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

, a name admitted into various biographical collections, without much propriety. It has usually been said that Abdias was an impostor, who pretended that he had seen our Saviour, that he was one of the seventy-two disciples, had been an eye-witness of the lives and martyrdom of several of the apostles, and had followed St. Simon and St. Jude into Persia, where he was made the first bishop of Babylon. From what he saw, he compiled a work entitled “Historia certaminis Apostolici.” This work Wolfgang Lazius, a physician of Vienna, and historiographer to the emperor Ferdinand I. (hereafter noticed) found in manuscript in a cave of Carinthia, and believing it to be genuine, originally written in Hebrew, translated into Greek by one Europius, a disciple of Abdias, and into Latin by Afrieanus, published it at Basil in 1551, after which it was several times reprinted, but, on examination both by Papist and Protestant writers, was soon discovered to be a gross imposture, from the many anachronisms which occur. Melancthon, who saw it in manuscript, was one of the first to detect it; and the greater part of the learned men in Europe, at the time of publication, were of opinion that Abdias was a fictitious personage, and that it was neither written in Hebrew, nor translated into Greek or Latin: Fabricius has proved from internal evidence that it was first written in Latin, but that the author borrowed from various ancient memoirs, which were originally in Greek. As to the age of the writer, some have placed him in the fifth and some in the sixth century, or later. The object of the work is to recommend chastity and celibacy .

He now resolved to remove to the Low Countries; this he could not do without a passport, which he at length obtained, after many tedious delays, and arrived at Antwerp in July 1528. The duke de Vendome was the principal cause of these delays; for he, instead of signing the passport, tore it in pieces in a passion, protesting he would never sign a passport for a conjuror. In 1529, Agrippa had invitations from Henry VIII. king of England, from the chancellor of the emperor, from an Italian marquis, and from Margaret of Austria, governess of the Low Countries: he preferred the last, and accepted of being historiographer to the emperor, which was offered him by that princess. He published, by way of introduction, the “History of the Coronation of Charles V.” Soon after, Margaret of Austria died, and he spoke her funeral oration. Her death is said in some measure to have been the life of Agrippa, for great prejudices had been infused into that princess against him: “I have nothing to write you (says he in one of his letters) but that I am likely to starve here, bein entirely forsaken by the deities of the court; what the great Jupiter himself (meaning Charles V.) intends, I know not. I now understand what great danger I was in here: the monks so far influenced the princess, who was of a superstitious turn, as women generally are, that, had not her sudden death prevented it, I should undoubtedly have been tried for offences against the majesty of the cowl and the sacred honour of the monks; crimes for which I should have been accounted no less guilty, and no less punished; than if I had blasphemed the Christian religion.” His treatise, “Of the Vanity of the Sciences,” which he published in 1530, greatly enraged his enemies; and that which he soon after printed at Antwerp, “Of the Occult Philosophy,” afforded them fresh pretexts for defaming his reputation. Cardinal Campej us, the pope’s legate, however, and the cardinal de la Mark, bishop of Liege, spoke in his favour; but could not procure him his pension as historiographer, nor prevent him from being thrown into prison at Brussels, in the year 1531. When he regained his liberty, he paid a visit to the archbishop of Cologn, to whom he had dedicated his Occult Philosophy, and from whom he had received a very obliging letter in return. The inquisitors endeavoured to hinder the impression of his Occult Philosophy, when he was about to print a second edition with emendations and additions; however, notwithstanding all their opposition, he finished it in 1533. He staid at Bonne till 1535; and when he returned to Lyons, he was imprisoned for what he had written against the mother of Francis I.; but he was soon released from his confinement, at the desire of several persons, and went to Grenoble, where he died the same year. Some authors say, that he died in the hospital; but Gabriel Naude affirms, it was at the house of the receiver-general of the province of Dauphiny.

, a historian and poet, whose name also was originally Weiss, or White, was born at Schneeberg, in Misnia. After studying at Leipsic and Francfort, he was appointed professor of poetry at Wittemberg, and soon after historiographer, and private secretary to the house of Saxony, a situation which he held under the electors Augustus and Christian I. He died at Dresden in 1598. The faults in the style and arrangement of his historical works are rather those of his age, while his learning and accuracy have justly entitled him to the praise he has received from his countrymen. Among his numerous works are: 1. A chronicle of Misnia, “Meisnische Landund Berg-Chronica,” Wittemberg and Dresden, 1580, 1599, fol. 2. “Scriptores varii de Russorum religione,” Spire, 1582. 3. “Genealogical tables of the house of Saxony,” in German, Leipsic, 1602. 4. “Historiæ Thuringorum novæ specimen,” which is printed in the “Antiquit. regni Thuringici,” by Sagittarius. His “Latin Poems” were printed at Francfort, 1612, 8vo.

, of Messina, canon of the cathedral of Palermo, and historiographer to Philip IV. king of Spain, acquired much reputation for his knowledge in, the history and antiquities of Sicily. Of his numerous works on this subject, some have been printed, and the manuscripts of the rest were after his death deposited in. the libraries of the duke of Madonia and of Palafox, archbishop of Palermo. Those published are, 1. “Trium orientalium Latinorum ordinum, post captam a duce Gothofredo Hierusalem, &c. notitiae et tabularia,” Palermo, 1636, fol. 2. “Dissertatio historica et chronologica de antique urbis Syracusarum archiepiscopatu,” Naples, 1640, 4to. This relates to the serious disputes between the three churches of Syracuse, Palermo, and Messina, respecting the metropolitan title and rights, and was inserted, with the answers, in the 7th vol. of the “Thesaurus antiquitatutn Sicilian,” Leyden, 1723. 3. “Series ammiratorum insulse Sicilian, ab ann. 842 ad 1640,” Palermo, 1640, 4to. 4. “De Messanensis prioratus sacræ hospilitatis domus militum sancti Joan. Hierosolymitani origine,” Palermo, 1640, 4to. 5. “Chronologia de los Virreyes, &c. de Sicilia,” Palermo, 1640, 4to. Amico died Oct. 22 in the year following the publication of the four last-mentioned works.

, a Danish political and miscellaneous writer, was born at Stoiberg in 1678, was educated at Rundsburgh by one of his uncles, and in. 1704, was appointed professor of law and political science at Kiel, where he acquired great reputation. Some verses which he wrote in praise of, the Danish ministers having given offence to the court of Holstein-Gottorp, he entered into the service of Denmark in 1713, and was appointed historiographer to the king, and counsellor of the chancery of the duchy of Holstein Schleswic. In this situation he wrote, at the king’s request, several pamphlets on the differences which existed between Denmark, Sweden, and the duchy of Holstein-Gottorp, which were published in German, 1715, 4to. These were so much approved of, that in 1715 he was invited to Copenhagen, appointed counsellor of justice, and had apartments in the royal castle of Rosembourg until his death, Feb. 21, 1721. He wrote also “Meditationes philosophies de justitia divina et materiis cum ea connexis;” and a volume of “poems and translations,” in German, Flensburgh, 1717.

, son of the above, was born at Metz, July 29, 1659: he began his studies in that city, and went to Hanau for the prosecution of them. He afterwards applied himself to the civil law at Marpurg, Geneva, and Paris, in the last of which cities he was admitted an advocate. Upon his return to Metz, in 1679, he followed the bar, where he began to raise himself a considerable reputation. After the revocation of the edict of Nantes in 1685, the protestants of Metz deputed him to court, in order to represent that they ought not to be comprehended in this revocation. But all that he could obtain was, that this city should be treated with more lenity and favour. He followed his father to Berlin, where the elector of Brandenbourg appointed him judge and director of the French in that city. In 1695, that prince gave him, new marks of his confidence and favour, by sending him to Swisserland in order to negociate some affairs of importance. The marquis of Baden Dourlach, who was then at Basil, having had an opportunity of seeing him, entertained so great an esteem for him, that he chose him for his counsellor, and desired the elector of Brandenbourg to give Ancillon leave that he should serve him for some time. Our author did not return to Berlin till the end of the year 1699, and was then appointed inspector of all the courts of justice which the French had in Prussia, and counsellor of the embassy. The elector, being crowned king of Prussia, made him likewise his historiographer and superintendant of the French school, which had been founded at Berlin, according to the scheme which he had formed. He died in that city the 5th of July, 1715, being fifty-six years of age. His works are, 1. “L‘Irrevocabilité de l’Edit de Nantes prouvé par les principes du droit & de la politique,” Amsterdam, 1688, 12mo. 2. “Reflexions politiques, par lesquelles on fait voir que la persecution des reformez est contre les veritable interets de la France,” Cologne, 1686, 12mo. Mr. Bayle is mistaken in supposing, that this work was written by Sandras des Courtils, the author of the “Nouveaux Interets des Princes.” 3. “La France interessée a rétablir l'Edit de Nantes,” Amsterdam, 1690, 12mo. 4. “Histoire de l'Etablissement des François Refugiez dans les Etats de son altesse electorate de Brandebourg,” Berlin, 1690, 8vo. He wrote this out of gratitude to the elector for the generosity which he had shewn to the French Protestants. It appears from this piece, that the elector’s humanity extended to all the different ranks of persons among them. The men of learning tasted all the satisfactions of ease notwithstanding the pressure of misfortune and distress, and enjoyed the charms of society in the conferences which were held at Mr. Spanheim’s, their patron and Mæcenas, who was one of the ornaments of that court, as well as of the republic of letters. 5. “Melange Critique,” mentioned before in his father’s article. 6. “Dissertation sur l‘usage de mettre la premiere pierre au fondement des edifices publics, addressée au prince electoral de Brandebourg, à l’occasion de la premiere pierre, qu‘il a posée lul même au fondement du temple qu’on construit pour les François Refugiez dans le quartier de Berlin nommé Friderichstadt,” Berlin, 1701, 8vo. The author having given an account of every thing which his knowledge and reading would supply him with on this subject, acknowledges at last, that this custom is very like those rivers, whose source is unknown, though we may observe the course of them. 7. “Le dernier triomphe de Frederic Guillaume le Grand, electeur de Brandebourg, ou discours sur la Statue Equestre érigée sur le Pont Neuf du Berlin,” Berlin, 1703. Mr. Beauval says that this piece is an oration and a dissertation united together, and that the style is a little too turgid. 8. “Histoire de la vie de Soliman II. empereur des Turcs,” Rotterdam, 1706, 8vo; a work not very correct, but the preliminary matter is valuable, and contains, among other particulars, some curious information respecting Thuanus, taken from the “Bibliotheque Politique Heraldique Choisie,” 1705, 8vo. 9. “Traité des Eunuques, par C. Dollincan,” 1707, 12mo, Dollincan is an assumed name, and the work unworthy of our author’s abilities. 10. “Memoires concernant les vies et les ouvrages de plusieurs modernes celebres dans la Republique des Lettres,” Amst. 1709, 12mo. This piece, which he was induced to undertake by the persuasion of a bookseller of Rotterdam, as a supplement to Bayle’s dictionary, contains the lives, somewhat diffusely written, of Valentine Conrart, whose article contains 133 pages; Bartholomew d'Herbelot, Urban Chevreau, Henry Justel, Adrian Baillet, James Aubery, Benjamin Aubery Sieur du Maurier, Lewis Aubery, John Aubery, Claudius Aubery, John Baptist Cotelier, and Laurence Beger. 11. “Histoire de la vie de M. Ltscheid,” Berlin, 1713.

, historiographer to Philip III. king of Spain, wrote the history of John III. king of Portugal: this work, in the Portuguese tongue, was published at Lisbon in 1525, 4to. He was brother to the preceding theologian, and left a son Dihgo, who died in 1660, at the age of eighty-four, and is known in Portugal as the author of a poem on the siege of Chaoul, and by an “ Exanimation of the antiquities of Portugal,” 4to; which is a criticism on Bernard Brito’s “Portuguese monarchy.” He also published in 1630, a moral work, of which there have been many editions, under the title of “Casamento perfecto,” or the perfect marriage.

, author of several pieces relating to the history of literature, was born the 14th of October 1675, at Lecce, the capital of Otranto in the kingdom of Naples, of one of the noblest and most considerable families in that city. He began his studies at Lecce, and at seventeen years of age went to finish them at Naples, where he applied very closely to the Greek language and geometry. He went afterwards to Macerata, where he was admitted LL. D. His desire of improvement; induced him also to travel into France and Spain, where he acquired great reputation. Several academies of Italy were ambitious of procuring him as a member, in consequence of which we find his name not only amongst those of the Transformati and Spioni of Lecce, but also in that of the Investiganti of Naples, in the academy of Florence, and in that of the Arcadians at Rome, into the last of which he was admitted the 8th of August 1698. $Ie went into orders very early, and was afterwards canon aftd grand penitentiary of the church of Lecce, vicar general of Viesti, Gallipoli, and Gragnano, first chaplain of the troops of the kingdom of Naples and of the pope, auditor of M. Nicholas Negroni, and afterwards of the cardinal his uncle. Whilst Philip V. of Spain was master of the kingdom of Naples, he was honoured with the title of principal historiographer, which had likewise been given him when he was in France, by Louis XIV.; and he afterwards became secretary to the duke of Gravina. He died at Lecce the 9th of August 1719, and was interred in the cathedral of that city; or, according to another authority, Aug. 7, 1718. His works are, 1. “Dissertazione intorna alia patria di Ennio,” Rome, 1701, Florence in the title, but really at Naples, 1712. In this he endeavours to prove that Ennius was born at Rudia, two miles from Lecce, and not Rudia near Tarento. 2. “Vita di rnonsignor Roberto Caracciolo vescovo d' Aquino e di Lecce, 1703.” 3. “Delia vita di Scipione Ammiralo, patrizio Leccese, libri tre,” Lecce, 1706. 4. “Vita di Antonio Caraccio da Nardo.” 5. “Vita di Andrea Peschiulli da Corigliano.” These two are not printed separately, but in a collection entitled “Vite de' Letterati Salentini.” 6. “Vita di Giacomo Antonio Ferrari,” Lecce, 1715. 7. “Vita di Giorgio Baglivo,” Leccese. 8. “Lettera discorsiva al March. Giovani GioSeffo Orsi, dove si tratto dell' origine e progressi de signori accademici Spioni, e delle varie loro lodevoli applicazioni,” Lecce, 1705, 8vo. 9. “Discorso historico, in cui si tratta dell' origine e delle fondazione della citta di Lecce e d'Alcune migliori e piu principal! notizie di essa,” Lecce, 1705. 10. “Le Vite de letterati Salentini, parte I.” The Lives of the learned men of Terra d'Otranto, part I. Florence in the title, but really Naples, 1710. The second part was published at Naples, 1713, in 4to. 11. “Orazione funebre recitata in occasione della morte dell' imperadore Giuseppe nel vescoval domo di Gallipoli,” Naples, 1716. 12. “Scritto istorico legale sopra le ragioni della suspension! del' interdetto locale generale della chiefa di Lecce e sua diocesi,” Rome, 1716. 13. “Tre lettere legale.” These three letters were written in defence of the right of the church of Lecce. 14. He wrote likewise several poems, particularly seven sonnets, which are published in the second part of the “Rimo scelte del sign. Bartolommeo Lippi,” printed at Lucca, 1719.

, or Antony of Lebrija or Lebrixa, was born in 1442, at Lebrixa, a town in Andalousia. At the age of fourteen he went to the university of Salamanca, and five years after studied at some of the most celebrated schools in Italy, and such was his application, that within ten years he had run through the whole circle of sciences. He was an able Hebrew, Greek, and Latin scholar, and on that account, on his return to Salamanca, was promoted to the classical chair. During the twenty years that he filled this station, he published various works on the learned languages, the belles lettres, mathematics, medicine, grammar, jurisprudence, and sacred criticism. He had the farther honour of suggesting to cardinal Ximenes, who had invited him to the newly-founded university of Alcala, the plan of his celebrated Polyglot, and assisted in the publication. He finished his labours by inquiries into the history of his country, and intended to have written the lives of the kings of Spain, being appointed historiographer to his majesty, but was too far advanced in life for the undertaking. He died at Alcala de Henarez, July 11, 1522. His eloge, proposed by the academy of Madrid, was published so lately as 1796, by D. I. B. Munoz. The list of his works in the “Bibl. Hispana nova,” is said to be erroneous and defective, yet we know not of a better. Among his works may be mentioned, 1. “Two decades of the history of Ferdinand and Isabella,” Granada, 1545, fol. 2. " Lexicon, Spanish and Latin, and Latin and Spanish, of which, according to D. Clement, there have been eighteen editions, the first and most rare, Alcala, 1532, fol. 3. Explanations on the Holy Scriptures, in the Critici Sacri; commentaries on many ancient authors, &c. His Latin poems were published at Vivamo, 1491.

, the name of two Spanish poets, brothers, and natives of Balbastro in Aragon, who descended from a family originally of Ravenna. Their poems were published under the title of “Rimas de Lupercio, i del doctor Bartolome Leonardo de Argensola,” Saragossa, 1634, 4to. Antonio, the Spanish biographer, speaks in high terms of this volume, and after him Baillet and Feutry declare that these brothers were the Horaces of Spain. Lupercio, or Lobergo-Leonardo d‘Argensola, the eldest, born about the year 1565, was gentleman of the chamber to cardinal Albert of Austria, secretary to the empress Maria of Austria, and secretary of state and of war under count de Lemes, the viceroy of Naples, where he went to reside in 1611, and where he died in 1613. He wrote three tragedies, Isabella, Phillis, and Alexander. Bartholomew Leonard d’ Argensola, the brother, born in 1566, was successively canon of the metropolitan church of Saragossa, chaplain to the empress Maria, and rector of Villa Hermosa. He accompanied his brother to Naples, and after his death, became historiographer of Aragon, and died at Saragossa, Feb. 26, 1631. Besides the poems printed with those of his brother, he wrote, 1. “Conquista delas islas Molucas,” Madrid, 1609, fol. 2. “Primera parte de los analesde Aragon que prosigue los de Zurita,” Saragossa, 1630, fol. and some other works enumerated by Antonio.

, a French miscellaneous writer of considerable note, was born at Aubignan, near Carpentras, July 27, 1721, and afterwards became an ecclesiastic. In 1752 he came to Paris, and in 1762 was admitted into the Academy of Inscriptions and Belles Lettres. He was for some time attached to prince Louis of Wirtemberg, afterwards sovereign of that duchy, but then in the service of France. The advocate Gerbier, his friend, having in 1765, gained an important cause for the clergy of France against the Benedictines, he demanded, as his reward, that Arnaud should be placed at the head of the abbey of Grandchamp. In 1771 he was elected a member of the French academy, and became librarian to Monsieur, with the reversion of the place of historiographer of the order of St. Lazarus. He died at Paris Dec. 2, 1784. The abbé Arnaud was a man of learning, much information, and taste, but too much a man of the world, and too indolent, to give his talents fair play. His “Lettre sur la Musique, au Comte de Caylus,” 1754, 8 vo, which made him first known to the learned world, and has been generally praised, was little more than the prospectus of a far larger work on the music of the ancients, but he never could bring himself to execute his plan, and for the rest of his life employed his pen only on occasional papers and essays. Being a warm admirer of Giuck, when the disputes took place in 1777 respecting music, he wrote in the Journal de Paris a considerable number of articles in favour of German music, and against Marmontel, who patronized Piccini; and in, concert with his friend M. Suard, edited “L‘Histoire ancienne des peuples de l’Europe par de Buat,” 1772, 12 vols. 12mo. He assisted also in the following works: 1. “Journal Etranger,” with M. Suard, from Jan. 1760 to March 1762. The complete work consists of 54 vols. 12mo, beginning 1754. Suard and he afterwards quitted it to translate the Gazette de France. 2. “Gazette litteraire de l'Europe,” also with M. Suard, 1764 1766, 8 vols. 8vo. 3. “Varietes litteraires, ou Ilecueil des pieces tant originales que traduites, concernant la philosophic, la litterature, et les arts,” 1768 1769, 4 vols. 12mo. This consists of the best pieces from the two first mentioned journals; and M. Suard' s “Melanges de litterature,” 1803 4, 5 vols. 8vo, may be considered as a new edition, but with many additions and omissions. It is in the “Varietes” only, that we find Bissy’s translation of Young’s Night Thoughts. 4. “Description des principales pierres gravees du cabinet du due d'Orleans,” 1730, 2 vols. fol. Arnaud compiled the articles in the first volume of this magnificent work: the second bears the names of the abbés de la Chau and le Blond. 5. Various dissertations in the “Memoires de l'Academie des inscriptions,” collected and published under the title of “Œuvres completes de l'abbé Arnaud,” 3 vols. 8vo, but incorrectly printed. The “Memoires pour servir a l'histoire de la revolution opere dans la Musique par le chevalier Gluck,” 1781, 8vo, attributed to our author, was written by the abbé le Blond. Arnaud was well acquainted with ancient literature, and improved his style, which, however, is not quite pure, by the study of the best ancient writers. Although at first an enemy to the new philosophy introduced in France, he was afterwards ranked among its supporters, but did not live to witness its consequences.

, pastor and inspector of the churches of Perleberg, and historiographer to the king of Prussia, was born at Annaburg in Misnia, in 1666. He was a man of considerable eloquence and extensive reading, but he disturbed the tranquillity of the church by his singular opinions in theology, and especially by his “Ecclesiastical History,” in which he seemed to place all opinions, orthodox or heretic, on the same footing, but considered the mystic divines as superior to all other writers, and as the only depositaries of true wisdom. He wished to reduce the whole of religion to certain internal feelings and motions, of which, perhaps, few but himself or his mystical brethren could form an idea. As he advanced in years, however, he is said to have perceived the errors into which he had been led by the impetuosity of his passions, and became at last a lover of truth, and a pattern of moderation. His principal works were this “Ecclesiastical History,” which was printed at Leipsic in 1700, and his “History of Mystic Theology,” written in Latin. He died in 1714. There is a very elaborate account of his life and writings in the General Dictionary, and of his opinions in Mosheim’s Ecclesiastical History.

2. “Theatrum Chemicum Britannicum, containing several poetical pieces of our famous English philosophers, who have written the Hermetique mysteries, in their own ancient language. Faithfully collected into one volume, with annotations thereon, by Elias Ashmole, esq. qui est Mercuriophilus Anglicus,” London, 1652, 4to. The authors published in this collection are, Thomas Norton’s ordinal of Alchemic~ George Rrpley’s compound of Alchemic; Pater Sapientice, i.e. the father of wisdom, by an anonymous writer; Hermes’ s Bird, written originally in Latin, by Raymund Lully, and done into English verse by Abbot Cremer, of Westminster; Sir Geoffrey Chaucer’s Chanons Yeoman’s tale Dastin’s Dream, which seems to be a version of the Latin poem of John Dastm, entitled his Vision Pearce, the black monk, on the Elixir Richard Carpenter’s work, which some think, and not without reason, ought rather to be ascribed to John Carpenter, bishop of Worcester, who was one of the best chemists of his time Hunting of the Green Lion, by Abraham Andrews but there is also a spurious piece with the same title Breviary of Natural Philosophy, by Thomas* Charnock Ænigmas, by the same person Bloomfield' s Blossoms, which is likewise entitled the Camp of Philosophy, by William Bloomfield Sir Edward Kelle’s work his letter to G. S. Gent. (It is somewhat strange that this gentleman’s name, even by Mr. Ashmole, is written Keiley, though sir Edward himself wrote it Kelle.) Dr. John Dee’s Testament, which appears to be an epistle to one John Gwin, written A. D. 1568, and a third letter, the first two being wanting; Thomas Robinson, of the Philosopher’s Stone Experience and Philosophy, by an anonymous author the Magistery, by W. B. i. e. William Bloomfield John Gower, on the Philosopher’s Stone George Ripley’s Vision verses belonging to Ripley’s Scrowle Mystery of Alchymists preface to the Medulla of George Ripley; Secreta Secretorum, by John Lydgate Hermit’s Tale, anonymous description of the Stone the Standing of the Glass, for the time of the putrefaction and congelation of the medicine Ænigma Philosophicum, by William Bedman Fragments by various authors. 3. “The Way to Bliss, in three books, made public by Elias Ashmole, esq; qui est Mercuriophilus Anglicus,” London, 1658, 4to. This was the work in which he took his leave of the astrologers and aichymists, and bestowed his attention on the studies which produced, 4. “The Institution, Laws, and Ceremonies of the most noble Order of the Garter. Collected and digested into one body by Elias Ashmole, of the Middle Temple, esq. Windesore herald at arms. A work furnished with variety of matter relating to honour and noblesse” London, 1672, folio. He was not only so happy as to receive those extraordinary marks of the sovereign’s favour, mentioned above, but was complimented in an obliging manner by his royal highness the duke of York; who, though then at sea against the Dutch, sent for his book by the earl of Peterborough, and afterwards told our author he was extremely pleased with it. The rest of the knights-companions of the most noble order received him and his book with much respect and civility, and the regard shown him abroad was more singular. It was reposited, by the then pope, in the library of the Vatican. King Christie of Denmark, sent him, in 1674, a gold chain and- medal, which, with the king’s leave, he wore on certain high festivals. FredericWilliam, elector of Brandenburg!), sent him the like present, and ordered his boot to be translated into High Dutch. He was afterwards visited by the elector Palatine’s, the grand duke of Tuscany’s, and other foreign princes’ ministers, to return him thanks for this book, which he took care should be presented them, and thereby spread the fame of the garter, the nation, and himself, all over Europe. Yet it does not appear that this laborious and exquisite performance advanced at all the design he had formed some years before, of being appointed historiographer to the order, to which proposal some objections were made, and by our author fully answered, although we find no mention of this circumstance in any memoirs of Mr. Ashmole hitherto extant. 5, “The Arms, Epitaphs,. Feuestral Inscriptions, with the draughts of the Tombs, &c. in all the churches in Berkshire.” It was penned in 1666, and the original visitation taken in the two preceding years, in virtue of his deputatien from sir Edward Byshe, elariencieux king at arms, and published under the title of “The Antiquities of Berkshire,” 3 vols. 8vo, 1717, 1723, and at Reading in 1736, fol. 6. “Familiarum iilustrium Imperatorumque Romanorum Numismata Oxonire in Bodleianae Bibliotbecoe Archivis descripta et explanata.” This work was finished by the author in 1659, and given by him to the public library in Oxford, in 1666, in 3 vols, folio, as it was fitted for the press. 7. “A description and explanation of the Coins and Medals belonging to king Charles II.” a folio ms. in the king’s cabinet. 8. “A brief ceremonial of the Feast of St. George, held at Whitehall 1661, with other papers relating to the Order.” 9. “Remarkable Passages in the year 1660, set down by Mr. Elias Ashmole.” 10. “An account of the Coronation of our Kings, transcribed from a ms. in the king’s private closet.” 11 “The proceedings on the day of the Coronation of king Charles II.” mentioned by Anthony Wood, as printed in 1672, but he owns he never saw it. 12. “The Arms, Epitaphs, &c. in some churches and houses in Staffordshire,” taken when he accompanied sir William Dugdale in his visitation. 13. “The Arms, Epitaphs, Inscriptions, &c. in Cheshire, Shropshire, Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire, &c.” taken at the same time. Bishop Nicolson mentions his intention to write the history and antiquities of his native town of Litchfield. 14. “Answers to the objections urged.against Mr. Ashmole’s being made historiographer to the order of the Garter,” A. D. 1662. 15. “A Translation of John Francis Spina’s book of th Catastrophe of the World; to which was subjoined, Ambrose Merlin’s Prophecy.” It is doubtful whether this was ever published. What, indeed, he printed, was but a very small part of what he wrote, there being scarcely any branch of our English history and antiquities, on which he has not left us something valuable, of his own composing, in that vast repository of papers, which make several folios in his collection of Mss. under the title of, 16. CoU lections, Remarks, Notes on Books, and Mss. a wonderful proof of industry and application. 17. “The Diary of his Life,” written by himself, which was published at London, 1717, in 12mo, with the following title “Memoirs of the life of that learned antiquary, Elias Ashmole, esq. drawn up by himself by way of diary, with an appendix of original letters. Published by Charles Burman, esquire.” The copy from whence these papers were published, was in the hand-writing of Dr. Robert Plott, chief keeper of the Ashmolean museum at Oxford, and secretary of the Royal Society, and was transcribed by him for the use of a near relation of Mr. Ashmole’s, a private gentleman in Staffordshire. They had been collated a few years before, by David Perry, M. A. of Jesus’ college in Oxford. The appendix* contains a letter of thanks, dated January 26, 1666, from the corporation at Litchfield, upon the receipt of a silver bowl presented to them by Mr. Ashmole a preface to the catalogue of archbishop Laud’s medals, drawn up by Mr. Ashmole, and preserved in the public library at Oxford a letter from Dr. Thomas Barlow, afterwards bishop of Lincoln, to Mr. Ashmole, dated December 23, 1668, on the present of his books, describing archbishop Laud’s cabinet of medals a letter from John Evelyn, esq. to recommend Dr. Plott to him for reader in natural philosophy, and another from Mr. Joshua Barnes, dated from Emanuel college, Cambridge, October 15, 1688, wherein he desires Mr. Ashmole’s pardon, for having reflected upon his Order of the Garter, in his own history of king Edward III. with Mr. Ashmole’s answer to that letter, dated October 23 following. It is from this diary, which abounds in whimsical and absurd memoranda, that the dates and facts in his life have been principally taken.

, historiographer of France under Louis XII. abbot of Angle in Poitou, was originally of Saintonge, and of the same family from which, according to some authors, the famous Barbarossa descended. He wrote the history of France from 1490 to 1508, with great fidelity, but M. Gamier says, that “Louis XII. who usually employed the most celebrated pens, chose, with less than his ordinary discernment, Jean d‘Authon, to write the particular history of his reign’: for, though he had bestowed several benefices upon him though he made him commonly travel in the suite of the army, and gave orders to his ministers and generals to conceal nothing frorn Jiim of all that was worthy of being handed down to posterity, he was less happy in this respect than a great number of his predecessors. Authon is but a cold proser, nice in giving the particulars of little matters, but deficient in unfolding motives, &c.” Theodore Godefroi published the four first years of his history in 1620, 4to, and the two last which had appeared in 1615, in 4to, with “l'Histoire de Louis XII.” by Seyssel the three others, whieh have not yet been sent to the press, are now in the Imperial library. This historian died in January 1523, according to Moreri, or 1527 in Diet. Hist, which gives the following productions from his pen: 1. “Les Epistres envoyees au roy par les 6tats de France, avec certaines ballades et rondeaux,” Lyons, 1509, 4to. 2. “L'exil de Gennes le Superbe,” 1508, 4to. 3. te Diverses pieces sur la mort de Thomassine Espinolle (Spinola) ms."

, a French writer, Lorn in 1594 at Angouleme. When about seventeen years of age he went to Holland, where he composed a discourse on the state of the United Provinces. He accompanied also the duke d'Epernon to several places. In 1621 he was taken into the service of the cardinal de la Valette, with whom he spent eighteen months at Rome. Upon his return he retired to his estate at Balzac, where he remained for several years, till he was drawn thence by the hopes he had conceived of raising his fortune under cardinal llichelieu, who had formerly courted his friendship but being in a few years tired of the dependent state of a court- life, he went again to his country retirement all he obtained from the court was a pension of two thousand livres, with the addition of the titles of counsellor of state and historiographer of France, which he used to call magnificent trifles, He was much esteemed as a writer, especially for his letters, which went through several editions, but there were in his own time some critics who started up against him the chief of these was a young Feuillant, named Andre de St. Denis, who wrote a piece entitled, “The conformity of M. de Balzac’s eloquence, with that of the greatest men in the past and present times.” Although this piece was not printed, yet it was circulated very extensively, which made Balzac wish to have it publicly refuted, which was accordingly done by prior Ogier in 1627, with the assistance of Balzac himself. Father Goulu, general of the Feuillants, undertook the cause of brother Andre, and, under the title of Phyllarchus, wrote two volumes of letters against Balzac. Several other pieces were also written against him, but he did not think proper then to answer his adversaries he did, indeed, write an apology for himself, but this was never made public till it appeared witli some other pieces of his in 1645. The death of his chief adversary father Goulu having happened in 1629, put an end to all his disputes, and restored him to a state of tranquillity for father Andre de St. Denis, who had been the first aggressor, became heartily reconciled, and went to pay him a visit at Balzac.

, of Langnedoc, historiographer of France under Louis XIII. was one of the most fertile and heavy writers of his time, but we have no particulars of his life. He left behind him many works composed without either method or taste, but which Abound in particulars not to be found elsewhere. 1. “Histoire generale tie la Religion desTurcs, avec la Viede leurpropht-te Mahomet, et des iv premiers califes;” also, “Le Livre et la Theologie de Mahomet,” 1636, 8vo, a work translated from the Arabic, copied by those who wrote after him, though they have not vouchsafed to cite him. 2. “ Histoire du Cardinal d'Amboise,” Paris, 1651, in 8vo. Sirmond, of the Academie Franchise, one of the numerous flatterers of the cardinal de Richelieu, formed the design of elevating that minister at the expence of all those who had gone before him. He began by attacking d'Amboise, and failed not to sink him below Richelieu. Baudier, by no means a courtier, avenged his memory, and eclipsed the work of his detractor. 3. “Histoire du Marechal de Toiras,” 1644-, fol. 1666, 2 vols. 12mo; a curious performance which throws considerable light on the reign of Louis XIII. 4. “The Lives of the Abbé Suger, and of Cardinal Ximenes, &c.” The facts that Baudier relates in these different works are almost always absorbed by his reflections, which have neither the merit of precision nor that of novelty to recommend them. Moreri informs us that he wrote a history of Margaret of Anjou, queen of Henry VI. of England, that the manuscript was in the library of the abbey of St. Germain des Pres, at Paris, among the collection of M. de Coislin, bishop of Metz; and that this history was translated and published in English, without any acknowledgment by the translator, or any notice of the original author.

He was admitted advocate at the Hague, the 5th of Jarmary 1587; but being soon tired of the bar, went to France, where he remained ten years, and was much esteemed, acquiring both friends and patrons. Achilles de Harlai, first president of the parliament of Paris, got him to be admitted advocate of the parliament of Paris in 1592. In 1602, he went to England with Christopher de Harlai, the presidents son, who was sent ambassador thither by Henry the Great; and the same year, having been named professor of eloquence at Leyden, he settled in that university. He read lectures on history after the death of Morula, and was permitted also to do the same on the civil Jaw. In 1611, the states conferred upon him the office of historiographer in. conjunction with Meursius and in consequence thereof he wrote “The history of the Truce.” Baudius is an elegant prose-writer, as appears from his “Letters,” many of which were published after his death. He was also an excellent Latin poet: the first edition of his poems. was printed in 1587; they consist of verses of all the different measures: he published separately a book of iambics in 1591, dedicated to cardinal Bourbon. Some of his poems he dedicated to the king of England; others to the prince of Wales, in the edition of 1607, and went over to England to present them, where great respect was paid to him by several persons of rank and learning.

On the 4th of July, 1.689, being already M.A. in the university of Cambridge, he was incorporated as such in the university of Oxford, in Wadham college, and is mentioned by Anthony Wood (though then but a young man, a good deal under thirty) as a genius that was promising, and to whom the world was likely to be obliged, for his future studies and productions. In 1691 he published a Latin epistle to John Mill, D.D. containing some critical observations relating to Johannes Malala, Greek historiographer, published at the end of that author, at Oxon, in 1691, in a large 8vo. This was the first piece that our author published. Nor was religion less indebted to him than learning, for in 1691-2, he had the honour to be selected as the first person to preach at Boyle’s lectures (founded by that honourable gentleman, to assert and vindicate the great fundamentals of natural and revealed religion), upon which occasion he successfully applied sir Isaac Newton’s “Principia Mathematica,” to demonstrate the being of God, and altogether silenced the Atheists, who, in this country, have since that time, for the most part, sheltered themselves under Deism. The subject of his discourses was the folly of atheism, even with respect to the present life, and that matter and motion cannot think; or a confutation of atheism from the faculties of the soul, from the structure and origin of human bodies, and the origin and trame of the world itself; and though he was bnt young, and even only in deacon’s orders, he laid the basis and foundation upon which all the successors to that worthy office have since built. Though this was a task of great extent, and no small difficulty, yet Mr. Bentley acquitted himself with so much reputation, that the trustees not only publicly thanked him for them, but did moreover, by especial command and desire, prevail upon him to make the said discourses public, upon which he gave the world a volume, 1693, 4to, containing eight sermons, which have not only undergone a number of editions, but have been translated abroad into several languages. On the 2d of October, 1692, he was installed a prebendary of Worcester by bishop Stillingfleet. Upon the death of Mr. Justel, Mr. Bentley was immediately thought upon to succeed him, as keeper of the royal library at St. James’s; and accordingly, a few months after his decease, he had a warrant made out for that place, from the secretary’s office, December 23, 1693, and had his patent for the same in April following. Soon after he was nominated to that office, before his patent was signed, by his care and diligence he procured no less than a thousand volumes of one sort or other, which had been neglected to be brought to the library, according to the act of parliament then subsisting, which prescribed that one copy of every book printed in England, should be brought and lodged in this library, and one in each university library. It was about this time and upon this occasion of his being made library-keeper, that the famous dispute between him and the honourable Mr. Boyle, whether the epistles of Phalaris were genuine or riot, in some measure, at first took rise, which gave occasion to so maiw books and pamphlets, and has made so much noise in the world. This controversy upon a point of learning, in itself not very entertaining, was managed with a wit and humour which rendered it interesting to the public. The world was at that time a little biassed in favour of the production of the young nobleman, at least as to the genteel raillery of his pieces; for as to the dispute itself, viz. the genuineness of the Epistles of Phalaris, the best judge^s almost universally now give the preference to Dr. Bentley; nor does he much, if at all, fall short of Mr. Boyle, in throwing a deal of life and spirit into the controversy, particularly in his answer to Mr. Boyle, which is interspersed, as well as Mr. Boyle’s piece, with abundance of wit and humour, and is, upon the whole, reckoned much the best book. When, in 1696, he was admitted to his degree of D. D. he preached, on the day of the public commencement, from 1 Peter iii. 15. “Be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you.” About this time the university entered upon a design of publishing some editions, in 4to, of some classic authors, for the use of the duke of Gloucester. Dr. Bentley, who was consulted upon the occasion, advised Laughton, to whose care the edition of Virgil was committed, to follow Heinsius very close, but his advice was not complied with. Terence was published by Leng, Horace byTalbot, and Catullus, Tibnllus, and Propertius, by Mr. Annesley, afterwards earl of Anglesey. Dr. Bentley procurecUfrom Holland the types with which these books were printed. At the express desire of his friend Mr. Graevius, he published his “Animadversions and remarks on the poet Callimachus,” making, at the same time, a collection of some scattered pieces or fragments of that author. These he finished and sent over to Mr. Grarmus, towards the latter end of his dispute with Mr. Boyle, and Mr. Graevius published them abroad in 1697. in 1700, upon the death of Dr. Montague, he was by the crown presented to the mastership of Trinity-college, Cambridge, which is reckoned worth near 1000l. per annum, upon obtaining which preferment he resigned his prebend of Worcester; but June 12, 1701, on Dr. Say well’s death, he was collated archdeacon of Ely. What next employed his critical genius were the two first comedies of Aristophanes. Upon these he made some curious annotations, which were published at Amsterdam in 1710; as was much about the same time, at Rheims, his emendations, &c. on the fragments of Menancler and Philemon, in the feigned name of “Philcleutherus Lipsiensis.” Under this character he appeared again, in 1713, in remarks upon Collins’s discourse of free-thinking, a book which had made no small noise in the world at that time. This he handles and confutes in a critical, learned, and yet familiar manner. Before his Remarks on Freethinking, in 1711, came forth his so long-expected and celebrated edition of Horace. What he intended, was not properly to explain his author, but only to correct what he judged remained still corrupted in the text, as he himself tells us in his preface; and this by the help and assistance, either of ancient manuscripts, old editions, or by conjecture. This, it must be confessed, was a nice and dangerous undertaking, but he succeeded at least in correcting a much greater number of passages than any, or all his former interpreters, ever had done; furnishing us, in this his new edition of our elegant Roman poet, with a great number of very plausible, and probable, and unquestionably, some genuine emendations. Le Clerc abroad was Bentley’s chief opponent in this edition. At home, in the year following the doctor’s edition, viz. 1712, came out, by various hands, the odes and epodes of Horace, in sixpenny numbers, making in the whole two volumes in 8vo; the titles of which are “The odes and epodes of Horace in Latin and English, with a translation of Dr. Bentley’s notes. To which are added notes upon notes, done in the Bentleian style and manner.” In the preface they “humbly hope that the reader will encourage the following essays, upon several accounts. First, as they are designed to shew him the best author of Augustus’s age in his native purity. Secondly, to give him a further proof how far all attempts to render him into English, even after the best version now extant has succeeded no better, must fall short of the original. Thirdly, to convince him how ridiculous it is to presume to correct Horace without authority, upon the pretended strength of superior judgment in poetry. And lastly, how easily such a presumption may be turned upon the authors, and sufficiently expose them in their own way.” This last paragraph seems indeed to express the greatest part of the design of this work, which is executed with a great deal of spirit and humour. On the 5th of November, 1715, the doctor preached a sermon before the university against popery, on which somebody soon after published remarks, which occasioned Dr, Bentley’s answer, entitled “Reflections on the scandalous aspersions cast on the Clergy, by the author of the Remarks on Dr. Bentley’s Sermon on Popery, &c.” This was printed in 1717, in 8vo. In 1716, at which time he succeeded to the chair of Regius professor of divinity, the doctor had two printed letters inscribed to him, dated Jan. 1, to which also was added his answer, concerning his intended edition of the Greek Testament, giving some account of what was to be expected in that edition; and in them we are informed, that he intended to make no use of any manuscript in this edition that was not a thousand years old or above; of which sort he had got at that time twenty together in his study, which made up, one with another, 20,000 years. After having had this affair in agitation for about four years, he at last published proposals for it, which met with great encouragement. But soon after came out Remarks, paragraph by paragraph, on these proposals, by Dr. Conyers Middleton, as it afterwards appeared, who sets out by assuring his reader, that it was neither personal spleen, nor envy to the author of the Proposals, that drew the following remarks from him, but a serious conviction that Dr. Bentley had neither talents nor materials proper for the work, and that religion was much more likely to receive detriment than service from it. “The time, manner, and other circumstances of these proposals,” says he, “make it but too evident, that they were hastened out to serve quite different ends than those of common Christianity; and I think it my duty to obviate, as far as I am able, the influence they might have on some, whom big words, and bold attempts, are apt to lead implicitly into an high opinion and admiration of the merit and abilities of the undertaker.” Dr. Middleton then proceeds to criticise, paragraph by paragraph, Dr. Bentley’s proposals. Soon after these Remarks, paragraph by paragraph, the Proposals appeared, with a pamphlet entitled “A full answer to all the Remarks of a late pamphleteer, by a member of Trinity college, Cambridge,” 1721, signed J. E. This Dr. Middleton, and all, imagined could be none but the doctor himself, as well from the style, as the letters J. E. the two first vowels of Richard Bentley: and, upon this supposition, Dr. Middleton and others, in their future remarks, make that one great handle for abusing him. It is, however, somewhat uncertain, whether Dr. Middleton might not be as much mistaken as to the author of those Remarks, as the very author of those Remarks was with respect to the author of the Remarks paragraph by paragraph, who supposed them to be made by Dr. Colbatch. Soon after this came out a pamphlet, with some further “Remarks, &c. containing a full answer to the editor’s late defence -of his Proposals, as well as all his objections there made against my former remarks, by Conyers Middleton, D. D.” As also, an anonymous letter to the reverend master of Trinity college, Cambridge, editor of a new Greek Testament. We also find, under the Catalogue of the doctor’s works in the Bibliotheca Bodleiana,-much about this time, another publication, somewhat analogous, and relating to this affair, viz. “An enquiry into the authority of the primitive Complutensian edition of the New Testament, in a letter to archdeacon Bentley,” 1722, 8vo. As to these proposals, Dr. Middleton takes upon him to say, that they were only published with a view “that some noise should be made in the world in his favour, to support his declining character by something great and popular, to recover esteem and applause to himself, and throw an odium and contempt upon his prosecutors, &c.” In 1725, at a public commencement on the 6th of July, the doctor made an elegant Latin speech, on creating seven doctors of divinity, in which, at the several periods, by little notes below, is set forth the whole form of the creation of a doctor of divinity. This piece is usually joined to his edition of Terence and Phsedrus: at least it is added to the Amsterdam edition of them in 1727, a very neat edition, corrected for the press by the doctor. To these notes on Terence, he has also added those of the learned Gabriel Faernius, and taken great pains in amending and correcting the author, not only from those ancient manuscripts which Gabriel Faernius had procured, but also from whatever manuscripts the royal library, those of Cambridge, or any of his friends, could afford; some of which, he assures us, were of great antiquity, and at least next, and very little inferior, to those of Faernius, the orthography of which, as the most ancient manuscript, he altogether follows. He has likewise altered the text in abundance of places, and assigns in the notes the reason for such alteration. Then follows the Schediasma of the metre and accents of Terence, by which the doctor proves that Terence is written all in Verse. This, however', was a matter of some controversy betw-een the learned bishop Hare and our author; and during the warmth of the debate. Will. Whiston remarked how intolerable it was, that while Grotius, Newton, and Locke, all laymen, were employing their talents on sacred studies, such clergymen as Dr. Bentley and bishop Hare were fighting about a play-book. About 1732, the doctor published his Milton’s “Paradise Lost,” when he was, as he says in his preface, about seventy years old. This is a very elegant and beautiful edition of that poem, but cannot be said to have contributed much to the editor’s deputation. Dr. Bentley tells us, that he had prepared a new edition of the poet Manillas for the press, which he would have published, had not the clearness of paper, and the want of good types, and some other occasions, hindered him. He had also some design of publishing an edition of Hesychius, as we find by Mr. Graevius’s letter to him, and assured Dr. Mill, he could, if he pleased, correct five thousand faults in that author. His emendations on the Tusculan Questions of Cicero are adjoined to Mr. Davis’s edition of that author. From this produce of his studious, we must now pass to that of his more active, life, in the memorable complaints of rrial -administration urged against him by the college, which were the occasion of a long suit, whether the Crown‘ or the bishop of Ely was general visitor. A party in the college, displeased at some of his regulations, began to talk of the fortieth statute, de Magistri (si res exigat) Amotionc, and meditated a complaint to the bishop of Ely. The master hearing this, went to bishop Patrick, then at Ely, who told him, he had never heard before, that, as bishop of Ely, he had any thing to do in the royal college of Trinity; called his secretary to him, and bid him seek if there was any precedent for it in the bishop’s archives; but not one was found, nor so much as a copy of Trinity college statutes. Upon that, the doctor lent him one; and during that bishop’s time the matter was dropped. But in his successor Dr. Moore’s time, the party were encouraged to apply to the bishop, in 1709, and avast number of articles about dilapidations, but not one of immorality, bribery, or fraud, were exhibited against the master. These were, however, the subject of many pamphlets on both sides. His lordship received the charge, intending to proceed upon it, which he conceived himself sufficiently authorised to do, and required Dr. Bentley’ s answer, which he declined for some time to give, pleading want of form in the charge; because other members of the college, besides the seniors, had joined in the accusation, and the seniors themselves, as he alleged, had never yet admonished him; from whence he inferred, that all proceedings on such a charge, and whatsoever should follow on the same foot, would be ipso facto null and void. The bishop, however, did not, it seems, think this plea to be material; for he insisted upon Dr. Bentley’s answer to the charge; who, upon that, began to question what authority his lordship had over him; and, by a petition presented to queen Anne, prayed “that her majesty would take him and the college into her protection, against the bishop’s pretensions, and maintain her sole power and jurisdiction over her royal foundation, and the masters thereof.” This petition was referred to the then attorney and solicitor-general, and they were ordered fully to consider the matter, and report their opinions. Notice was given at the same time to the bishop, that her majesty having taken this affair into her cognizance, his lordship was to stay proceedings till the queen’s pleasure was farther known. Mr. attorney and solicitor-general took some time to consider; and were of opinion, the bishop had power over the master. But this report not proving satisfactory to some persons then in administration, a letter was brought to the bishop from Mr. secretary St. John, dated 18th June, 1711, acquainting him, “that the matter of the petition of Dr. Richard Bentley, master of Trinity-college in Cambridge, together with the report of Mr. attorney and Mr. solicitorgeneral, being then before the queen, and ordered to be taken into consideration by my lord keeper, assisted by her majesty’s counsel learned in the law, her majesty thought it to be a business of such weight and consequence, that she had commanded him (the secretary) to signify her pleasure to his lordship, that he should stop all further proceedings, according to her majesty’s direction.” But the master seeing that all discipline and studies would be lost in the college, if that controversy were not one way or other decided, requested of the ministry that he might be permitted to take his trial under any visitor the queen should appoint; or if none could be so appointed, that he might have leave, salvo jure regio, to be voluntarily tried under the bishop. Upon this the inhibition was taken off by Mr. secretary St. John, by order of the queen, signifying, “that his lordship was at liberty to proceed, so far as by the law he might.” But his lordship did not think fit to proceed, till he was served uith a rule of court from the king’s-bench, in Easter-term 1714, to shew cause why a writ of mandamus should not issue out against him. The bishop, being then at Ely, was applied to by joint messengers on both sides, to go to the college, where he might have ended the matter in two days. But this was not thought so proper, and Ely-house at London was pitched on, where, instead of two days, the trial lasted at least six weeks, and the college paid a thousand pounds for it; three learned lawyers, who could know but very little of the matter, being admitted on each side, to make eloquent harangues, answers, and replies, upon questions arisingfrom above fifty articles, in which there was scarcely any thing material that might not easily be determined upon a bare inspection of the college statutes, registers, and books of accounts. The trial being ended, and the cause ripe for sentence, the bishop’s death prevented his giving judgment. Thus the matter dropped for the present; but was afterwards revived in 1728, when new articles of complaint against Dr. Bentley, charging him with having in many instances made great waste of the college revenue, and violated the statutes, all founded on the 40th of Elizabeth, were again exhibited to the bishop of Ely, as specially authorised and appointed to receive the same, and to proceed thereupon; though the matter had been long before decided in favour of the crown, as having the general visitatorial power. Upon this, a petition was subscribed by the college, and presented to his majesty under the common-seal, the 10th of August 1728, and the cause carried before the king in council for the college itself now engaged as party in the cause against the bishop, and above fifteen hundred pounds out of the revenues of the college, were spent in carrying it on. This being referred to a committee of his majesty’s most honourable privy-council, Dr. Fleetwood, the lord bishop of Ely, on the 2nd of November, 1728, also presented a petition to his majesty, to be heard touching his right, which was likewise referred to the said committee. The lords committee, just before the clay appointed for a hearing, viz. March 13, 1728, had a printed pamphlet put into their hands, entitled, “The Case of Trinity-college; whether the Crown or the Bishop of Ely be General Visitor;” at the end of which, as well as in their petition, the college applied to the king, to take the visitatorial power (as by the opinion of council he might with their consent) into his own hands, that they might b0 only visited by the crown, but not with a view or intent of avoiding a visitation or inquiry into the state of the society, for which they were very pressing, both in their petition, and at the end of this pamphlet. On the fifteenth the cause came on before the lords of the committee of privy-council, but was from thence referred to the king’s bench, where the May following it was tried by way of prohibition, and after a long pleading, the judges unanimously determined it in favour of the bishop, as to his visitatorial power over the doctor; and the June following, the fellows exhibited their articles of complaint against him before the bishop of Ely, his lordship having two assistants, viz. sir Henry Penrice, and Dr. Bettesworth. But it being urged, that the bishop was going to exercise a general visitatorial power, another petition was preferred to his majesty and council, by the master and fellows, and a farther hearing appointed in the cause, in the court of king’s bench, in November, 1729, &c. and in November, 1731, we find the cause had gone against the bishop of Ely, by his taking out a writ of error, for carrying the' cause by appeal into the house of lords. The crown, however, at last, to put an end to the dispute and disturbance, (as fully impowered to do) took both college and master, according to their petition, into its own jurisdiction and visitation, and here the matter ended.

, an eminent French antiquary, was born at Rheims, March 1, 1567, and not 1557, as asserted by Bayle, Moreri, and Niceron. After finishing his studies at the university of that city, he became preceptor to the children of count de St. Souplet, who always testified his respect for him on account of the pains he bestowed on their education. He then was admitted an advocate, and appointed law-professor and syndic of the city, a place which he filled during many of the elections. His talents and virtues were so highly estimated by his fellow-citizens, that as a mark of their confidence they employed him on their affairs at Paris. During his visits to that metropolis, he commenced a friendship with Dupuy and Peiresc, and formed an acquaintance with the president de Bellievre, who obtained for him the place of historiographer by brevet, with a pension of two hundred crowns. He was on a visit at the country-house of this celebrated magistrate, when he was attacked by a fever, which terminated fatally, August 18, 1623, in his fifty -seventh year. The president honoured him with an affectionate epitaph, which is printed in his two principal works. He is particularly known in the literary world by his “Histoire des grands chemins de l'empire Remain,” a work in which he was assisted by his friend Peiresc, who furnished him with many necessary documents. It was first printed in 4to, 1622, and in the course of a century became very scarce. In 1712 the first book of it was translated into English, and published at London, in 8vo, entitled “The general history of the Highways in all parts of the world, particularly in Great Britain.” In 1728, John Leonard, bookseller and printer at Brussels, published a new edition of the original, 2 vols. 4to, from a copy corrected by the author; and one yet more improved was printed at the same place, in 1736, 2 vols. 4to. They are both scarce, but the first is reckoned the best printed. It has also been translated into Latin by Henninius, professor in the university of Duisbourg, with learned notes, and the remarks of the abbé Du Bos, for Graevius’s antiquities, vol. X. but Bayle is mistaken in supposing that this work was translated into Latin and Italian by Benedict Baccliini, who, however, made some progress himself in a work “De viis antiquorum Romanorum in Italia,” and doubtless would have availed himself of Bergier’s labours. Besides this history of the Roman roads, Bergier had begun a history of Rheims, the manuscript of which the president de Bellievre wished Andre Duschesne to complete, but some obstruction arising on the part of the chapter of Rheims, who refused Duschesne access to their archives, he declined proceeding with the undertaking. The son of the author, however, John Bergier, unwilling that the whole should be lost, published the two books left complete by his father, with a sketch of the other fourteen of which it^as to consist. This wasentitled “Dessein de I'Histoire de Reims,” ibid. 1635, 4fo. Bergier was also author of 1. “Le point du Jour, ou Traite du Commencement des Jours et de l'endroit ou il est etabli sur la terre,” Rheims, 1629, 12 mo. The first, a Paris edition, 1617, wasentitled “Archemeron.” His object is to attain some general rule for avoiding the disputes respecting the celebration of the Catholic festivals. 2. “Le Bouquet royal,” Paris, 1610, 8vo; Rheims, 16:57, 4to, enlarged, an account of the devises and inscriptions which graced the entrance of Louis XIII. into Rheims. 3. “Police generale de la France,” 1617. 4. Various Latin and French poems inserted in the collections, but we cannot pronounce him very successful as a poet.

, a Latin poet, born in Denmark in 1627, whose taste for letters does not appear to have impeded his fortune, was a member of the royal council of finances, and historiographer to his majesty. It was to justify his promotion to this last office, that he published “Florus Danicus, sive Danicarum rerum a primordio regni ad tempera usque Christian! I. Oldenburgici Breviarium.” This work was printed in fol. 1698, at Odensee, the ca-, pital of Funen, at the private press of Thomas Kingorius, bishop of that island, who spared no expence to make an elegant book. The bookseller, however, to whom thesale was consigned, eager to get rid of the unsold copies, printed a new title with the date of 1700, and when that did not quite answer his expectations, he printed another with the date of 1709, and notwithstanding this obvious trick, there are connoisseurs who think the pretended edition of 1709 preferable to that of 1698. In 1716, however, a second edition was published in 8vo, at Tirnaro, under the direction of the Jesuits of that place. Bering’s poetry, printed separately, was collected in the 2d vol. of “Deliciae quorundam Danorum,” Leyden, 1693, 12mo. The smaller pieces, lyrics, sonnets, &c. are the best; he had not genius for the more serious efforts of the muse. He died in 1675.

, successively poet laureate of Henry VII. and VIII. kings of England, was a native of Tholouse, and an Augustine monk. By an instrument in Rymer’s Foedera, Vol. XII. p. 317, pro Potta laureafo, dated 1486, the king grants to Andrew Bernard, poet& laureato, which, as Mr. Warton remarks, we may construe either “the laureated poet,” or “a poet laureat,” a salary of ten marks, until he can obtain some equivalent appointment. He is also supposed to have been the royal historiographer, and preceptor in grammar to prince Arthur. All the pieces now to be found, which he wrote in the character of poet laureat, are in Latin. Among them are, an “Address to Henry VIII. for the most auspicious beginning of the tenth year of his reign,” with “An epithrflamium on the Marriage of Francis the dauphin of France with the king’s daughter.” These were formerly in the possession of Mr. Thomas Martin of Palgrave, the antiquary; - A New Year’s gift for 1515,“in the library of New college, Oxford and” Verses wishing prosperity to his Majesty’s thirteenth year,“in the British museum. He has also left some Latin hymns, a Latin life of St. Andrew, and many Latin prose pieces, which he wrote as historiographer to both monarchs, particularly a” Chronicle of the life and achievements of Henry VII. to the taking of Perkin Warbeck," and other historical commentaries on thq reign of that king, which are all in the CotIonian library. He was living in 1522, but is not mentioned by Bale, Pits, or Tanner.

, king’s counsellor, and historiographer of France, was born at Paris Dec. 25, 1571, and died in 1640. The chief part of his labours were directed to the history of France; on which he wrote, l.“La Conjunction des mers,” on the junction of the ocean with the Mediterranean by the Burgundy canal, 1613, 4to. 2. “Discours surl'etatdes Finances,” Paris, 1614, 4to. 3. “Histoire des guerres de Louis XIII. centre les religionnaires rebelles,” ibid. 1633, fol. Of this only abont three dozen copies were printed, but the whole was afterwards inserted in his history of Louis XIII. 4. “Carte genealogique de la royale maison de Bourbon, avec des Eloges des princes, &c.” ibid. 1634, fol. and 1646, under the title of “Genealogie de la maison de Bourbon.” 5. “Histoire de Louis XIII. jusqu‘a la guerre declaree contre les Espagnols, avec un Discours sur la vie de l’auteur,” ibid.' 1646, fol. This account of the life of the author was written by Charles Sorel, his nephew, who also continued the work down to 1643. The abbé de Gendre says that Bernard is deficient both in style and taste, dealing too much in trifles and digressions, and too prolix in his descriptions of works of architecture, as well as in common-place reflections. He allows, however, that he gives a good account of military affairs, and developes with great skill the intrigues of the court, with which he had a good opportunity of being acquainted.

, cosmographer and historiographer to Louis XIII. of France, and regius professor, of mathematics, was born at Beveren in Flanders, on the confines of the dioceses of Bruges and Ypres, Nov. 14, 1565. He was brought into England when but three months old, by his parents, who dreaded the persecution of the protestants which then prevailed in the Netherlands. He received the rudiments of his education in the suburbs of London, under Christian Rychius, and his learned daughter-in-law, Petronia Lansberg. He afterwards completed his education at Leyden, whither his father, then become protestant minister at Rotterdam, removed him in his twelfth year. In 1582, when only seventeen years of age, he began the employment of teaching, which he carried on at Dunkirk, Ostend, Middleburgh, Goes, and Strasburgh but a desire for increasing his own stock of learning induced him to travel into Germany with Lipsius, and the same object led him afterwards into Bohemia, Silesia, Poland, Russia, and Prussia. On his return to Leyden he was appointed to a professor’s chair, and to the care of the library, of which, after arranging it properly, he published a' catalogue. In 1606, he was appointed regent of the college, but afterwards, having taken part with the disciples of Arminius, and published several works against those of Gomarus, he was dismissed from all his employments, and deprived of every means of subsistence, with a numerous family. In March 1620, he presented a petition to the states of Holland for a pension, which was refused. Two years before, Louis XIII. had honoured him with the title of his cosmographer, and now constrained by poverty and the distress of his family, he went to France and embraced the popish religion, a change which gave great uneasiness to the protestants. Some time after he was appointed professor of rhetoric in the college of Boncourt, then historiographer to the king, and lastly assistant to the regius professor of mathematics. He died Oct. 3, 1629. A veryline engraving of him occurs at the back of the dedication to Louis XIII. of his “Theatrum Geographise veteris,” but (the collectors will be glad to hear) only in some copies of that work, which are supposed to have been presents from the author.

In 1702, the pope appointed him, with the title of historiographer, to accompany cardinal Barberini the legate a latere to Naples, when the king of Spain, Philip V. came to take possession of that kingdom. Bianchini profiled by this opportunity to visit mount Vesuvius, and ascended to the summit of the crater. On his return to Rome, in 1703, the senate of Rome conferred upon him, his family, and descendants, the rank of the Roman nobility and the patrician order. At the same time the pope chose him secretary of the committee for the reformation of the calendar. In order to regulate with precision the course of the year, it was necessary to establish and fix with the greatest accuracy the equinoxial points. Bianchini being employed to trace a meridian line, and to construct a gnomon on one of the churches, performed this with great success, with the assistance of the learned PhiJip Maraldi. The pope commemorated the construction of the gnomon by a medal, and Bianchini wrote a treatise on both, “De Nunnnis et Gnomone Clementine.”

On his return to Rome in the month of June, 1713, he resumed his astronomical and antiquarian pursuits. When in France he conceived the idea of tracing a meridian line through Italy, from sea to sea, in imitation of that of Cassini through the middle of France. He accordingly began his operations, and pursued the object at his own expence, ‘ for eight years, but other plans and employments occurring, he never completed the design. The papal favours, however, were still conferred on him, purely as a man of science. Innocent XIII. the successor of Clement XI. appointed him referendary of the pontifical signatures, and domestic prelate, and in the council held at Home in 1725, he filled the office of first historiographer. Next year, his love for antiquities was highly gratified, although at the same time checked by an accident which had serious consequences. Tnere was discovered near Rome on the Appian way, a magnificent marble subterraneous building of three large halls, whose walls consisted of a great number of little cells like those of our modern pidgeon -houses. Most of these cells contained, each, four cinerary urns, accompanied with inscriptions of the name and office of the person whose ashes they contained, who were all slaves or freed-men and women of the household of Augustus, especially that of Livk. There were also in this place some exquisite specimens of mosaic ornaments. Biauchini’s joy on this discovery may be easily appreciated by genuine antiquaries; but one unfortunate day, while he was examining one of the chambers or halls, and preparing to make a drawing, the ground on which he stood gave way, and although his fall was broken by some earth which had been dug, one of his thighs received such a serious injury, that he was lame for the remainde’r of his iif and although he found some relief at the baths of Vignona near Sienna, where he went the following year, his health was never completely re-established.

, an eminent Italian scholar, was born at Bologna in 1488, of a noble family. In his studies he made uncommon proficiency, and had distinguished himself at the early age of twenty by his very learned work on Plautus. According to the custom of the age, he attached himself to various princes, but at first to the celebrated Albert Pio, count of Carpi. Having become imperial orator at the court of Rome, he obtained by his talents and knowledge of business, the titles of chevalier and count Palatine, and was intrusted with some important functions, such as that of bestowing the degree of doctor, of creating notaries, and even legitimizing natural children. At Bologna he was professor of Greek and Latin, rhetoric and poetry, and was chosen one of the Auziani in 1522. Having acquired a handsome fortune, he built a palace, and in 1546 founded an academy in it, named from himself Academia Bocchiana, or Bocchiale. It was also called Ermatena, agreeable to its device, on which was engraven the two figures of Mercury and Minerva. He also established a printing-office in his house, and he and his academicians employed themselves in correcting the many beautiful editions which they printed. Bocchi was a good Hebrew scholar, and well versed in antiquities and history, particularly that of his own country. The senate of Bologna employed him on writing the history of that city, and bestowed on him the title of Historiographer. Cardinal Sadolet, the two Flaminio’s, John Phil. Achillini, and Lcl. Greg. Giraldi, were among his particular friends, who have all spoken very favourably of him in their works. This last was much attached to him, and it is supposed that he meant to express this attachment by giving him the name of Phileros (loving friend), or Philerote, which is on the title of some of his works. Bocchi died at Bologna, Nov. 6, 1562. He wrote, 1. “Apologia in Plautum, cui accedit vita Ciceronis authore Plutarcho,” Bologn.

, an eminent German critic and historian, and counsellor to the emperor and to the elector of Mentz, was born in 1611, at Cronheim in Franconia, and was during a long life reputed one of the ablest men Germany had produced, particularly in Greek, Latin, and Hebrew, in history, and political and legal knowledge. He was only twenty when thought worthy of being appointed professor of eloquence at Strasburgh, and in 1640 was made a canon of St. Thomas. Christina, queen of Sweden, invited him to Upsal in 1648, to be professor of eloquence, and the following year conferred on him the place of historiographer of Sweden, with a pension of eight hundred crowns, which she generously continued when his health obliged him to return to Strasburgh. He was then elected professor* of history at Strasburgh, and in 1662 the elector of Mentz appointed him his counsellor. The year after, the emperor Ferdinand III. bestowed the' same honour upon him, with the title of count Palatine. Louis XIV. offered him a pension pf two thousand livres, but the court of Vienna, unwilling to lose him, induced him to decline it, and made up his loss by another pension of six hundred rix-dollars. Boeder, honoured and enriched by so many favours, pursued his studies with unremitting ardour, until his death in 1692. He published with notes or commentaries, editions of Herodian, Strasburgh, 1644, 8vo Suetonius, ibid. 1647, 4to Manilius, ibid. 1655, 4to Terence, ibid, 1657, 8vo Cornelius Nepos, Utrecht, 1665, 12mo; Polybius, 1666, 1670, 1681, 4to; part of Tacitus, Velleius Paterculus, Virgil, Herodotus, and Ovid. His other works were 1 “De Jure Galliae in Lotharingiam,” Strasburgh, 1663, 4to, a refutation of the treatise on the rights of the French king to Lorraine. 2. “Annotationes in Hippolytum a Lapide,” ibid. 1674, 4to, a refutation of the work entitled “De ratione status imperii Romano-Germanici,” by Chemnitz or James de Steinberg. 3. “Dissertatio de scriptoribus Graecis et Latinis, ab Homero usque ad initium XVI seculi,” ibid. 1674, 8vo, and reprinted by Gronovius in the tenth vol. of his Grecian antiquities. 4. “Bibliographia historico-politico-philologica,” 1677, 8vo. 5. “Historia Belli Sueco-Danici annis 1643 1645,” Stockholm, 1676, Strasburgh, 1679, 8vo. 6. “Historia universalis ab orbe comlito ad J. C. nativitatem,” ibid. 1680, 8vo, with a dissertation on the use of history. 7. “Notitia sacri imperii Romani,” ibid. 1681, 8vo. 8. An edition with notes and improvements, of Picolomini’s Latin history of Frederic III. ibid. 1685, fol. reprinted 1702. 9. “De rebus saeculi post Christum XVI. liber memorialis,” Kiel, 1697, 8vo: 10. “Historia universalis IV saeculorum post Christum,” 1699, 8vo, reprinted at Rostock, 4to, with a life of the author, by J. Theophilus Moller. 11. Various “Letters” in Jaski’s collection, Amsterdam, 1705, 12mo. 12. “Commentatio in Grotii librum de jure belli ac pacis,” Strasburgh, 1705, 1712, 4to. He was a most enthusiastic admirer of Grotius. 13. “Bibliographia critica,” Leipsic, 1715, 8vo, enlarged by J. Gottlieb Krause the former editions of this work were very defective. 14. “Dissertations, and smaller pieces,” published by J. Fabricius, ajt Strasburgh, 1712, 4 vols. 4to, on history, politics, morals, criticism, many of them very valuable.

Boileau knew how to procure a still more powerful protection at court than the duke de Montausier’s, that of Lewis XIV. himself. He lavished upon this monarch praises the more flattering, as they appeared dictated by the public voice, and merely the sincere and warm expression of the nation’s intoxication with respect to its king. To add value to his homage, the artful satirist had the address to make his advantage of the reputation of frankness he had acquired, which served as a passport to those applauses which the poet seemed to bestow in spite of his nature; and he was particularly attentive, while bestowing praises on all those whose interest might either support or injure him, to reserve the first place, beyond comparison, for the monarch. Among other instances, he valued himself, as upon a great stroke of policy, for having contrived to place Monsieur, the king’s brother, by the side of the king himself, in his verses, without hazard of wounding the jealousy of majesty; and for having celebrated the conqueror of Cassel more feebly than the subduer of Flanders. He had however the art, or more properly the merit, along with his inundation of praises, to convey some useful lessons to the sovereign. Lewis XIV. as yet young and greedy of renown, which he mistook for real glory, was making preparations for war with Holland. Colbert, who knew how fatal to the people is the most glorious war, wished to divert the king from his design. He engaged Boileau to second his persuasions, by addressing to Lewis his first epistle, in which te proves that a king’s true greatness consists in rendering his subjects happy, by securing them the blessings of peace. But although this epistle did not answer the intentions of the minister or the poet, yet so much attention to please the monarch, joined to such excellence, did not remain unrecompensed. Boileau was loaded with the king’s favour, admitted at court, and named, in conjunction with Racine, royal historiographer. The two poets seemed closely occupied in writing the history of their patron; they even read several passages of it to the king; but they abstained from giving any of it to the public, in the persuasion that the history of sovereigns, even the most worthy of eulogy, cannot be written during their lives, without running the risk either of losing reputation by flattery, or incurring hazard by truth. It was with repugnance that Boileau had undertaken an office so little suited to his talents and his taste. “When I exercised,” said he, “the trade of a satirist, which I understood pretty well, I was overwhelmed with insults and menaces, and I am now dearly paid for exercising that of historiographer, which I do not understand at all/' Indeed,” far from being dazzled by the favour he enjoyed, he rather felt it as an incumbrance. He often said, that the first sensation his fortune at court inspired in him, was a feeling of melancholy. He thought the bounty of his sovereign purchased too dearly by the Joss of liberty a blessing so intrinsically valuable, which all the empty and fugitive enjoyments of vanity are unable to compensate in the eyes of a philosopher. Boileau endeavoured by degrees to recover this darling liberty, in proportion as age seemed to permit the attempt; and for the last ten or twelve years of his life he entirely dropped his visits to court. “What should I do there?” said he, “I can praise no longer.” He might, however, have found as much matter for his applauses as when he lavished them without the least reserve. While he attended at court^ he maintained a freedom and frankness of speech, especially on topics of literature, which are not common among courtiers. When Lewis asked his opinion of some verses which he had written, he replied, “Nothing, sire, is impossible to your majesty; you wished to make bad verses, and you have succeeded.” He also took part with the persecuted members of the Port-royal; and when one of the courtiers declared that the king was making diligent search after the celebrated Arnauld, in order to put him in the Bastile, Boileau observed, “His majesty is too fortunate; he will not find him:” and when the king asked him, what was the reason why the whole world was running after a preacher named le Tourneux, a disciple of Arnauld, “Your majesty,” he replied, “knows how fond people are of novelty: this is a minister who preaches the gospel.” Boileau appears from various circumstances, to have been no great friend to the Jesuits, whom he offended by his “Epistle on the Love of God,” and by many free speeches. By royal favour, he was admitted unanimously, in 1684, into the French academy, with which he had made very free in his epigrams; and he was also associated to the new academy of inscriptions and belles-lettres, of which he appeared to be a fit rnember, by his “Translation of Longinus on the Sublime.” To science, with which he had little acquaintance, he rendered, however, important service by his burlesque “Arret in favour of the university, against an unknown personage called Reason,” which was the means of preventing the establishment of a plan of intolerance in matters of philosophy. His attachment to the ancients, as the true models of literary taste and excellence, occasioned a controversy between him and Perrault concerning the comparative merit of the ancients and moderns, which was prosecuted for some time by epigrams and mutual reproaches, till at length the public began to be tired with their disputes, and a reconciliation was effected by the good offices of their common friends. This controversy laid the foundation of a lasting enmity between Boileau and Fontenelle, who inclined to the party of Perrault. Boileau, however, did not maintain his opinion with the pedantic extravagance of the Daciers; but he happily exercised his wit on the misrepresentations of the noted characters of antiquity, by the fashionable romances of the time, in his dialogue entitled “The Heroes of Romance,” composed in the manner of Lucian. In opposition to the absurd opinions of father Hardouin, that most of the classical productions of ancient Rome had been written by the monks of the thirteenth century, Boileau pleasantly remarks, “I know nothing of all that; but though I am not very partial to the monks, I should not have been sorry to have lived with friar Tibullus, friar Juvenal, Dom Virgil, Dom Cicero, and such kind of folk.” After the death of Racine, Boileau very much retired from court; induced partly by his love of liberty and independence, and partly by his dislike of that adulation which was expected, and for which the dose of Lewis’s reign afforded more scanty materials than its commencement. Separated in a great degree from society, he indulged that austere and misanthropical disposition, from which he was never wholly exempt. His conversation, however, was more mild and gentle than his writings; and, as he used to say of himself, without “nails or claws,” it was enlivened by occasional sallies of pleasantry, and rendered instructive by judicious opinions of authors and their works. He was religious without bigotry; and he abhorred fanaticism and hypocrisy. His circumstances were easy; and his prudent economy has been charged by some with degenerating into avarice. Instances, however, occur of his liberality and beneficence. At the death of Colbert, the pension which he had given to the poet Corneille was suppressed, though he was poor, old, infirm, and dying. Boileau interceded with the king for the restoration of it, and offered to transfer his own to Corneille, telling the monarch that he should be ashamed to receive his bounty while such a man was in want of it. He also bought, at an advanced price, the library of Patru, reduced in his circumstances, and left him in the possession of it till his death. He gave to the poor all the revenues he had received for eight years from a benefice he had enjoyed without performing the duties of it. To indigent men of letters his purse was always open; and at his death he bequeathed almost all his possessions to the poor. Upon the whole, his temper, though naturally austere, was on many occasions kind and benevolent, so that it has been said of him, that he was “cruel only in verse;” and his general character was distinguished by worth and integrity, with some alloys of literary jealousy and injustice. Boileau died of a dropsy in the breast, March 11, 1711, and by his will left almost all his property to the poor. His funeral was attended by a very numerous company, which gave a woman of the lower class occasion to say, “He had many friends then I yet they say that he spoke ill of every body.”

, a French antiquary and miscellaneous writer, was born at Louvres, in the district of Paris, in 1694, and educated for the ecclesiastical profession; but, devoting himself entirely to literature, he became under-librarian of St. Victor, and distinguished both by the politeness of his manners, and the variety as well as assiduity of his studies. In 1727, he was admitted a member of the academy of inscriptions and belles lettres, and made many valuable contributions to its memoirs. His papers are characterised by simple but correct language, variety of erudition, clearness of argument, and solidity of criticism. At the instigation of M. Turgot, a place was created of historiographer of Paris, and Bonamy being appointed to occupy it, was led to write various memoirs relative to the history and antiquities of the city; and on occasion of the bequest of a curious library to the city, he was made librarian. From the year 174-7, he conducted the “Journal of Verdun” with the strictest propriety and decorum, and indeed in every thing displayed candour and probity, as well as learning. He died at Paris in 1770.

, an elegant Italian scholar of the sixteenth century, was born at Gorzano in the Brescian territory, but in what year is not known. He was three years secretary to cardinal Bari at Rome; but lost the fruits of his services by the death of his master. He then served cardinal Glinucci in the same capacity; but long sickness made him incapable of that employment. When he was recovered, he found himself so disgusted with the court, that he resolved to seek his fortune by other means. He continued a good while in the kingdom of Naples, then went to Padua, and to Genoa; where he read public lectures on Aristotle’s politics. He was ordered to read some likewise upon his rhetoric, which he did with great success to a numerous auditory. His reputation increasing daily, the republic of Genoa made him their historiographer, and assigned him a handsome pension for that office. He now applied himself laboriously to compose the annals of that state, and published the five first books; but by speaking too freely and satirically of some families, he created himself enemies who resolved to ruin him, by a prosecution for an unnatural crime, and being convicted, he was condemned to be first beheaded, and then burnt, or as some say, sentence of burning was changed into that of beheading. Some have attributed this prosecution to the freedom of his pen; but the generality of writers have agreed that Bonfadio was guilty, yet are of opinion, that he had never been accused, if he had not given offence by something else. He was executed in 1560. Upon the day of his execution he wrote a note to John Baptist Grimaldi, to testify his gratitude to the persons who had endeavoured to serve him, and recommended to them his nephew Bonfadio, who is perhaps the Peter Bonfadio, author of some verses extant in the “Gareggiamento poetico del confuso accademico ordito,” a collection of verses, divided into eight parts, and printed at Venice in 1611. The first five books of Bonfadio’s history of Genoa were printed at Padua, 1586, 4to, under the title “I. Bonfadii annales Genuensium ab anno 1528, ubi desinit Folieta, ad annum 1550,” and was in 1597 published in Italian. He also published an Italian and very elegant translation of Cicero’s oration for Milo, an edition of which was published at Bologna in 1744, with his letters and miscellaneous works, “Lettere famigliari, &c.” 8vo, dedicated to pope Benedict XIV. with a life of the unfortunate author, and a curious Latin poem by Paul Manutius, in honour of those persons who used their interest to save Bonfadio from punishment.

, the historian of the university of Paris, was born at St. Ellier or Helier, and became professor of rhetoric in the college of Navarre, and afterwards register, historiographer, and rector of the university of Paris, where he died Oct. 16, 1678. Of all his works, his history of the university of Paris, “Historia Universitatis Parisiensis,” 6 vols. 1665 1673, fol. contributed most to his fame. The publication of this vast undertaking was at first interrupted by some objections from the theological faculty of Paris, who carried their remonstrances to the king; but the commissioners, whom his majesty employed to inspect the work, having reported that they saw no reason why it should not be continued, he proceeded to its completion, and in 1667 published an answer to their objections, entitled “Notue ad censuram.” Not entirely satisfied with this triumph, he also published a poetical satire against them, with the title of “Ad Zoilosycopuantam, sive Bulaeistarum obtrectatorem,” a work of considerable spirit and elegance of style. His history is an useful repository of facts and lives of learned men connected with the revival of literature, and especially the progress of learning in that eminent university, and is blameable only for the fabulous accounts, in which our own university-historians have not been wanting, respecting the early history of schools of learning. Boulai’s other writings are, 1. “Tresor des antiquues Romanies,” Paris, 1650, fol. 2. “Speculum eloquentia?,” ibid. 1658, 12mo. S. “De Patronis quatuor nationum universitatis Parisiensis,” Paris, 1662, 8vo. 4. “Remarques sur la dignite, rang, preseance, autorite, et jurisdiction du recteur de Tuniversite de Paris,” ibid. 1668, 4to. 5. “Recueil des Privileges de PUniversite de Paris accordes par les rois de France depuis sa fondation., &c.” ibid. 1674, 4to. 6. “Fondation de l'universite, &e,” 1675, 4to. Boulai was frequently involved in disputes with the members of the university respecting the election of officers, &c. which occasioned the publication of many papers on these subjects, which, if we may judge from his extensive labours, he must have understood very accurately; and from these disputes, and the general bent of his researches, he appears to have very closely resembled the celebrated historian of the university of Oxford.

, a Portuguese historian, was born at Almeida, Aug. 20, 1569, and entered young into the order of the Cistercians, by whom he was sent to Italy to be educated. During his studies he betrayed much more fondness for history than for philosophy or divinity, yet did not neglect the latter so far as to be unable to teach both, which he did with reputation on his return home. His abilities in investigating the affairs of Portugal procured him the office of first historiographer of Portugal, and he was the first who endeavoured to give a regular form to its history, two folio volumes of which he published in 1597, at Alcobasa, and 1609, at. Lisbon, under the title of “Monarchia Lusitana.” It is written with elegance; and was brought down to Alfonsus III. by Antony and Francis Brandano, monks of the same order, making in all 7 vols. He published also, 2. Panegyrics of the kings of Portugal, with their portraits. 3. Ancient Geography of Portugal. 4. Chronicle of the Cistercian order. The ' Guerra Brasilica," Lisbon, 1675, 2 vols. folio, is by Francis de Brito, a different person from Bernard, who died in 1617.

, a very learned Venetian, was born about 1518, and studied at Padua. It appears from his letters, that he was obliged to leave his country as an exile; but he does not say upon what account, only that it was without any blemish to his honour. He travelled much, passing part of his life in Spain, England, France, Germany, Transylvania, and Poland. Notwithstanding this itinerant kind of life, he acquired great learning, as appears from his notes on Horace, Caesar, Cicero, &c. He was in Transylvania in 1574, having been invited thither by prince Stephen, in order to compose a history of that country. One of his letters, dated from Cracow, Nov. 23, 1577, informs us, that he had followed that prince, then king of Poland, in the expedition into Prussia. He had a convenient apartment assigned him in the castle of Cracow, that he might apply himself the better to his function of historiographer. He left Poland after the death of that monarch, and lived with William of St. Clement, ambassador from the king of Spain to the imperial court, where he was honoured with the title of his imperial majesty’s historiographer. He died afterwards in Transylvania, in 1594, in his seventy-sixth year.

, a learned historiographer of Palermo, where he was born in 1673, devoted his life to the history and antiquities of Sicily; and first published “Memorie Istoriche della Sicilia,” Palermo, 1716, fol. and afterwards a collection of the Sicilian historians, under the title of “Bibliotheca Historica Regni Siciliae,” 1723, 2 vols. fol. Saxius says he died in 1724; but the editors of the Diet. Hist, in 1750, and they add that his “Bibliotheca” was translated into Italian, and published in 1745, 3 vols. fol.

, grandson of the preceding Chemnitz, the reformer, was bora at Stettin May 9, 1605, and after completing his education, served in the army, first in Holland, and afterwards in Sweden, where his merit raised him from the rank of captain to that of counsellor of state, and historiographer of Sweden. Queen Christina also granted him letters of nobility, with the estate of Holstaedt in that country, where he died in 1678. He wrote, in six books, an account of the war carried on by the Swedes in Germany, which was published in 2 vols. folio, the first at Stettin in 1648, and the second at Holme in 1653; the whole in the German language: the second volume is most highly esteemed, owing to the assistance the author received from count Oxenstiern. The abbe Lenglet mentions a Latin edition, at least of the first volume, entitled “Beilum Germanicum ab ejus ortu anno 1612, ad mortem Gustavi Adolphi anno 1632.” Chemnitz is also said to be the author of “De ratione Status Imperii Romano- Germanici,” which was published at Stettin in 1640, under the assumed name of Hyppolitus a Lapide. Its object is to impugn the claims of the house of Austria, and it was answered by an anonymous writer, Franefort, 1657, by Bruggeman, at Jena, 1667, and by Henry Boeder, at Strasbtirgh, in 1674. It was afterwards translated into French by Bourgeois de Chastelet, under the title of “Des Interets des princes d'Allemagne,” Friestad, 1712, 2 vols. 12mo, and by Samuel Formey, as late as 1762, under the title of “Les vrais interets de l'Allemagne,” Hague, with notes and applications to the then state of German politics.

, an eminent historian, and justly considered as the father of French history, was bornin the Isle of Bouchard; in Torrairie, May 1584. He was the youngest of the four sons of Tanneguy Du Chesne, lord of Sausoniere. His name has been Latinized in different forms. He has at different times called himself Quema3us, Quercetanus, Duchenius; and by others he has been called Querceus, a Quercu, Chesneus, and Chesnius. In his historical works he assumed no other title than that of geographer to the king, except in his history of the house of Bethune, printed in 1639, where he calls himself historiographer to the king. His family produced many men of talents in the army and at the bar. He was first educated at Loudun, and after a course of grammar and rhetoric, came to Parisj where he studied philosophy, in the college of Boncours, under Julius Caesar Boulanger, an eminent philosopher, and one of the best historians of that period.

In 1617 he undertook an edition of the “Histoire de la Maison de Luxembourg,” written in 1574, by Nicholas Viguier, and continued it to the year 1557. He was also editor this year of the works of Alain Chartier, and of Alcuinus, and at the same time projected two great works the one, “A Geographical Description of France,” which was to extend to many volumes. This work, of which he published a specimen, was begun to be printed in Hoiland, but was not continued; the other was that on which his fame chiefly rests, his collection of French historians, under the title “Historia Francorum Scriptores cocetanei ab ipsius gentis origine ad nostra usque tempora.” In the preface to his collection of the historians of Normandy, he gives some account of the plan, which may be seen in the life of Bouquet, in this Dictionary, (vol. VI.) Peter Pithou and Marquard Freher had given him the idea of it, and he undertook it by order of Louis XIII. who encouraged him, by a pension of 2400 livres, which he enjoyed till his death, with the title of royal geographer and historiographer in ordinary. As a preparation for this work, he published in 1618, his “Bibliotheque des Auteurs qui ont ecrit Histoire et Topographic de la France,” 8vo, which is now superseded by the more extensive work of Le Long. It appears that in forming his collections for the French historians, he was assisted by Peiresc, who examined the church and monastic libraries for him.

In 1664 he became superintendant of the buildings; and from that time applied himself earnestly to the enlarging and adorning of the royal edifices, particularly those splendid works, the palace of the Tuilleries, the Louvre, St. Germain, Fontainbleau, and Chombord. Versailles, which he found a dog-kenuel, where Louis XIII. kept his hunting equipage, he rendered a palace fit for the greatest monarch. Colbert also formed several designs for increasing the beauty and convenience of the capital city, and had the principal hand in the establishment of the academy for painting and sculpture in 1664, which originated in the following circumstance: the king’s painters and sculptors, with other skilful professors of those arts, being prosecuted at law by the master-painters at Paris, joined together in a society, under the name of the Royal Academy for sculpture and painting, with a view to hold public exercises, for the sake of improving the arts, and advancing them to the highest degree of perfection. They put themselves under the protection of Mazarine, and chose chancellor Seguier their vice-protector; and after Mazarine’s death chose Seguier their protector, and Colbert their vice-protector; and it was at his solicitation that they were finally established by a patent, containing new privileges, in 1664. Colbert, being made protector after the death of Seguier, thought fit that an historiographer should be appointed, whose business it should be to collect all curious and useful observations made at their conferences. His majesty acquiesced in the appointment of this new officer, and settled on him a salary of 300 livres. To Colbert also the lovers of naval knowledge are obliged, for the erection of the academy of sciences; and in 1667, for the royal observatory at Paris, which was first inhabited by Cassini. France also owes to him all the advantages she receives by the union of the two seas; a prodigious work, begun in 1666, and finished in 1680. Colbert was besides very attentive to matters which regarded the order, decency, and well-being of society. He undertook to reform the courts of justice, and to put a stop to the usurpation of noble titles; which was then very common in France. In the former of those attempts he failed, in the latter he succeeded.

In 1742, the place being vacant, the abbé Gordara was appointed historiographer of his order and in 1750 published, in elegant Latin, 2 vols. fol. “Historia Societatis Jesu, Pars VI. complectens res gestas sub Mutio Vitellesco.” Two years after, this was followed by another work of less bulk, but perhaps more curious, entitled “Caroli Odoardi Stuartii, Walliae principis, expeditio in Scotiam, Libris IV. comprehensa.” This was thought by Ins friends to be his master-piece, but as it has not been, as far as we know, imported into England, we can give no opinion as to its merits. In 1770 Cordara published “The History of the Germanic and Hungarian College at Rome,” a work which, though local, may contribute to the geneijal mass of literary history. On the dissolution of the order of the Jesuits, some of whom were imprisoned and otherwise harshly treated, he retired in 1772 from Rome to Turin, and notwithstanding his advanced age and change of life, resumed his juvenile pursuits in poetry and belles lettres. He composed a drama*, “The Deliverance of Betulia” a burlesque poem, “The Foundation of Nice,” accounted one the best of the kind his “Essay on Military Eclogues,” and in 1783, an eulogy on Metastasio, none of which betrayed any decay in his powers. Towards the close of his life he resided at Alexandria, his native place, in a secular college, where he died in 1790. His eloge was written by his countryman, the marquis Charles Guasco.

, a monk of the Ecoles-Pies, and a mathematician and antiquary, was born at Fanano in 1702, and died in 1765, at Pisa, where the grand duke had given him a chair in philosophy. This science occupied his first studies, and his success soon appeared from the “Philosophical and Mathematical Institutions,” 1723 and 1724, 6 vols. 8vo. For the doctrines of Aristotle, which then were generally adopted in a part of Italy, he substituted a species of philosophy at once more useful and more true. Encouraged by the favourable reception his work had met with, he published in 1735 a new “Course of Geometrical Elements,” written with precision and perspicuity. On being appointed professor at Pisa, he revised and retouched his two performances. The former appeared, with considerable corrections, at Bologna in 1742; and the second, augmented with f< Elements of Practical Geometry,“was published at Venice in 1748, 2 vols. 8vo. He was well versed in hydrostatics and history. After having sedulously applied for several years to the classical authors, and particularly those of Greece, he proposed to write the” Fasti of the Archons of Athens,“the first volume of which appeared in 1734, in 4to, and the fourth and last, ten years after. Being called in 1746 to the chair of moral philosophy and metaphysics, he composed a” Course of Metaphysics,“which appeared afterwards at Venice in 1758. His learned friends Muratori, Gorio, Maffei, Quirini, Passionei, now persuaded him to abandon philosophy; and, at their solicitations, he returned to criticism and erudition. In 1747 he published four dissertations in 4to, on the sacred games of Greece, in which he gave an exact list of the athletic victors. Two years afterwards he brought out, in folio, an excellent work on the abbreviations used in Greek inscriptions, under this title,” De notis Graecorum.“This accurate and sagacious performance was followed by several dissertations relative to objects of learning. But the high esteem in which he was held by his acquaintance on account of his virtues and industry, was an interruption to his labours, he being appointed general of his order in 1754; yet the leisure left him by the arduous duties of his station he devoted to his former studies, and when the term of his generalship expired, he hastened back to Pisa, to resume the functions of professor. He now published several new dissertations, and especially an excellent work, one of the best of his performances, entitled” De praefectis urbis.“At length he confined the whole of hi:; application on the” History of the University of Pisa," of which he had been appointed historiographer, and was about to produce the first volume when a stroke of apoplexy carried him off, in spite of all the resources of the medical art, in December 1765.

was born at Drumsoy near Glasgow, 1665, and brought up to the law; but seldom went to the bar, his taste being confined to history and antiquities, in which he made very great progress. He was appointed historiographer-royal of Scotland by queen Anne, and it was at that time thought that no man ever deserved that place better. In 1706 he published, 8vo, “Memoirs of Scotland” during the times of the four regents, which has gone through two editions. The “Peerage,” and “History of the Stuart Family,” attributed to him in the last edition of this Dictionary, belong to George Crawfurd, of whom we have no account; but, perhaps, with more reason, the Biographia Dramatica attributes to him two plays, “Courtship Alamode,” 1700, and “Love at first Sight,” 1704. He is said to have died at Drumsoy, 1726.

, a native of Brussels, where he was born in 1586, became a monk of the Augustine order, and rose to honours and high official situations among his order; being prefect of the schools of Brussels and Louvaine, a provincial of various convents, and counsellor and historiographer to the emperor of Germany. He had the character of a man of extensive learning and piety, the latter carried sometimes to the minuUsc of superstition, as appears by his work “De Clavis Dominicis,” of which there are three editions, 1622, 1632, and 1670: in this he gravely discusses whether our Saviour. was fixed to the cross with three nails or four? and decides in favour of the latter number. His more valuable works are: 1. “Vita; S. S. Rupert! et Virgilii,” Ingolstadt, 1622. 2. “Epistolas familiares,” ibid. 1621. 3. “Poematum libri tres,” Ant. 1629, 12mo. 4. “Amphitheatrum amorum, Christ. Fonseca auctore, Curtio interprete,” Ingolstadt, 1623, 8vo. 5. “Quadragesimale” by Fonseca, translated from the Spanish into Latin, Cologn. 6. “Vitae quinque Virginum Augustiniarum,” ibid. 1636. 7. “Elogia virorum illustrium Ord. Eremit. S. Augustini,” with engraven portraits, Antwerp, 1636, 4to. 8. “Vita S. Nicolai Tolentinatis,” with the lives of other Augustines, ibid, 1637, 16mo. He left also some unfinished manuscripts. He died in Oct. 1633.

, a Spanish ecclesiastic, and historiographer to the king of Spain, was a native of the town of Avila, from which he derived his name. He accompanied the cardinal Pierra Deza to Rome, and made great progress in the study of sacred and profane history. On his return to Spain, he was presented to a benefice in the church of Salamanca; and being invited to Madrid in 1612, he was appointed king’s historiographer for Castille. He composed in Spanish, “A History of the Antiquities of Salamanca;” the “Life of Alphonso Tostat;” “Theatre* de las Grandesas de Madrid;” “Theatro ecclesiastico de las iglesias de las Indias;”a life of Henry III. king of Castille, &c. and other works. He died in 1658, upwards of eighty years old.

, a learned French advocate and classical scholar, was born in 1609 at Toulouse, of a family distinguished by their talents. After having studied classics and philosophy with great success, he went through a course of law, and was admitted an advocate of the parliament of Toulouse in 1637. Removing afterwards with a view to settle in Paris, he was admitted to the same rank in the parliament of that city in 1639. Here his reputation for knowledge and eloquence became soon acknowledged, and in 1650, on the death of Balthazar Baro, he was chosen into the French academy in his place. The following year, according to the “Menagiana,” he went to Bourges as candidate for a law professorship, but we are not told whether he succeeded; in the same year, however, he was appointed professor of the canon law in the royal college; and four years after, in 1655, had the appointment of regent doctor of the faculty of the law, and filled both offices with the highest reputation, nor did their laborious duties prevent him from finding sufficient leisure to write many of his published works. He was also appointed preceptor to the dauphin in history, and became one of the learned editors of the Dauphin classics. He died Oct. 27, 1688, in his 79th year, being then dean of the French academy, of the royal college, and of the faculty of law. He had an extensive knowledge of languages, wrote fluently in Latin and French, and spoke Italian, Spanish, Greek, Hebrew, and even the Turkish, and understood English, German, and Sclavonic. With all these accomplishments, he was a man of singular modesty, probity, and disinterestedness. His talents having procured him what he thought a competent maintenance, he had no ambition for riches, and employed what was not necessary for his own moderate wants, upon the poor. His works are numerous, and justify the fame he acquired. 1. “Dictionnaire de la' langue Toulousaine,” lt)38, 8vo. This, which is without Doujat’s name, was printed at the end of Goudelin’s works, which are in that language. 2. “Grammaire Espagnole abregee,” Paris, 1644, 12mo, also without his name. 3. “Moyen aise d'apprendre les langues mis en pratique sur la langue Espagnole,” ibid. 1646, 12rao. 4. “Joannis Dartis opera Canonica, edente J. Doujatio,” ibid. 1656, fol. 5. “De Pace a Ludovico XIV. constituta, oratio panegyrica,” ibid. 1660, 12mo. 6. “Historica juris Pontificii Synopsis,” added afterwards to his edition of Lancelot’s Institutions, ibid. 1670, 12mo. 7. “Synopsis Conciliorum et Chrono* logia Patrum, Pontificum, Imperatorum,” &c. ibid. 1671, 12mo. 8. A Latin translation of the “Panegyrique duRoy,” by M. Pellison, ibid. 1671, 4to. 9. “La Clef du grand Pouille de France,” ibid. 1671, 2 volumes, 12mo. 10. “Specimen Juris Canonici apud Gallos usu recepti,” &c. ibid. 1671, 2 vols. 12mo, often reprinted. 11. A French translation of Velleius Paterculus, with notes, ibid. 1672 and 1708, 12mo. 12. “Histoire du droit Canonique,” ibid. 1675, 12mo. 13. “Historia Juris Civilis Romanorum,” ibid. 1678, 12mo. 14. “Francisci Florentii opera Canonica et Juridica,” with additions, ibid. 1679, 2 vols. 4to. 15. The Delphin “Livy,” ibid. 1679, 6 vols. 4to. 16. “Theophili Antecessoris Institutionum lib. quatuor,” with notes, &c. ibid. 1681, 2 vols. 12mo. 17. “Institutiones Juris Canonici a J. P. Lancelotto Perusino conscriptae,” with notes, ibid. 1685, 2 vols. 12mo. Inconsequence of a new statute of the university of Paris, every regent doctor was obliged to lecture for three years on some branch of jurisprudence, and Doujat in obedience to this statute lectured on the subject of this work. 18. “Pra?­notionum canonicarum libri quinque,” ibid. Paris, 1687, 4to. 19. “Eloges des personnes illustres de l‘Ancient Testament^ pour donner quelque teinture de l’Histoire Sacree, a I‘usage de monseigneur le due de Bourgogne,’” ibid. 1688, 8vo, in verse, but not of the best sort. 20. “Reponse a M. Furetiere,” Hague, 1688, 4to. 21. “Lettre touchant un passage conteste de Tite Live,” printed in the Journal des Savans, Dec. 1685. 22. “Martini Bracarensis episcopi Collectio Canonum Orientalium.” This Doujat revised and corrected, for insertion in the “Bibl. Juris Canon, veteris,” by Justell, Paris, 1661, 2 vols. fol. Doujat wrote also several shorter pieces in the literary journals, some prefaces, &c. and had made some progress in a history of the regency of queen Anne of Austria, in consequence of the king’s having appointed him historiographer; but before a sheet had been printed, it was thought proper to suppress it. In the British Museum catalogue we find an article attributed to him under the title “Supplementa Lacunarum Livianarum,” 4to, without date, and probably part of his edition of Livy.

In 1661 he produced his first play, “The Duke of Guise,” which was followed the next year by the “Wild Gallant.” In the same year, 1662, he addressed a poem to the lord chancellor Hyde, presented on new-year’s-day; and, the same year also, published a satire on the Dutch*. His next production was “Annus Mirabilis,” the year of wonders, 1666; an historical poem: printed in 1667. His reputation as a poet was now so well established, that this, together with his attachment to the court, procured him the place of poet-laureat, and historiographer to Charles II. of which accordingly he took possession, upon the death of sir William Davenant, in 1668, but his patent was not signed till 1670. The pension of the two offices was 200l. a year. In 1667 he published “An Essay on Dramatic Poesy,” dedicated to Charles earl of Dorset and Middlesex. In the preface we are told that the purpose of this discourse was to vindicate the honour of our English writers from the censure of those who unjustly prefer the French. The essay is drawn up in the form of a dialogue. It was animadverted upon by sir Robert Howard, in the preface to his “Great Favourite, or Duke of Lerma,” to which Dryden replied in a piece prefixed to the second edition of his “Indian Emperor.” Although his first plays had not been very successful, he went on, and in the space of twenty-five years produced twenty-seven plays, besides his other numerous poetical writings. Of the stage, says Dr. Johnson, when he had once invaded it, he kept possession; not indeed, without the competition of rivals, who sometimes prevailed, or the censure of critics, which was often poignant, and often just; but with such a degree of reputation, as made him at least secure of being heard, whatever might be the final determination of the public. These plays were collected, and published in 6 vols. 12mo, in 1725; to which is prefixed the essay on dramatic poetry, and a dedication to the duke of Newcastle by Congreve, in which the author is placed in a very equivocal light.

At the revolution in 1688, being disqualified by having turned papist, he was dismissed from the offices of poetlaureat and historiographer, which were given to his antagonist Shadwell. The earl of Dorset, however, though obliged, as lord-chamberlain, to withdraw his pension, was so generous a friend and patron to him, that he allowed him an equivalent out of his own estate. This Prior tells us, in the dedication of his poems to lord Dorset, his descendant. In 1688 also he published the “Life of St. Francis Xavier,” translated from the French of father Dominic Bouhours. In 1690 he produced his play of “Don Sebastian.” In 1693 came out, in folio, a translation of “Juvenal and Persius,” in which the first, third, sixth, tenth, and sixteenth satires of Juvenal, and Persius entire, were done by Dryden, who prefixed a long and beautiful discourse, by way of dedication to the earl of Dorset.

, born at Dinant in Bretagne, about the close of 1705, the son of a hatter, received a distinguished education at Paris. His taste for literature obtained him admission to the most celebrated academies of the metropolis, of the provinces, and of foreign countries. Being chosen to succeed Mirabaud, as perpetual secretary of the French academy, he filled that post as a man who was fond of literature, and had the talent of procuring it respect. Though domesticated at Paris, he was appointed in 1744 mayor of Dinant; and in 1755 had a patent of nobility granted him by the king, in reward for the zeal which the states of Bretagne had shewn for the service of the country. That province having received orders to point out such subjects as were most deserving of the favours of the monarch, Duclos was unanimously named by the tiers-6tat. He died at Paris, March 26, 1772, with the title of historiographer of France. His conversation was at once agreeable, instructive and lively. He reflected deeply, and expressed his thoughts with, energy, and illustrated them by well selected anecdotes. Lively and impetuous by nature, he was frequently the severe censor of pretensions that had no foundation. But age, experience, intercourse with society, a great fund of good sense, at length taught him to restrict to mankind in general those hard truths which never fail to displease individuals. His austere probity, from whence proceeded that bluntness for which he was blamed in company, his beneficence, and his other virtues, gave him a right to the public esteem. “Few persons,” says M. le prince de Beauvau, “better knew the duties and the value of friendship. He would boldly serve his friends and neglected merit on such occasions he displayed an art which excited no distrust, and which would not have been expected in a man who his whole life long chose rather to shew the truth with force, than to insinuate it with address.” At first he was of the party which went under the name of the philosophers; but the excesses of its leader, and of some of his subalterns, rendered him somewhat more circumspect. Both in his conversation and in his writings he censured those presumptuous writers, who, under pretence of attacking superstition, undermine the foundations of morality, and weaken the bands of society. Once, speaking on this subjert, “these enthusiastic philosophers,” said he, “will proceed such lengths, as at last to make me devout.” Besides, he was too fond of his own peace and happiness to follow them in their extravagancies, and placed no great value on their friendship or good will. “Duclos est a la fois droit et adroit,” said one of his philosophical friends, and it was in consequence of this prudence, that he never would publish any tiling of what he wrote as historiographer of France. “Whenever I have been importuned,” said he, “to bring out some of my writings on the present reign, I have uniformly answered, that I was resolved neither to ruin myself by speaking truth, nor debase myself by flattery. However, I do not the less discharge my duty. If I cannot speak to my contemporaries, I will shew the rising generation what their fathers were.” Indeed, we are told that he did compose the history of the reign of Lewis XV. and that after his death it was lodged in the hands of the minister. The preface to this work may be seen in the first vol. of the “Pieces inte>essantes” of M. de la Place. Duclos’s works consist of some romances, which have been much admired in. France; 1. “The Confessions of count ***.” 2. “The baroness de Luz.” 3. “Memoirs concerning the Manners of the eighteenth Century;” each in 1 vol. 12mo. 4. <l Acajou;“in 4to and 12mo, with plates. In the Confessions he has given animation and action to what appeared rather dry and desultory in his” Considerations on the Manners.“Excepting two or three imaginary characters, more fantastical than real, the remainder seems to be the work of a master. The situations, indeed, are not so well unfolded as they might have been; the author has neglected the gradations, the shades; and the romance is not sufficiently dramatical. But the interesting story of madame de Selve proves that M. Duclos knew how to finish as well as to sketch. His other romances are inferior to the” Confessions.“The memoirs relating to the manners of the eighteenth century abound in just observations on a variety of subjects. Acajou is no more than a tale, rather of the grotesque species, but well written. 5.” The History of Lewis XI.“1745, 3 vols. 12mo; and the authorities, an additional volume, 1746, contain curious matter. The style is concise and elegant, but too abrupt and too epigrammatical. Taking Tacitus for his model, whom, by the way, he approaches at a veryhumble distance, he has been less solicitous about the exact and circumstantial particularization of facts, than their aggregate compass, and their influence on the manners, laws, customs, and revolutions of the state. Though his diction has been criticised, it must be confessed that his lively and accurate narration, perhaps at the same time rather dry, is yet more supportable than that ridiculous pomp of words which almost all the French authors have employed in a department where declamation and exaggeration are the greatest defects. 6.” Considerations on the Manners of the present Century,“12mo; a book replete with just maxims, accurate definitions, ingenious discussions, novel thoughts, and well-drawn characters, although the style is sometimes obscure, and there is here and there an affectation of novelty, in which a writer of consummate taste would not have indulged; but these defects are amply compensated by a zeal for truth, honour, probity, beneficence, and all the moral and social virtues. Lewis XV. said of this book,” It is the work of a worthy man.“7.” Remarks on the general Grammar of PortRoyal.“In these he shews himself a philosophical grammarian. 7.” Voyage en Italie,“1791, 8vo. This trip he took in 1767 and 1768. 8.” Memoirs secrets sur les regnes de Louis XIV et Louis XV. 1791," 2 vols. 8vo, in which are many curious anecdotes and bold facts. He wrote also several dissertations in the Memoirs of the academy of belles-lettres, which contain much eruuiti Hi, qualified by the charms of wit, and ornamented by a diction clear, easy, correct, and always adapted to the subject. Duclos had a greater share than any other in the edition of 1762 of the Dictionary of the French Academy; in which his usual accuracy and judgment are everywhere apparent and he had begun a continuation of the history of that society. His whole works were collected for the first time, and printed at Paris in 1806, 10 vols. 8vo, with a life by M. Auger, and many pieces left by him in manuscript. This edition appears to have revived his fame in France, and made him be enrolled among her standard authors.

, baron of Carlscroon, historiographer to the emperor, who was forced to fly to Holland on account of religion, after having served without much benefit in France, is known by several writings, although we know little of his personal history. The chief of them are 1. “Des Memoires Politiques, pour servir a Pintelhgence de la paix de Ilyswic,” Hague, 1699, 4 vols. 12mo, the authorities of which are comprised also in 4 vols. 1705, 12mo. This instructive and interesting performance contains an abstract of every thing of moment that passed from the peace of Minister to the end of the year 1676. 2. “Voyages en France, en Italie, en Aiiemagne, aMalte, et en Turkic,” 1699, 4 vols. 12mo. 3. “Corps univers^lle diplomatique du droit des gens;” containing the treaties of alliance, of peace, and of commerce, from the peace of Munster to 1709, Amsterdam, 1726, 8 vols. folio. This work is not exempt from fanlts, but neither is it without utility. With the addition of the treaties made before the Christian n>ra, published by Barbeyrac, Rousset, and Saint-Priest, and those of Munster and Osnaburg, they together form a collection of 19 volumes in folio. 4. “Hist, militaire du prince Eugene de Savoie, du prince et due de Marlborough, &c.” Hague, 1729 1747, 3 vols, folio. 5. “Lettres Historiques,” from January 1652 to 1710. Another person, of less ability than Dumont, has continued them. 6. Other collections, tolerably numerous. This author wrote in a languid and incorrect manner; but there is a great deal of industrious inquiry in all he has left us. He died about the year 1726, in an advanced age.

, a French historian, was born at Condom in 1569, of a noble family originally from Languedoc. His father had served with distinction under marshal de Montluc. Scipio having attracted notice at the court of queen Margaret, then at Nerac, came to Paris in 1605 with that princess, who afterwards made him her master of requests. His next appointment was to the post of historiographer of France, and he employed himself for a long time on the history of that kingdom. In his old age he compiled a work on the liberties of the Gallican. church; but the chancellor Seguier having caused the manuscript, for which he came to apply for a privilege, to be burnt before his face, he died of vexation not long after, at Condom, in 1661, at the age of ninety-two, the greater part of which time he had passed without sicknesses or infirmities. The principal of his works are, 1. “Memoirs of the Gauls,” 1650, folio, forming the first part of his History of France, a work much valued for its information, but ill written. 2. “History of France,” in 5, afterwards in 6 vols. fol. The narration of Dupleix is unpleasant, as well from the language having become obsolete, as from his frequent antitheses and puerile attempts at wit. Cardinal Richelieu is much flattered by the author, because he was living at the time; and queen Margaret, though his benefactress, is described like a Messalina, because she was dead, and the author had nothing farther to expect from her. Matthew de Morgues, and marshal Bassompierre both convicted him of ignorance and insincerity. Dupleix endeavoured to answer them, and after the death of the cardinal he wished to recompose a part of his history, but was presented by declining age. 3. “Roman History,” 3 vols. fol. an enormous mass, without spirit or life. 4. “A course of Philosophy,” 3 vols. 12mo. 5. “Natural Curiosity reduced to questions,” Lyons, 1620, 8vo, publications of which very little can be said in their praise. His “Liberte de la Langue Francaise,” against Vaugelas, does him still less credit; and upon the whole he appears to be one of those authors whose fame it would be impossible to revive, or perhaps to account for.

, a German historian and antiquary, was born at Duingen in the duchy of Brunswick, Sept. 7, 1674. Alter studying for some time at Brunswick and Helmstadt, where he made very distinguished progress in the belles lettres and history, he became secretary to the count de Flemming in Poland; and there became acquainted with the celebrated Leibnitz, by whose interest he was appointed professor of history at Helmstadt. After Leibnitz’s death, he was appointed professor at Hanover, where he published some of his works. Although this place was lucrative, he here contracted debts, and his creditors having laid hold of a part of his salary to liquidate some of these, he privately quitted Hanover in 1723, where he left his family, and the following year embraced the religion of popery at Cologne. He then passed some time in the monastery of Corvey in Westphalia; and the Jesuits being very proud of their convert, sent him advantageous offers to settle at Vienna, Passau, or Wurtzbourg. He chose the latter, and was appointed the bishop’s counsel, historiographer, and keeper of the archives and library, and the emperor afterwards granted him letters of nobility. Pope Innocent XIII. seems also to have been delighted with his conversion, although his embarrassed circumstances appear to have been the chief cause of it. He died in the month of February 1730; and whatever may be thought of his religious principles, no doubt can be entertained of his extensive learning and knowledge of history. He wrote, 1. “Historia studii etymologici linguae Germanicas,” Hanover, 1711, 8vo. 2. “De usu et pr&stantia studii etymologici linguae Gerjnanicse.” 3. “Corpus historicum medii aevi,” Leipsic, 1723, 2 vols. fol. a work on which the abbé Lenglet bestows high praise, as very curious and well -digested. 4. “Origines Habsburgo-Austriacae,” Leipsic, 1721, folio. 5. “Leges Francorum et Hipuariorum,” &c. ibid. 1730, fol. 6. “Historia genealogica principumSaxonite superioris, necnon origines Aulialtiiue et Sabaudicae,” ibid. 1722, fol. 7. “Caihechesis theotisca monachi Weissenburgensis, interpretatione illustrate.” 8. “Leibnitzii collectanea etymologica.” 9. “Brevis ad historian! Germanise introductio.” 10. “Programma de antiquissimo Helmstadiistatu,” Helmstadt, 1709. 11. “De diplomate Caroh magui pro scholis Osnaburgensibus Grsecis et Latinis.” 12. “Animadversiones historical et criticae in Joannis Frederic! Schannati dicecesim et hierarchiam Fuldeusem.” 13. “Annales Franciae orientalis et episcopatus Wurceburgensis,” 2 vols. 1731. 14. “De origine Germanorum,” Gottingen, 1750, 4to. He wrote also some numUtnatical tracts, &c.

, a French antiquary of great fame, whose laborious researches into the earliest and most obscure parts of the history of his country, obtained him more celebrity than profit, was born at Paris in 1529. Having gone to Italy with cardinal de Tournon, his eminence often sent him with dispatches to the French court, which served to introduce him there with advantage, and procured him the place of first president of the Cour des Monnoies; and he is said by some to have obtained a pension from Henry IV. with the title of historiographer. He died in 1601, overwhelmed with debts. His works were collected in 4to at Paris, in 1610. The principal of them are, 1. His “Gaulish and French antiquities,” the first part of which treats chiefly of matters anterior to the arrival of the Franks, the second is extended to Hugh Capet. 2. “A treatise on the Liberties of the Gallican church.” 3. “On the origin of knights, armorial bearings, and heralds.” 4. “Origin of dignities and magistracies in France.” All these contain much curious matter, not to be found elsewhere, but are written in a harsh, incorrect, and tedious style. Saxius mentions an edition of his works printed at Paris in 1710, 2 vols. 4to, which we conceive to be a mistake for 1610. It is said, that the pei'usal of his French Antiquities gave Louis XIII. an invincible distaste to reading.

, Sieur des Avaux et de Javerci, counsellor and historiographer to the king of France, was born at Chartres in 1619. He finished his first studies there at the age of fourteen, and then was sent to Paris to improve himself in the sciences, and in the management of affairs: but his inclination soon made him devote himself entirely to the muses, and he gained a great reputation by his knowledge in the fine arts. The marquis de Fontenay-Mareuil, being chosen for the second time ambassador extraordinary to the court of Rome in 1647, Felibien was made secretary to the embassy, and perfectly answered the hopes which that minister had conceived of him. During his stay at Rome, his fondness for the liberal arts made him spend all the time he could spare in visiting those who excelled in them; and especially the celebrated Poussin, from whose conversation he learned to understand all that is most beautiful in statues and pictures: and it was according to the exalted notions he then formed to himself of the excellence and perfection of painting, that he wrote those valuable works which established his reputation. On his return from Italy he went to Chartres; and, as he designed to settle himself, he married a lady of considerable family. His friends introduced him afterwards to Fouquet, who would have done something for him had he not soon after lost the king’s favour: but Colbert, who loved the arts and sciences, did not suffer him to be useless. After he had desired him to make some draughts for his majesty, in order to engage him to complete the works he had begun, he procured him a commission of historiographer of the king’s buildings, superintendant of them, and of the arts and manufactures in France: this commission was delivered to him March 10, 1666. The royal academy of architecture having been established in 1671, he was made secretary to it. The king made him afterwards keeper of his cabinet of antiques, in 1673, and gave him an apartment in the palace of Brion. He was also one of the first members of the academy of inscriptions and medals, and became afterwards deputy comptroller general of the bridges and dykes of the kingdom. He died June 11, 1695, aged seventy-six; and left five children.

, of the same family with the famer, was born at Milan in 1607. He went through Is studies in the Ambrosian college, and after he had conpleted a course of philosophy and divinity, applied himself entirely to polite literature, in which he made so grat progress, that cardinal Frederic Borromeo procured hn a professorship of rhetoric in that college, when he vis but one and twenty years old. Six years after, the ipublic of Venice invited him to Padua, to teach eloquene, politics, and the Greek ianguage, in that university, whih was then extremely in its decline; but Ferrari restoredit to its former flourishing state. The republic rewarded hn by enlarging his pension every six years, which from fre hundred ducats was at last raised to two thousand. Afer the death of Ripamonte, historiographer of the city of Milan, Ferrari was appointed to write the history of tat city; and a pension of two hundred crowns was settledm htm for that purpose. He began, and composed eilit books; but finding he could not have access to the necssary materials in the archives of Milan, he desisted, id left what he had done to his heir, on condition thathe should not publish it. His reputation procured him f esents and pensions from foreign princes. Christimof Sweden, in whose honour he had made a public disccrse upon her mounting the throne, presented him withagden chain, and honoured him with her letters; and Louis IV. of France gave him a pension of five hundred crown for seven years. He died in 1682, aged seventy-five. He was remarkable for the sweetness, sincerity, and affability of his temper; and had so happy a way of mitigating persons exasperated against each other, that he acquire the title of “the Reconciler, or Pacificator.”

He was the author of several works: 1. “First Fruits, which yield familiar speech, merry proverbs, witty sentences, and golden sayings,” 1578, 4to, and 1591, 8vo. 2. “Perfect Introduction to the Italian and English Tongues.” Printed with the former, and both dedicated to Robert earl of Leicester. 3. “Second Fruits to be gathered of twelve trees, of divers but delightsome tastes to the tongues of Italian and English men,” 151H, 8vo. 4. “Garden of Recreation, yielding six thousand Italian Proverbs;” printed with the former. 5. “Dictionary, Italian and English,” 1597, folio. It was after* ards augmented by him, and published in 1611, in folio, by way of compliment to his royal mistress, under this title, “Queen Anna’s New World of Words.” This was a work of great merit, being at that time by far the most perfect of the kind. The author, however, laboured to make it still more perfect, by collecting many thousand words and phrases, to be added to the next edition; but, not living to complete this, the care of it fell to one Gio. Torriano, an Italian, and professor of the Italian tongue in London; who, after revising, correcting, and supplying many more materials out of the Dictionary of the Academy della Crusca, printed them in 1659, folio, all in their proper places. 6. “The Essays of Montaigne,” translated into English, and dedicated to queen Anna, 1603, 1613, 1632, folio. Prefixed to this work we find rather a long copy of verses, addressed to him by Samuel Daniel, the poet and historiographer, whose sister Florio had married. Wood says, that he wrote other things, but he had not seen them.

, a learned classical editor, was born in 1608, in the city of Dim in Swabia, and after studying law in the universities of Marpurg and Giessen, came to Strasburgh, where some poetical attempts in the German language recommended him to Matthias Bernegger, who made him his librarian. With this advantage, he applied to those classical pursuits on which his fame rests. He came afterwards to France, where he was admitted among the king’s interpreters, but did not remain here above three years, returning in 1637 to Strasburgh, where he married the daughter of his patron Bernegger. The university of Upsal making him very liberal offers, he accepted the professorship of eloquence, and filled that office for five years. Queen Christina then invited him to her court, appointed him her librarian and historiographer, with 2000 crowns salary, and a table; but the air of the country not agreeing with him, he was obliged to quit this profitable situation in 1655, and return home. Freinshewas a man of extensive learning; for, besides Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, he was familiar with almost all the living languages of Europe, and his fame induced the elector Palatine, when he projected the restoration of the university of Heidelberg, to appoint him honorary professor, and electoral counsellor. He accordingly removed with his family to Heidelberg in 1656, and died there in 1660.

, an eminent antiquary, was a native of Antwerp, and born in the end of the sixteenth century. He studied at Louvain, where he took his master’s degree in 1596, and became professor of rhetoric and law in that university. He was afterwards historiographer to the Low Countries, and for three years employed himself in examining their records. He them travelled through the greater part of Germany and Italy, but, while proceeding from the latter country to Spain, he was unfortunately made captive by an Algerine corsair, and carried to Africa. How he obtained his release does not appear, but upon his return to his native land he was preferred by the archduke Albert to be dean of the collegiate church of Leusa, in Heinault, and afterwards by the same patronage was made president of the college at Louvain. Some years after he travelled into Moravia and Silesia, and

, a learned philologist, antiquary, and historian of Copenhagen, was born at Aalburg in Jutland, Oct. 28, 1685. His father, who was a clergyman, carefully superintended his education until he was fit to go to the university. He went accordingly in 1703 to Copenhagen, where he very soon distinguished himself as a classical scholar and critic. In 1705 he took his bachelor’s degree with great credit, and in 1707 published the first specimen of his learned researches, entitled “Archytce Tarentini fragmentum ntp vw pafapalucw, cum disquisitione chronologica de aetate Archytse.” This was followed by other dissertations, which raised his fame so highly that he was made professor of Greek at Copenhagen, and was also appointed counsellor of justice, archivist, historiographer, and librarian, to the king, whom he had taught when a youth. In 1745, he was made counsellor of state, and died March 19, 1748, leaving an elaborate work, “Corpus diplomatum ad res Danicas facientium.” This work, which he undertook by order of Christian VI. is still in ms. and probably consists of several folio volumes. Gramm laid the first foundation of the academy at Copenhagen, and contributed very frequently to the literary journals of his time. He was a man of very extensive learning, but particularly skilled in Greek and Latin, and in history, and of such ready memory that he was never consulted on books or matters of literature without giving immediate information. He corresponded with many of the literati of Germany, England, Italy, and France, but was most admired by those who were witnesses of his amiable private character, his love of literature, and his generous patronage of young students.

, a French poet of considerable eminence, was born 1709, at Amiens, entered among the Jesuits at 16, and quitted the society at the age of 26, about the end of J735. It was about this time his “Ver Vert” first came out, which has been so justly admired, as the production of a genius (in Rousseau’s judgment) “at once refined, embellished, ornamented;” appearing in short, “in all its perfection.” This great poet considers the author as “displaying in his familiar style, whatever is most brilliant in poetry, and every idea >vith which a complete knowledge of the world could furnish a man who had passed his whole life in it.” He thought the same of the “Chartreuse,” another of his productions, but accused its author of negligence in his other pieces, being of opinion that the familiar style did not exclude the perfection of poetry. M. Cresset was admitted into the French academy in 1748, and gave up poetry that he might devote himself wholly to works of piety, and died June 16, 1777, at Amiens, after having received letters of nobility, and been appointed historiographer of the order of St. Lazore. He married in 1751, mademoiselle Galland, daughter of a merchant of Amiens, but had no children. Besides the pieces above-mentioned, he wrote “Le Lutrin vivant;” Les Ombres;“” Epistles;“66 Odes” a poetical translation of Virgil’s Eclogues “Edward III.” a tragedy “Sidney,” and “Le Mechant,” comedies the latter of which is deservedly admired. They have all been collected in 1748, 2 vols. 12mo. Two little poems in the style of “Ver Vert” were found among his papers, one entitled “Le Gazetin;” the other, “Le Parrain Magnifique,” but not the two cantos which he had added to the Ver Vert. This last poem has been versified in English by Gilbert Cooper, and by Dr. Geddes.

During the life of the treasurer Cecil, he obtained no advancement in the court or state; but, in 1615, some time after his death, was made under-treasurer and chancellor of the exchequer; in consequence of which he was called to the board of privy-council. In 1617 he obtained from the king a special charter, confirming all such liberties as had been granted to any of his ancestors in behalf of the town of Alcester, upon a new reserved rent of ten shillings a year; and, in 1620, was created lord Brooke of Beau* champ-court. He obtained this dignity as well by his merit and fidelity in the discharge of his offices as by his noble descent from theNevils, Willoughbys de Brook, and Beauchamps. In September 1621, he was made one of the lords of the king’s bed-chamber; and on this, resigning his post in the exchequer, he was succeeded therein by Richard Weston, afterwards earl of Portland. After the demise of king James, he continued in the privy-council of Charles I. in the beginning of whose reign he founded a historylecture in the university of Cambridge, and endowed it with a salary of lOOl. per annum. He did not long survive this last act of generosity; for, though he was a munificent patron of learning and learned men, he at last fell a sacrifice to the extraordinary outrage of a discontented domestic. The account we have of this fatal event is, that his lordship, neglecting to reward one Ralph Heywood, who had spent the greatest part of his life in his service, this attendant expostulated thereupon with his lordship in his bed-chamber, at Brook-house in Holborn; and, being severely reproved for it, presently gave his lordship a mortal stab in the back with a knife or sword; after which he withdrew into another room, and, locking the door, murdered himself with the same weapon. He died September 30, 1628, and his corpse being wrapt in lead, was conveyed from Brook-house, Holborn, to Warwick; where it was interred on the north side of the choir of St. Mary’s church, there, in his own vault, which had formerly been a chapter-house of the church; and where, upon his monument, there is this inscription: “Fulke Greville, servant to queen Elizabeth, counsellor to king James, and friend to sir Philip Sidney. Tropheum peccati.” He made that dear friend the great exemplar of his life in every thing; and Sidney being often celebrated as the patron of the muses in general, and of Spenser in particular, so we are told, lord Brooke desired to be known to posterity under no other character than that of Shakspeare’s and Ben Jonson’s master, lord-chancellor Egerton and bishop Overal’s patron. His lordship also obtained the office of clarencieux at arms for Mr. Camden, who very gratefulty acknowledged it in his life-time, and at his death left him a piece of plate in his will. He also raised John Speed from a mechanic to be an historiographer.

, an Italian historian, was born 1606, of a noble family at Vincenza. He was historiographer to the emperor, and distinguished himself in the seventeenth century by his historical works, written, in a very pleasing style, in Italian; the principal are, “History of the Wars of Ferdinand II. and Ferdinand III.” from 1630 to 1640, fol. “History of Leopold,” from 1656 to 1670, 3 vols. fol.; History of Troubles in France,“from 1648 to 1654. The authors of the” Journal des Savans,“March 16, 1665, said they had found as many errors as words in this work. But Gualdo, not discouraged by that censure, continued his History to the peace of the Pyrenees, and reprinted it with that addition at Cologn, 1670. His” History of cardinal Mazarine’s Administration“is much esteemed, and has been translated into French, 1671, 3 vols. 12mo;” The Life and Qualities“of the same cardinal, a valuable work, which appeared in French, 1662, 4to” An account of the Peace of the Pyrenees" the most ample edition is, Cologn, 1667, 12mo. This work is likewise much esteemed, and has been translated into Latin, and inserted in the fourth volume of the Public Law of the Empire, published at Francfort, 1710. It has been also translated into French. Gualdo died at Vincenza in 1678.

, a Spanish writer, was born in the province of Alaba, towards the end of the fifteenth century, and was brought up at court. After the death of Isabella, queen of Castile, he turned Franciscan monk, but afterwards having made himself known at court, became preacher and historiographer to Charles V. He was much admired for his politeness, eloquence, and great parts, but his preaching and conversation proved very superior to his writing. His style was found to be extravagantly figurative, and full of antitheses, but this was trifling, compared with his notions of writing history, and the liberty he took to, falsify whatever he pleased, and to advance as matter of fact the inventions of his own brain, and when censured for it, alleged by way of excuse, that no history, excepting the Holy Scripture, is certain enough to be credited. Being in the emperor’s retinue he had an opportunity of visiting a great part of Europe, an4 was made bishop of Guadix, in the kingdom of Granada, and then bishop of Mondonedo, in Galicia. He died in 1544, or 1548. He was the author of several works in Spanish, the most famous of which is his “Dial of Princes, or Life of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus,” which has been translated into all the languages of Europe. Vossius says it “has nothing in it of Antoninus, but is all a fiction, and the genuine offspring of Guevara himself, who scandalously imposes upon the reader, plainly against the duty of an honest man, but especially of a bishop. In the mean time he has many things not unuseful nor unpleasant, especially to a prince, whence it is entitled The Dial of Princes’.” Those who may be supposed to have spoken of Guevara in the most indulgent manner, have yet been forced to set him in a most scandalous light. “It deserves our pity rather than our censure,” says Nicolas Antonio, “that a writer of such fame should think himself at liberty to forge ancient facts, and to play with the history of the world, as with Æsop’s Fables or Lucian’s Monstrous Stories.” Among Guevara’s works must be ranked his “Epistles,” with which some have been so charmed, that they have not scrupled to call them Golden Epistles; but Montaigne says, “Whoever gave them this title, had a very different opinion of them from what I have, and perhaps saw more in them than I do.” Bayle had such a contempt for Guevara as an author, as to speak with surprize of “the eagerness of foreigners in translating some of his works into several languages.” Mr. Hay ley, however, remarks, that if we may judge of his personal character from his “Letters,” he appears to have been an amiable man. In one he reproves a female relation, with good nature, for intemperate sorrow on the death of a little dog and in another he draws the character of a true friend, with great energy of sentiment and expression. One of Guevara’s sayings, that heaven is filled with those that have done good works, and hell with those that have resolved to do them," has been, under a different form of expression, ascribed to other writers.

, a French historian, was born about 1625, at Thiers in Auvergne, and became the first historiographer of the academy of painting and sculpture to which office he was elected in 1682. H& died at Paris, April 6, 1705. He was author of many works of considerable reputation, as “Athene Ancienne et Nouvelle;” “Lacedemone Ancienne et Nouvelle,” both printed in 1675, 12mo, and known to be his own productions, though he pretended to have taken them from the papers of his younger brother, who had travelled in that country. He published also “A History of the grand viziers’ Caprogji,” c. “The Life of Mahomet II.;” “The History of Castrucio Castracani,” translated from the Italian of Machiavel; “Les Arts de l‘homme d’Epee, ou Dietionnaire du Genlilhomme,” 1670, in two volumes. His “Ancient and modern Athens” involved him in a serious dispute with Spon, in which he was said to have gained the victory, as far as style and mannerly writing were concerned.

, ayoungrnan of extraordinary talents, was born at Bergen, in the duchy of Hanover, in 1692. He soon acquired an extensive knowledge of the learned languages, and when he was only fourteen years of age, he pronounced, at the university of Halle, a Latin harangue on the origin of the monastery of Bergen, which was printed with some other pieces. In 1703, he published a continuation of the “Chronicon Bergense” of Meibomius; and, in 1711, printed two “Dissertations;” one on “Henry the Fowler,” the other on the kingdom of Aries, which do him great honour. After giving public lectures for some years at Halle, he was appointed professor of history at Helmstadt, though but twenty-four years old, and afterwards was made counsellor, historiographer, and librarian to his Britannic majesty at Hanover. He died in 1729, leaving the first four volumes of a “History of the Empire; 17 and” Collectio Monumentorum veterum et recentium ineditorum," 2 vols. 8vo, &C.

, a French historian, of an ancient family, was born at Bourdeaux about 1535. He went to court at twenty years of age, and in 1556 and 1557 was secretary to Francis de Noailles, bishop of Acqs, in his embassies to England and Venice. After that, his first appearance in the republic of letters was in the quality of a poet and translator. In 1559, he published a poem, entitled “The Union of the Princes, by the Marriages of Philip King of Spain and the Lady Elizabeth of France, and of Philibert Emanuel Duke of Savoy, and the Lady Margaret of France;” and another entitled “The Tomb of the most Christian King Henry II.” In 1560 he published an abridged translation of “Tully’s Offices, 7 ' and of” Eutropius’s Roman History;“and, in 1568, of” The Life of JEmilius Probus.“He applied himself afterwards to the writing of history, and succeeded so well, that by his first performances of this nature, he obtained of Charles IX. the title of Historiographer of France 1571. He had published the year before at Paris a book entitled” Of the State and Success of the Affairs of France;“which was reckoned very curious, and was often reprinted. He augmented it in several successive editions, and dedicated it to Henry IV. in 1594: the best editions of it are those of Paris 1609 and 1613, in 8vo. He had published also the same year a work entitled” Of the Fortune and Power of France, with a Summary Discourse on the Design of a History of France:“though Niceron suspects that this may be the same with” The Promise and Design of the History of France," which he published in 1571, in order to let Charles IX. see what he might expect from him in support of the great honour he had conferred of historiographer of France. In 1576, he published a history, which reaches from Phararnond to the death of Charles VII. and was the first who composed a body of the French history in French. Henry III. shewed his satisfaction with this by the advantageous and honourable gratifications he made the author. The reasons which induced de Haillan to conclude his work with Charles Vllth’s death were, that the event beingrecent, he must eitlier conceal the truth, or provoke the resentment of men in power, but he afterwards promised Henry IV. to continue this history to his time, as may be seen in his dedication to him of this work in 1594; nothing however of this kind was found among his papers after his death: the booksellers, who added a continuation to his work as far as to 1615, and afterwards as far as to 1627, took it from Paulus Æmilius, de Comines, Arnoul Ferron, du Bellay, &c.

, an English lawyer and historiographer, was the son of John Halle of Northall in Shropshire, by Catherine his wife, daughter and heir of Thomas Gedding, and was descended from sir Francis Van Halle, knight of the garter in the time of Edward III. who was the son of Frederic Van Halle, of the Tyrol, in Germany, natural son of Albert king of the Romans and archduke of Austria. He was born, probably about the last year of the fifteenth century, in the parish of St. Mildred’s, London. He was educated at Eton, whence in 1544 he was sent to King’s college, Cambridge, where he continued until he became a junior fellow. He afterwards studied at Gray’s-inn, and resided there until he was made a judge in the sheriffs’ court. Wood, however, says that he went to Oxford about 1518, when cardinal Wolsey founded certain lectures there; and adds that, that being the common mart of learning, no person of ingenuity or curiosity thought themselves complete until they had been there. But Mr. Baker of St. John’s, in a letter to Hearne, seems to think this doubtful, as he is not to be traced from Gray’s-inn to Oxford.

In 1759, he published his “History of Gustavus Adolphus,” 2 vols. 4to, a work on which he had bestowed much labour, and in which he has accumulated very valuable materials. An edition was soon published in German by George Henry Martini, with a preface, notes, and corrections from the pen of the translator John Gottlieb Bohme, Saxon historiographer, and professor of history in the university of Leipsic. Its success, however, at home was far inferior to his hopes, although sufficient to encourage him to publish an 8vo edition in 1763, corrected and improved. At this time he resided at Bath, dejected and dispirited between real and imaginary distempers. In November 1766, a paralytic stroke deprived him of the use of his right leg, affected his speech, and in some degree his bead. He employed, however, his intervals of health, in preparing “The Amaranth” for the press, which was published in 1767. In the following year, he had entirely lost the use of his left side, and languished in this melancholy condition till March 1774, when he breathed his last, having just outlived the publication of the celebrated letters addressed to his pupil, Mr. Stanhope, but which, it is hoped, he did not see. At the time of his death he was vicar of St. Austel and St. Blazy in Cornwall.

, a French poet of the seventeenth century, was nephew to du Vair, a celebrated keeper ef the seals. His original profession was military, but being disabled by a wound from actual service, hfe bought the place of treasurer to the French guards. He was afterwards appointed historiographer of France, and died in 1680. He wrote only two tragedies, of no great merit, “Hercule furieux,” and “Clavis,” and a few fugitive poems, some of which have a degree of elevation, particularly the “Portrait d'Amaranthe.”

, a Spanish historian of great fame, was born in 1565. He became first secretary to Vespasian Gonzaga, viceroy of Naples, and afterwards grand historiographer of India, with a considerable pension under Philip II. He did not receive his money unearned, but published a general history of India from 14^2 to 1554, in four volumes, folio. A very short time before his death he received from Philip IV. the appointment of secretary of state. He died in 1625. His History of India is a very curious work, carried to a great detail, and chargeable with no defects, except too great a love for the marvellous, a degree of national vanity, and too great inflation in the style. There is an English translation by capt. John Stevens, published in 1725 and 1726, 6 vols. 8vo. He published also a general History of Spain, from 1554 to 1598, which has been less esteemed than the other work. It is in three volumes, folio.

He had now no resource except his pen: and applied himself therefore wholly to write and translate books. “Here,” he says, “I purchased a small spot of ground upon Parnassus, which I have in fee of the muses, and I have endeavoured to manure it as well as I could, though I confess it hath yielded me little fruit hitherto.” This spot, however, brought him a comfortable subsistence, during his long stay in prison, where he was confined till some time after the king’s death; and as he got nothing by his discharge but his liberty, he was obliged to continue the same employment afterwards. His numerous productions, written rather out of necessity than choice, shew, however, readiness of wit, and exuberant fancy. Though always a firm royalist, he does not seem to have approved the measures pursued by Buckingham, Laud, and Strafford; and was far from approving the imposition of shipmoney, and the policy of creating and multiplying monopolies. Yet the unbridled insolence and outrages of the republican governors so much disgusted him, that he was not displeased when Oliver assumed the sovereign power under the title of protector; and in this light he addressed him on that occasion in a speech, which shall be mentioned presently. His behaviour under Cromwell’s tyranny was prudential, and was so considered; for Charles II. at his restoration, thought him worthy of his notice and favour: and his former post under the council being otherwise disposed of, a new place was created, by the grant of which he became the first historiographer royal in England. He died Nov. 1666, and was interred in the Temple-church. London, where a monument was erected to his memory, with the following inscription, which was taken down when the church was repaired in 1683, and has not since been replaced: “Jacobus Howell, Cambro-Britannus, Regius Historiographus in Anglia primus, qui post varies peregrinationes tandem naturae cursum peregit, satur annorum & famas domi forisque hue usque erraticus, hie fixus 1666.”

correspondence of this kind (after As- the office of the royal historiographer, chain), and in our own language, at which discover a variety of literature,

, was born Oct. 16, 1668, at Dresden. He acquired great knowledge of the belles lettres and medals, and was successively teacher at Schleusingen, Eysenach, and Altenburg, where he died June 19, 1714. He had been admitted a member of the royal society at Berlin in 1711. He left a great number of German translations from ancient authors, and several editions of classic authors, with notes, in the style of those published by Minellius also, “Schediasma de Diariis eruditorum” “Centuria feminarum eruditione et scriptis illustrium” “Theatrurn Latinitatis. universae RegheroJunkerianum,” “Lineoe eruditionis universae et Historiae Philosophical;” “Vita Lutheri ex nummis,” “Vita Ludolphi,” &c. He was historiographer to the Ernestine branch of the house of Saxony. Poverty obliged him to write rather in haste, which may be discovered in his works.

, a learned professor of the university of Louvain, was born in the neighbourhood of Maestricht, about the year 1673. He pursued his academical studies at Louvain, and distinguished himself during several years for his accurate and comprehensive knowledge of history and the belles-lettres. In 1708 he was appointed historiographer to the emperor Joseph I. and died in 1738. He was author of many works in general history and theology, of which the principal are entitled, “De Monarchia Romae Paganae secundum Concordiam inter S S. Prophetas Danielem et Joannem,” &c. and “Prodromus Danielicus, sive novi Conatus historici, critici, in ceieberrimas difficultates Historiae Veteris Testamenti.” These pieces are distinguished by profound erudition and great critical acumen, and are said to throw much light on many obscure passages in the Scriptures relating to history, chronology, and geography. He also published a Latin grammar, and a number of Latin poems.

After these visits, he returned to Vienna Sept. 28, 1662, and, as it would appear, without any employment or resources. While sitting pensive at his inn, and ignorant which way to turn himself, he received a letter from Miller the Jesuit, mentioned above, and who was confessor to the emperor, requesting him to state in writing in what manner he wished to be employed under his majesty. Lambecius immediately returned for answer, that it had always been his greatest desire to serve the emperor and the august house of Austria, and that if his majesty would be so gracious as to admit him to court, he should endeavour to prove the sincerity of his zeal, by placing the imperial library in a better condition than it had ever been, by writing the history of Germany in general, and of the house of Austria in particular, and by continuing the history of literature, of which he had already dedicated a specimen to, his majesty. In consequence of these offers, the emperor appointed him his under-librarian and historiographer, and the same day (Nov. 27), the emperor spent three hours in shewing Lambecius his collection of medals, and made him a present of some of them. Three months afterwards, on the death of the head librarian, he was appointed to succeed him, and the emperor gave him also the title of counsellor, and bestowed, indeed, every mark of esteem upon him, conversing with him in the most familiar manner, and taking him as part of his suite in some of his travels. During the ten years that he lived at Vienna, he lodged with an advocate, who managed all his domestic concerns, and in return he made him his heir. He died in the month of April 1680. Lambecius was unquestionably one of the most learned men of his time; but his character, in other respects, as may be collected from the preceding narrative, was not without considerable blemishes. With respect to the imperial library, he certainly performed what he undertook, and has laid the learned world under great obligations by his vast catalogue, published in 8 vols. folio, from 1665 to 1679, under the title of “Commentariorum de augustissima Bibliotheca Csesarea Vindobonensi, libri octo.” To thes must be added as a supplement, “Dan. de Nessel Breviarium et supplementum commentariorum Bibl. Caes. Vindobon.” Vienna, 1690, 2 vols. folio. A second edition of this work was published at Vienna in 1766 82, in 8 vols. folio, “opera et studio Ad. Fr. Kollarii,” to which must be added “A. F. Kollarii ad Lambecii commentariorum libros octo, Supplementum liber primus posthumus,” Vienna, 1790, folio. In 1712 Reimann published, at Hanover, an abridgment of this catalogue in one volume, 8vo, under the title “Bibliotheca acromatica.” A new edition of Lambecius’s “Prodromus historic litterariae,” was published by Fabricius, at Leipsic, 1710, folio.

, a French historian, was born September 7, 1638, at Montivilliers, of noble parents, who were Protestants. After having practised as an attorney some time in his native country, he went to Holland, was appointed historiographer to the States General, and settled afterwards at Berlin, where he had a pension from the elector of Brandenburg. He died March 17,1719, aged eighty. His principal works are, the “History of Augustus,” 1690, 12mo; “The History of Eleanor, queen of France, and afterwards of England,” 1691, 8vo; “A History of England,” 1697 to 1713, 4 vols. fol. the most valued of all Larrey’s works on account of the portraits, but its reputation has sunk in other respects since the publication of the history written by Rapin. He wrote also the history, or rather romance of “the Seven Sages,” the most complete edition of which is that of the Hague, 1721, 2 vols. 8vo; and “The History of France, under Louis XIV.” 3 vols. 4to, and 9 vols. 12mo, a work not in much estimation, but it was not entirely his. The third volume 4to was the production of la Martiniere.

, historiographer of buildings of the academy della Crusca, and of that of the Arcades at Rome, was born at Dijon, in 1707, of poor parents, but he went early to Paris, where his talents procured him friends and patrons. He then came to London, and met with the same advantage. In 1746 Maupertuis offered him, on the part of the king of Prussia, a place suitable to a man of letters, at the court of Berlin; but he preferred mediocrity at home to flattering hopes held out to him from abroad. He died in 1781. His tragedy of “Abensaïde,” the subject of which is very interesting, was well received at first, notwithstanding the harshness of the versification but it did not support this success when revived on the stage in 1743. What most brought the abbé Le Blanc into repute was the collection of his letters on the English, 1758, 3 vols. 12mo, in which are many judicious reflections; but he is heavy, formal, fruitful in vulgar notions, and trivial in his erudition, and the praises he bestows on the great men, or the literati, to whom he addresses his letters, are deficient in ease and delicacy. The letters of abbé Le Blanc cannot bear a comparison with the “London” of Grosley, who is a far more agreeable writer, if not a more accurate observer.

, a voluminous writer of history, was born at Milan, May 29, 1630, of a family once of considerable distinction at Bologna. He was intended for the church, but was induced to make open profession of the protestant religion at Lausanne in 1657. This so pleased Guerin, an eminent physician, with whom he lodged, that he gave him his daughter for a wife; and Leti, settling at Geneva in 1660, passed nearly twenty years in that city employed on many of his publications. In 1674, the freedom of the city was presented to him, which had never before been granted to any stranger. Five years after he went to France, and in 1680, to England, where he was very graciously received by Charles II.; received a large present in money, and was promised the place of historiographer. On this he wrote his “Teatro Britannico,” a history of England; but, this work displeasing the court, he was ordered to quit the kingdom. Leti then went to Amsterdam, had the office of historiographer in that city, and died suddenly June 9, 1701, aged seventy-one. He was an indefatigable writer, and tells us in his “Belgic Theatre,” that three days in the week he spent twelve hours in writing, and six hours the other three days; whence the number of his works is prodigious. The greatest part are written in Italian; among which are, “The Nepotism of Rome,” 2 vols. 12mo; “The Universal Monarchy of Louis XIV.” 2 vols. 12mo; “The Life of Pope Sixtus V.” in Italian, Amsterdam, 1721, 3 vols. 12mo, plates; in French, 4to, or 2 vols. 12mo and in English by Farneworth. “The Life of Philip 11. king of Spain,” 6 vols. 12mo; “Of Charles V.”. Amsterdam, 1730, 4 vols. 12mo; “Of Queen Elizabeth,” Amsterdam, 1741, 2 vols. 12mo, plates; “History of Cromwell,” 1703, 2 vols. 12mo, plates; “Life of Giron, duke d'Ossone,” 3 vols. 12mo; “The French Theatre,*' 7 vols. 4to, a bad work;” The Belgic Theatre,“2 vols. 4to, equally bad;” The British Theatre, or History of England, 11 Amsterdam, 1684, 5 vols. 12mo; in which there is a capital portrait of queen Elizabeth. It was for this work that he was sent out of England. “L'ltalia regnante,” 4 vols. 12mo; “History of the Roman Empire in Germany,” 4 vols. 4to; “The Cardinalism of the Holy Church,” 3 vols. 12mo, a violent satire; “History of Geneva,” 5 vols. 12mo; “The just balance in which are weighed all the maxims of Rome, and the actions of the living cardinals,” 4 vols. 12mo; “The Historical Ceremonial,” 6 vols. 12mo; “Political Dialogues on the means used by the Italian Republics for their preservation,” 2 vols. 12mo “An Abridgment of Patriotic virtues,” 2 vols. 8vo “Fame jealous of Fortune a panegyric on Louis XIV,” 4to “A Poem on the enterprize of the Prince of Orange in England,” 1695, folio; “An Eulogy on Hunting,” 12mo; “Letters,” 1 vol. 12mo; “The Itinerary of the Court of Rome,” 3 vols. 8vo “History of the House of Saxony,” 4 vols. 4to “History of the House of Brandenburg,” 4 vols. 4to “The slaughter of the Innocent reformed,” 4to “The Ruins of the Apostolical See,” 1672, 12mo, &c. Although M. le Clerc, his son-in-law, has mentioned him with high encomiums, we know few writers of history who are less to be depended on, having debased all his productions with fable. It is impossible to give credit to him unless his facts can be supported by other authority. He, on some occasions, assumes all the dignity of conceited ignorance, and relates his fictions with all the confidence of a vain man, who thinks he cannot be contradicted. His aim indeed was to please rather than instruct, and he has, with his anecdotes, frequently amused and misled his readers. We know few more amusing works than his “Life of pope Sixtus V.” Granger, whose character of him we have partly adopted, relates that Leti being one day at Charles II.'s levee, the king said to him, “Leti, I hear you are writing the history of the court of England.” “Sir,” said he, “I have been for some time preparing materials for such a history.” “Take care,” said the king, “that your work give no offence.” “Sir,” replied Leti, “I will do what 1 can but if a man were as wise as Solomon, he would scarce be able to avoid giving some offence.” “Why then,” rejoined the king, “be as wise as Solomon, write proverbs, not tories.”

, historiographer and censor royal, and the first of a family of men of considerable eminence in France, was born Nov. 5, 1644, at Vaucouleurs. He gave private lectures on history and geography at Paris, and had not only the principal lords of the court among his pupils, but the duke of Orleans, afterwards regent of France, who always retained a particular value for him, and gave him frequent proofs of his esteem. He died at Paris, May 2, 1720, aged 76, leaving twelve children, of whom three sons will form the subject of the ensuing articles. His works are, “Relation historique du Roiaume de Siam,” 1684, 12mo; “An Abridgement of the Universal History,” 1731, 7 vols. 12mo-, and a Genealogical and Historical Atlas, on engraved plates.

, a celebrated political writer and historian, was born of a good family, at Florence, in 1469. He first distinguished himself as a dramatic writer, but his comedies are not formed on the purest morals, nor are the verses by which he gained some reputation about the same time, entitled to much praise. Soon after he had entered public life, either from the love of liberty, or a spirit of faction, he displayed a restless and turbulent disposition, which not only diminished the respect due to his abilities, but frequently endangered his personal safety. He involved himself in the conspiracy of Capponi and Boscoli, in consequence of which he was put to the torture, but endured it without uttering any confession, and was set at liberty by Leo X. against whose house that conspiracy had been formed. Immediately after the death of Leo, he entered into another plot to expel the cardinal de Medici from Florence. Afterwards, however, he was raised to hitjh honours in the state, and became secretary to the republic of Florence, the 'duties of which office he performed with great fidelity. He was likewise employed in embassies to king Lewis XII. of France; to the emperor Maximilian; to the college of cardinals; to the pope, Julius II., and to other Italian princes. Notwithstanding the revenues which must have accrued to him in these important situations, it would appear that the love of money had no influence on his mind, as he died in extreme poverty in June 1527. Besides his plays, his chief works are, 1. “The Golden Ass,” in imitation of Lucian and Apuleius 2. “Discourses on the first Decade of Livy” 3. “A History of Florence” 4. “The Life of Castruccio Castracani;” 5. “A Treatise on the Military Art;” 6. “A Treatise on the Emigration of the Northern Nations;” 7. Another entitled “Del Principe,” the Prince. This famous treatise, which was first published in 1515, and intended as a sequel to his discourses on the first decade of Livy, has created very discordant opinions between critics of apparently equal skill and judgment, some having considered him as the friend of truth, liberty, and virtue, and others as the advocate of fraud and tyranny. Most generally “the Prince” has been viewed in the latter light, all its maxims and counsels being directed to the maintenance of power, however acquired, and by any means; and one reason for this opinion is perhaps natural enough, namely, its being dedicated to a nephew of pope Leo X. printed at Rome, re*published in other Italian cities, and long read with attention, and even applause, without censure or reply. On the other hand it has been thought impossible that Machiavel, who was born under a republic, who was employed as one of its secretaries, who performed so many important embassies, and who in his conversation always dwelt on the glorious actions of Brutus and Cassius, should have formed such a system against the liberty and happiness of mankind. Hence it has frequently been urged on his behalf, that it was not his intention to suggest wise and faithlul counsels, but to represent in the darkest colours the schemes of a tyrant, and thereby excite odium against him. Even lord Bacon seems to be of this opinion. The historian of Leo considers his conduct in a different point of view; and indeed all idea of his being ironical in this work is dissipated by the fact, mentioned by Mr. Roscoe, that “many of the most exceptionable doctrines in” The Prince,“are also to be found in his” Discourses,“where it cannot be pretended that he had any indirect purpose in view; and in the latter he has in some instances referred to the former for the further elucidation of his opinions. In popular opinion” The Prince“has affixed to his name a lasting stigma; and Machiavelism has long been a received appellation for perfidious and infamous politics. Of the historical writings of Machiavel, the” Life of Castruccio Castracani“is considered as partaking too much of the character of a romance; but his” History of Florence," comprising the events of that republic, between 1205 and 1494, which was written while the author sustained the office of historiographer of the republic, although not always accurate in point of fact, may upon the whole be read with both pleasure and advantage. It has been of late years discovered tnat the diary of the most important events in Italy from 1492 to 1512, published by the Giunti in 1568, under the name of Biagio Buonaccorsi, is in fact a part of the notes of Machiavel, which he had intended for a continuation of his history; but which, after his death, remained in the hands of his friend Buonaccorsi. - This is a circumstance of which we were not aware when we drew up the account of this author under the name Esperiente.

, the learned exchequer antiquary, and historiographer royal, of whose personal history we have no information, is well known among antiquaries and lawyers for his valuable collection of records relating to the ancient laws and constitution of this country; the knowledge of which tends greatly to the illustration of English history. In 1702, under the patronage of the learned lord Somers, he published the first fruits of his researches, under the title of “A Collection of antique Charters and Instruments of divers kinds taken from the originals, placed under several heads, and deduced (in a series according to the order of time) from the Norman conquest, to the end of the reign of king Henry VIII.” This is known by the name of the “Formulare AngJicanum.” To it is prefixed a dissertation concerning “Ancient Charters and Instruments,” replete with useful learning upon that subject. He was prompted to this work, by considering that there was no methodical history or system of ancient charters and instruments of this nation then extant; and that it would be acceptable to curious persons, and useful to the public, if something were done for supplying that defect. Having entertained such a design, and being furnished with proper materials from the archives of the late court of augmentations, he was encouraged to proceed in it, especially by lord Somers and prosecuted it with so much application, that out of an immense heap of original charters and writings, remaining in that repository, he selected and digested the chief substance of this volume. In 1711, he proceeded to a work of still greater importance than the foregoing, “The History and Antiquities of the Exchequer of the Kings of England, in two periods, viz. from the Norman conquest, to the end of the reign of king John; and from the end of the reign of king John, to the end of the reign of king Edward II. Taken from records. Together with a correct copy of the ancient dialogue concerning the Exchequer, generally ascribed to Gervasius Tilburiensis and a Dissertation concernlag the most ancient great roll of the exchequer, commonly styled the roll of Quinto Regis Stephani,” folio; reprinted in 1769, in 4to. This was dedicated to queen Anne; but there is likewise prefixed to it a long prefatory epistle to the lord Somers, in which he gives that illustrious patron some account of this unprecedented undertaking. He observes, that though some treatises had been written concerning the exchequer, yet no history [of it had been yet attempted by any man; that he had pursued his subject to those ancient times, to which, he thinks, the original of the exchequer in England may properly be assigned; and thence had drawn down an orderly account of it through a long course of years; and, having consulted, as well the books necessary to be perused upon this occasion, as a very great number of records and manuscripts, he had endeavoured all along x to confirm what he offered by proper vouchers, which are subjoined column-wise in each page, except where their extraordinary length made it impracticable. The records. which he here attests were, as he adds, taken by his own pen from the authentic parchments, unless where it appears by his references to be otherwise. He has contrived throughout the whole (as far as the subject-matter would permit) to make use of such memorials as serve either to make known or to explain the ancient laws and usages of this kingdom. For which reason, as he notes“, this work may be deemed, not merely a history of the exchequer, but likewise a promptuary towards a history of the ancient law of England. He afterwards acquaints” his lordship in what method he began and proceeded in compiling this work. First, he made as full a collection from records as he could, of materials relating to the subject. Those materials being regularly arranged in several books of collectanea, he reviewed them, and, weighing what they imported, and how they might be applied, he drew from thence a general scheme of his design. When he had pitched upon the heads of his discourse, he took materials for them out of the aforesaid fund, and digested them into their proper rank and order. In do ng this, it was his practice for the most part to write down, in the draught of his book, the respective records or testimonies first of all; i. e. before he wrote his own text or composition; and from them formed his history or accouit of things; connecting and applying them afterwards, as the case would admit. At the end of this history (as we have expressed it in the title) Mr. Maddox has publisteti a copy of the treatise concerning the exchequer, written in the way of dialogue, and generally ascribed to Gervasius Tilburiensis. This treatise is certainly very ancient, and intrinsically valuable. Our author introduces it by an epistolary dissertation, in Latin, to the then lord Halifax. The dialogue is followed by another epistolary dissertation, in the same language, addressed to the lord Somers, relating to the great roll of the exchequer, commonly styled the “Roll of Quinto Regis Stephani.” No historical account has been given, in this volume, of the records reposited in the exchequer. Mr. Madox thought that it might be more properly done if there was occasion for it, hereafter, in a continuation of this work; which he seems to have had some intention of performing himself when he published this part; or hoped some other hand would supply, if he did not. The concluding chapter of the history is a list of the barons of this court from the first year of William the Conqueror to the 20th of Edward II. The last work this laborious historiographer published himself, was the “Firma Burgi, or historical essay concerning the cities, towns, and boroughs of England. Taken from records.” This treatise was inscribed to king George I. The author warns his readers against expecting to find any curious or refined learning in it; in regard the matter of it is low. It is only one part of a subject, which, however, is extensive and difficult, concerning which, be tells us, much has been said by English writers to very little purpose, serving rather to entangle than to clear it. When he first entered upon the discussion of it, he found himself encompassed with doubts, which it hath been his endeavour, as he says, to remove or lessen as he went along. He has throughout mixed history and dissertation together, making these two strengthen and diversify each other. However modestly Mr. Madox might express himself concerning the learning of this work, it is in reality both curious and profound, and his inquiries very useful. The civil antiquities of this country would, in all probability, have been further obliged than they are to this industrious person, if his life had been of a somewhat longer continuance; for it may be presumed, from two or three passages in the prefaces of those books he published himself, that he meditated and intended some others to follow them, different from this posthumous History of Baronies, which his advertisement of it apparently suggests to be the only manuscript left finished by the author. This is compiled much in the manner of his other writings. In the first book he discourses largely of land baronies; in the second book he treats briefly of titular baronies and in the third of feudal tenure in capite.

, a French historian, was born at Porentrui, in the diocese of Basle, Dec. 10, 1583, and was first principal of the college of Verceil, and afterwards an advocate at Lyons. He was a zealous partizan of the league, and much attached to the Guises. When he went to Paris, he quitted poetry, which he had followed hitherto, for history, to which he attached himself from that time. He acquired the esteem of Henry IV. who manifested it by giving him the title of historiographer of France, and furnishing him with all the memoirs necessary to make him so effectually. He attended Louis Xiji. to the siege of Montauhan; but, falling sick, was removed to Toulouse, where he died October 12, 1621, at the age of fifty-eight. Matthieu was only a moderate author: he wrote easily, but in an undignified style. He produced, l.“A History of the memorable Events which happened in the reign of Henry the Great,” 1624, 8vo. This contains some curious anecdotes communicated to the author by Henry himself; but the flatness of the style destroys, in a great measure, the interest of the work. 2. “The History of the deplorable Death of Henry the Great,” 1611 folio; 1612, 8vo. 3, “The History of St. Louis,” 1618, 8vo. 4. “The History of Louis XI.” in folio. This work is esteemed. 5, “The History of France,” from Francis I. to Louis XIII. inclusive, Paris, 1631, 2 vols, folio, published by his son, who added the reign of Louis XIII. 6. “Quatrains on Life and Death;” very languid and fatiguing, but often printed after those of Pibrac. 7. “La Guisiade,” the Guisiad, a tragedy, was published at Lyons, 1589, in 8vo. He was also the writer of some other tragedies, published in the same year in 2 vols. 12mo and of some other historical pieees of less note than what we have mentioned.

His skill is in parody; and he was breaking out of the civil wars, joined himself very heartily to the parliament. Fuller gives a reason for this when he says that “some disgust at court was given to, or taken by him, as some would have it, because his bays were not gilded richly enough, and his verses rewarded by king Charles according to expectation.” Others, as Phillips and Winstanley, say more particularly, “that his desertion from the court was owing to his being disappointed of the place of queen’s poet, to which sir William Davenant, his competitor, was preferred before him;” and Clarendon seems to have suggested this opinion. Whatever was the cause, it is certain that he threw himself under the protection, and into the service of the parliament; and recommended himself so effectually to them, as to be appointed their secretary and historiographer. Agreeably to the duties of this last office, he published, in 1647, “The History of the Parliament of England, which began Nov. 3, 1640; with a short and necessary view of some precedent years,” folio. The first book of this history begins with short characters of queen Elizabeth and king James, passing through the former part of king Charles’s reign, to 1641; and the last ends with a narrative of the first battle of Newbury, in 1643. He afterwards made an abstract of this history, and a continuation of it to the death of king Charles I. in Latin, in 16^-9; and then an English translation of it, entitled “A Breviary of the History of the Parliament of England,” 1650, 8vo. Echard calls this history, “one of the genteelest and handsomest libels of those times.” Granger is of opinion that there is more candour in this history than the royalists were willing to allow him, but less elegance than might have been expected from the pen of so polite and classical a scholar. Warburton’s praise of this work is perhaps of more value. In a letter to Dr. Hurd he says, “May’s History of the Parliament is a just composition, according to the rules of history. It is written with much judgment, penetration, manliness, and spirit. And with a candour that will greatly increase your esteem, when you understand that he wrote by order of his masters the parliament. It breaks off (much to the loss of the history of that time) just when their armies were new modelled by the self-denying ordinance”

, the son of the preceding, was born at Leipsic, April 8, 1674, and was admitted master of arts in that university in 1694. He spent some time there in the study of divinity, and then travelled into Holland and England. The reputation of his father, and his own great merit, procured him access to all the men of learning in the places through which he passed. He spent one year in his travels; and immediately upon his return to Leipsic in 1699, was appointed professor of history. His first intention was to have fixed himself to divinity; but he quitted it soon after for the law, in which he succeeded so well that he received the degree of doctor in that faculty at Halle, in 1701. After this he returned to Leipsic, to continue his lectures in history, by which he gained great reputation as well as by his writings. Frederic Augustus, king of Poland, and elector of Saxony, conceived so high an esteem for him, that in 1708 he appointed him his historiographer. In 1709 he became counsellor to that king; and, in 1723, aulic counsellor. His health began to decline early in life, and he died April 1, 1732, aged fifty-eight. He had been chosen, in 1700, fellow of the royal society of London, and some time after of that of Berlin.

, a learned Dutchman, was born in 1579 at Losdun, a town near the Hague, where his father was minister. At six years of age his father began to teach him the elements of the Latin language; and the year after sent him to a school at the Hague, where he continued four years. He was then removed to Leyden, and made so great a progress in literature, that at twelve he could write with fluency in Latin. He advanced with no less rapidity in the Greek language, for which he conceived a particular fondness; insomuch that at thirteen he made Greek verses, and at sixteen wrote a “Commentary upon Lycophron,” the most obscure of all the Greek authors. When he had finished the course of his studies, and gained the reputation of a person from whom much might be expected, the famous John Barnevelt intrusted him with the education of his children; and he attended them ten years, at home and in their travels. This gave him an opportunity of seeing almost all the courts in Europe, of visiting the learned in their several countries, and of examining the best libraries. As he passed through Orleans, in 1608, he was made doctor of law. Upon his return to Holland, the curators of the academy of Leyden appointed him, in 1610, professor of history, and afterward of Greek; and the year following, the States of Holland chose him for their historiographer. In 1612 he married a lady of an ancient and good family, by whom he had a son, called after his own name, who died in the flower of his age, yet not till he had given specimens of his uncommon learning, by several publications.

Barnevelt having been executed in 1619, they proceeded to molest all who had been any way connected with him, and who were of the party of the Remonstrants, which he had protected. Meursius, as having been preceptor to his children, was unjustly ranked in this number, although he had never interfered in their theological disputes: but as he had always acquitted himself well in his professorship, they had not even a plausible pretence to remove him from the chair. They used, however, all the means of ill treatment they could devise, to make him quit it of himself: they reproached him with writing too many books, and said that the university, on that account, did not reap any benefit from his studies. Meursius, thus ill-treated, only waited for an opportunity of resigning his post with honour and, at last, in 1625, the following failone- presented itself Christieni IV. king of Denmark, offered him at that time the professorship of history and politics, in the university of Sora, which he had just reestablished; and also the place of his historiographer. These Meursius accepted with pleasure, and went immediately to Denmark, where he fully answered all the expectations which had been conceived of his capacity, and was highly respected by the king and the chief men at court. He was greatly afflicted with the stone at the latter end of his life, and died Sept. 20, 1639, a* his epitaph at Sora shews; and not in 1641, as Valerius Andreas says in his “Bibliotheca Belgica.”

, a historian of some note in Spain, when history was mere compilation, was a native of Seville, of a family of some rank, and liberally educated. His inclination being principally for historical studies, he was made chronographer, perhaps what we should call, historiographer to Charles V. He is also said to have been a poet. Antonio has collected from various authors, his contemporaries, opinions highly favourable to his learning and knowledge. The only fault imputable seems to be that of mixing Latin words too frequently with his Spanish. He died about 1552. His principal work, for which he is known in this country, is entitled “Silvade varia Leccion,” which with the additions of the Italian and French translators, was published at London under the title of the “Treasury of ancient and modern Times,” fol. The original was first printed at Seville, in black-letter, in 1542, fol. often reprinted, and translated into most European languages, with additions. His other writings were, a “History of the Caesars,” Seville, 1545, fol. likewise translated by W. T. and enlarged by Edward Grimeston, Lond. 1623. foL 2. “Colloquies o Dialogos,” or “Laus Asini,” in imitation of Lucian and Apuleius, Seville 1547, 8vo, often reprinted and translated into Italian. 3. “Parenesis de Isocrates.” He left some Mss. and an unfinished life of Charles V.

By these satires Mezerai gained a considerable sum in less than three years; and being now in easy circumstances, applied himself, at the age of twenty-six, to compile an “History of France.” Cardinel Richelieu, hearing of his character and circumstances, made him a present of two hundred crowns, with a promise to remember him afterwards. He published the first volume of his history in 1643, which extends from Pharamond to Charles VI.; the second in 1646, which contains what passed from Charles VI. to Charles IX.; and the third in 1651, which comprehends the history from. Henry Hi. till the peace of Vervins, in 1598; all in folio. This history procured him a pension from the king. It was received with extraordinary applause, as if there had been no history of France before: and perhaps there was none more agreeable as to Teracity. In 1668, he published, in 3 vols. 4to, an “Abridgement of the history of France:” in which there being several bold passages, which displeased Colbert, that minister ordered Perrault, of the French academy, to tell Mezerai, in his name, that “the king had not given him a pension of 4000 livres to write in so free a manner; that his majesty had indeed too great a regard to truth, to require his historiographers to disguise it, out of fear or hope; but that he did not think they ought to take the liberty of reflecting, without any necessity, upon the conduct of his ancestors, and upon a policy which had long been established, and confirmed by th.e suffrages of the whole nation.” Upon this remonstrance, the author promised to retouch the passages complained of, which he did in a new edition, 1672, in 6 vols. 12mo. In this, however, he was so unfortunate as neither to satisfy the public, who were displeased to see the truth altered, nor the minister, who retrenched half his pension. Mezerai was extremely piqued at this, and complained of Colbert in such severe terms, as induced that minister to deprive him of the remainder of his pension. Mezerai then declared that he would write history no longer; and that the reason of his silence might not be concealed, he put the last money which he recieved as historiographer, into a box by itself with this note “Here is the last money I have received of the king he has ceased to pay me, and 1 to speak of him either good or ill.” * Mezerai had designed at first to revise his great work; but some friends giving him to understand that a correct abridgement would be more acceptable, he followed their advice, as we have related, and spent ten whole years in drawing it up. The first edition of it “met with greater applause than even his larger work, and was much sought after by foreigners as well as Frenchmen. Learned men, and critics in historical matters, have remarked many errors in it; but he did not value himself at all upon correctness; and used to tell his friends, who reproached him with the want of it, that” very few persons could perceive the difference between a history that is correct and one that is not so; and that the glory which he might gain by greater accuracy was not worth the pains it would cost."

, a pious and learned Spanish priest, born in 1513 at Cordova, was one of those who greatly contributed to restore a taste for the belles lettres in Spain. He taught with reputation in the university of Alcala, was appointed historiographer to Philip II. king of Spain, and died 1590, at Alcala, aged 77, leaving several works relative to Spanish antiquities besides other valuable books. The principal are, “The general Chronicle of Spain,” which had been begun by Florian Ocampo, 1574, and 1588, 2 vols. folio, in Spanish. “The Antiquities of Spain,” folio, in the same language, a curious and very valuable work “Scholia,” in Latin, on the works of Eulogius the “Genealogy of St. Dominick,” &c. He was originally a Dominican, but obliged to quit that order in consequence of having been induced, by a mistaken piety, to follow Origen’s example. He was unquestionably a man of learning, and had many of the best qualities of a historian, but he scarcely rose above the grossest superstitions of his age and religion. A complete edition of his works was published at Madrid in 1791—92.

, a French advocate, counsellor of the aides of Provence, historiographer of France, and librarian to the queen, was born at St. Florentine, Dec. 20, 1717. Of his early life we have little account, but it appears that he quitted his professional engagements in the country when young, and came to Paris to indulge his taste for study and speculation. Having acquired considerable fame by his writings, he was appointed historiographer of France, and was long employed in collecting and arranging all the charters, historical documents, and edicts and declarations of the French legislature from the time of Charlemagne to the present day. This vast collection being reduced to order was put under his especial care, under the title of “Depot des chartres et de legislation:” whether it was dispersed at the revolution does not appear. He also employed his pen on a variety of subjects, some arising from temporary circumstances, and others suggested probably in the course of his researches. Among these are: 1. “Observateur Holiandais,” a kind of political journal, consisting of forty-five papers, written against the measures of the English court, at what period we know not, as our authority does not specify its date. 2. “Memoire pour servir a l'histoire des Cacouac,” 1757, 12mo, a satire, which was probably of a beneficial tendency, as it created him enemies among the irreligious writers of France. 3. “Memoires pour servir a Phistoire de riotre temps,” 1757, 2 vols. 12mo. 4. “Devoirs d'un prince,” 1775, 8vo, reprinted 1782. In this he is said to have exposed the dangers of a corrupt court, and to have predicted its ruin from that torrent of corruption which would one day overwhelm both the flatterers and the flattered. 5. “Principes de morale politique et du droit public, ou Discours sur l'histoire de France,” 1777 1789, 21 vols. 8vo. This, which is his principal work, attracted much attention by the boldness and freedom of some of his opinions, but these he did not carry so far as to enable us to class him among the revolutionary writers; for while some critics in France consider him as never separating the cause of the people from that of the prince, others condemn him for writing under ministerial influence, and inclining to the support of arbitrary power. It was his maxim that every thing should be done for the people, but nothing by them, and that the best state of France would be that in which the people received their laws from the absolute will of a chief. Upon account of these sentiments he is said to have been refused a place in the French academy; yet he was not guillotined, as has been reported, but survived all the horrors of the revolution, and died quietly at Chambouci, near St. Germain-en-Laye, in 1799. His personal character is represented as very amiable. He was a good father, a good husband, and a friend to religion and peace.

Having thus failed in obtaining the first situation in which a man of letters could be placed, he succeeded, in 1647, in being appointed to what might be considered as the second, that of preceptor to Philip, then duke of Anjou, and afterwards duke of Orleans, the king’s brother. He had also conferred on him the titles of historiographer of France and counsellor of state. By his first wife he had an only son, who died in 1664, in the thirty-fifth year of his age. His wife also being dead long before, he is said to have been so much afflicted at the loss of his son, as to determine to marry again, which he did the same year, 1664, at the age of seventy-six He died in 1672, aged eightyfour. He was a voluminous writer, and upon all subjects, ancient, modern, sacred and profane. We cannot, perhaps, to some of our readers, give a better idea of his works, than by comparing them to those of Bayle. We find in them the same scepticism and the same indecencies; and on this account Bayle expatiates on his character with congenial pleasure. In his private character, he was somewhat of a humourist, but his moral conduct was more correct than might have been expected from his writings. He is mentioned hy Guy Patin as a Stoic, who would neither praise nor be praised, and who followed his own fancies and caprices without any regard to the opinions of the world, and his dress and usual demeanour distinguished him from other men. In the court he lived like a philosopher, immersed in books, simple and regular in his manner of living, and void of ambition and avarice. His treatise which we have mentioned, “On the Virtue of Pagans/' was answered by Arnauld. La Mothers bookseller complaining that his book did not sell,” I know a secret,“said the author,” to quicken the sale:" he procured an order from government for its suppression, which was the means of selling the whole edition. His works were collected in two volumes folio; and there was an edition, we believe the last, printed at Dresden, in 1756, in 14 vols. 8vo, so lowpriced, in the French catalogues, that there seems now little value placed on them.

, a celebrated German traveller and writer, was born in 1705, in Herforden, in Westphalia, and was educated at the age of seventeen at llinteln and Leipsic, at which last place he so distinguished himself, that professor Mencke obtained for him the place of adjunct in the historical class of the academy founded at Petersburgh by Peter the Great. In tbat city he was some time employed in teaching Latin, geography, and history, and as assistant secretary to the institution. In 1728, he was made under-keeper of the imperial library, and in 1730 he was chosen professor of history. He now applied for leave of absence, in order to gratify his wish of seeing foreign countries. In the year 1731 he visited London, and was elected a fellow of the Royal Society, and after his return to Petersburgh he was appointed to accompany Gmelin and De l'Isle de la Croyere on their travels through Siberia, which occupied ten years, during which they travelled 4480 German miles, or more than three times that number of English miles. An account of their travels was published by Gmelin, in four volumes, 8vo. After this, Mullef, who was not rewarded in any degree equal to the labours and sufferings which he had undergone, undertook, at the desire of prince Jusupof, “A Dissertation on the Trade of Siberia,” which, though written, or at least begun, in 1744, was not published till 1750, and then only the first part. In 1747, he was appointed historiographer of the Russian empire, and in 1754 he was nominated by the president to be the secretary of the Academy of Sciences, and was employed in superintending the publication of their transactions, and in other literary undertakings. In 1763, he was appointed director ^of the school for foundlings, established by Catherine at Moseow, and in 1766, he was appointed keeper of the archives in that city, with an additional salary of 1000 roubles. From this period till his death, which took place in 1783, he devoted himself entirely to the pursuits of literature, having been previously raised to the rank of counsellor of state, and invested with the order of Wladimir. Mr. Coxe, in his Travels, vol. I. in speaking of Muller, who was then living, says, “He collected during his travels the most ample materials for the history and geography of this extensive empire, which was scarcely known to the Russians themselves before his valuable researches were given to the world in various publications. His principal work is” A Collection of Russian Histories,“in nine volumes octavo, printed at different intervals at the press of the Imperial Academy of Sciences. The first part came out in 1732, and the last in 1764. This storehouse of information pnd literature in regard to the antiquities, history, geography, and commerce of Russia, and many of the neighbouring countries, conveys the most indisputable proofs of the author’s learning, diligence, and fidelity. To this work the accurate and indefatigable author has successively added many other valuable performances upon similar subjects, both in the German and Russian languages, which elucidate various parts in the history of this empire.” Mr. Coxe adds, that he spoke and wrote the German, Russian, French, and Latin tongues, with surprizing fluency; and read the English, Dutch, Swedish, Danisn, and Greek, with great facility His memory was surprising; and his accurate acquaintance with the minutest incidents of the Russian annals almost surpassed belief. His collection of state papers and manuscripts were all arranged in the exactest order, and classed into several volumes, distinguished by the names of those illustrious personages to whom they principally relate; such as Peter L, Catherine I. Menzikof, Osterman, &c."

In 1515, he was nominated by the senate of Venice historiographer of iiis native country, and was at that time deemed the most elegant Latin writer that Italy could boast. He appears however to have been so fastidious as to be rarely satisfied with any thing he wrote, and is supposed to have destroyed ten books of the history of Venice a few hours before his death. Many of his poems shared the same fate, either because they fell short of that standard of excellence which he had formed in his own mind, or had been composed after models which he deemed illchosen. If he could be thus severe to himself, we cannot wonder that he should be equally so to others. It is said, that he every year burnt a copy of Martial, as a corrupter of that pure taste which distinguished the writers of the Augustan age. Navagero’s Latin poems are how consequently few in number, but sufficient to justify the character bestowed by his countrymen, and the esteem in which they held him. They were printed in 1530, under the title “Andreas Naugerii Patricii Veneti Orationes duse, Carminaque nonnulla,” Venice, folio. Considerable additions were made by Vulpius, although improperly called “opera omnia;” and printed at Padua, in quarto, 1718.

, commonly known by his Latin name of Gul. Neubrigensis, an early English historian, was born at Bridlington in Yorkshire, in the first year of king Stephen’s reign, 1136, and educated in the abbey of Newborough, of which he became a member. Besides the name of Neubrigensis, which he derived from his abbey, we find him called Parvus, or “Little;” but whether this was a surname or nickname, is somewhat dubious. Tanner notices him under the name of Petyt; and Nicolson says, that his true surname was Little; and that he calls himself Petit, or Parvus. Hearne allows that others called him so but does not remember where he styles himself so. Mr. Denne thinks it remarkable, that with allusion to himself, he twice uses the word “Parvitas,” thereby insinuating how little qualified he was to discharge the office of a historiographer, or to hastily form a judgment of the actions of so great a man as Becket.

, an eminent historian, the son of Dr. Alexander Orme, a physician and surgeon in the service of the East India company, was born at Anjengo, in the Travancore country, in 1728. He was sent to England for hi education, and was entered at Harrow-school when he was only six years of age. After he left school, he was a year in the office of the accomptant-general of the African company, to be initiated in commercial transactions, and then embarked for Calcutta, where he arrived in 1742. As soon as he engaged in the company’s service, he acquired the highest reputation for the zeal with which he entered into their interests, and at the same time acquired such knowledge of the institutions, manners, and customs of the natives of India, that, in 1752, when some regulations were thought necessary in the police of Calcutta, he was desired to give his opinion on the subject. He accordingly drew up the greater part of “A general idea of the Government and People of Indostan.” In 1753 he returned to England, and was frequently consulted by men in power on Indian affairs, and respecting plans, at that time in agitation, for supporting the British interest in Hindoostan. Mr. Orme revisited India in 1754, on being appointed by the court of directors a member of the council at Fort St. George, and contributed much to those measures which finally gave to the English the superiority in India which they have ever since possessed. Mr. Orme held the office of commissary and accomptant-general during the years 1757-8, but in the latter year his health obliged him to embark for England, where he arrived in the autumn of 1760, and settling in London, employed himself in preparing “The History' of the Military Transactions of the British nation in Itidostan, from the year 1745,” the first volume of which, bringing down the history to 1756, was published in 1763, and extremely well received by the public. The East India company, duly sensible of his merits, and of the importance of his historical researches, not only gave him free access to all their records, but appointed him to be their historiographer, with a salary of 400l. per annum. To obtain the most accurate information respecting the war which was to be the subject of the second volume, he went over to France in 1773, where he was furnished liberally with various authentic documents, but it was not till 1778 that the work was brought to its completion. This contained all the events which took place in the English settlements in India from 1756 to 1763, with an investigation of the rise and progress of the English commerce in Bengal, and an account of the Mahommedan government from its establishment in 1200. In 1782 Mr. Orme published a work entitled “Historical Fragments of the Mogul empire of the Marattoes, and of the English concerns in Indostau from the year 1659.” This, which was an octavo volume, was his last publication, for though his literary pursuits were unremitted, yet his health was unequal to the exertions required for the composition. In 1792 he left the metropolis to enjoy in retirement the society of. his friends, and the recreation afforded by a well- assorted library. The place of his retirement was Ealing, where he was often visited by his friends, who appear to have loved him with great affection. Amongst these may be mentioned general Richard Smith, Mr. Robarts, one of the court of directors, Mr. Dairy mple, sir George Baker, and the late Mr. Owen Cambridge. But his books were his chief companions; and such was the active curiosity of his mind, that at the age of seventy he found in them a constant source of amusement. He continued his studies to the last month of his life, and a great many of his books bear interesting evidence of the strict attention with which he perused them; for their margins are filled with observations in his own hand writing. In the beginning of January 1801, he fell into a state of weakness and languor that prognosticated his speedy dissolution; and he expired on the 14th of that month, in the seventy-third year of his age.

, antiquary and librarian to the duke of Parma, and historiographer of the order of Malta, was born at Turin, Nov. 13, 1710. After studying in the university of Turin, he took the religious habit in the order of the Theatins, at Venice, and then went to Bologna to study mathematics and natural philosophy under the celebrated Beccari. It appears that he began his subsequent literary career with the last-mentioned pursuit; and that as soon as he had attained the higher orders, he was appointed professor of philosophy in the college of Genoa; and was one of those who first dared, to explode, from the schools of Italy, the old rooted prejudices of fantastic systems, and to substitute for them the eternal truths discovered by Newton. He did not, however, long remain in the professorship of philosophy, at Genoa, but quitted philosophy for divinity, and devoted ten years to preaching and the composition of sermons, by neither of which he acquired much reputation; but within this period he published some orations, his “Treatise on the Antiquities of Hipa Transone,” the ancient Cupra; and three years after, his “Explanation of an ancient engraved Stone.”

The literary establishments which had been formed by him in that place, did not then require so much of his attention and care, as to prevent him from indulging himself in other pursuits. He therefore conceived the plan of a general biography of the grand masters of the order of Malta. In 1749, when he published, at Naples, the series of medals concerning the government of Malta, he had received from the grand master, Pinto, the place of historiographer of the order; but his uninterrupted labours in other pursuits had prevented him, for nearly thirty years, from directing his attention to that great object, the most interesting, perhaps, in the religious and military history of the middle ages. At last he devoted to it some of his latter years, and, in 1780, published from the unrivalled press of Bodoni, of Parma, his “Memorie de Gran Maestri,” &c. or “Memoirs of the Grand Masters of the Holy Military Order of Jerusalem,” in 3 vols. 4to. This publication contains only the history of the first century of the order, and consequently, not more than the lives of its founder and of the first ten grand masters. It would have been continued, if the author had not, soon after its appearance, fallen into that languor, which generally attends long labours and old age, and which accompanied him till his death, which took place on the 2d of February 1785, in the 75th year of his age.

His first engagement in Philadelphia was with a bookseller, who employed him as editor of the Philadelphia Magazine, for which he had an annual salary of fifty pounds currency. When Dr. Rush of that city suggested to Paine the propriety of preparing the Americans lor a separation from Great Britain, he seized with avidity the idea, and immediately beg^n the above mentioned pamphlet, which, when finished, was shewn in manuscript to Dr. Franklin and Mr. Samuel Adams, and entitled, after some discussion, “Common Sense,” at the suggestion of Dr. Rush. For this he received from the legislature of Pennsylvania, the sum of 500l.; and soon after this, although devoid of every thing that could be called literature, he was honoured with a degree of M. A. from the university of Pennsylvania, and vvas chosen a member of the American Philosophical Society. In the title-page of his “Rights of Man,” he styled himself “Secretary for foreign affairs to the Congress of the United States, in the late war.” To this title*, however, he had no pretensions, and so thorough a republican ought at least to have avoided assuming what he condemned so vehemently in others. He was merely a clerk, at a very low salary, to a committee of the congress; and his business was to copy papers, and number and file them. From this office, however, insignificant as it was, he was dismissed for a scandalous breach of trust, and then hired himself as a clerk to Mr. Owen Biddle of Philadelphia; and early in \1&0, the assembly of Pennsylvania chose hiii) as cierk. fn 1782 he printed at Philadelphia, a letter to the abbé Raynal on the affairs of North Amer ca, in which he undertook to clear up the mistakes in Raynal’s account of the revolution; and in the same yer he also printed a letter to the earl of Shelburne, on his speech in parliament, July 10, 1782, in which that nobleman had prophesied that, “When Great Britain shall acknowledge American independence, the sun of Britain’s glory is set for ever.” It could not be difficult to answer such a prediction as this, which affords indeed a humiliating instance of want of political foresight. Great Britain did acknowledge American independence, and what is Great Britain now? In 1785, as a compensation for his revolutionary writings, congress granted him three thousand dollars, after having rejected with great indignation a motion for appointing him historiographer to the United States, with a salary. Two only of the states noticed by gratuities his revolutionary writings. Pennsylvania gave him, as we have mentioned, 500l. currency; and NewYork gave him an estate of more than three hundred acres, in high cultivation, which was perhaps the more agreeable to him, as it was the confiscated property of a royalist. lu 1787 he came to London, and before the end of that year published a pamphlet on the recent transactions’ between Great Britain and Holland, entitled “Prospects on the Rubicon.” In this, as may be expected, he censured the Cneasures of the English administration.

, historiographer, printer, and bookseller to the king, and genealogist of the duchy of Burgundy, was born at Paris, March 19, 1608. In his youth he showed a taste for genealogy, and heraldic studies, in which he appears to have been instructed and encouraged by his relation, Louvain Gelliot, who published a work on armorial bearings. In his twenty -fifth year he settled at Dijon, where he married Vivanda Spirinx, the daughter of a printer and bookseller, with whom he entered into business. At his leisure hours, however, he still continued his heraldic researches, and laboured with so much perseverance in this study as to produce the following works: 1. “Le parlement de Bourgogne, avec les armoiries,” &c. 1660, fol. 2. “Genealogie des comtes d'Amanze,” fol. 3. “La vraie et parfaite science des Armoiries de Gelliot, avec de plus de 6000 ecussons,” 1660, fol. 4. “Histoire genealogique de comtes de Chamilli.” 5. " Extraits de la hambre des comptes de Bourgogne, fol. He left also thirteen volumes of ms collections respecting the families of Burgundy. It is an additional and remarkable proof of his industry and ingenuity, that he engraved the whole of the plates in these volumes with his own hand. His history of the parliament of Burgundy was continued by Petitot, and published in 1733. Palliot died at Dijon in 1698, at the age of eighty-nine.

, a noble Venetian, born in 1540, was made historiographer of the republic in 1579, and afterwards was employed in several embassies, was made governor of Brescia, and finally elected a procurator of St. Mark. Such was his character for wisdom, integrity, and zeal for the public welfare, that he was called the Cato of Venice. He died in 1598, at the age of 58. He cultivated the sciences and general literature, and was the author of several works of merit. Among these are: “Delia Perfezione della vita Politica;” “Discorsi Politici,” published by his sons in 1599 “A History of Venice, from 1513 to 1551, with the Addition of an Account of the War of Cyprus:” written also in Italian, but he had begun to write it in Latin, in imitation of the style of Sallust, and had finished four books in that language. A new edition of this history was given by Apostolo Zeno in 1703.

, eminent for being the first who formed a plan for a natural history of England, the son of Robert Plot, esq. captain of the militia, in the hundred of Milton, in Kent, was born in 1640, at Sutton Baron, in the parish of Borden, in that county, and educated at the free -school of Wye, in the same county. In March 1658, he went to Magdalen-hall, in Oxford, where Josiah Pullen was his tutor took a bachelor of arts degree in 1661, a master’s in 1664, and both the degrees in law in 1671. He removed afterwards to University-college, where he was at the expence of placing the statue of king Alfred over the hall-door. His general knowledge and acuteness, and particularly his attachment to natural history, procured his being chosen, in 1677, a fellow of the royal society and in 1682, elected one of the secretaries of that learned body. He published their “Philosophical Transactions,” from No. 143, to No. 166, inclusive. In 1683, Elias Ashmole, esq. appointed him the first keeper of his museum and about the same time he was nominated by the vicechancellor the first reader in chemistry in that university. In 1687, he was made secretary to the earl-marshal, or court of chivalry, which was then renewed, after it had lain dormant from the year 1641. In 1690, he resigned his professorship of chemistry, and also his place of keeper of the museum; which he then augmented by a very large collection of natural curiosities, being such as he had figured and described in his Histories of Oxfordshire and Staffordshire, and there distinguished by the names of “Scrinium Plotianum Oxoniense,” and “Scrinium Plotianum Staffordiense.” In 1688 he received the title of Historiographer to James II. which he could not long retain, as this was just before the abdication of that sovereign. In 1694-5, Henry Howard, earl-marshal, nominated him Mowbray herald extraordinary; and two days after, he was constituted registrar of the court of honour. He died of the stone, April 30, 1696, at his house in Borden, and was buried in the church there, where a monument was afterwards erected to his memory. He left two sons by his wife Rebecca, widow of Henry Burman, to whom he was married in August 1690.

, historiographer to his Danish majesty, and to the province of Guelderland, was of a family of Harlem, but was born in Denmark, in 1571, and died in 1640, aged 69, at Harderwick, where he had taught physic and mathematics. His works are, “Historia Urbis et Rerum Amstelodamensium,” folio; “Itinerarium Gallic Narbonensis,” 12mo; “Rerum Danicarum Historia,” folio. This history, which is esteemed, comes dewn to 1548; and M. de Westphal, chancellor of Holstein, printed the Supplement in vol. II. of his “Monumenta inedita Rerum Germanicarum,” &c. Leipsic, 1740, folio which includes the reigns of Christiern I. and the five succeeding kings, with a life of Pontanus. Pontanus wrote also, “De Rheni divortiis et accolis populis adversus Ph. Cluverium,” 1617, 4to, a learned and judicious work “Discussiones Historicse,” 8vo “Historia Geldrica,” fol.; “Origines Francicse,” 4to the “Life of Frederic II. king of Denmark,” published 1737, by Dr. George Kry sing, a physician at Flensburg. Pontanus left several other works in ms.; among others, an account of women who have distinguished themselves by their learning. He also wrote some very indifferent verses published at Amsterdam itt 1634, 12mo.

During his confinement, which lasted eight months, as he had no books, and was allowed to see no person, he amused himself by meditating upon what he had read in Grotius’s treatise “De jure belli & pacis,” and in the political writings of Hobbes. He drew up a short system of what he thought best in them he turned and developed the subject in his own way he treated of points which had not been touched by those authors and he added much that was new. In all this he appears to have had no other object than to divert himself in his solitude; but two years after, shewing his work to a friend in Holland, where he then was, he was advised to review and publish it. It appeared accordingly at the Hague in 1660, under the title of “Elementorum Jurisprudent Universalis libri duo;” and gave rise to his more celebrated work “De jure naturae &^gentium.” The elector Palatine, Charles Louis, to whom he had dedicated the “Elements,” not only wrote him immediately a letter of thanks, but invited him to the university of Heidelberg, which he was desirous of restoring to its former lustre and founded there, in his favour, a professorship of the law of nature and nations which was the first of that kind in Germany, though many have since been established in imitation of it. The elector engaged him also to allot some portion of his time to the instruction of the electoral prince, his son. Puffendorf remained at Heidelberg till 1670, when Charles XL king of Sweden, having founded an university at Lunden, sent for him to be professor there and thither, to the great concern of the elector Palatine, he went the same year, and was installed professor of the law of nature and nations. His reputation greatly increased after that time, both by the fame and success of his lectures, and by the many valuable works that he published. Some years after, the king of Sweden sent for him to Stockholm, and made him his historiographer, and one of his counsellors. In 1688, the elector of Brandenberg obtained the consent of the king of Sweden for Puffendorf to go to Berlin, in order to write the history of the elector William the Great; and granted him the same titles of historiographer and privycounsellor, which he had in Sweden, with a considerable pension. The king of Sweden also continued to give him marks of his favour, and made him a baron in 1694. But he did not long enjoy the title for he died the same year, of a mortification in one of his’toes, occasioned by cutting the nail. He was as much distinguished by the purity of his morals, and the rectitude of his conduct, as by the superiority of his talents, and the celebrity of his numerous writings.

, in Flemish Vander Putten, and in French Dupuy, was born at Venlo, in Guelderland, Nov. 4, 1574. His Christian name was Henry. He studied the classics at Dort, philosophy at Cologne, and law at Louvain, under the celebrated Lipsius, with whom he formed a lasting friendship. He afterwards, in pursuit of knowledge, visited the chief academies of Italy, and heard the lectures of the most learned professors. He remained some months at Milan, and at Padua, where John Michael Pinelli gave him an apartment in his house. In 1601 he accepted the professorship of rhetoric at Milan, and nearly about the same time, was nominated historiographer to the king of Spain. Two years afterwards he was honoured with the diploma of a Roman citizen, and the degree of doctor of laws. These flattering marks of distinction made him resolve to settle in Italy; and in 1604 he married Mary Magdalen Catherine Turria, of a considerable family at Milan, a very advantageous alliance. But notwithstanding his resolution, he could not resist the offer made to him in 1606 to succeed the now deceased Lipsius, as professor of the belles lettres at Louvain. This office he filled for forty years, although neither with the same success or the same reputation as his predecessor. Puteanus was a man of vast reading, but of little judgment. He was well acquainted with the manners and customs of the ancients, but had little of the spirit of criticism or philosophy, and was incapable of undertaking any work of great extent. Every year he published some small volumes, and such was his desire to increase their number that he even printed a volume of the attestations he used to give to his scholars.

, lieutenant-general under Louis XIII. and XIV. was of a noble family in Armagnac, and was born in the year 1600. He is one of those Frenchmen of distinction who have written memoirs of their own time, from which so abundant materials are supplied to their history, more than are generally found in other countries. His memoirs extend from 1617 to 1658. - They were first published at Paris, and at Amsterdam in 1690, under the inspection of Du Chene, historiographer of France, in 2 vols. 12mo, and are now republished in the general collection of memoirs. The life of iPuy-Segur was that of a very active soldier. He entered into the army in 1617, and served forty-three years without intermission, rising gradually to the rank of lieutenantgeneral. In 1636, the Spaniards having attempted to pass the Somme, in order to march to Pans, Puy-Segur was ordered to oppose them with a small body of troops. The general, the count de Soissons, fearing afterwards that he would be cut off, which was but too probable, sent his aidde-camp to tell him that he might retire if he thought proper. “Sir,”“replied this brave officer,” a man ordered upon a dangerous service, like the present, has no opinion to form about it. I came here by the count’s command, and shall not retire upon his permission only. If he would have me return, he must command it." This gallant man is said to have been at one hundred and twenty sieges, in which there was an actual cannonade, and in more than thirty battles or skirmishes, yet never received a wound. He died in 1682, at his own castle of Bernouille, near Guise. His memoirs are written with boldness and truth; contain many remarkable occurrences, in which he was personally concerned; and conclude with some very useful military instructions.

, an eminent antiquary, and great benefactor to the university of Oxford, was the fourth son of sir Thomas; and was educated at St. John’s college, Oxford, where he was admitted gentleman commoner, and proceeded M. A. and grand cornpounder in 1713, and was admitted to the degree of doctor of civil law by diploma in 1719. He was F. R. S. and became F. S. A. May 10, 1727. He was greatly accessary to the bringing to light many descriptions of counties; and, intending one of Oxfordshire, had collected materials from Wood’s papers, &c. had many plates engraved, and circulated printed queries, but received accounts only of two parishes, which in some degree answered the design, and encouraged him to pursue it. In this work were to be included the antiquities of the city of Oxford, which Wood promised when the English copy of his “Historia & Antiquitates Oxon.” was t.o be published, and which have since been faithfully transcribed from his papers, by Mr. Gutch, and much enlarged and corrected from ancient original authorities. All Dr. Rawlinson’s collections for the county, chiefly culled from Wood, or picked up from information, and disposed b,y hundreds in separate books, in each of which several parishes are omitted, would make but one 8vo volume. But he made large collections for the continuation of Wood’s “Athena Oxonienses” and “History of Oxfor.d,” and for an account of “Non-compilers” at the Revolution which, together with some collections of Hearne’s, and note-books of his own travels, he bequeathed by his will to the university of Oxford. The Life of Mr. Anthony Wood, historiographer of the most famous university of Oxford, with an account of his nativity, education, works, &c. collected and composed from Mss. by Richard Rawlinson, gent, commoner of St. John’s college, Oxon. was printed at London in 1711. A copy of this life, with ms additions by the author, is in the Bodleian library. He published proposals for an “History of Eton College,” 1717; and, in 1728, “Petri Abselardi Abbatis Ruyensis & Heloissae Abbatissae Paracletensis Epistolae,” 8vo, dedicated to Dr, Mead. The books, the publication of which he promoted, are supposed to be the “History and Antiquities of Winchester,” 1715, 8vo. “History and Antiquities of Hereford,” 1717, 8vo. “History and Antiquities of Rochester,” 1717, 1723, 8vp. “Inscriptions on tombs in Bunhill-fields,” 1717, 8vo. “History and Antiquities of the Churches of Salisbury and Bath,” 1719, 1723, 8vo. “Aubrey’s History of Surrey,” 1719, 5 vols. 8vo. “Norden’s Delineation of Northamptonshire,” 1720, 8vo. “History and Antiquities of Glastonbury,” Oxford, 1722, 8vo. In 1728, he translated and printed Fresnoy’s “New Method of studying History, with a Catalogue of the chief Historians,” 2 vols. 8vo. But his principal work was “The English Topographer, or, an Historical Account of all the Pieces that have been written relating to the antient Natural History or Topographical Description of any Part of England,” 1720, 8vo, the plan of which has been so much augmented and improved in Mr. Cough’s two editions of the “British Topography.” In 1750, he gave, by indenture, the yearly sum of 87l. 165. Sd. being the rents and profits of various estates which he inherited under the will of his grandfather Daniel Rawlinson to the university of Oxford, for the maintenance and support of an Anglo-Saxon lecture or professorship for ever. To the Society of Antiquaries, he gave, by will, a small freehold and copyhold estate at FulEam, on condition that they did not, upon any terms, or by any stratagem, art, means, or contrivance howsoever, increase or add to their (then) number of 150 members, honorary members only excepted. He also made them a considerable bequest of dies and matrices of English seals and medals, all his collection of seals , charters, drawings by Vertue and other artists, and other antiquities ten walnut-tree book-cases, which had been given to his late brother Thomas by the then earl of Pembroke, and four mahogany presses, all marked P, all his English prints of which they had not duplicates, and a quit-rent of 5L per annum, in Norfolk, for a good medal for the best description on any English, Saxon, Roman, or Greek, coin, or other antiquity not before treated of or in print; but, resenting some supposed want of deference to his singularities and dictatorial spirit, and some reflections on his own and his friend’s honour, in an imputation of libelling the Society in the public papers, he, by a codicil made and signed at their house in Chancery lane, revoked the whole, and excluded all fellows of this or the Royal Society from any benefit from his benefactions at Oxford, which, besides his Anglo-Saxon endowment, were extremely considerable; including, besides a number of books with and without ms notes, all his seals, English and foreign, his antique marbles, and other curiosities; his copper-plates relative to several counties, his ancient Greek and Roman coins and medals, part of his collection of English medals, his series of medals of Louis XIV. and XV. a series of medals of the popes, which Dr. Rawlinson supposed to be one of the most complete collections in Europe; and a great number of valuable Mss. which he ordered to be safely locked up, and not to be opened till seven years after his decease . His music, ms. and printed, he gave to the music-school at Oxford. He died at Islington, April 6, 1755 and in the same year was printed “The Deed of Trust and Will of Richard Rawlinson, of St. John the Baptist college, Oxford, doctor of laws concerning his endowment of an Anglo-Saxon lecture, and other benefactions to the college and university.” He left to Hertford college the estate in F-ulham before mentioned, and to the college of St. John the Baptist the bulk of his estate, amounting to near 700l. a year, a plate of archbishop Laud, thirty-one volumes of parliamentary journals and debates; a set of the “Fo?dera,” all his Greek, Roman, and English, coins not given to the BocU leian library, all his plates engraved at the expence of the Society of Antiquaries, with the annuity for the prizemedal, and another to the best orator. The produce of certain rents bequeathed to St. John’s college was, after 40 years’ accumulation, to be laid out in purchase of an estate, whose profits were to be a salary to a keeper of the Ashmolean Museum, being a master of arts, or bachelor Ib civil law; and all legacies refused by the university or others, to center in this college. To the hospitals of Bridewell and Bethlehem, for the use of the incurables of the latter he left 200l. and ten guineas as an equivalent for the monthly coffee which he had received in Bethlehem common room: but, if they did not give up the picture of his father hanging in their hall, in order to its being put up in the Mansion-house, they were to forfeit the larger sum, and receive only the smaller. This picture, after it had hung up at the Mansion-house for some years, without any companion, in a forlorn, neglected state, and received considerable damage, the late sir Walter Rawlinson obtained leave of the court of aldermen (being then himself & member of that body, and president of those hospitals) to restore to Bridewell. It is one of sir Godfrey Kneller’s best performances, and well engraved by Vertue. Constanxine, another brother, is mentioned by Richard RawJinson’s will, as then residing at Venice, where he died in 1779. To him he gave the copper-plate of his father’s portrait, and all family-pictures, except his father’s portrait by Kneller, which was given to the Vintners’ company, of which his father was a member. He left him also his rents in Paul’s-head court, Fenchurch-street, jointly with his sisters, Mary Rawlinson, and Anne Andrews, for life. In the same will is mentioned another brother, John, to whom he left estates in Devonshire-street, London; and a nephew Thomas. To St. John’s college he bequeathed also his diploma, and his heart, which is placed in a beaur tiful marble urn against the chapel- wall, inscribed

, an English historian, so named from his birth-place, flourished in the fourteenth century. No (races of his family or connections can be discovered, but they appear to have been such as to afford him a liberal education. In 13 50 “he entered into the Benedictine monastery of St. Peter, Westminster, and his name occurs in various documents of that establishment in 1387, 1397, and 1399. He devoted his leisure hours to the study of British and Anglo-Saxon history and antiquities, in which he made such proficiency, that he is said to have been honoured with the name of the Historiographer. Pits informs us, without specifying his authority, that Richard visited different libraries and ecclesiastical establishments in England, in order to collect materials. It is at least certain that he obtained a licence to visit Rome, from his abbot, William of Colchester, in 1391, and there can be little doubt that a man of his curiosity would improve his knowledge on such an occasion. He is supposed to Have performed this journey in the interval between 1391 and 1397, for he appears to have been confined in the abbey infirmary in 1401, and died in that or the following year. His works are,” Historia ab Hengista ad ann. 1348,“in two parts. The first contains the period from the coming of the Saxons to the death of Harold, and is preserved in the public library of Cambridge. Whitaker, the historian of Manchester, speaks of this as evincing very little knowledge or judgment; the second part is probably a ms. in the library of the Royal Society, p. 137, with the title of” Britonum Anglorum et Saxonurn Historia.“In the library of Bene't college, Cambridge, is” Epitome Chronic. Ric. Cor. West. Lib. I.“Other works of our author are supposed to be preserved in the Lambeth library, and at Oxford. His theological writings were,” Tractatus super Symbolum Majus et Minus,“and” Liber de Officiis Ecclesiasticis,“in the Peterborough library. But the treatise to which he owes his celebrity, is that on the ancient state of Great Britain,” De situ Britanniae,“first discovered by Charles Julius Bertram, professor of the English language in the royal marine academy at Copenhagen, who transmitted to Dr. Stukeley a transcript of the whole in letters, together with a copy of the map. From this transcript Stukeley published an analysis of the work, with the itinerary, first in a thin quarto, 1757, and afterwards in the second volume of his ” Itinerarium Curiosum.“In the same year the original itself was published by professor Bertram at Copenhagen, in a small octavo volume, with the remains of Gildas and Nennius, under the title” Britannicarum gentium Historiae Antiquæ scriptores tres, Ricardns Corinensis, Gildas Badonicus, Nennius Banchorensis, &c.“This work has long been scarce, and in very few libraries; but in 1809, a new edition, with an English translation, &c. was published at London. To this the editor, Mr. Hatchard, has prefixed an account of Richard’s life, from which we have extracted the above particulars, and an able defence of his merit and fidelity as a historian, against the objections of certain writers. Among these we observe that Gibbon cannot be reckoned, for he says that Richard of Cirencester” shews a genuine knowledge of antiquity, very extraordinary for a monk of the fourteenth century.“This useful and accurate republication is entitled” The Description of Britain, translated from Richard of Cirencester; with the original treatise de situ Britanniæ; and a commentary on the Itinerary; illustrated with maps," 8vo.

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

, a voluminous French writer, was born at Laon, in Picardy, Aug. 26, 1686. His father and mother were of good families, both protestants, and sutrerers for their religion. His mother’s body was ordered to be drawn upon a hurdle, because she died in the protestant faith, and his father was condemned to be hanged for endeavouring to escape into Holland, but was saved at the intercession of the chancellor Voisin, who prevailed on the Jesuit La Chaise to obtain his pardon. His son was educated first at the college of Laon, and afterwards in that of Du Plessis at Paris, Having finished his philosophical studies, some family discontents, owing to the introduction of a step- mother, determined him to go to Holland, where he entered into the company of the French cadets attached to the regiment of guards belonging to the States-general. He served with reputation until after the battle of Malplaquet, when he returned to his studies, and married. In order to maintain himself and family, he commenced the business of teaching for fourteen or fifteen years at the Hague, and educated in that time above fifty young men of family, who afterwards rose to offices of distinction in the republic. This employment, however, he relinquished in 1723, in order to devote his time to the study of politics and history, and became editor or contributor to various literary and political journals, in which he was assisted by some Frenchmen of talents, who, like himself, had taken refuge in Holland. Political writers are not always safe, even in republics; and Rousset, in 1747, having written some pamphlets against the magistrates, and in favour of the prince of Orange, was arrested at Amsterdam, and confined for some weeks there or at the Hague; but when the prince was made Stadtholder, by the name of William IV. he not only released Rousset, but soon after conferred on him the title of counsellor extraordinary, and appointed him his historiographer. Returning now to Amsterdam, he plunged farther into politics by becoming one of the chiefs of the party known in that country by the name of Doelisten, from Doele, the name of a hotel where they assembled. This party obtained what they demanded, but the stadtholder wishing to unite all parties in the common cause, and the Doelisten having become obnoxious to the public, he dismissed Rousset, in 1749, from the places he had conferred on him, and forbid the publication of a work he had written against the French court. Rousset being at the same time informed that he was in danger of being taken up, went to Brussels, where his pen was his chief resource, and there he died in 1762.

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

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

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

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

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

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

, a learned historian and antiquary, was born September 6, 1694-, at Sulzbourg, a town in the margraviate of Baden Dourlach; his father, holding an honourable office in the margrave’s court, died soon after in Alsace, leaving his son to the care of his mother. After tei: years studying at Dourlach and Basil, he kept a public exercise on some contested points of ancient history with applause, and finished his studies in eight years more at Strasbourg. In 1717, he there spoke a Latin panegyric on Ge^manicus, that favourite hero of Germany, which was printed by order of the city. In return for this favour he spoke a funeral oration on M. Barth, under whom he had studied; and another on Kuhn, the professor of eloquence and history there, whom he was soon after elected to succeed in 1720, at the age of twenty ­ix. The resort of students to him from the Northern nations was very great, and the princes of Germany sent their sons to study law under him. The professorship of history at Francfort on the Oder was offered to him; the czarina invited him to another at St. Petersburg, with the title of historiographer royal; Sweden offered him the same professorship at Upsal, formerly held by Scheffer and Boeder, his countrymen; and the university of Leyden named him successor to the learned Vitriarius. He preferred Strasbourg to all. Amidst the succession of lectures public and private, he found time to publish an innumerable quantity of historical and critical dissertations, too many to be here particularised. In 1725 he pronounced a congratulatory oration before king Stanislaus, in the name of the university, on the marriage of his daughter to the king of France; and, in 1726, another on the birth of the dauphin, besides an anniversary one on the king of France’s birthday, and others on his victories. In 1726 he quitted his professorship, and began his travels at the public expence. From Paris he went to Italy, stayed at Rome six months, re* ceived from the king of the Two Sicilies a copy of the “Antiquities of Herculaneum,” and from the duke of Parma the “Museum Florentinum.” He came to England at the beginning of the late king’s reign, and left it the day that Pere Courayer, driven out of Paris by theological disputes, arrived in London. He was now honoured with a canonry of St. Thomas, one of the most distinguished Lutheran chapters, and visited Paris a third time in 1728. Several dissertations by him are inserted in the “Memoirs of the academy of inscriptions and belles lettres;” one, ascribing the invention of moveable types to Guttenberg of Strasbourg, 1440, against Meerman,

In 1733, he narrowly escaped from a dangerous illness, He had long meditated one of those works, which alone, by their importance, extent, and difficulty, might immortalise a society, a “History of Alsace.” To collect materials for this, he travelled into the Low Countries and Germany in 1738, and into Switzerland 1744. At Prague he found that the fragment of St. Mark’s Gospel, so carefully kept there, is a continuation of that at Venice. The chancellor D'Aguesseau sent for him to Paris, 1746, with the same view. His plan was to write the History of Alsace, and to illustrate its geography and policy before and under the Romans, under the Franks, Germans, and its present governors; and, in 1751, he presented it to the king of France, who had before honoured him with the title of “Historiographer Royal and Counsellor,” and then gave him an appointment of 2000 livres, and a copy of the catalogue of the royal library. He availed himself of this opportunity to plead the privileges of the Protestant university of Strasbourg, and obtained a confirmation of them. His second volume appeared in 1761; and he had prepared, as four supplements, a collection of charters and records, an ecclesiastical history, a literary history, and a list of authors who had treated of Alsace: the publication of these he recommended to Mr. Koch, his assistant and successor in his chair. Between these two volumes he published his ^Vindiciae Celticse,“in which he examines the origin, revolution, and language of the Celts. The” History of Baden“was his last considerable work, a duty which he thought he owed his country. He completed this history in seven volumes in four years; the first appeared in 176 3, the last in 1766. Having by this history illustrated his country, he prevailed upon the marquis of Baden to build a room, in which all its ancient monuments were deposited in 1763. He engaged with the elector palatine to found the academy of Manheim. He pronounced the inaugural discourse, and furnished the electoral treasury with antiques. He opened the public meetings of this academy, which are held twice a year, by a discourse as honorary president. He proved in two of these discourses, that no electoral house, no court in Germany, had produced a greater number of learned princes than the electoral house. In 1766, he presented to the elector the first volume of the” Memoirs of a Rising Academy," and promised one every two years.

, an Italian physician of celebrity, was born at Milan, in February 1552. He evinced great talents from his early childhood, and at the age of sixteen defended some theses on the subject of natural philosophy with much acuteness. His inclination leading him to the medical profession,* he repaired to Pavia, for the study of it, and obtained the degree of doctor in his twenty-first year, and was even appointed to a chair in this celebrated university two years after. At the end of four more years he resigned his professorship to devote himself entirely to practice at Milan, and while here Philip III. king of Spain, selected him for his historiographer; but neither this, nor many other honours, that were offered to him, could induce him to quit his native city, to which he was ardently attached. The only honour which he accepted was the appointment of chief physician to the state of Milan, which Philip IV. conferred upon him in 1627, as a reward for his virtues and talents. In 1628, during the plague at Milan, Septalius, while attending the infected, was himself seized with the disease, and although he recovered, he had afterwards a paralytic attack, which greatly impaired his health. He died in September 1633, at the age of eighty-one. Septalius was a man of acute powers, and solid judgment, and was reputed extremely successful in his practice. He was warmly attached to the doctrines of Hippocrates, whose work? he never ceased to study. He was author of various works, among which are <k In Lihrum Hippocratis Coi, de Aeribus, Aquis, et Locis, Commentarii quinquc,“1590;” In Aristotelis Problemata Commentaria Latina,“torn. I. 1602, II. 1607;” Animadversionum et Cautionum Meriicarmn Libri duo, septem aliis additi,“1629; the result of 40 years of practice, and equal to any of its contemporaries of the seventeenth century.” De Margaritis Judicium,“1618;” De Peste et Pestiferis Affectibus Libri V.“1622” Analyticarum et Animasticarum Dissertationum Libri II." 1626, &c. &c.

, a Spanish writer of no good fame, was born at Cordova in 1491, and became historiographer to the Emperor Charles V. He is memorable for writing a “Vindication of the Cruelties of the Spaniards against the Incliana,” in opposition to the benevolent pen of Barthelemi de la Casas. Sepulveda affirmed, that such cruelties were justifiable both by human and divine laws, as well as by the rights of war. It is an act of justice to Charles V. to mention that he suppressed the publication of Sepulveda’s book in his dominions; but it was published at Rome. This advocate for the greatest barbarities that ever disgraced human nature, died at Salamanca in 1572. He was author of various works besides that above mentioned; in particular, of some Latin letters, a translation from Aristotle, with notes, a life of Charles V. &c. printed together at Madrid in 1780, 4 vols. 4to. under the care of the royal academy of history, a proof that he still holds his rank among Spanish authors.

, an English dramatic poet, was descended of a good family in the county of Stafford, but born at Stanton-hail, in Norfolk, a seat of his father’s, about 1640. He was educated at Cains college in Cambridge, and afterwards placed in the Middle Temple; where he studied the law some time, and then went abroad. Upon his return from his travels he applied himself to the drama, and wrote seventeen plays, with a success which introduced him to the notice of several persons of wit and rank, by whom he was highly esteemed. At the Revolution he was, by his interest with the earl of Dorset, made historiographer and poet-laureat; and when some persons urged that there were authors who had better pretensions to the laurel, his lordship is said to have replied, " that he did not pretend to determine how great a poet Shadwell might be, but was sure that he was an honest man.' 7 He succeeded Dryden as poet-laureat; for Dryden had so warmly espoused the opposite interest, that at the Revolution he was dispossessed of his place. This, however, Dryden considered as an indignity, and resented it very warmly. He had once been on friendly terms with Shadwell, but some critical differences appear to have first separated them, and now Dryden introduced Shadwell in his Mac-Fleckno, in these lines:

, an Italian annalist, was born in 1613, and was a monk of Parma, where he employed the leisure hours which a monastic life afforded, in writing- the history of his times. The confidence placed in him by political men, and the correspondence to which he had access, enabled him to penetrate into the secret motives and causes of actions and events, and gave an air of authenticity and consequence to his public communications. He is said to have been the first, in Italy at least, who published a kind of political journal under the name of “Memorie recondite,” afterwards collected into volumes. The first two having found their way into France, induced cardinal Mazarine to entertain a very high opinion of the author, and by his persuasion, Louis XIV. invited Siri to Paris. On his arrival, he was preferred to a secular abbey, and quitting his ecclesiastical functions, lived at court in great intimacy and confidence with the king and his ministers, and was made almoner and historiographer to his majesty. There, in 1677, he published the 3d and 4th volumes of his journal, and continued it as far as the eighth, 4to. This, says Baretti, is as valuable a history as any in Italian, though the style and language are but indifferent, and it is very difficult to find all the volumes. The period of time they include is from 1601 to 1640. He published also another work of a similar kind, called “11 Mercurio, owero istoria de' correnti Tempi,” from 1647 to 1682, which extends to fifteen 4to volumes, the two last of which are more difficult to be found than all the rest. The former work, however, is in most estimation on account of the historical documents it contains, which are always useful, whatever colouring an editor may please to give. Siri has not escaped the imputation of venality, especially in his attachment to the French court, yet Le Cierc observes (Bibl. Choisie, vol. IV.) that no French writer dared to speak so freely of the public men of that nation as Siri has done. There is a French translation of the “Memorie recondite,” under the title of “Memoires secrets,” which, Landi says, might have been much improved from Siri’s extensive correspondence with almost all the ministers of Europe, now extant in the Benedictine library of Parma, and among the private archives of Modena. Siri died in 1683, in the seventieth year of his age.

, an excellent German historian, was born in 1506, at Sleiden, a small town upon the confines of the duchy of Juliers, whence he derived his name. His origin, according to Varillas, was so obscure, that not knowing the name of his father, he adopted that of his birth-place; but this is the report of an enemy, as his father’s name was Philip, and his family not of the lower order. He went through his first studies in his own country, together with the learned John Sturmius, who was born in the same town with himself; and afterwards removed, first to Paris, and then to Orleans, where he studied the law for three years. He took the degree of licentiate in this faculty, but, having always an aversion to the bar, he continued his pursuits chiefly in polite literature. Uporf his return to Paris, he was recommended by his friend Sturmius, in 1535, to John Du Bellay, archbishop and cardinal; who conceived such an affection for him, that he settled on him a pension, and communicated to him affairs of the greatest importance; for Sleidan had a turn for business, as well as letters. He accompanied the ambassador of France to the diet of Haguenan, but returned to Paris, and remained there till it was not safe for him to stay any longer, as he was inclined to the sentiments of the reformers. In 1542 he retired to Strasburg, where he acquired the esteem and friendship of the most considerable persons, and especially of James Sturmius; by whose counsel he undertook, and by whose assistance he was enabled, to write the history of his own time. He was employed in some uegociations both to France and England; and, in one of these journeys, he met with a lady whom he married in 1546. About the same time the princes of the league of Smalcald honoured him with the title of their historiographer, and granted him a pension, and when he lost this by the dissolution of the league in 1547, the republic of Strasburgh gave him another. In 1551, he went, on the part of the republic, to the council of Trent; but, the troops of Maurice, elector of Saxony, obliging that council to break up, he returned to Strasburgh without having transacted any business. He was employed in other affairs of state, when the death of his wife, in 1555, plunged him into a deep melancholy, with such a total loss of memory, as that he did not know his own children. Some imputed this to poison; and others to natural causes. It ended, however, in his death, at Strasburg, Oct. 31, 1556, in the fiftieth year of his age.

, an ingenious Spanish writer, was of an ancient and illustrious family, and born at Placenza in Old Castile, July 18, 1610. He was sent to Salamanca to study law; but, having a natural turn for poetry, gave it the preference, and cultivated it with a success which did him great honour. He was but seventeen, when he wrote an ingenious comedy, called “Amor y Obligacion:” and he afterwards composed others, which were received with the highest applause. Antonio affirms him to have been the best comic poet Spain has ever seen. At six and twenty, he applied himself to ethics and politics. His great merit procured him a patron in the count d'Oropesa, viceroy then of Navarre, and afterwards of the kingdom of Valence, who appointed him his secretary. In 1642, when he wrote his comedy of “Orpheus and Eurydice,” for representation at Pampeluna, upon the birth of the count’s son, Philip IV. of Spain made him one of his secretaries; and, after Philip’s death, the queen regent made him first historiographer of the Indies, a place of great profit as well as honour. His “History of the Conquest of Mexico” was thought to justify this honour, and was much praised. But it is evident that his object was to celebrate the glories of Ferdinand Cortez, his hero, to whom he has imputed many strokes of policy, many reflections, and many actions, of which he was not capable; and he has very wisely closed his account with the conquest of Mexico, that he might not have occasion to introduce the cruelties afterwards committed. Nevertheless, the history is reckoned upon the whole very interesting, and has been translated into several languages; and he is better known for it, out of his own country, than for his poetry and dramatic writings, although they are said to be excellent. After living many years in the busy and gay world, he resolved to dedicate himself to the service of God, by embracing the ecclesiastical state; and accordingly was ordained a priest at fifty- seven. He now renounced all profane compositions, and wrote nothing but some dramatic pieces upon subjects of devotion, which are represented in Spain on certain festivals. He died April 19, 1686. His comedies were printed at Madrid in 1681, 4to; his sacred and profane poems, at the same place, 1716, 4to; his “History of Mexico” often, but particularly at Brussels in 1704, folio; with his life prefixed by D. Juan de Goyeneche. There is also a collection of his “Letters” published at Madrid in 1737.

In 1653 he embraced the Popish religion; and, going to Paris in 1654, published, according to custom, a discourse upon the motives of his conversion, which he dedicated to cardinal Mazarine. He went afterwards to Rome, where he made himself known to Alexander VII, by a Latin letter addressed to that pope, in which he inveighed against the envious Protestants, as he called them. Upon his return from Rome, he came over to England; and afterwards published, in 1664, a relation of his voyage hither, which brought him into trouble and disgrace; for, having taken some unwarrantable liberties with the character of a nation with which France at that time thought it policy to be on good terms, he was stripped of his title of “Historiographer of France,” which had been given him by the king, and sent for some time into banishment. His book also was discountenanced and discredited, by a tract published against it in the city of Paris; while Sprat, afterwards bishop of Rochester, refuted its absurdities in “Observations on M. de Sorbiere’s Voyage into England,” 1665, 12mo. This work was reprinted with an English edition of Sorbiere’s voyage, and a life of him in 1709, 8vo. Voltaire has also been very severe upon this work: “I would not,” says he, “imitate the late Mr. Sorbiere, who, having stayed three months in England, without knowing any thing either of its manners or of its language, thought fit to print a relation, which proved but a dull scurrilous satire upon a nation he knew nothing of.”

, an eminent antiquary, was the fourth sou of Richard Stephens, esq. of the elder house of that name atEastington in Gloucestershire, by Anne the eldest daughter of sir Hugh Cholmeley, of Whitby, in Yorkshire, baronet. His first education was at Wotton school, whence he removed to Lincoln-college, Oxford, May 19, 681. He was entered very young in the Middle Temple, applied himself to the study of the common law, and was called to the bar. As he was master of a sufficient fortune, it may be presumed that the temper of his mind, which was naturally modest, detained him from the public exercise of his profession, and led him to the politer studies, and an acquaintance with the best authors, ancient and modern: yet he was thought by all who knew him to have made a great proficience in the law, though history and antiquities seem to have been his favourite study. When he was about twenty years old, being at a relation’s house, he accidentally met with some original letters of the lord chancellor Bacon; and finding that they would greatly contribute to our knowledge of matters relating to king James’s reign, he immediately set himself to search for whatever might elucidate the obscure passages, and published a complete edition of them in 1702, with useful notes, and an excellent historical introduction. He intended to have presented his work to king William but that monarch dying before it was published, the dedication was omitted. In the preface, he requested the communication of unpublished pieces of his noble author, to make his collection more complete; and obtained in consequence as many letters as formed the second collection, published in 1734, two years after his death. Being a relation of Robert Harley earl of Oxford (whose mother Abigail, was daughter of Nathaniel Stephens of Eastington), he was preferred by him to be chief solicitor of the customs, in which employment he continued with unblemished reputation till 172C, when he declined that troublesome office, and was appointed to succeed Mr. Madox in the place of historiographer royal. He then formed a design of writing a history of king James the first, a reign which he thought to be more misrepresented than almost any other since the conquest: and, if we may judge by the good impression which he seems to have had of these times, his exactness and care never to advance any thing but from unquestionable authorities, besides his great candour and integrity, it could not but have proved a judicious and valuable performance. He married Mary the daughter of sir Hugh Cholmeley, a lady of great worth, and died at Gravesend, near Thornbury, in Gloucestershire, Nov. 12, 1732; and was buried at Eastington, the seat of his ancestors, where is an inscription to his memory.

, one of the many sons of the preceding, was born at Weimar, May 26, 1671. His father, who soon perceived his turn for study, sent him to Zeitz, to profit by the instructions of the learned Cellarius, who then lived in that place, and he afterwards pursued his studies under the ablest masters at Jena, Helmstadt, Francfort, and Halle. In the latter city he went to the bar, but did not follow that profession long, devoting his attention chiefly to history and public law, which were his favourite pursuits. He paid some visits to Holland and Sweden, whence he returned to Wetzlar, accompanied by his brother, who had dissipated his fortune in search of the philosopher’s stone. This misfortune affected our author, who, after the death of his brother, spent almost his whole property in paying his debts, and he fell into a melancholy state, which lasted for two years; but having then recovered his health and spirits, he was appointed librarian at Jena in 1697, and took his degree of doctor of philosophy and law at Halle. In 1704, he was made professor of history in that university, and in 1712 professor extraordinary of law, counsellor and historiographer to the dukes of Saxony; and at length in 1730, counsellor of the court, and ordinary professor of public and feudal law. He died at Jena, March 25, 1738, leaving many distinguished proofs of learned research, particularly in law and literary history. One of his first publications was his “Bibliotheca numismatum antiquiorum,” 12mo, which appeared at Jena in 1693. 2. “Epistolaad Cellarium, de Bibliothecis,” Jena, 1696, 12mo. 3. “Atuiquitatum Romanorum Syntagma,” Jena, 1701, 4to, This is the first part of a larger work, and chiefly respects the religion of the Romans, but is valuable. 4. “Tractatus Juridicus de Balneis et Balneatoribus” 4to, the same year, at Jena; all his works indeed appear to have been published there. 5. “Acta Literaria,” vol.1. 1703, 8vo; vol.11. 1720. 6. “Bibliotheca Philosophica,” 1704, 8vo, and again, 1728. 7. “Bibliotheca Historica,” 1705, 8vo. This, like several other works of this author, has undergone several editions, and been much augmented b) other editors. The title to the latest edition of this book is “Bibliotheca Historica, instructa a Burcardo Gotthelf Siruvio, aucta a Christi. Gottlieb Budero, nunc vero a Joanne Georgio Meuselio ita digesta, amplificata, et emendata, ut pcene novum opus videri possit.” This account of it is literally true, for, from a single volume, it is now extended to twenty-two vols. 8vo, usually bound in eleven, 1782 1804. It forms a complete index to the histories of all nations. 8. “Bibliotheca Librorum rariorum,” 1719, 4to. 9. “Introductio ad Notitiam Rei Literariee, et usum Bibliothecarum.” The fifth edition of this work, a very thick volume, small 8vo, with the supplements of Christopher Coler, and the notes of Michael Lilienthal, was printed at Leipsic in 1729; but the best is that of 1754 by John Christian Fischer, 2 vols. 8vo. 10. A life of his father, entitled, “De Vita et Scriptis Geo. Adam Struvii,” 1705, 8vo. He published also several works in German, and some others in Latin, all of which are mentioned in H- insius’s Biicher Lexicon, published at Leipsic in 1793, which is indeed a very excellent index to the works of German authors in particular.

, a learned and laborious French writer, was born at Montpellier Jan. 28, 1632. He studied at Lunel, Orange, and other places, and having acquired a knowledge of Greek, Hebrew, and theology, he went to Paris, where he formed an acquaintance with some eminent men of the day, Pelisson, Conrart, Menage, and others, and on his return received the degree of doctor of laws at Bourges. He then went to Nismes, and practised at the bar, became a counsellor of the city, and a member of the Protestant consistory, and a member also of the newly-founded academy. In 1685, on the revocation of the edict of Nantz, he found it necessary to retire to Switzerland, and finally to Berlin, where the elector of Brandenburgh gave him the title of counsellor of embassy, and historiographer, with an annual pension of 300 crowns, which was afterwards increased. He died at Berlin, Sept. 7, 1715, in the eighty-fourth year of his age. He published several translations, from the works of St. Chrysostom; the lives of Calvin and Beza, from the Latin of Galeacius Carraccioli, and of Francis Spira; the eloges of eminent men, from Thuanus, of which there have been four editions, the best that of Leyden, 1715, 4 vols. 12mo; the epistle of St. Clement to the Corinthians, from the Greek; a treatise on martyrdom, from the Latin of Heidegger, &c. &c. This most useful work is entitled “Catalogus auctorum qui librorum catalogos, indices, bibliothecas, virorum literatorum elogia, vitas, ant orationes funebres scriptis consignarunt,” Geneva, 1686, 4to, with a supplement, in 1705. This is a greatly improved edition of Labbe’s “Bibliotheca Bibliothecarum.”

, a writer of some note in the 16th century, was horn at Angflulesme, and entered the Franciscan order, and afterwards visited Italy, the Holy Land, Egypt, Greece, and Brasil. At his return to France in 1556, he quitted the cordelier’s habit, took that of an ecclesiastic, and was appointed almoner to queen Catherine de Medicis. He had the titles of historiographer of France, and cosmographer to the king, and received the profits of those offices. He died Nov. 23, 1590, aged eighty-tight, leaving “Cosmographie de Levant,” Lyons, 1554, 4to; “A History of illustrious Men/' 1671, 8 vols. 12mo, or 1684, 2 vols. fol. a work of very little merit; but the folio edition is esteemed of some price on account of the portraits. He wrote also” Singularity’s de la France Aniarctique," Paris, 1558, 4to, and several other books, from which the author appears to have been a great reader, but at the same time, to have possessed great credulity, and little judgment.

He excelled in the two great points which form a just historian, truth and eloquence. The faith of his History has never been called into question. He wanted no opportunities of knowing the truth, and he does not appear to have misrepresented it; and though some have fancied him a little malevolent towards his country, because the usage hy had received would have made most people so, yet he has not written any thing that discovers such a passion. His manner of writing is coherent, perspicuous, and persuasive, yet close, strong, and pithy. The ancients have spoken <of him in the highest terms and if Herodotus, as his senior, obtained the title “father of history,” yet the greater part have allowed that Thucydides is the better historian. Plutarch says, in his treatise De Gloria Atheniensinm, that Thucydides “aims always at this, to make his auditor a spectator, and to excite in his reader the same passions witii those who were beholders.” Then enumerating some examples, “these things,” he says, “are so described, and so evidently set before our eyes, that the mind of the reader is no less affected, than if he had been present in the actions.” And it was probably for his skill in painting, certainly not for his eloquence (for, as Cicero says, “what great rhetorician ever borrowed any thing of Thucydides?”) that the famous orator Demosthenes wrote over his History, according to Lucian, eight times with his own hand. The same Lucian, in his book “How a history ought to be written,” continually exemplifies the virtues required in an historiographer by Thucydides; and it seems as if the image of Thucydides’s History, preconceived in Lucian’s mind, suggested to him all the precepts he there delivers. As to his style, Cicero speaks of it thus: “Thucydides in the art of speaking, in my opinion, has far exceeded them all. ^For he is so full of matter, that the number of his sentences almost equals the number of his words; and in his words he is so apt, and so close, that it is hard to say, whether his words more illustrate his sentences, or his sentences his words,” The Romans thought highly of Thucydides’s work; and Sallust evidently took him for his model.

, a learned Danish historian and antiquary, was born in Iceland, and partly educated there, but completed his studies in Denmark. Here he became so well known for his acquaintance with history, that when Frederick III. king of Denmark, himself a very learned prince, wanted some able scholar to translate certain Icelandic Mss. which were in his library, Torfa-us was recommended to him, and executed his task so much to the king’s satisfaction, that he retained him for several years in his court, and employed him on other affairs that had no connexion with his studies, and always admired him as a man of talent and probity. As a reward he gave him a valuable appointment in the customs, but Torfseus found it not very agreeable to one of his disposition, and was about soliciting an exchange when the king died. His successor and son, Christian V. appointed him his historiographer for Norway, with a salary of 600 German crowns. This enabled Torfaeus to reside either at Copenhagen, or at an estate he had in Stongeland, pursuing his researches into history and antiquities. He died in 1719, or 1720, nearly eighty years old. As an historian, he occupies a very high rank among his countrymen. His principal works, or those best known, although all are scarce, are, 1. “Historia rerum Norvegicarum,” Hafniae (Copenhagen) 1711, 4 vols. in 2, fol. 2. “Orcades, seu rerum Orcadensium historiae libri tres,” ibid. 1697, 1715, fol. 3 “Series Dynastarum et Regum Daniae, a Skioldo Odini filio, ad Gormum Grandaevum,” ibid. 1702, 4to. 4. “Historia VinJandiae antiquae,” 1705, 8vo. 5. “Groenlandia antiqua, seu veteris Groenlandiae descriptio,” 1706, 8vo.

In 1660, he was, with his brother, honoured with the title of historiographer to the king; and had a pension settled upon him. In 1664, he lost the company of his brother; who, when he married, left his mother and brethren, with whom he had lived till then. Adrian, however, some years after, followed his brother’s example, and married a wife too; by whom he had children. He enjoyed good health, till he was eighty-five, and then died, July the 2d, 1692.

, a French miscellaneous writer, was born in 1653, of a good family, at St. Quentin in Picardy. He became secretary to the king’s closet, to the marine, a member of the French academy, an honorary member of the academy of sciences, and historiographer to his majesty. M. de Valincour had collected a great number of very curious and important memoirs respecting marine affairs; but these Mss. were consumed with his library by a fire, which burnt his house at St. Cloud in the night, between the thirteenth and fourteenth of January, 1725. He died January 5, 1730, at Paris, aged seventy. His works are, A Criticism on the romance of the princess of Cleves, entitled “Lettres a Madame la Marquise de sur le sujet de la Princesse de Cleves,” Paris, 1678, 12mo, which is much esteemed. A good “Life of Francis de Lorraine, duke of Guise,” 1681, 12mo. “Observations critiques sur PCEdipe de Sophocle,” and several short poetical pieces in Pere Boiihours’ collection.

He next turned his thoughts to Livy, and drew up notes on that author on the following occasion. It was the custom of Alphonsus to have some ancient author read by one of the literati about his court, during his public dinners, where the king himself gave some opinion on the subject of the book, and invited the different guests to give theirs; and, as the discussion of any particular point pleased him, he divided the sweetmeats among the competitors, and poured out a glass of wine to the reader. This office had fallen on Beccadelli and Valla, who, from intimate friends, became inveterate enemies, by disputing about passages in Livy on these occasions. Valla became equally hostile to Bartholomew Facio (see Facio), whom Alphonsus had made his historiographer, and had appointed Valla at the same time to write the Life of his royal father Ferdinand. The first copy of this Life, in three books, drawn up in two months, and submitted to the king for his correction, was privately overlooked by Facio, who, boasting of having detected five hundred errors in it, was answered by Valla in four books of invectives, or recriminations, in the last of which he inserted his corrections and notes on the first six books of Livy, on the Punic war. These books he had heard Beccadelli read before Alphonsus, and his enemies charged him with saying that he would undertake to correct these better than Aretine, Guarini, and eve Petrarch himself, whose corrections were in the ms. at Naples sent to the king by Cosmo de Medici from Florence. Valla’s frequent attacks on barbarous Latinists and ignorant theologists of his time exposed him to imminent danger from the inquisition; bat he generally found a protector in the king.

, an Italian historian, poet, and critic, was born at- Florence in 1502. His father, a lawyer, placed him with a master, who reported that he was not fit for literature, and advised him to breed the boy up to merchandise. He was accordingly sent to a counting-­house, and there his masters discovered that he never was without a book, and minded nothing but reading. His father then, after examining him, found that he had been deceived by the school-master, and determined to give his son a learned education, and for that purpose sent him to Padua and Pisa. Unfortunately, however, he prescribed the study of the law, which Varchi relished as little as commerce; and although, out of filial respect, he went through the usual courses, he immediately, on his father’s death, relinquished both the study and practice of the law, and determined to devote all his attention to polite literature. In this he acquired great reputation; but when Florence became distracted by civil commotions, he joined the party in opposition to the Medici family, and was banished. During his exile he resided at Venice, Padua, and Bologna, where his talents procured him many friends; and his works having diffused his reputation more widely, Cosmo de Medicis had the generosity to forgive the hostility he had shewn to his family, and, respecting him as a man of letters, recalled him home, and appointed him his historiographer. In this capacity he recommended him to write the history of the late revolutions in Florence. All this kindness, accompanied with a handsome pension, produced a great change in the mind of the republican Varchi, who became now the equally zealous advocate of monarchy. As soon as he had finished a part of it, he submitted it to the inspection of his patron, and some copies were taken of it. These being seen by soma persons who suspected that he would make free with their characters, or the characters of their friends, they conspired to assassinate the apostate author, as they thought him; and having one night attacked him, left him weltering in his blood, but his wounds were not mortal; and although it is said he knew who the assassins were, he declined appearing against them. He was, however, so much affected by the affair, that he embraced the ecclesiastical profession, and obtained some preferment. He died at Florence in 1565. His history, which extends from 1527 to 1538, was not published until 1721, at Cologne, and reprinted at Leydeu 1723; but both these places are wrong, as both editions were published in Italy. There is a recent edition, Milan, 1803, 5 vols. 8vo. The style, like that of all his works, is pure and elegant, though a little too much elaborated. The facts, of course, are strongly tinctured with an attachment to the house of Medici.

, a very useful biographer and bibliographer, was born at Montbrison en Forez, Nov. 11, 1544. He appears to have served the king both in a military and civil capacity, and was historiographer and gentleman in ordinary to his majesty. He died at Duerne, Sept. 25, 1600. In his youth he had cultivated poetry, but of his poetical efforts he published only some indifferent specimens in his great work. He had, according to Scaliger, a fine library of Italian, French, Spanish, Greek, and Latin authors, and was conversant in books of all kinds. The fruits of his labours were, 1. “La Prosopographie, ou Description des personnes insignes, &c. avec les effigies d‘aucuns d’iceux, et braves observations de leur temps, annees, fails, et dits,” Lyons, 1373, 4to. This he reprinted three times with improvements; and the last, left also by him for the press, was published by his son Claude, who made some, few additions at Paris in 1603, 3 vols. folio. This is a very miscellaneous compilation, in which, although there are a few particulars of the eminent men of his time, it requires some patience to find them. 2. “Les Diverses lemons d'Antoine Duverclier, suivant celJes de P. Messi-e,” Lyons, 1576, 8vo. Of this there have been several editions, the most complete of which is that ofTournon, 1605. These legons were part of Duverdier’s extracts, in the course of his reading, from various Greek, Latin, and Italian authors, 3. “Le Compseutique, ou Traits facetieux,” 12mo; but there are some doubts whether this, which did not appear until 1584-, was not the compilation of another author. 4. “La Bibliotheque d'Ant. Duverdier, contenant le catalogue de tons les auteurs qui ont ecrit ou traduit en Frangais, avec le supplement Latin, du meme Duverdier, a la biblioiheque de Gesner,” Lyons, 1585, folio. Croix Du Maine’s work of the same kind had appeared the year before, and was thought to be the best executed of the two; but they have both been republished with so many improvements, that, like Moreri’s, they retain very little of the original authors. This improved edition was the production of Rigoley and Juvigny, who added the notes of Lamonnoye, the president Bouhier and Falconet, and published the whole in six handsome volumes, 4to, under the title of Les Bibliotheques Franchises de Lacroix du Maine et de Duverdier,“1772. The work is undoubtedly still capable of improvement, but, as it is, it forms a very valuable addition to the bibliographical library. There is a copy in the king’s library at Paris, with a vast mass of ms additions and corrections by Mercier de Saint-Leger. Le Long and some others attribute to Du. Verdier” La Biographic et Prosopographie des rois de France jusqu'a Henri III.“Paris, 1583, and 1586, 8vo. But others have doubted this, because he makes no mention of it in a list of his works which he wrote in 1585, and in which he gave not only what he had published, but what remained in manuscript, such as a translation of Seneca, &c. His son, Claude Verdier, was born about 1566, and had the ambition to become an author, but turned out to be a bad poet and a worse critic; he also spent the property his father left him, and lived an obscure and miserable life till about 1649, which is said to have been its period. The worst feature of his character is the disrespectful manner in which he has treated his father’s talents and labours, in a work which he published in 1586, and 1609, 4to, entitled” In autores pene omnes anttquos potissimum censiones et correctiones." It is a sufficient character of this work, that he blames Virgil for his bad Latin.

, one of the most prolific authors in the French series, deserves some notice as having been often mistaken for Claude Du Verdier, and even for Antony, who was dead long before this Gilbert was born. It is not known to what part of France he belonged. It appears that he was historiographer of France, and that after all his numerous publications, he was obliged in 1676 to apply for an asylum, for himself and his wife, in the hospital of Salpetriere, where he died in 1636. Bayle has a very superficial article on him. Joly allows him to have been the author of the historical works attributed to him, but doubts whether the romances under the name of Duverdier are not by another hand, and his reason is, that it is difficult to conceive a man’s continuing to write and publish for the long space of sixty years. This, however, is not absolutely decisive. Thirteen historical works are ascribed to Duverdier, all published in 12mo, in one, two, or more volumes each, consisting of histories of France, Turkey, Spain, England, Rome, and some lives. His romances amount to fourteen, but seem to be quite forgotten in his own country, and will not easily be revived in this by any list we can give. Some of them seem to be translations.

, a very pleasing French historian, whose principal works have been translated into English, was born at the castle of Bennetot, in Normandy, Nov. 25, 1655, of a good family. Such was his application to study, that in his seventeenth year he maintained his last philosophical theses. Much against his father’s will he entered among the Capuchins, and took the name of brother Zachary, but the austerities of this order proving hurtful to his health, he was induced to exchange it for one of milder rules. Accordingly, in 1677, he entered among the Premonstratenses, where he became successively secretary to the general of the order, curate, and at length prior of the monastery. But with this he does not appear to have been satisfied, and after some other changes of situation, became a secular ecclesiastic. In 1701 he came to Paris in that character, and was in 1705 made an associate of the academy of belles lettres. His talents soon procured him great patronage. He was appointed secretary of commands to the duchess of Orleans Bade-Baden, and secretary of languages to the duke of Orleans. In 1715 the grand-master of Malta appointed him historiographer to that order, with all its privileges, and the honour of wearing the cross. He was afterwards appointed to the commandery of Santery, and would, but for some particular reasons, not specified, have been intrusted with the education of Louis XV. His last years were passed in much bodily infirmity, from which he was released June 15, 1735. His literary career has in it somewhat remarkable. He was bordering on his forty- fifth year when he wrote his first history, and had passed his seventieth when he bad finished the last, that of Malta. He lived nine years afterwards, but under extreme languor of body and mind. During this, when, from the force of habit, he talked of new projects, of the revolutions of Carthage, and the history of Poland, and his friends would represent to him that he was now incapable both of reading or writing, his answer was, that he had read enough to compose by memory, and written enough to dictate with fluency. The French regard him as their Quintus Curtius. His st)le is pleading, lively, and elegant, and hjs reflections always just, and often profound. But he yielded too much to imagination, wrote much from memory, which was not always sufficiently retentive, and is often wrong in facts, from declining the labour of research, and despising the fastidiousness of accuracy. His works, which it is unnecessary to characterise separately, as they have been so long before both the French and English public, are, 1. “Histoire des Revolutions de Portugal,” Paris, i6?9, 12mo. 2. “Histoire des Revolutions de Suede,” 1696, 2 vols. 12mo. 3. “Histoire des Revolutions Romanies,” 3 vols. 12mo. 4. “histoire de Malte,” 1727, 4 vols 4to, and 7 vols. 12mo. 5. “Traité de la mouvance de Bretagne.” 6. “Hisjtoire critique de l'etablissment des Bretons dans les Gaules,” 2 vols 12mo, a posthumous work, 1713. H wrote also some dissertations in the Memoirs of the Academy of Belles Lettres, and corresponded much with the literati of his time on subjects of history, particularly with earl Stanhope, on the senate of ancient Rome. His and lord Stanhope’s Inquiry on this subject were published by Hooke, the Roman historian, in 1757, or 1758.

With lord Orford, lord Coleraine, and Mr. Stephens the historiographer, he made several tours to various parts of England. For the former he engraved portraits of Matthew Prior, sir Hugh Middleton, and other distinguished men: for the duke of Montague he engraved sir Ralph Windwood; for sir Paul Methuen, the portraits of Cortez, and archbishop Warham from Holbein’s original at Lambeth; and for lord Burlington, Zncchero’s queen Mary of Scotland, a plate which evinces more felicity, and a better taste of execution, than most other of his works. In 1727 he travelled with lord Oxford to Burleigh, Lincoln, Weibeck, Chatsworth, and York, at which latter place he obtained from Francis Place many of those anecdotes of Hollar which are inserted in his biography. In the next year, the duke of Dorset invited him to Knowle. From the gallery there, he copied the portraits of several of the poets, but he was disappointed on an excursion to Penshurst, at not finding there any portrait of sir Philip Sidney.

, king’s physician, and historiographer of France, was born in 1530, of a good family, at Troyes, in Champagne. He became very celebrated by his practice, and died at Paris, 1596, aged sixty-six, after having abjured protestantism, in which he was brought up. His principal works are, 1. “Les Fastes des anciens Hébreux, Grecs, et Remains,” 4to. 2. “Bibliotheque Historiale,” 4 Vols. fol. 3. A collection of “Church History,” fol. but little valued. 4. An excellent treatise “On the state and origin of the ancient French,” fol. and 4to. 5. “Sommaire de l'Histoire des François,” fol. 6. “Traité de l'ancien etat de la petite Bretagne,” 4to, and other works on French history, which are said to be useful for consultation. His son, Nicholas Vignier, was minister at Blois at the beginning of the seventeenth century, but adopted the sentiments of the Catholic church after the year 1631, and left several controversial works.

, the greatest literary character which France produced in the last century, was born at Paris, February 20, 1694. His father, Francis Arouet, was “ancien notaire du Chatelet,” and treasurer of the chamber of accounts; his mother, MaryMargaret Daumart. At the birth of this extraordinary man, who lived to the age of eighty-five years and some months, there was little probability of his being ‘reared, and for a considerable time he continued remarkably feeble. In his earliest years he displayed a ready wit and a sprightly imagination: and, as he said of himself, made verses before he was out of his cradle. He was educated under Father Por6, in the college of Louis the Great; and such was his proficiency, that many of his essays are now existing, which, though written when he was between twelve and fourteen, shew no marks of infancy. The famous Ninon de l’Enclos, to whom this ingenious boy was introduced, left him a legacy of 2000 livres to buy him a library. Having been sent to the equity-schools on his quitting college, he was so disgusted with the dryness of the law, that he devoted himself entirely to the Muses. He was admitted into the company of the abb< Chaulieu, the marquis de la Fare, the duke de Sully, the grand prior of Vendo;ne, marshal Villars, and the chevalier du Bouillon; and caught from them that easy taste and delicate humour which distinguished the court of Louis XIV. Voltaire had early imbibed a turn for satire; and, for some philippics against the government, was imprisoned almost a year in the Bastile. He had before this period produced the tragedy of “Oedipus,” which was represented in 1718 with great success; and the duke of Orleans, happening to see it performed, was so delighted, that he obtained his release from prison. The poet waiting on the duke to return thanks: “Be wise,” said the duke, “and I will take care of you.” “I am infinitely obliged,” replied the young man; “but I intreat your royal highness not to trouble yourself any farther about my lodging or board.” His father, whose ardent wish it was that the son should have been an advocate, was present at one of the representations of the new tragedy: he was affected, even to tears, embraced his son amidst the felicitations of the ladies of the court, and never more, from that time, expressed a wish that he should become a lawyer. About 1720, he went to Brussels with Madam de Rupelmonde. The celebrated Rousseau being then in that city, the two poets met, and soon conceived an unconquerable aversion for each other. Voltaire said one day to Rousseau, who was shewing him “An Ode to Posterity,” “This is a letter which will never reach the place of its address.” Another time, Voltaire, having read a satire which Rousseau thought very indifferent, was advised to suppress it, lest it should be imagined that he “had lost his abilities, and preserved only his virulence.” Such mutual reproaches soon inflamed two hearts already sufficiently estranged. Voltaire, on his return to Paris, produced, in 1722, his tragedy of “Mariamne,” without success. His “Artemira” had experienced the same fate in 1720, though it had charmed the discerning by the excellence of the poetry. These mortifications, joined to those which were occasioned by his principles of imprudence, his sentiments on religion, and the warmth of his temper, induced him to visit England, where he printed his “Henriade.” King George I. and particularly the princess of Wales (afterwards queen Caroline) distinguished him by their protection, and obtained for him a great number of subscriptions. This laid the foundation of a fortune, which was afterwards considerably increased by the sale of his writings, by the munificence of princes, by commerce, by a habit of regularity, and by an ceconomy bordering on avarice, which he did not shake off till near the end of his life. On his return to France, in 1728, he placed the money he carried with him from England into a lottery established by M. Desforts, comptroller-general of the finances; he engaged deeply, and was successful. The speculations of finance, however, did not check his attachment to the belles lettres, his darling passion. In 1730, he published “Brutus,” the most nervous of all his tragedies, which was more applauded by the judges of good writing than by the spectators. The first wits of the time, Fontenelle, La Motte, and others, advised him to give up the drama, as not being his proper forte. He answered them by publishing “Zara,” the most affecting, perhaps, of all his tragedies. His “Lettres Philosophiques,” abounding in bold expressions and indecent witticisms against religion, having been burnt by a decree of the parliament of Paris, and a warrant being issued for apprehending the author in 1733, Voltaire very prudently withdrew; and was sheltered by the marchioness du Chatelet, in her castle of Cirey, on the borders of Champagne and Lorraine, who entered with him on the study of the “System” of Leibnitz, and the “Principia” of Newton. A gallery was built, in which Voltaire formed a good collection of natural history, and made a great many experiments on light and electricity. He laboured in the mean time on his “Elements of the Newtonian Philosophy,” then totally unknown in France, and which the numerous admirers of Des Cartes were very little desirous should be known. In the midst of these philosophic pursuits, he produced the tragedy of “Alzira.” He was now in the meridian of his age and genius, as was evident from the tragedy of “Mahomet,” first acted in, 174-1 but it was represented to the “procureur general” as a performance offensive to religion and the author, by order of cardinal Fleury, withdrew it from the stage. “Merope,” played two years after, 1743, gave an idea of a species of tragedy, of which few models have existed. It was at the representation of this tragedy that the pit and boxes were clamorous for a sight of the author; yet it was severely criticised when it came from the press. He now became a favourite at court, through the interest of madam d'Etoile, afterwards marchioness of Pompadour. Being employed in preparing the festivities that were celebrated on the marriage of the dauphin, he attained additional honours by composing “The Princess of Navarre.” He was appointed a gentleman of the bed-chamber in ordinary, and historiographer of France. The latter office had, till his time, been almost a sinecure; but Voltaire, who had written, under the direction of the count d'Argenson, the “History of the War of 1741,” was employed by that minister in many important negociations from 1745 to 1747; the project of invading England in 1746 was attributed to him and he drew up the king ofFrance’s manifesto in favour of the pretender. He had frequently attempted to gain admittance into the academy of sciences, but could not obtain his wish till 1746 , when he was the first who broke through the absurd custom of filling an inaugural speech with the fulsome adulation of Richelieu; an example soon followed by other academicians. From, the satires occasioned by this innovation he felt so much uneasiness, that he was glad to retire with the marchioness du Chateletto Luneville, in the neighbourhood of king Stanislaus. The marchioness dying in 1749, Voltaire returned to Paris, where his stay was but short* Though he had many admirers, he was perpetually complaining of a cabal combined to filch from him that glory of which he was insatiable. “The jealousy and manoeuvres of a court,” he would say, “are the subject of conversation; there is more of them among the literati.” His friends and relations endeavoured in vain to relieve his anxiety, by lavishing commendations on him, and by exaggerating his success. He imagined he should find in a foreign country a greater degree of applause, tranquillity, and reward, and augment at the same time both his fortune and reputation, which were already very considerable. The king of Prussia, who had repeatedly invited him to his court, and who would have given any thing to have got him away from Silesia, attached him at last to his person by a pension of 22,000 livres, and the hope of farther favour . From the particular respect that was paid to him, his time was now spent in the most agreeable manner; his apartments were under those of the king, whom he was allowed to visit at stated hours, to read with him the best works of either ancient or modern authors, and to assist his majesty in the literary productions by which he relieved the cares of government. But this happiness was soon at an end; and Voltaire saw, to his mortification, when it was too late, that, where a man is sufficiently rich to be master of himself, neither his liberty, his family, nor his country, should be sacrificed for a pension. A dispute which our poet had with Manpertuis, the president of the academy at Berlin, was followed by disgrace . It has been said that the king of Prussia dismissed him with this reproof: “I do not drive you away, because I called you hither; I do not take away your pension, because I have given it to you; I only forbid you my presence.” Not a word of this is true; the fact is, that he sent to the king the key of his office as chamberlain, and the cross of the order of merit, with these verses:

, a Dutch historian, and historiographer to the city of Amsterdam, was born there in 1709, and died in 1773. His principal work is a “History of Holland,” from the earliest times to 1751, in 21 vols. 8vo, the first two of which appeared in 1749. There was a second edition published at Amsterdam in 1752—1759, with many engravings, maps, and portraits by Houbraken. It appears to have been the merit of this work which occasioned his being honoured with the title of historiographer to the city of Amsterdam in 1758. In it he is said to display profound research, sound political principles, and elegance and precision of style; and the Dutch esteem it one of the greatest ornaments to their literature. Wagenaar wrote many other works: 1. “The present state of the United Provinces,” Amst. 1739, 12 vols. 8vo. 2. “Description of the city of Amsterdam,” ibid. 1760, 3 vols. fol. 3. “The character of John de Witt placed in its true light.” He published also some tracts on topics of divinity.

, one of the best English historians of the fifteenth century, was a native of Norfolk, a Benedictine of St. Albans, and historiographer royal, about 1440, in the reign of Henry VI. He compiled two historical works of considerable length, the one “A History of England,” beginning at the 57th Henry III. the year 1273, and concluding with the funeral oF Henry V. and the appointment of Humphrey duke of Gloucester to the regency of England. His other work is entitled “Ypodigma Neustrise,” a sort of history of Normandy, an* ciently called Neustria, interspersed with the affairs of England from the beginning of the tenth century to 1418. In the dedication of this work, which, with the other, was published by archbishop Parker in 1574, Fol. he tells Henry V. that when he reflected on the cunning intrigues, frauds, and breaches of treaties in his enemies the French, he was tormented with fears that they would deceive him: and had composed that work, which contained many examples of their perfidy, to put him upon his guard. Walsingham himself allows that his style is rude and unpolished, and he relates many ridiculous stories of visions, miracles, and portents, but all this was the credulity of the age. In what belongs to himself he is more to be praised: his narrative is far more full, circumstantial, and satisfactory, than that of the other annalists of those times, and contains many things no where else to be found.

In 1768, he repaired to Rome, and was soon appointed librarian to the college of Jesus, and historiographer of the society for the literary department. Here a new field was open to his exertions. He became the champion of the holy see against the prevailing philosophy of the age, and against the encroachment of the secular powers on the church, for which he was rewarded with a pension by the then reigning and unfortunate pontiff Clement Alii. He did not long enjoy either this gift of fortune or his own tranquillity, as in 1773, by the dissolution of his order, after repeated risks of being confined in the castle of St. Angelo, he received a perpetual injunction not to go out of the gates of Rome without a licence from the magistrates. Pope Ganganelli esteemed and lamented him, though he could not restrain these violent measures. He had better days under the new pontificate, when Pius VI. not only restored liberty to Mr. Zaccaria, but increased the pension which had been formerly granted to him. He also appointed him governor to the newly established academy of noble clergymen, with a liberal salary; and as he had been, before that period, professor of ecclesiastical history in the Roman university, better known by the name of Sapienza, the pope gave him for the remainder of his life the dignity of ex-professor in that school, with the enjoyment of the same salaries as if he had retained the official post. In this situation he remained till his death, which took place October 10, 1795, in the eighty-second year of his age.

In 1731 he returned to Venice, and his place at court was entirely supplied by Metastasio, but the salaries of poet and historiographer were still continued to him. Zeno corresponded with the learned of Italy, and other countries; was an able antiquary, and had made an excellent collection of literary anecdotes. His candour, sincerity, affability, and other amiable qualities, rendered him universally esteemed, and highly agreeable in society. He died at Venice, November 11, 1750, in the eighty-second year of his age, and was buried at the convent of the Dominicans of the strict observance, to whom he had left his library. He is universally allowed to have possessed great talents for dramatic poetry, and is the first Italian poet who gave his countrymen good rules for tragedy, and taught them to consider music only as an embellishment. He discovers genius, spirit, and feeling; but his style, as has been remarked, is far inferior to that of Metastasio. Zeno also left a great number of works on Antiquities, &c. “Dissertationi Vossiani,” 3 vols. 8vo “Letters,” Venice, 1752, 2 vols. 4to.