious, but somewhat fanciful work, illustrated with engravings by Bartolozzi, showing the gradations of character, from the outline of a feature, 'to the outline of the face, and to each face is applied an head dress in the style of the antique. He also published “The various species of Composition in Nature, in sixteen subjects, on four plates,” with observations and instructions and “The shape, skeleton, and foliage of thirty-two species of Trees,” 1771, reprinted 1736; but, in Mr. Edwards’s opinion, not very creditable to the artist. As a drawingmaster, he had very considerable reputation and employment. He attended for some years at Eton school, and among other pupils of high rank, had the honour of giving some lessons to his royal highness the prince of Wales, He died at his house in Leicester-street, Leicester-square, April, 1786, leaving a son John Cozens, who greatly excelled him as a landscape painter: rejecting his lather’s method of fortuitous blots and dashes, he followed the arrangements of nature, which he saw with an enchanted eye, and drew with an enchanted hand. He owes his fame to those tinted drawings, of which, Mr. Fuseli says, the method has been imitated with more success than the sentiment which inspired them. A collection of his drawings, amounting to ninety-four, the property of Mr. Beckford, were sold by Christie in 1805, and produced 510l. He visited Italy twice, where he appears to have drawn most of these In 1794, he was seized with a mental derangement which continued to his death in 1799.