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

, an eminent bookseller, who began business at Leyden about the year 1682, and devoted his attention principally to geographical works and the construction of maps. A catalogue appeared at Amsterdam in 1729 of his publications, which are very numerous. Those in highest esteem are: 1. “A collection of Travels in France, Italy, England, Holland, and Russia,” Leyden, 1706, 30 vols. 12mo. 2. “A collection of Voyages in the two Indies,” Leyden, 1706, 8 vols. fol.; another edition, 29 vols. 8 vo, 1707-1710. This consists chiefly of an abridgment of De Bry’s collection, with some additions. 3. “A collection of Voyages in the Indies by the Portuguese, the English, the French, and the Italians,” 4 vols. fol. Leyden. These three works are in Dutch. 4. An “Atlas of two hundred Maps,” not in much estimation. 5. “A Gallery of the World,” containing an immense quantity of maps, topographical and historical plates, but without letter-press, in 66 vols. fol. which are usually bound in 35. He also continued Graevius’ “Thesaurus,” or, an account of the modern Italian writers, with the “Thesaurus Antiquitatum Siciliæ.” He died about 1730.

, a learned divine of the Lutheran persuasion, was born at Zwolle, a town of Overyssel, in 1718, and was a preacher in the Lutheran church at Haerlem for fifty-one years, where his public and private character entitled him to the highest esteem. His favourite motto, “God is love,” was the constant rule of his pastoral conduct. In 1752, he had the chief hand in establishing the Haerlem Society of Sciences, and in 1778 formed a separate branch for the study of Œconomics. In both he acted as secretary for many years; and, besides some Sermons, published, in the Transactions of that Society, a variety of scientific papers. He died at Haerlem in 1795.

, a Danish poet, born at Wibourg in 1616, was professor of poetry at Sora, and afterwards lecturer in theology at Ripen, in Jutland. Among his poems are: 1. “De hommagio Frederici III. Daniae et Norw. Regis,” Hafnioe, 1660, fol.; and 2. “Threni Hyperborei” on the death of Christian IV. All his pieces are inserted in the “Delicioe quorundam Poetarum Danorum, Frederici Rostgaard,” Leyden, 1695, 2 vols. 12mo. He died in February 1664, leaving a son, Severin Aagard, who wrote his life in the above collection.

, brother of the above, was librarian and professor in the University of Sora, in Denmark, where he died Jan. 22, 1657, aged forty-five years, and left several critical and philosophical works, written in Latin. The principal are: 1. “A treatise on Subterraneous Fires.” 2. “Dissertation on Tacitus.” 3. “Observations on Ammianus Marcellinus.” And 4. “A disputation on the Style of the New Testament,” Sora, 4to, 1655. He and his brother were both of the Lutheran Church.

, a Danish historian, flourished about the year 1186, and appears to have been secretary to the archbishop Absalon, by whose orders he wrote a history of Denmark, intituled, “Compendiosa historia regurn Daniae a Skioldo ad Canutum VI.” This work is thought inferior in style to that of Saxo Grammaticus; but, on some points, his opinions are in more strict conformity to what are now entertained by the literati of the North. He was also author of “Historia legum castrensium Regis Canuti magni,” which is a translation into Latin of the law called the law of Witherlag, enacted by Canute the Great, and re-published by Absalon in the reign of Canute VI. with an introduction by Aagesen. on the origin of that law. Both works are included in “Suenonis Agonis filii, Christierni nepotis, primi Daniæ gentis historici, quæ extant opuscula. Stephauus Johannis Stephanius ex vetustissimo codice membraneo ms. regiæ bibliothecæ Hafniensis primus publici juris fecit. Soræ, typis Henrici Crusii,” 1642, 8vo. His history is also printed, with excellent notes, in Langebek’s “Scriptores rerum Danicarum,” vol. I.; and the “Leges castrenses,” are in vol. III.

, a presbyter of Alexandria, the author of thirty books on physic in the Syriac tongue, which he called the Pandects. They were supposed to be written before 620, and were translated out of the Syriac into Arabic, by Maserjawalh, a Syrian Jew, and a physician in the reign of the calif Merwan, about A. D. 683; for then the Arabians began to cultivate the sciences and to study physic. In these he has clearly described the small-pox, and the measles, with their pathognomonic symptoms, and is the first author that mentions those two remarkable diseases, which probably first appeared and were taken notice of at Alexandria in Egypt, soon after the Arabians made themselves masters of that city, in A. D. 640, in the reign, of Omar Ebnol Chatab, the second successor to Mohammed. But both those original Pandects, and their translation, are now lost; and we have nothing of them remaining, but what Mohammed Rhazis collected from them, and has left us in his Continens; so that we have no certain account where those two diseases first appeared; but it is most probable that it was in Arabia Fcelix, and that they were brought from thence to Alexandria by the Arabians, when they took that city.

, a Briton, who suffered martyrdom with another, St. Julius, during the persecution under the emperor Dioclesian, in the year 303, and about the same time with St. Alban, the protomartyr of Britain. What the British names of Aaron and Julius were, we are not told; nor have we any particulars of their death. They had each a church erected to his memory in the city of Caer-Leon, the antient metropolis of Wales, and their festival is placed, in the Roman Martyrology, on the first of July.

, a celebrated Jewish rabbi, was a physician at Constantinople towards the end of the 13th century, and a man of extensive reputation, He wrote: 1. “A commentary on the Pentateuch;” a translation of which into Latin was published at Jena, 1710, fol. a work highly praised by Simon, in his Critical History of the Old Testament, and by Wolfius, in his Bibl. Hebraica. It appears by a manuscript of the original, in the library of the Oratory at Paris, that it was written in 1294. 2. “A commentary on the books of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings, translated from the Arabic into Hebrew,” a manuscript in the library at Leyden. 3. “A commentary on Isaiah and the Psalms,” in the same library. 4. “A commentary on Job,” which the author notices in his firstmentioned work on the Pentateuch. 5. “A treatise on, Grammar,” a very rare work, printed at Constantinople in 1581, which some have attributed to another Aaron. 6. “The Form of Prayer in the Caraite Synagogue,” Venice, 1528-29, 2 vols. small quarto.

, who flourished in the sixteenth century, was a Florentine, of the order of Jerusalem, and a voluminous writer on Music. He first appeared as an author in 1516. when a small Latin tract in three books. “De institutione Harmonica,” which he wrote originally in Italian, was translated into Latin, and published at Bologna, by his friend Job. Ant. Flaminius, of Imola, 4to.

2. “Toscanello della Musica, libri tre.” This treatise, the most considerable of all his writings, was first printed at Venice, 1523; then in 1529, and lastly, with additions, in 1539. In the Dedication he informs us, that he was born to a slender fortune, which he wished to improve by some reputable profession; that he chose Music, and had been admitted into the Papal chapel at Rome during the pontificate of Leo X. but that he sustained an irreparable loss by Leo’s death. 3. “Trattato della natura e cognizione di tutti li Tuoni di Canto figurato,” Venice, 1525, fol. 4. “Lucidario in Musica di alcune Oppenioni Antiphe e Moderne,” 4to. Venice, 1545. In this work we have discussions of many doubts, contradictions, questions, and difficulties, never solved before. 5. “Compendiolo di niolti dubbj segreti et sentenze intorno il Canto-fermo e figurato,” 1547, 4to. This seems a kind of supplement to his Lucidario. There is not much novelty in any of his works; but, in the state of musical science in his time, they were all useful.

, lord of Someldyck and Spyck, one of the most celebrated negociators of the United Provinces, was the son of Cornelius Aarsens, (who was greffier, or secretary of state, from 1585 to 1623,) and was born at the Hague in 1572. His father put him under the care of Duplessis Mornay at the court of William I. prince of Orange. The celebrated John Barnevelt sent him afterwards as agent into France; and, after residing there some time, he was recognised as ambassador, the first whom the French Court had received in that capacity from the United States; and the king, Louis XIII. created him a knight and baron. After holding this office for fifteen years, he became obnoxious to the French Court, and was deputed to Venice, and to several German and Italian princes, on occasion of the troubles in Bohemia. But such was the dislike the French king now entertained against him, that he ordered his ambassadors in these courts not to receive his visits. One cause of this appears to have been a paper published by Aarsens in 1618, reflecting on the French king’s ministers. In 1620 he was sent as ambassador to England, and again in 1641: the object of this last embassy was to negociate a marriage between prince William, son to the prince of Orange, and a daughter of Charles I. Previous to this, however, we find him again In France, in 1624, as ambassador extraordinary, where it appears that he became intimate with and subservient to the cardinal Richelieu; who used to say that he never knew but three great politicians, Oxenstiern, chancellor of Sweden, Viscardi, chancellor of Montferrat, and Francis Aarsens. His character, however, has not escaped just censure, on account of the hand he had in the death of Barnevelt, and of some measures unfriendly to the liberties of his country. He died in 1641. The editors of the Diet. Historique attribute to him “A Journey into Spain, historical and political,” published by De Sercy at Paris, 1666, 4to, and often reprinted; but this was the work of a grandson, of both his names, who was drowned in his passage from England to Holland, 1659.

, a celebrated sage, or impostor, whose history has been the subject of much learned discussion. Jamblicus, in his credulous Life of Pythagoras, mentions Abaris as a disciple of that philosopher, and relates the wonders he performed by means of an arrow which he received from Apollo. He also gives the particulars of a conversation which he had with Pythagoras, whilst the latter was detained prisoner by Phalaris, the tyrant. But this narration is filled with so many marvellous circumstances, and chronological errors, that it deserves little credit. Brucker, whom we principally follow in this article, gives the following instance. It is said that, in the time of a general plague, Abaris was sent from the Scythians on an embassy to the Athenians. This plague happened in the third olympiad. Now, it appears, from the learned contest between Bentley and Boyle, on the subject of Phalaris, that this tyrant, in whose presence Abaris is said to have disputed with Pythagoras, did not exercise his tyranny, at the most, longer than twenty-eight-years, and that his death happened not earlier than the fourth year of the fifty-seventh olympiad, which is the opinion of Bentley, nor later than the first year of the sixty-ninth olympiad, which is the date fixed by Dodwell. It is evident, therefore, that Abaris could not have lived, both at the time of the general plague mentioned above, and during the reign of Phalaris. The time when he flourished may, with some degree of probability, be fixed about the third olympiad; and there seems little reason to doubt, that he went from place to place imposing upon the vulgar by false pretensions to supernatural powers. He passed through Greece, Italy, and many other countries, giving forth oracular predictions, pretending to heal diseases by incantation, and practising other arts of imposture. Hence the fabulous tales concerning Abaris grew up into an entire history, written by Heraclides. Some of the later Platonists, in their zeal against Christianity, collected these and other fables, and exhibited them, not without large additions from their own fertile imaginations, in opposition to the miracles of Christ

, an Italian poet of the 17th century, enjoyed much reputation during his life. He was in the service of the archduke Leopold of Austria, and travelled in France and the Netherlands. On his return to Italy, he was successively governor of several small towns in the ecclesiastical state. He died at Sinagaglia, in 1667, after a long illness. The emperor Ferdinand III. made a bad acrostic in honour of his memory, but does not appear to have been a very liberal patron, while he was living He wrote 1. “Ragguaglio di Parnasso contra poetastri e partegiani delle nazioni,” Milan, 1638, 8vo. 2. “Le Frascherie, fasci tre,” satirical poems, with some prose, Venice, 1651, 8vo. 3. “Poesie postume,” Bologna, 1671, 8vo. 4. “II Consiglip degli Dei, dramma per musica,” &c. Bologna 1671, written on occasion of the Peace between France and Spain, and the marriage of Louis XIII. to the Infanta of Spain.

, was born at Uzes on the llth of November 1679. His father died in the second year after his birth. As his parents were protestants, the mother removed him from France, to prevent his being educated in the Romish faith; but it being difficult to find a secure retreat, he was sent from one place to another, and at last was obliged to wander among the mountains of Cevennes, and to change his residence as often as his concealment was discovered, until at length he found a safe asylum in Geneva. In the mean time his mother was confined in the castle of Somieres; but nothing could shake her fortitude, or alter her resolution to have her son educated in her own persuasion. Her health was much impaired by confinement, under which she probably must have died, had not a fortunate occurrence required the commander of the fort to visit Paris. His brother, who occupied his place, interested himself in behalf of his prisoner, and obtained her enlargement. Having surmounted various perils, she arrived at Geneva two years after her son. The small share which she had been able to save from the wreck of a fortune which once had been considerable, she expended in the education of young Abauzit, who made a very rapid progress in his studies. Mathematics and natural history chiefly attracted his attention; tut he cultivated almost every department of literature. In 1698 he visited Hoiland, where he became acquainted with the most celebrated literary characters of the place, Bayle, Jurieu, and the Basnages. From Rotterdam he went to England, where he conversed with St. Evremond and sir Isaac Newton. With the latter he afterwards engaged in an epistolary correspondence, and received a compliment which must be esteemed highly honourable. “You,” says Sir Isaac, “are a very fit person to judge between Leibnitz and me.”

William III. invited Abauzit to settle in England, and ordered Michael le Vassor to offer some advantageous proposals; which, however, were not accepted. Filial aflectioil, or attachment to the country in which he had obtained a refuge, recalled him to Geneva; where, in 1723, the University offered him the chair of philosophy, which he declined, ple‘ading the weakness of his constitution, and his inability to do credit to the appointment. Jn 1726, he lost his mother, to whom he had ever been most affectionately attached. In the same year he was admitted a citizen of Geneva, and appointed librarian to the city. He profited by such a favourable opportunity to improve in useful literature. Principally attached to antiquities, he now dedicated to his newly-adopted country the fruit of his labours and his talents. In 1730, he published a newedition of the History and State of Geneva, which had been originally written by David Spon, and printed in two vols. 12mo. The work having already passed through three editions, was committed to Abauzit. Not contented with the mere republication, he corrected the errors, gave two dissertations on the subject, and annexed the public acts and memorials, that were necessary as proofs and illustrations. To these were added a copious variety of learned and useful notes, in which he gave an ample detail of facts which were but imperfectly related in the text. Modest himself, he was not ambitious of fame, but assisted others by his labours. Among those who derived benefit from his learning and researches, M. de Meiran alone had the gratitude to acknowledge his obligation. The labours of Abauzit were assiduous, and his knowledge was extensive. While he declined public notice his name was known, and his communications were frequent to most of the celebrated mathematicians, philosophers, and divines in Europe. Notwithstanding the simplicity of his manners, thismoclestphilosopher was not, perhaps, without a small share of vanity. For he employed himself in discovering what to his apprehension seemed errors in the different translations of the Bible. He could believe nothing but what he saw, or was suggested by his own ideas, or could be reduced to mathematical demonstration, and, becoming sceptical, wished to divest’ the scriptures of several miracles. He even made some efforts in poetry; but they were soon forgotten. He is acknowledged to have excelled more in diligence, accuracy, and precision, than in taste or genius. Voltaire, who had as great an aversion to miracles as Abauzit, esteemed and consulted him. As a citizen of Geneva, the philosopher was active in the dissensions of 1734. He exerted himself in support of the aristocratic party, though he had much of republican zeal. His industry was indefatigable, and he seemed to have written and acted from the conviction of his own mind. In religion he adopted and supported the doctrines of Arianism. Though declining praise, he acquired the esteem of many of the most eminent characters in Europe, and received an elegant compliment from Rousseau: “No,” says he, “this age of philosophy will not pass without having produced one true philosopher. I know one, and I freely own, but one; but what I regard as my supreme felicity is, that he resides in my native country, it is in my own Country that he resides: shall I presume to name him, whose real glorv it is to remain almost in obscurity? Yes, modest and learned Abauzit, forgive a zeal which seeks not to promote your fame. I would not celebrate your name in an age that is unworthy to admire you. I would honour Geneva by distinguishing it as the place of your residence: my fellowcitizens are honoured by your presence. Happy is the country where the merit that seeks concealment is the more revealed.” The reader will appreciate the merit of Abauzit, in proportion to the value he sets on the esteem of Voltaire or the praises of Rousseau. He, however, who could gain the approbation of two such opposite characters, could have been no ordinary person. He died on the 20th of March 1767.

Ahauzit left behind him some writings, chiefly theological. Of these the principal was an “Essay upon the Apocalypse,” written to shew that the canonical authority of the book of Revelation was doubtful, and to apply the predictions to the destruction of Jerusalem. This work was sent by the author to Dr. Twells, in London, who translated it from French into English, and added a refutation, with which Abauzit was so well satisfied, that he desired his friend in Holland to stop an intended impression. The Dutch editors, however, after his death, admitted this essay into their edition of his works, which, besides, comprehends “Reflections on the Eucharist,” “On Idolatry,” “On the Mysteries of Religion,” “Paraphrases and explanations of sundry parts of Scripture,” several critical and antiquarian pieces, and various letters. An edition without the Essay on the Apocalypse, was printed at Geneva in Oct. 1770, and translated into English in the same year by Dr. Harwood.

These writings afford an idea of the merit of Abauzit as a divine. To judge of the depth of his physical and mathematical knowledge, it must be remembered that he defeuded Newton against father Castel; that he discovered an error in the “Principia,” at a time when there were few people in Europe capable of reading that work; and that Newton corrected the error in the second edition. Abauzit was one of the first who adopted the grand conceptions of Newton, because he was a geometrician sufficiently learned to see their truth. He was perfectly acquainted with many languages; he understood antient and modern history so exactly, as to be master of all the principal names and dates; he was so accurate a geographer, that the celebrated Pococke concluded, from his minute description of Egypt, that he must, like himself, have travelled in that country; he had a very extensive 'knowledge of physics; and lastly, he was intimately conversant with medals and antient manuscripts. All these different sciences were so well digested and arranged in his mind, that he could in an instant bring together all that he knew upon any subject. Of this the following example has been given. Rousseau, in drawing up his Dictionary of Music, bad taken great pains to give an accurate account of the music of the antients. Conversing with Abauzit upon the subject, the librarian gave him a clear and exact account of all that he had with so much labour collected. Rousseau concluded that Abauzit had lately been studying the subject: but this learned man, of whom it might almost literally be said that he knew every thing, and never forgot any thing, unaffectedly confessed, that it was then thirty years since he had inquired into the music of the antients. It was probably owing to the strong impression which this incident made upon the mind of Rousseau, that the only panegyric which his wretched temper ever permitted him to write upon a living person, was what is given above upon Abauzit. It yet remains to be noticed that an edition of his works was printed at Amsterdam in 2 vols, after that of Geneva, and, according to the editors of the Diet. Historique, considerably different from it.

, a learned Protestant divine, was born at Nay in Berne, in 1658, according to Niceron, or in 1654, as in the Gen. Dictionary. He studied at Puy Laurent, at Saumur, at Paris, and at Sedan; at which last place he received the degree of doctor in divinity. He intended to have dedicated himself very early to the ministry; but the circumstances of the Protestants of France rendering it impracticable there, he accepted the offer of the count d'Espense, an officer in the service of the elector of Brandenburgh, by whom he was settled at Berlin, as a French minister. Here he resided many years, and his congregation, at first very thin, was greatly increased by the revocation of the edict of Nantes. In 1688, the elector, Frederic William, died, and our author accepted of an invitation from marshal Schomberg, to go with him first into Holland, and then into England, with the prince of Orange. In 1689 he went to Ireland, and was there in the following year, when his patron was killed at the battle of the Boyne. On his return to England, he became minister of the French church at the Savoy, but the air disagreeing with him, he went again to Ireland, and would have been promoted to the deanery of St. Patrick’s had he been acquainted with the English language. He obtained, however, that of Killaloo, the value of which was far inferior, and never had any other promotion. He occasionally visited England and Holland, for the purpose of printing his works, which were all in French. In one of these visits to London, he died at Marybone, Sept. 25, 1727. He was strongly attached to the cause of king William, as appears by his elaborate defence of the Revolution, and his history of the Assassination-plot. He had great natural abilities, which he cultivated with true and useful learning. He was a most zealous defender of the primitive doctrine of the Protestants, as appears by his writings; and that strong nervous eloquence, for which he was so remarkable, enabled him to enforce the doctrines of his profession from the pulpit with great spirit and energy.

His works are: 1. “Sermons sur divers textes de l'Ecriture,” Leyderi, 1680. 2. “Panegyrique de M. l'Electeur de Brandenbourg,” Rotterdam, 1684, 4to. Gregorio Led translated this into Italian, and inserted it in his History of Brandenburgh. 3. “Traite de la Verite de la Religion Chretienne.” This treatise on the truth of the Christian Religion has passed through many editions, and has been translated into English, 2 vols. 8vo, and Dutch, and has long been esteemed an able confutation of infidel principles. The abbe Houteville, a steady Catholic, gives it the following character: “The most shining of these treatises in defence of the Christian religion, which were published by the Protestants, is that written by Mr. Abbadie. The favourable reception it obtained, the almost unexampled praise it received on the publication, the universal approbation it still preserves, render it unnecessary for me to join my commendations, which would add so little to the merit of so great an author. He has united in this book all our controversies with the infidels. In the first part, he combats the Atheists; the Deists in the second; and the Socinians in the third. Philosophy and theology enter happily into his manner of composing, which is in the true method, lively, pure, and elegant, especially in the first books.” 4. “Reflexions sur la Presence reelle du Corps de Jesus Christ dans l'Eucharistie,” Hague, 1685, 12mo, and Rotterdam, 1713, but both editions so erroneous as to induce the author to disown them. 5. “Traite de la Divinitie de notre Seigneur Jesus Christ,” Rotterdam, 1689, 8vo. A translation of this was published about the year 1777, by the Rev. Abraham Booth, a dissenting clergyman in London. 6. “L'art de se Connoitre Soimeme; ou, la recherche des Sources de la Morale,” Rotterdam, 1692, 12mo. An edition of this excellent treatise was published at Lyons in 1693, in which all the passages in favour of the Protestant religion are left out. 7. “Defence de la Nation Britannique,” &c. London, 1692, 8vo. This defence of the Revolution in England was in answer to Mr. Bayle’s “Avis important.” 8. “Panegyrique de Marie reine d'Angleterre,” Hague, 1695, 4to. 9. “Histoire de la Conspiration derniere d'Angleterre,” &c. Lond. 1698, 8vo, reprinted in Holland, and translated into English, but at present a very scarce book. It regards what was called the Assassination-plot, and was written by order of king William 111.; the original papers and documents were furnished by the earl of Portland, and sir William Trumball, secretary of state. 10. “La Verite de la Religion lleformee,” Rotterdam, 1718, 2 vols. 8vo. Dr. Henry Lambert, bishop of Dromore, translated this work for the instruction of the Roman Catholics in his diocese. 11. “Le triomphe de la Providence et de la Religion, en l'ouverture des Sept Sceaux par le Fils de Dieu,” &c. Amsterdam, 1723, 4 vols. 12mo. In this commentary on the Revelations, for such it is, the author has been supposed more inclining to conjecture and fancy than in his other works. Besides these he revised, in 1719, the French translation of the Common Prayer, and published some single sermons and small tracts.

, or Ali Ebnol Abbas, as Abulpharagius calls him in his Hist. Dyn. or, as he is usually called, Magus, as being one of the Magi, the followers of Zaradusht or Zoroaster; and not for his learning, as the learned Dr. Freind supposes. He was a Persian physician, and studied under Abu Maher, another Persian doctor, who probably was of the Magian religion also; he wrote his book, or Royal Work, at the request of Bowaia the son of Adadb'ddaula the calif, to whom he dedicates it in the oriental manner, in lofty hyperbolical language, about A. D. 980. It was translated into Latin by Stephen of Antioch in 1127, in which language we have two editions, Venice 1492, and Leyden 1523, fol. There is an Arabic ms copy in 4 vols. folio in the Leyden library, which was brought by James Golius from the East.

, an eminent historical painter, was born at Modena in 1512, and was the scholar of Antonio Beggarelli, a Modenese sculptor, whose models Correggio is said to have often made use of for his works. Little is known of his progress at Modena, except that, in partnership with his fellow-scholar Alberto Fontana, he painted the pannels of the Butchers hall in that place; and at the age of thirty-five, for the church of the Benedictines, the celebrated picture of the martyrdom of St. Peter and St. Paul, now in the Dresden gallery: with some fresco paintings, drawn from Ariosto and Virgil, in the palace Scandiano. Of his works at Bologna, tradition has left a very distinguished account, though little or nothing exists of them now but the large symbolic picture in the Via di St. Mamolo; a nativity of Christ, under the portico of the Leoni palace; and four conversation pieces and concertos, of exquisite taste, in the Academical Institute, which have been engraved. Notwithstanding the innate vigour, the genial facility, and independent style of this artist, he owes his fame, in a great measure, to his coalition with Francisco Primaticcio, and to his happy execution of the designs of that great master, particularly the frescoes he painted in the galleries and apartments at Fountainbleau. These, however, being destroyed in 1738, to make room for a new fabric, nothing remains but a few pictures of the history of Alexander. Some of the others were engraved. The period of his death is not known .

, a physician, a native of Eusnibio, a man who is said to have surmounted the prejudices of his age, and wrote 1. “De admirabili Viperae natura, et de mirificis ejusdem facultatibus,” of which there are four editions, 1589—1660. 2. “Discussse concertationes de Rebus, Verbis, et Sententiis controversis,” Pisaur. 1594, 4to. There is no account of his death.

, a monk of St. Germain-des-Pres, was the author of a poetical relation of the siege of Paris by the Normans and Danes towards the end of the 9th century. He was himself of Normandy, and an eye-witness; and if not eminent as a poet, is at least a faithful and minute historian. His poem consists of twelve hundred verses, in two books, and has been admitted into Pithou’s and Duchesne’s collections; but a more correct edition, with notes, and a French translation, may be seen in the “Nouvelles Annales de Paris,” published by D. Toussaint Duplessis, a Benedictine of the congregation of St. Maur, 1753, 4to. There are also “Five select Sermons” under his name in vol. IX. of D'Acheri’s Spicilegium; and in vol. V. Bibl. P. P. Colon. 1618, is “Abbonis Epistola ad Desiderium episc.” There was originally a third book to his History of the siege, addressed “to the Clergy,” which his editors omitted as having no connexion with the history.

, or Abbot of Fleuri, a Benedictine monk of the tenth century, was born in the territory of Orleans, and educated in the abbey of Fleuri, and afterwards at Paris and Rheims, where he distinguished himself in all the learning of the times, and particularly in mathematics, theology, and history. Oswald, bishop of Worcester, in 985, applied to the abbey of Fleuri to obtain a proper person to preside over the abbey of Ramsay, which he had founded, or rather re-established. Abbo was sent over to England for this purpose, and much caressed by king Ethelred and the nobility. Returning to Fleuri upon the death of the abbot, he was declared his successor. Here he experienced many vexations from some of the bishops, against whom he asserted the rights of the monastic order. His enemies charged him with some acrimony against his persecutors. In his justification, he wrote an apology, which he addressed to the kings Hugh and Robert. Some time afterwards he dedicated to the same princes a collection of canons on the duties of kings and the duties of subjects. King Robert, having sent him to Rome to appease the wrath of Gregory V. who had threatened to lay the kingdom under an interdict, the pope granted him all he requested. Abbo, on his return from this expedition, set about the reform of the abbey of Reole in Gascony. He was here slain in a quarrel that rose between the French and the Gascons, in 1004. His works are: 1. “Epitome de vitis Pontificum,” taken from Anastasius Bibliothecarius, and published with an edition of that author by Busscus, Mentz, 1602, 4to. 2. “Vita S. Edmundi Anglorum Orientalium regis & martyris,” printed in Surius’ Lives of the Saints. There is a ms. of it in the Cottonian Library. 3. “Collectio, seu epitome Canonum,” printed by Mabillon. 4. “Epistola ad abbatem Fuldensem,” in Baluze’s Miscellanies, 1678, 8vo. 5. “Letters to Hugh, king of France, to St. Bernard, Gregory,” &c. and his Apology, are inserted whole, or in fragments, in his Life by Aimonius, a monk of Fleuri, and his pupil.

, archbishop of Canterbury, was born at Guildford, in Surrey, Oct. 29, 1562, the son of Maurice Abbot, a clothworker in that town, and Alice March, who, having been sufferers by the persecution in queen Mary’s reign, educated their children in a steady zeal for the Protestant religion. George was sent, with his elder brother Robert, to the free-school of Guildford, where he was educated under Mr. Francis Taylor, and in 1578 was entered of Baliol college, Oxford. On April 31, 1582, he took the degree of bachelor of arts, and Nov. 29, 1583, was elected probationer fellow of his college. After taking his master’s degree, Dec. 17, 1585, he entered into holy orders, became a celebrated preacher in the University, and was sometime chaplain to Thomas lord Buckhurst. In 1593, March 4, he commenced bachelor of divinity, and proceeded doctor of that faculty May 9, 1597. On September 6 he was elected master of University college, to which he afterwards proved a benefactor. About this time some differences took place between him and Dr. Laud, which subsisted as long as they lived.

In 1598 he published his “Quæstiones Sex,” which obtained him great reputation. On March 6, 1599, he was installed dean of Winchester, and in 1600 was appointed vice-chancellor of Oxford, and while in this office decided a dispute which at that time engaged the attention of the public, respecting the repairing of the cross in Cheapside, which was ornamented with Popish images. The citizens of London requested the advice of both Universities; and Dr. Abbot, as vice-chancellor of Oxford, gave as his opinion, that the crucifix with the dove upon it should not be put up again. Dr. Bancroft, bishop of London, was of a different opinion; but Dr. Abbot’s advice was followed, as expressed in a letter printed many years after. He published, the same year, his Sermons on the Prophet Jonah. In 1693 he was again chosen vice-chancellor; and in 1604, when king James ordered the new translation of the Bible, he was one of the eight divines of Oxford to whom the translation of the historical books of the New Testament was committed. In 1605 he was a third time vice-chancellor; and, in the succeeding year, he is thought to have had some share in the censures passed on Laud, on account of a sermon he preached before the University. The principles of the two men were continually at variance, Abbot being at rigid Calvinist, and a foe to every thing that had the appearance of Popery, and Laud equally strenuous for the opinions afterwards known by the name of Arminian, and a friend to the ceremonies and splendour of public worship.

In 1608, on the death of his patron, lord Buckhurst, earl of Dorset, he became chaplain to George Hume, earl of Dunbar, and treasurer of Scotland; and went home with him,in order to establish an union between the Churches of England and Scotland. King James’s object was to restore the antient form of government by bishops; notwithstanding the aversion of the people of Scotland to this measure, Dr. Abbot’s skill, prudence, and Moderation succeeded so far as to procure an act of the General Assembly, which was afterwards ratified and confirmed by the Parliament of Scotland. By this it was enacted, that the king should have the calling of all General Assemblies; that the bishops or their deputies should be perpetual moderators of the diocesan synods; that no excommunication or absolution should be pronounced without their approbation; that all presentations of benefices should be made by them, and that the deprivation or suspension of ministers should belong to them; that every minister, at his admission to a benefice, should take the oath of supremacy, and canonical obedience; that the visitation of the diocese should be performed by the bishop or his deputy only; and finally, that the bishop should be moderator of all conventions for exercisings or prophesyings, which should be held within their bounds.

This service advanced Dr. Abbot’s character very high in the opinion of king James, and an incidental affair about this time brought him yet more into favour. While he was at Edinburgh, a prosecution was commenced against one George Sprot, notary of Aymouth, for having been concerned in Gowrie’s conspiracy eight years before, for which he was now tried before sir William Hart, lord justice general of Scotland, and condemned and executed. A long account of the affair was drawn up by the judge, and a narrative prefixed by Dr. Abbot unfolding the precise nature of the conspiracy, about the reality of which doubts had previously been entertained, and perhaps were afterwards. Dr. Robertson and Guthrie, however, are both persuaded of the authenticity of the generally-received account.

Soon after this, the king being engaged in the mediation of peace between the crown of Spain and the United Provinces, by which the sovereignty' of the latter was to be acknowledged by the former, he demanded the advice of the convocation then sitting, as to the lawfulness of espousing the cause of the States; but, instead of a direct answer, the members entered upon a wide field of discussion, which excited new jealousies and apprehensions. On this occasion the king wrote a confidential letter to Abbot, reflecting on the convocation for not being more explicit in their answer to his question, “how far a Christian and a Protestant king may concur to assist his neighbours to shake off their obedience to their own sovereign?” It does not appear what effect this letter produced; but Dr. Abbot now stood so high in his majesty’s favour, that on the death of Dr. Overton, bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, he promoted him to the vacant see, May 27, 1609, and he was consecrated Dec. 3. Before he had held this above a month, he was translated to the bishoprick of London, and confirmed Jan. 20, 1609-10. During the short time that he held the bishoprick of London, he distinguished himself by the diligent performance of his function, and by frequent preaching, and patronizing learning and learned men. In private life he was equally noted for ardent piety, generosity, and gentleness of manners.

In the following year he was preferred to the see of Canterbury, and confirmed April 9, and on the 23d of June he was sworn of his majesty’s most honourable privycouncil. At this time he was in the highest favour both with prince and people, and appears to have taken an active part in all the great transactions in church and state. Although not thought excessively fond of power, or desirous of carrying his prerogative, as primate of England, to an extraordinary height, yet he was resolute in maintaining the rights of the high commission court, and would not submit to lord Coke’s prohibitions. In the case of Vorstius, his conduct was more singular. Vorstius had been appointed to a professorship hi the university of Leyden, and was a noted Arminian. King James, by our archbishop’s advice, remonstrated with the States on this appointment; and the consequence was that Vorstius was banished by the synod of Dort, as will appear more at length in his life. This condact on the part of the archbishop alarmed those who were favourers of Arminianism, and who dreaded Calvinism from its supposed influence on the security of the church; but their fears as far as he was concerned appear to have been groundless, his attachment to the church of England remaining firm and uniform. He had soon, however, another opportunity of testifying his dislike of the Arminian doctrines. The zeal which the king had shewn for removing, first Arminius, and then Vorstius, had given their favourers in Holland so much uneasiness, that the celebrated Grotius, the great champion of their cause, was sent over to England to endeavour to mitigate the King’s displeasure, and, if possible, to give him a better opinion of the Remonstrants, as they then began to be called. On this occasion the archbishop wrote an account of Grotius and his negociation in a letter to sir Ralph Winwood, in which he treats Grotius with very little ceremony. For this he has met with an advocate in archdeacon Blackburn, who, in his Confessional, observes in his behalf, that “his disaffection to Grotius was owing to the endeavours and proposals of the latter, towards a coalition of the Protestants and Papists, which every wise and consistent Protestant, in every period lince the Reformation, as well as Abbot, has considered as a snare, and treated accordingly.” Another affair which occurred in 1613, created no little perplexity to our archbishop, while it afforded him an opportunity of evincing a decidedness of character not common at that period. This was the case of divorce between lady Frances Howard, daughter to the earl of Suffolk, and Robert, earl of Essex, her husband, which has always been considered as one of the greatest blemishes of king James’s reign. The part Abbot took in this matter displayed his unshaken and incorruptible integrity; and he afterwards published his reasons for opposing the divorce, as a measure tending to encourage public licentiousness. If this conduct displeased the king, he does not appear to have withdrawn his favour from the archbishop, as in 1615 he promoted his brother, Robert, to the see of Salisbury. The archbishop was less prudent in recommending -to the king, George Villiers, afterwards the celebrated duke of Buckingham; but of this he lived to repent, and to leave a satisfactory vindication.

Towards the close of 1616, the learned Antonio de Dominis, archbishop of Spalato, took shelter in England, from the persecution with which he was threatened by the Pope, for discovering his dislike both of the doctrine and discipline of the church of Rome, and was very kindly received by his majesty, and hospitably entertained by the archbishop. It was by his means that the archbishop got Father Paul’s History of the Council of Trent transmitted into this country. Mr. Nathaniel Brent was employed on this service, and succeeded in procuring the whole of the manuscript, although with some hazard to himself. In 1618, while lamenting the death of his brother the bishop of Salisbury, which happened in March of that year, he encountered a fresh anxiety from the king’s declaration for permitting sports and pastimes on the Lord’s day. This declaration, usually called the Book of Sports, was ordered to be read in the churches; but the archbishop, being at Croydon when it came thither, had the courage to forbid its being read.

In 1619 he executed a design which he had long formed, of founding an hospital at Guildford, where, on the 5th of April, he was present when sir Nicholas Kempe laid the first stone. The archbishop endowed it with lands to the value of three hundred pounds per annum: one hundred of which was to be employed in setting the poor to work, and the remainder for the maintenance of a master, twelve brothers, and eight sisters, who were to have blue clothes, and gowns of the same colour, and half-a-crown a week each. Oct. 29, being the anniversary of the archbishop’s birth, is commemorated at Guildford; and the archbishop of Canterbury for the time being is visitor of the hospital. Towards the end of this year, the Elector Palatine accepted of the crown of Bohemia, which occasioned great disputes in king James’s councils. Some were desirous that his majesty should not interfere in this matter, foreseeing that it would produce a war in Germany; others were of opinion, that natural affection to his son and daughter, and a just concern for the Protestant interest, ought to engage him to support the new election. The latter was the archbishop’s sentiment; and not being able at that time to attend the privy council, he wrote his mind with great boldness and freedom to the secretary of state. The archbishop, now in a declining state of health, used in the summer to go to Hampshire for the sake of recreation; and, being invited by lord Zouch to hunt in his park at Branzill, he met there with the greatest misfortune that ever befel him; for he accidentally killed that nobleman’s keeper, by an arrow from a cross-bow, which he shot afc one of the deer. This accidentthrew him into a deep melancholy; and he ever afterwards kept a monthly fast on Tuesday, the day on which this fatal mischance happened. He also settled an annuity of 20l. on the widow. There were several persons who took advantage of this misfortune, to lessen him in the king’s favour; but his majesty said, “An angel might have miscarried in this sort.” But his enemies representing, that, having incurred an irregularity, he was thereby incapacitated for performing the offices of a primate, the king directed a commission to ten persons, to inquire into this matter. The points referred to their decision were, 1. Whether the archbishop was irregular by the fact of involuntary homiciue 2. Whether that act might tend to scandal in a churchman 3. How his grace should be restored, in case the commissioners should find him irregular All agreed, that it could not be otherwise done, than by restitution from the king; but they varied in the manner. The bishop of Winchester, the lord chief justice, and Dr. Steward, thought it should be done by the king, and by him alone. The lord keeper, and the bishops of London/ Rochester, Exeter, and St. David’s, were for a commission from the king directed to some bishops. Judge Doddridge and sir Henry Martin were desirous it should be done both ways, by way of caution. The king accordingly passed a pardon and dispensation; by which he acquitted the atchbishop of all irregularity, scandal, or infamation, and declared him capable of all the authority of a primate. From that time an increase of infirmities prevented his assistance at the council. But when, in the last illness of James I. his attendance was required, he was attentive to the charge till the 27th of March 1625, the day on which the king expired. Though very infirm, and afflicted with the gout, he assisted at the ceremony of the coronation of Charles I. whose favour, however, he did not long enjoy. His avowed enemy, the duke of Buckingham, soon found an opportunity to make him feel the weight of his displeasure. Dr. Sibthorp had in the Lent assizes 1627 preached before the judges a sermon at Northampton, to justify a loan which the king had demanded. This sermon, calculated to reconcile the people to an obnoxious measure, was transmitted to the archbishop with the king’s direction to license it; which he refused, and gave his reasons for it : and it was not licensed by the bishop of London, until after the passages deemed exceptionable had been erased. On July 5, lord Conway, who was then secretary of state, made him a visit; and intimated to him, that the king expected he should withdraw to Canterbury. The archbishop declined this proposal, because he had then a law-suit with that city; and desired that he might rather have leave to retire to his house at Ford, five miles beyond Canterbury. His request was granted; and, on Oct. 9 following, the king gave a commission to the bishops of London, Durham, Rochester, Oxford, and Bath and Wells, to execute the archiepiscopal authority; the cause assigned being, that the archbishop could not at that time in his own person attend those services which were otherwise proper for his cognizance and direction. The archbishop did not remain long in this situation; for, a parliament being absolutely necessary, he was recalled about Ciuistmas, and restored to his authority and jurisdiction. On his arrival at court he was received by the archbishop of York and the earl of Dorset, who conducted him to the king, and his regular attendance was from that time required. He sat in the succeeding parliament, and continued afterwards in the full exercise of his office. On the 24th of August 1628, the archbishop consecrated to the see of Chichester Dr. Richard Montague, who had before been active in supporting the pretence of irregularity which had been alleged against him. Laud, bishop of London, one of his former enemies, also assisted at the consecration. When the petition of right was discussed in parhament, the archbishop dehvercd the opinion of the House of Lords at a conference with the House of Commons, offering some propositions from the former, and received the thanks of sir Dudley Digges. Dr. Manwaring, having preached before the House of Commons two sermons, which he afterwards published, and in which he maintained the king’s authority in raising subsidies without the consent of parliament, was brought before the bar of the House of Lords, by impeachment of the Commons. Upon this occasion the archbishop, with the king’s consent, gave the doctor a severe admonition, in which he avowed his abhorrence of the principles maintained in the two discourses. The interest of bishop Laud being now very considerable at court, he drew up instructions, which, having the king’s name, were transmitted to the archbishop, under the title of “His majesty’s instructions to the most reverend father in God, George, lord archbishop of Canterbury, containing certain orders to be observed and put in execution by the several bishops in his province.” His grace communicated them to his suffragan bishops; but, to prove that he still intended to exercise his authority in his own diocese, he restored Mr. Palmer and Mr. Unday to their lectureships, after the dean and archdeacon of Canterbury had suspended them. In other respects he endeavoured to soften their rigour, as they were contrived to enforce the particular notions of a prevailing party in the church, which the archbishop thought too hard for those who made the fundamentals of religion their study, and were not so zealous for forms. His conduct in this and other respects made his presence unwelcome at court; so that, upon the birth of the prince of Wales, afterwards Charles H. Laud had the honour to baptize him, as dean of the chapel. It appears, ho.vever, from almost the last public act of his life, that Abbot was not so regardless of the ceremonial parts of religious duty in the church of England as his enemies have represented him; for he issued an order, dated the 3d of July 1633, requiring the parishioners of Crayford in Kent to receive the sacrament on their knees, at the steps ascending to the communion table. On the 5th of August, in the same year, he died at Croydon, worn out with cares and infirmities, at the age of 71, and was according to his own direction buried in the chapel of Our Lady, within the church dedicated to the Holy Trinity at Guildford. A stately monument was erected over the grave, with the effigies of the archbishop in his robes. He shewed himself, in most circumstances of his life, a man of great moderation to all parties; and was desirous that the clergy should attract the esteem of the laity by the sanctity of their manners, rather than claim it as due to their function. His notions and principles, however, not suiting the humour of some writers, have drawn upon him many severe reflections. Heylin asserts, “That marks of his benefactions we find none in places of his breeding and preferment;” an aspersion which is totally groundless. Dr. Wellwood has done more justice to the merit and abilities of our prelate: “Archbishop Abbot,” says he, “was a person of wonderful temper and moderation; and in all his conduct shewed an unwillingness to stretch the act of uniformity beyond what was absolutely necessary for the peace of the church, or the prerogative of the crown, any farther than conduced to the good of the state. Being not well turned for a court, though otherwise of considerable learning and genteel education, he either could not, or would not, stoop to the humour of the times; and now and then, by an unseasonable stiffness, gave occasion to his enemies to represent him as not well inclined to the prerogative, or too much addicted to a popular interest; and therefore not fit to be employed in matters of government.”

Others of the contemporary historians, besides Heylin, have given unfavourable characters of the archbishop; but their accounts disagree. Lord Clarendon likewise bears hard on his religious principles and general character. “He had,” says his lordship, “been master of one of the poorest colleges in Oxford, and had learning sufficient for that province.” The Editor of the Biog. Britannica has here supplied the name (Balliol), a blunder which lord Clarendon was not likely to have made, as our archbishop was master of University College, and his brother Robert, master of Balliol. It is rather singular, however, that his lordship should undervalue the “learning sufficient for that province.” He also notices, as extraordinary, that he was promoted to the bishoprick of Lichfield and Coventry “before he had been parson, vicar, or curate of any parish church in England, or dean or prebendary of any cathedral church in England; and was in truth totally ignorant of the true constitution of the church of England, and the state and interest of the clergy.” Here again his lordship seems to have forgot, that he was dean of Winchester before he was bishop of Lichfield, and that the chief cause of uis promotion was the service he rendered to his majesty by procuring the establishment of episcopacy in Scotland. Upon the whole of his character as drawn by lord Clarendon, the late right hon. Arthur Onslow, speaker of the House of Commons, offers the following remarks: “That worthy prelate did surely deserve a better representation to posterity. He was a very wise and prudent man, knew well the temper and disposition of the kingdom with respect to the ceremonies and power of the church, and did therefore use a moderation in the point of ecclesiastical discipline, which if it had been followed by his successor, the ruin that soon after fell on the church might very likely have been prevented. His being without any credit at court from the latter end of king James’s reign will bring no dishonour on his memory, if it be considered that his disgrace arose from his dislike of, and opposition to, the imprudent and corrupt measures of the court at that time, and from an honest zeal for the laws and liberties of his country, which seemed then to be in no small danger, and it was a part truly becoming the high station he then bore. His advice upon the affair of the Palatinate and the Spanish match shewed his knowledge of the true interest of England, and how much it was at his heart; and his behaviour and sufferings in the next reign, about the loan and Sibthorp’s sermon, as thoy were the reasons of his disgrace at that time, so ought they to render his memory valuable to all who wish not to see the fatal counsels and oppression of those times revived in this nation. The duke of Buckingham was his enemy, because the archbishop would not be his creature; and the church perhaps might have been thought to have been better governed, if he had stooped to the duke, and given in to the wantonnesses of his power: but he knew the dignity of his character, and loved his country too well to submit to such a meanness, though very few of his brethren had the courage or honesty to join with him in this, and, if the archbishop himseif is to be credited, his successor’s rise was by the practice of those arts this good man could not bend to. As to his learning, we need no better testimony of it than his promotion by king James, who had too much affectation that way to prefer any one to such a station who had not borne the reputation of a scholar; but there are other proofs of his sufficiency in this, even for the high place he held in the church. If he had some narrow notions in divinity, they were rather the faults of the age he had his education in, than his; and the same imputation may be laid on the best and most learned of the Reformers. His warmth against Popery became the office of a Protestant bishop; though even towards Papists there is a remarkable instance of his mildness and charity, which shewed that his zeal against their persons went no farther than the safety of the state required. His parts seem to have been strong and masterly, his preaching grave and eloquent, and his style equal to any of that time. He was eminent for piety and a care for the poor; and his hospitality fully answered the injunction king James laid on him, which was, to carry his house nobly, and live like an archbishop. He had no thoughts of heaping up riches; what he did save was laid out by him in the erecting and endowing of an handsome Hospital for decayed tradesmen and the widows of such, in the town of Guildford, in the county of Surrey, where he was born and had his first education; and here I cannot omit taking notice that the body of statutes drawn by himself for the government of that house, is one of the most judicious works of that kind I ever saw, and under which for near one hundred years that hospital has maintained the best credit of any that I know in England. He was void of all pomp and ostentation, and thought the nearer the church and churchmen came to the simplicity of the first Christians, the better would the true ends of religion be served; and that the purity of the heart was to be preferred to, and ought rather to be the care of a spiritual governor, than the devotion of the hands only. If under this notion some niceties in discipline were given up to goodness of life, and when the peace of the church as well as of the kingdom was preserved by it, 'twas surely no ill piece of prudence, nor is his memory therefore deserving of those slanders it has undergone upon that account. It is easy to see that much of this treatment has been owing to a belief in the admirers and followers of archbishop Laud, that the reputation of the latter was increased by depreciating that of the former. They were indeed men of very different frames, and the parts they took in the affairs both of church and state as disagreeing. In the church, moderation and the ways of peace guided the behaviour of the first, rigour and severity that of the last. In the state they severally carried the like principles and temper. The one made the liberty of the people and the laws of the land the measure of his actions; when the other, to speak softly of it, had the power of the prince and the exalting the prerogative only, for the foundation of his. They were indeed both of them men of courage and resolution; but it was sedate and temperate in Abbot, passionate and unruly in Laud. It is not however to be denied that many rare and excellent virtues were possessed by the latter; but it must be owned too, he seems rather made for the hierarchy of another church and to be the minister of an arbitrary prince, and the other to have had the qualifications of a Protestant bishop and the guardian of a free state .”

As Heylin has insinuated something to the prejudice of the archbishop’s liberality, it may be necessary to record, that, besides his noble foundation at Guildford, he gave to the schools at Oxford one hundred and fifty pounds. In 1619, he bestowed a large sum of money on the library of Balliol college; he built a conduit in the city of Canterbury; in 1624 he contributed to the founding of Pembroke college, Oxford, and discharged a debt of three hundred pounds owing from Balliol to Pembroke college. In 1632 he gave one hundred pounds to the library of University College, Oxford, and by will left large sums to charitable purposes.

His works are: 1. “Quæstiones Sex, totidem pralectionibus in Schola Theologica Oxoniae, pro forma habitis, discussae et disceptatae anno 1597, in quibus e Sacra Scriptura & Patribus, quid statuendum sit definitur.” Oxon. 1598, 4to, & Francfort, 1616, 4to, published by Abraham Scultetus. 2. “Exposition on the Prophet Jonah, contained in certaine Sermons, preached in S. Maries Church in Oxford,” 4to, 1600. It appears by a postscript to the reader, that these sermons or lectures were delivered on Thursdays early in the morning, “sometimes before daylight,” from 1594 to 1599. They were reprinted in and form the most popular of his works. 3. His “Answer to the questions of the Citizens of London in Jan. 1600, concerniug Cheapside Cross,” not printed until 1641. 4. “The reasons which Dr. Hill hath brought for the upholding of Papistry, unmasked and shewed to be very weak, &c.” Oxon. 4to. 1604. Hill was a clergyman of the church of England, which he exchanged for that of Rome, and wrote his “Quatron of Reasons” in vindication of his conduct, printed at Antwerp, 4to. 1600. 5. “A Preface to the examination of George Sprot,” &c. noticed before. 6. “Sermon preached at Westminster, May 26, 1608, at the funeral of Thomas earl of Dorset, late lord high treasurer of England, on Isaiah xl. 6.” 4to. 1608. 7. “Translation of a part of the New Testament,” with the rest of the Oxford divines, 1611. 8. “Some memorials, touching the Nullity between the earl-of Essex and his lady, pronounced Sept. 25, 1613, at Lambeth; and the difficulties endured in the same.” To this is added “some observable things since Sept. 25, 1613, when the sentence was given in the cause of the earl of Essex, continued unto the day of the marriage, Dec. 26, 1613,” which appears also to have been penned by his grace, or by his direction; and to it is annexed “the speech intended to be spoken at Lambeth, Sept. 25, 1613, by the archbishop of Canterbury, &c.” These were reprinted in one volume, 1719, 12mo, and the ms. in the archbishop’s hand was then said to be in the hands of an eminent lawyer. 9. “A brief description of the whole World, wherein is particularly described all the monarchies, empires, and kingdoms of the same, with their academies,” &c. 4to. 1617; a work, of which there have been several editions. 10. “A short apology for archbishop Abbot, touching the death of Peter Hawkins, dated Oct. 8, 1621.” 11. “Treatise of perpetual visibility and succession of the true Church in all ages,” Lond. 4to. 1624; published without his name; but his arms, impaled with those of Canterbury, are put before it. 12. “A narrative containing the true cause of his sequestration and disgrace at Court: in two parts, written at Ford in Kent,” 1627, printed in Rushworth’s Historical Collections, vol. I. p. 438—461, and In the Annals of king Charles, p. 213 224. Bp. Racket, in his life of Abp. Williams, p. 68, attests the authenticity of this curious memorial. 13. “History of the Massacre in the Valtoline,” printed in the third volume of Fox’s Acts and Monuments. 14. His “Judgment on bowing at the name of Jesus,” Hamburgh, 8vo. 1632. In 1618, he and sir Henry Savile defrayed the expence of an edition of Bradwardin’s “Cause of God,” a work written against the Pelagians.

, nephew of the preceding, and son of sir Maurice Abbot, the archbishop’s youngest brother, was elected probationer fellow of Merton College, Oxford, 1624, and admitted. LL. B. 1630. He wrote: 1. “The whole book of Job paraphrased,” Lond. 4to. 1640. 2. “Vindiciae Sabbati, or an answer to two treatises of Mr. Broad,” Lond. 1641, 4to. Broad was rector of Rendcombe in Gloucestershire; and wrote two treatises, one concerning the Sabbath or seventh day, and the other concerning the Lord’s day, or first day of the week; which falling into Mr. Abbot’s hands in manuscript, he wrote an answer to them, and published the whole under the above title. 3. “Brief notes upon the whole book of Psalms,” 4to, 1651. He married a daughter of col. Purefoy, of Caldecote-hall, Warwickshire, whose house he gallantly defended, by the help of the sen-ants only, against the attack of the princes Rupert and Maurice with eighteen troops of horse. He died Feb. 4, 1648, aged 44 years.

, father of the above, and youngest brother of archbishop Abbot, was bred up to trade, became an eminent merchant in London, and had a considerable share in the direction of the affairs of the East India Company. He was one of the commissioners employed in negociating a treaty with the Dutch East-India Company, by which the Molucca islands, and the commerce to them, were declared to be divided, two-thirds to the Dutch East India Company, and one-third to the English. This important treaty, which put an end to the long and violent disputes between the English and Dutch East India companies, was concluded at London, July 7, 1619, and ratified by the king on the sixteenth of the same month. In consequence of this treaty, and in order to recover the goods of some English merchants, sir Dudley Digges and Mr. Abbot were sent over into Holland in the succeeding year, 1620, but with what success does not appear. He was afterwards one of the farmers of the customs, as appears from a commission granted in 1623, to him and others, for administering the oaths to such persons, as should either desire to pass the seas from this kingdom, or to enter it from foreign countries. In 1624, he was appointed one of the council for settling and establishing the colony of Virginia, with full powers for the government of that colony. On the accession of king Charles I. he was the first person on whom the order of knighthood was conferred, and he was chosen to represent the city of London in the first parliament of that reign. In 1627 he served the office of Sheriff, and in 1738 that of Lord Mayor. There are no other particulars extant concerning him, unless the date of his death, Jan. 10, 1640 .

, eldest brother to the archbishop, was born also in the town of Guildford in 1560; educated by the same schoolmaster; and afterwards sent to Balliol college, Oxford, in 1575. In 1582 he took his degree of M. A. and soon became a celebrated preacher; to which talent he chiefly owed his preferment. Upon his first sermon at Worcester, he was chosen lecturer in that city, and soon after rector of All Saints in the same place. John Stanhope, esq. happening to hear him preach at Paul’s cross, was so pleased with him, that he immediately presented him to the rich living of Bingham in Nottinghamshire. In 1594 he became no less eminent for his writings than he had been for his excellence in preaching. In 1597 he took his degree of D. D. In the beginning of king James’s reign he was appointed chaplain in ordinary to his majesty; who had such an opinion of him as a writer, that he ordered the doctor’s book “De Antichristo” to be reprinted with his own commentary upon part of the Apocalypse. He had also acquired much reputation for his writings against Dr. William Bishop, then a secular priest, but afterwards titular bishop of Chalcedon. In 1609 he was elected master of Balliol college; which trust he discharged with the utmost care and assiduity, by his frequent lectures to the scholars, by his continual presence at public exercises, and by promoting discipline in the society. In May 1610 the king nominated Dr. Abbot one of the fellows in the college of Chelsea, which had been, lately founded for the encouragement and promotion of polemical divinity. In November 1610 he was made prebendary of Normanton in the church of Southwell; and in 1612 his majesty appointed him regius professor of divinity at Oxford; in which station he acquired the character of a profound divine, though a more moderate Calvinist than either of his two predecessors in the divinity-chair, Holland and Humphrey: for he countenanced the sublapsarian tenets concerning predestination. He was not, however, less an enemy to Dr. Laud than his brother; and in one of his sermons pointed at him so directly, that Laud intended to have taken some public notice of it.

The fame of Dr. Abbot’s lectures became very great; and those which he delivered upon the supreme power of kings against Bellarmine and Suarez afforded the king so much satisfaction, that, when the see of Salisbury became vacant, he named him to that bishoprick; and he was consecrated by his own brother, the archbishop of Canterbury, Dec. 3, 1615. It would appear that he had enemies who would have deferred his promotion for various reasons. When he came to do homage, the king said, “Abbot, I have had very much to do to make thee a bishop; but I know no reason for it, unless it were because thou hast written against one,” alluding to Dr. Bishop before-mentioned. In his way to Salisbury, he took a solemn farewell of Oxford, and was accompanied for some miles by the heads of houses and other eminent scholars, who deeply regretted his departure. On his arrival at Salisbury he bestowed much attention on his cathedral, which had been neglected, and raised a considerable subscription for repairs. He afterwards visited the whole of his diocese, and preached every Sunday while his health permitted, which was not long, as the sedentary course he had pursued brought on the stone and gravel, which ended his pious and useful life, March 2, 1617. He had enjoyed his bishoprick only two years and three months, and was interred in the cathedral. He was twice married; the last time, which is said to have given offence to his brother the archbishop, about half a year after his promotion to the see. The lady, whose name seems to have escaped the researches of his biographers, was Bridget Cheynell, wU dow, and mother of the famous Francis Cheynell. By his first wife he left one son, or more, and a daughter who was married to sir Nathaniel Brent, warden of Merton college. All his biographers concur in the excellence of his character, his eminent piety, charity, and learning. One of them has attempted a parallel between the two brothers, viz. that “George was the more plausible preacher, Robert the greater scholar; George the abler statesman, Robert the deeper divine; gravity did frown in George, and smile in Robert.”

A few paritculars [sic] hitherto unnoticed by his biographers may be gleaned from Wood’s Annals, published by Mr. Gutch. It appears that in 1596 the corporation of London requested the two universities to send them a list of persons properly qualified for the professorships of Gresham college, just founded. On this occasion Mr. Abbot, then M. A. of Balliol college, was chosen with three others, but the election ultimately fell upon a gentleman of Cambridge. In 1612, Dr. John Howson, one of the canons of Christ church, preaching at St. Mary’s, reflected on the Annotations to the Geneva translation of the Bible, “as guilty of misrepresenting the divinity of Christ and his Messiahship.” For this he was afterwards suspended, or forced to recant, by Dr. Abbot, then pro-vicechancellor. Wood thinks this the more hard, because king James had been known to censure the partiality of these annotations. While king’s professor of Divinity, he had neither the canonry of Christ church, nor the rectory of Ewelme usually annexed; and his only profits were some fees from those who performed exercises in divinity, and a salary of forty pounds a-year paid by the dean and canons of Christ church. In dislike to Laud, as already noticed, he shared amply with his brother; but Wood’s account of the sermon he preached against him is more particular than that in the Biographia, and throws some light on the controversies as well as the manners of the times. “On Shrove Sunday towards the latter end of this year (1614), it happened that Dr. Laud preached at St. Mary’s, and in his sermon insisted on some points which might indifferently be imputed either to Popery or Arminianism (as about this time they began to call it), though in themselves they were by some thought to be no other than the true doctrine’s of the Church of England. And having occasion in th-it sermon to touch upon the Presbyterians and their proceedings, he used some words to this etfect, viz. `that the Presbyterians were as bad as the Papists.' Which being directly contrary to the judgment and opinion of Dr. Robert Abbot, the king’s professor of Divinity, and knowing how much Dr. Laud had been distasted by his brother when he lived in Oxford, conceived he could not better satisfy himself and oblige his brother, now archbishop of Canterbury, than by exposing him (on the next occasion) both to shame and censure, which he did accordingly. For preaching at St. Peter’s in the East upon Easter-day (1615) in the afternoon, in the turn of the vicechancellor, he pointed at him so direptly, that none of the auditors were so ignorant as not to know at whom he aimed. Dr. Laud, being not present at the first preaching of the sermon, was by hiss friends persuaded to shew himself at St. Mary’s the Sunday after, when it should come to be repeated (according to the ancient custom in this university); to whose persuasions giving an unwilling consent, he heard himself sufficiently abused for almost an hour together, and that so palpably and grossly, that he was pointed to as he sate.” It appears that Laud consulted his patron, Dr. Neal, bishop of Lincoln, who probably dissuaded him from taking any notice of the matter, as we do not find that he wrote any answer, or vindication.

Bishop Abbot’s works are: 1. “The mirror of Popish Subtleties,” Lond. 4to, 1594. 2. “The exaltation of the kingdom and priesthood of Christ,” sermons on the first seven verses of the 110th Psalm, 4to, Lond. 1601. 3. “Antichristi demonstratio, contra fabulas Pontificias, et ineptam Rob. Bellarmini de Antichristo disputationem,” Lond. 4to, 1603, 8vo, 1603, a work much commended by Scaliger. 4. “Defence of the reformed Catholic of Mr. W. Perkins, against the bastard counter-Catholic of Dr. William Bishop, seminary priest,” in three parts, 4to, 1606, 1607, 1609. 5. “The Old Way; a sermon at St. Mary’s, Oxon.” 4to, Lond. 1610. This was translated into Latin by Thomas Drax. 6. “The true ancient Roman Catholic; being an apology against Dr. Bishop’s reproof of the defence of the reformed Catholic,” 4to, 1611. This work was dedicated to prince Henry, who returned the author thanks in a letter written with his own hand; a circumstance which seems to have escaped Dr. Birch in his life of that prince. 7. “Antilogia; adversus apologiam Andreae Eudaemon-Johannis, Jesuitse, pro Henrico Garnetto Jesuita proditore;” Lond. 4to. 1613. The true name of the apologist was Isaac Casaubon. 8. “De gratia et perseverantia Sanctorum, Exercitationes habitse in Academiae Oxon.” Lond. 4to, 1618; Francfort, 8vo, 1619. 9. “In Ricardi Thomsoni Angli-Belgici diatribam, da amissione et intercessione justificationis et gratiae, animadversio brevis.” Lond. 4to, 1618. Thomson was a Dutchman, born of English parents, and educated at Clarehall, Cambridge. Our author finished this book on the last day of his life, and it was published by his brother the archbishop and Dr. Featley his chaplain. 10. “De Suprema Potestate Regia, exercitationes habitse in Academia Oxoniensi, contra Rob. BellarminunV et Franciscum Suarez,” Lond. 4 to, 1619, also a posthumous publication. He left behind him various sermons in manuscript, lectures on St. Matthew, and commentaries on some parts of the Old and New Testament, particularly a commentary in Latin upon the whole epistle to the Romans, in four folio volumes, which was given to the Bodleian library by Dr. Edward Corbet, rector of Haseley in Oxfordshire, his grandson by his only daughter the wife of sir Nathaniel Brent .

, a clergyman of the Church of England, but whether belonging to the archbishop’s family is uncertain, was originally of the university of Cambridge, and was incorporated master of arts of Oxford, July 14, 1607. He was afterwards vicar of Cranbrooke in Kent, and minister of South wick in Hampshire. When Ephraim Udall, the lawful rector of St. Augustine’s, Watling-street, was sequestered by authority of the House of Commons in 1643, the living was given to Mr. Abbot, which he enjoyed until his death, at a very advanced age, in 1653. He published “Four Sermons,” 8vo, Lond. 1639, dedicated to Curie, bishop of Winchester, who had been his patron; and some other single sermons, a small catechism, &c.

There was about the same time a Robert Abbot of Hatfield, mentioned by Dr. Pulteney, as a learned preacher, and an excellent and diligent herbalist, who assisted the celebrated Johnson in his works .

, a German writer of high character, was born Nov. 25, 1738, at Ulm, where he received his education, and in 1751 produced his first dissertation, under the title of “Historia vitae magistra,” in which he maintained two theses, the one on burning mirrors, the other on the miracle of the dial of Ahaz. In 1756, he went to the university of Halle, where he was invited by professor Baumgarten to live in his house. Here he published a thesis “De Extasi,” and studied chiefly philosophy and the mathematics; and from 1758, when he received the degree of M. A. he confined himself to these, giving up divinity, to which he had been originally destined. In 1760, he was appointed professor-extraordinary of philosophy in the university of Francfort-on-the-Oder, and in the midst of the war which then raged, inspirited his fellow-­citizens by a work on “Dying for our Country.” In the following year, he passed six months at Berlin, and left that city to fill the mathematical chair in the university of Rinteln, in Westphalia; but, becoming tired of an academical life, began to study law, as an introduction to some civil employment. In 1763, he travelled through the south of Germany, Switzerland, and part of France; and, on his return to Rinteln, at the end of that year, published his work “On Merit,” which was re-printed thrice in that place, and obtained him much reputation. In 1765, the reigning prince of Schaumburg Lippe bestowed on him the office of counsellor of the court, regency, and consistory of Buckeburgh; but he did not long enjoy the friendship of this nobleman, or his promotion, as he died Nov. 27, 1766, when only in his twenty-eighth year. The prince caused him to be interred, with great pomp, in his private chapel, and honoured his tomb by an affecting epitaph from his own pen. Abbt was highly esteemed by his contemporaries, who seem agreed that, if his life had been spared, he would have ranked among the first German writers. He contributed much to restore the purity of the language, which had become debased before his time, as the Germans, discouraged by the disastrous thirty years war, had written very little, unless in French or Latin.

Besides what we have mentioned, Abbt wrote a great number of works in German or Latin. His first publications were theological: in 1757, he wrote on “the Burial of Moses,” Halle, 4to, which, contrary to the usual opinion, he contended was performed by men. In 1758, he published a thesis, to prove that the “Confusion of Tongues at Babel was not a punishment,” Halle, 4to; and another on the “Search of Truth,” Halle, 1759, 4to. These appear to have been the efforts of a young author eadeavouring to establish a reputation on paradox. After he had begun to study philosophy, he published a thesis on the proper manner of studying that science, Halle, 1760, 4.to. His “Treatise on the influence of the Beautiful on Science,” Rinteln, 1762, 4to, was intended as an introduction to his lectures on the belles-lettres. He next published a “Programma on the difficulty of measuring the Human Faculties,” Rinteln, 1763, 4to; and a “Consolatory Epistle to Dr. Schwartz,” 1763, 8vo. His work entitled “Recherches sur les Sentiments Moraux, traduites de l'Allemand de M. Moses Mendelsohn,” 1763, 12mo, was the only book he wrote in French. He wrote also a “Life of his old friend professor Baumgarten,” 1765, Halle, 4to, which was re-printed in the Rinteln Literary Journal. An anonymous work, which has the date of Hamburgh 1766, 8vo, but was really printed at Berlin, the subject, the “folly of persecution among Protestants,” is ascribed to him. “Reflections on a plan of Study for young men of rank,” was written by him in 1759, but not printed till after his death, in 1767; and reprinted at Berlin 1780. He had begun an universal history, a fragment of which was published by Miller, at Halle, 1767, 8vo. After his death, the count de la Lippe published a translation of the Catiline conspiracy from Sallust, written by Abbt, and esteemed one of his best productions, Stadthagen, 1767, &vo; but it must not be confounded with a translation of the same author published at Lemgow, 1772, under his name. His reputation was such, that there have appeared two surreptitious editions of his works, at Reutlingen in 1782, and at Frankfort in 1783; but the genuine edition is that of Nicolai, 6 vols. Stetin and Berlin, in 1768, 1781, and 1790, which contains many pieces not before printed. His correspondence with Blum, Gause, Gleim, Klotz, Moses Mendelsohn, Nicolai, and others, contained in this edition, was reprinted by itself at Berlin and Stetin in 1782, 8vo. Besides these, there are several papers, on various subjects, written by Abbt, in the German literary journals, particularly that conducted by Less’ing and Moses Mendelsohn. Abbt’s life was written by Frederic Nicolai, and published at Berlin 1767, 4to.

, 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 .

, an eminent Persian historian and philosopher, was born at Bagdad, in the 557th year of the Hegira, or the 1161st of the Christian aera. Having been educated with the greatest care by his father, who was himself a man of learning, and resided in a capital which abounded with the best opportunities of instruction, he distinguished himself by an early proficiency, not only in rhetoric, history, and poetry, but also in the more severe studies of Mahommedan theology. To the acquisition of medical knowledge he applied with peculiar diligence; and it was chiefly with this view that he left Bagdad, in his 28th year, in order to visit other countries. At Mosul, in Mesopotamia, whither he first directed his course, he found the attention of the students entirely confined to the chemistry of that day, with which he was already sufficiently acquainted. He therefore removed to Damascus, where the grammarian Al Kindi then enjoyed the highest reputation; and with him Abdcllatiph is said to have engaged in a controversy on some subjects of grammar and philology, which was ably conducted on both sides, but terminated in favour or our author.

At this time Egypt had yielded to the arms of Saladin, who was marching against Palestine for the purpose of wresting that country from the hands of the Christians; yet towards Egypt Abdollatiph was irresistibly impelled by that literary curiosity which so strongly marked his character. The defeat, however, of the Saracens by the English king Richard, had plunged the Sultan into melancholy, and prevented our traveller from being admitted into his presence; but the favours which he received evinced the munificence of Saladin, and he pursued his purpose, visiting Cairo, where his talents procured him a welcome reception. From this he withdrew, in order to present himself before the Sultan, who, having concluded a. truce with the Franks, then resided in Jerusalem. Here he was received by Saladin with every expression of esteem, and Saladin granted him a liberal pension, which was increased by his son and successor, till the unnatural ambition of his uncle forced him from the throne of Egypt 9-nd of Syria; and thus our traveller was compelled to resort again to Damascus, after a short abode at Jerusalem; where his oral lectures, and his written treatises, were equally the objects of general admiration. At Damascus he distinguished himself chiefly by his medical skill and knowledge; but nothing could detain him from travelling in pursuit of higher improvement, and on this account, he left Damascus, and after having visited Aleppo, resided several years in Greece. With the same view he travelled through Syria, Armenia, and Asia Minor, still adding to the number of his works, many of which he dedicated to the princes whose courts he visited. After this, sentiments of devotion induced him to undertake a pilgrimage to Mecca; but he first determined to pay a visit to his native pountry, and had scarcely reached Bagdad, when he was suddenly attacked by a distemper, of which he died, A. D, 1223, in the 63d year of his age.

Of one hundred and fifty treatises, on various subjects of medichre, natural philosophy, and polite literature, which have been ascribed to Abdollatiph, one only is to be found in the libraries of Europe. It is entitled “Al-kital Alsagir,” or his “Little Book,” being an abridgment of a larger history of Egypt. Of this compendium, one manuscript only has yet been discovered by the industry of European scholars, and is now in the Bodleian library. An edition of it was published in 1300, by professor White of Oxford (from whose preface the above particulars have been taken), enriched with valuable notes, and a translation into Latin. A very learned account and criticism on this work appeared in the Monthly Review for April 1802.

was born at Riez in Provence, in 1648. He removed to Paris early in life, where he was much admired for the brilliancy of his wit. The marechai de Luxembourg took notice of him, and gave him the title of his secretary; and the poet followed the hero in his campaigns. The marshal gave him his confidence during his life, and at his death recommended him to his heirs as an estimable man. The prince of Conti and the duke de Vendome vouchsafed him their familiarity, and found great pleasure in his lively and animated conversation. The witticisms which would have been common in the mouth of any other man, were rendered striking in him by the turn he gave them, and by the grimaces with which he accompanied them. A countenance remarkably ugly and full of wrinkles, which he managed at pleasure, stood him instead of a variety of masks. Whenever he read a tale or a comedy, he made a ludicrous use of this moveable physiognomy for distinguishing the personages of the piece he was reciting. The abbe Abeille enjoyed a priory, and a place in the French academy. We have of him some odes, some epistles, several tragedies, one comedy, and two operas. A certain prince observed of his tragedy of Cato, that, if Cato of Utica should return from the grave, he would be only the Cato of the abbe Abeille. He understood well enough what was necessary to the formation of a good poet: but he was not one himself. His style is feeble, low, and languid. In his versification he discovers none of that dignity he had in his character. He died at Paris, the 21st of May, 1718. A French critic, speaking of the two tragedies, Solyman and Hercules, written by Jean Juvenon de la Thuillerie, says, the reader will be able to judge of their merit, when he is informed that they were attributed to the Abbé Abeille .

, brother of the preceding, was also born at Riez, and became a surgeon and medical writer of considerable eminence. His publications are: 1. “Htstoire des Os,” Paris, 1685, 12mo. 2. “Traité des plaies d'Arquebusades,” Paris, 1696, 12mo. 3. “Le parfait Chirurgien d'armée,” 1696, 12mo, reckoned his most useful work. He wrote also some poetry. He died Nov. 9, 1697, leaving a son who wrote two unsuccessful dramas .

was born at Toulouse, June 2, 1719; and died at Paris, July 28, 1807. He was formerly inspector general of the manufactures of France, and secretary to the council of trade. He wrote: 1. “Corps d‘observations de la Societe d’ Agriculture, de Commerce, et des Arts, etablie par Jes Etats de Bretagne,” Rennes, 1761, 8vo. “Principes sur la libe'rte du Commerce des Grains,” Paris, 1768, 8vo. He also published “Observations sur l'Histoire Naturelle de Buffon,” written by M. Malesherbes, with a preface and notes, Paris, 1796, 2 vols. 8vo .

, a native of Halberstadt, and an eminent historian of the last century, born at Hindenburg in 1676, published in 1710 the history of Prussia and Brandenburg, “Preussische und Brandisburgische Staats-Historie,” Leipsic, 8vo; in 1714, some favourite satires; and, in 1715, a work of far more utility and importance, “Historia Monarchiarum orbis antiqui,” Leipsic, 8vo; a Greek Archaeology, 1738; and a translation of Boileau. He died at Westdorf in 1763 .

, a physician, assessor of the College of Physicians, and member of the Literary Society at Halberstadt, the son of the preceding Gaspar, was born July 8, 1714. In 1731, he commenced his theological studies at Halberstadt, under the celebrated Mosheim, and a year after removed to Halle, where he attended the lectures of Wolfe and Baumgarten, and often preached with much applause. In a few years, however, he gave up his theological pursuits, studied medicine, and in 1744 was admitted to the degree of doctor at Konigsberg. On his return to Halberstadt, he practised as a physician above half a century, and died Nov. 23, 1794. He is said to have been uncommonly successful in practice, yet had very little faith in medicine, and always prescribed such remedies as were cheap and common. Probity, modesty, and humanity, were the most striking features in his character. While studying medicine at Halle, he did not neglect polite literature. He made some poetical translations, particularly one of Juvenal into German, which he published in 1738 .

, an eminent musician, was a native of Germany, and a disciple of Sebastian Bach. During nearly ten years he was in the band of the electoral king of Poland at Dresden; but the calamities of war having“reduced that court to a close ceconomy, he left Dresden in 1758, with only three dollars in his pocket, and proceeded to the next little German capital, where his talents procured a temporary supply. In 1759 he made his way to England, where he soon obtained notice and reward. He was first patronized by the dukje of York: and on the formation of her present majesty’s band, was appointed chamber-musician to her majesty, with a salary of o”.200 per annum. In 1763, in conjunction with John Christian Bach, he established a weekly concert by subscription, which was well supported; and he had as many private pupils as he chose to teach. Abel performed on several instruments; but that to which he chiefly attached himself was the viol da gamba, an instrument growing out of fashion, and now very little used. His hand was that of a perfect master.

Dr. Burney gives the following character of his compositions and performance. “His compositions were easy and elegantly simple; for he used to say, ` I do not choose to be always struggling with difficulties, and playing with all my might. I make my pieces difficult whenever I please, according to my disposition, and that of my audience.' Yet in nothing was he so superior to himself, and to other musicians, as in writing and playing an adagio; in which the most pleasing, yet learned modulation, the richest harmony, and the most elegant and polished melody, were all expressed with such feeling, taste, and science, that no musical production or performance with which I was then acquainted, seemed to approach nearer perfection. The knowledge Abel had acquired in Germany in every part of musical science, rendered him the umpire of all musical controversies, and caused him to be consulted in all difficult points. His concertos and other pieces were very popular, and frequently played on public occasions. The taste and science of Abel were rather greater than his invention, so that some of his later productions, compared with those of younger composers, appeared somewhat languidand monotonous. Yet he preserved a high reputation in the profession till his death.”

Abel was a man who well knew the world, and kept on tolerable terms with society, though a natural irascibility, and disposition to say strong things, sometimes rendered him overbearing and insolent in company. His greatest failing was a love of the bottle, in which he indulged to a degree that probably shortened his life. He died in London, June 20, 1787 .

, the historian of Malta; born in that ilsand [sic] about the end of the sixteenth century, descended from an illustrious family, which became extinct on his death. He entered of the order of the knights of Jerusalem, and distinguished himself so as to attain, before 1622, the title of vice-chancellor, and, at last, that of commander. He is principally known by a very rare and curious work, entitled, “Malta illustrata, ovvero della descrizione di Malta, con le sue antichità, ed altre notizie,” Malta, 1647, fol. In this volume the author has displayed great learning, and has accumulated a fund of information on every part of the history of his country. It is divided into four books, comprehending the topography and actual state of the island of Malta, its antient history, churches, convents, and an account of the grand masters, and most distinguished families and individuals. A few particulars of his life'are incidentally noticed, by which it appears that he had travelled over the greatest part of Europe, in quest of antient books and remains of antiquity, and corresponded with the most eminent scholars of his time, as Gualteri, Holstein, and Peiresc. This history, which he yvrote when considerably advanced in life, was translated into Latin by John Anthony Seiner, with a short preface, first published separately, and afterwards, in 1725, printed in the 15th volume of Gnsvius’ “Thesaurus antiquitatum et historiarum Sicilice.” Burmann, in his preface to the llth volume of that Thesaurus, blames Abela for admitting some fabulous traditions; but adds, that this little defect is more than compensated by his great learning ,

, the son of Berenger, of noble descent, was born at Palais, near Nantes, in Bretagne, in 1079. Such was the state of learning at that time, that he had no other field for the exercise of his talents, which were exceedingly promising, than the scholastic philosophy, of which he afterwards became one of the most celebrated masters. After the usual grammatical preparation, he was placed under the tuition of Rosceline, an eminent metaphysician, and the founder of the sect of the Nominalists. By his instructions, before the age of sixteen, he acquired considerable knowledge, accompanied with a subtlety of thought and fluency of speech, which throughout life gave him great advantage in his scholastic contests. His avidity to learn, however, soon induced him to leave the preceptor of his early days, and to visit the schools of several neighbouring provinces. In his 20th year, he fixed hist residence in the university of Paris, at that time the first seat of learning in Europe. His master there was William de Champeaux, an eminent philosopher, and skilful in the dialectic art. At first he was submissive and humbly attentive to de Champeaux, who repaid his assiduity by the intimacy of friendship; but the scholar soon began to contradict the opinions of the master, and obtained some victories in contending with him, which so hurt the superior feelings of the one, and inflamed the vanity of the other, that a separation became unavoidable; and Abelard, confident in his powers, opened a public school of his own, at the age of 22, at Melun, a town about ten leagues from Paris, and occasionally the residence of the court.

While Abelard confesses the ambition which induced him to take this step, it must at the same time be allowed that he had not overrated the qualifications he could bring into this new office. Notwithstanding every kind of obstacle which the jealous de Champeaux contrived to throw in his way, his school was no sooner opened than it was attended by crowded and admiring auditories; and, as this farther advanced his fame, he determined to remove his school to Corbeil, near Paris, where he could maintain an open contest with his old rival. This was accordingly executed; the disputations were frequent and animated; Abelard proved victorious, and de Champeaux was compelled to retire with considerable loss of popular reputation. After an absence of two years spent in his native country for the recovery of his health, which had been impaired by the intenseness of his studious preparations, and the vehemence and agitation incident to such disputes, Abelarjl found, on his return to Corbeil, that de Champeaux had taken the monastic habit among the regular canons in the convent of St. Victor, but that he still taught rhetoric and logic, and held public disputations in theology. On this he immediately renewed his contests, and with such success, that the scholars of his antagonist came over in crowds to him, and even the new professor, who had taken the former school of de Champeaux, voluntarily surrendered the chair to our young philosopher, and even requested to be enrolled among his disciples. De Champeaux, irritated at a mortification so public and so decisive, employed his interest to obtain the appointment of a new professor, and to drive Abelard back to Melun. Means like these, however, even in an age not remarkable for liberality, were not likely to serve de Champeaux’s cause; and the consequence was, that even his friends were ashamed of his conduct, and he was under the necessity of retiring from the convent into the country. Abelard then returned to Paris, took a new station at the abbey on Mount Genevieve, and soon attracted to his school the pupils of the new professor. De Champeaux, returning to his monastery, made another feeble attempt, which ended in another victory on the part of his rival, but being soon after made bishop of Chalons, a termination was put to their contests.

Abelard now determined to quit the study and profession of philosophy, which he appears to have pursued, at least in a great measure, out of opposition to the fame of his old master, and turned his thoughts to theology. Accordingly, leaving his school at St. Genevieve, he removed to Laon, to become a scholar of Anselm; but his expectations from this celebrated master seem to have been disappointed, as he speaks of his abilities very slightingly. This probably roused his early ambition to excel his teachers; for, on a challenge being given him by some of Anselm’s scholars, to explain the beginning of the prophecy of Ezekiel, he next morning performed this in such a manner as to excite the highest admiration. At the request of his audience, he continued for several successive days his lectures on that prophecy, until Anselm prohibited him, lest so young a lecturer might fall into mistakes, which would bring discredit upon his master. Abelard thought proper to obey the prohibition, but could not so easily relinquish the new path to fame which he had so favourably opened, and went immediately to Paris, where he repeated these lectures on Ezekiel. His auditors were delighted, his school was crowded with scholars; and from this time he united in his lectures the sciences of theology and philosophy, with so much reputation, that multitudes repaired to him, not only from various parts of France, but from Spain, Italy, Germany, Flanders, and Great Britain.

An incident now occurred in his life, which has given him more popular renown than his abilities as a philosopher, a theologian, or a writer, could have conferred, but which has thrown a melancholy shade on his moral character. About this time, there was resident in Paris, Heloise, the niece of Fulbert, one of the canons of the cathedral church, a lady about eighteen years of age, of great personal beauty, and highly celebrated for her literary attainments. Abelard, who was now at the sober age of 40, conceived an illicit passion for this young lady, flattering himself that his personal attractions were yet irresistible. Fulbert, who thought himself honoured by the visits of so eminent a scholar and philosopher, while he had any reason to place them to his own account, welcomed him to his house, as a learned friend whose conversation might be instructive to his niece, and was therefore easily prevailed upon, by a handsome payment which Abelard offered for his board, to admit him into his family as an inmate. When this was -concluded upon, as he apprehended no danger from one of Abelard’s age and gravity, he requested him to devote some portion of his leisure to the instruction of Heloise, at the same time granting him full permission to treat her in all respects as his pupil. Abelard accepted the trust, and, we gather from his own evidence, with no other intention than to betray it. “I was no less surprized,” he says, “than if the canon had delivered up a tender lamb to a famished wolf,” &c. In this infamous design he succeeded but too well, and appears to have corrupted her mind, as, amidst the rage of her uncle, and the reflections which would naturally be made on such a transaction, every other sentiment in her breast was absorbed in a romantic and indecent passion for her seducer. Upon her pregnancy being discovered, it was thought necessary for her to quit her uncle’s house, and Abelard conveyed her to Bretagne, where she was delivered of a son, to whom they gave the name of Astrolabus, or Astrolabius. Abelard now proposed to Fulbert to marry his niece, provided the marriage might be kept secret, and Fulbert consented; but Heloise, partly out of regard to the interest of Abelard, whose profession bound him to celibacy, and partly from a less honourable notion, that love like hers ought not to submit to ordinary restraints, at first gave a peremptory refusal. Abelard, however, at last prevailed, and they were privately married at Paris; but in this state they did not experience the happy effects of mutual reconciliation. The uncle wished to disclose the marriage, but Heloise denied it; and from tbis time he treated her with such unkindness as furnished Abelard with a sufficient plea for removing her from his house, and placing her in the abbey of Benedictine nuns, in which she had been originally educated. Fulbert, while he gave the provocation, pretended that Abelard had taken this step in order to rid himself of an incumbrance which obstructed his future prospects. Deep resentment took possession of his soul, and he meditated revenge; in the pursuit of which he employed some ruffians to enter Abelard’s chamber by night, and inflict upon his person a disgraceful and cruel mutilation, which was accordingly perpetrated. The ruffians, however, were apprehended, and punished according to the law of retaliation; and Fulbert was deprived of his benefice, and his goods confiscated.

Abelard, unable to support his mortifying reflections, and probably those of his enemies, resolved to retire to a convent; but first, with a selfishness which seems to have been characteristic in him, insisted upon Heloise’s promising to devote herself to religion. She accordingly submitted, and professed herself in the abbey of Argenteuil. Her romantic ardour of affection supported her through this sacrifice, and seems never to have forsaken her to the latest moment of her life. A few days after she had taken her vows, Abelard assumed a monastic habit in the abbey of St. Denys; but, upon the earnest solicitations of his admirers and scholars, he resumed his lectures at a small village in the country, and with his usual popularity. His rival professors, however, soon discovered an opportunity of bringing him under ecclesiastical censures. A treatise which he published about this time, entitled, “The Theology of Abelard,” was said to contain some heretical tenets respecting the Trinity. The work was accordingly presented to the archbishop of Rheims as heretical; and, in a synod called at Soissons in the year 1121, it was condemned to be burnt by the author’s own hand: he was further enjoined to read, as his confession of faith, the Athanasian creed, and was ordered to be confined in the convent of St. Medard; but this arbitrary proceeding excited such general dissatisfaction, that, after a short imprisonment, he was permitted to return to St. Denys. But here, too, his enemies endeavoured to bring him into new disgrace. Having read in Bede’s Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles that Denys (Dionysius) the Areopagite was not Bishop of Athens, but of Corinth, he ventured this passage as a proof, that the patron of the convent, and of the French nation, was not, as commonly believed, the Areopagite, but another St. Dionysius, bishop of Athens. A violent ferment was immediately raised in the convent; and Abelard, being accused to the bishop and the king, as a calumniator of the order, and an enemy to his country, found it necessary to escape with a few friends to the convent of St. Ayoul, at Provins, in Champagne, the prior of which was his intimate friend. But even here persecution, followed him, until at length, with difficulty, he obtained permission to retire to some solitary retreat, on condition that he should never again become a member of a convent.

The spot which he chose was a vale in the forest of Champagne, near Nogent upon the Seine, where, accompanied by only one ecclesiastic, he erected a small oratory, which he dedicated to the Trinity, but afterwards enlarged, and consecrated it to the Third Person, the Comforter, or Paraclete. In this asylum he was soon discovered, and followed by a train of scholars. A rustic college arose in the forest, and the number of his pupils soon increased to six hundred. But his enemies St. Norbert and St. Bernard, who enjoyed great popularity in this neighbourhood, conspired to bring him into discredit, and he was meditating his escape, when, through the interest of the Duke of Bretagne, and with the consent of the abbot of St. Denys, he was elected superior of the monastery of St. Gildas, in the diocese of Vannes, where he remained several years.

About this time Suger, the abbot of St. Denys, on the plea of an ancient right, obtained a grant for annexing the convent of Argenteuil, of which Heloise was now prioress, to St. Denys, and the nuns, who were accused of irregular practices, were dispersed. Abelard, informed of the distressed situation of Heloise, invited her, with her companions, eight in number, to take possession of the Paraclete. Happy in being thus remembered in the moment of distress by the man of her affections, she joyfully accepted the proposal; a new institution was established; Heloise was chosen abbess; and, in 1127, the donation was confirmed by the king. Abelard, now abbot of St. Gildas, paid frequent visits to the Paraclete, till he was obliged to discontinue them through fear of his enemies the monks, who not only endeavoured to injure him by gross, insinuations, but carried their hostility so far as to make repeated attempts upon his life.

It was during Abelard’s residence at St. Gildas, that the interesting correspondence passed between him and Heloise, which is still extant, and that he wrote the memoirs of his life which came down to the year 1134. The letters of Heloise, in this correspondence, abound with proofs of genius, learning, and taste, which might have graced a Better age. It is upon these letters that Mr. Pope formed his “Epistle from Eloisa to Abelard,” which, however, deviates in some particulars from the genuine character and story of Heloise, and is yet more seriously censurable on account of its immoral tendency. Here, too, Abelard probably wrote his “Theology,” or revised it, which again subjected him to prosecution. William, abbot of St. Thievry, the friend f Bernard, now abbot of Clairvaux, brought a formal charge against him for heresy in thirteen articles, copied from the “Theology.” Bernard, after an unsuccessful private remonstrance, accused Abelard to pope Innocent II. of noxious errors and mischievous designs. Abelard, with the concurrence of the archbishop of Sens, challenged his accuser to appear in a public assembly, shortly to be held in that city, and make good his accusation. The abbot at first declined accepting the challenge; but afterwards made his appearance, and delivered to the assembly the heads of his accusation. Abelard, instead of replying, appealed to Rome, which did not prevent the council from examining the charges, and pronouncing his opinions heretical. It was, however, judged necessary to inform the bishop of Rome of the proceedings, and to request his confirmation of the sentence. In the mean time, Bernard, by letters written to the Roman prelates, strongly urged them to silence, without delay, this dangerous innovator. His importunity succeeded; for the pope, without waiting for the arrival of Abelard, pronounced his opinions heretical, and sentenced him to perpetual silence and confinement. Immediately upon being informed of the decision, Abelard set out for Rome, in hopes of being permitted to plead his cause before his holiness. In his way he called at Cluni, a monastery on the confines of Burgundy, where he found a 2ealous friend in Peter Maurice, the abbot, and also in Reinardus, the abbot of Citeaux, who negociated a reconciliation between him and Bernard, while Peter, by his earnest remonstrances, procured his pardon at Rome, and he was permitted to end his days in the monastery of Cluni.

In this retreat he passed his time in study and devotion, with occasional intervals of instruction which the monks solicited; but his health began to decay, and he expired April 21, 1142, in the priory of St. Marcellus, near Chalons, to which he had been removed for the benefit of the change of air. His character is thus summed up by his late elegant and most impartial biographer. “He was born with uncommon abilities; and, in a better age, had they been directed to other purposes, their display might have given more solid glory to their possessor, and more real advantage to mankind. But he was to take the world as he found it, for he could not correct its vicious taste, nor, indeed, did he attempt it. On the contrary, the vicious taste of the age seemed to accord with the most prominent features of his mind. He loved controversy, was pleased with the sound of his own voice, and, in his most favourite researches, rather looked for quibbles and evasive sophistry, than for truth, and the conviction of reason. He was a disputatious logician, therefore; and in this consisted all his philosophy. His divinity was much of the same complexion.

“When we consider him as a writer, not much more can be added to his praise. He is obscure, laboured, and inelegant: nor do I discover any traces of that genius and vivid energy of soul, which he certainly possessed, and which rendered him so formidable in the schools of philosophy. Even when he describes his own misfortunes, and is the hero of his own tale, the story is languid, and it labours on through a tedious and digressive narration of incidents. In his theological tracts he is more jejune, and in his letters he has not the elegance, nor the harmony, nor the soul of Heloise. Therefore, did we not know how much his abilities were extolled by his contemporaries, what encomiums they gave to his pen, and how much the proudest disputants of the age feared the fire of his tongue, we certainly should be inclined to say, perusing his works, that Abelard was not an uncommon man.

“Nor was he uncommon in his moral character. He had not to thank nature for any great degree of sensibility, that source of pain and of pleasure, of virtue and of vice. Thrown, from early youth, into habits which could not meliorate his dispositions, he became selfish, opiniative, and vain-glorious. What did not serve to gratify his own humour, called for little of his regard. He wished to appear above the common feelings of humanity, for his philosophy was not of a nature to make him the friend of man. Of religion he knew little more than the splendid theory; and its amiable precepts were too obvious and familiar to engage the attention, and modify the heart, of an abstruse and speculative reasoner. When he loved Heloise, it was not her person, nor her charms, nor her abilities, nor her virtues, which he loved: he sought only his own gratification; and in its pursuit no repulsion of innocence could thwart him, no voice of duty, of friendship, of unguarded confidence, could impede his headlong progress. He suffered: and from that moment rather he became a man. We may blame him, perhaps, that he should so easily forget Heloise: but I have said that he never really loved her. More than other men, he was not free to command his affections: and from motives of religion, perhaps even of compassion, he wished in her breast to check that ardent flame, which burned to no other purpose than to render her heart miserable, and her life forlorn.

“To erase these unfavourable impressions which the mind has conceived of Abelard, we must view him in distress, smarting from oppression and unprovoked malevolence. There was in his character something which irritated opposition, whether it was a love of singularity, an asperity of manners, or a consciousness of superior talents r which he did not disguise. However this might be, the behaviour of his enemies was always harsh, and sometimes cruel; and him we pity. He now became a religious, a benevolent, and a virtuous man; and thousands reaped benefit from his instructions, as they were tutored by his example. The close of his unhappy life was to the eye of the Christian spectator its most brilliant period. In his death he was the great and good man, the philosopher and the Christian.”

In what manner Heloise received the tidings of Abelard’s death is uncertain. She requested, however, that his body might be sent for interment to the Paraclete, and this was said to have been in consequence of a wish formerly expressed to her by Abelard. Her request was complied with, and the remains of her lover deposited in the church with much solemnity. For one-and-twenty years after we hear no more of her, only that she was held in the highest estimation; that she was a pattern of every monastic and Christian virtue; and that, ever retaining the tenderest affection of a wife, she prayed unceasingly at her husband’s tomb. In 1163, she fell sick. History does not inform us what her disorder was, nor does it relate the circumstances of her death. She expired, however, on Sunday, May 17th, in the sixty-third year of her age, and her body was deposited, by her own orders, in the tomb by the side of Abelard. Their bones have lain, in the abbey of the Paraclete, in the diocese of Troyes, in France, ever since 1142 and 1163. They have been at several times, and in different centuries, moved to other parts of the church. The last transposition was made by order of the present abbess madame de Roucy, in the year 1779, with the following ceremonies. The relics of this fond pair were taken up out of the vault, and laid by a priest in a leaden coffin separated into two divisions, in order that they might not be mixed, which was exposed to view for a quarter of an hour, and then soldered up. After which the coffin was borne, attended by the ladies of the convent singing anthems, first into the choir, and then to the place of its destination under the altar; where, after prayers had been said over it, it was solemnly interred. The abbess has caused a monument of black marble to be erected on the spot, with the following inscription:

Of Abelard’s works, we have “Abaelardi et conjugis ejus, Opera 5 ex editione Andrese Quercetam,” 4to, Paris, 1616. This collection was published from the ms. of Francis d'Amboise. It contains Letters, which have been elegantly translated by Mr. Berrington in the work already referred to; “Sermons, and Doctrinal tracts.” There is a scarce edition of the Letters, “ex recensione Ric. Rawlinson,” 8vo. London, 1716, which is said to be the best, as it was corrected from the most authentic manuscripts.

, a historian, born at Strasburgh, and who died about 1646, is perhaps better known by the name of John Louis Gottfried, or Gothofredus, which he used in most of his numerous works. Under his proper name, he published only the first volume of the “Theatre of Europe,” which contains the history of Europe from 1617 to 1628; and the 17th, 18th, 19th, and 20th volumes of the “Mercurius Gallo-Belgicus,” begun by Gothard Arthus, and containing the annals of Europe, but particularly of France, from 1628 to 1636, Francfort, 1628—1636, 8vo. The Mercurius is in Latin, but the Theatre in German. The second volume of the latter bears the name of Avelin; but Christian Gryphius, in his account of the historians of the seventeenth century, attributes it to John George Schleder, who also compiled some of the subsequent volumes. The best edition of the “Theatre of Europe” is that published at Francfort, from 1662 to 1738, in 21 vols. fol. illustrated by the engravings of Matthew Maittaire. The volumes composed by Abelin, Schleder, and Schneider, are most esteemed; the others, composed by their continuators, have neither the same reputation or merit.

In 1619, Abelin published an explanation of the metamorphoses of Ovid, under the title “P. Ovidii Nasonis Metamorphoseon plerarumque historica, naturalis, moralis *pfflwij,Εχφρις” Francfort, 8vo, with the engravings of J. Theodore de Bry. He signs the dedication to this work, “Ludovicus Gottofridus.” In 1628, he was concerned in a German and Latin translation of D'Ativy’s “Etats, Empires, Royaumes, et Principautez du Monde,” under the title of “Archontologia cosmica,” of which there have been three editions, the two last with plates by Merian; but, since the modern improvements in geography, this work is less esteemed. He also compiled or translated the 12th and last volume of the History of the East Indies, published at Francfort 1628, fol. under the title of “Historiarum Orientalis Indiae tomus XII.” This history bears a high price, when complete. The copy in the French imperial library cost 4000 francs. In 1632, Abelin published, in German, his “Description of Sweden,” folio; and the year following, also in German, a “Historical Chronicle,”, from the beginning of the world to the year 1619, folio, with a great number of plates by Merian, of which the letter-press is merely the description. His last work was a “History of the Antipodes, or the New World;” this, which is in German, is a description of the West Indies, and was published at Francfort, 1655, folio. It is thought that he published a German translation of the Plasnum, a comedy by Daniel Cramer, under the fictitious name of John Philip Abel, in 1627; but why he assumed these disguises, we are not told.

, an English musician, was celebrated for a fine counter-tenor voice, and for his skill on the lute. Charles II. of whose chapel he was, and who admired his singing, had formed a resolution of sending him to the carnival at Venice, in order to shew the Italians what England could produce in this way; but the scheme was dropped. Abell continued in the chapel till the Revolution, when he was discharged as being a Papist. Upon this he went abroad, and distinguished himself by singing in public in Holland, at Hamburgh, and other places; where, acquiring considerable wealth, he set up a splendid equipage, and affected the man of quality, though at intervals he vyas so reduced, as to be obliged to travel through whole provinces with his lute slung at his back. In rambling he got as far as Poland, and at Warsaw met with a very extraordinary adventure. He was sent for to court; but, evading to go by some slight excuse, was commanded to attend. At the palace he was seated in a chair, in 'the middle of a spacious hall, and suddenly drawn up to a great height, and the king, with his attendants, appeared in a gallery opposite to him. At the same instant a number of wild bears were turned in, when the king bid him choose, whether he would sing, or be let down among the bears Abell chose to sing, and declared afterwards, that he never sung so well in his life.

was born in the Vexin Francois, in 1603. He was promoted to be grand vicar of Bayonne, then curate of Paris, and lastly bishop of Rhodes, in 1664, which he resigned about three years afterwards, in order to live a retired life in the house of St. Lazare, at Paris. He died Oct. 4, 1691, aged 88 years. His principal works are: 1. “Medulla Theologica,” 2 vols. 12mo, which gained him the title of Modleuz A belli (the marrowy) from Boileau. 2. A treatise “De la Hierarchic, et de l'autorité du Pape,” 4to. 3. “La Tradition de l'Eglise, touchant la devotion a Sainte Vierge,” 8vo, 1662, a work which the Protestants have often quoted against Bossuet. 4. “La Vie de M. Renard,” 12mo. 5. “La Vie de St. Vincent de Paul,” 4to, in which he openly declares himself against the Jansenists. 6. “Enchiridion sollicitudinis pastoralis,” 4to. 7. “Meditation pour chaque jour de Tanne'e,” 2 vols. 12mo. His Latin style is harsh, and his French writings are accounted by his countrymen flat and insipid. They allow him, however, to have excelled in every sacerdotal virtue, and to have been exemplary in his pastoral offices.

, a Spanish Jew, who died in 1685, was prefect of a synagogue in London, and the author of a Spicilegium of explanations of various passages in the Hebrew bible, published at Amsterdam, folio, about the time of his death. He published also some other works in considerable esteem with Hebrew scholars.

, Aven-Hezer, or Ben-Meir, (Abraham), a celebrated Rabbi, born at Toledo, in Spain, in 1099, called by the Jews, the wise, great, and admirable doctor, was a very able interpreter of the Holy Scriptures, and was well skilled in grammar, poetry, philosophy, astronomy, and in medicine. He was also a perfect master of the Arabic. His style is in general clear, elegant, concise, and much like that of the Holy Scriptures; he almost always adheres to the literal sense, and everywhere gives proofs of his genius and good sense: he however advances some erroneous sentiments, and his conciseness sometimes makes his style obscure. He travelled in most parts of Europe, visiting England, France, Italy, Greece, &c. for the purpose of acquiring knowledge, and far surpassed his brethren both in sacred and profane learning. He wrote theological, grammatical, and astronomical works, many of which remain in manuscript, but the following have been published: 1. “Perus a l'Altora,” or a commentary on the Law, fol. Constantinople, 5262 (1552), a very rare edition. There is likewise another edition printed at Venice, 1576, fol. 2. “Jesod Mora,” intended as an exhortation to the study of the Talmud, Constantinople, 8vo. 1530, by far the most scarce of all his works. 3. “Elegantiæ Grammaticæ,” Venice, 1546, 8vo. 4. “De Luminaribus et Diebus criticis liber,” Leyden, 1496, 4to. of which there have been three editions. 5. “De Nativitatibus,” Venice, 1485, 4to, republished by John Dryander, Col. 1537, 4to. He died in 1174 at the island of Rhodes, in the 75th year of his age, but some have placed his death in 1165.

, Abhengnefit, or Albenguefit, an Arabian physician, who flourished in the 12th century, is the author of 1. “De virtutibus Medicinarum et Ciborum,” translated from the Arabic into Latin by Gerard of Cremona, and published at Strasburgh, 1531, fol. 2. “DeBalneis,” Venice, 1553, fol.

, or Aben-Mallek, a learned rabbi of the 17th century, who wrote a commentary on the Bible, called in Hebrew the “Beauty of Holiness,” Amst. 1661, fol. Different parts of it have been translated into Latin, and printed, 4to and 8vo, in Germany. This rabbi follows the grammatical sense, and the opinions of Kimchi .

, a horticultural writer of considerable note, and to whose taste and writings the English garden is considerably indebted, was the son of a respectable gardener near Edinburgh, and descended of a good family. The father, having early discovered a predilection in the son for that profession in which he was himself allowed to excel, afforded him every encouragement; and, as his mind was solely bent on this delightful pursuit, his proficiency in horticulture, &c. soon outstripped his years. To increase his knowledge in the different branches of gardening, he came to London at the age of eighteen, and worked in Hampton court, St. James’s, Kensington, Leicester, &c. gardens. His taste in laying out grounds, and his progress in botany, were so highly appreciated, that he was advised to publish something on those subjects; but his extreme diffidence for a long time counteracted the wishes of his friends. At length he was induced to commence author: having submitted his manuscript to Mr. Griffin, bookseller, of Catherine-street, in the Strand, Mr. Griffin candidly told him he was not a judge of the subject, but, with permission, he would consult a friend of his who was allowed to be so, Mr. Mawe, gardener to the duke of Leeds. Mr. Abercrombie consented. Mr. Mawe bore testimony to the merit of the production, and prefixed his name to the publication, in order to give it that celebrity to which it was so justly entitled, for which he received a gratuity of 20 guineas. The work was published under the title of “Mawe’s Gardener’s Calendar;” the flattering reception which it experienced induced the real writer to publish another work under his own name; “The Universal Dictionary of Gardening and Botany,” in 4to. This was followed by “The Gardener’s Dictionary,” “The Gardener’s Daily Assistant,” “The Gardener’s Vade Mecum,” “The Kitchen Gardener and Hot-Bed Forcer,” “The HotHouse Gardener,” &c. &c. Some of these are hasty compilations, without much display of botanical knowledge; but they were in general popular, and most of them were translated into French, German, &c. Mr. Abercrombie’s industry enabled him to bring up a large family, and to give them a good education; but he survived them all, except one son, who has more than once distinguished himself at sea in the service of his country. He died at his apartments, Chalton-street, Somers Town, in the 80th year of his age, 1806.

, a physician and historian, was the son of Alexander Abercromby, of Fetternear, in Aberdeenshire, and brother of Francis Abercromby, who was created lord Glasford in July 1685. He was born at Forfar, in the county of Angus, in 1656, and educated in the university of St. Andrew’s, where he took the degree of doctor in medicine in 1685. Some accounts say that he spent Ims youth in foreign countries, was probably educated in the university of Paris, and that his family were all Roman Catholics, who partook of the misfortunes of James II.; others, that on his return to Scotland he renounced the Protestant religion, at the request of king James, and was by him appointed one of the physicians to trie court, which he was obliged to relinquish at the Revolution. Soon after he attached himself to the study of antiquities, and published, “The Martial Achievements of Scotland,” 2 vols. fol. 1711 and 1715, to which he was encouraged by a large list of subscribers. The first volume abounds in the marvellous, but the second is valuable on account of its accurate information respecting the British history in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. He wrote also a treatise on Wit, 1686, which is now little known, and translated M. Beague’s very rare book, “L‘Histoire de la Guerre d’Escosse,” 1556, under the title of “The History of the Campagnes 1548 and 1549: being an exact account of the martial expeditions performed in those days by the Scots and French on the one side, and the English and their foreign auxiliaries on the other: done in French by Mons. Beague, a French gentleman. Printed in Paris 1556, with an introductory preface by the translator,” 1707, 8vo. The ancient alliance between France and Scotland is strenuously asserted in this work. He died about the year 1716, according to Mr. Chalmers, or, as in the last edition of this Dictionary, in 1726, about the age of 70, or rather 72.

In the former edition of this work it is said that he never made any distinguished figure in the physical profession. There was, however, a David Abercromby, a contemporary and countryman of his, who published in London some medical tracts on the venereal disease, the pulse, &c. which were collected in one volume, entitled, “D. Abercrombii Opuscula Medica hactenus edita,” Lond. 1687, 12mo. Of him no memoirs have been preserved; but his works are analysed in the Act. Lips, 1685, 1686, 1687. Saxius denominates him “medicus et philologus,” and attributes to him a humorous publication, entitled, “Fur Academicus,” Amsterdam, 1689, 12mo.

, K. B. a British officer of great bravery and talents, was the son of George Abercrombie, of Tillibodie, in Clackmannanshire, esq. by Mary daughter of Ralph Dundas, of Manour, esq. and was born about the year 1738, or, according to his epitaph at Malta, 1733; and, after a liberal education, went by choice into the army. His first commission was that of cornet in the third regiment of dragoon guards, dated March 23, 1756. In the month of February 1760, he obtained a lieutenancy in the same regiment, and in that of April, a company in the third regiment of horse. In this last regiment he rose to the rank of major and lieutenant-colonel. In November 1780, he was included in the list of brevet colonels, and in 1781 was made colonel of the 103d, or king’s Irish infantry. On Sept. 26, 1787, he was promoted to the rank of major-general.

Soon after the war broke out on the Continent in 1792-3, he was employed there, and had the local rank of lieutenant-general conferred upon him. He commanded the advanced guard in the action on the heights at Gateau, and was wounded at Nimeguen. On every occasion his bravery and skill procured him the warmest praise of the commander in chief, and of the army. In the unfortunate retreat from Holland, in the winter of 1794, the guards as well as the sick were left under his care, whom he conducted with the utmost humanity, amidst many painful scenes, during the disastrous march from Deventer to Oldensall. In 1795, he was made knight of the Bath, and appointed commander in chief of the forces in the West Indies. On his arrival, he obtained possession of the island of Grenada, in the month of March, and soon after of the settlements of Demarara and Essequibo, in South America. His next conquests were the islands of St. Lucia and St. Vincent’s; and in February 1797 the Spanish island of Trinidad capitulated to him. This successful campaign being concluded, he returned to Europe, and had the command conferred upon him of the 2d, or North British dragoons, and had been before his arrival promoted to the rank of lieutenant-general, and was appointed lieutenant-governor of the Isle of Wight, from which he was in 1798 removed to the higher office of governor of Fort Augustus and Fort St. George. Previous to this he was appointed commander in chief in Ireland. In this situation he laboured to maintain the discipline of the army, to suppress the rising rebellion, which had been concerted between the French government and a number of traitors at home; and he protected the people from the inconveniencies of military government, with a care and skill worthy of the great general, and the enlightened and beneficent statesman. But circumstances rendering it necessary that the civil and military command of that country should be invested in the same person (the marquis Cornwallis), he was removed to the chief command in Scotland, where his conduct gave universal satisfaction.

When the great, and, in its plan, highly judicious enterprize against Holland was undertaken, sir Ralph Abercromby held a principal command under his royal highness the duke of York; and it was confessed, even by the enemy, that no victory could have conferred more honour than the great talents, activity, and bravery he displayed in forwarding the purposes of that expedition, which failed, partly from the want of a judicious co-operation on the part of our allies, the Russians, but perhaps chiefly from the conduct of the Dutch themselves, who still were deluded by the professions and pretended amity of the French.

A more favourable enterprize, however, soon afforded our gallant hero an opportunity of immortalizing his name. This was the memorable expedition ordered in 1801 to dispossess the French of Egypt. To this destination, sir Ralph conducted the English army and fleet in perfect health and spirits, and landed at Aboukir on the 8th of March, 1801, after a severe battle, in which the English were victorious. The landing, the first dispositions, the attack, and the courage opposed to attack, the high confidence of the army in their general, and the decided superiority of the British infantry under his command over the French, which was thought the bravest and best disciplined infantry in Europe, all demonstrated that the best qualities of the greatest commanders were united in sir Ralph Abercromby. But it was his destiny to fall in the moment of victory. After having repulsed the French in a general attack upon our army near Alexandria, the French again, on the 21st March, made a second advance, which was contested with unusual obstinacy, and they were again forced to retreat. On this memorable occasion, he received a mortal wound in the thigh, which he concealed until the enemy were totally routed, when he fell from his horse through loss of blood. He was conveyed from the field of battle on board the admiral’s ship, where he died on the 28th, and was interred under the castle of St. Elmo, in La Valetta, in the island of Malta. The following just and admired tribute to his memory was contained in the dispatch from lord Hutchinson, who succeeded him in the chief command:——“We have sustained an irreparable loss, in the person of our never to be sufficiently lamented commander in chief, sir Ralph Abercromby, who was mortally wounded in the action, and died on the 28th of March, I believe he was wounded early; but he concealed his situation from those about him, and continued in the field giving his orders with that coolness and perspicuity which had ever marked his character, till long after the action was over, when he fainted through weakness and loss of blood. Were it permitted for a soldier to regret any one who has fallen in the service of his country, I might be excused for lamenting him more than any other person; but it is some consolation to those who tenderly loved him, that, as his life was honourable, so his death was glorious; His memory will be recorded in the annals of his country; will be sacred to every British soldier, and embalmed in the recollection of a grateful posterity.” In private life, sir Ralph in his manners had somewhat of reserve; but was truly amiable, honourable, and virtuous, attached to his country and to his profession, and in every relative duty most exemplary. He was one of a family distinguished for bravery or talents. His brother James, a lieutenant-colonel in the 22d foot, was killed in America, 1774, at the battle of Bunker’s Hill. The character and high rank of his surviving brother, sir Robert Abercrombie, K. B. are well known. Another, Alexander, one of the Scotch Judges, died in 1795, a man of high reputation in the law, and not less distinguished for his taste in the belles lettres. He was the author of ten papers in the Mirror, and nine in the Lounger, two well-known periodical papers published at Edinburgh. Sir Ralph sat in three parliaments for the county of Clackmannan.

As a testimony of national regard, the House of Commons unanimously voted a monument to his memovy in St. Paul’s cathedral, and a pension of £.2000. was settled on his family. His widow, Mary Anne, daughter of John Menzies, of Farnton, in Perthshire, esq. was created Baroness Abercrombie, of Aboukir and Tillibodie, in the county of Clackmannan, with remainder to her issue male by her late husband. Sir Ralph left four sons: George, a barrister, heir-apparent to the barony; John, a majorgeneral in the army; James, member of parliament for Midhurst; and Alexander, also a major in the army.

, an eminent dissenting minister in Ireland, was born Oct. 19, 1680: his father was a dissenting minister in Colraine, his mother a Walkiushaw of Renfrewshire, in Scotland. In 1689 he was separated from his parents; his father having been employed by the Presbyterian clergy to solicit some public affairs in London, at a time when his mother, to avoid the tumult of the insurrections in Ireland, withdrew to Derry. He was at this time with a relation, who in that general confusion determined to remove to Scotland; and having no opportunity of conveying the child to his mother, carried him along with him. Thus he happily escaped the hardships of the siege of Derry, in which Mrs. Abernethy lost all her other children. Having spent some years at a grammar-school, he was removed to Glasgow college, where he continued till he took the degree of M. A. His own inclination led him to the study of physic, but he was dissuaded from it by his friends, and turned to that of divinity; in pursuance of which he went to Edinburgh, and was some time under the care of the celebrated professor Campbell. At his return home, he proceeded in his studies with such success, that he. was licensed to preach by the presbytery before he was 21 years of age. In 1708, having a call by the dissenting congregation at Antrim, he was ordained. His congregation was large, and he applied himself to the pastoral work with great diligence. His preaching was much admired; and, as his heart was set upon the acquisition of knowledge, he was very industrious in reading. In 1716, he attempted to remove the prejudices of the native Irish in the neighbourhood of Antrim, who were of the Popish persuasion, and bring them over to the Protestant faith. His labours were not without success, for several were induced to renounce their errors. About the time the Bangorian controversy was on foot in England, encouraged by the freedom of discussion which it had occasioned, a considerable number of ministers and others, in the North of Ireland, formed themselves into a society for their improvement in useful knowledge. Their plan was to bring things to the test of reason and scripture, without having a servile regard to any human authority. Abernethy pursued this design with much zeal, and constantly attended their meetings at Belfast, whence it was called the Belfast society. Debates, however, soon grew warm, and dissensions high among them, on the subject of requiring subscription to the Westminster confession. This controversy, on the negative side of which Abernethy was one of the principal leaders, was brought into the general synod, and ended in a rupture in 1726. The synod determined, that those ministers, who at the time of this rupture, and for some years before, were known by the name of non-subscribers, should be no longer of their body: the consequence of which was, that the ministers of this denomination found everywhere great difficulties arising from jealousies spread among their people. The reputation which Abernethy had acquired began now to decay, and some of his people forsook his ministry, and went to other congregations: and in a short time the number of the scrupulous and dissatisfied so increased, that they were by the synod erected into a distinct congregation, and provided with a minister. There happened about this time a vacancy in the congregation of Wood-street, in Dublin: to this Abernethy had an invitation, which he accepted. When he came to Dublin, he applied himself to study and to the composing of sermons with as great industry as ever. He wrote all his sermons at full length, and constantly made use of his notes in the pulpit. Here he continued his labours for ten years with much reputation: and while his friends, from the strength of his constitution and his perfect temperance, promised themselves a longer enjoyment of him, he was attacked by the gout, to which he had been subject, in a vital part, and died, Dec. 1740, in the 60th year of his age.

The most celebrated of his writings were his two volumes of “Discourses on the Divine Attributes,” the first of which only was published during his life. These excited a very general attention and admiration, were much applauded and recommended by archbishop Herring, and are still held in high esteem. Four volumes of “Posthumous Sermons” were likewise published, the two first in 1748, and the others in 1757: to which is prefixed the life of the author, written, as is generally understood, by Dr. Duchal. In 1751, a volume of his controversial “Tracts” was published in London. He published in his life-time three occasional Sermons, and a pamphlet or two on the dissenting controversy. He left behind him a diary of his life, which begins in February 1712-13, a little after his wife’s death. It consists of six large volumes in quarto, ia a very small hand, and very closely written. It is, indeed, say his biographers, an amazing work, in which the temper of his soul is throughout expressed with much exactness; and the various events he met with are described; together with his reflections upon them, and his improvements of them. The whole bears such characters of a reverence and awe of the Divine presence upon his mind, of a simplicity and sincerity of spirit, and of the most careful discipline of the heart, that how great soever his reputation in the world was, it shews his real worth to have been superior to the esteem in which he was held.

, or Abgarus, a name given to several of the kings of Edessa in Syria, one of whom is said to have written a letter to our Saviour, and to have received an answer, and at the same time an handkerchief, on which was impressed the portrait of Jesus Christ Eusebius is the first who has reported this story, which has generally obtained more belief from Protestant than from Popish writers. Father Simon and M. du p in pronounce the letters to be forgeries, while Dr. Parser, in his “Demonstration of the Law of Nature and the Christian Religion,” Dr. Cave, in his Literary History, and Dr. Grabe, in his “Spicilegium Patrum,” and others, are inclined to think them genuine. Dr. Lardner, however, in his “Testimonies of ancient Heathen Authors,” argues with much force of reasoning against their authenticity. The letters being short, are inserted here as curiosities. “The copy of the letter which was written by Abgarus the toparch to Jesus, and sent to him at Jerusalem by the courier Ananias:

“Abgarus, toparch of Edessa, to Jesus the good saviour, who has appeared at Jerusalem, sendeth greeting. I have heard of thee, and of thy cures, performed without herbs, or other medicines. For it is reported that thou makest the blind to see, and the iame to walk; that thou cleansest lepers, and easiest out unclean spirits and demons, and healest those who are tormented with diseases of a long standing, and raisest the dead. Having heard of all these things concerning thee, I conclude in my mind one of these two things either that thou art God come down from heaven to do these things, or else thou art the Son of God, and so performest them. Wherefore I now write unto thee, entreating thee to come to me, and to heal my distemper. Moreover, I hear that the Jews murmur against thee, and plot to do thee mischief. I have a city, small indeed, but neat, which may suffice for us both.”

“Abgarus, thou art happy, forasmuch as thou hast believed in me, though thou hast not seen me. For it is written concerning me, that they who have seen me should not believe in me, that they who have not seen me might believe and live. As for what thou hast written to me, desiring me to come to thee, it is necessary that all those things, for which I am sent, should be fulfilled by me here; and that, after fulfilling them, I should be received up to him that sent me. When, therefore, I shall be received up, I will send to thee some one of my disciples, that he may heal thy distemper, and give life to thee, and to those who are with thee.”

The disciple, thus sent, was Thaddeus, one of the seventy, according to Eusebius’ account, which Lardrier allows, may have been procured by that historian from the archives of the city of Edessa. But it is not, perhaps, necessary to dwell longer on the authenticity of what is now so generally given up by ecclesiastical writers. Before Lardner’s time, an ample confutation appeared in the General Dictionary, including Bayle, art. Abgarus; and Mr. Jones, in the second volume of “A new and full method of settling the canonical authority of the New Testament,” discussed the question with much learning and judgment. Mosheim seems to be of opinion that, although the letters are spurious, there is no reason of sufficient weight to destroy the credibility of Abgarus having applied to our Saviour for his assistance.

, or Abiosus, a physician and mathematician, born at Bagnuolo, in the kingdom of Naples, flourished towards the end of the fifteenth and beginning of the sixteenth century. Some of his works were much esteemed. His “Dialogus in Astrologiae defensionem, item Vaticinium a diluvio usque ad Christi annos 17,” Venice, 1474, 4to, was put into the Index Expurgatovius, and is extremely rare.

, an English divine, was educated at Oxford, where he took the degree of B. A. July 4, 1513, and that of M. A. June 27, 1516, and afterwards proceeding in divinity, became doctor of that faculty. He was not only a man of learning, but a great master of instrumental music, and well skilled in the modern languages. These qualifications introduced him at court, where he became domestic chaplain to queen Catherine, wife of Henry VIII. and tauoht her music and grammar. Strype calls him “the lady Marie’s chaplain.” In 1530 queen Catherine gave him the living of Bradwelljuxta-mare, in Essex; and the affection he bore to his royal mistress engaged him in that dangerous controversy which was occasioned by king Henry’s determination to divorce Catherine that he might be at liberty to marry Anne Bullen. Able opposed this divorce both by word and writing, publishing a tract, entitled, “Tractatus de non dissolvendo Henrici et Catherinæ matrimonio.” Tanner mentions this, or perhaps another tract, by the name of “Invicta Veritas: An answer, that by no manner of Jaw it may be lawful for the king to be divorced from the queen’s grace, his lawful and very wife.” It is not improbable that this was a distinct tract from the former, as in the Stat. 25 Henry VIII. c. 12, he is mentioned as having “caused to be printed divers books against the said divorce and separation animating the said lady Catherine to persist in her opinion against the divorce procured divers writings to be made by her by the name of Queen-­abetted her servants to call her Queen.” In 1534 he was prosecuted for being concerned in the affair of Elizabeth Barton, called the Holy Maid of Kent, and was found guilty of misprision of treason. He was also one of those who denied the king’s supremacy over the church; for which he was imprisoned, and afterwardshanged, drawn, and quartered in Smithfield, July 30, 1540. In a room in Beauchamp’s Tower, in the Tower of London, anciently a place of confinement for state prisoners, are a great number of inscriptions on the wall, written by the prisoners, and among others, under the word Thomas a great A upon a bell, a punning rebus on his name.

, an eminent magistrate of the city of London, was one of the younger sons of James Abney, esq. of Willesley, in the county of Derby, where his ancestors had resided for upwards of five hundred years. He was born January 1639; and, as his mother died in his infancy, his father placed him at Loughborough school, in Leicestershire; to be under the eye of his aunt, lady Bromley, widow of sir Edward Bromley, a baron of the Exchequer in the reigns of queen Elizabeth and James I. At what time he came to London, we are not told; but he appears to have carded on business with success and reputation, as in 1693 he was elected sheriff of London, and in the following year he was chosen alderman of Vintry ward, and about the same time received the honour of knighthood from king William. In 1700, some years before his turn, he was chosen lord mayor, and employecd his influence in favour of the Protestant religion with much zeal. He had the courage, at this critical juncture, when the king of France had proclaimed the Pretender king of Great Britain, to propose an address from the Corporation to king William, although opposed by the majority of his brethren on the bench; and he completely succeeded. The example being followed by other corporations, this measure proved of substantial service to the king, who was thereby encouraged to dissolve the Parliament, and take the sense of the people, which was almost universally in favour of the Protestant succession. The zeal sir Thomas had displayed in this affair, as well as his steady adherence to the civil and religious privileges established by the Revolution, rendered him so popular, that his fellow-citizens elected him their representative in parliament. He was also one of the first promoters of the Bank of England, and for many years before his death was one of its directors. He died Feb. 6, 1721-2, aged 83, after having survived all his senior brethren of the court of Aldermen, and become the father of the city. He was a man of strict piety and independence of mind, and munificent in his charities. Having been educated among the dissenters, he attended their places of worship in common, but in his magistracy attended the church, on all public occasions, and. wjien solicited to support pubirc charities. The most remarkable circumstance of his hospitality, is the kind and lasting asyr lum which he provided for the celebrated Dr. Watts at his house at Stoke Newington. That eminent divine was attacked by an illness in 1712, which incapacitated him for public service. “This calamitous state,” says Dr. Johnson, “made the compassion. of his friends necessary, and drew upon him the attention of sir Thomas Abney, who received him into his house; where, with a constancy of friendship and uniformity of conduct not often to be found, he was treated for thirty-six years with all the kindness that friendship could prompt, and all the attention that respect could dictate. Sir Thomas died about eight years afterwards, but he continued with the lady and her daughters to the end of his life.”

Sir Thomas was married, first, to a younger daughter of the Rev. Joseph Caryl, by whom he had seven children, who all died before him. In 1700 he married Mary Guuston, eldest daughter of John Gunston, of Stoke Newington, esq. by whom he had a son, who died in infancy, and three daughters, who survived him; the last, Elizabeth, dying unmarried in 1782, aged 78. By this second wife, sir Thomas became possessed of the manor of Stoke Newington, and lived in the manor-house.

, or Aboanifa, surnamed Alfqqman, was the son of Thabet, and born at Cousa, in the year of the Hegira 80, and of the vulgar sera 700. He is the most famous of all the doctors of the orthodox musSuimans, concerning the matters of their law; for he held the first place among the four chiefs of particular sects, who may be followed implicitly in their decisions on points of right. He was not, however, in high estimation during his life, as the calif Almanzor had him put into prison at Bagdat, for refusing to subscribe to the opinion of absolute and determinate predestination, which the mussulmans term cad ha: but Abu-Joseph, sovereign Judge, and a sort of chancellor of the empire under the calif Hadi, brought his doctrine into such reputation, that, in order to be a good mussulman, it was necessary to be a Hanifite. Nevertheless he died in the prison of Bagdat; and it was not till 335 years after his death that Melikshah, sultan of the race of the Seljuk dynasty, caused to be built for him in the same city a noble mausoleum, to which he added a college particularly for those who made profession of his sect. This was in the year 485 of the Hegira, of the vulgar sera 1092. Several of the most illustrious authors among the Mohammedans have written, in a style of commendation, the life of this doctor; Zamakhsehari, Korderi, Marghinani, Deinouri, Sobahazmouni, are of that number r and some of them have even found his name in the Old Testament, and assert that he was foretold in the sacred writings, as well as their prophet. All the historians agree that he excelled not only in the knowledge, but also in the practice of the mussuhnau law: for he led a life of great austerity, entirely detached from the manners of the world; which has caused him to be considered as the first chief and iman of the law by all the orthodox, and he is only rejected by the Shiites, or followers of Ali. The author of Rabialabrar relates the opinion of this doctor concerning the authority of tradition in these terms: “As to what regards the things we have received from God and from his prophet, we respect them with perfect submission: as to what is come down to us from the companions or contemporaries of the prophet, we select the best of it; but as to what the other doctors who succeeded them have left us, we look upon it as coming from persons who were men like us.” Houssain-Vaez, expounding that verse of the chapter of Amram, where God says he has prepared Paradise for those who restrain their anger, and pardon such as have trespassed against them, relates a fact of Abou-Hanifah that deserves to be noted. That doctor, having received a blow on the face, said to him who had the audacity to strike him “I might return you injury for injury; hut I will not do it. 1 might carry my complaint to the calif; but 1 will not complain. I might at least lay before God in my prayers the outrage you have done me; but I will not. Lastly, I might, at the day of judgment, require God to avenge it; but, far from doing so, if that terrible day were to arrive this moment, and my intercession might avail, I would not enter into Paradise, except in your company.”

The principal writings of Abou-Hanifah are: “The Mesnad,” i. e. The Support, in which he establishes all the points of Mussulmanism on the authority of the Koran, and that of tradition. A treatise, “Filkelam, on scholastic theology;” and a catechism, or instruction, under the title of “Moallem,” that is, The Master; in which he maintains that the faithful who adhere to the faith, never become the enemies of God, though they fall into many sins; that sins do not cause a man to lose the faith, and that grace is not incompatible with sin. These propositions, and others of a like nature, gave a handle to Vazai to write against him the book “Ekhtelaf Abi-Hanifah,” or, The contradictions of Abou-Hanifah.

, an Arabian poet, was born in the town of Maara, A. D. 973. He was blind from three years old, having lost his sight at that age by the small-pox; but this defect was compensated by the qualities of his mind. He adopted the vegetable diet of the Bramins, but appears in other respects to have believed in no religious principles. His principal work was entitled Sekth-al-zend, a poem which was greatly esteemed in the East. He was considered as one of the most celebrated poets of his nation. He died in 1057. Fabricius in 1638, and Golius in 1656, published some extracts from his poem.

, a native of Biroun, in the province of Khovarezme, who flourished about the beginning of the eleventh century, attained the title of Ai-Mohakapad, or the subtle philosopher, on account of his knowledge of the sciences, and particularly his skill in astrology. He was contemporary and rival to Avicenna, a more celebrated Arabian writer. Abou-rihan wrote some treatises oa Geography, the fixed stars, and the sphere.

, a famous rabbi, was born at Lisbon in 1437,. of a family who boasted their descent from king David. He raised himself considerably at the court. of Alphonso V. king of Portugal, and was honoured with very high offices, which he enjoyed till this prince’s death; but, upon his decease, he felt a strange reverse of fortune under the new king. Abrabanei. was in his 45th year, when John II. succeeded his father Alphonso. All those who had any share in the administration of the preceding reign were discarded: and, if we give credit to our rabbi, their death was secretly resolved, under the pretext of their having formed a design to give up the crown of Portugal to the king of Spain. Abrabanei, however, suspecting nothing, in obedience to the order he received to attend his majesty, set out for Lisbon with all expedition; but having, on his journey, heard of what was plotting against his life, fled immediately to his Castilian majesty’s dominions. A party of soldiers were dispatched after him, with orders to bring him dead or alive: however, he made his escape, but his possessions were confiscated. On this occasion he lost all his books; and also the beginning of his Commentary upon the book of Deuteronomy, which he much regretted. Some writers affirm, that the cause of his disgrace at this time was wholly owing to his bad behaviour; and they are of the same opinion in regard to the other persecutions which he afterwards suffered. They affirm that he would have been treated with greater severity, had not king John contented himself with banishing him. They add that by negociating bills of exchange (which was the business he followed in Castile), he got introduced at the court of Ferdinand and Isabella: that he amassed prodigious wealth, by practising the usual tricks and frauds of the Jewish people, that he oppressed the poor, and by usury made a prey of every thing; that he had the vanity to aspire at the most illustrious titles, such as the noblest houses in Spain could hardly attain, and that being a determined enemy of the Christian religion, he was the principal cause of that storm which fell upon him and the rest of his nation. Of the truth of all this, some doubt may be entertained. That he amassed prodigious wealth seems not very probable, as immediately on his settling in Castile, he began to teach and write. In 1484, he wrote his “Commentary upon the books of Joshua, Judges, and Samuel.” Being afterwards sent for to the court of Ferdinand and Isabel, he was advanced to preferment; which he enjoyed till 1492, when the Jews were driven out of the Spanish dominions. He used his utmost endeavours to avert this dreadful storm; but all proved ineffectual; so that he and all his family were obliged to quit the kingdom, with the rest of the Jews. He retired to Naples; and, in 1493, wrote his “Commentary on the books of the Kings.” Having been bred a courtier, he did not neglect to avail himself of the knowledge he had acquired at the courts of Portugal and Arragon, so that he soon ingradated himself into the favour of Ferdinand king of Naples, and afterwards into that of Alphonso. He followed the fortune of the latter, accompanying him into Sicily, when Charles VIII. the French king, drove him from Naples. Upon the death of Alphonso he retired to the island of Corfu, where he began his “Commentary on Isaiah” in 1495; and, about this time, he had the good fortune to find what he had written on the book of Deuteronomy. The following year he returned to Italy, and went to Monopoli in Apulia, where he wrote several books. In 1496 he finished his “Commentary on Deuteronomy;” and also composed his “Sevach Pesach,” and his “Nachalath Avoth.” In the succeeding year he wrote his “Majene Hajeschua;” and in 1498 his “Maschmia Jeschua,” and his “Commentary on Isaiah.” Some time after, he went to Venice, to settle, the disputes betwixt the Venetians and Portuguese relating to the spice trade; and on this occasion he displayed so much prudence and capacity, that he acquired the favour and esteem of both those powers. In 1504 he wrote his “Commentary on Jeremiah;” and, according to some authors, his “Commentary on Ezekiel, and the twelve minor propnets.” In 1506 he composed his “Commentary on Exodus;” and died at Venice in 1508, in the 71st year of his age. Several of the Venetian nobles, and all the principal Jews, attended his funeral with great pomp. His corpse was interred at Padua, in a burial-place without the city. Abrabanel wrote several other pieces, besides what we have mentioned, the dates of which are not settled, and some have not been printed. The following list appears in the Leipsic Journal (Nov. 1686), and is probably correct: 1. “Commentaries on Genesis, Leviticus, and Numbers.” 2. “Rach Amana.” 3. “Sepher Jeschuoth Moschici, a treatise on the traditions relating to the Messiah.” 4. “Zedek Olammim, upon future rewards and punishments.” 5. “Sepher Jemoth Olam, a history from the time of Adam.” 6. “Maamer Machase Schaddai, a treatise on prophecy and the vision of Ezekiel, against rabbi Mainionides.” 7. “Sepher Atereth Sekenim.” 8. “Miphaloth Elohirn, works of God.” 9. “Sepher Schamaim Chadaschim.” 10. “Labakath Nebhiim.” His “Commentary on Haggai” was translated into Latin by Adam Sherzerus, and inserted in the Trifolium Orientale, published in Leipsic in 1663, where his “Commentary on Joshua, Judges, and Samuel,” was also printed in 1686, folio. In this same year his “Annotations on Hosea,” with a preface on the twelve minor prophets, were translated into French by Francis ab Husen, and published at Leyden. In 1683, Mr. de Veil, a converted Jew, published at London Abrabanel’s preface to Leviticus. His commentaries on the Scriptures, especially those on the prophets, are filled with so much rancour against our Saviour, the church, the pope, the cardinals, the whole clergy, and all Christians in general, but in a particular manner against the Roman catholics, that father Bartolocci was desirous the Jews should be forbid the perusal of them. And he tells us that they were accordingly not allowed to read or to keep in their houses Abrabanel’s commentaries on the latter prophets. He was a man of so great a genius, that most persons have equalled him, and some even preferred him, to the celebrated Maimonides. The Jews set a high value upon what he has written to refute the arguments and objections of the Christians; and the latter, though they hold in contempt what he has advanced upon this head, yet allow great merit in his other performances, wherein he gives many proofs of genius, learning, and penetration. He does not blindly follow the opinions of his superiors, but censures their mistakes with great freedom. The persecutions of the Jews, under which he had been a considerable sufferer, affected him to a very great degree; so that the remembrance of it worked up his indignation, and made him inveigh against the Christians in the strongest terms. There is hardly one of his books where he has omitted to shew his resentment, and desire of revenge; and whatever the subject may be, he never fails to bring in the distressed condition of the Jews. He was most assiduous in his studies, in which he would spend whole nights, and would fast for a considerable time. He had a great facility in writing; and though he discovered an implacable hatred to the Christians in his compositions, yet, when in company with them, he behaved with great politeness, and would be very cheerful in conversation.

, a learned Jesuit, was born in the diocese of Toul in Lorrain, in 1589; he entered into the society of Jesus in 1609, and took the fourth vow in 1623. He taught the belles lettres, and was made divinity professor in the university of Pont-a-Mousson, which place he enjoyed 17 years, and died Sept. 7, 1655.

His works are 1. “Commentaries on Virgil’s Æneid,” printed at Pont-a-Mousson, 1632, 8vo; and again at Toulouse, 1644; at Rouen, 1637 and 1648. 2. “Commentary on the third volume of Cicero’s Orations,” Paris, 1631, 2 vols. fol. His Analyses of the Orations were published separately at Pont-a-Mousson, 1633, 4to. 3. “Pharus Veteris Testament!, sive sacrarum questionum libri XV.” Paris, 1648, fol. This is the most esteemed of his works. 4. “Nonni Neopolitani paraphrasis sancti secundum Joannem Evangelii. Accesserunt notse P. N. A. soc. Jes.” Paris, 1623, 8vo. These notes were from the pen of our author. He published also a Hebrew grammar in Latin verse, and translated into French Bartoli’s Italian pieces, “The Life of Vinant Caraffa;” “The Man of Letters,” and “Contented Poverty.” As an original writer he is uncommonly prolix, but displays much learning and acuteness. Bayle gives most praise to his commentary on Cicero, by which Osorius and Olivet profited much; but others prefer his Pharus. It may be necessary to add what is meant by his taking the fourth vow. In addition to the vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience, the fourth is, that the person taking it shall labour to promote the salvation of others, by instructing youth, preaching, administering the sacraments, and by becoming missionaries among heretics and idolaters.

, a Spanish rabbi, of the thirteenth century, practised astrology, and assuming the character of a prophet, predicted the coming of the Messiah to be in 1358, but died himself in 1303, fifty-five years before the time when his prediction was to be fulfilled. A treatise of his, “De Nativitatibus,” was printed at Rome in 1545, 4to. He is also said to have written a treatise on the figure of the earth, in Hebrew and Latin, which was published at Basil, 1546, 4to.

, a Portuguese Jew, though Arnaud thinks him a Christian, joined with Tobias Athias in giving a Spanish translation of the Bible in the 16th century. The title of this famous version is as follows: “Biblia en lengua Espagnola, traduzida palabra por palabra de la verdad Hebraica, por mui excel lentes letrados, en Ferrara,” 1553, folio, in gothic characters. Though the nouns and the verbs are translated according to the strictest rules of grammar, this translation is looked upon as nothing more than a compilation from Kimchi, Rasci, Abenezra, ‘ the Chaldee paraphrast, and some ancient Spanish glosses. This version is extremely rare, and much sought after. Another edition has been made for the use of the Spanish Christians, which is neither less scarce nor less inquired for. The curious are desirous of having both, in order, to. compare them together. Notwithstanding their apparent conformity, the discrepancies are very observable in the various interpretations of several passages, according to the belief of those for whom they were printed. The version for the use of the Jews, which is the most in request, is addressed to sennora Græcia Naci, with the subscription d’Athias and d‘Usque; the other is dedicated to Hercules d’Est, and signed by Jerome de Vargas and Duarte Pinel.

, an eminent Greek scholar and commentator, was born at Hamburgh, Dec. 29, 1699. At the age of thirteen, he went to a village called Dabha-usen, or Taubhausen, near the town of Griefenstein, where there was then a French colony, to learn that language; and made so much progress within seven months, that it appeared to be his native tongue. On his return home, he studied Latin and Greek; and, as his father designed him for the church, he was sent, in 1717, to the college of Herborn, a small town in the principality of Nassau-Dillenbuvgh, where, for two years and a half, he went through a course of philosophy, and studied Hebrew and divinity. In 1720, he removed to the university of Utrecht, where the instructions of the celebrated Drakenburgh and Duker inspired him with a decided taste for ancient literature, and he gave up divinity. About the end of 1723, when he had finished his studies at Utrecht, and wished to go through the same course at Leyden, he was appointed vice-director of the college of Middleburgh. In 1725, he was promoted to be rector ofthe same college; and, in 1741, he filled the same office in that of Zwol, in Over-yssel, where he remained until his death, in 1782.

At Middleburgh he became first known to the learned world by many valuable pieces of criticism on ancient authors, Herodotus, Thucydides, Xenophon, Hesychius, Æschylus, &c. which he sent to a literary journal then printed at Amsterdam, under the title of “Miscellanea Observationes critics in auctores veteres et recentiores.” Some of these have his name appended, others are marked by an H. or H. L. or P. B. A. A. H., and the fictitious name of Petrobasilius. He published also separately some critical works in high estimation: 1. “Animadversionum ad Æschylum libri duo; accedunt annotationes ad qusedam loca Novi Testament!,” Middleburgh, 1743, 8vo. To this work is added a list of words in Æschylus which are not in Stephens’s Thesaurus. 2. “Aristaeneti Epistolae, Gr. cum notis,” Zwolle, 1749, 8vo, a most excellent edition, not only on account of the learned editor’s notes, but also for the emendations of Tollius, D'Orville, and Valckenaar. 3. With the assistance of J. J, Reiske, he published a “Supplement” to the preceding, Amsterdam, 1751, or 1752, 8vo. 4. “Dilucidationum Thucydidearum, pars prima,” Utrecht, 1753, 8vo; and the second part in 1755. In this are many valuable observations on other authors incidentally introduced; but the author has not been thought so happy in illustrations on the text of Thucydides. In 1763, he published a “Supplement” to this, and a continuation of his remarks on Æschyius. We also owe to Abresch a new and much improved edition of Cattier’s “Gazophyiacium Græcorum,” (which was first published at Paris in 1651) Utrecht, 1757, 8vo.

, of Vincenza, was a priest of the Carmelite order, and a professor at Genoa, Verona, Padua, and Vincenza. In 1654, he was obliged, we are not told why, to quit the religious habit; and died at Venice, 1699, in the 92d year of his age. He publisned 1. Academical Discourses, entitled “Funghi” because theygrew, as he said, like mushrooms in his uncultivated mind. 2. “II Vaglio,” or the Sieve, answers to the remarks of Veglia on the Godfrey of Tasso, Venice, 1662 and 1687. 3. “Poetry, Sonnets, &c.” Venice, 1663 and 1664, 12.rao. 4. “L‘Arte Poetica d’Horatio, tradotta in versi sciolti,” Venice, 1663, 12mo. 5. “Ode di Orazio tradotte,” Venice, 1630, 12mo. This, and the translation of the Ars Poetica, have been often re-printed. 6. “A translation of Lucan,” Venice, 1668, 8vo.

, an Italian writer, was born at Macerata, in La Marca de Ancona, and devoted himself early to the study of polite literature, in which he made great progress. He taught the belles lettres at Urbino, where he was librarian to duke Guido Ubaldo; to whom he dedicated a small piece entitled “Annotationes varioe,” explaining some dark passages in the ancient authors. 14e published it under the pontificate of Alexander VI. and another treatise also, entitled “Hecatomythium,” Venice, 1499, 4to, from its containing a hundred fables, which he inscribed to Octavian Ubaldini, count de Mercatelli. His fables have been often printed with those of Æsop, Phaedrus, Gabrias, Avienus, &c. He has these ancient mythologists generally in view, but does not always strictly follow their manner; sometimes intermixing his fable with ludicrous stories, and satires on the clergy, which, as usual in such cases, abound in indecent allusions to the Holy Scriptures. Some of his conjectures on particular passages in the ancients are inserted in the first volume of Gruterus’s Thesaurus criticus, under the title of Annotationes variae; but they are few in number. He wrote also a preface to the editio princeps of Aurelius Victor published at Venice, 1505, and a work entitled “Libri duo de quibusdam locis obscuris in libro Ovidii in Ibin, hactenus male interpretatis,” Venice, 4to, without date. The date of his birth and death are not known, but his works appeared at the end of the fifteenth and beginning of the sixteenth century.

, bishop of Caria, in the 8th century, attached himself to the party of the learned Photins, during the disputes which at that time disturbed the church at Constantinople. He undertook, with Zachary, bishop of Chalcedon, an embassy to the emperor Lewis L to present to him a book which Photius had written against pope Nicholas, and to endeavour to persuade him to shake off the pope’s yoke. On his journey he was recalled by Basil, who had usurped the empire; and soon afterwards, finding it no longer safe to support the interest of Photius, he prudently abandoned it, and, before the council of Constantinople, entreated pardon, which was granted, and he restored to his place in the council. Forty-two treatises, written by him against Jews, Mahometans, and heretics, were collected by Gretser, and published in 4to, at Ingolstadt, 1606. Andrew Arnold published another treatise by him “De Unione et Incarnatione,” Paris, 1685, 8vo, the manuscript of which, it is said, he found in the Bodleian library.

, commonly called IbnHaklma, son to Aaron a Christian physician, was born in 1226, in the city of Malatia. near the source of the Euphrates in Armenia. He is said by some to have followed the profession of his father, and practised with great success, numbers of people coming from the most remote parts to ask his advice; but others doubt this account. However, he would hardly have been known at this time, had his knowledge been confined to physic; but he applied himself to the study of the Greek, Syriac, and Arabic languages, as well as philosophy and divinity; and he wrote a history, which does honour to his memory. It is written in Arabic, and divided into dynasties. It consists of ten parts, being an epitome of universal history from the creation of the world to his own time. Dr. Pococke published it, with a Latin translation in 1663, Oxford, 2 vols. 4to, and added, by way of supplement, a short continuation relating to the history of the Eastern princes. Dr. Pococke had published in 1650, an abridgment of the ninth dynasty, as a “Specimen Histories Arabian.”

Abulfaragius was ordained bishop of Guba at 20 years of age, by Ignatius, the patriarch of the Jacobites. In 1247 he was promoted to the see of Lacabena, and some years after to that of Aleppo. About the year 1266 he was elected primate of the Jacobites in the East. As Abulfaragius lived in the 13th century, an age famous for miracles, it would seem strange if some had not been wrought by him, or in his behalf: he himself mentions two. One happened in Easter holidays, when he was consecrating the chrism or holy ointment; which, though before consecration it did not fill the vessel in which it was contained, yet increased so much after, that it would have run over, had they not immediately poured it into another. The other happened in 1285. The church of St. Barnagore having been destroyed by some robbers, Abulfaragius built a new one, with a monastery, in a more secure place, and dedicated it to the same saint; and as he desired the relics of the saint should be kept in the new church, he sent some persons to dig them out of the ruins of the old one: but they not finding the relics, the saint appeared to some Christians, and told them, if the primate himself did not come, they would never be found. Abulfaragius, hearing of this, would not believe it; and feigning to be sick, shut himself up in his cell from Friday till the Sunday evening; when a glorified boy appeared to him, and told him, the relics were deposited under the altar of the old church. Upon this the primate went immediately with his brother and two bishops in quest of those holy remains, which they found according to the boy’s direction.

The Eastern nations are generally extravagant in their applause of men of learning; and have bestowed the highest encomiums and titles upon Abulfafagius, as, the prince of the learned, the most excellent of those who most excel, the example of his times, the phoenix of his age, the glory of wise men, &c. Our historian, Gibbon, esteems him “eminent both in his life and death. In his life he was an elegant writer of the Syriac and Arabic tongues, a poet, physician, and a moderate divine. la his death, his funeral was attended by his rival the Nestorian patriarch, with a train of Greeks and Armenians, Who forgot their disputes, and mingled their tears over the grave of an enemy.” His death took place in 1286.

, a learned Arabian geographer and historian, was born at Damas in 1275, succeeded in 1310 to the rights of his ancestors, the emirs and shieks of Hamah in Syria. He did not however obtain peaceful possession before the year 1319, and in 1320 was acknowledged sultan or king by the caliph of Egypt. He died in 1331, or 1332. His writings are a lasting monument of his knowledge in geography and many other sciences. Attached, however, as he was to study, he appears to have for some time led a military life, and in his youth followed his father in many df his expeditions, particularly in the wars against the Tartars and French in Syria. He speaks in his writings of other expeditions in which he bore a part before he arrived at the throne. His works are: 1. A system of Universal Geography, under the title of “Tekn-yni el Boldaan,” or Geographical Canons, which ends at the year 1321. It consists of preliminary matter, a general view of land, water, rivers, mountains, &c. twenty-four tables of longitude and latitude, with marginal notes descriptive of 'the countries, and twentyfour chapters describing the principal towns. There are manuscripts of this work in the Imperial Library at Paris, in the Vatican, and in the Bodleian. That in the library of the university of Leyden was written under the inspection of the author, with some notes, supposed to be by his own hand. 2. “An Universal History,” from the creation of the world to the birth of Mahomet, which forms about fifty or sixty pages. Various portions of these two works have been translated; as, 1. “Chorasmiai et Mavaralnahrai;” i.e. “Regionum extra fluvium Oxum descriptio, Arab, et Lat. ex interpret. Joan. Graevii ,” London, 1650, 4to. reprinted by Dr. Hudson, in his Collection of the lesser Geographers, Oxford, 1698 1712, 4 vols. 8vo. with a description of Arabia by Abulfeda, Arab, et Lat. and the same, translated into French, was added, by Ant. de la Roque, to his “Voyage en Palestine,” Paris, 1717, 12mo. 3. “Caput primum Geographic ex Arabico in Latinum translat. promulgari jussit L. A. Muratorius, in Antiq. Italicis medii sevi,” Dissert. 54, p. 941, 942. 4. “Tabula Syriae, Arab, et Lat. cum notis Koehleri, et animadversionibus Jo. Jac. Reiskii,” Lips. 1766, 4to. 5. “Annales Moslemici, Arab, et Lat. a Jo. Jac. Reiskio,” Lips. 1754, 4to. 6. “Abulfedae Annales Moslemici, Aral), et Lat. opera et studiis J. J. Reiske, sumptibus atque auspiciis P. F. Suhmii, nunc primum edidit J. G. Ch. Adler,” Copenhagen, 1789—1794, 5 vols. 4to. 7. “Descriptio Egypti, Arab, et Lat. ed. Jo. Dav. Michaelis,” Gottirigen, 1776, 4to. 8. “Africa, Arab, cum notis; excudi curavit I. G. Kickhorn,” Gottingen, 1790, 8vo. Eickhorn’s notes and additions are in the 4th vol. of the “Bibliotheque Theologique Universelle,” with M. Rinck’s additions and corrections. 9. “Tabulae qusedam Geographicae et alia ejusdem argurnenti specimina, Arabice,” by Fred. Theoph. Rinck, Lips. 1791, 8vo. 10. “Geographia Latina facta ex Arabico, a Jo. Jac. Reiskio.” 11. “Abulfedae descriptio regionum Nigritarum,” printed at the end of Rinck’s edition of Macrizi’s “Historia regum Islamiticorum in Abyssinia,” Leyden, 1790, 4to. 12. “Tabula septima ex Abulfedoe Geographia, Mesopotamiam exhibens, Arabice, cura E. F. C. Rosenmuller, notas adspersit H. E. G. Paulus,” 1791; inserted in the “Nouveau Repertoire de la Litterature Orientale,” vol. 3. 13. “Abulfedae Arabia; descriptio,” faith a Commentary by Chr. Rommel, Gottingen, 1801, 4to. In 1728, Gagnier published the prospectus of a translation of Abulfeda’s Geography, and had made some progress in the printing of it, when he died. This occasioned the mistake of some Bibliographers, who speak of this translation as having been published at London in 1732, fol. Gagnier, however, published, 14. “De Vita et rebus gestis Mohammedis liber, Arab, et Lat. cum notis,” Oxford, 1725, fol. 15. “Auctarium ad vitam Saladini, extractum ex Abulfedos Historia universali, cum versione Lat. Alb. Scultens;” this appears at the end of Bohadinus’s Life of Saladine, Leiden, 1732, or 1755, fol. 16. “Climats Alhend et Alsend,” translated into Latin from Abulfeda, may be found in Thevenot’s Voyages, Paris, 1696, 2 vols. fol. And, 17. In Muratori’s Italian Historians, is the History of the Saracens. 18. The last publication we shall notice, is, some extracts respecting the history of Africa and Sicily, under the empire of the Arabs, by Gregorio, in his collections for a history of Sicily, 1790. It remains yet to be mentioned, that a manuscript of Abulfeda’s Universal History is in the library of St. Germain-des-Pres, and another in the French imperial library. Several chapters of the first part of the Universal History, which had never been published, are printed, Arab, et Lat. in the new edition of Pococke’s “Specimen Historise Arabum,” by Professor White, of Oxford, 1806.

, khan of the Tartars, worthy of a place in this Dictionary, as well on account of his literary talents as from the circumstance of his being the only Tartar historian with whom the nations of Europe are acquainted. He was born in the city of Urgens, capital of the country of Kharasm, in the year of the hegira 1014, answering to the year 1605 of the Christian sera. He was the fourth, in order of birth, of seven brothers, and descended in a direct line, both on nis father’s and his mother’s side, though By different branches, from Zingis khan. His youth was marked by misfortunes, which contributed not a little to form his character, and to fit him for the government. of his states when he came to the sovereignty of the country of Kharasm, which happened in the year of the hegira 1054. He reigned 20 years; and, by his conduct and courage, rendered himself formidable to all his neighbours, A short time before his death, he resigned the throne to his son Anuscha Mohammed Bayatur khan, in order to devote the remainder of his life to the service of God. It was in his retreat that he wrote the famous “Genealogical History of the Tartar’s;” but, being attacked by the mortal disease that put an end to his life in the year 1074 of the hegira, corresponding to 1663 of our sera, before he could complete it, when dying he charged his son and successor to give it the finishing hand, which he did accordingly two years afterwards. As a specimen of the style and manner of this historian, the reader will not be displeased to see the preface to that work, which, in English, is as follows; “There is but one God; and before him none other did ever exist, as after him no other will be. He formed seven heavens, seven worlds, and eighteen creations. By him, Mohammed, the friend of God, was sent, in quality of his prophet, to all mankind. It is under his auspices that I, Abulgasi Bayatur khan, have taken in hand to write this book. My father, Ariep Mohammed khan, descended in a direct line from Zingis khan, and was, before me, sovereign prince of the country of Kharasm. I shall treat in this book of the house of Zingis khan, and of its origin; of the places where it was established, of the kingdoms and provinces it conquered, and to what it arrived at last. It is true that, before me, many writers, both Turks and Persians, have employed their pens on this subject; and! have in my own possession 18 books of these several authors, some of which are tolerably well composed. But, perceiving that there was much to correct in many places of these books, and, in other places, a number of things to be added, I thought it necessary to have a more accurate history: and, especially as our countries are very barren in learned writers, I find myself obliged to undertake this work myself; and, notwithstanding that, before me, no khan has thought proper to take this trouble upon him, the reader will do me the justice to be persuaded that it is not from a principle of vanity that I set up for an author, but that it is necessity alone that prompts me to meddle in this matter that, if I were desirous of glorying in any thing, it could, at most, be only in that conduct and wisdom which I hold as the gift of God, and not from myself. For, on one hand, I understand the art of war as well as any prince in the world, knowing how to give battle equally well with few troops as with numerous armies, and to range both my cavalry and my infantry to the best advantage. On the other hand, I have a particular talent at writing books in all sorts of languages, and I know not whether any one could easily be found of greater ability than myself in this species of literature, except, indeed, in the cities of Persia and India; but, in all the neighbouring provinces of which we have any knowledge, I may venture to flatter myself that there is nobody that surpasses me either in the art of war or in the science of good writing; and as to the countries that are unknown to me, I care nothing about them. Since the flight of our holy prophet, till the day that I began to write this book, there have elapsed 1074 years [1663 of the Christian aera]. I call it A Genealogical History of the Tartars; and I have divided it into nine parts, in conformity with other writers, who universally hold this number in particular regard.”

The original manuscript of this history was purchased by some Swedish officers, who happened to be prisoners in Siberia, from a merchant, and had it translated into the Russian language. Count Strahlenberg translated it into German; and a French translation was published at Leyden, 1726, 12mo. Martiniere has copied it almost entirely in his Geographical Dictionary.

, or Abou-Navas, an Arabian poet of the first class, was born in the city of Bassora, in the year 762, and died in 810. He left his native country in order to go to settle at Cufa; but did not continue long there, as the caliph Haroun Al Raschid would have him near his person at Bagdad, and gave him an apartment in his palace with Abou-Massaab and Rekashi, two other excellent poets. His principal works have been collected into a body, called by the Arabians a Diwan t or volume, by various persons; for which reason there is a great difference in the copies of this author.

, a name assumed by a French poetical writer of the 16th century, who likewise sometimes called himself Maistre Tyburce. He resided at the town of Papetourte, whence he published or dated most of his productions, and called himself clerk or royal notary of Pont-St.-Esprit. He died, according to some biographers, in 1540 or 1544; and, according to others, in 1550. He wrote: 1. “Moralite, mystere, et figure de la Passion de N. S. Jesus Christ,” Lyons, printed by Benoit Rigaut, 8vo, without date, and now so rare that only one copy is known to exist, which is in the imperial library of Paris, and formerly belonged to that of La Valliere. 2. “La Joyeulx Mystere des trois Roys,” ms. in the same library. 3. “Farce nouvelle tres bonne et tres joyeuse de la Cornette,” ms. 4. “Le Gouvert d'Humanite, moralité a personnaiges,” printed at Lyons. 5. “Le Monde qui tourne le dos a chascun, et Plusieurs qui n'a point de conscience,” printed also at Lyons. According to the practice of the writers of his age, he assumed a device, which was Jin sans Jin. The titles and dates of his other works are given in the Bibliotheque of De Verdier, and consist of short poems, ballads, rondeaus, songs, &c.

, or Habib Ebn Aws Al-Hareth Ebn Kais, an Arabian poet of great eminence in his time, was born in the 190th year of the hegira, or A. D. 805, at Jasem, a little town between Damascus and Tiberias. He was educated in Egypt, and died at Mawsel, in the year 845. His poems consist chiefly of eulogiums on several of the caliphs, who richly rewarded him. He collected his compositions into a volume, entitled, “Al Hamasah,” according to D'Herbelot; but, according to Dr. Pococke, this was a selection from the ancient Arabic poets made by him, and not his own compositions. He was long considered as the prince of Arabian poets, and none but Al Motanabbi disputed precedence with him. Bakhteri, another celebrated poet, candidly as well as critically said of him, “Such verses as are good in Abu Temam excel the best of mine; but such of mine as are bad, are mortt endurable than where he falls off.”

, or Abydinus. This word, which signifies a native, or inhabitant of Abydos, is given by Eusebius, Cyril, and Syncellus, as the proper name of a Greek historian to whom some authors ascribe two works, “Assyriaca,” and “Chaldaica,” or the history of the Assyrians and Chaldeans; but it is probable that these are the titles of parts of the same work. The fragments quoted by Eusebius, in his “Praeparatio Evangelica,” St. Cyril, in his writings against Julian, and Syncellus, in his Chronography, have been collected and commented on by Scaliger, in his Thesaurus, and in his “Emendatio Temporum.” But Scipio Tettius, a Neapolitan writer of the sixteenth century, in his Catalogue of scarce Manuscripts, quoted by Labbe, in his “Biblioth. Nov. libror. Manuscr.” p. 167, informs us, that the entire work of Abydenus exists in manuscript in a library in Italy. The recovery of this would be of importance, as Abydenus appears to have taken, as the basis of his work, the Babylonish history of Berosus, of which only fragments remain, unless we admit, what is universally denied, the authenticity of the edition published by Annius of Viterbo.

The age and country of Abydenus are uncertain, the name Abydos being common to four cities. As Berosus, however, finished his work at Alexandria, under Ptolemy Philadelphia, it may be probable that our Abydenus, who followed him, was an Egyptian priest belonging to the temple of Osiris at Abydos, and that he flourished under the first Ptolemys, while the love of letters was encouraged at the court of Alexandria. Some writers have supposed that he was quoted by Suidas, because he mentions Paloephatus-Abydenus, a historian. This person, however, whose proper name was Palsephatus, was the disciple and friend of Aristotle, and may have written the histories of Cyprus, Delos, and Athens, which Suiclas attributes to him, after Philo of Heraclea, and Theodore of Ilium; but the history of Arabia, which Suidas also attributes to him, from the nature of the' subject, must belong to the author of the history of the Assyrians and Chaldeans, or perhaps been a different title to the same work. Such is the opinion of Malte-Bruu; but Vossius has ventured on another conjecture, although without giving his authority.

, surnamed Luscus, from his having but one eye, the disciple of Eusebius bishop of Cassarea, whom he succeeded in the year 338 or 340. Though scarce inferior to the former in erudition, eloquence, and reputation, he was deposed by the council of Sardica, together with several other bishops, who had declared themselves of his opinion; and who afterwards assembled at Philippolis, in Thrace; where, in their turn, they fulminated against Athanasius, pope Julius, and the rest of their antagonists. Acacius had also a great share in the banishment of pope Liberius, and bringing Felix into the see of Rome, he gave his name to a sect who were called Acaciani. He was a man of great genius and distinguished learning; and wrote several books before he was made a bishop, and particularly a book against Marceilus of Ancyra, of which Epiphanius has given us a fragment. Some time after he was made a bishop, he wrote the “Life of Eusebius” his predecessor; not now extant, but mentioned in Socrates’ history. St. Jerome says that he wrote 17 volumes of commentaries on Ecclesiastes, or probably a commentary in 17 books; and six volumes of miscellanies. He died in the year 365.

, patriarch of Constantinople, succeeded Gennadius in that see in the year 471. He maintained that his see ought to have the pre-eminence over those of Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem; and, to compass this design, prevailed on the Emperor Leo to restore and confirm all the privileges which the churches once enjoyed, and especially that of Constantinople. He was afterwards excommunicated by pope Felix III.; and in return he erased the pope’s name out of the sacred diptics, or the list of those bishops whose names were mentioned in the public prayers: but, being supported by the emperor of the east, he enjoyed his bishoprick quietly till his death, which happened in the year 488. There are two letters of his extant in vol. 4 of the Councils; one to Peter the Fuller, or Petrus Fullo, in Gr. and Lat. the other to pope Simplicius, in Lat. respecting 1 the state of the church of Alexandria. Cave entertains a higher opinion of Acacius, than the Editors of the General Dictionary; but the account in the latter is the more copious.

, bishop of Bercea in Syria, in the fourth and beginning of the fifth century, was at the council of Constantinople, held in the year 381, in which were present 150 bishops. He was the friend of Epiphanius Flavianus, and the enemy of John Chrysostom, bishop of Constantinople, whom he caused to be deposed. He also, when 110 years of age, wrote to the emperor Theodosius the younger, to advise him to confirm the sentence pronounced against Cyril, bishop of Alexandria, who had been deposed in a conventicle of schismatics. Notwithstanding these rigorous proceedings, Theodoret assures us that he was eminent both for his wisdom and the sanctity of his life. He died about the year 432.

, bishop of Amida, or of Constance on the Tigris in Mesopotamia, was highly celebrated in the fifth century for his piety and charity. In the year 420 during the war between the emperor Theodosius the younger, and Varanius, the king of Persia, Acacius, seeing 7000 Persian slaves made prisoners by the Roman soldiers, and perishing in want and misery, determined to alleviate the horrors of their situation. To accomplish this, he sold the sacred vessels belonging to his church, and with the purchase of them fed the poor prisoners, and sent them home with some money. This action appeared so extraordinary to the king of Persia, that he desired to see the bishop; and Theodosius allowed him to go to Persia. The interview was probably agreeable on both sides, as it was followed by a peace between Theodosius and the king of Persia. In the Latin church, he is commemorated on the 9th of April.

, bishop of Melitene in Armenia Secuuda, flourished about the year 431. He was a warm opposer of Nestorius, and equally zealous for Cyril. He was present at the Council of Ephesus, where he had a private conference with Nestorius, and refuted his opinions as soon as the council assembled. There are extant in the Councils vol. 3, a homily of his against Nestorius, Gr. and Lat. and a Latin letter to Cyril, among the “Epistolae Ephesinse” published by Lupus.

, bishop of Hagustald, or Hexham, in Northumberland, succeeded Wilfrid in that see, in the year 709. He was a monk of the order of St. Benedict, an Anglo-Saxon by birth, and had his education under Bosa, bishop of York; and was then taken under the patronage of Wilfrid, whom he accompanied in a journey to Rome. Here he improved himself in ecclesiastical usages and discipline; which his historian, Bede, tells us it was impracticable for him to learn in his own country. This prelate by the help of architects, masons, and glaziers, hired irT Italy, ornamented his cathedral to a great degree of beauty and magnificence, furnished it with plate and holy vestments, procured a large collection of the lives of the Saints, and erected a noble library, consisting chiefly of ecclesiastical learning. About the year 732, he was driven from his see into banishment, but for what cause is unknown. He was esteemed a very able divine, and was remarkably skilled in church-music. He not only revived and improved church music, but introduced the use of many Latin hymns hitherto unknown in the northern churches of England. Acca wrote the following pieces; -“Passiones Sanctorum;” or the Sufferings, of the Saints; “Officia Susp Ecclesiae;” and “Epistolae ad Amicos:” a treatise also for explaining the Scriptures, addressed to Bede, which occurs, or at least part of it, in the catalogue of the Bodleian library. He died in the year 740, having governed the church of Hexham 2-1 years, under Egbert king of the Northumbrians. His body was buried with great solemnity in the church at Hexham.

, a native of Cento in the duchy of Ferrara, lived in the sixteenth century. He published in 1545, a “Vocabulary, Grammar, and Orthography of the Vulgar Tongue,” which Fontanini praises very highly, but is wrong in supposing it the first Italian vocabulary, Lucilio Minerbi having published a Vocabulary from Boccacio in 1535, and Fabricio Luna another in 153ft. Accarisi also wrote “Observations on the vulgar Tongue,” which were printed by Sansovino in 1562, 8vo, with other observations on the same subject by Bembo, Gabriello, Fortunio, and others.

, an eminent Italian civilian, born in Ancona, studied at Sienna, where Bargalio and Benvolente taught the law with considerable reputation. Bargalio very much promoted his studies, and appears to have entertained a high opinion of his talents. The first public employment Accarisi obtained, was that of explaining Justinian’s institutes in Sienna, which he continued for six years. He was afterwards desired to explain the Pandects: and as several foreigners resorted to Sienna, for the purpose of pursuing their studies, the great duke Ferdinand the first ordered that a professor should be appointed to explain the civil law, in the same manner as Cujacius had done. Accarisi was chosen for this purpose, and acquitted himself very honourably; after which he was raised to the chair of law-professor in ordinary, vacant by the death of Bargalio, and filled it with great reputation for '20 years. His fame spread so far that every university in Italy wished to have him, and made him very liberal offers, which he Jong resisted. At length his patron duke Ferdinand nominated him law-professor in the university of Pisa, which he occupied until his death, Oct. 4, 1622.

, of Bologna, was professor of rhetoric at Mantua in the academy founded by the duke Ferdinand in 1627, and died bishop of Vesta in 1654. A volume has been published of his discourses, or orations on various subjects of divinity. When lecturing at Rome in 1636, from Aristotle’s book on the heavens, he maintained that the sun moved round the earth, and published his opinion 1637, 4to. Many of his other works yet remain in manuscript, among which are: 1. “De natalibus Virgilii.” 2. “De conscribenda Tragoedia.” 3. “Histoha rerum gestarum a sacra congregatione de fide propaganda, &c. duobus annis 1630 et 1631.” 4. “Epistolae Latinae.” 5. “Bentivoglio’s History of the Wars in Flanders, translated into Latin.”

was of an illustrious family, being descended on the father’s side from Justin, nephew to Justinian emperor of Constantinople, and also from the dukes of Athens, Bohemia, and Corinth. His ancestors bad enjoyect very honourable posts in the kingdom of Naples, and had also been viceroys of Sicily, and generals. Some of them had filled very high employments in the republic of Florence, had been ambassadors to several powers of Europe, were related to all the princes of the Morea and adjacent islands, raised to the dignity orcardinal; and had erected several splendid Carthusian monasteries in Florence, Naples, &c. Our author, the son of Neri Acciaioli and Lena Strozzi, was born at Florence in 1428. His first preceptors were James Ammanati, afterwards cardinal of Pavia, and Leonard d'Arezzo. He afterwards studied Greek under Argyropilus, and became one of the first Greek scholars of his time. He was one of the celebrated literary parties at which Lorenzo de Me.lici presided. Excelling in rhetoric, philosophy, and mathematics, he would have attained a very high rank in the republic of letters, if his weak state of health, and the part he took in the affairs of his country, had not interrupted his studies. He filled several employments in the state, and gave universal satisfaction. In 1475 he was gonfalonier, or ensign of the republic, and died in 1478 at Milan, when on his way to Paris as ambassador from the Florentines. This circumstance was a subject of the sincerest grief to the Florentines, who well knew how to appreciate the virtues of their fellow-citizens, and omitted no opportunity of inciting the patriotism of the living, by the honours they bestowed on the memory of the dead. A sumptuous funeral was decreed to his remains, which were brought to Florence for that purpose. Lorenzo de Medici and three other eminent citizens were appointed curators of his children, and the daughters had considerable portions assigned them from the public treasury. The celebrated Angelo Politian wrote his epitaph, and Christopher Landino pronounced the funeral oration. His works are: 1. “Expositio super libros Ethicorum Aristotelis, in novam traductionem Argyropili,” Florence, 1478, fol. 2. “In Aristotelis libros octp Politicorum commentarii,” Venice, 1566, 8vo. 3. In the Latin translation of Plutarch, he translated the lives of Alcibiades and Demetrius, and added to the same collection those of Hannibal and Scipio from his own pen, with a life of Charlemagne. 4. “The Latin history of Florence, by Leonard d'Arezzo, translated into Italian,” Venice, 1473, fol. and often reprinted. He left some other works, orations, letters, and miscellanies, both in prose and verse, which have not been committed to the press.

, son to Marcellus, of the same family with the former Acciaioli, was a native of Florence, first educated to the bar, where he presided in quality of senator, but afterwards acquired a prodigious stock of general learning and science. He took a journey to Padua, and became so distinguished as a disputant in scholastic knowledge, that the Venetian nobility crowded to hear him. Nor did he acquire less reputation in Florence in 1565, where he disputed publicly for several days before a great concourse of learned men. He left only the following work, “Multa doctissimorum problematum monumenta, magno studio et ingenio elucubrata.” He is mentioned with great honour by Francis Bocchi, in his Elogia of the most celebrated Florentine writers.

, probably of the same family with the preceding, was born at Florence in 1461, and having been banished in his infancy with his relations, was recalled when about 16 years of age by Lorenzo the magnificent, and educated by his directions with Lorenzo, the son of Pier-Francesco de Medici, to whom Zanobio was nearly related. He became very eminent as a Greek and Latin scholar, and had much intercourse with Angelo Politian, Marsilius Ficinus, and other eminent Florentine scholars. After the death of Lorenzo the magnificent, he became disgusted with the commotions which agitated his native place, and devoting himself to a monastic life, received fiom the famous Savonarola, about 1494, the habit of a Dominican. At this time he studied Hebrew with great industry; but his chief employment was the examination of the Greek manuscripts in the library of the Medici, and in that of St. Mark at Florence. On the elevation of Leo X. he went to Rome, and was enrolled by Leo among his constant attendants, with an honourable stipend, and a residence in the oratory of S. Silvestro. In 1518 Leo appointed him librarian to the Vatican, where he undertook the laborious task of selecting and arranging the ancient public documents, of which he formed an index, published since by Montfaucon, in his Bibl. Biblio-ithecarum Mss. vol. I. p. 202. His industry probably shortened his days, as he did not long enjoy his office, having died July 27, 1519, and not 1536, as Fabricius asserts. Saxius gives 1520 as the date.

While attending a general chapter of his order at Naples in 1515, he made an oration in Latin in praise of the city of Naples, which he afterwards published. He also translated into Latin, Eusebius of Caesarea, Olympiodorus, and Theodoret, and is supposed to have been the translator of the greater part of the works of Justin Martyr. Among his remaining works is an oration in praise of the city of Rome, printed in 4to, without place, printer, or date; but the dedication to the cardinal Julio de Medici is dated 26 May 1518. In 1495 he published Politian’s Greek epigrams, which were recommended to his care by the author in his last moments. He translated also into Latin verse the Greek address of Marcus Musurus to Leo X. prefixed to the first edition of Plato. Giraldi, in his first dialogue “De Poetis nostrorum temporum,” admits him among the good poets of his age; and others have bestowed great applause on his verses, a specimen of which may be seen in the work first quoted below.

, an Italian poet of the fifteenth century, was born at Verona, and flourished about 1470. His principal work was printed at Verona, 1479, 4to, and entitled “Acci Zucchi Summa Campaneae, Veronensis, viri eruditissimi in Æsopi Fabulas interpretatio per rhythmos, in libellum Zucharinum inscriptum, &c.” In this work each fable is preceded by a Latin epigram, and followed by a sonnet containing the moral. It was a work of considerable popularity, as there were no less than three editions in the same century; viz. in 1491, 1493, and 1497. Maffei speaks of him in his “Verona illustrata.”

, a Latin tragic poet, the son of a freed-man, and according to St. Jerome, born in the consulship of Hostilius Mancinus and Attilius Serranus, in the year of Rome 583; but there appears somewhat of confusion and perplexity in this chronology. He made himself known before the death of Pacuvius, a dramatic piece of his being exhibited the same year that Pacuvius brought one upon the stage, the latter being then 80 years of age, and Accius only 30. We do not know the name of this piece of Accius, but the titles of several of his tragedies are mentioned by various authors. He wrote on the most celebrated stories which had been represented on the Athenian stage, as Andromache, Andromeda, Atreus, Clytemnestra, Medea, Meleager, Philocletes, the civil wars of Thebes, Tereus, the Troades, &c. He did not always, however, take his subjects from the Grecian story; for he composed one dramatic piece wholly Roman: it was entitled Brutus, and related to the expulsion of the Tarquins. It is affirmed by some, that he wrote also comedies; which is not unlikely, if he was the author of two pieces, “The Wedding,” and “The Merchant,” which have been ascribed to him. He did not confine himself to dramatic writing; for he left other productions, particularly his Annals, mentioned by Macrobius, Priscian, Festus, and Nonius Marcellus. Decimus Brutus, who was consul in the year of Rome 615, and had the honour of a triumph for several victories gained in Spain, was his particular friend and patron. This general was so highly pleased with the verses which Accius wrote in his praise, that he had them inscribed at the entrance of the temples and monuments raised out of the spoils of the vanquished. Though this might proceed from a principle of vanity, and may not be so much a proof of his affection for the poet as his love of applause; yet it proves that Brutus had an opinion of Accius’s poetry, and Brutus was far from being a contemptible judge. He has been censured for writing in too harsh a style, but was in all other respects esteemed a very great poet. Aulus Gellius tells Us, that Accius, being on his way to Asia, passed through Tarentum, where he paid a visit to Pacuvius, and read to him his play of Atreus; that Pacuvius told him his verse was lofty and sonorous, but somewhat harsh and crude. “It is as you observe,” said Accius; “nor am I sorry for it, since my future productions will be better upon this account; for as in fruit so in geniuses, those which are at first harsh and sour, become mellow and agreeable; but such as are at first soft and sweet, grow in a short time not ripe, but rotten.” Accius was so much esteemed by the public, 'that a comedian was punished for only mentioning his name on the stage. Cicero speaks with great derision of one Accius who had written a history; and, as our author wrote annals, some insist that he is the person censured; but as Cicero himself, Horace, Quintilian, Ovid, and Paterculus, have spoken of our author with so much applause, he cannot be supposed the same whom the Roman orator censures with so much severity. Nothing remains of Accius, but some few fragments collected by Robert Stephens, and the titles of his pieces. He is supposed to have died at an advanced age, but the precise time is not known.

, an eminent lawyer and historian of the fifteenth century, and the first of that ancient Tuscan family who acquired a name for literary talents, was born at Arezzo, in 1415. His father was Michel Accolti, a civilian of Florence, and his mother a daughter of Roselli of Arezzo, also a lawyer. After a classical education, he studied the civil law, and was made professor at Florence, where his opinions acquired him much popularity. The Florentines, after conferring on him the rights of citizenship, chose him in 1459 to be secretary of the republic, in the room of Poggius, which office he retained until his death in 1466. The account of his transactions in public affairs are preserved in four books, with a great collection of his letters to foreign princes, which evince his sagacity as a statesman, and his politeness as a writer. He married Laura Frederigi, the daughter of a lawyer and patrician of Florence, by whom he had a numerous family, of whom Bernard and Peter will be noticed hereafter. His memory is said to have been so retentive, that on one occasion, after hearing the Hungarian ambassador pronounce a Latin address to the magistrates of Florence, he repeated the whole word for word. His inclination for the Study of history made him relax in the profession of the law, and produced: 1. “De bello a Christianis contra Barbaros gesto, pro Christi sepulchre et Judaea recuperandis, libri quatuor,” Venice, 1532, 4to, and reprinted at Basle, Venice, and Florence, the latter edition with notes by Thomas Dempster, 1623, 4to, and at Groninguen, by Henry Hoffnider, 1731, 8vo. It was also translated into Italian, by Francis Baldelli, and printed at Venice, 1549, 8vo. Yves Duchat of Troyes in Champagne, translated it into French and Greek, and printed it at Paris, 1620, 8vo. This is a work of considerable historical credit, and in the succeeding century, served as a guide to TorquatoTasso, in his immortal poem, the Gerusalemme liberata. It was dedicated to Piero de Medici, and not to Cosmo, as Moreri asserts. Paulo Cortesi, a severe censor, allows that it is a work of great industry, and that it throws considerable light on a very difficult subject. A more recent critic objects to the purity of his style, and the length of the speeches he puts in the mouths of his principal personages. 2. “De praestantia virorum sui aevi,” Parma, 1689, or 1692, the tendency of which is to prove that the moderns are not inferior to the ancients. It appeared originally in the Bibliotheque of Magliabechi, and has been often reprinted since, particularly at Coburg, in 1735, in the first volume of John Gerard Meuschen’s “Vitae summorum dignitate et eruditione virorum.”

was one of the sons of the preceding, and,on account of the great fame of his poetry, called Unico Aretino; but such of his works as have descended to our days are not calculated to preserve the very extraordinary reputation which he enjoyed from his contemporaries. According to them, no fame could be equal to what he obtained at the court of Urbino and at Rome, in the time of Leo X. When it was known that the Unico was to recite his verses, the shops were shut, and all business suspended; guards were necessary at the doors, and the most learned scholars and prelates often interrupted the poet by loud acclamations. The testimony of his contemporaries, and among them, of the Cardinal Bembo, will not permit us to doubt that his merit was extraordinary; but it is probable that he owed his fame more to his talents at extempore verse, than to those which he prepared by study. In the latter, however, there is an elegance of style, and often the fancy and nerve of true poetry. His poems were first printed at Florence in 1513, under the title “Virginia comedia, capitoli, e strambotti di messer Bernardo, Accolti Aretino, in Firenze (al di Francesco Rossegli),” 8vo; and at Venice, 1519, “Opera nuova del preclarissimo messer Bernardo Accolti Aretino, scrittore apostolico ed abbreviatore, &c.” 8vo, and have been often re-printed. In this volume, his comedy “Virginie,” written, according to the custom of the age, in the ottava rima, and other measures, obtained its name from a natural daughter, whom he gave in marriage to a nobleman, with a large dowry. Leo X. who had an esteem for him, gave him the employment of apostolic secretary; and is likewise said to have given him the duchy of Nepi; but Accolti informs us, in one of his letters to Peter Aretin, that he purchased this with his own money, and that Paul III. afterwards deprived him of it. The dates of his birth and death are not known; but he was living in the time of Ariosto, who mentions him as a person of great consideration at the court of Urbino.

, the brother of Benedetto, and usually called Francis D'Arezzo, or Aretin, from the place of his birth, was born in 1418. The celebrated Francis Philelphus was his preceptor in polite learning; after which he studied law under the ablest professors, and became himself one of their number, teaching that faculty at Bologna, Ferrara, and Sienna. He was for five years secretary to the duke of Milan, and died of the stone at the baths of Sienna, in 1483. He has been accused, but without proof, of the grossest avarice. If he left vast wealth, it was owing to the profits of his profession, of which he was acknowledged to be the ablest and most successful practitioner. A journey which he made to Rome, when Sixtus IV. was Pope, has given rise to another story, equally without proof, that he solicited to be made Cardinal, which the Pope refused, on pretence of the injury that would accrue to learning from such a promotion. Another story is recorded, more to his honour. While professor of law at Ferrara, he had occasion to lecture to his scholars on the advantages of a character known for probity and honour; and, in order to exemplify his doctrine, he went in the night, accompanied by only one servant, broke open the butchers’ stalls, and took away some pieces. The law-students were immediately suspected of the robbery, and two of them, of indifferent character, were imprisoned. The Professor then went before the Duke, demanded their release, and accused himself: having proved the fact, which was with difficulty believed, he took the opportunity to show the advantage of a good character, and the dangers of a bad one.

He left several works. The principal are 1. “S. Chrysostomi homilias in Evangelium- S. Joannis, interprete F.A.” Rome, 1470, fol. Erasmus is of opinion that this translation is deficient in fidelity, anJ that the author was not sufficiently acquainted with the Greek language. 2. “Phalaridis Epistolae,” Rome, about 1469, 8vo; afterwards re-printed in 1471, 1474, 1475. 3. “Diogenis Cynici philosophi Epistolae.” 4 -“Authoris incerti libellus de Thermis Puteolorum, et vicinis in Italia, a Fr. de Accoltis Aretino repertus, publicatus, &c.” Naples, 1475, 4to. Some writers, not attending to the title of this work, have considered him as the author of it. 5. “Consilia seu Responsa,” Pisa, a collection of consultations on questions of law. 6. “Commentaria super Lib. II. Decretalium,” Bonon. 1481. 7. “Commentaria,” Pavia, 1495, fol. He also cultivated Italian poetry, and the libraries of Chigi and Strozzi contain several of his poetical pieces in manuscript. Crescembini inserted some of his sonnets in his history of Italian poetry. His Latin letters are in the Ambrosian library at Milan.

, another of the sons of Benedetto the historian, was born at Florence in 1455, and studied law at Pisa, where he became doctor and professor. He afterwards went into the church, was promoted to the bishoprick of Ancona, and six years after, to be Cardinal, under the title of St. Eusebius, hut is better known by the title of Cardinal of Ancona. He afterwards held seven bishopricks in Spain, Flanders, France, and Italy; and attained the higher honours of cardinal-vicar and legate. He died at Rome Dec. 12, 1532, aged 77; and left some works on law of no great importance. He was the author of the bull against Luther, which condemned forty-one propositions or that reformer. One of his natural sons, Benedict Accolti, was, in 1564j the chief of the Florentine conspiracy against Pius IV. for which he was executed.

, an eminent lawyer, who first collected the various opinions and decisions of his predecessors, in the Roman law, into one body, was born at Florence, in 1151, or, according to some writers, in 1182. He was the scholar of Azzo, and soon became more celebrated than his master. Yet it is thought that he did not begin the study of law before he was forty years old. When professor at Bologna, he resigned his office in order to complete a work on the explanation of the laws, which he had long meditated, and in which he was now in danger of being anticipated by Odefroy. By dint of perseverance for seven years, he accumulated the vast collection known by the title of the “Great Gloss,” or the “Continued Gloss” of Accursius. He may be considered as the first of glossators, and as the last, since no one has attempted the same, unless his son Cervot, whose work is not in much esteem; but he was deficient in a proper knowledge of the Greek and Roman historians, and the science of coins, inscriptions, and antiquities, which are frequently necessary in the explanation of the Roman law. On this account, he was as much undervalued by the learned lawyers of the fourteenth and sixteenth centuries, as praised by those of the twelfth and thirteenth, who named him the Idol of Lawyers. They even established it as a principle, that the authority of the Glosses should be universally received, and that they should rally round this perpetual standard of truth. The different studies pursued in the ages of Accursius’ friends and enemies, will account for their different opinions of his merits; the one consisted of accumulated learning, interpretation, and commentary, the other approached nearer to nature and facts, by adding the study of antiquities, and of the Greek and Latin historians. Another reason probably was, that Accursius, who has been careless in his mode of quotation, became blamed for many opinions which belong to Irnerius, Hugolinus, Martinus Bulgarus, Aldericus, Pileus, &c. and others his predecessors, whose sentiments he has not accurately distinguished. The best edition of his great work is that of Denis Godefroi, Lyons, 1589, 6 vols. fol, Of his private life we have no important materials. He lived in splendour at a magnificent palace at Bologna, or at his villa in the country; and died in his 78th year, in 1229. Those who fix his death in 1260 confound him with one of his sons of the same name. All his family, without exception, studied the law; and he had a daughter, a lady of great learning, who gave public lectures ou the Roman law in the university of Bologna. Bayle doubts this; but it is confirmed by Pancirollus, Fravenlobius, and Paul Freyer. The tomb of Accursius, in the church of the Cordeliers at Bologna, is remarkable only for the simplicity of his epitaph “Sepnlchrum Accursii glossatoris legum, et Francisci ejus filii.”

, eldest son of the preceding, was professor of law at Bologna, where he attained great reputation. When Edward I. king of England passed through Bologna, in 1275, after his return from the Holy Land, he wished to engage Accursius to teach law in the French provinces under his dominion; but the government of Bologna, unwilling to part with so able a professor, threatened to confiscate his goods if he dared to leave the city. Accursius, however, took his leave, and after having taught law at Toulouse for three years, was invited to Oxford by king Edward, and lodged ill his palace at Beaumont. The king gave him also the manor of Martlegh, and in the grant styles him “dilectus et fidelis Secretarius noster;” and in another charter, “illustris regis Anglian consiliarius.” In 1275, he read lawr lectures at Oxford, or more probably in 1276, if he remained three years at Toulouse, In 1280, he returned to Bologna, and was restored to his chair and his property. His death took place in 1321. None of his writings remain.

, a native of Aquila, in the kingdom of Naples, and one of the most eminent critics of his time, flourished in the beginning of the sixteenth century, and lived for thirty-three years in the court of Charles V. who had a great respect for him. He was well acquainted with the Greek, Latin, French, Spanish and German languages, was one of the most indefatigable antiquaries of the age, and enriched Naples with a great number of monuments of antiquity. His favourite employment was to correct the editions of ancient authors by the aid of manuscripts, which he sought out with great care; and his first work is a lasting proof of his industry and acuteness. This was his “Diatribae in Ausonium, Solinum, et Ovidium,” Rome, 1524, fol. The frontispiece is an engraving of antique statues, among which are the Apollo Belvidere, and a Minerva, and two bas-reliefs of the rape of Proserpine and the death of Meleager. At the end of the work is a fable entitled “Testudo.” The Diatribe have been reprinted, but not entirely, as the titlepage asserts, in the variorum edition of Ausonius, printed at Amsterdam, 1671, 8vo. They are also incorporated in the Delphin edition, by John Baptist Souchay, Paris, 1730, 4to.

This writer has left an example of an author’s jealousy, and fear of being thought a plagiarist, which is too curious to be omitted. Having been accused of owing his notes on Ausonius to Fabricio Varano, bishop of Camarino, he endeavoured to clear himself by the following very solemn oath: “In the name of God and man, of truth and sincerity, I solemnly swear, and if any declaration be more binding than an oath, I in that form declare, and I desire that my declaration may be received as strictly true, that I have never read or seen any author, from which my own lucubrations have received the smallest assistance or improvement: nay, that I have even laboured, as far as possible, whenever any writer has published any observations which I myself had before made, immediately to blot them out of my own works. If in this declaration I am. foresworn, may the Pope punish my perjury; and may an evil genius attend my writings, so that whatever in them is good, or at least tolerable, may appear to the unskilful multitude exceedingly bad, and even to the learned trivial and contemptible; and may the small reputation I now possess be given to the winds, and regarded as the worthless boon of vulgar levity.” This singular protestation, which is inserted in the Testudo, has. been often quoted. In 1533, he published at Augsburgh a new edition of “Ammianus Marcellinus,” fol. more complete than the preceding edition (which is the princeps), and augmented by five books, not before known, and, as stated in the title, with the correction of above five thousand errors. In the same year and place, he published the “Letters of Cassiodorus,” and his “Treatise on the Soul.” This is the first complete collection of these letters, and, with the Treatise, is improved by many corrections. He also had made preparations for an edition of Claudian, and had corrected above seven hundred errors in that author; but this has not been published. At his leisure hours, he studied music, optics, and poetry. We have a specimen of his poetry in his “Protrepticon ad Corycium,” of eighty-seven verses, which is printed in a very rare work, entitled “Coryciana,” Rome, 1524, 4to. This Corycius, according to La Monnoie, was a German of the name of Goritz. The volume contains the poems of various Neapolitan authors, as Arisio, Tilesio, &c.

In Accorso’s time, it was the fashion with many Latin writers to make use of obsolete words. This he endeavoured to ridicule, and with considerable success, in a dialogue entitled “Osco, Volsco, Romanaque eloquentia interlocutoribus, dialogus ludis Romanis actus, &c.” 1531, 8vo, without place, or the name of the author; but La Monnoie thinks it must have been printed before, as it is quoted by Tori in his “Champ-Fleuri,” which appeared in 1529. At the end of this volume is a small work, entitled “Volusii Metiani, jurisconsulti antiqui distributio. Item vocabula ac notae partium in rebus pecimiariis, pondere, numero, et mensura.” The Dialogue was reprinted at Rome, 1574, 4to, with the author’s name, and with the title of “Osci et Volsci Dialogas ludis Romanis actus a Mariangelo Accursio.” There is another 4to edition, without date or name of the author. In the imperial library of Paris are two editions, both of Cologne, 1598. It appears by the dedication of the fable Testudo, that Accorso was employed on a history of the house of Brandenbourg; but this, and his other works, were lost on the death of his son Casimir, who was a man of letters, and had intended to publish all his father’s works. Toppi, in his Biblioteca Napolet. among other inaccuracies, attributes to Accorso a work entitled “De Typographies artis Inventore, ac de libro primum omnium impresso;” but the mistake seems to have arisen from a few manuscript notices on the subject, written by our author in a copy of Donatus’ grammar, a very early printed book.

, a native of Poland, whose real name was Klonowicz, was born in 1551, and became burgomaster of Lublin, His Latin poem, “Victoria Deorum, in qua continetur veri Herois educatio,” on which he spent ten years, procured him the name of the Sarmatian Ovid. This poem, which was printed at Ilacow by Sebastian Sternacius, the Socinian printer, in 1600, is become very rare, as the impression was ordered to be burnt. He wrote also in the Polish language, a poem on the Navigation of the Dantzickers, 1643; a Memorial of the Dukes and Kings of Poland, and other works, and “Disticha moralia Catonis, interprete Seb. Fab. Klonowicio,” Cracow, 1595. He died in 1608 in great distress, owing to the extravagance of his wife.

, a Greek poet, a native of Eretria, the son of Pythodorus, flourished, according to Saxius, between the 74th and 82d olympiad, or between 484 and 449 before the Christian æra, and consequently was the contemporary of Æschylus. He was both a tragic and satirical poet, having, according to some, composed thirty tragedies, and according to others, more than forty. These are all lost, except some fragments which Grotius collected in his “Fragmenta Tragic, et Comicorum Græcorum.” Achæus carried off the poetical prize only once. His satirical pieces have likewise perished, but Athenseus quotes them often. There was another Greek poet of the same name, quoted by Suidas, who also composed tragedies, of which there are no remains,

, bishop of Avranches in Normandy, usually surnamed St. Victor, flourished in the twelfth century. His birth-place is much contested; but it appears most probable that he was a Norman, of a noble family; and as Normandy was at that time subject to the King of England, it was supposed he was an Englishman. He was, however, a Canon-regular of the order of St. Augustine, and second abbot of St. Victor at Paris. He was preferred to the bishoprick of Avranches in 1162 by the interest of King Henry II. of England, with whom he appears to have been a favourite, as he stood god-father to Eleanor, daughter to that prince, and afterwards wife of Alphonso Jx. king of Castile. He died March 29, 1172, and was interred in the church of the Holy Trinity, belonging to the abbey of Luzerne, in the diocese of Avranches. His epitaph, which, the authors of the General Dictionary say, is still remaining, speaks his character: “Here lies bishop Achard, by whose charity our poverty was enriched.” He was a person of great eminence for piety and learning. His younger years he spent in the study of polite literature and philosophy, and the latter part of his life in intense application. His works were: “De Tentatione Christi,” a ms. in the library of St. Victor at Paris. “De divisione Animae & Spiritus,” in the same library; copies of which are in the public library at Cambridge, and in that of Bene't. His “Sermons” are in the library of Clairvaux. He likewise wrote “The Life of St. Geselin,” which was published at Douay, 12mo, 1626.

, a learned Prussian divine, was born at Geneva in 1696, took orders in 1722, and in 1724 was promoted to the church of Werder in Berlin. He enjoyed the protection of the prince-royal of Prussia; and having in 1730 accompanied the son of M. de Finkenstein to Geneva, was admitted into the society of pastors. Eight years after, the king of Prussia appointed him counsellor of the supreme consistory, and in 1740, a member of the French directory, with the title of Privy-counsellor. Having been received into the academy of Berlin in 1743, he was also appointed inspector of the French college, and director of the Charity-house. He died in 1772. He was long the correspondent of the Jesuits Colonia, Tournemine, Hardouin, Poreus, and of father Le Long, and Turretine, Trouchin, and Vernet of Geneva. He often preached before the royal family of Prussia; and such were his powers of oratory, that a celebrated French comedian at Berlin, who there taught the theatrical art, recommended his pupils to hear Achard. He was of a very feeble constitution, and for twenty years subsisted entirely on a milk-diet. In the Memoirs of the Academy of Berlin, for 1745, there is the outline of a very considerable work, in which he proves the liberty of the human mind against Spinosa, Bayle, and Collins. Two volumes of “Sermons sur divers textes de l'Ecriture Sainte,” were published at Berlin after his death.

His son Francis, born at Berlin in 1753, a member of several academies, has furnished many dissertations for the Literary Journal of Berlin, and other Memoirs of learned societies. Senebier in his literary history of Geneva gives a list of all his pieces, and a collection of them was published in German, in two volumes.

, a French physician, secretary to the academy of Marseilles, and librarian of that city, was born in 17.53, and died in 1809. He published, 1. “Dictionnaire de la Provence et du Comtat Venaissin,” Marseilles, 1785—87, 4 vols. 4to. The first two volumes contain a French and Provençal vocabulary, and the last two the lives of the celebrated characters of Provence. Bouche, the abbe Paul, and some other authors, assisted in this work. 2. “Description historique, geographique, et topographique de la Provence et du Comtat Yenaissin,” Aix, 1787, 4to.; one volume only of this has been published. 3. “Tableau de Marseilles,” intended to be comprized in two vols.; of which one only has appeared. 4. “Bulletin des Societés savantes de Marseilles et de departements du Midi,” 1802, 8vo. 5. “Cours elementaire de Bibliographic, ou la Science du Bibliothecaire,” Marseilles, 1807, 3 vols. 8vo, verv incorrectly printed, and little more than a compilation from Fournier’s “Manuel Typographique,” and Peignot’s “Dictionnaire de Bibliologie;” and it is objected to him that the immense knowledge he requires in a librarian would render bibliography impossible, and tiresome. He also published a Catalogue of the Abbe Rive’s library, 1793, 8vo, and another of the library of Marseilles; and had published four numbers of the first volume of a Catalogue of the Museum of Marseilles.

was born at Avignon, Jan. 29, 1679, of a noble and ancient family. After having embraced the ecclesiastical profession, he became not only distinguished by the excellence of his doctrines, but particularly by his charitable exertions during the plague in 1721; and his subsequent promotions had no other effect on him than to increase his zeal and his piety. Pope Clement XII. informed of his talents and conciliating spirit, employed him in the capacity of apostolic vicar, to settle the disgraceful disputes that had arisen among the missionaries of China. Achards, who was then bishop of Halicarnassus, undertook this commission; and after a tedious voyage of two years, and two years’ residence in China, where he ineffectually laboured to accomplish the object of his mission, died at Cochin, April 2, 1741, a martyr to his indefatigable and benevolent zeal. The Abbe Fab re, his secretary, published an account of this mission, entitled “Lettres edifiantes et curieusessurla visite apostolique de M. de la Baume, eveque d'Halicarnasse, a la Cochinchine,” Venice, 1746, 4to, & 1753, 3 vols. 12mo, with the translation of a funeral oration delivered on his death by a Chinese priest.

, an eminent painter, was born at Cologne, in 1556, of a good family. He discovered a taste for his art from his earliest years, and at the age of eleven, painted a portrait with such success, as to induce his parents to encourage his studies. After having been for some time taught by a very indifferent painter, he became the disciple of de Georges, or Jerrigh, a good portrait-painter, with whom he remained six years; and afterwards improved himself by studying and copying the works of Spranger. In his twenty-second year he went to Italy, and was introduced at Venice to a Flemish artist, named Gaspard Reims. This man no sooner learned that Van Achen was a German, than he recommended him to an Italian who courted necessitous artists that he might make, a trade of their labours. With him Van Achen made some copies, but, being unable to forget the reception which Reims had given him, he painted his own portrait, and sent it to him. Reims was so struck with the performance, that he apologized to Van Achen, took him into his house, and preserved the portrait all his life with great veneration. At Venice, he acquired the Venetian art of colouring, and thence went to Rome to improve his design, but never quitted the mannered forms of Spranger. His best performances at Rome were a Nativity for the church of the Jesuits, and a portrait of Madona Venusta, a celebrated performer on the lute. His talents, however, and polite accomplishments, recommended him to several of the greatest princes of Europe, and particularly to the elector of Bavaria, and the emperor Rodolph, by both of whom he was patronized and honoured. He was one of that set of artists who, in the lapse of the sixteenth century, captivated Germany and its princes by the introduction of a new style, or rather manner, grossly compounded from the principles of the Florentine and Venetian schools. He died at Prague in 1621.

, a celebrated publicist, and considered by some as the father of the t science of Statistics, was born at Elbing, a Prussian tpwn, Oct. 20, 1719. He received his academical education at Jena, Halle, and Leipsic. In 1746 he took up his residence at Marbourg, where he taught history, the law of nature and nations, and statistics, of which he appears to have formed very just notions, but at first confined himself to a knowledge of the constitutions of the different states. In 1748 he went to Gottingen, where, some years after, he became one of the professors of that university, and one of its greatest ornaments: here he remained until his death, May 1, 1772. He. had often travelled in Switzerland, France, Holland, and England; and published several works on the states of Europe, and political law and oeconomy. Those in highest estimation are, his “Constitution des. royaumes et etats d'Europe,” and “Elementa Juris Naturae,” of which six editions were printed in a very short time, each retouched and improved with great care. In his researches on the subjects of national wealth, resources, and means of prosperity, he availed himself, of the observations of all historians and travellers, and was much assisted by Hermann Conring, of Helmstadt, and Eberhard Otto, who had made large collections for the same purpose. Achenwall gave his new science the name of Statistics, or Scientia Statistica. His last work was “Observations sur les Finances de la France.”

, a Benedictine of the congregation of St. Maur, was born at St. Quintin, in Picardy, in 1609. He became celebrated as the editor of valuable manuscripts which lay buried in libraries. The first piece he published was the epistle ascribed to St. Barnabas. Father Hugh Menard, a monk of the same congregation, intended to publish this epistle, and for that purpose had illustrated it with notes, but having been prevented by death, D'Acheri gave an edition of it under the title of “Epistola Catholica S. Barnabas Appstoli, Gr. & Lat. cum notis Nic. Hug. Menardi, et eiogio ejusdem auctoris,” Paris, 1645, 4to. In 1648 he collected into one volume the “Life and Works of Lanfranc, archbishop of Canterbury,” Paris, fol. The Life is taken from an ancient manuscript in the abbey of Bee; and. the works are, Commentaries on the epistles of St. Paul, taken from a manuscript in the abbey of St. Melaine de Rennes, and a treatise on the Sacrament, against Berenger. The appendix contains the Chronicle of the Abbey of Bee from its foundation in 1304 to 1437; the life of St. Herluinus, founder and first abbot, of some of his successors, and of St. Austin the apostle of England, and some treatises on the eucharist. His catalogue of ascetic works appeared the same year, entitled “Asceticorum, vulgo spiritual] nm opusculorum, quae inter Patrum opera reperiuntur, Indiculus,” Paris, 1648, 4to. This curious work was reprinted by father Remi, at Paris, in 1671. In 16.51, D'Aclieri published the “Life and Works of Guibert, abbot of Nogent-sous-Couci,” and the lives of some saints, and other pieces, Paris, fol. There is much antiquarian knowledge in this work, respecting the foundation, Sac. of abbeys, but the dates are not always correct. In 1653 he republished father Grimlaic’s “Regie des Solitaires,” 12mo, Paris, with notes and observations. His most considerable work is “Veterum aliquot scriptorum, qui in Gallice bibliothecis, rnaxime Benedictinorum, latuerunt, Spieilegium, &c.” 1653 1677, 13 vols. 4to. Under the modest title of Spicilegium, it contains a very curious collection of documents pertaining to ecclesiastical afiairs; as acts, canons, councils, chronicles, lives of the saints, letters, poetry, diplomas, charters, &c. taken from the libraries of the different monasteries. This work becoming scarce and much sought after, a new edition was published in 1725, in 3 vols. fol. by Louis-FrancisJoseph de la Barre, with some improvements in point of arrangement, but at the same time some improper liberties taken with the text of D‘Acheri, and particularly with his learned prefaces. D’Acheri contributed also to Mabillon’s “Acta Sanctorum ordinis S. Benedicti,” &c. He lived a life of much retirement, seldom going out, or admitting trifling visits, and thus found leisure for those vast labours already noticed, and which procured him the esteem of the popes Alexander VII. and Clement X. who honoured him with medals. Although of an infirm habit, he attained the age of seventy-six, and died in the abbey of St, Germain-des-Pres, April 29, 1685. He was interred under the library of which he had had the care for so many years, and where his literary correspondence is preserved. There is a short eloge on him in the Journal de Trevoux for Nov. 26, 1685; but that of Maugendre, printed at Amiens in'1775, is more complete. Dupin says he was one of the first learned men that the congregation of St. Maur produced.

, a nobleman of Prussia, lived at the court of Uladislaus, king of Poland, and died at Stockholm in 1675, in the ninety-first year of his age. The king of Poland sent him as ambassador to Persia, and the elector of Brandenburgh employed him on a similar mission to the Cossacks. He wrote, in German, a treatise on Earthquakes, and left some manuscripts political and philosophical.

, a native of Bologna, where he was born Oct. 29, 1463, was a philosopher and physician, and professed both those sciences with great reputation. He had scholars from all parts of Europe. He died in his own country, August 2, 1512, at the age of 40, with the surname of The great philosopher, after having published various pieces in anatomy and medicine. To him is ascribed the discovery of the little bones in the organ of hearing'. He adopted the sentiments of Averroes, and was the rival of Pomponacius. These two philosophers mutually decried each other, and Pomponacius had generally the advantage, as he had the talent of mixing witticisms with his arguments, for the entertainment of the by-standers, while Achillini lowered himself with the public by his singular and slovenly dress. His philosophical works were printed in one vol. folio, at Venice, in 1508, and reprinted with considerable additions in 1545, 1551, and 1568. His principal medical works are: 1. “Annotationes Anatomies,” Bonon. 1520, 4to, and Venice, 1521, 8vo. 2. “De humani corporis Anatomia,” Venice, 1521, 4to. 3. “In Mundini anatomiam annotationes,” printed with Katham’s “Fasciculus Medicine,” Venice, 1522, fol. 4. “De subjecto Medicinæ, cum annotationibus Pamphili Montii,” Venice, 1568. 5. “De Chiromantiæ principiis et Physiognomiæ,” fol. without place or year. 6. “De Universalibus,” Bonon. 1501, fol. 7. “De subjecto Chiromantiæ et Physiognomiæ,” Bonon. 1503, fol. & Pavia, 1515, fol. Achillini also cultivated poetry; but if we may judge from some verses in the collection published on the death of the poet Seraphin dall' Aquila, not with much success.

, younger brother of the preceding, was born at Bologna in 1466, where he died in 1558. He was learned in the Greek and Latio languages, in theology, philosophy, and music, and the study of law and antiquities, but is most celebrated as a poet, although his works are not free from the faults peculiar to his age. Yet he gave even these a turn so peculiarly original, that they appear to have been rather his own than acquired by imitation. He published, among many other works: 1. A scientific and moral poem, written in the ottava rima, entitled “II Viridario,” Bologna, 4to, which contains eulogiums on many of his learned contemporaries. 2. “II Fedele,” also in heroics. These are both scarce, as they never were reprinted. 3. “Annotazioni della lingua volgare,” Bologna, 1.536, 8vo. This was intended as an answer to those who complained of the provincialisms in his style. 4. He also published a collection of poems pu the death of Seraphin dall' Aquila, mentioned in the preceding article, Bologna, 1504, 4to. He has more stretch of mind than most of his contemporaries.

, grandson of the preceding, and son of. Clearchus Achillini and Poly xena Buoi, was born at Bologna in 1574. After studying grammar, the belles lettres, and philosophy, he entered on the study of the law, and prosecuted it with so much success, that he was honoured with a doctor’s degree at the age of twenty, Dec. 16, 1594, and became a professor of that science at Bologna, Ferrara, and Parma, where he acquired great reputation. His learning was so much admired that an inscription to his honour was put up in the public schools, and both popes and cardinals gave him hopes, which were never realized, of making his fortune. Towards the end of his life he lived principally in a country house called Il Sasso, and died there Oct. 1, 1640. His body was carried to Bologna, and interred in the tomb of his ancestors in the church of St. Martin. He is principally known now by his poetry, in which he was an imitator of Marino, and with much of the bad taste of his age. It has been asserted that he received a gold chain worth a thousand crowns from the court of France, for a poem on the conquests of Louis XIII.; but this reward was sent him by the Cardinal Richelieu, in consequence of some verses he wrote on the birth of the dauphin. His poems were printed at Bologna, 1632, 4to, and were reprinted with some prose pieces, under the title “Rime e Prose,” Venice, 1651, 12mo, He published also in Latin “Decas Epistolarum ad Jacobum Gaufridum,” Parma, 1635, 4to.

, an Arabian author, who is supposed to have lived about the fourth century, and is styled the son of Seirim, wrote a book “On the interpretation of Dreams, according to the doctrine of the Indians, the Persians, and the Egyptians,” which, with all its absurdities, has been translated into Greek and Latin, and published, together with “Artemidorus on Dreams and Chiromancy,” by M. Rigault in Paris, 1603, 4to. The original is lost.

, a young man of great erudition, whom Baillet has enrolled among his “Enfans celebres,” and who would have proved one of the ablest critics of his time, had he enjoyed a longer life, was born at Wistock, in the march of Brandenburgh, in 1567. In his seventeenth year he composed some poetical pieces in Latin, which are not very highly esteemed. In 1589, he went to Helmstadt to pursue his studies, and there published some of his poems, which were reprinted after his death, at Leibnitz, in 1605, with those of Janus Lernutius and Janus Gulielmus. They are also inserted in the first volume of the “Delicise Poetarum Germanorum;” and several of his pieces are in the second volume of Caspar Dornavius’ “Amphitheatrum sapientiae Socraticae Jocoseriue,” Hanau, 1619. From Helmstadt, Acidalius went to Italy in 1590, and acquired the esteem and friendship of the most distinguished scholars; and here he studied medicine, but does not appear to have entered into practice. Before he went to Italy, he had begun his commentary on Paterculus, and published his edition of that author at Padua, in the above-mentioned year, 12mo. He adopted the text of Schegkius, but introduced corrections, and such new readings as appeared well founded. For this, however, he has been censured by Boeder, J. Mercier, and Burmann; and it has been said that he himself condemned this early production. His contemporaries appear to have thought more favourably of his labours, as his notes were adopted in the edition of Paterculus published at Lyons, 1595, 8vo; and they were again added to an edition of Tacitus printed after his death, at Paris, in 1608, folio. After remaining three years in Italy, he returned to Germany; and at Neiss, the residence of the bishop of Breslaw, he embraced the Roman Catholic religion. At this place he continued his critical researches on Quintus Curtius, Plautus, the twelve ancient Panegyrics, Tacitus, and some other authors. In 1594, he published, at Francfort, his “Animadversiones in Quintum Curtium,” 8vo; which have been adopted in the Francfort edition of that author, 1597, and Snakenburg’s edition, Leyden, 1724, 4to. His sudden death, May 25, 1595, at the age of 28, put a stop to his useful labours. At that time his observations on Plautus were in the press, and were published the following year at Francfort, 8vo, and again in 1607; and they are inserted in J. Gruter’s “Lampas Critica.” They conferred upon him a wellearned reptitation; and Barthius and Lipsius, with others, bore testimony to his growing merit as a critic. His remarks on the Ancient Panegyrics and on Tacitus were published in 1607, and the former were added to J. Gruter’s edition, Francfort, 1607, 12mo. They are, likewise, examined and compared with those of other scholars, in the fine edition of the Panegyrics published at Utrecht by Arntzenius, in 1790, 4to. His notes on Tacitus are in the edition of that author printed at Paris, 1608, fol. (where he is by mistake called Acidalus); in that of Gronovius, Amsterdam, 1635, 4to, and 1673, 2 vols. 8vo. We also owe to Acidalius, some notes on Ausonius, given in Tollius’ edition of that author, Amsterdam, 1671, 8vo. and notes on Quintilian’s dialogue de Oratoribus, added to Gronovius’ edition of Tacitus, Utrecht, 1721, 4to. It appears by his letters, that he had written observations on Apuleius and Aulus Gellius, but these have not been printed. His letters were published at Hanau, 1606, 8vo r by his brother Christian, under the title of “Epistolarum centuria una, cui accessemnt apologetica ad clariss. virum Jac. Monavium, et Oratio de vera carminis elegiaci natura et constitutione.” In the preface, his brother vindicates his character against the misrepresentations circulated in consequence of his embracing the Roman Catholic religion, particularly with regard to the manner of his death. Spme asserted that he became suddenly mad, and others that he laid violent hands on himself. It appears, however, that he died of a fever, brought on by excess i&f study. It still remains to be noticed, that he is said to have been the author of a pamphlet, published in 1595, entitled, “Mulieres non esse homines,” “Women are not men; i. e. not thinking and reasonable beings;” but he had no other hand in this work than in conveying it to his bookseller, who was prosecuted for publishing it. It was, in fact, a satire on the Socinian mode of interpreting the Scriptures; and a French translation of it appeared in 1744, 12mo.

, a physician and medical writer of considerable note in Germany, and professor of medicine at Altdorf, in Franconia, was born in 1756, at Zeulenrode, in Upper Saxony. His father was a physician, and initiated his son in that science at a very early age. When scarcely fifteen, he prescribed with success to many of his friends daring a dangerous epidemic which prevailed at Otterndorf. He afterwards finished his studies at Jena and Gottingen, under Baldinger, and became a very excellent classical scholar under the celebrated Heyne. After having practised medicine in his own country for some years, and distinguished himself by various translations of Italian, French, and English works, as well as by his original compositions, he was appointed to the professorship at Altdorf. He was also a member of various medical societies; and his practice is said to have been as successful, as his theory of disease was sound. He died at Altdorf in 1801. His principal works are: 1. “Institutiones Historiae Medicinse,” Nuremberg, 17.'J2, 8vo. 2. “A Manual of Military Medicine,” 2 vols. 8vo, Leipsic, 1794—95, in German. 3. “The Life of J. Conr. Dippel,” Leipsic, 1781, 8vo; also in German. For Hades’ edition of Fabricius’ Bibl. Græca, he furnished the lives of Hippocrates, Galen, Theophrastus, Dioscorides, and Aretams.; which are said to be well executed.

, LL. D. an English divine and civilian, of whose birth and family we have no account. During the reign of queen Mary, he travelled in France and Italy, where he studied the civil law. In 1560, he was public orator at Cambridge; and, in the following year, created doctor of laws. In 1562, he was admitted an advocate in the Arches court; and afterwards lived in the family of archbishop Parker, who gave him a prebend, probably that of Southwell. In 1567, he was vicar-general to Home, bishop of Winchester; and, in 1575, the archbishop of Canterbury permitted him to hold the rectory of Elington, alias Wroughton, in the diocese of Sarum, with any other benefice. In 1576, he was appointed master of the faculties, and judge of the prerogative court, in Ireland, after he had been turned out of all the situations he held in England, on account of his dissolute conduct. When, he died is not known. He wrote, in his better days:

2. The preface to Book II. of Bucer’s works, fol. Basil, 1577. 3. “Devisibili Romanarchia, contra Nic. Sanderi Monarchiam,” Lond. 1622, 4to. This was written while he lived with archbishop Parker, and probably at his instigation. At one time he enjoyed the confidence of this great and good prelate, and assisted him in his Antiquitates Britannicse.

, a learned Orientalist, and professor of divinity at Breslaw, was born at Bernstadt, March 6, 1654. It is said that, at six years of age, he could speak Hebrew. He died Nov. 4, 1704. His most celebrated works are some chapters of a polyglot Koran, which he intended to have completed. The specimen, which is very scarce, is “Tetrapla Alcoranica, sive Specimen Alcorani quadrilinguis Arabici, Persici, Turcici, et Latini,” Berlin, 1701, fol. He published also, “Obadias Armenus et Latinus, cum annotationibus,” Leipsic, 1680, 4to. In printing this work, in which he followed as his guides Ambrose Theseus and Francis Rivoli, he was obliged to have the Armenian types cast at his own expence. He corresponded with many learned contemporaries, as Longuerue, Spanheim, and Leibnitz, who, however, did not approve his notion of the Armenian being the ancient language of Egypt.

, a divine, philosopher, and civilian of the sixteenth century, was born at Trent, where he was afterwards in orders; but, being disposed to a liberality of sentiment not tolerated there, he went to Switzerland in 1557, and made profession of the Protestant religion on the principles of Calvin. From thence he went to Strasburgh, and lastly to England, where he was hospitably received. Queen Elizabeth gave him a pension, not as a divine, but as an engineer. In gratitude, he addressed to her his book on the “Stratagems of Satan,” a work in which are unquestionably many sentiments of greater liberality than the times allowed, but, at the same time, a laxity of principle which would reduceill religions into one, or rather create an indifference about the choice of any. It was first printed at Basle, in 1565, under the title of “De stratagematibus Satanae in religionis negotio, per superstitionem, errorem, heresim, odium, calumniam, schisma, &c. libri VIII.” It was afterwards often reprinted and translated into most European languages. His latest biographer says, that this work may be considered as the precursor of Lord Herbert of Cherbury, and thoso other English philosophers who have reduced the articles of religion to a very small number, and maintain that all sects hold its essential principles. Acontius, however, had his enemies and his supporters; and even the former could allow that, in many respects, he anticipated the freedom and liberality of more enlightened times, although he was, in many points, fanciful and unguarded. A better work of his is entitled “De methodo sive recta investigandarum, tradendarumque artium, ac scientiarum ratione, libellus,” Basle, 1558, 8 vo. This has often been reprinted, and is inserted in the collection “De Studiis bene instituejulis,” Utrecht, 1658. His “Ars muniendorum oppidorum,” in Italian and Latin, was published at Geneva in 1585. In one of the editions of his “Stratagemata,” is an excellent epistle by him, on the method of editing books. He had also made some progress in a treatise on logic, as he mentions in the above epistle, and predicts the improvements of after-times.

Tanner gives 1566 as the date of his death, but we have no account of it. We only know that he died in England; and that, in 1560, he belonged to the Dutch church in Austin Friars; and, with Hadrian Hamstedius, was accused of Anabaptist and Arian principles, and fell under the censure of excommunication pronounced by Grindall, then bishop of London, and bishop-superintendant of the foreigners’ churches. On this occasion Acontius wrote a long expostulatory letter to the Dutch church, which is still extant in the library at Austin Friars. Our authority does not state how this matter ended; but Hamstedius refused subscription to certain articles drawn up by the bishop previously to the ceremony of absolution.

, a celebrated Spanish author, born at Medina del Campo, about the year 1539. At the age of fourteen, he entered the society of the Jesuits, where he had already four brothers, all of whom he excelled in knowledge and enterprize. In 1571 he went to the East Indies, and became second provincial in Peru. In 1588, he returned to Spain, rind acquired the good graces of Philip II. by entertaining him with accounts of the New World. He then went to Italy-, to render a more particular account to the general of the Jesuits, Claude Aquaviva, with whom he had afterwards a difference, of little importance now, relative to certain ecclesiastical offices, and became superior of the order at Valladolid, and rector of Salamanca; at which last place he died, Feb. 15, 1600. He wrote: 1. “Historia natural y moral de las Indias,” Seville, 1590, 4to; also 1591, 8vo, a corrected edition; and again, Madrid, 1608 and 1610; a work in great estimation, and often quoted by Dr. Robertson. It has been translated into Latin and French; the latter by Robert Regnault, who says that the original became scarce, the Spaniards having burnt all the copies; but in this he has mistaken Acosta for Acuna. It has also been translated into Flemish, Italian, and German. 2. “De Natura Novi Orbis, libri duo,” Salamanca, 1589 and 1595, 8vo. This was translated by the author into Spanish, and added to the preceding work. 3. “De Promulgatione Evangelii apud Barbaros,” Salamanca, 1588, 8vo, Cologne, 1596. 4. “De Christo revelato, libri novem,” Rome, 1590, 4to; Lyons, 1591, 8vo. 5. “Conciones, tomi tres,” Salamanca, 1596, 4to, and often reprinted.

, a Portuguese, born at Oporto towards the close of the sixteenth century. He was educated in the Romish religion, which his father also sincerely professed, though descended from one of those Jewish families who had been forced to receive baptism. Uriel had a liberal education, having been instructed in several sciences; and at last studied the law. He had by nature a good temper and disposition; and religion had made so deep an impression on his mind, that he ardently desired to conform to all the precepts of the church. He applied with constant assiduity to reading the scriptures and religious books, carefully consulting also the creed of the confessors; but difficulties occurred, which perplexed him to such a degree, that, unable to solve them, he thought it impossible to fulfil his duty, with regard to the conditions required for absolution, according to good casuists. At length, he began to inquire, whether several particulars mentioned about a future life were agreeable to reason; and imagined that reason suggested many arguments against them. Acosta was about two-and-twenty when he entertained these doubts; and the result was, that he thought he could not be saved by the religion which he had imbibed in his infancy. He still, however, prosecuted his studies in the law; and, at the age of five-and-twenty years, was made treasurer in a collegiate church. Being naturally of an inquisitive turn, and now made uneasy by the popish doctrines, he began to study Moses and the prophets; where he thought he found more satisfaction than in the Gospel, and at length became convinced that Judaism was the true religion: but, as he could not profess it in Portugal, he resigned his place, and embarked for Amsterdam, with his mother and brothers; whom he had ventured to instruct in the principles of the Jewishreligion, even when in Portugal. Soon after their arrival in this city they became members of the synagogue, and were circumcised according to custom; and on this occasion, he changed his name of Gabriel for that of Uriel. A little timewas sufficient to shew him, that the Jews did neither in their rites nor morals conform to the law of Moses, and of this he declared his disapprobation: but the chiefs of the synagogue gave him to understand, that he must exactly observe their tenets and customs; and that he would be excommunicated if he deviated ever so little from them. This threat, however, did not in the least deter him; for he thought it would be beneath him, who had left the sweets of his native country purely for liberty of conscience, to submit to a set of rabbis who had no jurisdiction: and that it would shew both want of courage and piety, to stifle his sentiments on this occasion. He therefore persisted in his invectives, and, in consequence, was excommunicated. He then wrote a book in his justification; wherein he endeavours to shew, that the rites and traditions of the Pharisees are contrary to the writings of Moses; and soon after adopted the opinions of the Sadducees, asserting, that the rewards and punishments of the old law relate only to this lite; because Moses nowhere mentions the joys of heaven or the torments of hell. His adversaries were overjoyed at his embracing this tenet; foreseeing, that it would tend greatly to justify, in the sight of Christians, the proceedings of the synagogue against him. Before his book was printed, there appeared a piece upon the immortality of the soul, written by a physician in 1623, who omitted nothing he could suggest to make Acosta pass for an atheist. This, however, did not prevent him from writing a treatise against the physician, wherein he endeavoured to confute the doctrine of the soul’s immortality. The Jews now made application to the magistrates of Amsterdam; and informed against him, as one who wanted to undermine the foundation of both Jewish and Christian religions. Hereupon he was thrown into prison, but bailed out within a week or ten clays after; but all the copies of his pieces were seized, and he himself fined 300 florins. Nevertheless, he proceeded still farther in his scepticism. He now began to examine, whether the laws of Moses came from God; and he at length found reasons to convince him, that it was only a political invention. Yet, such was his inconsistency, that he returned to the Jewish church, after he had been excommunicated 15 years; and, after having made a recantation of what he Jiad written, subscribed every thing as they directed. A few days after, he was accused by a nephew, who lived in his house, that he did not, as to his eating and many other points, conform to the laws of the synagogue. On this he was summoned before the grand council of the synagogue; and it was declared to him, that he must be again excommunicated, if he did not give such satisfaction as should be required; but he found the terms so hard, that he could not comply. The Jews then again expelled him jfrom their communion; and he afterwards suffered various hardships and persecutions, even from his own relations. After remaining seven years in a most wretched situation, he at length declared he was willing to submit to the sentence of the synagogue, having been told that he might easily accommodate matters; for, that the judges, being satisfied with his submission, would soften the severity of the discipline; they made him, however, undergo the penance in its utmost rigour. These particulars, relating to the. life of Acosta, are taken from his piece, entitled “Exemplar humanae vitce,” published and refuted by Limborch. It is supposed that he composed it a few days before Jus death, after having determined to lay violent feands on himself. He executed this horrid resolution a little after he had failed in his attempt to kill his principal enemy; for the pistol, with which he intended to have shot him as he passed his house, having missed fire, he immediately shut the door, and shot himself with another pistol. This happened at Amsterdam, but in what year is not exactly known; but most authors are inclined to place it in 1640, or 1647.

, a very eminent Swedish surgeon and physician, was born near Stockholm in the beginning of the eighteenth century. He studied first at Upsal, and afterwards at Stockholm, under the ablest practitioners in physic and surgery. In 1741 he travelled to Germany and France, and served as surgeon in the French army for two years. In 1745 he took up his residence in Stockholm, where for half a century he was considered as the first man in his profession. He introduced many valuable improvements in the army-hospitals, and his general talents and usefulness procured him the most flattering marks of public esteem. He was appointed director general of all the hospitals in the kingdom, had titles of nobility conferred upon him, was created a knight of Vasa, and became commander of that order. In 1764, the university of Upsal made him doctor in medicine by diploma, and he was enrolled a member of various learned societies. He died in 1807, at an advanced age. He published various works in the Swedish language, the principal of which are: 1. “A treatise on Fresh Wounds,” Stockholm, 1745. 2, “Observations on Surgery,” 1750. 3. “Dissertation on the operation for the Cataract,” 1766; and 4. “A Discourse on reforms in Surgical Operations,” 1767.

, a celebrated physician of Agrigentum in Sicily, lived, according to Plutarch, at the time of the great plague at Athens in the beginning of the Peloponnesian war, in the eighty-fourth olympiad, or 444 B. C. He is said to have stopped the prpgress of thecontagion by scattering perfumes in the air; but while doubts may be entertained of the efficacy of this practice, it was at least not new, having been tried before his time by the Egyptian priests, according to Suidas. Pliny considers Acron as the chief of the empirical sect, but that sect were riot known for two hundred years after. Suidas says he wrote a treatise on medicine, and another on food, neither of which is now known.

, the name of an aneient scholiast on Horace, who flourished in the seventh century. His scholia were published under the title “Expositio in Horatii Flacci Opera,” Mediolani, 1474, 4to. It forms the third edition of Horace, according to Dr. Harwood, and is so scarce as to have escaped the notice of Maittaire. A copy was purchased at Dr. Askew’s sale, by Mr. Mason, for nine guineas and a half; or, according to the editor of the Bibliographical Dictionary, for £6. 10s. It was reprinted at Venice in 1490, fol. Michael Bentius added the scholia to his edition, Basil, 1527, 8vo. Fabricius enumerates Aeron among the ancient commentators on Terence and Persius.

, one of the writers in the Byzantine history, was born at Constantinople in the year 1220, and brought up at the court of the emperor John Ducas, at Nice. He studied mathematics, poetry, and rhetoric under Theodorus Exapterygus, and learned logic of Nicephorus Blemmidas. In his one-and-twentieth year, he maintained a learned dispute with Nicholas the physician, concerning the eclipse of tLe sun, before the emperor John. He was at length appointed great logothete, and employed in the most important affairs of the empire. John Ducas sent him ambassador to Larissa, to establish a peace with Michael of Epirus. He was also constituted judge by this emperor, to try Michael Comnenus on a suspicion of being engaged in a conspiracy. Theodorus Lascaris, the son of John, whom he had taught logic, appointed him governor of all the western provinces of his empire. When he held this government, in the year 1255, being engaged in a war with Michael Angelus, he was taken prisoner by him. In 1260, he gained his liberty by means of the emperor Palasologus, who sent him ambassador to Constantine prince of Bulgaria. After his return, he applied himself wholly to the instruction of youth, in which employment he acquitted himself with great honour for many years; but being at last weary of the fatigue, he resigned it to Holobolus. In 1272, he sat as one of the judges upon the cause of John Vecchus, patriarch of Constantinople. The year following he was sent to pope Gregory, to settle a peace and re-union between the two churches, which was accordingly concluded; and he swore to it, in the emperor’s name, at the second council of Lyons, in 1274. He was sent ambassador to John prince of Bulgaria in 1382, and died soon after his return. His principal work is his “Historia Byzantina,” Gr. Lat. Paris, fol. 1651. This history, which he was well qualified to write, as he took an active part in public aifajrs, contains the history of about fifty-eight years; i.e. from 1203, when Baldwin, earl of Flanders, was crowned emperor, to 1261, when M. Palseologus put himself in the place of Baldwin II. A manuscript translation of it, by sir William Petty, was in Mr. Ames’s collection. The original was found in the east by Douza, and first published in 1614; but the Paris edition is superior, and now very scarce. His theological writings were never printed. His son Coustantine succeeded him as grand logothete, and was called by the Greeks, the younger Metaphrastes, from his having written the lives of some of the saints in the manner of Simeon Metaphrastes. There is little else in his history that is interesting.

. The name Actuarius was given to all the court physicians of Constantinople, although the subject of this article is the only one known by it. His father’s name was Zacharias. Authors are not agreed as to the time in which he lived. Wolfgang Justus places him in the eleventh century; Moreau in the twelfth; Fabricius in the thirteenth, and Lambecius in the fourteenth. He was the first Greek author who recommended the use of cassia, senna, manna, and other mild purgatives, and the first who mentions distilled waters. He is reckoned superior to the Arabian physicians, but inferior to the great physicians of his nation. He wrote 1. A work on “Therapeutics,” in six books, of which there is no Greek edition; but a Latin translation by Henry Mathisius of Bruges, entitled “Methodi Medendi libri Sex,” Venice, 4to, 1554; Paris, 1566, 8vo. The work was composed by Actuarius for the use of an ambassador in the north. 2. Two books on “Animal Spirits,” of which Goupil published a Greek edition, Paris, 1557, 8vo, with a Latin version by Mathisius. This was reprinted by Fischer, Gr. and Lat. Leipsic, 1774, 8vo, with the addition of two books of Actuarius on regimen. 3. Seven books “On Urines,” of which there is no Greek edition; but Ambrose Levon de Nole published a Latin version, 1519, 4to. and this was revised by Goupil, illustrated with notes, and reprinted under the title “De Urinis Hbri septem.” Paris, 1548, 8vo; Basil, 1558, 8vo; Utrecht, 1670, 8vo. 4. A Treatise on the “composition of Medicines,” with the commentaries of John Ruellius; but this is little more than the fifth and sixth books of the Therapeutics. The medical writings of our author were collected and printed, Paris, 1526, 8vo; and again in 1556. In 1567, Henry Stephens published an edition of the whole of his works, fol. translated by different authors amongf the “Medicae artis Principes.” We have also “Actuarii opera,” Paris, 8vo; Leyden, 1556, 3 vols. 12mo. There are some of his works in many libraries which remain in manuscript.

, a Spanish Jesuit and missionary, was born at Burgos, 1597. He was sent on a mission to the American Indians, and on his return in the year 1641, published in Spanish, by permission of the king, “Nuevo Descubrimiento del gran rio de las Amazones,” 4to; but the projects expected from his discoveries respecting this river, were discountenanced afterwards by the house of Braganza, and Philip IV. ordered all the copies of this curious work to be destroyed, so that for many years two only were known to exist; one in the Vatican library, and another in the possession of Marin Leroi de Gomberville, who translated it into French, and published it, under the title of “Relation de la riviere des Amazones,” Paris, 1682, 2 vols. 12mo, with a curious dissertation; but some passages of the text are not very faithfully translated. This was afterwards reprinted in the second volume of Wood’s Rogers’ s Voyage round the world. Acuna went to the East Indies some time after the publication of his work, and is supposed to have died at Lima about or soon after 1675.

, a Spanish poet, horn at Madrid in the beginning of the sixteenth century, was at first remarkable for his military talents in the service of Charles V. but more so afterwards for his poetical merit, which has been extolled by Louis Zapata and Lope de Vega. His first attempt was a translation of Olivier de la Marche’s “Chevalier delibere,” under the title of “El Cavallero determinando;” to which he added an entire book of his own composition, Antwerp, 1555, 8vo. He also composed in Italian verse, sonnets, eclogues, and other smaller pieces, in which the thoughts are natural, and the expression elegant. He succeeded in translating Ovid in verse of nine syllables, which the Spaniards consider as the most difficult in their poetry; and before his death he had begun a translation of Roland from Boyardo, and added four chants, which were thought equal to the original. His translation of the “Chevalier delibere” was reprinted at Salamanca, 1575, with alterations and additions. He died at Grenada in 1580; and in 1591, a collection of his pieces was published at Salamanca, “Varias Poesias.”

, or Acusilaus, a Greek historian, the son of Cabas, born at Argos, lived, according to Josephus, a little before the expedition of Darius against Greece, and near the time when Caduius the Milesian wrote the first prose history. Acusilas’ work was entitled “Genealogies,” as they related to the chief families of Greece. Many authors quote this work, but the only fragments preserved are added to those of Ph'erecydes by M. Sturz, printed at Gera, 1798, 8vo.

, an English lawyer, and sometime recorder of London, was born in that city, and educated at Peter-house, Cambridge; where he took the degree of B. A. 1764, and of M. A. 1767. After prosecuting his lawstudies, he was admitted to the bar, and began to distinguish himself about the year 1770, when he took an active part in the political contentions of that period. Having sided with Mr. Wilkes in the memorable dispute between that gentleman and his co-patriot Mr. Home, Mr. Wilkes spoke of him at political meetings in such a manner as to draw the public eye upon him; and in 1779 he was chosen recorder of London, although not without a contest with his opponent Mr. Howarth. This situation he retained for some years, while his advancement at the bar was rapid, and highly honourable to his talents. The duties of the recordership he discharged with much ability, strict justice, and humanity. The situation, however, was rendered in some degree irksome by the changes of political sentiment which had taken place among his constituents, the members of the corporation. When he was chosen into this office, the city was out of humour with the court, and Mr. Adair probably owed his election to his being reputedly of Wilkes’s party, who was still rhe idol of the city. A great revolution, however, took place when the coalition-administration (that of lord North and Mr. Fox) was overthrown. Mr. Pitt and his friends, and by consequence the King and court, became highly popular in the city, while Mr. Adair retained his old opinions, took the part of the dismissed ministers, and became a zealous assertor of the whig principles which were then divulged from a newly-erected club, called the Whig club. This could not please his city friends; although such was his impartiality and integrity, that no fault could be found with the manner in which he discharged the duties of his office. The Common-council, however, requiring a closer attendance at their courts than he thought requisite, or was perhaps consistent with his numerous professional engagements in the court of Common pleas, he chose to resign the recordership in 1789; and upon this occasion received the thanks of the Court of Aldermen, and the freedom of the city in a gold box of one hundred guineas value, for his able and upright conduct in that office; and he was ordered to be retained, with the attorney and solicitorgeneral, in all causes in which the city was concerned.

In the parliament of 1780 he sat as member for Cockermouth, but afterwards for Higham Ferrars. He was also one of his majesty’s Serjeants at law, and was rapidly advancing in his profession, when the revolutionary principles of France, making great progress in this kingdom, alarmed the minds of every well-wisher to the constitutional monarchy. Mr. Adair, among others of high rank and weight, now withdrew from all connection with the Whig club; but, not before he had zealously promoted the subscription which some noblemen and gentlemen set on foot to purchase an annuity for Mr. Fox. When the trials of Hardy, Tooke, &c. and others accused of high treason, were instituted in 1794-5, Mr. Adair appeared as one of the counsel fof the crown, and was allowed to have acquitted himself with great ability. In 1798, when the country was menaced with threats of invasion, volunteer offers of service were made to government throughout the whole kingdom, and London and its environs raised a force of about twelve thousand men, fuily armed, equipped, and trained at their own expence. Mr. Adair, although his age might have formed a sufficient excuse, thought proper to join this patriot band; and, it is thought, fell a sacrifice to the fatigues attending the discipline. The day his corps returned from shooting at a target near London, July 21, 1798, he was seized with a paralytic stroke, while walking along Lincoln’s-inn, and died in a few hours. He was interred on the 27th in Bunhill-rields’ burying-ground, near the ashes of his father and mother. At his death, he was king’s prime serjeant at law, M. P. for Higham Ferrars, and chief justice of Chester.

Mr. Adair was not distinguished for luminous talents, but was esteemed an able constitutional lawyer; his eloquence was vigorous and impressive, but his voice was harsh, and manner uncourteous. He is said to have been the author of “Thoughts on the dismission of Officers, civil and military, for their conduct in Parliament,” 1764, 8vo; which we much doubt, as at that time he had but just taken his bachelor’s degree, and was probably too young to interest himself much in the contests of the times. On better authority, we find attributed to him, “Observations on the power of alienation in the Crown before the first of queen Anne, supported by precedents, and the opinions of many learned judges; together with some remarks on the conduct of administration respecting the case of the duke of Portland,” 1768, 8vo.

, a physician, a native of Scotland, but many years settled at Bath, was afterwards physician to the commander in chief, and the colonial troops, of the island of Antigua, and subsequently of the Leeward islands, and also one of the judges of the court of King’s Bench and Common pleas in Antigua. His abilities as a physician have never been questioned, and his private character is said to have been in some respects amiable; but he possessed an irritability of temper, joined, as it generally is, with extraordinary self-conceit, which occasioned his being constantly engaged in disputes, and often with men, such as Philip Thicknesse, equally rulous and turbulent. Towards the end of his life, his writings partook much of his temper, and although read with some degree of pity, were soon thrown aside. Some account of one of his last quarrels may be seen in the dedication, to the first volume of Thicknesse' s Memoirs. He died at a very advanced age, April 24, 1802, at Harrowgate in Yorkshire. His first publications were on Regimen and the Materia Medica, in vol. VIII and IX of Duncan’s Medical Commentaries: 2. “Medical Cautions for the consideration of Invalids, those especially who resort to Bath,” 8vo, 1786, and a much enlarged edition, 1787. 3. “A philosophical and medical sketch of the Natural History of the Human Body and Mind,” 8vo, 1787. 4. “Unanswerable objections against the Abolition of the Slave-Trade,” 8vo, 1789. He was examined on this subject by the privy-council; but his objections have been long since fully answered. 5. “Essays on Fashionable Diseases,” 8vo, 1789. 6. “An essay on a Non-descript, or newlyinvented Disease,” 8vo, 1790. 7. “A candid inquiry into the truth of certain charges of the dangerous consequences of the Suttonian or Cooling regimen, under Inoculation for the Small Pox,” 8-vo, 1790. 8. “Anecdotes of the Life, Adventures, and Vindication of a Medical Character, metaphorically defunct, by Benjamin Goosequill and Peter Paragraph,” 8vo, 1790. This rambjing and incoherent production contains some particulars of his life, but more of his quarrels with his contemporaries. 9. “Two Sermons; the first addressed to British seamen, the second to the British West India slaves,” 8vo, 1791. Most of these were published for the benefit of the Bath, hospital, or the tin-miners of Cornwall.

, or Adelard, born about the year 753, was son of count Bernard, grandson of Charles Martel, and cousin-german of Charlemagne. He had been invited to the court in his youth, but, fearing the infection of such a mode of life, had retired; and, at the age of 20 years, became a monk of Corbie in Picardy, and was at length chosen abbot of the monastery. His imperial relation, however, forced him again to attend the court, where he still preserved the dispositions of a recluse, and took every opportunity, which business allowed, for private prayer and meditation. After the death of Charlemagne, he was, on unjust suspicions, banished by Lewis the Meek, to a monastery on die coast of Acquitaine, in the isle of Here. After a banishment of five years, Lewis, sensible of his own injustice, recalled Adalard, and heaped on him the highest honours. The monk was, however, the same man in prosperity and in adversity, and in the year 823 obtained leave to return to Corbie. Every week he addressed each of the monks in particular 5 he exhorted them in pathetic discourses, and laboured for the spiritual good of the country around his monastery. His liberality seems to have bordered on excess; and his humility induced him to receive advice from the meanest monk. When desired to live less austerely, he would frequently say, “I will take care of your servant, that he may be enabled to attend on you the longer.” Another Adalard, who had governed the monastery during his banishment, by the direction of our Adalard, prepared the foundation of a distinct monastery, called New Corbie, near Paderborn, as a nursery for ecclesiastical laboarers, who. should instruct the northern nations. Our Adalard now completed this scheme; went himself to New Corbie twice, and settled its discipline. The success of this truly charitable project was great: many learned and zealous missionaries were furnished from the new seminary, and it became a light to the north of Europe. Adalard promoted learning in his monasteries, for he was himself a man of great learning; and instructed the people both in Latin and French: and after his second return from Germany to old Corbie, he died ill the year 827, aged 73. Such is the account given us of Adalard, a character, there is reason to believe, of eminent piety and usefulness in a dark age. To convert monasteries into seminaries of pastoral education, was a thought far above the taste of the age in which he lived, and tended to emancipate those superstitious institutions from the unprofitable and illiberal bondage in which they had long subsisted. His principal work work was “A treatise on the French Monarchy;” but fragments only of any of his works have come down to our times. Hincmar has incorporated the treatise on the French monarchy in his: fourteenth Opusculum, “for the instruction of king Carloman.” The ancient statutes of of the abbey of Corbie, by our author, are in the fourth volume of D'Achery’s Spicilegium.

was consecrated bishop of Leon in the year 977. He was an ambitious prelate and a servile courtier; he had the baseness to deliver up to Hugh Capet, Arnoul, archbishop of Rheims, and Charles duke of Lorrain, competitor of Hugh, to whom he had given an asylum in his episcopal city. He died in 1030. He is the author of a satirical poem in 430 hexameter verses, dedicated to king Robert. Adrian Valois gave an edition of it in 1663, in 8vo, at the end of the Panegyric on the emperor Berenger. But it is more correctly given in the I Oth vol. of “the Historians of France.” Although the style is obscure and in a bad taste, it contains many curious facts and anecdotes of the manners of the age. In the library of the abbey of Laubes is a ms poem by Adalberon, on the Holy Trinity, which is likewise dedicated to king Robert.

, archbishop of Rheims, and chancellor of France, under the reigns of Lothaire and Louis V. was one of the most learned French prelates of the tenth century. Having attained the archbishoprick in the year 969, he called several councils for the establishment of ecclesiastical discipline, which he enforced by his example with much firmness of mind. He also induced men of learning to resort to Rheims, and gave a high renown to the schools of that city. In the year 987, he consecrated Hugh Capet, who continued him in his office of grand chancellor. He died Jan. 5, 988. Several of his letters are among those of Gerbert, afterwards pope Sylvester II.; and two of his discourses are in Moissac’s Chronicle. The cathedral of Rheims was indebted to him for the greater part of its sumptuous furniture.

, a German divine, of the tenth century, archbishop of Magdeburg, was educated in the monastery of St. Maximum of Treves, and promoted to the above see in the year 968. Previous to that, in the year 961, he was employed by the emperor Otho I. to preach the gospel to the people along the Baltic sea, and the Sclavonians with the latter he had considerable success.

, archbishop of Prague, in the tenth century, was one of the first founders of the Christian religion in Hungary. He also preached the gospel in Prussia and Lithuania, where he was murdered by Sego, a pagan priest. His death was amply revenged by Boleslaus, king of Poland.

, LL.D. an eminent schoolmaster and useful writer in Scotland, was born June 1741, at Coats of Burgle, in the parish of Rafford, in the county of Moray, His parents were poor, but gave him such education as a parish school afforded; and after having unsuccessfully endeavoured to procure an exhibition at King’s college, Aberdeen, he was encouraged, in 1753, to go to the university of Edinburgh, where he surmounted pecuniary difficulties with a virtuous and honourable perseverance, such as are rarely to be found; and improved his opportunities of knowledge with great assiduity and success. In 1761 he was elected schoolmaster to Watson’s hospital, an establishment for the education of the poor, and continued to improve himself in classical knowledge by a careful perusal of some of the best and most difficult authors. In 1767, he was appointed assistant to the rector of the high school of Edinburgh, and in 1771 successor to the same gentleman, and filled this honourable statiou during the remainder of his life, raising the reputation of the school much higher than it had been known for many years. He would have perhaps raised it yet higher, had he not involved himself, not only with his ushers, but witk the patrons and trustees of the school, in a dispute respecting the proper grammar to be taught; Dr. Adam preferring one of his own compiling to that of Ruddiman, which had long been used in all the schools in Scotland, and was esteemed as near perfection as any work of the kind that had ever been published. The ushers, or undermasters, were unanimous in retaining Ruddtmaw’s grammar, for which they assigned their reasons; and Dr. Adam was as resolute in teaching from his own. The consequence was, that Dr. Adam taught his class by one grammar, and the four uncler-masters theirs by another. The inconvenience of this mode was soon felt; and the patrons of the school, who were the Magistrates of Edinburgh, after referring the question at issue to the principal of the university, the celebrated Dr. Robertson, together with the professors of the Greek and Latin languages, issued an order in 1786, directing the rector and other masters of the High School, to instruct their scholars by Ruddi man’s Rudiments and Grammar, and prohibiting any other grammar of the Latin language from being made use of. Dr. Adam, however, disregarded this and a subsequent 'order to the same purpose, and continued to use his own rules, in his daily practice with the pupils of his own class, and without being any further interrupted . The work which gave rise to this dispute was published in 1772, under the title of “The Principles of Latin and English Grammar,” and is undoubtedly a work of very considerable merit, and highly useful to those who are of opinion that Latin and English grammar should be taught at the same time.

Soon after this dispute was apparently terminated, Dr. Adam compiled “A Summary of Geography and History” for the use of his pupils, which he afterwards enlarged and published in 1794. In 1791, he published “Roman Antiquities, or, an account of the manners and customs of the Romans,” 8vo. This useful work has been translated into German, French, and Italian, and has been very generally recommended in preference to Dr. Kennet’s work on the same subject. In 1800 he published his “Classical Biography,” which was originally intended as the appendix to a Latin dictionary on which he had been employed for some years; but the high price of paper, and the great expence of printing such works, discouraged him from carrying into effect his original design. He printed, however, in 1805, an abridgement of his dictionary, under the title of “Lexicon Lingua? Latinx compendiarium,” 8vo. All these works have attained a high degree of popularity, and are used in the principal schools of this kingdom. Dr. Adam died Dec. 18, 1809, of an apoplexy, in the 69th year of his age, universally regretted as an able and successful teacher, a man of high rank in classical literature, and in private life benevolent and amiable. At one period of his life, when the French revolution distracted the political opinions of his country, he incurred some degree of censure for having introduced matters of a political kind into his school. For this no apology can be valid; but it appears that he became afterwards more cautious: and at the period of his death, his character was so universally esteemed, that his remains were honoured with a public funeral.

, so called because he was a canon of that church. He was born, according to some writers, at Misnia in the eleventh century; he devoted himself early to the church, and in 1067, was made a canon by Adelbert, archbishop of Bremen, and at the same time placed at the head of the school of that city, a situation equally important and honourable at a time when schools were the only establishments for public instruction. Adam employed his whole life in the functions of his office, in propagating religion, and in compiling his history, “Historia ecclesiastica ecclesiarum Hamburgensis et Bremensis vicinorurnque locorum septentrionalium, ab anno 788 ad annum 1072,” Copenhagen, 1579, 4to; Leyden, 159.5, 4to; Helmstadt, 1670, 4to the latter, edited by John Mader, is the best edition. This work contains the most accurate account we have of the establishment of Christianity in the north of Europe. As Bremen was the centre of the missions for this purpose, in which Adam was himself engaged, and had travelled over the countries visited by Anscharius about 200 years before, he had the farther advantage of making valuable collections from the archives of the archbishoprick, the library of his convent, and the conversations he held with the missionaries. He lived in an age when the dignified clergy were not inattentive to temporal affairs, and yet acquitted himself with much impartiality in writing the history of his patron Adelbert, a man of intrigue and ambition. He made a tour in Denmark, where he was favourably received by the reigning sovereign; and on his return wrote a geographical treatise, which was published at Stockholm, under the title of “Chronographia Scandinavise,” 1615, 8vo, and afterwards at Leyden, with the title “De situ Daniae et reliquarum trans Daniam regionum natura,” 1629. This short work is added to Mader’s edition of his history, and although not without a portion of the fabulous, is curious as the first attempt to describe the North of Europe, particularly Jutland, and some of the islands in the Baltic. We also owe to Adam of Bremen the first accounts of the interior of Sweden, and of Russia, the name of which only was then known in Christian Europe. He even speaks of the island of Great Britain, but chiefly from the accounts of Solinus and Martian us Capella, as his visits did not extend so far. This description of the North has been preserved by Lindenbrog in his “Scriptores rerum Gerrn. septentrional.” Hamburgh, 1706; and Muray, one of the most distinguished professors of Gottingen, has enriched it with a learned commentary. The time of our author’s death is not known.

, a French translator of some note, was born at Vendome in 1663, and after finishing his studies, entered into the service of the prince of Conti, who appointed him to be his secretary. He was elected into the French academy in 1723, in room of the abbe Fleury. He translated part of De Thou’s history, which has London on the title, but was printed at Paris, 1734, 16 vols, 4to. This he undertook with Charles Le Beau, the abbes Mascrier, Le Due, Fontaines, Prevost, and father Fabre. He translated also the memoirs of Montecuculli, Amsterdam, 1734, 12mo; an account of the cardinal Tournon; Atheneus; and other works. He died Nov. 12, 1735.

, an eminent French sculptor, was born at Nancy, Feb. 10, 1700. He was the son of Jacob-Sigisbert Adam, also a sculptor of considerable note. At the age of eighteen, he came to Metz; but a desire to extend his reputation made him repair to Paris, where he arrived in 1719. After exercising his profession about four years, he obtained the first prize, and then went to Rome, with a royal pension, where he remained ten years. While here, he was employed by the cardinal de Polignac in restoring the twelve marble statues known as the “family of Lycomedes,” which had been discovered among the ruins of the villa of Marius, about two leagues from Rome, and acquitted himself with great success in a branch of the art which is seldom rewarded or honoured in proportion to its difficulties. He afterwards restored several antique sculptures, of which the king of Prussia had got possession, and which he conveyed to Berlin. When an intention was formed of erecting that vast monument at Rome known by the name of the “Fountain of Trevi,” he was one of the sixteen sculptors who gave in designs; but, although his was adopted by pope Clement XI I. the jealousy of the Italian artists prevented his executing it. At this time, however, advantageous offers were made by his own country, to which he returned, after being chosen a member of the academies of St. Luke, and of Bologna. His first work, after his return to France, was the groupe of the “Seine et Marne” for the cascade at St. Cloud. He was then employed at Choisi; and, in May 1737, was elected a member of the French academy, and professor. The piece he exhibited on his admission was “Neptune calming the waves,” with a Triton at his feet; and not “Prometheus chained to the rock,” as some biographers have asserted, which was the production of his brother Nicholas. He then executed the groupe of “Neptune and Amphitrite” for the bason at Versailles, on which he was employed five years, and was rewarded, besides the stipulated price, with a pension of 500 livres. One of his best works was the figure of “St. Jerome,” now at St. Roch. His other works are, a groupe of five figures and of five animals, at Versailles, in bronze; the bas-relief of the chapel of St. Elizabeth, in bronze; two groupes in bronze of hunting and fishing at Berlin; “Mars caressed by Love,” at Bellevue; and a statue representing the enthusiasm of poetry. In all these there are undoubted proofs of genius, but proofs likewise of the bad taste in sculpture which prevailed in his time, and induced him, after the example of Bernini and others, to attempt efforts which can only be successful in painting. In 1754, he published “Recueil de Sculptures antiques Græcques et Romanies,” fol. for which he made the designs. Most of these he had purchased from the heirs of cardinal de Polignac. He died of an apoplexy, May 15, 1759.

, brother of the preceding, and likewise an eminent artist, was born at Nancy, March 22, 1705. He studied under his father at Paris, and in 1726 went to Rome. Two years after he gained one of the prizes of the academy of St. Luke. At this time his brother, the subject of the preceding article, and Francis, a younger brother, were at Rome, and assisted each other in their labours. After a residence of nine years, he returned to Paris, and with some opposition was admitted into the academy, where he exhibited his model of “Prometheus,” but did not execute it until long after. Next year he executed the “martyrdom of St. Victoria,” a bas-­relief in bronze, for the royal chapel at Versailles. For some time he assisted his brother in “the Neptune;” but, a disagreement occurring, quitted this, and employed himself at the hotel Soubise, the chamber of accounts, and the abbey of St. Dennis. He was a candidate for the mausoleum of the cardinal de Fleury, and the public adjudged him the prize; but Lemoyne was employed. The tomb of the queen of Poland, wife of Stanislaus, is esteemed one of his best works. His Prometheus was finished in 1763, and the king of Prussia offered him 30,000 franks for it; but Adam said it was executed for his master, and no longer his own property. He died March 27, 1778, in his 75th year. His merits as a sculptor have been thought equal to those of his brother. It is said to have been his constant prayer that he might be neither the first northe last in his art, but attain an honourable middle rank, as the surest way to avoid jealousy on the one hand, or contempt on the other; and his last biographer thinks his prayer was heard. The younger brother, Francis-Gaspard, exercised his profession as a sculptor for some years with considerable reputation, and obtained a prize from the French academy, but no important works of his are mentioned; he died at Paris in 1759.

, a very useful biographer, lived in the 17th century. He was born in the territory of Grotkaw in Silesia, and educated in the college of Brieg, where the dukes of that name, to the utmost of their power, ^encouraged learning and the reformed religion as professed by Calvin. Here he became a firm Protestant, and was enabled to pursue his studies by the liberality of a person of quality, who had left several exhibitions for young students. He was appointed rector of a college at Heidelberg, where he published his first volume of Illustrious Men in the year 1615. This volume, which consists of philosophers, poets, writers on polite literature, historians, &c. was followed by three others; that which treats of divines was printed in 1619; that of the lawyers came next; and finally, that of the physicians: the two last were published in 1620. All the learned men, whose lives are contained in these four volumes, lived in the 16th, or beginning of the 17th century, and are either Germans or Flemings; but he published, in 16 18, the lives of twenty divines cf other countries, in a separate volume. All his divines are Protestants. He has given but a few lives, yet the work cost him a great deal of time, having been obliged to abridge the pieces from whence he had materials, whether they were lives, funeral sermons, eulogies, prefaces, or memoirs of families. He omitted several persons who deserved a place in his work, as well as those he had taken notice of; which he accounts for, from the want of proper materials and authorities. The Lutherans were not pleased with him, for they thought him partial; nor will they allow his work to be a proper standard whereby to judge of the learning of Germany. His biographical collections were last published in one vol. fol. at Franc-fort, under the title, “Dignorum laude Virorum, quos Musa vetat mori, immortalitas.” His other works were, 1. “Apographum-Monumentorum Heidelbergensium,” Heidelberg, 1612, 4to. 2. “Parodice et Metaphrases Horatianse,” Frapcfort, 1616, 8vo. 3. “Notae io Orationem Julii Caesaris Scaligeri pro M, T. Cicerone contra Ciceronianum Erasmi,” 1618; and he reprinted Erasmus’s dialogue “De optimo genere dicendi,” 1617. The Oxford catalogue erroneously ascribes to him the history of the churches of Hamburgh and Bremen, which, we have just seen, was the work of Adam de Bremen. His biographical works are, however, those which have preserved his name, and have been of great importance to all subsequent collections. He died in 1622.

, a French grammarian, born at Paris, in 1716, was the pupil of Louis Le Beau, and many years professor of rhetoric in the college of Lisieux. The duke de Choiseul, who had a friendship for him, sent him to Venice as charge d'affaires to that republic, where he resided twelve years. On his return to France, he published his various elementary treatises, which have been much approved by teachers. 1. “La vraie maniere d'apprendre une Langue quelconque, vivante ou morte, par le moyen de la langue Française,” 1787, 5 vols. 8vo, and often reprinted. This work includes a French, Latin, Italian, English, and German grammar. 2. “Les quatre chapitres, de la Raison, de l‘Amour de soi, de l’Amour du prochain, de la Vertu,” 1780. Besides these, he published literal translations of Horace, 1787, 2 vols. 8vo. Phoedrus, and Dr. Johnson’s Rassclas. He died in Paris, 1792, leaving behind him the character of a man of talents, an able linguist, and of amiable manners.

, an eminent architect, was born in 1728, at the town of Kirkaldy, in Fifeshire, Scotland. He was the second son of William Adam, esq. of Maryburgh, an architect of distinguished merit. He received his education at the university of Edinburgh. The friendships which he formed in that seat of learning were with men of high literary fame, among whom were Mr. Hume, Dr. Robertson, Dr. Adam Smith, and Dr. Ferguson. As he advanced in life, he had the happiness to enjoy the friendship and intimacy of Archibald duke of Argyle, Mr. Charles Townsend, and the celebrated earl of Mansfield. To perfect his taste in the science to which he had devoted himself, he went to Italy, and there studied, for some time, the magnificent remains of antiquity which still adorn that country. He was of opinion, that the buildings of the ancients are, in architecture, what the works of nature are with respect to the other arts; serving as models for our imitation, and standards of our judgment. Scarce any monuments, however, of Grecian or Roman architecture now remain, except public buildings, The private edifices, however splendid and elegant, in which the citizens of Athens and Rome resided, have all perished: few vestiges remaining, even of those innumerable villas with which Italy was crowded, although, in erecting them, the Romans lavished the spoils and riches of the world. Mr. Adam, therefore, considered the destruction of these buildings with particular regret; some incidental allusions in the ancient poets, and occasional descriptions in their historians, conveying ideas of their magnificence, which astonish the artists of the present age. He conceived his knowledge of architecture to be imperfect, unless he should be able to add the observation of a private edifice of the ancients fo his study of their public works. He therefore formed the scheme of visiting the ruins of the emperor Dioclesian’s palace, at Spalatro, in Venetian Dalmatia. To that end, having prevailed on M. Clerisseau, a French artist, to accompany him, and engaged two draughtsmen to assist him in the execution of his design, he sailed from Venice, in June 1757, on his intended expedition, and, in five weeks, he accomplished his object with much satisfaction.

In 1762, he was appointed architect to their majesties. In 1764, he published the result of his researches at Spalatro, in one volume large folio: it was entitled, “Ruins of the Palace of the Emperor Dioclesian, at Spalatro, in Dalmatia.” It is enriched with seventy-one plates, executed in the most masterly manner. He had at this time been elected a member of the Royal and Antiquary Societies. In 1768, he resigned his office of architect to their majesties, it being incompatible with a seat in parliament, and he being this year elected representative for the county of Kinross. By this time, in conjunction with his brother James Adam, he had been much employed by the nobility and gentry, both in constructing many noble modern edifices, and in embellishing ancient mansions: and, in 1773, they first began to publish “The Works in Architecture of R. and J. Adam,” in numbers, four of which appeared before 1776, and contain descriptions of Sion House, Cane Wood, Luton Park House, and some edifices at Whitehall, Edinburgh, &c. That noble improvement of the metropolis, the Addphij will long remain an honour to the brothers; but, as a speculation, it was not so fortunate. In 1774, however, they obtained an act of Parliament to dispose of the houses by way of lottery.

The many other elegant buildings, public and private, erected in various parts of the kingdom by this ingenious architect, display a great variety of original designs. To the last moment of his life, he evinced an increasing vigour of genius, and refinement of taste: for in the space of one year preceding his death, he designed eight great public works, besides twenty-five private buildings, so various in their style, and so beautiful in their composition, that they have been allowed by the best judges, sufficient of themselves to establish his fame as an architect. His talents, too, extended beyond the line of his own profession; and in his numerous drawings in landscape, we observe a luxuriance of composition, and an effect of light and shadow, which have scarce ever been equalled.