Page:Imperialdictiona03eadi Brandeis Vol3b.pdf/92

ROG admired and loved almost to idolatry, was the chief guest at the house-warming dinner; and there, in subsequent years, he often entertained Scott, Byron, Wordsworth, Moore, Coleridge, Southey, Sydney, Smith, Mackintosh, Wellington, Erskine, Chantrey, Washington Irving, and other celebrities, both of our own and other countries. Fourteen years elapsed between the publication of the "Epistle to a Friend" and Rogers' next poem, "Columbus," which was included in a new edition of his poems in 1812. "Columbus" had the misfortune to meet with the disapprobation both of the public and of the critics, and posterity has ratified the unfavourable verdict. The refined but insipid tale of "Jacqueline," which appeared in 1814 in the same volume with Byron's Lara, was Rogers' next work, and did nothing to retrieve the failure of its predecessor. His "Human Life," however, which was published in 1819, was every way worthy of his reputation. An accomplished critic has declared that in this poem the genius, if not the fame, of Rogers reached its culminating point. Lord Jeffrey pronounces it "pensive rather than passionate, and more full of wisdom and tenderness than of high flights of fancy, or overwhelming bursts of emotion;" and says "that the verses are very sweet, that they overcome us with a bewitching softness, and soothe the troubled spirits with a refreshing sense of truth, purity, and elegance." The last and largest of Rogers' productions was "Italy," the first part of which appeared in 1822, when he was in his sixtieth year, and was completed at intervals extending in all over sixteen years. "In its finished state," says Mr. Hayward, "it offers a rich treat to the scholar, the virtuoso, and the lettered traveller." Though "Italy" was the last of his formal and deliberate appeals to the public, Rogers continued occasionally to write verses down to his ninetieth year, and almost to the last took pleasure in revising and polishing his poems, and enriching them with notes. He spent no less than £15,000 on the illustrated editions of his "Italy" and his "Poems," probably the most exquisite works of their class in English literature. The remainder of the poet's protracted life passed away in almost unbroken comfort. At one period, indeed, the robbery of a large sum of money from his banking house threatened seriously to impair his fortune, but the greater part of the money was ultimately recovered; and the generosity of his friends, one of whom offered to place £10,000, a second £30,000, and a third £100,000 at his disposal, showed how highly he was esteemed, and must have afforded him the highest gratification. All his life long he was remarkable for his generosity. Innumerable instances might be given of his considerate and unostentatious liberality, especially to distressed artists and men of letters. One-third at least of his income, Campbell says, was spent in relieving distress, or in aiding modest merit and struggling genius. His words, however, were not always as kind as his actions. His caustic humour and habit of uttering bitter and sarcastic remarks made many enemies, and often caused uneasiness among his best friends. In 1850 the aged poet met with a fall on the street, which ever afterwards confined him to his chair—a sad privation to a man of his active habits and fondness of exercise. He survived this injury, however, for a number of years, and breathed his last on the 18th December, 1855, in his ninety-third year. Rogers will be remembered not only for his poetry, but for his peculiar social position and his remarkable connection with the most eminent poets, painters, actors, artists, critics, travellers, historians, warriors, orators, and statesmen of two generations. The treasures of art—pictures, books, gems, vases, and antiques of all descriptions which he had accumulated—were sold after his death and produced upwards of £50,000. A small volume of his "Recollections" has been published by his nephew, and some specimens of his Table Talk, of no great value, by Mr. Dyer.—J. T.  ROGERS,, an English voyager and buccaneer, acquired a certain celebrity by the expeditions which he made against the Spanish settlements in the South Seas, in a small vessel from Bristol. He returned to England in 1711, after circumnavigating the globe. He published an account of his voyage, and died in 1732.—W. J. P.  ROHAN,, Duc de. Prince de Leon, one of the leaders of the French protestants during the reign of Louis XIII., was born at Blein in Brittany, 21st of August, 1579. Going to court as soon as he was sixteen, he distinguished himself by his bravery at the siege of Amiens, under the eyes of Henri IV., to whose kingdom, no dauphin having yet been born, he was then presumptive heir. After some years of continental travel, Rohan married Marguerite de Bethune, a daughter of the illustrious Sully, in 1605. After the assassination of Henri, and the outbreak of civil war, Rohan assumed the leadership of the protestant party. In 1621 he successfully defended Montauban. Whilst Richelieu was besieging La Rochelle, Rohan was in Languedoc. Making his submission in 1629, he retired to Venice, where he was named general in chief against the imperialists. Recalled to France, he was sent as ambassador to Switzerland. In 1633 he drove the Germans and Spaniards out of the Valteline, and he subsequently defeated a Spanish force on the banks of Como. For a time he lived quietly at Geneva, but in 1638 he went to the camp of Duke Bernard of Saxe Weimar. The union of these two daring and able leaders was not destined to be of long endurance. Charging at the head of the regiment of Nassau in the battle of Rheinfeld (28th February, 1638), Rohan received a wound which terminated his existence on the 13th April following. A magnificent monument was erected to him at Geneva. His writings, which were numerous, were almost entirely of a political character.—W. J. P.  ROHAN,, Prince of, a cardinal and bishop of Strasburg, was born in 1734, and was destined from early life for the higher ecclesiastical offices. His history offers a striking example of that degeneracy of the old French nobility which preceded the first revolution. Self-indulgent, presumptuous and extravagant, he relied upon intrigue and the influence of his powerful family connections for advancement in rank and fortune. By arts of this kind he supplanted M. Breseuil, the French ambassador at the court of Vienna, and when established there speedily contrived to make himself odious to the Empress Maria Theresa by his prodigality, his flippancy, and his profligacy. He was recalled and was punished for his want of respect to the empress-queen by the cold regards of her daughter, Marie Antoinette, and of King Louis XVI. In the hope of reinstating himself in the favour of his queen, he listened to Madame La Motte and Count Cagliostro, who duped him with the famous scheme of buying a magnificent diamond necklace. He accepted forged letters as authentic orders from the queen, and was favoured with an interview in which a veiled woman played the part of Marie Antoinette. The scandal of this transaction, which led to a long trial before the parliament of Paris, recoiled upon the lovely but unfortunate queen. Party spirit raised an outcry against what was called royal despotism, and the acquittal of the cardinal was virtually the first day of the revolution which followed. When that convulsion broke out in all its force, the cardinal temporized at first, but after the decrees against the clergy he took refuge in his diocese of Strasburg and laboured for the royalist cause. He resigned his bishopric in 1801, and died at Ettenheim in 1803. See Memoires de l'Abbé Georgel, who was the cardinal's creature and confidant —R. H.  ROHAULT,, a French physicist, was born at Amiens in 1620, and died in Paris in 1675. He followed in most respects the doctrines of Descartes, and at the same time advocated strongly the use of experiment as a means of discovery. He wrote a treatise on physics, of high repute in its day.  ROLAND, one of the principal leaders of the Camisards, was a native of Mialet, in the diocese of Alois, and had served for some time in a regiment of dragoons. Along with considerable knowledge of military tactics, he possessed great intrepidity, firmness, and indefatigable activity. He preached as well as fought, and had a kind of natural eloquence which enabled him to exercise vast influence over his fellow protestants, who, it is said, regarded him as inspired. When the insurrection broke out in the Cevennes, on account of the revocation of the edict of Nantes, Roland, about 1701, raised a troop, of which he took the command, and during two years, by his courage and skill, baffled successively two marshals of France at the head of a powerful army. He met with occasional reverses, which, however, he repaired with remarkable promptitude; and his victories over the royal troops, in spite of their greatly superior numbers and discipline, were frequent and complete. He was accused by certain writers of having abused his successes by his severities towards his opponents—burning their churches, ravaging their estates, and putting to death those who fell into his hands. At the same time they admit that he often treated his enemies with great generosity. Marshal Villiers at length persuaded Cavalier, another of the Camisard leaders, to accept of terms; but Roland obstinately refused to submit unless on condition that the edict of Nantes should be re-established, the prisoners set at liberty, 