be no other way opposed. In 1706, he published A Letter to Mr. Dodwell, on the Immortality of the Soul, and, during the same year, gave an elegant Latin version of sir Isaac Newton's Optics, for which that great man presented him with £500. His friend, bishop Moore, now introduced him to queen Anne, who appointed him her chaplain, and presented him with the rectory of St. James's, Westminster, the highest preferment he ever obtained. On this occasion, he took his degree as D. D. In 1712, he appeared as a philologist, by editing a fine edition of Cæsar's Commentaries, which he dedicated to the great duke of Marlborough, and, in the same year, published a work which involved him in endless controversy, entitled The Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity. In this production, that mysterious tenet is, on critical principles, examined as deducible from the words of Scripture; and the result of the author's reasonings was so different from the opinion of the church of England, that it became a subject of complaint in the lower house of convocation. Several controversial pieces were written on this occasion, the chief champion of orthodoxy being doctor Waterland. In 1715 and 1716, a disputation was carried on between doctor Clarke and the celebrated Leibnitz, concerning the principles of natural philosophy and religion, the papers of which were collected and addressed to the princess of Wales, afterwards queen Caroline. In 1717, he published Remarks upon Collins's Enquixy concerning Human Liberty, and, soon after, gave much offence by altering the doxology of the singing psalms at St. James's; on which occasion the bishop of London sent a circular to the clergy forbidding the use of them. In 1724, he published a volume consisting of 17 sermons, and, on the death of sir Isaac Newton, in 1727, was offered the place of master of the mint. This office he declined accepting, as inconsistent with his profession, preferment in which had, however, now become hopeless. In 1728, he wrote a letter to Mr. Hoadley, On the Proportion of Velocity and Force in Bodies in Motion, and, the next year, published the first 12 books of Homer's Iliad, with a Latin version, the remaining books of which were published by his son in 1732. Doctor Clarke's reputation as a classical scholar is chiefly founded on this performance, which is held in high esteem. He had all his life enjoyed sound health; but, on. Sunday, May 11, 1729, when going to preach before the

judges at Serjeants' Inn, he was seized with a pleuritic complaint, which carried him off, after a few days' illness, in his 54th year. He left in manuscript, prepared for the press, An Exposition of the Catechism, which was published by his brother, with 10 posthumous volumes of sermons. The private character of doctor Clarke was extremely amiable, being upright, mild and unaffected. His intellectual eminence was founded on a strong cultivation of the reasoning faculty, without passion or enthusiasm. He closely pursued his object, with methodical accuracy and logical acuteness, aided by a strongly retentive memory and indefatigable attention.

CLARKE, George Rogers, colonel in the service of Virginia against the Indians in the revolutionary war, distinguished himself greatly in that post, and, for some time, was the protector of the people of the frontiers of Virginia and Pennsylvania from the inroads of the savages. In 1778, he was appointed to command a regiment of infantry, and one troop of cavalry, raised for the defence of the country of Illinois, in which was comprehended the country claimed by Virginia that had been conquered by colonel Clarke. The families which came with him to the falls of the Ohio were the first settlers at that place. At first, their situation was very dangerous, in consequence of the proximity of several tribes of Indians, and some British posts; but, by the exertions of Clarke, it was soon rendered secure, and, in 1779, they were enabled to remove into Kentucky, where emigrants quickly flocked in great numbers. In the same year, colonel Clarke descended the Ohio, and built fort Jefferson, on the eastern bank of the Mississippi, and, in 1781, received a general's commission.-The following anecdote is related of Clarke, in a work published not very long since, called Notes of an Old Officer:-"The Indians came in to the treaty at fort Washington in the most friendly manner, except the Shawahanees, the most conceited and warlike of the aborigines, the first in at a battle, the last at a treaty. 300 of their finest warriors set off in all their paint and feathers, and filed into the council-house. Their number and demeanor, so unusual at an occasion of this sort, was altogether unexpected and suspicious. The United States' stockade mustered 70 men. In the centre of the hall, at a little table, sat the commissary-general Clarke, the indefatigable scourge of these very marauders, general Richard Butler and Mr. Parsons.

There was also present a captain Denny, who, I believe, is still alive, and can attest this story. On the part of the Indians, an old council-sachem and a war-chief took the lead. The latter, a tall, raw-boned fellow, with an impudent and villanous look, made a boisterous and threatening speech, which operated effectually on the passions of the Indians, who set up a prodigious whoop at every pause. He concluded by presenting a black and white wampum, to signify they were prepared for either event, peace or war. Clarke exhibited the same unaltered and careless countenance he had shown during the whole scene, his head leaning on his left hand, and his elbow resting on the table. He raised his little cane, and pushed the sacred wampum off the table, with very little ceremony. Every Indian, at the same time, started from his seat with one of those sudden, simultaneous, and peculiarly savage sounds, which startle and disconcert the stoutest heart, and can neither be described nor forgotten. At this juncture, Clarke rose. The scrutinizing eye cowered at his glance. He stamped his foot on the prostrate and insulted symbol, and ordered them to leave the hall. They did so, apparently involuntarily. They were heard all that night, debating in the bushes near the fort. The raw-boned chief was for war, the old sachem for peace. The latter prevailed, and the next morning they came back and sued for peace."-General Clarke died on the 13th of February, 1817, in the 66th year of his age, at his seat near Louisville, Kentucky.

CLASSIC (from the Latin classis). The Roman people were divided into six classes, and classici was the name given to the citizens belonging to the first class. From this circumstance, the Greek and Roman authors have been, in modern times, called classics, that is, the excellent, the models. There is, of course, a great diversity of value among them; but their superiority to the writers of modern Europe, at the time of the revival of letters, was so great, that it was very natural for their admirers to give them, collectively, the name of classics. The Germans soon gave the word klassisch (classical) a wider sense, applying it more philosophically, and making it embrace, 1. the standard works of any nation, and, 2. ancient literature and art, in contradistinction to the modern or romantic. The English and French have followed this example, though but recently. The Dictionnaire de l'Académie gives no other definition to the word

classique than Auteur classique, c'est-à-dire un auteur ancien, approuvé, et qui fait autorité dans une certaine matière: Platon. Homère, Démosthène, Cicéron, Virgile, Tite-Live, &c. sont des auteurs classiques.

As regards classical, by which we mean, in this place, ancient, literature, we observe a striking difference between it and modern literature. The Greek authors were the pupils of nature and an active, energetic life. These furnished their discipline rather than the pedantic forms of schools, which are impressed with painful labor upon the memory, and only half understood. They had, besides, a very keen sensibility for beauty, which was fully developed by the loveliness of surrounding nature, and by their active life, in which all their faculties were unfolded. They spent their lives in constant contests for liberty, and for superiority in physical or mental accomplishments. Every thing was public; every thing stimulated emulation. Nature and Liberty are the genii which presided over the labors of the Greeks; and their works are classical, that is, models, as far as they are the natural fruit of the circumstances in which they were placed. The successes of the Greeks over the slaves of Asia, and the overthrow of their own tyrants, first produced poets among them; and these continued, in an uninterrupted series, exerting a decisive influence upon rhetoric, history and the plastic arts, and receiving, in their turn, a corresponding influence, until degeneracy, over-refinement and political subjugation took the place of nature and liberty. The Macedonian and Roman dominion fixed the limits of Greek classical literature. From that time, Greece produced only learned inquirers and rich treasures of knowledge, but no works distinguished as models, such as had been composed in the time of her freedom, under the joint influence of her political constitution, religion, beautiful climate, and language, which contained the elements of the highest perfection in a far greater degree than most other languages.-The Romans, from their political constitution and national character, have become models only in history and rhetoric, and works on war, architecture and law. The most active element in their national character was always the military and legal spirit. But their language acquired, from the habits of the nation, such conciseness and precision, that they remain models in history, and, in fact, in every branch of composition, as far as concise expression is concerned, so difficult

and so valuable an attainment. The rapid growth of their power outstripped the developement of their literature, which attained its meridian soon after the overthrow of liberty and the establishment of despotism. Hence it speedily degenerated, and the time soon arrived when Roman literature consisted, in a great measure, of descriptions of the universal corruption and misery of the people, characterized either by a morose bitterness or by the complacency of deep-seated immorality. The style of the ancient writers is very characteristic, and forms a striking distinction between them and the moderns. Their language is generally simple, natural, pure, and therefore expressive; whilst the modern writers, by reason of their greater erudition, and the refinements of our social life, are constantly tempted to sacrifice energy and conciseness to brilliancy and richness of illustration; so much so, that Rousseau was led into the paradox of declaring himself an enemy to all wit. Besides the style of the ancient writers, so many circumstances contributed to the excellence of their productions; the union of knowledge and ignorance, of rudeness and refinement, was fitted to exercise so beneficial an influence upon them, that the best works of the Greeks and Romans have secured to themselves a permanent place among the means of intellectual cultivation, throughout Europe and the nations of European descent. It has often been said, that the knowledge of the languages and literature of Greece and Rome can be of little value to us, as their condition and character, their principles, political and religious, were so different from ours. But, without mentioning the advantages to be derived from a knowledge of these languages by men devoted to certain particular pursuits, we do not hesitate to affirm, that the highest degree of intellectual accomplishment is not possible without classical attainments. We ought to be thankful that we are permitted to avail ourselves of the literary treasures of these glorious nations, without being obliged to participate in the sufferings and struggles which contributed so essentially to their richness and beauty. The very study of their languages has a most salutary influence on the intellectual developement of the students of modern times, whose native languages are of a much less philosophical construction. If it were necessary to bring forward examples, it would be easy to show, not only that most of the men of modern times, distinguished in

the various branches of moral and political science, have had a classical education, but also that this education has exerted a most important influence on their minds. The beneficial effect of classical literature on the character of nations might also be easily shown. Undoubtedly a wrongly directed classical education has, in some instances, produced injurious consequences. So, too, has misdirected religious instruction; but the one is no more an argument against classical literature than the other is against religion.— We shall not, in this place, enter upon a statement of the characteristic differences of ancient and modern literature, as the subject has not been sufficiently discussed by English writers to give that precision to the requisite phraseology which would be necessary to make a condensed view of the subject intelligible. We will only remark, that the religion of the Greeks to use the words of the celebrated Augustus William Schlegel-was the apotheosis of the powers of nature and of terrestrial life. Every thing, therefore, was positive, clear and finished in their religion and religious views. Such is also the predominating character of their literature. Modern literature, on the other hand, is marked with the character of the Christian religion, which directs the mind to the mysterious and the infinite. The Greek philosophy, moreover, sought for happiness in mental tranquillity and the well-balanced and harmonious action of the different faculties. The Christian encourages a struggle between the higher and lower powers of our nature. The influence of the Christian principle on modern writers is not, indeed, universal. Some productions of modern times are characterized by the Grecian element rather than the romantic, or, as it might properly be called, the Teutonico-Christian, for instance, some of the poems of Göthe. This cannot be said of Byron, notwithstanding the anti-Christian character of much which he has written. We will conclude our remarks respecting the difference between ancient and modern writers by another remark of Schlegel. He says that the genius of the ancient poets was of a plastic character; that their creations resembled those of the sculptor. Sculpture directs our attention exclusively to a particular object: it detaches the statue from all surrounding objects, or indicates them, if at all, very slightly. This is the character of the creations of the ancient dramatists, whilst the genius of the modern drama has much more resemblance to that which fills a picture with a

great variety of objects, operating, it is true, to produce a common effect, but having also much individuality of char

acter.

The same difference which exists between ancient and modern or classical and romantic literature, prevails, to a great degree, between ancient and modern art. We may remark in general, respecting classical art, by which we mean especially Greek art (the Romans having always remained, in a great measure, imitators of the Greeks), that its productions are complete in themselves, expressing, in their beautiful forms, all which the artist intended to convey, while the genius of modern art is characterized by aiming at something infinite, beyond the power of precise conception and perfect representation. For this reason, the Greeks devoted themselves to sculpture more than to painting, and even gave to their productions in the latter branch of art something of a plastic character, whilst the moderns have directed their attention much more to painting, and have given to sculpture a character different from that which it had among the ancients. The same difference of feeling is apparent in the architecture of the two periods, and the music of modern times owes its excellence to causes similar to those which have carried painting to such perfection.

As regards the classical writers of any country, meaning, by this term, the standard writers in the different departments of literature, it would be difficult to give a precise definition of what entitles an author to the epithet classical; yet we find the judgment of nations (allowance being made for the peculiar tastes of each) pretty uniform and pretty correct. Still, however, there are considerable diversities of opinion as to the writers who are to be ranked as classics, in nations among whom the overwhelming authority of some great learned body has not determined who are entitled to this designation. We might instance the Germans, and even the French, as far as respects the writers who have appeared since the publication of the Dictionnaire de l'Académie.-Much information is contained on the French classics in La Harpe's Cours de Littérature Française, and in that of Levizac (Paris, 1807, 4 vols.); also in Bouterwek's extensive Geschichte der Poesie und Beredtsamkeit. For the English classics, Johnson and Warton are to be consulted. Bouterwek's work, also, is full of valuable information on this subject. The Italian classics are to be learned from the works

of Tiraboschi, Ginguené, Sismondi and Bouterwek. An account of the best authors of Spanish literature is to be found in Velasquez and Nicolas Antonio, Bibliotheca Vetus et Nova, in Sismondi's Litérature du Midi de l'Europe, and in Bouterwek's work, of which the part relating to Spain has been lately translated into Spanish, under the following title: Historia de la Literatura Española, escrita en Aleman por F. Bouterwek, traducida al Castellano y adicionada por D. José Gomez de la Cortina y D. Nicolás Hugalde y Mollinedo (Madrid, 1829, 8vo. vol. i, pp. 276). Half of vol. i. consists of additions by the translators, which, however, do not add much to the value of the work. For Portuguese literature, Bouterwek, Sismondi, and, chiefly, don Barbosa Machado's Bibliotheca Lusitana (Lisbon, 1731, 4 vols. fol.), are to be recommended. The works of Ideler and Nolte, Handbücher, for French, Italian, Spanish and English literature, are highly valuable, containing judicious selections from the best prose writers and poets in these literatures, with short accounts of each author from whom extracts are made. These gentlemen are distinguished literati at Berlin, of whom the former is likewise known as one of the greatest chronologists of the age, and by his Arabian chrestomathy. For German literature, Ersch's Handbuch der Deutschen Literatur (new edition, 1822 et seq., 4 vols.) is to be consulted. For further information respecting the literature of different countries, see the articles on these countries respectively. Augustus William Schlegel's works must be considered as still unrivalled for profound and original criticism on the art and literature of the ancient and modern nations.

CLAUDE LORRAINE, so called, was one of the most distinguished landscape painters. His real name was Claude Gellée: he was called Lorraine from the province of this name, where he was born in the castle of Champagne, of poor parents, whom he lost early. His education was much neglected. When 12 years old, he went to live with his brother, an engraver in wood at Friburg. Afterwards, a relation of his took him to Rome, where he was employed by the landscape painter Agostino Tassi, as a color-grinder and a kitchen-boy. Here he received a little instruction in painting, having previously acquired some skill in drawing from his brother. The sight of some paintings of Godfrey Vals enchanted him so much, that, in spite of his poverty, he travelled to Naples to study with the artist. His

genius now unfolded itself with such rapidity, that he was soon considered one of the first landscape-painters of his time; particularly after he had studied, in Lombardy, the paintings of Giorgione and Titian, whereby his coloring and chiaro scuro were greatly improved. After making a journey into his native country, he settled, in 1627, in Rome, where his works were greatly sought for, so that he was enabled to live much at his ease, until 1682, when he died of the gout. The principal galleries of Italy, France, England, Spain and Germany are adorned with his productions. His best work, and the one on which he himself set the greatest value, is the painting of a small wood belonging to the villa Madama (in Rome). Clement XI offered to purchase it for as many pieces of gold as would cover its surface; but the artist would not part with it, since he used it as a study. Claude possessed the greatest power of invention, by which he gave an inexhaustible variety to his paintings, united with an ardent and persevering study of nature. The truth with which he portrays the effect of the sun in every part of the day, soft breezes playing through the tops of the trees, and all the delicate beauties of nature, is surprising; and no artist but Caspar Dughet comes near him in this particular. But all his rivals fell far short of equalling the dewy humidity which he threw over dark, shadowy places. His figures are poor, and he used to say "I sell my landscapes, and give my figures into the bargain." In a great part of his paintings, the figures are the work of Lauri and Francesco Allegrini. Claude most frequently chooses agreeable views without fixed limits, in which the eye loses itself. He often introduces grand architectural structures, and makes his landscapes the scenes of mythological and historical events. As other artists frequently gave his name to their own productions, he made drawings of all his paintings, and called the books in which they were contained Libri di verità. Such a collection, containing 200 drawings, belongs to the duke of Devonshire; another, of 130 drawings, to lord Holland.

CLAUDIANUS (Claudius), a Latin poet, a native of Alexandria, lived under the emperor Theodosius and his sons, and was an experienced warrior, as well as a writer of merit. His poems gained him such renown, that, at the desire of the senate, the emperors Arcadius and Honorius erected a statue to his honor in the forum of Trajan, with the inscription, that e

combined the genius of Virgil and of Homer. Besides several panegyrical poems on Honorius, Stilicho, and others, we possess two of his epic poems, the Rape of Proserpine, and an unfinished Gigantomachia, eclogues, epigrams and occasional poems. He exhibits a brilliant fancy, rich coloring, great variety and precision in his descriptions, but he is often deficient in taste and gracefulness of thought. The best editions of his works are those of Gessner, Leipsic, 1759, and of Burmann, Amsterdam, 1760, 4to.

CLAUDIUS (Tiberius) Drusus Cæsar, a Roman emperor, the youngest son of the elder Claudius Drusus Nero and Antonia the younger, the daughter of Augustus's sister, born at Lyons, grew up without any education, for the most part among slaves and women, and was an object of ridicule and scorn at court. He lived as an unimportant private man, and occupied himself with literature. Among other works, he wrote a Roman history, embracing the period from the death of Casar to his own time, in 43 volumes, and also his own life. After the murder of Caligula, the body-guard, who were ransacking the palace, discovered him secreted in a corner, dragged him out, and proclaimed him emperor (41 A. D.). The senate, who had determined on the restoration of the republic, were forced to confirm the appointment. Claudius, suddenly transferred from retirement and oppression to uncontrolled power, distinguished the beginning of his reign by some praiseworthy acts; he recalled the exiles, and restored their estates to them; embellished Rome, and erected several large buildings for the public good. He made Mauritania a Roman province; his armies fought successfully against the Germans, and kept possession of several strong places in Britain. But he soon sunk into debauchery and voluptuousness; and his wives, particularly the infamous Messalina (q. v.), together with his freedmen, administered the government, sold offices and places of honor, and committed the greatest atrocities unpunished. He died of poison administered by his second wife, Agrippina (mother of Nero), at the age of 63, A.D. 54. His deification was the cause of Seneca's pasquinade entitled Apokolokynthosis.

CLAUDIUS, Matthias (called Asmus, or the Wandsbeck Messenger), a German poet, whose prose and poetry bear a peculiar stamp of humor, frankness and cordiality, was born, in 1741, at Reinfeld, in Hol

, near Lübeck. In 1775, he made a