ought to be restored thus: "Unde nunc auctorare se quotannis solent qui se de eo monte jaciunt in pelagus;" and this may signify that there were some who ventured for a sum of money to take this leap, as others articled at such a price to kill one another on the amphitheatre. The curious will do well to search to the bottom of this particular. It is certain they engaged themselves by a vow to take this leap, as appears by the answer of a Lacedemonian who was insulted for drawing back at the sight of the precipice. "I knew not," said he, "that my vow would stand in need of another vow still greater." Menander's verses cited by Strabo, shew that Sappho made a vow to Apollo before she threw herself down, that is, probably she consecrated this action to the god. I forgot to say that there were two verses of Anacreon concerning the Lovers' Leap. Scaliger mentions them, but I think that they who say Hephestion has preserved them are mistaken.

Arts. SAPPHO and LEUCAS.

SATIRE.

(On Catholicism.)

M. VINCENT has found, in Peter Pacteau's journal, a large account of the magnificent reception the Rochellers gave the king and queen of Navarre (Jane D'Albret) in 1558. He has there also met with the following passage. "Whilst the king and queen of Navarre staid at Rochelle, there came a company of comedians. One day that they had a notable comedy to represent, as they had publicly given out, the king and queen came with their court; and there was also an extraordinary concourse of people; they represented a woman dying, who fetched deep sighs and groans, and demanded immediately to be confessed. The curate of the parish was sent for; he came with all his equipage, and did all he could; but the sick

woman continued still in great uneasiness, saying she was not well confessed. Other ecclesiastics came after the curate, and had no better success than he. After them came the monks of the several orders in their turn, and spared neither for relics nor indulgences executed in due form, whereof they had sacks full, and which they read one by one to the sick, who for her last remedy, was clothed in St. Francis's habit. All this operated nothing towards giving her conscience any repose; she said, lamenting herself, that none of them all understood the business of confession. Hereupon one of her acquaintance came upon the stage, and looking about on all sides, as having a secret to tell which he would not have any body to hear, he acquainted the sick person that he knew one who would confess her as he ought, and restore her to her health; but that appearing in public being prejudicial to him, he only came out by night: the sick woman prayed and pressed he should be sent for. After having waited some time, this person came in an ordinary habit, and approaching her bed side, he spoke to her without letting those present hear what he said; they only observed, by the woman's gestures, that she appeared to be very well satisfied. At last, he drew a little book out of his pocket, which he gave to her, saying aloud, "that this book contained infallible receipts against her distemper, and that if she would use it, she should in a few days find her health perfectly restored." When the man was gone, the woman arose sound and entirely cured; and having taken two or three turns upon the stage, she told the spectators that this unknown person had done what was impossible for all the rest; and that it must be confessed his book contained admirable receipts, as might be seen from the speedy effect she had found from it; that if any of them were seized with the same distemper, she would advise them to have recourse to this book, which she would gladly lend them; but

admonishing them withal, that in touching it, they would find it somewhat hot, and that there proceeded an ill scent from it, savouring of the faggot; that, for the rest, if the assistants desired to know her name who spoke, and the name of the book, those were riddles which she left to their own solution.

The king and queen of Navarre showed that they were pleased with this comedy, and so did all the court; and after their example, a great number of spectators, many of whom were already disgusted with the Romish religion. They did not find it difficult to discover that this sick person was Truth; that the first who had not well confessed her, were such as took the title of doctors and pastors; and who, instead of confessing the truth of God, held it in unrighteousness; that this last comer was one of the pretended heretics, who, by the severity of the times, were obliged to hide themselves; and who alone, when they were called, duly confessed the truth, which they had understood; lastly, that the hot book, which smelt of the faggot, was the New Testament, which they were forbidden to have and read in the vulgar tongue, upon peril of being burnt; but which as well pleased some as it much displeased others. The ecclesiastics especially were offended, and went to make their complaints to the king of Navarre himself, and afterwards to the magistrates of the town, who already talked of drawing up an information: so that the comedians thought it their best way to depart, as silently and suddenly as possible; and they would not have come off so, had it not appeared that they belonged to this prince and to his queen.

Art. NAVARRE.

SAVONAROLA.

JEROM SAVONAROLA was born at Ferrara on the twenty-first of September, 1452, and without the

knowledge of his parents, took the habit of a Dominican friar at Bologna, in the year 1474. His superiors employed him to teach physics and metaphysics; but after having followed that business for several years, he took a disgust at these vain subtleties, and applied himself wholly to the reading of pious books, particularly of the holy Scripture. He was employed to preach and confess, and did both with great assiduity, till such time as he quitted the latter that he might have the more leisure for the former. He was sent for, in the year 1492, to prepare Lorenzo de Medicis for death. It is certain, that he distinguished himself in an extraordinary manner by the austerity of his life, and by the fervent eloquence with which he preached against immorality, without sparing the disorders of the clergy, nor even the court of Rome; that he pretended to partake in divine revelations; that by all these means he acquired a great authority in Florence and the veneration of the whole city; that he lost his credit, was excommunicated, degraded from his ecclesiastical orders, hanged, and burnt, in the year 1498. These are things which are not contested; but people are divided in their sentiments as to the point whether he were an honest man or a hypocrite. Some authors maintain that his conduct was the effect of a great zeal for truth, and for the reformation of the church: others pretend that he was an impostor who, to gratify his lust of power, borrowed the mask of virtue, and set up for a prophet. It is hard to find out the truth exactly in this conflict of opinions: for if, on the one hand, it be certain that the most impious hypocrites find apologists; it is no less certain, on the other, that the most honest zealots find accusers; and it is equally certain that on both sides, whether in defending or accusing, people generally give full scope to party interest, artifice, and disingenuousness. Methinks therefore, that I ought to content myself with making some collec

tions concerning what has been said for, or against this Dominican.

Philip de Comines, who had seen Savonarola, praises him much, and ascribes to him the glory of having foretold certain things that came to pass. It is likewise upon his testimony that the greatest stress is laid by persons who strive to justify the revelations of Savonarola; but as he mentions a prophecy which proved false, I mean that which affirmed that Charles VIII would come a second time into Italy, he serves as a witness to those who would censure the said prophet. This will appear from a passage that I quoted out of Gabriel Naudé, one of the authors who blame the conduct of our monk. He does not do it with so much harshness as Volaterranus, who has roundly affirmed that Savonarola was an arrant cheat, and that rising up in rebellion against the church, he endeavoured to found a new sect. What he adds, that Savonarola, when he went to church in order to preach, got armed men to accompany him, is no small proof of a factious spirit. It cannot be denied that he concerned himself too much with political affairs, which is always blamable in persons who have dedicated themselves to the ministry of the word of God; but they are chiefly to be condemned when they meddle with the government, in a state which is divided into factions. Now this was precisely Savonarola's case. There were two factions in the republic of Florence; the one endeavoured to support the house of Medicis, or at least the aristocracy; the other wanted to extirpate that house, and to set up a popular government. In these divisions he made himself the head of a party, and the soul or primum mobile of the democratical faction so that he may be well compared to the tribunes of the people, who favoured Marius against Sylla, in the Roman republic, or rather to the Athenian Demagogues, who so frequently became the directors of the state. Can a friar, a minister of the