gns of Edward and Richard II. with Reflections and
Characters on their chief ministers and favourites. As also a comparison
between these princes Edward and Richard II. with Edward I. and Edward
III. London printed 1690.

A Letter to Mr. Samuel Johnson, occasioned by a scurrilous pamphlet,
entitled, Animadversions on Mr. Johnson's Answer to Jovian, in three
Letters to a country friend, Lond. 1692. At the end of this letter is
reprinted the preface before the history of the reigns of Edward and
Richard II. before mentioned.

The History of Religion, Lond. 1694.

The 4th book of Virgil translated into English, which contains the loves
of Dido and AEneas, 1660.

Likewise P. Papinius Statius, his Achilles, in five books; to each of
which he has subjoined Annotations.

* * * * *

RICHARD FLECKNOE

This poet lived in the reign of King Charles II. and is more remarkable
for having given name to a satire of Mr. Dryden's, than for all his own
works. He is said to have been originally a jesuit, and to have had
connexions in consequence thereof, with such persons of distinction in
London as were of the Roman Catholic persuasion, Langbaine says, his
acquaintance with the nobility was more than with the mules, and he had
a greater propensity to rhiming, than genius to poetry.

Tho' he wrote several plays, yet he never could obtain the favour to
have more than one of them acted.

His dramatic works are:

1. Damoiselles a-la-mode, a Comedy, printed 8vo, Lond. 1667, and
addressed to the duke and duchess of Newcastle. This comedy was designed
by the author to have been acted by his Majesty's servants, which they
thought proper however to refuse, we know not for what reason,--The poet
indeed has assigned one, whether true or false is immaterial; but it may
serve to shew his humour.

For the acting this comedy (says he) those who have the government of
the stage have their humours, and would be intreated; and I have mine,
and won't entreat them; and were all dramatic writers of my mind, they
should wear their old plays thread-bare, er'e they should have any new,
till they better understood their own interest, and how to distinguish
between good and bad.'

This anger of Mr. Flecknoe's at the players for refusing the piece,
bears some resemblance to that of Bayes, when the players went to dinner
without his leave. 'How! are the players gone to dinner? If they are
I will make them know what it