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

Mr. Archdeacon Stephens, rector of Drokinsford, in Hampshire, preached his funeral sermon in Winchester cathedral. In that sermon, and other authorities, his character is thus given: “He had a very serious and devout turn of mind, and performed the duty of every station with the greatest exactness, notwithstanding the weakness of a constitution broken, in the early part of life, by long ant! frequent fastings, and too diligent an application to his studies. But this had no effect upon his mind, which was calm and composed at all times. The uneasiness he suffered from an ill habit of body, never made him uneasy to others. He was of a very affectionate, meek, and gentle nature; and though he had a good deal of warmth in his temper, he subdued it so effectually by reflection and habit, that he was hardly ever seen in a pas*, siott^ but behaved in all the private, as well as public circumstances of life, with great moderation and firmness of. spirit. He was a lover of peace and order, both from judgment and inclination; and, being a most sincere friend to the church of England, he constantly avowed those principles” of toleration and indulgence, which make that church the glory of the reformation. "There are letters extant, by which it appears, that he was very diligent in examining the arguments urged on both sides, before he took the oaths to king William and queen Mary, which he religiously observed by a steady and uniform attachment to the Revolution-interest, as longas he lived. No man ever supported the character of a bishop with greater dignity and authority, and yet no one was ever more beloved by the clergy of both his dioceses; for he was very courteous and obliging, and easy of access to all, and had a strict regard to those parts of behaviour which are most suitable to the profession of a minister of the gospel. His rebukes were conveyed in few words, and those delivered with a sort of uneasiness for the necessity of them: but although they were few, and smoother than oil, yet were they very swords; for to an understanding heart they seemed to receive an aggravation of anger, from that very meekness which endeavoured to soften them. He was of a temper incapable of soliciting favours for himself, or his nearest friends, though he had the tei/derest affection for them. He was very much displeased at the appearance of an importunate application in others, and always avoided it in his own conduct. And notwithstanding all his relations have prospered very much in the world by his means, their success has been owing rather to the credit and influence of his character, than any direct applications made by him. The nobleness of his mind appeared in many other instances; in his candour and generosity of spirit, and contempt of money; of which he left so many marks in every place where he lived, that he had neither ability, nor occasion, 1 to perpetuate his memcry by any posthumous charities. He did not consider his revenue as designed for the private advantage of a family; but as a trust or stewardship, that was to be employed for the honour of his station; the maintenance of hospitality; the relief of the poor; the promoting a good example amongst his clergy; and the general encouragement of religion and learning.

, a Dominican friar, son of sir Thomas Trivet, lord chief justice, was author of the “Annales 6. Regurn Anglise,” published by Mr. Ant. Hall, of Queen’s college, Oxford, in 1719, 2 vols. 8vo. He lived in the reigns of Edward I. II. III. and died in 1328. Bishop Nicolson says that an excellent copy of his history, which John Pits subdivides into three several treatises, was in his time in the library of Merton college, Oxford, “whence several of our most eminent antiquaries have had very remarkable observations.” It is in French, and bears the title of “Les Gestes des Apostoiles, or the popes, empereurs, et rois;” but this must be a different work from the former. Trivet left many other Mss. on various subjects of philosophy and theology, a commentary on Seneca’s Tragedies, &c. He was educated at Oxford, and esteemed one of the ornaments of the university in his time.

, a learned divine of the sixteenth century, was the third son of Mr. William Tooker of Exeter, where he was born. He was educated at Winchester school, whence he went to New college, Oxford, and was admitted perpetual fellow in 1577. He completed his master’s degree in 1583, about which time he distinguished himself as a disputant before some illustrious visitors of the university. In 1585 he gave up his fellowship on being promoted to the archdeaconry of Barnstaple in Devonshire. He was afterwards made chaplain to queen Elizabeth, which, Prince says, was occasioned by his writing and dedicating a book to her majesty on the king’s evil, which we shall presently notice. He became afterwards prebendary of Salisbury, and took his degree of D. D. in 1594. He then became canon of the church of Exeter, and dean of Lichfield, but did not attain the latter preferment in consequence of the death of Dr. Boleyne, as Wood and Prince say, for he succeeded Dr. Montague, and was installed Fei>. 21, 1604. These biographers inform us that king James designed him for the bishopric of Gloucester, and that the conge d'elire was actually issued, but for some reason the king was pleased to revoke it. Dr. Tucker died at Salisbury March 19, 1620, and was buried in the cathedral there.

Dr. Tucker was esteemed an excellent Greek and Latin scholar. “The purity of his Latin pen,” says Fuller, “procured his preferment. He was an able divine, a person of great gravity and piety, and well read in curious and critical authors.” His publications are, 1. “Charisma, sive Donum Sanationis, seu Explicatio totius qusestionis de mirabilium sanitatum gratia, &c.” Lond. 1597, 4to. This is the work which, Prince says, introduced him to the favour of queen Elizabeth. It is a historical defence of the power of our kings in curing what is called the king’s evil. Deirio, the Jesuit, answered it, and “with him,” say Wood and Prince, “are said to agree most fanaticks,” and we may add, most persons of common sense. Tucker was, if we mistake not, the first who wrote in defence of the royal touch, and Carte, the historian, the last, or perhaps the celebrated Whiston, who has a long digression on the subject in his life. 2. “Of the Fabrick of the Church and Church-men’s Living,” Lond. 1604, 8vo. This appears’ to have been written to obviate the scruples of some of the puritan party. The subjects treated are: I. “Of parity and imparity of gifts; of competency and incompetency of men’s livings; and of the reward of men’s gifts or maintenance, so called; of parity and imparity of men’s livings, which ariseth out of the equality or inequality of men’s gifts, and of preferments so called; of singularity and plurality of beneh'ces, and of the cause thereof, viz. dispensations; of the friends and enemies of pluralities; and of supportance and keeping of the fabrick of the church upright, in which he vindicates the hierarchy and constitution of the church of England against the enemies thereof, who are for reducing all to a parity and equality.” 3. “Singulare Certamen cum Martino Becano Jesuita,” Lond. 1611, 8vo, in defence of James I. against Becan and Bellarmin.

, a learned English divine and controversial writer, was born in St. Martin’s parish in the city of Carlisle, July 22, 1620, and was educated partly at the free-school there, and afterwards at Barton-kirk in Westmoreland. He was entered of Queen’s college, Oxford, in 1634, where Gerard Langbaine was his tutor, and attained a fellowship. In 1642 he was created M. A. and became master of the grammar-school at Tetbury in Gloucestershire; but this he seems to have accepted rather as a retreat, while Oxford was garrisoned during the rebellion, for after the surrender of the garrison, he returned to his college, and became a noted tutor and preacher, and in 1657 was admitted bachelor of divinity. He was soon after made principal of Edmund-hall, which he found almost empty, but raised it, as Wood informs us, to a state as flourishing as that of any hall in Oxford. After the restoration, he was created D. D. and was made chaplain to his majesty. He was also presented to the rectory of Griggleton, or Grittleton, near Malmsbury in Wiltshire, by Thomas Gore of Alderton, esq. who had been one of his pupils, and in 1675 the king conferred upon him the deanery of Rippon, which he did not long enjoy, as he died on January 14 following, 1675-6, at the parsonage house at Griggleton, and was interred in the chancel of that church.

There was another of this name, George Tully, son of Isaac Tully of Carlisle, who, we conjecture, was a nephew of the above Dr. Tully. He was educated at Queen’s college, Oxford, and was beneficed in Yorkshire. He died rector of Gateside near Newcastle, subdean of York, &c. in 1697. He was a zealous writer against popery, and was suspended for a sermon he preached and published in 1686, against the worship of images, and had the honour, as he terms it himself, to be the first clergyman in England who suffered in the reign of James II. “in defence of our religion against popish superstition and idolatry.” He was one of the translators of “Plutarch’s Morals,” “Cornelius Nepos,” and “Suetonius,” all which were, according to the phrase in use, “done into English by several hands.” Thomas Tully, author of the funeral sermon on the death of bishop Rainbow, which is appended to Banks’s Life of that prelate, was, we presume, of the same family as the preceding. He died chancellor of Carlisle about 1727.

When the great question of Henry VIII. 's divorce was agitated, Tti install at first favoured the divorce, and even wrote on that side of the question; but, having reason afterwards to change his sentiments, he espoused the queen’s cause, which many of the Roman catholics then and now consider as the conscientious side. When Henry took the title of Supreme head of the church of England, Tunstall recommended it both in his injunctions, and in a sermon preached at Durham, although he had, in 1531, solemnly protested against that title. He also vindicated the king’s supremacy, in 1538, in a sermon preached before his majesty, upon Palm-sunday, in which he zealously condemned the usurpations of the bishop of Rome. In 1535, he was one of the commissioners for taking the valuation of ecclesiastical benefices, in order to settle the first fruits and tenths. And in 1537, the king commanded him, on account of his learning and judgment, to peruse cardinal Pole’s book of “Ecclesiastical Union,” which occasioned some letters between the cardinal and Tunstall, particularly, a severe one written jointly by him and by Stokesley, bishop of London, against the pope’s supremacy. The year following, he was appointed to confer concerning the reformation, with the ambassadors of the German protestant princes; but matters were not yet ripe for an alteration in this kingdom. In 1541 a new edition of the English Bible was revised by him and Nicholas Heath, bishop of Rochester. Attached as he was to popery, he appears to have taken in many cases a calm and judicious view of the questions agitated in Henry VIII.'s reign, and this led him to concur in some of the measures which were favourable to the reformation; and in that of Edward VI. he yielded obedience to every law which was enacted, and to all the injunctions, at the same time that he protested, in his place in parliament, against the changes in religion, which, Burnet says, he thought he might with a good conscience submit to and obey, though he could not consent to them. In the question of the corporal presence, he adhered to the popish opinion, and wrote on the subject.

On the accession of queen Mary in 1553, Tunstall was restored to his bishopric; but still he was not a man to her mind, behaving with great lenity and moderation, and consequently his diocese escaped the cruel persecutions which prevailed in others. When he left London, he was strictly charged with the entire extirpation of heresy in his diocese; and was given to understand, that severity would be the only allowed test of his zeal. These instructions, says Mr. Giipin, he received in the spirit they were given; loudly threatening, that heretics should no where find a warmer reception than at Durham: and it was thought indeed that the protestants would hardly meet with much favour from him, as they had shown him so little. But nothing was further from his intention than persecution: insomuch that his was almost the only diocese where the poor protestants enjoyed any repose. When most of the other bishops sent in large accounts of their services to religion, very lame ones came from Durham; they were filled with high encomiums of the orthodoxy of the diocese, interspersed here and there with the trial of an heretic, but either the depositions against him were not sufficiently proved, or there were great hopes of his recantation; no mention however was made of any burnings. A behaviour of this kind was but ill relished by the zealous council: and the bishop lay deservedly under the calumny of being not actuated by true Romish principles. When his nephew Bernard Gilpin, an avowed protestant, came home from his travels, the bishop not only received him with great friendship, but gave this heretic the archdeaconry of Durham; and Fox tells us, that when one Mr. Russel, a preacher, was before bishopTunstail, on a charge of heresy, and Dr. Hinmer, his chancellor, would have examined him more particularly, the bishop prevented him, saying, “Hitherto, we have had a good report among our neighbours; I pray you bring not this man’s blood upon my head.”

From such a man it was naturally expected that, on the accession of queen Elizabeth, there would have been little difficulty in reconciling him to the reformation, and in fact the queen had nominated him as the first in a list of prelates to officiate at the consecration of several new bishops; but notwithstanding this, he refused to take the oath of supremacy, and was consequently deprived of his bishopric in July 1559. At the same time he was committed to the custody of Parker, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury, and then in possession of Lambeth palace, by whom he was entertained in a very kind, friendly, and respectful manner; and Parker is said to have produced a change in some of his sentiments. It appears that Tunstall told Bernard Gilpin, that in the matter of transubstantiation, pope Innocent III. had done unadvisedly, in making it an article of faith; and he further confessed, that the pope committe<l a great error in the affair of indulgences, and in other things. Tunstall also held the doctrine of justification by faith only.

, an English poet, descended from a family of considerable note in Dorsetshire, was a younger son of Nicholas Turbervile of Whitchurch, and supposed to have been born about 1530. He received hia education at Winchester school, and became fellow of New college, Oxford, in 1561, but left the university without taking a degree, and resided for some time in one of the inns of court. He appears to have accumulated a stock of classical learning, and to have been well acquainted with modern languages. He formed his ideas of poetry partly on the classics, and partly on the study of the Italian school. His poetical pursuits, however, did not interfere with more important business, as his well-known abilities recommended him to the post of secretary to Thomas Randolph, esq. who was appointed queen Elizabeth’s ambassador at the court of Russia. While in this situation, he wrote three poetical epistles to as many friends, Edward Davies, Edmund Spenser (not the poet), and Parker, describing the manners of the Russians. These may be seen, in Hackluyt’s voyages, vol. I. p. 381. After his return, he was much courted as a man of accomplished education and manners; and the first edition of his " Songs and Sonnets/* published in 1567, seems to have added considerably to his fame. A second edition appeared in 1570, with many additions and corrections.

, an ancient historian, of the eleventh century, was an Anglo-Saxon, of a good family in Lincolnshire. When a young man, he was delivered by the people of Lindsay, as one of their hostages, to William the Conqueror, and confined in the castle of Lincoln. From thence he made his escape to Norway, and resided several years in the court of king Olave, by whom he was much caressed and enriched. Returning to his native country, he was shipwrecked on the coast of Northumberland, by which he lost all his money and effects, escaping death with great difficulty. He then travelled to Durham; and applying to Walter, bishop of that see, declared his resolution to forsake the world, and become a monk; in which he was encouraged by that pious prelate, who committed him to the care of Aldwine, the first prior of Durham, then at Jarrow. From that monastery he went to Melross; from thence to Wearmouth, where he assumed the monastic habit; and lastly returned to Durham, where he recommended himself so much to the whole society, by his learning, piety, prudence, and other virtues, that, on the death of Aidwine, in 1087, he was unanimously chosen prior, and not long after was appointed by the bishop archdeacon of his diocese. The monastery profited greatly by his prudent government; the privileges were enlarged, and revenues considerably increased by his influence; and he promoted many improvements in the sacred edifices. In this office he spent the succeeding twenty years of his life, sometimes residing in the priory, and at other times visiting the diocese, and preaching in different places. At the end of these twenty years, he was, in 1107, elected bishop of St. Andrew’s and primate of Scotland, and consecrated by archbishop Thomas, at York, Aug. 1, 1109. Dissentions arising between our archbishop and the king of Scotland, the prelate’s anxiety and distress of mind brought on a decline of health, under which he obtained permission to return to England; and came back to Durham in 1115, where he resided little more than two months before his death. Stevens, in the “Monasticon,” says that he returned to Durham after the death of king Malcolm and his queen; and Spotiswood, in his “Church History,” that he died in Scotland, and was thence conveyed to and buried at Durham, in the Chapter-house, between bishops Walcher and William.

Some of his leisure hours he employed in collecting and writing the history of the church of Durham from the year 635 to 1096, in four books. But not having published this work, or made many transcripts of it, according to the custom of those times, it fell into the hands of Simeon, precentor of the church of Durham, who published it under his own name, expunging only a few passages that would have discovered its real author. This curious fact, of which we were not aware when we drew up our brief account of Simeon, is demonstrated by Selden, in his preface to sir Roger Twysden’s “Decem Scriptores,” and shews that literary fame was even then an object of ambition. Turgot composed several other works, particularly the lives of Malcolm Canmore, king of Scotland, and of his pious consort queen Margaret, which is often quoted by Fordun and others, but is not supposed to exist. Turgot had been confessor to queen Margaret, and as Papebroch has published in the “Acts of the Saints,” a life of her, under the name of Theodoric, also said to have been a confessor to the queen, it seems not improbable, according to lord Hailes and others, that Theodoric is another name for Turgot, or that the name of Theodoric has been prefixed to the saint’s life, instead of that of Turgot, by the mistake of some copier: but Papebroch certainly thinks they were two distinct persons.

, an English prelate, son of the preceding, received his education at Winchester school, and was thence elected fellow of New college, Oxford; where he took his degrees in arts, that of bachelor, April 14, 1659, and that of master in the beginning of 1663. He commenced B. I), and D. D. July 6, 1669, and in December following was collated to the prebend of Sneating in St. Paul’s. On the promotion of Dr. Gunning to the see of Chichester, he succeeded him in the mastership of St. John’s college, Cambridge, April 11, 1670. In 1683, he was made dean of Windsor, and the same year, was promoted to the see of Rochester, being consecrated on Nov. 11, and next year Aug. 23, was translated to the bishopric of Ely. Though he owed most of these preferments to the influence of the duke of York, afterwards James II. yet on the accession of that prince to the throne, as soon as he perceived the violent measures that were pursued, and the open attempts to introduce popery and arbitrary power, he opposed them to the utmost. He was one of the six bishops who joined archbishop Sancroft on May 18, 1688, in subscribing and presenting a petition to the king, setting forth their reasons, why they could not comply with his commands, in causing his majesty’s “Declaration for liberty of conscience” to be read in their churches. This petition being styled by the court, a seditious libel against his majesty and his government, the bishops were all called before the privy council; and refusing to enter into recognizances, to appear in the court of the king’s bench, to answer the misdemeanour in framing and presenting the said petition, were, on June 8, committed to the Tower; on the 15th of the same month they were brought by habeas corpus to the bar of the king’s bench, where, pleading not guilty to the information against them, they were admitted to bail, and on the 29th came upon their trials in Westminster-hall, where next morning they were acquitted to the great joy of the nation. However, when king William and queen Mary were settled on the throne, our bishop, among many others of his brethren and the clergy, refused to own the established government, out of a conscientious regard to the allegiance he had sworn to James II.; and refusing to take the oaths required by an act of parliament of April 24, 1689, was by virtue of that act suspended from his office, and about the beginning of the following year, deprived of his bishopric. After this he lived the rest of his days in retirement, and dying Nov. 2, 1700, was buried in the chancel of the parochial church of Therfteld in Hertfordshire, where he had been rector, but without any memorial except the word Expergiscar engraven on a stone over the vault.

On the accession of Edward VI. he returned o England, was incorporated M. D. at Oxford, appointed physician to Edward, duke of Somerset, and, as a divine, was rewarded with a prebend of York, a canonry of Windsor, and the deanery of Wells. In 1552 he was ordained priest by bishop Ridley. He speaks of himself in the third part of his “Herbal,” as having been physician to the “erle of Embden, lord of East Friesland.” In 1551 he published the first part of his History of Plants, which he dedicated to the duke of Somerset his patron. But on the accession of queen Mary, his zeal in the cause of the reformation, which he had amply testified, not only in preaching, but in various publications, rendered it necessary for him to retire again to the continent, where he remained at Basil, or Strasburgh, with others of the English exiles, until queen Elizabeth came to the throne. He then returned, and was reinstated in his preferments. He had, however, while abroad, caught some of the prejudices which divided the early protestants into two irreconcilable parties, and spoke and acted with such contempt for the English discipline and ceremonies, as to incur censure, but certainly was not deprived, as some of those writers who are hostile to the church have asserted, for he died possessed of the deanery of Wells. It would appear, indeed, that he had given sufficient provocation, but found a friend in the queen on such occasions. In the dedication of the complete edition of his “Herbal” to her in 1568, he acknowledges with gratitude, her favours in restoring him to his benefices, and in other ways protecting him from troubles, having, at four several times, granted him the great seal for that purpose.

In 16y3 he began his travels, and first resided for a considerable time in Holland, where his talents recommended him to the acquaintance and friendship of the most eminent scholars and divines of the time. He lived eight months at Rotterdam, and in the midst of the disputes between Jurieu and Bayle, was on good terms with both, without any sacrifice of principle on his own part. His chief object during his residence in Holland was the study of ecclesiastical history under Spanheim; and with that view he continued about eight months at Leyden, and maintained some theses which did him great credit, particularly “Pyrrhonismus pontificius, sive Theses Theologico-historicse de variationibus pontificiorum circa ecclesise infallibilitatem.” This was reprinted in the collection of his Dissertations. In July 1692 he came to England, but had not slept many nights in London before he was attacked by an asthmatic complaint, which disturbed him for the greater part of his life. He removed for better air to Chelsea, but preached in the French church in London, and visited the universities of Oxford and Cambridge. At the latter he first saw Mr. (afterwards sir) Isaac Newton, in whose modest manners and conversation he discerned the future illustrious character. It appears also that he held some amicable disputes with our divines on the respective constitutions of the churches of England and Geneva. He passed much of his time with his old friend bishop Burnet, at the palace at Salisbury, where he also met Dr. V/hitby and Mr. Allix: and by means of lord Galloway was introduced at court, and very graciously received by king William and queen Mary. Burnet also introduced him to Tillotson, Compton, Tenison, Lloyd, Wake, &c. &c. He learned English so well, that when after his return to Geneva, the duke of Bridgwater and lord Townsend, with hoth of whom he was intimate, engaged him to preach in English, he performed it with a facility which astonished his noble hearers; but he afterwards lost the art of speaking, although he could always write and read English with great ease and correctness.

In 1711 he began to print his theses on different subjects, but chiefly on the necessity of a revelation, and on the truth of the Christian religion, all of which were published at Geneva in 2 vols. 4to, 1737. In 1719 he published a “Dissertation on Fundamental Points,” which he had written at the request of two persons of rank of the Lutheran profession. Along with it was published his “Cloud of Witnesses.” The title was “Nubes Testium de moderate et pacifico de rebus theologicis judicio, et instituenda inter protestantes concordia. Premissa est brevis et pacifica de articulis fundamentalibus disquisitio, qua ad protestantium pacem, mutuamque tolerantiam via sternitur,” 4to. This work, which contains an assemblage of the sentiments of eminent men of all ages on the subject of toleration, was dedicated to archbishop Wake, who as well as the author laboured much to procure a re-union between the protestant churches; and Turretin derived no little reputation from this attempt, which many of the leading men among the Lutherans highly approved. About this time he had a controversy with Buddeus on the subject of miracles, which was conducted on both sides with great urbanity. Turretm also began to prepare for the press his lectures on natural religion, which form an excellent system on that subject. On the death of Pictet he succeeded him in his duties on. solemn academical festivals, and in delivering the accustomed harangues, prescribed by the laws of Geneva, not only in the council of two hundred, but in the half-yearly meetings of the burgesses. He also took an active part in various improvements introduced by the church of Geneva, as a revision of their liturgies, a translation of the new testament published in 1726, the establishment of a society for the education of the young, &c. In 1734 he published his abridgment of ecclesiastical history, in Latin, “Historiae Ecclesiastics compendium a Christo nato usque ad annum. 1700,” Genev. 8vo. This he used to dictate to his students, and it served as a text-book for his lectures. The preceding year he received from our queen Caroline, who had often shewn him marks of respect, a gold medal, brought by Sir Luke Schaub, but she was dead before it arrived. On the death of archbishop Wake in 1737, which Turretin very much regretted, the divines of Geneva having determined to write a letter to the new archbishop, Potter, congratulating him on his promotion, and requesting his protection to the foreign churches, Turretin was employed on the occasion, and this was the last letter of any importance which he wrote. His health, always delicate, now began to give way, and he died May I, 1737, in his sixty-sixth year, regretted as one of the most able divines of his church or time.

, a very learned nonconformist divine, was descended from German ancestors, of whom his grandfather is said to have been the first who settled in England. He was born about 1575. His father, who was a clothier at Newbury in Berkshire, perceiving this his sou to be weil qualified for a learned education, sent him to Winchester-school, whence he was in 1596 elected probationer fellow of New-college, Oxford, and two years after became actual fellow. According to Wood, he studied divinity for sixteen years together. In 1604 he proceeded in arts, and about that time taking orders, was a frequent and diligent preacher, “noted to the academicians for his subtile wit, exact judgment, exemplary life and conversation, and for the endowment of such qualities that were befitting men of his function.” He was not less esteemed as a logician and philosopher, and his learning appeared not only in his public lectures and disputations, but in the accuracy with which he corrected the works of the celebrated Bradwardine, published by sir Henry Savile. Besides his catechistical lectures, which he read every Thursday in term-time in the college chapel, he preached every Sunday at St. Aldate’s church; and at length his fame reaching the court, king James appointed him chaplain to his daughter Elizabeth, afterwards the unfortunate queen of Bohemia, who was then about to leave her native country and go to the Palatinate. On this he was admitted to his degree of D. D.

, a musician of the sixteenth cen-, tury, born at Westminster, and brought up in the royal chapel, was musical preceptor to prince Edward, and probably to the other children of Henry VIII. In 1545 he was admitted to the degree of doctor in music at Cambridge and in 1548 was incorporated a member of the university of Oxford; in the reign of queen Elizabeth he was organist oithe royal chapel, and a man of some literature. In music he was excellent; and notwithstanding that Wood, speaking of his compositions, says they are antiquated, and not at all valued, there are very few compositions for the church of equal merit with his anthems.

, an English historian, descended from an ancient family, was the eldest son of sir Timothy Tyrrell, of Shotover near Oxford, kiit. by Elizabeth his wife, sole daughter of the celebrated archbishop Usher. He was born in Great Queen -street, Westminster, in May 1642, and educated chiefly at the free school of Camberwell in Surrey. In 1657 he was admitted a gentleman commoner of Queen’s college, Oxford, where he continued three years under the tuition of Mr. Thomas Tully and Mr. Timothy Halton. After going to the Temple to study law, he returned to Oxford in September 1663, and was created M. A. In 1665 he was called to the bar, but did not practise, employing his time chiefly in historical researches, particularly respecting the history and constitution of England. Having an independent fortune, he resided chiefly on his estate at Onkeley, near Brill in Buckinghamshire, and was made one of the deputy lieutenants and justices of the peace for that county; in which offices he continued till king James If. turned him and the rest out of the commission, for not assisting in taking away the penal laws and test. On the revolution, he zealously espoused king William’s interest, and wrote with great effect in vindication of his right to the crown.

Thomas Tyrwhitt, the subject of the present article, the eldest son of Dr. Tyrwhitt, was born March 29, 1730, and had his first education at a school at Kensington, to which he was sent in his sixth year. In 1741 he removed to Eton. Here, as well as afterwards, he manifested the strongest propensities tp literature, at an age when other boys are employed, every moment they can steal from books, in pursuit of pleasure. But Mr. Tyrwhitt, it has been justly said, never was a boy, his calm and contemplative disposition always leading him to manly and scholar-like studies. After a residence of six years at Eton, he was entered of Queen’s college, Oxford, in 1747, and took the degree of bachelor of arts in 1750. He removed to Merton college, in consequence of being elected to a fellowship in 1755, and the following year took his degree of M.A. He remained on his fellowship until 1762, when he left the university, carrying with him an extensive fund of various knowledge, to which he afterwards added by most unwearied application.

The publications of this excellent scholar were, I. “An Epistle to Florio (Mr. Ellis, of Christ-church) at Oxford,” Lond. 1749,4to. 2. “Translations in Verse; Pope’s Messiah; Philips’s Splendid Shilling, in Latin,” and “the eighth Isthmian of Pindar, in English,” 1752, 4to. 3. “Observations and Conjectures on some passages in Sbakspeare,” 1766, 8vo. Mr. Tyrwhitt afterwards communicated many judicious remarks on our national bard to Mr. Steevens and Mr. Reed for the editions of 1778 and 1785. 4 “Proceedings and Debates in the House of Commons in 1620 and 1621, from the original ms. in the library of Queen’s college, Oxford, with an appendix, printed at the Clarendon press, 1766, 2 vols. 8vo. 5.” The manner of holding parliaments in England; by Henry Elsynge, Cler. Par. corrected and enlarged from the author’s original ms.“Lond. 1768, 8vo. With a view to raise a spirit of research into ancient classical Mss. his first critical publication in literature was, 6.” Fragmenta duo Plutarchi, 1773, from an Harleian ms. 5612.“He observes himself of this, that it had no great merit, and was only published to stimulate similar inquiries. 7.” The Canterbury Tales of Chaucer,“in 4 vols. 8vo, to which he afterwards added a 5th volume in 1778. There has since been a splendid edition printed at Oxford in 2 vols. 4to. This is certainly the best edited English classic that has ever appeared. 8.” Dissertatio de Babrio, Fabularum jsopicarum scriptore. Inseruntur fabnlse quaedam Æsopese nunquam antehac editae ex cod.ms. Bodl. AcceduntBabriifragmenta. 1776.“The object of this publication, which, though small in sjze, evinced the greatest critical acumen, was to shew, that many of the fables which pass under the name of Æsop, were from another antient writer of the name of Babrius, whose fragments are preserved in Suidas in verse. 9.” Notes on Euripides,“which, in Dr. Harwood’s opinion, form the most valuable part of Musgrave’s edition, 1778. 10.” Poems, supposed to have been written at Bristol in the 15th century, by Rowley and others; with a preface, an account of the Poems, and a Glossary.“This was twice re-published in 1778, with an appendix tending to prove that they were written, not by any antient author, but by Chatterton. This became the subject of warm controversy, which, however, was settled, by 11” A Vindication of the Appendix to the Poems called Rowley’s, in reply to the dean of Exeter, Jacob Bryant, esq. and others, by Thomas Tyrwhitt.“Mr. Tyrwhitt’s next work was of a different kind, namely, 12.” Περι Λιθων; de Lapidibus, Poema Orpheo a quibusdam adscriptum, Græce et Latine, ex edit. Jo. Matthæi Gesneri. Recensuit, notasque adjecit, Thomas Tyrwhitt. Simul prodit auctarium dissertationis de Babrio.“Mr. Tyrwhitt in this critical work, refers the poem” on Stones“to the age of Constant! us. He next printed for his private friends, 13.” Conjecturas in Strabonem;“and be also superintended, 14.” Two Dissertations on the Grecian Mythology, and an examination of sir Isaac Newton’s objection to the Chronology of the Olympiads,“by Dr. Musgrave. For this work a very liberal subscription was raised for the doctor’s family, entirely by the exertions of Mr. Tyrwhitt, who had before given up to the widow a bond for several hundred pounds which the Doctor had borrowed of him. His last literary labour was, 15.” A newly discovered Oration of Isaeus against Menecles," which Mr. Tyrwhitt revised in 1785, and enriched with valuable notes, at the request of lord Sandys. These few specimens are from the Medicean Library, and are sufficient to shew Mr. Tyrwhitt’s powers, and to make us regret that his modesty declined the proposal made to him of directing the publication of the second volume of Inscriptions collected by Mr. Chishull, and first laid open to the public by the sale of Dr. Askew’s Mss. How he succeeded in the illustration of such subjects will best appear by that most happy explanation of the Greek inscription on the Corbridge altar, which had baffled the skill of all preceding critics, and will be a lasting proof how critical acumen transcends elaborate conjecture. (See Archseologia, vol. III. p. 324, compared with vol. II. pp. 92, 98.) Nor raust his observations on some other Greek inscriptions in Archseologia, vol. III. p. 230, be forgotten.

With the duties of his profession he combined a more than common share of classical learning, historical knowledge, and a singularly correct taste in the sister arts of poetry, painting, and music; all of which he continued to cultivate and enjoy to the close of his long life. To his other studies, he added those of metaphysics and moral philosophy; by means of which he had early become acquainted with Dr. Beattie, whom, as the biographer of the latter informs us, he loved and respected as an able champion of truth, and with whom he ever after continued to Jive on the footing of the most intimate friendship. He also possessed the esteem and regard of many of the most distinguished literary characters of the age, as lord Monbodclo, lord Kaimes, Dr. John Gregory, Dr. Reid, Principal Campbell, Dr. Gerard, and others. As an author, Mr. Tytler was first and principally distinguished for his “Inquiry, historical and critical, into the evidence against Mary queen of Scots, and an examination of the Histories of Dr. Robertson and Mr. Hume, with respect to that evidence,” 1759, 8vo, frequently reprinted, and in 1790 extended to 2 vols. 8vo, with large additions. In this work, he displayed an uncommon degree of acuteness in the examination of a question, which has been maintained on both sides with great ability, but not always with the temper and manners which guided Mr. Tytler’s pen. As a supplement to this work, he read in the Society of Antiquaries in Scotland, of which society he was a warm friend and protector, and for many years vice-president, “A dissertation on the marriage of queen Mary to the earl of Bothwell,” which forms a distinguished article in the first volume of the transactions of that society published in 1751, in 4to.

, an illuminator on vellum, who was in England in the reign of queen Elizabeth, appears to have been a native of Florence, and, while here, a teacher of the Italian language. Vertue speaks of some of his works as extant in his time, or as having very lately been so; as the Psalms of David in folio, with an inscription by Ubaldini to Henry earl of Arundel, whom he calls his Maecenas. The date is, London, 1565. There was another book on vellum, written and illuminated by him, by order of sir Nicholas Bacon, who presented it to the lady Lumley. This is, or was, at Gorhambury. There were other specimens of his skill in the royal library, now in the British Museum, and he appears also to have been an author. Walpole mentions one of his Mss. in the Museum, entitled “Scotiae descriptio a Deidonensi quodain facto, A. D. 1550, et per Petruccium Ubaldinum transcripta A. D. 1576,” which was published afterwards in Italian, with his name, at Antwerp, 1588, fol. The Museum catalogue attributes also the following to Ubaldini: 1. “Discourse concerning of the Spanish fleet invading England in 1588 and overthroweu,” Lond. 1590, 4to. 2. “Le Vite delle Donne illustri del regno d'lughilterra, e del regnb di Scotia, &c.” ibid. 1591. Walpole, who appears to have examined this work, gives, as a specimen of Petrucchio’s talents for history, two of his heroines. The first was Chembrigia, daughter of Gurguntius, son of king Bellinus, who, having married one Cantabro, founded a city, which, from a mixture of both their names, was called Cambridge. The other illustrious lady he styles expressly donna senza. name, and this nameless lady, as Walpole says, was the mother of Ferrex and Porrex in lord Dorset’s “Gorboduc,” who, because one of her sons killed the other that was a favourite, killed a third son in a passion. 3. “Precetti moral i, politici, et economici,” 1592, 4to. 4. “Scelta di alcune Attioni, e di varii Accidenti,” 1595, 4to. 5. “Rime,”

, an eminent schoolmaster of the sixteenth century, styled by Leland, in his “Encomia,” Odovallus, was born in Hampshire in 1506, and was admitted scholar of Corpus Christi college, Oxford, June 18, 1520. He then took the degree of bachelor of arts, and became probationer fellow Sept. 3, 1524; but was prevented taking the degree of master soon afterwards, on account of his inclination to the tenets of Luther. He then obtained the mastership of Eton school, and, in the performance of his duty there, behaved, as Thomas Tusser the poet tells us, with great severity. He proceeded in arts in 1534, but in 15il was near losing his place, being suspected of some concern in a robbery of plate belonging to the college, with two of his scholars. For this fact he was examined by the king’s council, but we do not know the result of their inquiries. The charge probably was discovered to be ill-grounded, as he was at this time in possession of the living of Braintree in Essex, which he did not resign till 1544, and in 1552 was preferred to the rectory of Calbourne in the Isle of Wight. He afterwards was servant to queen Catherine Parr, and, in the beginning of Edward VI. 's time, was promoted to a canonry at Windsor. The time of his death is not known, unless by a manuscript note on a copy of Bale, in which that event is said to have taken place in 1557, and that he was buried at Westminster. In 1555 he had been appointed headmaster of Westminster-school, a circumstance not noticed by Wood. He is said to have written several comedies, and Bale mentions “The Tragedy of Popery.” But none of these now exist. A specimen, however, of his abilities in this wav, niay be seen in a long quotation from a rhiming interlude by him, printed in Wilson’s “Art of Logicke,” 1587, and reprinted in the new edition of Wood’s Athense. His more useful works were, 1. “Flowers for Latin speaking, selected and gathered out of Terence, and the same translated into English,” &c. often printed, particularly in 1533, 1538, 1568, and 1575. Both Leland and Newton wrote encomiastic verses on this book. 2. A translation of the “Apophthegms” of Erasmus, 1542 and 1564, 8vo. 3. “Epistolce et carmina ad Gul. Hormannum et ad Joh. Lelandum.” 4. A translation of Erasmus’s “Paraphrase on the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles,” 1551, fol. 5. A translation of Peter Martyr’s “Treatise on the Sacrament.*' He also drew up” An answer to the sixteen articles of the Commons of Devonshire and Cornwall," a ms. in the royal collection.

, one of those pontiffs who deserve some notice on account of his learning, and attention to the interests of literature, was born at Florence in 1568. His family name was Maffei Barbarini, and his family was of the most ancient and honourable. His father dying while Maffei was an infant, he was entrusted to the care of his uncle Francis, a prothonotary of the Roman court, who sent for him to Rome, and placed him for education in the Jesuits’ college. Here he made great proficiency in classical studies under Tursellino and Benci, and was particularly distinguished for his taste for poetry. But as his uncle intended him for active life, he took him from his beloved studies, and sent him to Pisa, where he might acquire a knowledge of the law, so neoessary then to those who would rise to preferment; and here he applied with such diligence, that in his twentieth year the degree of doctor was deservedly conferred upon him. He then returned to Rome, where his uncle received him with the greatest kindness, and having always treated him as his son, bequeathed him, on his death, which happened soon after, a handsome fortune, as his sole heir. His first patron was cardinal Farnese, and by his interest and his own talents he soon passed through the various gradations of preferment which led, in 1606, to the rank of cardinal, bestowed on him by Paul V. In 1623, while cardinal legate of Bologna, he was elected pope, and took the name of Urban VIII. It is not our intention to detail the historical events in which he was concerned. The errors in his government, which were fewer than might have been expected in one so zealous for the church, arose from two circumstances, his early attachment to the Jesuits, and his nepotism, or family partiality. The latter was so powerful, that he bestowed on his relations red hats and temporal employments with a very liberal hand, and often entrusted the management of affairs to them; and the chief errors of his pontificate were imputed to them by the candid, although he only was blamed by the people at large. As a mjjn of learning, and a patron of learned merr, he has generally been praised; but he was no antiquary, and was justly censured for having destroyed some Roman antiquities, which the barbarous nations had spared when masters of Rome; and this gave occasion to the famous pasquinade, “Quod non fecerunt Barbari, fecerunt Barherini.” He wrote many Latin poems in an elegant style, of which an edition was published at Paris in 1642, fol. and a very beautiful one at Oxford, in 1726, 8vo, edited by Joseph Brown, M. A. of Queen’s college, and afterwards provost of that college, with a life and learned notes. Urban’s patronage of learned men was very liberal, and he received those of all nations with equal respect. Among others he extended his patronage to Ciampolo, Cesarini, Herman Hugo, and to Dempster and Barclay, two learned Scotchmen. The latter has celebrated him in his “Argenis” under the name of Ibburranis, the transposition of Barberini. Urban published a remarkable edition of the Romish breviary, aud several bulls and decrees which are in “Cherubini bullarium.” Among the most noticeable is that which abolishes the order of female Jesuits, and certain festivals; and others which relate to image worship; those by which, in compliance with the Jesuits, he condemns Jansenius; and that by which the title of eminence was conferred upon the cardinal-legates, the three ecclesiastical electors, and the grand master of Malta. Among his foundations was the college “De propaganda fide.” In the article of cardinals he was profuse, for he created no less than seventy-four. He died July 29, 1644, and was buried in St. Peter’s, in the stately tomb erected by his own orders by the celebrated Bernini.

, a most illustrious prelate, and as he has been justly styled by Dr. Johnson, the great luminary of the Irish church, was descended from a very antient family, and born at Dublin, Jan. 4, 1580. His father, Arnold Usher, was one of the six clerks in chancery, a gentleman of good estate and reputation, and descended of a very ancient family, which in England bore the name of Nevil, till the reign of Henry II. when it was fchanged by one of his ancestors, who about 1185, passing with prince (afterwards king) John in quality of usher into Ireland, settled there by the name of his office, a practice very common in those early ages, and probably occasioned by the ambition of founding a family; and his descendants, spreading into several branches, filled the most considerable posts in and about Dublin for many ages, to the time of our author, who gave fresh lustre to the family. His mother was the daughter of James Stanyhurst (father of Richard the poet. See Stanyhurst) thrice speaker of the House of Commons, recorder of the city of Dublin, and one of the masters in chancery. This gentleman, of whom we took some notice in our account of his son, is yet more memorable for having first moved queen Elizabeth to found and endow a college and university at Dublin; in which he was vigorously seconded by Henry Usher , archbishop of Armagh, who was James Usher’s uncle. James discovered great parts and a strong passion for books from his infancy; and this remarkable circumstance attended the beginning of his literary pursuits, that he was taught to read by two aunts, who had been blind from their cradle, but had amazing memories, and could repeat most part of the Bible with readiness and accuracy; C<ecorum mens oculatissima. At eight years of age he was sent to a school, which was opened by Mr. James Fullerton and Mr. James Hamilton, two young Scots gentlemen, who were placed at Dublin by king James I. then only king of Scotland, to keep a correspondence with the protestant nobility and gentry there, in order to secure an interest in that kingdom, in the event of queen Elizabeth’s death: but her majesty being very sore upon this point, and unwilling to think of a successor, this was a service of some danger, and therefore it was thought expedient for them to assume the disguise of school-masters, a class of men which was very much wanted in Ireland at that time. Mr. Fullerton was afterwards knighted, and of the bed-chamber to king James; and Mr. Hamilton was created viscount Clandebois.

Usher left his library, being the chief part of his property, as a portion to his only daughter, who had been the mother of a numerous offspring. It was first bought by the officers and soldiers of Cromwell’s army in Ireland, and lodged in Dublin-castle, where it lay, though not without being much pillaged, till the restoration; which bringing it into the possession of king Charles II. he gave it, according to the primate’s first intention, to Dublincollege, where it now remains. This, in truth, had been the primate’s first intention; but, upon the loss of every thing else except his books, he was compelled to consider the necessities of his family, his daughter having before had nothing from him except some pieces of gold presented to him by Mr. Selden’s executors and other pqrsons of quality. The library consisted of ten thousand volumes printed and manuscript, and cost the primate many thousand pounds. Both the king of Denmark and cardinal Mazarine offered a good price for it by their agents here; but the executors were forbidden, by an order from Oliver and his council, to sell it to any one without his consent; so it was at last bought by the soldiers and officers of the then army in Ireland, who, out of emulation to the former noble action of queen Elizabeth’s army, were incited by some men of public spirit to the like performance, and they had it for much less than the real worth, or what had been offered for it before by the agents above mentioned. They had also with it all the manuscripts which were not of his own hand-writing, and a choice though not numerous collection of ancient coins. But, when this library was carried over into Ireland, the usurper and his son, who then commanded in chief there, would not bestow it upon the college, lest perhaps the gift should not appear so considerable there as it would do by itself; and therefore they gave out that they intended it for a new college or hall which they said they intended to build and endow. But it proved that, as these were not times, so they were not persons capable of any such noble or pious work; and this library lay in the castle of Dublin till Cromwell’s death; and, during the anarchy and confusion that followed, the rooms where it was kept being left open, many of the books, and most of the best manuscripts, were stolen away, or else embezzled by those that were intrusted with them.

Archbishop Usher was tall, well-shaped, and walked upright to the last. His hair was b'rown, his complexion sanguine, his countenance full of good-nature as well as gravity: yet, Dr. Parr says, the air of his face was hard to hit, and that, though many pictures were taken of him, he never saw but one like him, which was done by sir Peter Lely. He was a man who abounded in all graces, moral as well as spiritual; which, joined with the greatest abilities and learning, made him upon the whole a very complete character. Among his Mss. were many notes and observations upon the writings and characters of the fathers and ecclesiastical authors, which he designed as the foundation of a large and elaborate work, to be called “The.ologica Bibliotheca;” and this was indeed, of all his works, that which, he had most set his heart upon: yet the calamities of the times would not suffer him to finish it. He left these papers, however, to Dr. Gerard Langbaine, proTost of Queen’s college, as the only man on whose learning as well as friendship he could rely, to render them fit for the press: but Langbaine, while pursuing his task in the public library, got so severe a cold, that he died in 1657; and nothing farther appears to have been done, though Dr. Fell afterwards made some attempts to get it finished. A copy of it is lodged ip the Bodleian library. The works from his Mss. published after his death, were: 1. “Chronologia sacra seu Annorum & wadoncltcts Patriarcharum, isapoMiois Israelitarum in Ægypto Annorum etiamJudicum,RegumJudae Israelis, ^o3fi|<jChronologica,” Oxford, 166Q, in 4to, published by Dr. Thomas Barlow,. afterwards bishop of Lincoln. Reprinted with the Annals of the Old and New Testament at Geneva, in 1722, folio. This chronology is imperfect, the author dying while he was engaged in it. He proposed to have subjoined to it a tract “De primitive & veterurn Hebraeorum Kalendario.” 2. A collection of piece’s published by Dr. Nicholas Bernard at London, in 1658, 8vo, under the title of “The Judgment of the late Archbishop,” &c. 3. Dr. Bernard published likewise at London in 1659 our author’s “Judgment and sense of the present See of Rome from Apocal. xviii. 4.” 4. “The power of the prince and obedience of the subject stated;” with a preface by Dr. Robert Sanderson, published by James Tyrrell, esq. grandson to our author, at London, 1661. 5. A volume of “Sermons,” preached at Oxford before his majesty, and elsewhere. 6. “Historia Dogmatica Controversise inter Orthodoxos & Pontificios de Scripturis & sacris Vernaculis. Accessere ejusdem Dissertationes duoe de Pseudo-Dionysii scriptis & de Epistola ad Laodicenos. Descripsit, digessit, & Notis atque Auctario locupletavit Henricus Wharton,” London, 16yO, 4to. 7. “A Collection of three hundred Letters written to James Usher lord archbishop of Armagh, and most of the eminentest persons for piety and learning in his time both in England and beyond the seas. Collected and published from original copies under their own hands by Richard Parr, D. D. his lordship’s chaplain at the time of his death, uith whom the care of all his papers were intrusted by his lordship,” London, 1686, folio. To this Dr. Parr has prefixed the life of the archbishop, collected from authentic documents, and with the assistance of the Tyrrell family, his only descendants. This volume forms the best monument yet erected to his memory, and from the very names of his correspondents, gives us a high ictea of the respect in which he was held, and the high place he filled in the literary world.

, a learned botanist, was born in the parish of St. Margaret, Westminster, May 25, 1642; educated at Westminster school under Dr. Busby; whence he was elected to Trinity college, Cambridge; B. A. 1662; M. A. 1666; LL. D. Com. Reg. 1682; and was master of the grammar school at Enfield about 1670. He resided in the old manor-house in that town called Queen Elizabeth’s Palace; and, being much attached to the study of botany, had a very curious garden there; and planted, among other trees, a cedar of Libanus, which (till within these few years) was one of the finest in the kingdom, measuring (in October 1793) 12 feet in the girth. In an account of the most remarkable gardens, near London in 1691, by J. Gibson, printed in the Archaeologia, vol. XII. p. 188, Dr. Uvedale is said to have “the greatest and choicest collection of exotics that perhaps was any where in this land.” Dr. Pulteney, hi his brief memoirs of Dr. Leonard Plukenet, says, “I regret that I cannot collect any material anecdotes relating to his friend and fellow collegian Dr. Uvedale, of whom Plukenet ever speaks in a style which indicates that he held him in great esteem.” “The garden which he cultivated at Enfield appears to have been rich in exotic productions; and though he is not known among those who advanced the indigenous botany of Britain, yet his merit as a botanist, or his patronage of the society at large, was considerable enough to incline Petiver to apply his name to a new plant, which Miller retained in his Dictionary, but which has since passed into the genus Polymnia, of the Linnsean system; the author of which has nevertheless retained Uvedalia, as the trivial name.” In the British Museum (Bibl. Sloan. 4064, Plut. 28 F.) are fifteen letters from him to sir Hans Sloane; also letters from him to Dr. Sherard, and Mr. James Petiver. Dryden, Dr. Uredale, and other learned men, having agreed to translate Plutarch’s Lives from the original Greek, Dr. Uvedale translated the Life of Dion, and the work was published in 1684. A whole length portrait of him, and another of his wife, were in the possession of the late admiral Uvedale, of Bosmere-house, Suffolk.

, or Henry de Valois, a French critic of great abilities and learning, was born at Paris in 1603, of parents, whose circumstances supported them without any profession. He began his studies at Verdun in 1613, under the Jesuits, and the greatest hopes were formed of him from his childhood. He was recalled to Paris five years after, and continued there in the college of Clermont; where he learned rhetoric under Petavius, who, as well as father Sirmond, conceived a great esteem for him. After having maintained his theses in philosophy with much applause, he went to Bourges in 1622, to study the civil law; and at the end of two years returned to Paris, where he was received advocate. He frequented the bar for seven years, but more to oblige his father than out of any fondness for the law, which he at length quitted, and devoted himself entirely to literary pursuits. Greek and Latin authors were all his study, and all his pleasure. Sunday he consecrated to devotion, Saturday afternoon he allotted to his friends; but all the rest of the week was spent in reading and labour. His own library not sufficing, he borrowed books of every body; and he used to say, that he learned more from other people’s books than his own, because, not having the same opportunity of reviewing them, he read them over with more care. He acquired a great reputation by his learning and publications, when a misfortune befel him, which interrupted the course of his studies. He had always a weak sight; but continual application had hurt him so, in this respect, that he lost his right eye, and saw very indifferently with the left. This put him under the necessity of having a reader; for, though his father was of too sparing a humour to make him an allowance for this purpose, yet the defect was supplied by the generosity of his friends. His father, however, died in 1650; and then his circumstances were better suited to his necessities. The same year he composed an oration in praise of Christina queen of Sweden, who had just ascended the throne; and her majesty, by way of acknowledging the favour, promised to send him a gold chain, and gave him at the same time an invitation to accompany the learned Bochart to Sweden. But the chain never came, and the invitation ended in nothing, for which Valesius himself is said to have been to blame, having been so imprudent, while he was meditating this journey, as to make use of some satirical expressions on the learned in those parts; which, being related to the queen, occasioned her majesty’s neglect of him.

But the advantages he reaped in his own country were not proportioned to his merits, and as he loved to make a figure, he resolved to augment his fortune by a visit to England, where he had heard of the favour king Charles I. shewed to the arts. On his arrival he lodged with Geldorp, a painter, hoping to be introduced to the king; but, owing to whatever means, this was not accomplished, and he went away chagrined. The king, however, soon learning what a treasure had been within his reach, ordered sir Kenelm Digby, who had sat to Vandyck, to invite him over. He immediately complied, and was lodged among the king’s artists at Black-friars. Thither the king went often by water, and viewed his performances with singular delight, frequently sitting to him himself, and bespeaking pictures of the queen, his children, and his courtiers; and he conferred the honour of knighthood on him at St. James’s July 5, 1632. This was the following year attended bv the grant of an annuity of 200^. a year, and with this he had the title of painter to his majesty.

, usually styled the most learned of all the Romans, was born in the year of Rome 638, or 28 B.C. His immense learning made him the admiration of his time; which yet was the most flourishing for arts and glory that Rome ever knew. He was an intimate friend of Cicero; and his friendship was confirmed and immortalized by a mutual dedication of their learned works to each other. Thus Cicero dedicated his “Academic Questions” to Varro; and Varro dedicated his “Treatise on the Latin tongue” to Cicero, who, in a letter in which he recommends him as questor to Brutus, assures the commander, that he would find him perfectly qualified for the post, and particularly insists upon his good sense, his indifference to pleasure, and his patient perseverance in business. To these virtues he added uncommon abilities, and large stores of knowledge, which qualified him for the highest offices of the state. He attached himself to the party of Pompey, and in the time of the triumvirate was proscribed with Cicero: and, though he escaped with his life, he suffered the loss of his library, and of his own writings; a loss which would be severely felt by one who had devoted a great part of his hfe to letters. Returning, at length, to Rome, he spent his last years in literary leisure. He died in the 727th year of the city. His prose writings were exceedingly numerous, and treated of various topics in antiquities, chronology, geography, natural and civil history, philosophy, and criticism. He was, besides, a poet of some distinction, and wrote in almost every kind of verse. He is said to have been eighty when he wrote his three books “De Re Rustica,” which are still extant. Five of his books “De Lingua Latina,” which he addressed to Cicero, are also extant, and some fragments of his works, particularly of his “Menippean Satires,” which are medleys of prose and verse. Scaliger has likewise collected some of his epigrams from among the “Catalecta Virgilii. The first edition of Varro” De Lingua Latina“is a quarto, without date or place, but supposed to be Rome, 1471. There is a second, at Venice, 1474, 4to, and a third at Rome, 1474, fol. His whole works, with the notes of Scaliger, Turnebus, &c. were printed by Henry Stephens, 1573, 8vo, reprinted 1581; but the former edition is in greatest request among the curious, on account of a note of Scaliger' s, p. 212, of the second part, which was omitted in the subsequent editions. Varro” De Re Rustica“is inserted among the” Auctores de Re Rustica." The use which Virgil makes of this work in his Georgics entitles it *o some respect; and it is amusing as giving us a notion of the agriculture of his time, and the method of laying out gardens, and providing the luxuries of the table, in which the Romans were particularly extravagant. It contains many absurdities, however, and many of those remarks and pieces of information which would now be thought a disgrace to the meanest writer on agriculture. The rev. T. Owen, of Queen’s college, Oxford, and rector of Upper Scudamore, in Wiltshire, published a good translation of this work in 1800, 8vo.

, Lord Vaux of Harwedon, an English poet, was the eldest son of Nicholas, the first lord Vaux, and was born in 1510. In 1527 he was among the attendants in Wolsey’s stately embassy, when that prelate went to treat of a peace between the emperor Charles V. and the kings of England and France; and in January 1530, he took his place in parliament as a baron. In 1532 he waited on the king in his splendid expedition to Calais and Boulogne, a little before which time he is said to have had the custody of the persecuted queen Catherine. In the following year he was made a knight of the bath, at the coronation of Anne Boleyn. He appears to have held no public office but that of the captain of the island of Jersey, which he surrendered in 1536. He died early in the reign of Philip and Mary.

Such was his reputation that he began to distrust the sincerity of the public, and seems to have suspected that there was more fashion than real opinion in the extravagance of their applause. This engaged him in a dangerous experiment, the publication of a poem without his name. But whether the number of his productions had gradually formed the public taste to his own standard of excellence, or that his fertile and irregular genius was singularly adapted to the times, the result of this trial confirmed the former judgment of the public; and his “Soliloquies to God,” though printed under a feigned name, attracted as much notice, and secured as many admirers, as any of his former productions. Emholdened probably by this success, he dedicated his “Corona Tragica,” a poem on the queen of Scots, to pope Urban VIII, who had himself composed an epigram on the subject. Upon this occasion he received from that pontiff a letter written in his own hand, and the degree of doctor of theology. Such a flattering tribute of admiration sanctioned the reverence in which his name was held in Spain, and spread his fame through every catholic country. The cardinal Barberini followed him with veneration in the streets; the king would stop to gaze at such a prodigy; the people crowded round him whereever he appeared; the learned and the studious thronged to Madrid from every part of Spain to see this phoenix of their country, this “monster of literature;” and even Italians, no extravagant admirers in general of poetry that is not their own, made pilgrimages from their country for the sole purpose of conversing with Lope. So associated was the idea of excellence with his name, that it grew in common conversation to signify any thing perfect in its kind; and a Lope diamond, a Lope day, or a Lope woman, became fashionable and familiar modes of expressing their good qualities.

, or Venantius Honorius Clementianus Fortunatus, a Christian poet of the sixth century, was a native of Italy, and studied at Ravenna. He applied himself to grammar, rhetoric, poetry, and jurisprudence, but was most attached to rhetoric and poetry, and was honoured by Hilduinus, the abbot of St. Denis, with the title of Scholasticissimus. It sems uncertain what was the cause of his leaving Italy for France, but the step was peculiarly fortunate for him, as his poetical genius procured him the most honourable reception. Princes, bishops, and persons of the highest ranks, became eager to confer on him marks of their esteem. He arrived in France during the reign of Sigebert, king of Austrasia, who received him with great respect. This being about the time of the king’s marriage with Brunehaut, in the year 566, Venantius composed an epithaiamium, in which he celebrated the graces and perfections of the new queen. It is also said, that he gave the king lectures on politics. The following year he went to Tours to perform a vow to St. Martin, whose image had cured him of a complaint in his eyes. He then went to Poictiers, and was invited by St. Radegonda, the foundress of a monastery there, to reside in the capacity of her secretary; and afterwards, when he became a priest, she appointed him her chaplain and almoner. He resided here for some years, employing his time in study and writing, and edifying the church as much by his example as by his works. He was much esteemed by Gregory of Tours and other prelates, and was at last himself raised to be bishop of Poictiers, which dignity, it is said, he did not long enjoy. He died about the commencement of the seventh century, some say in the year 609. His works consist of eleven books of poetry, mostly of the elegiac kind, and generally short: hymns adapted to the services of the church: epitaphs, letters to several bishops, and some to Gregory of Tours: courtly verses addressed to queen Radegonda, and her sister Agnes, usually sent with presents of flowers, fruit, &c. four books of the “Life of St. Martin,” in heroic verse: several lives of the saints. Editions of his works were published at Cagliari in 1573, 1574, and 1584, and at Cologne in 1600: but all these are said to be incomplete and incorrect, yet they shew the respect paid to him as the best Latin poet of his time. In 1603 Christopher Brower, a German Jesuit, produced a very correct edition, with notes, printed at Fulda, and reprinted at Mentz, in 1617, 4to; but this contains only his poems. His other works are in the “Bibliotheca Patrum,” of Lyons, 1677. The most complete edition is that of Rome, published under the title of “Venantii opera omnia quae extant, post Browerianam editionetn mine recens novis addiiamentis aucta, not. et scholiis illustr. opera Mich-Ange Luchi,” 1786—87, 2 vols. 4to.

Mr. Henry Venn was born at Barnes, in the county of Surrey, 1725. He was educated, partly under Dr. Pitman, at Market-street, and partly under the reverend Mr. Catcott, rector of St. Stephen, Bristol, a Hutchinsonian divine of great ingenuity and learning, the author of a curious treatise on the deluge, and a volume of sermons. In 1742 Mr. Venn was admitted of Jesus college, Cambridge, proceeded to the degree of B.A. in 1745, and to that of M.A. in 1749. There being no fellowship vacant in his own college, the fellows of Queen’s unanimously elected him a member of their society, in which he continued till his marriage in 1757. The lady to whom he became united was daughter of Dr. Bishop of Ipswich, author of an Exposition of the creed, and a volume of Sermons preached at Lady Moyer’s lecture in 1724.

, a brave English commander, was second son to Geoffrey Vere, who was third son of John Vere, earl of Oxford. He was born in 1554, and applying himself early to the military art, became one of the most famous generals of his time. He served first among the forces sent by queen Elizabeth, under the command of the earl of Leicester, to the assistance of the States of Holland, where he gave proofs of a warlike genius, and undaunted courage. In 1588, he was part of the English garrison which gallantly defended Bergen -op- Zoom against the prince of Parma and “that true courage might not want its due reward or distinction,” says Camden, “the lord Willoughby, who was general of the English after Leicester’s departure, conferred the honour of knighthood on sir Francis Vere, whose great fame commenced from this siege.”

Sir Francis also assisted count Maurice at the siege of Deventer, being the chief instrument in the taking that place; and it was also through his conduct and valour, that the duke of Parma received a signal defeat before Knodsenburgh fort, near Nimeguen: which obliged that prince to retire from thence, with more dishonour than m any action that he had undertaken in those wars. In 1596 he was recalled from the Low Countries, and employed in the expedition against Cadiz, -with the title of Lord Marshal: and in this enterprize he displayed his usual courage and military skill. He returned again to Holland the following year, and had a principal share in the action near Turnhout, where near three thousand of the enemy were killed and taken. Some time after he was appointed governor of the Brill, one of the cautionary towns in the Low Countries, and was permitted at the same time to retain the command of the English troops in the service of the States. In 1599, when a new Spanish invasion was apprehended, the queen constituted him Lord Marshal: and being sent over in all possible haste, he embarked on the 22d of August at the Brill, and arrived in London the next day, where he remained until all apprehensions of an invasion were over. He then returned back to the Hague, and had there an audience of the States.

Soon after his discharge from the government of Ostend, sir Francis, at the request of the States, came into England to desire fresh succours, which went over in May, and were to be under his command. He accordingly returned again to Holland; and upon receiving the news of queen Elizabeth’s death, he proclaimed king James I. at the Brill, in April 1603. A few months after he came to England, and his government of the Brill expiring, or he being superseded at Elizabeth’s death, it was renewed to him by king James. But under this pacific sovereign, a peace was concluded with Spain in 1601. Sir Francis survived this about four years, and died at home, Aug. 28, 1608, in the fifty-fourth year of his age. He was interred in St. John’s chapel, Westminster-abbey, where a monument was erected to his memory by his lady. Besides his other preferments, he was governor of Portsmouth. He had three sons and two daughters, who all died before him. He married Elizabeth, second daughter of John Dent, a citizen of London, and she re-married with Patrick Murray, a son of John earl of Tullibardine, in Scotland.

Sir Francis Vere was a general of the greatest bravery, and of equal military talents. Queen Elizabeth had an high opinion of him, and always treated him with the greatest respect, often saying that she “held him to be the worthiest captain of her time.” He was a man of letters, as well as an accomplished general, and wrote an account of his principal military transactions, which were published from the author’s original, compared with two other transcripts, in 1657, by William Dillingham, D. D. under the title of “The Commentaries of sir Francis Vere, being divers pieces of service, wherein he had command, written by himself, in way of commentary,” Cambridge, fol. with portraits of sir Francis, and sir Horace Vere, sir John Ogle, and maps and plans, &c. and additions by sir John Ogle, Henry Hexham, Isaac Dorislaus, and the editor.

, seventeenth earl of Oxford, was the only son of John the sixteenth earl, who died in 1563, by his second wife, Margaret, daughter of John Golding, esq. He is supposed to have been born about 1540 or 1541, and in his youth travelled in Italy, whence it is said he was the first who imported embroidered gloves and perfumes into England, and presenting queen Elizabeth with a pair of the former, she was so pleased with them, as to be drawn with them in one of her portraits. This gives us but an indifferent opinion of his judgment, yet he had accomplishments suited to the times, and made a figure in the courtly tournaments so much encouraged in queen Elizabeth’s reign. He once had a rencounter with sir Philip Sidney (see Sidney, vol. XXVII. p. 507), which did not redound much to his honour. In 1585, Walpole says he was at the head of the nobility that embarked with the earl of Leicester for the relief of the States of Holland; but Camden, who gives a list of the principal personages concerned in that expedition, makes no mention of him. In 1586 he sat as lord great chamberlain of England on the trial of Mary queen of Scots. In 1588 he hired and fitted out ships at his own charge against the Spanish Armada. In 1589 he sat on the trial of Philip Howard, earl of Arwndel; and in 1601, on the trials of the earls of Essex and Southampton. One of the most remarkable events of his life was his cruel usage of his first wife, Anne, daughter of the celebrated William Cecil, lord Burleigh, in revenge for the part acted by that statesman against Thomas duke of Norfolk, for whom he had a warm friendship. Camden says, that having vainly interceded with his father-in-law for the duke’s life, he grew so incensed that he vowed revenge against the daughter, and “not only forsook her bed, but sold and consumed that great inheritance descended to him from his ancestors;” but in answer to this, Collins says, that the estate descended to his son. It was probably, however, much impaired, as Arthur Wilson agrees with Camden, and something of the same kind may be inferred from a letter in Winwood’s Memorials, III. 422. The earl was buried at Hackney, July 6, 1604.

, esq. an admiral of distinguished bravery, was descended from an ancient family in Staffordshire, and born at Westminster on the 12th of November, 1684. His father, who was secretary of state to king William and queen Mary, gave him a good education, but never intended him for the sea-service: but, as the youth became desirous of entering on that employment, his father at last consented, and he pursued those studies which had a relation to navigation and gunnery with surprising alacrity and success. His first expedition at sea was under admiral Hopson, when the French fleet and Spanish galleons were destroyed at Vigo. In 1702, he served in an expedition to the West Indies under commodore Walker; and, in 1704, on board the fleet commanded by sir George Rooke, which convoyed the king of Spain to Lisbon, when Mr. Vernon received a hundred guineas and a ring from that monarch’s own hand. He was also at the famous battle of Malaga, the same year. In January 1705, he was appointed commander of the Dolphin; and, in 1707, commanded the Royal Oak, one of the ships sent to convoy the Lisbon fleet, which falling in with the French, three of our men of war were taken, and a fourth blown up. In 1708, Mr. Vernon commanded the Jersey, and was sent to the W'est Indies as rear-admiral under sir Charles Wager, where he took many valuable prizes, and greatly interrupted the trade of the enemy. In 1715, he commanded the Assistance, a ship of fifty guns, under sir John Norris, in an expedition to the Baltic; and, in 1726, the Grafton of seventy guns, under sir Charles Wager, in the same seas. On the accession of his late majesty George II. in 1727, Mr. Vernon was chosen member for Penryn, in Cornwall, and soon after was sent, to Gibraltar, as commander of the Grafton, to join sir Charles Wager. The next expedition in which he was engaged was that which immortalized his name. This was in 1739: he was sleeping in his bed at Chatham when the courier arrived with the news at about two in the morning; and, being informed that dispatches of the utmost importance were arrived from London, he arose. On opening the packet, he found a commission appointing him vice-admiral of the blue, and commander in chief of a squadron fitting out for destroying the settlements of the Spaniards in the West Indies, with a letter from his majesty, requiring his immediate attendance on him. Having received his instructions, he weighed anchor from Spithead on the 23d of July; and, on the 20th of November, arrived in sight of Porto Bello, with only six ships under his command. The next day he began the attack of that town; when, after a furious engagement on both sides, it was taken on the 22nd, together with a considerable number of cannon, mortars, and ammunition, and also two Spanish men of war. He then blew up the fortifications, and left the place for want of land forces sufficient to keep it; but first distributed 10,000 dollars, which had been sent to Porto-Bello for paying the Spanish troops, among the forces for their encouragement. In 1741, he made an unsuccessful attempt upon Carthagena in conjunction with general Wentworth. After his return home, the rebellion in 1745 breaking out, he was employed in guarding the coasts of Kent and Sussex; when he stationed a squadron of men of war in so happy a manner as to block up the French ports in the channel. But, soon after, complaints being made against him for superseding the orders of the lords of the admiralty, in appointing a gunner in opposition to one recommended by themselves, and for exacting too severe duty from his men, he was struck off the list of admirals; on which he retired from all public business, except attending the House of Commons as member for Ipswich in Suffolk. He died suddenly at his seat at Nacton in Suffolk, on the 29th of October, 1757, in the seventythird year of his age.

, a learned lawyer, of whom our accounts are very imperfect, was the son and heir of Richard Vernon, esq. of Henbury-hall, Worcestershire, and made a considerable figure in the reigns of queen Anne and George I. representing the borough of Whitechurch, Hampshire, in the parliaments called in 1710, 1713, 1714, and 1722. He had been secretary to the unfortunate duke of Monmouth. He died at Twickenham-park, August 22, 1726. His “Law Reports” were printed by order of the court of chancery, in 2 vols. fol. 1726, 1728, under the title of the “Reports” of Thomas Vernon, esq. “of Cases argued and adjusted in the high court of chancery, from 33 Car. II. to 5 Geo. I.” Among other eminent authorities, the late lord Kenyon took occasion to observe, that it had been an hundred and an hundred times lamented that Vernon’s Reports were published in a very inaccurate manner; there were some private reasons, said his lordship, assigned for that, which he would not mention. Mr. Vernon’s notes were taken for his own use, and never intended for publication. He was, added lord Kenyon, the ablest man in his profession. There being a dispute after Mr. Vernon’s death, whether his Mss. should go to his heir-at-law, or pass under the residuary clause in his will to his legal personal representatives, the court of chancery made an order for the publication of them, under the direction of Mr. Melmoth and Mr. Peere Williams, but as many of the cases have been found inaccurate, and to consist of loose notes only, John Raithby, esq. has lately edited and republished them with great labour, and as he has taken pains to examine all the cases with the register’s book, they cannot fail to be an acceptable offering to the profession. Mr. Raithby 's elaborate edition appeared in 1806 and 1807, 2 vols. 8vo.

With lord Orford, lord Coleraine, and Mr. Stephens the historiographer, he made several tours to various parts of England. For the former he engraved portraits of Matthew Prior, sir Hugh Middleton, and other distinguished men: for the duke of Montague he engraved sir Ralph Windwood; for sir Paul Methuen, the portraits of Cortez, and archbishop Warham from Holbein’s original at Lambeth; and for lord Burlington, Zncchero’s queen Mary of Scotland, a plate which evinces more felicity, and a better taste of execution, than most other of his works. In 1727 he travelled with lord Oxford to Burleigh, Lincoln, Weibeck, Chatsworth, and York, at which latter place he obtained from Francis Place many of those anecdotes of Hollar which are inserted in his biography. In the next year, the duke of Dorset invited him to Knowle. From the gallery there, he copied the portraits of several of the poets, but he was disappointed on an excursion to Penshurst, at not finding there any portrait of sir Philip Sidney.

, an extraordinary enthusiast in the seventeenth century, was born in London in 1582, descended from the family of Vicars in Cumberland. He was educated in Christ’s hospital, London, and afterwards was a member of Queen’s college, Oxford, but whether he took his degrees, Wood has rppt discovered. After leaving college he went to London, and became usher of Christ’s hospital, which place he held till towards the close of his life. It does not appear that he was a preacher, although most of his writings concern the religious controversies of the times Upon the commencement of the rebellion, “he showed his great forwardness,” says Wood, “for presbyterianism, hated all people that loved obedience, and affrighted many of the weaker sort, and others, from having any agreement with the king’s party, by continually inculcating into their heads strange stories of God’s wrath against the cavaliers. Afterwards, when the independents became predominant, he manifested great enmity against them, especially after the king’s death.” Foulis, in his “History of Plots,” says that “he could out-scold the boldest face in Billingsgate, especially if kings, bishops, organs, or maypoles, were to be the objects of his zealous indignation.” This indeed is a pretty just character of John Vicars’s writings, which form a store-house of the abusive epithets and gross personal reflections which passed between the lower order of sectaries in that period of confusion. The title of his work against John Goodwin, will afford a good specimen of John’s language. This was published in 1648, “Coleman-street Conclave visited; and that grand impostor, the schismatics’ cheater-in-chief (who hath long slily lurked therein) truly and duly discovered; containing a most palpable and plain display of Mr. John Goodwin’s self-conviction (under his own hand- writing), and of the notorious heresies, errors, malice, pride, and hypocrisy, of this most huge Garagantua in falsely pretended piety, to the lamentable misleading of his too credulous soul-murdered proselytes of Coleman-street, and elsewhere; collected principally out of his own big-braggadochio wave-like swelling and swaggering writings, full fraught with six-footed terms, and fleshlie rhetorical phrases, far more than solid and sacred truths, and may fitly serve (if it be the Lord’s will) like Belshazzar’s hand-writing on the wall of his conscience, to strike terror and shame into his own soul and shameless face, and to undeceive his most miserably cheated, and iuchanted or be-witched followers.” This is accompanied by a portrait of Goodwin (the only one mentioned by Granger, and of course in great request) with a windmill over his head, and a weather-cock upon it; the devil is represented blowing the sails; and there are other emblems, significant of Goodwin’s fickleness. Vicars died Aug. 12, 1652, in the seventy-second year of his age, and was buried in Christ church, Newgate-street. Wood has given a list of sixteen of his writings, the most curious of which is his “Parliamentary Chronicle.” This is still esteemed useful, and being scarce, is generally sold at a very high price. It was printed at different times under the following titles: 1. “God in the Molint; or England’s Remembrancer, being the first and second part of a Parliamentary Chronicle,” 1644, 4to. 2. “God’s Arke overtopping the World’s waves; or, a third part of a Parliamentary Chronicle,” 1646. 3. “The Burning-bush not consumed; or the fourth and last part of a Parliamentary Chronicle,” 1646. These were then published together, under the title of “Magnalia Dei Anglicana, or, England’s Parliamentary Chronicle,” 1646. Vicars was also a poet, and in the “Censura Literaria,” we have an account and specimen of a work of this kind entitled “Mischief’s Mysterie; or, Treason’s Master-piece; the powder-plot, invented by hellish malice; prevented by heavenly mercy truly related, and from the Latin of the learned and reverend Dr. Herring, translated, and very much dilated by John Vicars,” 1617. At the end of this are some smaller poems.

, a learned chronologist, was born Oct. 29, 1649, at the castle of Aubais, in Languedoc, of a very ancient family, and received a liberal education. His preparatory studies being finished, he passed a year at Geneva, and heard a course of lectures ou divinity. His father had intended him for the army, but was unwilling to put any restraint upon his inclinations, and therefore permitted him to go to Saumur, and afterwards to England, to complete his divinity studies. In 1675 he returned to Aubais, and was appointed minister of that church, which he afterwards resigned for that of Cailar, and while he performed the functions of his order with great zeal, found leisure at the same time to indulge his taste for chronological researches. On the revocation of the edict of Nantz he returned to Geneva, and afterwards to Berlin, where he was appointed pastor of the church of Schwedt. When his merit became better known, he had the choice of many churches of more emolument, but ^ave the preference to that of Brandenburgh, on account of its vicinity to the metropolis, where he might enjoy opportunities of study. In the mean time he began to form an intimacy with many eminent men, as Lenfant, La Croze, Kirck, &c. and distinguished himself by some learned papers inserted in the iiterary journals. When the royal society of Berlin was founded in 1701, he was chosen one of the members, and at the suggestion of Leibnitz was invited to settle in Berlin, that the new society might profit by his communications. With this he appears to have complied, and on the formation of the society of the Anonymi was chosen their secretary. In 1711 he became one of the editors of the “Bibliotheque Germanique,” which he enriched with many valuable criticisms, and analyses of books. Amidst all these employments he did not neglect the duties of his profession, but was a very frequent preacher, and having obtained the cure of Copenick, near Berlin, he passed his summers there, and there composed his great chronological work, the plan of which he published in 1721, but the whole did not appear until some years afterwards. Its success did not answer the expectation of the author, or of his friends, and although one of the best which had appeared on the subject, sold so slowly, that tKe bookseller was obliged more than once to have recourse to the trick of a new title-page. Vignoles, however, satisfied with a moderate competence, a stranger to worldly ambition and passions, lived quietly and happily among his books, with the occasional conversation of a few agreeable and steady friends. His wife died in child-bed, and none of the children she brought survived him. He was, in his old age, on the point of losing his sight by two cataracts, the one of which was dissipated naturally, and the other removed by an operation, the particulars of which he published in the “Miscellanea Berolinensia,” vol. IV. The king and queen shewed him many marks of kindness. The latter, it appears from the dedication of his chronology, had at one time ordered the eve of his birth-day to be kept by an entertainment, at which her proxy expressed her royal wishes forthe continuance of his life. He died at Berlin, July 24, 1744, aged upwards of ninety-four. His principal work, already noticed, was published under the title of “Chronologic de l‘historie sainte et des histoires etrangeres depuis la sortie d’Egypte jusqu'a la captivite de Babylone,” Berlin, 1738, 2 vols. 4to, a work unquestionably of vast labour and extent, and consequently cannot be supposed altogether free from imperfections.

In this fatal conjuncture, and while the war with Spain was yet kept up, anew war was precipitately declared against France; for which no reasonable cause could ever be assigned. It has been said, that the king was hurried into this war, purely from a private motive of resentment in the duke of Buckingham, who, having bfeen in France to bring over the queen, had the confidence to make overtures of love to Anne of Austria, the consort of Lewis XIII.; and that his high spirit was so fired at the repulse he met with on this extraordinary occasion, as to be appeased with nothing less than a war between the two nations. Whatever was the cause, the fleet, which had been designed to have surprised Cadiz, was no sooner returned without success and with much damage, than it was repaired, and the army reinforced for the invasion of France. Here the duke was general himself, and made that unfortunate descent upon the Isle of Rhee, in which the flower of the army was lost. Having returned to England, and repaired the fleet and the army, he was about to sail to the relief of Rochelle, which was then closely besieged by the cardinal Richelieu; and to relieve which the duke was the more obliged, because at the Isle of Rhee he had received great supplies of victuals and some men from that town, the want of both which he laboured under at this time. He was at Portsmouth for this purpose, when he was assassinated by one Felton, on the 23d of August, 1628, in the thirty-sixth year of his age. The particulars of this assassination are well known, being related, at large by lord Clarendon, to whom we refer the reader; but we may subjoin another account, as being circumstantial and curious, and less known. This is given by sir Simonds D'Ewes, in a manuscript life of himself: “August the 23d, being Saturday, the duke having eaten his breakfast between eight and nine o‘clock in the morning, in one Mr. Mason-’ s house in Portsmouth, he was then hasting away to the king, who lay at Reswicke, about five miles distant, to have some speedy conference with him. Being come to the farthef part of the entry leading out of the parlour into the hall of the house, he had there some conference with sir Thomas Frier, a colonel; and stooping down in taking his leave of him, John Felton, gentleman, having watched his opportunity, thrust a long knife, with a white helfc, he had secretly ahout him, with great strength and violence, into his breast, under his left pap, cutting the diaphragm* and lungs, and piercing the very heart itself. The duke having received the stroke, and instantly clapping his right-hand on his sword-hilt, cried out ` God’s wounds! the villain hath killed me.‘ Some report his last words otherwise, little differing for substance from these; and it might have been wished, that his end had not been so sudden, nor his last words mixed with so impious an expression. He was attended by many noblemen and leaders, yet none could see to prevent the stroke. His duchess, and the countess of Anglesey (the wife of Christopher Villiers, earl of Anglesey, his younger brother), being in an upper room, and hearing a noise in the hall, into which they had carried the duke, ran presently into a gallery, that looked down into it $ and there beholding the duke’s blood gush out abundantly from his breast, nose, and mouth (with which his speech, after those his first words, had been immediately stopped), they brake into pitiful outcries, and raised great lamentation. He pulled out the knife himself; and being carried by his servants unto the table, tha,t stood in the same hall, having struggled with death near upon a quarter of an hour, at length he gave up the ghost, about ten o’clock, and lay a long time after he was dead upon the table.”

The third period dates from the return of Lionardo to Florence, after the fall of Francesco Sforza. The thirteen years of his stay there produced some of his best works; the celebrated portrait of Mona Lisa, a labour of four years, though still declared unfinished; the cartoon of St. Anna, prepared for an altar-piece at the church A'Servi, which never was coloured; the other cartoon of the battle of Niccolo Piccinino, in competition with Michael Angelo, and likewise never made use of, because his endeavour to paint it in oil on the wall had failed. He employed perhaps anpther method in a Madonna with the child, at St. Onofrio of Rome, a Raffaelesqne picture, but peeling in many places off the pannel. To this period probably belongs his own portrait in the ducal gallery, in an age which does not disagree with these years, a head whose energy leaves all the rest in that room far behind; and that other, in a different cabinet, which is called the portrait of Raffaello; and that half-figure of a young nun in the palace Niccolini, so much celebrated by Bottari. Christ among the doctors, formerly a picture of the Doria palace; the supposed portrait of queen Gioyanna with architecture; and Vertumnus with Pomona, commonly called vanity and modesty, a work as often copied as inimitable, in the Barberini; seem to coincide with this epoch; and we may count with them the Madonna begging the lily of the infant Christ in the Albani, a picture full of graces, and considered by Mengs as the masterpiece of the collection. It would however be too bold a conjecture to decide the date of every picture painted by an artist whose life was spent in search of new methods, and who too often dropped his work before it had received its finish.

Their tranquillity was at length disturbed by an edict of Charles IX. artfully procured by the Jesuits, which forbad the French churches from having any preachers who were not natives of France. Viret then, in 1563, retired to Orange, whence the pious Jeanne D'Albret, queen of Navarre, invited him to Beam. He preached also some time at Ortez, and died in that country in 1571, in the sixtieth year of his age. He had always been of a weakly constitution, and his health had been much injured by two attempts on his life by the enemies of the reformation, once when he was nearly poisoned at Geneva, and a second time when he received a stab from a knife, and was left for dead. He was a man of a meek and gentle disposition^ but of such winning eloquence, that many of his hearers conceived a kind of attachment to him, although they did not subscribe to his doctrines. Of the three great contemporaries in the church of Geneva, Calvin, Farel, and Viret, it was said that Calvin was admired for his profound erudition, Farel for his zeal and warmth, and Viret for his persuasive eloquence. Viret also, in his writings at least, had a happy talent in turning the superstitions he opposed into ridicule, and this he did with such effect that Dupin and other catholic biographers of later date cannot forgive him.

His works are very numerous, and regard principally the points in dispute between the reformed and the Romish church. They are written, some in French and some in Latin, and the form of dialogue seems to have been a favourite with him. During queen Elizabeth’s time, the most popular writings of the foreign reformers were translated into English, and this compliment we find paid to nine of Viret’s publications, the titles of which may be seen in Ames. From the list of his whole works given by Niceron, we may notice, 1. “De origine, continuatione, usu, auctohtate, atque prasstantia ministerii verbi Dei et Sacramentorum; et de controversiis ea de re in Christiano orbe, hoc praesertim sasculo excitatis, ac de eorum componendorum ratione, libri octodecini,” Geneva, 1554, folio. 2. “Instruction Chretienne en la doctrine de la loi et de l'evangile, &c.” ibid. 1564, folio.

, one of the revivers of literature, was born at Valentia, in Spain, in 1492. He learned grammar and classical learning in his own country, and went to Paris to study logic and scholastic philosophy, the subtleties and futility of which he had soon the good sense to discover, and when he removed from Paris to Louvain, he there published a book against them, entitled “Contra Pseudo-Dialecticos.” At Louvain he undertook the office of a preceptor, and exerted himself with great ability and success in correcting barbarism, chastising the corruptors of learning, and reviving a taste for true science and elegant letters. This so raised his reputation that he was chosen to be preceptor to William de Croy, afterwards archbishop of Toledo, and cardinal, who died in 1521. In July 1517 he was made, though then at Louvain, one of the first fellows of Corpus Christi college, in Oxford, by the founder; his fame being spread over England, as well on account of his great parts and learning as for the peculiar respect and favour with which queen Catherine of Spain honoured him. In 1522 he dedicated his “Commentary upon St. Augustin de Civitate Dei” to HenryVlII; which, says Wood, was so acceptable to that prince, that cardinal Wolsey, by his order, invited him over to England; but this must be a mistake, for in a letter of the cardinal’s to the university in 1519, mention is made of his being then reader of rhetoric, and that by the cardinal’s appointment. He was also employed to teach the princess Mary polite literature and the Latin tongue: it was for her use that he wrote “De Ratione studii puerilis,” which he addressed to his patroness queen Catharine, in 1523; as he did the same year “De institutione fceminae Christiance,” written by her command. During his stay in England he resided a good deal at Oxford, where he was admitted doctor of law, and read lectures in that and the belles lettres. King Henry conceived such an esteem for him, that iie accompanied his queen to Oxford, in order to be present at the lectures which he read to the princess Mary, who resided there: yet, when Vives afterwards presumed to speak and write against the divorce of Catherine, Henry considered his conduct as criminal, and confined him six months in prison. Having obtained his liberty, he returned to the Netherlands, and resided at Bruges, where he married, and taught the belles lettres as long as he lived. He died in 1537, or, according toThuanus, 1541.

, the greatest literary character which France produced in the last century, was born at Paris, February 20, 1694. His father, Francis Arouet, was “ancien notaire du Chatelet,” and treasurer of the chamber of accounts; his mother, MaryMargaret Daumart. At the birth of this extraordinary man, who lived to the age of eighty-five years and some months, there was little probability of his being ‘reared, and for a considerable time he continued remarkably feeble. In his earliest years he displayed a ready wit and a sprightly imagination: and, as he said of himself, made verses before he was out of his cradle. He was educated under Father Por6, in the college of Louis the Great; and such was his proficiency, that many of his essays are now existing, which, though written when he was between twelve and fourteen, shew no marks of infancy. The famous Ninon de l’Enclos, to whom this ingenious boy was introduced, left him a legacy of 2000 livres to buy him a library. Having been sent to the equity-schools on his quitting college, he was so disgusted with the dryness of the law, that he devoted himself entirely to the Muses. He was admitted into the company of the abb< Chaulieu, the marquis de la Fare, the duke de Sully, the grand prior of Vendo;ne, marshal Villars, and the chevalier du Bouillon; and caught from them that easy taste and delicate humour which distinguished the court of Louis XIV. Voltaire had early imbibed a turn for satire; and, for some philippics against the government, was imprisoned almost a year in the Bastile. He had before this period produced the tragedy of “Oedipus,” which was represented in 1718 with great success; and the duke of Orleans, happening to see it performed, was so delighted, that he obtained his release from prison. The poet waiting on the duke to return thanks: “Be wise,” said the duke, “and I will take care of you.” “I am infinitely obliged,” replied the young man; “but I intreat your royal highness not to trouble yourself any farther about my lodging or board.” His father, whose ardent wish it was that the son should have been an advocate, was present at one of the representations of the new tragedy: he was affected, even to tears, embraced his son amidst the felicitations of the ladies of the court, and never more, from that time, expressed a wish that he should become a lawyer. About 1720, he went to Brussels with Madam de Rupelmonde. The celebrated Rousseau being then in that city, the two poets met, and soon conceived an unconquerable aversion for each other. Voltaire said one day to Rousseau, who was shewing him “An Ode to Posterity,” “This is a letter which will never reach the place of its address.” Another time, Voltaire, having read a satire which Rousseau thought very indifferent, was advised to suppress it, lest it should be imagined that he “had lost his abilities, and preserved only his virulence.” Such mutual reproaches soon inflamed two hearts already sufficiently estranged. Voltaire, on his return to Paris, produced, in 1722, his tragedy of “Mariamne,” without success. His “Artemira” had experienced the same fate in 1720, though it had charmed the discerning by the excellence of the poetry. These mortifications, joined to those which were occasioned by his principles of imprudence, his sentiments on religion, and the warmth of his temper, induced him to visit England, where he printed his “Henriade.” King George I. and particularly the princess of Wales (afterwards queen Caroline) distinguished him by their protection, and obtained for him a great number of subscriptions. This laid the foundation of a fortune, which was afterwards considerably increased by the sale of his writings, by the munificence of princes, by commerce, by a habit of regularity, and by an ceconomy bordering on avarice, which he did not shake off till near the end of his life. On his return to France, in 1728, he placed the money he carried with him from England into a lottery established by M. Desforts, comptroller-general of the finances; he engaged deeply, and was successful. The speculations of finance, however, did not check his attachment to the belles lettres, his darling passion. In 1730, he published “Brutus,” the most nervous of all his tragedies, which was more applauded by the judges of good writing than by the spectators. The first wits of the time, Fontenelle, La Motte, and others, advised him to give up the drama, as not being his proper forte. He answered them by publishing “Zara,” the most affecting, perhaps, of all his tragedies. His “Lettres Philosophiques,” abounding in bold expressions and indecent witticisms against religion, having been burnt by a decree of the parliament of Paris, and a warrant being issued for apprehending the author in 1733, Voltaire very prudently withdrew; and was sheltered by the marchioness du Chatelet, in her castle of Cirey, on the borders of Champagne and Lorraine, who entered with him on the study of the “System” of Leibnitz, and the “Principia” of Newton. A gallery was built, in which Voltaire formed a good collection of natural history, and made a great many experiments on light and electricity. He laboured in the mean time on his “Elements of the Newtonian Philosophy,” then totally unknown in France, and which the numerous admirers of Des Cartes were very little desirous should be known. In the midst of these philosophic pursuits, he produced the tragedy of “Alzira.” He was now in the meridian of his age and genius, as was evident from the tragedy of “Mahomet,” first acted in, 174-1 but it was represented to the “procureur general” as a performance offensive to religion and the author, by order of cardinal Fleury, withdrew it from the stage. “Merope,” played two years after, 1743, gave an idea of a species of tragedy, of which few models have existed. It was at the representation of this tragedy that the pit and boxes were clamorous for a sight of the author; yet it was severely criticised when it came from the press. He now became a favourite at court, through the interest of madam d'Etoile, afterwards marchioness of Pompadour. Being employed in preparing the festivities that were celebrated on the marriage of the dauphin, he attained additional honours by composing “The Princess of Navarre.” He was appointed a gentleman of the bed-chamber in ordinary, and historiographer of France. The latter office had, till his time, been almost a sinecure; but Voltaire, who had written, under the direction of the count d'Argenson, the “History of the War of 1741,” was employed by that minister in many important negociations from 1745 to 1747; the project of invading England in 1746 was attributed to him and he drew up the king ofFrance’s manifesto in favour of the pretender. He had frequently attempted to gain admittance into the academy of sciences, but could not obtain his wish till 1746 , when he was the first who broke through the absurd custom of filling an inaugural speech with the fulsome adulation of Richelieu; an example soon followed by other academicians. From, the satires occasioned by this innovation he felt so much uneasiness, that he was glad to retire with the marchioness du Chateletto Luneville, in the neighbourhood of king Stanislaus. The marchioness dying in 1749, Voltaire returned to Paris, where his stay was but short* Though he had many admirers, he was perpetually complaining of a cabal combined to filch from him that glory of which he was insatiable. “The jealousy and manoeuvres of a court,” he would say, “are the subject of conversation; there is more of them among the literati.” His friends and relations endeavoured in vain to relieve his anxiety, by lavishing commendations on him, and by exaggerating his success. He imagined he should find in a foreign country a greater degree of applause, tranquillity, and reward, and augment at the same time both his fortune and reputation, which were already very considerable. The king of Prussia, who had repeatedly invited him to his court, and who would have given any thing to have got him away from Silesia, attached him at last to his person by a pension of 22,000 livres, and the hope of farther favour . From the particular respect that was paid to him, his time was now spent in the most agreeable manner; his apartments were under those of the king, whom he was allowed to visit at stated hours, to read with him the best works of either ancient or modern authors, and to assist his majesty in the literary productions by which he relieved the cares of government. But this happiness was soon at an end; and Voltaire saw, to his mortification, when it was too late, that, where a man is sufficiently rich to be master of himself, neither his liberty, his family, nor his country, should be sacrificed for a pension. A dispute which our poet had with Manpertuis, the president of the academy at Berlin, was followed by disgrace . It has been said that the king of Prussia dismissed him with this reproof: “I do not drive you away, because I called you hither; I do not take away your pension, because I have given it to you; I only forbid you my presence.” Not a word of this is true; the fact is, that he sent to the king the key of his office as chamberlain, and the cross of the order of merit, with these verses:

, a man of great parts and learning, was the son of Gerard John Vossius, and born of his second wife at Leyden, in 1618. The particulars of his life will be comprised in a short compass: he had no master but his father in any thing; and his whole life was spent in studying. His merit having recommended him to the notice of Christina of Sweden, the queen submitted to correspond with him by letters, and employed him in some literary commissions. He even made several journeys into Sweden by her order, and had the honour of teaching her majesty the Greek language: but, being there in 1662 with M. Huet and Bochart, she refused to see him, because she had heard that he intended to write against Salmasius, for whom she had at that time a particular regard. In 1663, he received a handsome present of money from Lewis XIV. of France, and at the same time the following obliging letter from Mons. Colbert. “Sir, Though the king be not your sovereign, he is willing nevertheless to be your benefactor; and has commanded me to send you the bill of exchange, hereunto annexed, as a mark of his esteem, and as a pledge of his protection. Every one knows, that you worthily follow the example of the famous Vossius your father; and that, having received from him a name which hath rendered him illustrious by his writings, you will preserve the glory of it by yours. These things being known to his majesty, it is with pleasure that he makes this acknowledgment of your merit,” &c. After the death of his father, he was offered the history-professorship, but refused it; preferring a studious retirement to any honours. In 1670 he came over to England, and was that year created doctor of laws at Oxford; “after he had been,” says Wood, “with great humanity and friendship entertained by some of the chief heads of colleges, as his father had been before in 1629.” In 1673, Charles II. made him canon of Windsor, assigning him lodgings in the castle, where he died Feb. the 10th, 1638. He left behind him the best private library, as it was then supposed, in the world; which, to the shame and reproach of England, was suffered to be purchased and carried away by the university of Leyden.

Such a multitude of works from the pen of the same author engaged the attention of Henry II. who, to reward his merit, bestowed on him a canonry in the cathedral of Bayeux. Monsieur Lancelot, in his explanation of the tapestry of queen Matilda, preserved in the treasury of that cathedral, has contended that Wace borrowed several facts which he could not have found elsewhere from that valuable monument, but for this there seems very slight foundation. Dumoutier in his.“Nenstria pia” says that Wace was canon of Caen, but it is certain there was no chapter established in that city. That of St. Sepulchre, which still remains, was not founded till 1219. It is true, that in March 1152, Philip de Harcourt, bishop of Bayeux, founded three new canonries in his cathedral church, and to endow them, annexed the parish churches of Notre Dame, St. John, and St. Peter, belonging to the city of Caen; perhaps Wace being afterwards provided with one of these benefices, might have been called canon of Caen, because the chief place of his prebend was situated in that city; this conjecture acquires the greater probability on account of a practice still existing in Normandy of describing every canon by the name of the place appropriated to his canonry.

, esq. of Edge and Merrifield, in Somersetshire, in which county he was born, the founder of Waclham-college, Oxford, was a descendant of the ancient family of YVadhams of Devonshire; but the period of his birth is not known, nor have we many particulars of his personal history. According to Wood, he was a gentleman-commoner either of Christ-church, or CorpusChrist! college, where he is supposed to have been admitted about 1548. He inherited an estate which he increased to more than 3000l. a-year, and accumulated about 14,000^. in money. A large portion of this property he resolved to devote to some foundation of public utility. His first intention is said to have been to found a college at Venice for such Englishmen of the Roman catholic persuasion as might wish to enjoy their education and religion, now no longer tolerated in England. From this it may be inferred, that he was himself attached to popery; but his adherence could not be inflexible, as he was soon persuaded by his friend Mr. Grange to erect a college in Oxford, in imitation of the others, where the established religion was now cultivated with zeal. His, or rather his wife’s, appointing, that the warden should not be married, may be thought a part of the old persuasion; but it must be remembered, that the marriage of the clergy was one of the last changes of opinion to which the nation was completely reconciled. Queen Elizabeth was always against it; and it was prohibited by the statutes of Jesus-college. A more ridiculous reason has been traditionally assigned for Mrs. Dorothy Wadham’s injunction against marriage; she is said to have been refused by the first warden; but she was at this time seventy-five years old, and he considerably advanced, which renders this story highly improbable. As Mr. Wadham died before this design could be carried into execution, he bequeathed the management of it to his wife, the daughter of siv William Petre, secretary of state, who so often occurs as a benefactor to the university of Oxford. This lady, assisted by trustees, and with a zeal proportioned to her husband’s spirited design, completed the necessary purchases, buildings, and endowment. She survived her husdand nine years, died May 16, 1618, aged eighty-four, and was buried with her husband in the north transept of the church of Ilminster in Somersetshire, under a stately monument of alabaster, on which are their figures on brass plates; but the whole is considerably decayed.

, a physician, whose writings, as well as his indolent habits of life, seem to have very strongly resembled those of the facetious Dr. William King of the Commons, was related to the preceding Wagstaffes, and descended from a very ancient family, who were lords of the manor of Knightcote in Warwickshire. He was born in 1685, and being the only son of his father the rector of Cublington in Buckinghamshire, he was educated with great care, and sent early to school at Northampton. In his sixteenth year he was removed to Lincoln college, Oxford, where he was soon distinguished, not only for talents and learning, but for a facetious humour which made his conversation very acceptable to persons of superior rank and standing in the university. After taking his degree of B. A. in 1703, he had some, thoughts of entering into the church, from no better motive, however, than the hopes of being preferred by a relation; but after taking his degree of A. M. in 1707, he left the university, and coming up to London, visited another relation, the rev. Thomas Wagstaffe, who then was a physician; and marrying this gentleman’s daughter some time afterwards, resolved on medicine as a profession, in which his wife’s relations did their utmost to assist him. After her death, he formed a second eligible union with the daughter of Charles Bernard, esq. sergeant-surgeon to queen Anne. Not long after this marriage, he completed his degrees in physic, in 1714, and returning to town was admitted fellow both of the college of physicians, and in 1717 of the Royal Society. Business gradually increasing, he was chosen one of the physicians of St. Bartholomew’s hospital, which trust he discharged with great reputation, as to skill and humanity. He appears, however, to have been a man of indolence, and of some irregular habits, which brought on lowness of spirits, and decay of health. In hopes of recovery he went to Bath in March 1724-5, but died there May 5, in the fortieth year of his age. His works were the same year collected under the title of “The Miscellaneous Works of Dr. William Wagstaffe, physician to St. Bartholomew’s hospital,” &c. 8vo. Their contents are characteristic of the author’s peculiar humour, and his opinions of his contemporaries. 1. “A comment upon the History of Tom Thumb,” in ridicule of Addison’s papers on “Chevy Chase.” 2. “Crispin the Cobler’s confutation of Ben H(oadly), in an. epistle 10 him.” 3. “The Story of the St. A(lba)n’s ghost,” &c. 4. “The testimonies of the citizens of Fickleborough, concerning the life and character of Robert Huish, commonly called Bob, &c.” 5. “The representation of the loyal subjects of Albinia.” 6. “The character of Richard St(ee)le, esq.:” not a very just one. 7. “The state and condition of our Taxes considered.” 8. “The Plain Dealer,” 16 numbers. 9. “Preface to the complete history of the treaty of Utrecht.” 10. “A Letter from the facetious Dr. Andrew Tripe, at Bath, to his loving brother the profound Greshamite, &c.” Most of these tracts were written in his early years, and without his name. He was also the author of two scarce little volumes, called “Annotations on the Tatler,” frequently quoted in the variorum editions of that periodical paper.

, a learned divine in the reign of Henry VIII. was born in the north of England, and educated at the university of Cambridge, whence, after taking his degrees in arts, he went abroad to study the Oriental languages. In a few years he made a considerable progress in the Greek, Hebrew, Chaldaic, and Syriac; and taught those languages both in Paris and in Germany. In 1519 he was Hebrew professor at Louvain, but after holding that office only a few months, he returned home, and became chaplain to Dr. Pace, then dean of St. Paul’s, who recommending him to the king as an able linguist, he was sent to Cambridge, and there honoured with the degree of B. D. which qualified him for ecclesiastical preferments. When the controversy relating to king Henry VIII.'s divorce commenced, Wakefield is said to have been of the queen’s party, and thought the divorce unjustifiable, but was afterwards induced to be of the king’s opinion. Dodd says that the reason he gave for changing sides was the circumstance of prince Arthur’s having consummated the marriage, of which he was not before aware; and Dodd adds, that “as the world is apt to judge the worst of things of this nature, Mr. Wakefield was represented as a mercenary writer, especially by those that maintained the queen’s cause.” We have, however, the evidence of another Roman catholic biographer that the world was not much to blame for its unfavourable opinion. Phillips, in his Life of cardinal Pole, assures us, that a letter is extant, “to Wakefield’s eternal infamy,” addressed by secretary Pace to the king, in which he informs him, that “he had treated with Dr. Wakefield of the divorce, and that the doctor was ready to solve the question, either in the negative or affirmative, just as the king thought proper, and in such a manner as all the divines in England should not be able to make any reply.” This letter is dated 1526. Accordingly he soon after wrote a work in favour of the divorce; and in 1530, the king sent him to Oxford, and made him public professor of Hebrew; by which means he had an opportunity of being more serviceable to his majesty. In 1532, he was made a canon of Wolsey’scollege, and incorporated bachelor of divinity. He appears to have been a lover of learning, and when, in 1536, the lesser monasteries were dissolved, he took care to save from destruction several valuable books and Mss. especially such as were in Greek and Hebrew; and, among others, several curious Mss. in Ramsay-abbey, particularly a Hebrew dictionary, which had been lodged there by Robert Holbeach, a monk of that monastery in the reign of Henry IV. Wakefield died at London, Oct. 8, 1537. He left some learned works, as, 1, “Oratio de laudibus et militate trium linguarum, Arabics, Chaidaicae, et liebraicae, atque id -viaicis qua- ii utfoque Testajnr- io niveniuntur,” 15^4, 4to. Thepmuei w. Wynix lie Worde; and the author complains, that he was obliged to omit his whole third part, because the printer had no Hebrew types. Some few Hebrew and Arabic characters, however, are introduced, but extremely rude, and evidently cut in wood. They are the first of the sort used in England. 2. “Koster Codicis,” &c. the same mentioned by Bale and Pits, with the title “De non ducenda fratria,” and is the book he wrote in favour of king Henry’s -divorce, Lond. 1628, 4to. Tanner and Wood attribute other pieces to him, but they are probably in ms. except “Syntagma de Hebraeorum codicum incorruptione,” 4to, without date; and " Paraphrasis in Hbrum Koheleth (Ecclesiasticen) succincta, clara, et fidelis, 4to.

The next poem is supposed by Fenton to be the address “To the Queen” on her arrival but this is doubtful, and we have no date of any other poetical production before that which the murder of the duke of Buckingham occasioned. Neither of these pieces that seem to carry their own dates could have been the sudden effusion of fancy. In the verses on the prince’s escape, the prediction of his marriage with the princess of France must have been written after the event; in the other, the promises of the king’s kindness to the descendants of Buckingham, which could not be properly praised till it had appeared by its effects:, shew that time was taken fqr revision and improvement. It is not known that they were published till they appeared long afterwards with other poems.

From his twenty-eighth to. his thirty-fifth year, he wrote his pieces on the reduction of Sallee on the reparation of St. Paul’s; to the King on his navy the panegyric on the Queen mother; the two poems to the earl of Northumberland; and perhaps others, of which the time cannot be discovered. When he had lost all hopes of Sacharissa, he looked round him for an easier conquest, and gained a lady of the family of Bresse, or Breaux. The time of his marriage is not exactly known. It has not been discovered that his wife was won by his poetry; nor is any thing told of her, but that she brought him many children, He doubtless, says Johnson, praised some whom he would have been afraid to marry, and perhaps married one whom he would have been ashamed to praise. Many qualities contribute to domestic happiness, upon which poetry has no colours to bestow; and many airs and sallies may delight imagination, “which he who flatters them never can approve. There are charms made only for distant admiration. No spectacle is nobler than a blaze. Of this wife, however, his biographers have recorded that she gave him five sons and eight daughters, aud Aubrey says that she was beautiful and very prudent. During the long interval of parliament, he is represented as living among those with whom it was most honourable to converse, and enjoying an exuberant fortune with that independence of liberty of speech and conduct which wealth ought always to produce. Being considered as the kinsman of Hampden, he was therefore supposed by the courtiers not to favour them; and when the parliament was called in 1640, it appeared that, his political character had not been mistaken. The king’s demand of a supply produced from him a speech full” of complaints of national grievances, and very vehement; but while the great position, that grievances ought to be redressed before supplies are 'granted, is agreeable enough to law and reason, Waller, if his biographer may be credited, was not such an enemy to the king, as not to wish his distresses lightened; for he relates, “that the king sent particularly to Waller, to second his demand of some subsidies to pay off the army; and sirHenry Vane objecting against first voting a supply, because the king would not accept unless it came up to his proportion, Mr. Waller spoke earnestly to sir Thomas Jermyn, comptroller of the household, to save his master from the effects of so bold a falsity: c for,‘ he said, ’ I am but a country gentleman, and cannot pretend to know the king’s mind:' but sir Thomas durst not contradict the secretary; and his son, the earl of St. Alban’s r afterwards told Mr. Waller, that his father’s cowardice ruined the king.”

Waller had a brother-in-law, Tomkyns, who was clerk of the queen’s council, and had great influence in the city. Waller and he, conversing with great confidence, told both their own secrets and those of their friends: and, surveying the wide extent of their conversation, imagined that they found in the majority of all ranks great disapprobation of the violence of the Commons, and unwillingness to continue the war. They knew that many favoured the king, whose fear concealed their loyalty: and they imagined that, if those who had these good intentions could be informed of their own strength, and enabled by intelligence to act together, they might overpower the fury of sedition, by refusing to comply with the ordinance for the twentieth part, and the other taxes levied for the support of the rebel army, and by uniting great numbers_in a petition for peace. They proceeded with great caution. Three only met in one place, and no man was allowed to impart the plot to more than two others; so that, if any should be suspected or seized, more than three could not be endangered.

At the accession of king James, in 1685, he was, in his eightieth year, chosen member for Saltash, in Cornwall, and wrote a “Presage of the downfall of the Turkish Empire,” which he presented to the king on his birth-day. James treated him with kindness and familiarity, of which instances are given by Fenton. One day, taking him into his closet, the king asked him how he liked one of the pictures: “My eyes,” said Waller, “are dim, and I do not know it.” The king said it was the princess of Orange. “She is,” said Waller, “like the greatest woman in the world.” The king asked who that was, and was answered, queen Elizabeth. “I wonder,” said the king, “you should think so but, I must confess, she had a wise council.” “And, sir,” said Waller, “did you ever know a fool chuse a wise one” When the king knew that he was about to marry his daughter to Dr. Birch, a clergyman, he ordered a French gentleman to tell him that “the king wondered he eould think of marrying his daughter to a falling church.” “The king,” said Waller, “does me great honour,in taking notice of my domestic affairs but I have lived long enough to observe that this falling church has got a trick of rising again.” He took notice to his friends of the king’s conduct; and said that “he would be left like a whale upon the strand.” Whether he was privy to any of the transactions which ended in the revolution, is not known. His heir joined the prince of Orange.

In 1632 he was sent to Cambridge, and admitted of Emanuel college, under the tuition first of Mr. Anthony Burgess, afterwards rector of Sutton Colfield; next of Thomas Horton, afterwards master of Queen’s college, and lastly of the celebrated Benjamin Whichcot. It is not improbable that he had his divinity from the first two, and somewhat of his style from the last of these tutors. At his first entrance upon academical studies, he was reconciled to having staid a year or two longer at school than appeared necessary, or than he liked, since he found that owing to the knowledge he had accumulated in that time, he was now able to keep pace with those who were some years his seniors. “I found,” he says, “that beside the improvement of what skill I had in Latin, Greek, and Hebrew languages (which I pursued with diligence) and other philologic studies, my first business was to be the study of logic. In this I soon became master of a syllogism, as to its structure and the reason of its consequences, however cryptically proposed, so as not easily to be imposed on by fallacious or false syllogisms, when I was to answer or defend; and to manage an argument with good advantage, when I was to argue or oppose; and to distinguish ambiguous words or sentences, as there was occasion; and was able to hold pace with those, who were some years my seniors, and had obtained the reputation of a good disputant. And indeed I had the good hap all along, both at school and in the university, to be reputed (if not equal) not much inferior to those of the best of my rank. From logic I proceeded to ethics, physics, and metaphysics (consulting the schoolmen on such points), according to the methods of philosophy then in fashion in that university. And I took into the speculative part of physic and anatomy, as parts of natural philosophy; and, as Dr. Glisson (then public professor of physic in that university) hath since told me, I was the first of his sons, who, in a public disputation, maintained the circulation of the blood, which was then a new doctrine, though I had no design of practising physic. And I had then imbibed the principles of what they now call the new philosophy; for I made no scruple of diverting from the common road of studies then in fashion to any part of useful learning; presuming that knowledge is no burthen; and, if of any part thereof I should afterwards have no occasion to make use, it would at least do me no hurt; and what of it I might or might not have occasion for, I could not then foresee. On the same account I diverted also to astronomy and geography, as parts of natural philosophy, and to other parts of mathematics; though at that time they were scarce looked upon with us as academical studies then in fashion. As to divinity, on which I had an eye from the first, I had the happiness of a strict and religious education all along from a child. Whereby I was not only preserved from vicious courses, and acquainted with religious exercises, but was early instructed in the principles of religion and catechetical divinity, and the frequent reading of scripture and other good books, and diligent attendance on sermons: and whatever other studies I followed, I was careful not to neglect this: and became timely acquainted with systematic and polemic divinity, and had the repute of a good proficient therein.” The length of this extract we trust will be excused, as it is but seldom we attain that interesting part of biography, the progress of early studies.

Soon after his admittance into Emanuel college, he was chosen of the foundation, and admitted a scholar of the house, but by the statutes he was incapable of a fellowship, it being provided that there should not be more than one fellow of the same county at the same time, and there was already one of the county of Kent, Mr. Wellar, who continued in the college long after Mr. Wallis left it. Wallis, however, was so highly esteemed by the society, that when he declared his design of leaving the college, Dr. Richard Holdsworth, then master, and the fellows, had a consultation about founding a new fellowship on his account, that he might not remove from them. But the times growing confused, there was no room for executing such a design, and Mr. Wail is removed to Queen’s college in Cambridge, where he was chosen fellow, and continued so, till by his marriage he vacated his fellowship. In Hilary term 1636-7, he took the degree of bachelor of arts, and about four years after that of master; and then removed to Queen’s, probably in consequence of the interest of Dr. Horton, his former tutor, and now master of that college.

, a worthy English divine, and botanical writer, was born in 1714, in or near the parish of Ireby, in Cumberland. He was of Queen’s college, Oxford, where he took his degree of M. A. in 1740, and acquired some reputation as a sound scholar. Though possessed of good natural abilities, and no small share of acquired knowledge, he lived and died in an humble station. His disposition was so mild, and his sense of duty so proper, that he passed through life without a murmur at his lot. Early in life he married a lady near Portsmouth, where he at that time resided on a curacy. For fifty-six years they enjoyed the happiness of their'matrimonial connexion an happiness that became almost proverbial in their neighbourhood. After spending a few years in the south of England, he became curate of Simonburn, in Northumberland; and while here, indulged his taste for the study of botany, and filled his little garden with curious plants. This amusement led him gradually into deeper researches into natural history; and, in 1769, he published a “History of Northumberland,” 2 vols. 4to, the first of which, containing an account of minerals, fossils, &c. found in that country, is reckoned the most valuable. In other respects, as to antiquities, &c. it is rather imperfect, and unconnected. His fortune, however, did not improve with the reputation which this work brought him, and a dispute with his rector occasioned him to leave his situation, when he and his wife were received into the family of a clergyman who had formerly been his friend at college. He was curate for a short time at Haughton, near Darlington, in 1775, and soon afterwards removed to Billingham, near Stockton, where he continued until increasing infirmities obliged him to resign. He then removed to the village of Norton, where he died July 23, 1793, in the seventyninth year of his age. About two years before his death a small estate fell to him by the death of a brother; and to the honour of the present bishop of Durham (but certainly not to the surprize of any one that knows that munificent prelate), when the circumstances and situation of Mr. Wallis were represented to him, he allowed him an annual pension from the time of his resigning his curacy. From a sense of gratitude, Mr. Wallis, just at the close of life, was employed in packing up an ancient statue of Apollo, found at Carvoran, a Roman station on the wall, on the confines of Northumberland, as a present to the learned Daines Barrington, brother to the bishop. In the earlier part of his life Mr. Wallis published a volume of letters to a pupil, on entering into holy orders.

He was now elected member for Castle-Rising, and sat for that borough in the two short parliaments which were assembled in the last two years of the reign of king William, and soon became an active member for the whig party. In 1702 he was chosen member of parliament for King’s- Lynn, and represented that borough in several succeeding parliaments. In 1705 he was nominated one of the council to prince George of Denmark, as lord high admiral of England; in 1708 he was appointed secretary at war; and, in 1709, treasurer of the navy. In 1710 he was one of the managers of the trial of Sacheverel, but when the whig-ministry was dismissed he was removed from all his posts, and held no place afterwards during queen Anne’s reign. In 1711 he was voted by the House of Commons guilty of a high breach of trust and notorious corruption in his office of secretary at war; and it was resolved that he should be committed to the Tower, and ex- ­pelled the House. Upon a candid review of this affair, there does not appear sufficient proof to justify the severity used towards him; and perhaps his attachment to the Marlborough ministry, and his great influence in the House, owing to his popular eloquence, were the true causes of his censure and imprisonment, as they had been before of his advancement. All the whigs, however, on this occasion, considered him as a kind of martyr in their cause. The borough of Lynn re-elected him in 1714, and, though, the House declared the election void, yet they persisted in the choice, and he took a decided part against the queen’s tory-ministry. In the well-known debate relating to Steele for publishing the “Crisis,” he greatly distinguished himself in behalf of liberty, and added to the popularity he had before acquired. The schism-bill likewise soon after gave him a fine opportunity of exerting his eloquence, and of appearing in the character of the champion of civil and religious liberty. On the death of the queen a revolution of politics took place, and the whig-party prevailed both at court and in the senate. Walpole had before recoinmended himself to the house of Hanover, by his zeal for its cause when the Commons considered the state of the nation with regard to the protestant succession: and he had now the honour to procure the assurance of the House to the new king (which attended the address of condolence and congratulation), “That the Commons would make good all parliamentary funds.” It is therefore not surprising that his promotion soon took place after the king’s arrival; and that in a few days he was appointed receiver and paymaster general of all the guards and garrisons, and of all other the land forces in Gveat Britain, paymaster of the royal hospital at Chelsea, and likewise a privy counsellor. On the opening of a new parliament, a committee of secrecy vtfas chosen to inquire into the conduct of the late ministry, of which Walpole was appointed chairman; and, hy his management, articles of impeachment were read against the earl of Oxford, lord Bolingbroke, the duke of Ormond, and the earl of Stratford. The eminent service he was thought to have done the nation, and the crown, by the vigorous prosecution of those ministers who were deemed the chief instruments of the peace, was soon rewarded by the extraordinary promotions of first commissioner of the treasury, and chancellor and undertreasurer of the exchequer,

About the end of queen Anne’s reign, and the beginning of George the First, he wrote the following pamphlets. 1. “The Sovereign’s Answer to the Gloucestershire Address.” The sovereign meant Charles duke of Somerset, so nick-named by the whigs. 2. “Answer to the Representation of the House of Lords on the state of the Navy,” 1709. 3. “The Debts of the Nation stated and considered, in four papers,” 1710; the third and fourth, Mr. Coxe thinks, were not his. 4. “The Thirty-five millions accounted for,” 1710. 5. “A Letter from a foreign Minister in England to Monsieur Pettecum,” 1710. This likewise Mr. Coxe doubts, but thinks he might have written an answer to it, as it was a vindication of the tories, 6. “Four Letters to a friend in Scotland upon Sacheverell’s Trial;” falsely attributed in the ''General Dictionary“to Mr. Ma>nwariiig. 7. '< A short History of the Parliament.” Ims an account of the last Session of the queen, 8. “The South Sea Scheme considered.” 9. “A pamphlet against the Peerage-Bill,” 1719. 10. “The Report of the Secret Committee, June 9th; 1715.” 11. “The Thoughts of a Member of the Lower-house, in relation to a project for restraining and limiting the power of the Crown in the future creation of peers,” 1719. 12. “The Report of the Secret Committee, June 9, 17 15.” 13. “A private Letter from General Churchill after Lord Orford’s retirement,” which has been considered as indicating a love of retirement, and contempt of grandeur; but it wilj. probably appear to be rather an affectation of contentment with a situation which he could no longer change. Amidst all his knowledge, he had laid up very little for the purposes of retirement.

, an English critic and poet, was the son of Joseph Walsh of Abberley in Worcestershire, esq. and born about 1663, for the precise time does not appear. According to Pope, his birth happened in 1659; but Wood places it four years later. He became a gentleman-commoner of Wadham-college in Oxford in 1678, but left the university without a degree, and pursued his studies in London and at home. That he studied, in whatever place, is apparent from the effect; for he became, in Dryden’s opinion, “the best critic in the nation.” He was not, however, merely a critic or a scholar. He was likewise a man of fashion, and, as Dennis remarks, ostentatiously splendid in his dress. He was likewise a member of parliament and a courtier, knight of the shire for his native county in several parliaments, in another the re* presentative of Richmond in Yorkshire, and gentleman of the horse to queen Anne under the duke of Somerset. Some of his verses shew him to have been a zealous friend to the Revolution; but his political ardour did not abate his reverence or kindness for Dryden, to whom, Dr. Johnson says, he gave a Dissertation on Virgil’s Pastorals; but this was certainly written by Dr. Chetwood, as appears by one of Drydeu’s letters. In 1705 he began to correspond with Pope, in whom he discovered very early the power of poetry, and advised him to study correctness, which the poets of his time, he said, all neglected. Their letters are written upon the pastoral comedy of the Italians, and those pastorals which Pope was then preparing to publish. The kindnesses which are first experienced are seldom forgotten. Pope always retained a grateful memory of Walsh’s notice, and mentioned him in one of his latter pieces among those that had encouraged his juvenile studies.

, an eminent statesman in the reign of queen Elizabeth, of an ancient family in Norfolk, was the third and youngest son of William Walsingham of Scadbury, in the parish of Chislehurst, in Kent, by Joyce, daughter of Edmund Denny, of Cheshunt in Hertfordshire. He was born at Chislehurst in 1536. He spent some time at King’s-college in Cambridge, but, to complete his education, travelled into foreign countries, where he acquired various languages and great accomplishments. These soon recommended him to be agent to sir William Cecil, lord Burleigh; and under his direction he came to be employed in the most important affairs of state. His first engagement was as ambassador in France during the civil wars in that kingdom. In August 1570, he was sent a second time there in the same capacity, to treat of a marriage between queen Elizabeth and the duke of Alençon, with other matters; and continued until April 1573 at the court of France, where he acquitted himself with great capacity and fidelity, sparing neither pains nor money to promote the queen’s interest, who, however, did not support him with much liberality. It was even with great difficulty that he could procure such supplies as were necessary for the support of his dignified station. In a letter from him (Harleian Mss. No. 260), to the earl of Leicester, dated Paris, March 9, 1570, he earnestly solicits for some allowance on account of the great dearth in France; desiring lord Leicester to use his interest in his behalf, that he might not be so overburthened with the care how to live, as to be hindered from properly attending to the business for which he was sent thither. Five days after he wrote a letter to lord Burleigh, which gives a curious account of the distresses to which Elizabeth’s representative was reduced by her singular parsimony. “Your lordship knoweth necessity hath no law, and therefore I hope that my present request, grounded on necessity, will weigh accordingly. And surely if necessity forced me not hereto, I would forbear to do it for many respects. I do not doubt, after my lord of Buckhurst’s return, but you shall understand, as well by himself, as by others of his train, the extremity of dearth that presently reigneth here; which is such as her majesty’s allowance doth not, by 5l. in the week, defray my ordinary charges of household. And yet neither my diet is like to any of my predecessors, nor yet the number of my horses so many as they heretofore have kept. I assure your lordship, of 800l. I brought in my purse into this country, I have not left in money and provision much above 300/; far contrary to the account I made, who thought to have had always 500l. beforehand to have made my provisions, thinking by good husbandry somewhat to have relieved my disability otherwise,” &c. In another letter, dated June 22, 1572, he again solicits lord Burleigh for an augmentation of his allowance, alledging, that otherwise he should not be able to hold out: but notwithstanding this and other solicitations, there is much reason to believe that the queen kept him in considerable difficulties.

His negociations and dispatches during the above embassy were collected by sir Dudley Digges, and published in 1655, folio, with this title, “The complete Ambassador; or, two Treatises of the intended Marriage of queen Elizabeth, of glorious memory; comprised in Letters of Negotiation of sir Francis Walsingham, her resident in France. Together with the answers of the lord Burleigh, the earl of Leicester, sir Thomas Smith, and others. Wherein, as in a clear Mirrour, may be seen the faces of the two Courts of England and France, as they then stood; with many remarkable passages of State, not at all mentioned in any history." These papers display WaUingham’s acuteness, discernment, and fitness for the trust that was reposed in him.

After his return, in 1573, he was appointed one of the principal secretaries of state, and sworn a privy-counsellor, and soon after received the honour of knighthood. He now devoted himself solely to the service of his country and sovereign; and by his vigilance and address preserved her crown and life from daily attempts and conspiracies. ID 1578, he was sent on an embassy to the Netherlands, and in 1581, went a third time ambassador to France, in order to treat of the proposed marriage between the queen and the duke of Anjou; and also to conclude a league offensive and defensive between both kingdoms He resided in France from about the middle of July to the end of the year. In 1583, he was sent into Scotland on an embassy to king James, attended with a splendid retinue of one hundred and twenty horse. The particular design of this embassy is not very clearly expressed by historians. It appears to have been partly occasioned by king James having taken into his councils the earl of Arran, a nobleman very obnoxious to queen Elizabeth. Sir James Melvil, who was at this time at the Scottish court, mentions their expecting the arrival of secretary Walsingham, “a counsellor,” he says, “of worthy qualities, who had great credit with the queen of England.” Sir James was sent to welcome him, and to inform him, “That his majesty was very glad of the coming of such a notable personage, who was known to be endued with religion and wisdom, whom he hail ever esteemed as his special friend, being assured that his tedious travel in his long voyage (being diseased as he was) tended to more substantial points for the confirmation of the amity between the queen his sister and him, than had been performed at any time before.”

In the same year, 1586, he displayed his usual sagacity and vigilance in the management of every thing relative, to the detection of Babington’s conspiracy against queen Elizabeth; and in October was one of the commissioners appointed to try Mary queen of Scotland. In the course of this trial Mary indirectly charged sir Francis with counterfeiting her letters and cyphers, and with practising both against her life and her son’s. Upon this sir Thomas rose up, and protested that his heart was free from all malice against the Scottish queen. “I call God,” says he, “to witness, that as a private person I have done nothing unbeseeming an honest man; neither in my public condition, and quality have I done any thing unworthy of my place. I confess, that out of my great care for the safety of the queen and realm, I have curiously endeavoured to search and sift out all plots and designs against the same. If Ballard (one of the persons concerned in Babington’s conspiracy) had offered me his assistance, I should not have refused it; yea, I would have rewarded him for his pains and service. If I have tampered any thing with him, why did be not discover it to save his life?” With this answer queen Mary said she was satisfied; and she desired sir Francis “not to be angry that she had spoken so freely what she had heard reported, and that he would give no more credit to those that slandered her, than she did to such as accused him.”

Soon after this sir Francis was made chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster. As to his share in baffling the designs of the court of Spain, Welwood, in his “Memoirs,” informs us that Walsingham, by a refined piece of policy, defeated, for a whole year together, the measures that the Spanish monarch had taken for fitting out his armada to invade England. “The vast preparations,” he says, “that were making for a considerable time in Spain, kept all Europe in suspense, and it was not certain against whom they were designed; though it was the general opinion they were to subdue the Netherlands all at once, which Spain was sensible could not be done without a greater force by sea as well as land, than had hitherto been employed for that service. Queen Elizabeth thought fit to be upon her guard, and had some jealousies that she might be aimed at: but how to find it out was the difficulty, which at length Walsingham overcame. He had intelligence from Madrid, that Philip had told his council that he had dispatched an express to Rome with a letter written with his own hand to the pope, acquainting him with the true design of his preparations, and asking his blessing upon ity which for some reasons he would not disclose to them till the return of the courier. The secret being thus lodged with the pope, Walsingham, by means of a Venetian priest retained at Rome as his spy, got a copy of the original letter, which was stolen out of the pope’s cabinet by a gent tleman of the bed-chamber, who took the keys out of the pope’s pocket w.hile he slept. And upon this intelligence Walsingham found a way to retard the Spanish invasion for a whole year, by getting the Spanish bills protested at Genoa, which should have supplied them with money to carry on their preparations.” In our article of Thomas Sutton, founder of the Charter-house, we have mentioned that this gentleman was Walsingham’s chief agent in getting these bills protested.

Of the remainder of sir Francis Walsingham' s life we have few particulars. It appears, that, in 1589, he entertained queen Elizabeth at his house at Barn Elms, and, as was usual in all her majesty’s visits, her whole court. Previously to this visit, the queen had taken a lease of the manor of Barn- Elms, which was to commence after the expiration of sir Henry Wyai’s, in 160O. Her interest in this lease she granted by letters patent, bearing date the twenty-first year of her reign, to sir Francis Walsingham and his heirs. Sir Francis, in addition to his other dignities, was a knight of the garter, and recorder of Colchester. He passed his latter days mostly in this retirement at Barnes, and when any of his former gay companions came to see him and told him he was melancholy, he is said to have replied, “No, I am not melancholy; I am serious; and 'tis fit I should be so. Oh! my friends, while we laqgh, all things are serious round about us: God is serious, who exerciseth patience towards us: Christ is ser,ious, who shed his blood for us: the Holy Spirit is serious, in striving against the obstinacy of our hearts: the holy scriptures bring to our ears the most serious things in the world: the holy sacraments represent the most serious and awful matters: the whole creation is serious in serving God and us: all that are in heaven and hell are serious: how then can we be gay?”

Sir Francis Walsingham was a puritan in his religious principles, and at first a favourer of them in some matters of discipline. To them he offered, in 1583, in the queen’s name, that provided they would conform in other points, the three ceremonies of kneeling at the communion, wearing the surplice, and the cross in baptism, should be expunged out of the Common-prayer. But they replying to these concessions in the language of Moses, that “they would not leave so much as a hoof behind,” meaning, that they would have the church-liturgy wholly laid aside, and not be obliged to the performance of any office in it; so unexpected an answer lost them in a great measure Walsingham’s affection. His general character has been thus summed up, from various authorities: “He was undoubtedly one of the most refined politicians, and most penetrating statesmen, that ever any age produced. He bad an admirable talent both in discovering and managing the secret recesses of human nature: he had his spies in most courts of Christendom, and allowed them a liberal maintenance; for his grand maxim was, that” knowledge is never too dear.“He spent his whole time and faculties in the service of the queen and her kingdoms; on which account her majesty was heard to say that” in diligence and sagacity he exceeded her expectation.“He is thought (but this, we trust, is unfounded) to have had a principal hand in laying the foundation of the wars in France and Flanders; and is said, upon his return from his embassy in France, when the queen expressed her apprehension of the Spanish designs against that kingdom, to have answered*” Madam, be content, and fear not. The Spaniard hath a great appetite, and an excellent digestion. But I have fitted him with a bone for these twenty years, that your majesty shall have no cause to dread him, provided, that if the fire chance to slack which I have kindled, you will be ruled by me, and cast in some of your fuel, which will revive the “flame.” He would cherish a plot some years together, admitting the conspirators to his own, and even the queen’s presence, very familiarly; but took care to have them carefully watched. His spies constantly attended on particular men for three years together; and lest they should not keep the secret, he dispatched -them into foreign parts, taking in new ones in their room. His training of Parry, who designed the murder of the queen; the admitting of him, under the pretence of discovering the plot, to her majesty’s presence; and then letting him go where he would, only on the security of a centinel set over him, was an instance of reach and hazard beyond common apprehension. The queen of Scots’ letters were all carried to him by her own servant, whom she trusted, and were decyphered for him by one Philips, and sealed up again by one Gregory; so that neither that queen, nor any of her correspondents ever perceived either the seals defaced, or letters delayed. Video et taceo, was his saying, before it was his mistress’s motto. He served himself of the court factions as the queen did, neither advancing the one, nor depressing the other. He was familiar with Cecil, allied to Leicester^ and an oracle to Hadcliffe earl of Sussex. His conversation was insinuating, and yet reserved. He saw every man, and none saw him. “His spirit,” says Lloyd, “was as public as his parts; yet as debonnaire as he was prudent, and as obliging to the softer but predominant parts of the world, as he was serviceable to the more severe; and no less dextrous to work on humours than to convince reason* He would say, he must observe the joints and flexures of affairs; and so could do more with a story, than others could with an harangue. He always surprized business, and preferred motions in the heat of other diversions; and if he must debate it, he would hear all, and with the advantage of foregoing speeches, that either cautioned or confirmed his resolutions, he carried all before him in conclusion, without reply. To him men’s faces spake as much as their tongues, and their countenances were in* dexes of their hearts. He would so beset men with questions, and draw them on, that they discovered themselves whether they answered or were silent. He maintained fifty-three agents and eighteen spies in foreign courts; and for two pistoles an order had all the private papers in Europe. Few letters escaped his hands; and he could read their contents without touching the seals. Religion was the interest of his country, in his judgment, and of his soul; therefore he maintained it as sincerely as he lived it. It had his head, his purse, and his heart. He laid the great foundation of the protestant constitution as to its policy, and the main plot against the popish as to its ruin.”

On August 12, 1645, he was incorporated in the university of Oxford. Here it was that he formed the noble scheme of publishing the Polyglott Bible; and, upon the decline of the king’s cause, he retired to the house of Dr. William Fuller, his father-in-law, in London, where, though frequently disturbed by the prevailing powers, he lived to complete it. The “Biblia Polyglotta” was published at London in 1657, in 6 vols. folio; wherein the sacred text was, by his singular care and oversight, printed, not only in the vulgar Latin, but also in the Hebrew, Syriac, Chaldee, Samaritan, Arabic, Æ'thiopic, Persic, and Greek, languages each having its peculiar Latin translation joined therewith, and an apparatus fitted to each for the better understanding of those tongues. In this great work, so far as related to the correcting of it at the press, and the collating of copies, he had the assistance of several learned persons; the chief of whom was Mr. Edmund Castell, afterwards professor of Arabic at Cambridge. Among his other assistants were Mr. Samuel Clarke of Mertou college, and Mr. Thomas Hyde of Queen’s college, Oxford: he had also some help from Mr. Whelock, Mr. Thorndike, Mr. Edward Pocock, Mr. Thomas Greaves, &c. Towards printing the work, he had contributions of mqney from many noble persons and gentlemen, which were put intothe hands of sir William Humble, treasurer for the said work. The Prolegomena and Appendix to it were attacked in 1659, by Dr. John Owen, in “Considerations,” &c. who was answered the same year by Dr. Walton, in a piece under the title of “The Considerator considered: or, a brief View of certain Considerations upon the Biblia Polyglotta, the Prolegomena, and Appendix. Wherein, among other things, the certainty, integrity, and the divine authority, of the original text is defended against the consequences of Atheists, Papists, Ariti-Scripturists, &c. inferred from the various readings and novelty of the Hebrew points, by the author of the said Considerations; the Biblia Polyglotta and translations therein exhibited, with the various readings, prolegomena, and appendix, vindicated from his aspersions and calumnies; and the questions about the punctuation of the Hebrew text, the various readings, and the ancient Hebrew character, briefly handJed,” 8vo. These prolegomena, which have always beeti admired, and afford indeed the principal monument of his learning, consist of sixteen parts: 1. Of the nature, origin, division, number, changes, and use of languages. 2. Of letters, or characters, their wonderful use, origin and first invention, and their diversity in the chief languages. 3. Of the Hebrew tongue, its antiquity, preservation, change, excellency, and use, ancient characters, vowel points, and accents. 4. Of the principal editions of the Bible. 5. Of the translations of the Bible. 6. Of the various readings in the Holy Scripture. 7. Of the integrity and authority of the original texts. 8. Of the Masora, Keri, and Ketib, various readings of the Eastern and Western Jews, Ben Ascher, and Ben Napthali, and of the Cabala. 9. Of the Septuagint, and other Greek translations. 10. Of the Latin Vulgate. 11. Of the Samaritan Pentateuch, and the versions of the same. 12. Of the Chaldee language, and versions.13. Of the Syriac tongue, and versions. 14. Of the Arabic language and versions. 15. Of the Ethiopia tongue and versions; and, 16. Of the Persian language and versions. As these instructive prolegomena were highly valued by scholars on the continent, they were reprinted at Zurich in 1573, fol. by Heidegger, with Drusius’s collection of Hebrew proverbs; and about 1777 Dr. Dathe printed an edition at Leipsic in 8vo, with a preface containing many judicious and learned remarks on several of Dr. Walton’s opinions.

, an eminent antiquary, was descended from the ancient family of De Ware, or De Warr in Yorkshire, the only remains of which are, or lately were, in Ireland. His grandfather, Christopher Ware, was an early convert to the protestant religion in the beginning of the reign of queen Elizabeth, and that principally by the arguments and persuasion of Fox, the celebrated martyrologist. His father James, who was liberally educated, was introduced to the court of queen Elizabeth, where he soon because noticed by the ministers of state, and in 1588 was sent to Ireland as secretary to sir William Fitz-Wiiliams, the lord deputy. He had not filled this office long before he was made clerk of the common pleas in the exchequer, and afterwards obtained the reversion of the patent place of auditor general, a valuable appointment, which remained nearly a century in his family, except for a short time during the usurpation; and his income having enabled him to make considerable purchases in the county and city of Dublin, &c. his family may be considered as now removed finally to Ireland. While on a visit ui E;i^l md, James I. bestowed on him the honour of knighthood, and as a particular mark of favour, gave his eldest son the reversion of the office of auditor general. He also sat in the Irish parliament which began May 1613, for the borough of Mallow in the county of Cork. He died suddenly, while walking the street in Dublin, in 1632. By his lady, Mary, sister of sir Ambrose Briden, of Maidstone in Kent, he had five sons and five daughters. His eldest son, the subject of this article, was born in Castlestreet, Dublin, Nov. 26, 1594, and discovering early a love of literature, his father gave him a good classical education as preparatory to his academical studies. In 1610, when sixteen years of age, he was entered a fellow commoner in Trinity college, Dublin, under the immediate tuition of Dr. Anthony Martin, afterwards bishop of Meath, and provost of the college; but his private tutor and chamber-fellow was Dr. Joshua Hoyle, an Oxford scholar, and afterwards professor of divinity. Here Mr. Ware applied to his studies with such success, that he was admitted to his degree of M. A. much sooner than usual.

In March 1503-4, bishop Warham was translated to the see of Canterbury, in which he was installed with great solemnity, Edward duke of Buckingham officiating as his steward on that occasion. He was likewise, on May 28, 1506, unanimously elected chancellor of the university of Oxford, being then, and ever after, a great friend and benefactor to that university, and to learning in general. In 1509, Henry VII. died, and was succeeded by his son Henry VIII. from whose promising abilities great expectations were formed. Archbishop Warham’s high rank in the church, and the important office he held in the state, as lord chancellor, naturally caused him to preside at the council-board of the young king, and his rank and talents certainly gave him great authority there. One of the first matters of importance, in the new reign, was the marriage of the king, which, from his tender age, and his aversion to it r had not yet taken place, and it was now necessary that his majesty should decide to break it off, or conclude it. Warham still continued to oppose it, and Fox, as before, contended for it; and it, accordingly, was performed June 3, 1509; and on the 24th of the same month, the king and queen were crowned at Westminster by archbishop W r arham. In the years 1511 and 1512, we find our prelate zealously persecuting those who were termed heretics; and although the inttances of his interference with the opinions of the reformation are neither many, nor bear the atrocious features of a Bonner or a Gardiner, they form no small blemish in his character.

, an eminent surgeon, was born in the island of Antigua, in 1717, on the family estate, which he inherited, together with a ring, famous in history, as the one given by queen Elizabeth to the earl of Essex, and which in the hour of impending danger he entrusted to the countess of Nottingham, who never delivered it to the queen, and this, according to the story, was the cause of Essex’s losing his life. By some means this ring had regularly descended, together with the estate, in the Warner family. Mr. Warner was sent to England at an early age, and educated at Westminster school. At the age of seventeen he was apprenticed to the celebrated surgeon, Samuel Sharpe, and after residing seven years with him, was admitted joint lecturer in anatomy at St. Thomas’s hospital with Mr. Sharpe, after whose resignation Mr. Warner continued the lectures for several years. In 1746, during the rebellion in Scotland, he volunteered his professional services, and joined the royal army under the duke of Cumberland, In the course of that campaign he was recalled to London to fill the office of surgeon to Guy’s hospital, a situation which he held, with increasing reputation, and great professional success, for the long period of forty-four years. During this time his private practice became extensive, and his fame was increased by his valuable treatises on the cataract, the hydrocele, &c. and his still more va-r luable volume of “Cases in Surgery,” 1754, &c. In 1756 he was elected a fellow of the royal society, in whose Transactions a number of his communications were published. In 1764 he was elected a -member of the court of assistants of the then corporation of surgeons, and in 1771, became one of the court of examiners, in which office he continued to discharge his duty most punctually until the last month of his life.

, an old English poet, is called by Phillips, “a good honest plain writer of moral rules and precepts, in that old-fashioned kind ef seven-footed verse, which yet sometimes is in use, though in different manner, that is to say, divided into two. He may be reckoned with several other writers of the same time^ i. e> Queen Elizabeth’s reign: who, though inferior to Sidney, Spenser, Drayton, and Daniel, yet have been thought by some not unworthy to be remembered and quoted: namely George Gascoigne, Thomas Hudson, John Markham, Thomas Achely, John Weever, Charles Middleton, George TurberviTle, Henry Constable, sirEdward Dyer, Thomas Churchyard, Charles Fitzgeoffry.”

His “Albion’s England” was his principal work; and was not only a favourite with his own age, but has received very high praise from the critics of our own time. It is an epitome of the British history, and, according to the editor of the “Muses Library,” Mrs. Cooper, is written with great learning, sense, and spirit; in some places fine to an extraordinary degree, of which an instance is given in the story ofArgentill and Curan, a tale which, Mrs. Cooper adds, is full of beautiful incidents, in the romantic taste, extremely affecting, rich in ornament, wonderfully various in style, and in short one of the most beautiful pastorals she ever met with. To this opinion, high as it is, Dr. Percy thinks nothing can be objected, unless perhaps an affected quaintness in some of his expressions, and an indelicacy in some of his pastoral images. Warner’s contemporaries ranked him on a level with Spenser, and called him the Homer and Virgil of their age. But Dr. Percy remarks, that he rather resembled Ovid, whose Metamorphosis he seems to have taken for a model, having deduced a perpetiial poem from the deluge down to the reign of queen Elizabeth, full of lively digressions and entertaining episodes. And though he is sometimes harsh, affected, and indelicate, he often displays a most charming and pathetic simplicity.

, a very learned scholar, was born in Yorkshire in 1672, and educated at Queen’s college, Cambridge, where he took his bachelor’s degree in 1694, that of master in 1698, and that of bachelor of divinity in 1707. Before this he had assisted Kuster in his edition of Suidas, as appears by a letter of his, giving an account of that eminent critic. (See Kuster.) In 1710 Wasse became more generally known to the literary world by his edition of “Sallust,” 4to, the merits of which have been long acknowledged. He amended the text by a careful examination of nearly eighty manuscripts, as well as some very ancient editions. In Dec. 1711 he was presented to the rectory of Aynhoe in Northamptonshire, by Thomas Cartwright, esq. where John Whiston (the bookseller) says “he lived a very agreeable and Christian life, much esteemed by that worthy family and his parishioners.” He had an equal regard for them, and never sought any other preferment. He had a very learned and choice library, in which he passed most of his time, and assisted many of the learned in their publications. He became at length a proselyte to Dr. Clarke’s Arianism, and corresponded much with him and with Will. Whiston, as appears by Whiston’s Life of Dr. Clarke, and his own life. According to Whiston he was the cause of Mr. Wasse’s embracing the Arian sentiments, which he did with such zeal, as to omit the Athanasian creed in the service of the church, and other passages which militated against his opinions. Whiston calls him “more learned than any bishop in England since bishop Lloyd,” and informs us of the singular compliment Bentley paid to him, “When I am dead, Wasse will be the most learned man in England.”

, an excellent printer, was born at Aberdeen, where his father was an eminent merchant during the reign of Charles II. and in 1695 set up a printinghouse in Edinburgh, which reduced him to many hardships, being frequently prosecuted before the privy-council of Scotland for printing in opposition to a patent granted to one Mr. Anderson some years before. In 1711, however, Mr. Watson, in conjunction with Mr. Freebairn, obtained a patent from queen Anne, and they published several learned works; and some of them were printed on very elegant types, particularly a Bible, in crown 8vo, 1715, a matchless beauty, and another in 4to. He wrote also a curious “History of Printing,” in Scotland, which is prefixed to his “Specimens of Types,” a rare little volume, printed in the early part of the last century. He died at Edinburgh, Sept. 24, 1722.

At this time he had become a preacher; and a vacancy having happened in one of the churches of St. Andrew’s, he offered himself a candidate for that living, but was dis^­appointed, yet he succeeded in what proved more advantageous. Mr. Henry Rymer, who then taught logic at St. Salvador’s college, was in a very infirm state of health, and entertaining thoughts of retiring. Mr. Watson purchased, for no great sum of money, what, in familiar phraseology, may be termed the good-will of Mr. Rymer’s place; and with the consent of the other masters of St. Salvador’s, was appointed professor of logic. He obtained also a patent from the crown, constituting him professor of rhetoric and belles-lettres. The study of logic in St. Andrew’s, as in most other places, was at this time confined to syllogisms, modes, and figures. Mr. Watson, whose mind had been opened by conversation, and by reading the writings of the literati who had begun to flourish in the Scotch capital, prepared, and read to his students, a course of metaphysics and logic on the most enlightened plan; in which he analyzed the powers of the mind, aod entered deeply into the nature of truth or knowledge. Oil the death of principal Tullidelph, Dr. Watson, through the interest of the earl of Kinnoul, was appointed his successor, in which station he lived only a few years, dying in 1780. He is chiefly known in the literary world by his “History of Philip II.” a very interesting portion of history, and in which the English, under queen Elizabeth, had a considerable share. He wrote also the history of Philip III. but lived only to complete four books; the last two were written, and the whole published in 4to, 1783 (afterwards reprinted in 2 vols. 8vo), by Dr. William Thomson, at the desire of the guardians of Dr. Watson’s children, whom he had by his wife, who was daughter to Mr. Shaw, professor of divinity in St. Mary’s-college, St. Andrew’s.

, a Roman catholic prelate in the reign of queen Mary, was educated at St. John’s-college, Cambridge, of which he was elected fellow, and in 1553 master. In November of the same year the queen gave him the deanery of Durham, vacant by the deprivation of Robert Home. He had previously to this been for some time chaplain to Gardiner, bishop of Winchester, and was equally hostile to the reformed religion. In April 1554, he was incorporated D. D. at Oxford, and in August 1557, was consecrated bishop of Lincoln. In this see he remained until the accession of queen Elizabeth, when he was deprived on account of denying the queen’s supremacy; and remaining inflexible in his adherence to popery, he suffered confinement in or near London until 1580, when he was removed to Wisbech-castle, together with the abbot Feckenham, and several others. He died there Sept. 25, 1582, and was interred in the church-yard of Wisbech. He held several conferences with those of the reformed religion, and particularly was one of those appointed to confer with, or rather sit in judgment on Cranmer, Ridley f and Latimer, previously to their execution at Oxford. For some time he w,gs confined in Grindal’s house, and that prelate wished to converse calmly with him on the points in dispute at that time, but he answered that he would not enter into conference with any man. Watson is represented as of a sour and morose temper. Of his works we have heard only of, 1. “Two Sermons before queen Mary, on the real presence and sacrifice of the mass,” Lond. 1554, 8vo. 2. “Wholesome and Catholic doctrine concerning the seven Sacraments, in thirty Sermons,” ibid. 1558, 4to. Dodd mentions as his. antagonists or answerers, “A Sermon against Thomas Watson’s two Sermons, by which he would prove the real presence,” ibid. 1569, 4to, by Robert Crowley; and “Questio in Thomam Watsonium Episc. Lincoln, aliosque, super quibusdam articulis de bulla papali contra reginam Eliz.” Francfort, 1621.

, a distinguished antiquary, born in 1700, was regularly bred to the profession of the law: and was admitted an attorney before Mr. Justice Price, June 20, 1724: he lived then in the Old Jewry, but afterwards removed to Budge-row, and thence to Great Queen-street, Lincoln’s-Inn fields. He was peculiarly learned in the records of this kingdom, and particularly able as a parliamentary and constitutional lawyer. In 1747, he published “Observations on the Course of Proceedings in (he Admiralty-courts,” 8vo. In 1751. he assisted materially in obtaining the charter of incorporation for the Society of Antiquaries, remitting in that business the customary fees which were due to him as a solicitor; and on many other occasions proved himself a very useful member of that learned body. Purchasing a house and estate at Busbridge, Surrey, where he resided in the summer, it ga?e him 'an influence in the borough of Haslemere, for which he was chosen member in 1754, and again in 1761. He became, under the patronage of lord chancellor Hardwicke, secretary of bankrupts in the Court of Chancery, and was appointed one of the joint solicitors of the treasury in 1756. In July 1758, he obtained a silver medal from the Society of Arts for having planted a large quantity of acorns for timber. In 1760 he had the honour of presenting the famous Heraclean table to the king of Spain, by the hands of the Neapolitan minister, from whom he received in return (in November that year) a diamond-ring, worth 300l. In April 17G3, the period of Mr. Wilkes’ s being apprehended for writing “The North Briton,” No. 45, Mr. Webb became officially a principal actor in that memorable prosecution, but did not altogether approve of the severity with which it was carried on; and printed, on that occasion, “A Collection of Records about General Warrants;” and also “Observations upon discharging Mr. Wilkes from the Tower.” He held the office of solicitor to the Treasury till June 1765, and continued secretary of bankrupts till lord Northington quitted the seals in 1766. He died at Busbridge, June 22, 1770, aged seventy; and his Library (including that of John Godfrey *, esq. which he had purchased entire) was sold, with his Mss. on vellum, Feb. 25, and the sixteen following days, 1771. A little before his death he sold to the House of Peers thirty ms volumes of the rolls of parliament. His ms& on paper were sold, by his widow and executrix, to the late marquis of Lansdowne, and are now in the British Museum, The coins and medals were sold by auction the same year, three days sale; in which were all the coins and medals found in his collection at the time of his decease; but he had disposed of the most valuable part to different persons. The series of large brass had been picked by a nobleman. The noble series of Roman gold (among which were Pompey, Lepidus, &c.) and the collection of Greek kings and towns, had been sold to Mr. Duane, and afterwards formed part of the valuable museum collected by the late Dr. Hunter. The ancient marble busts, bronzes, Roman earthen-ware, gems, seals, &c. of which there were 96 lots, were sold in the above year. On the death of the late Mrs. Webb, the remainder of the curiosities was sold by Mr. Langford, Mr. Webb’s publications were, 1. “A Letter to the Rev. Mr. William Warburton, M. A. occasioned by some passages in his book, entitled ‘The Divine Legation of Moses demonstrated.’ By a gentleman of Lincoln’s Inn,” 1742, 8vo. 2. “Remarks on the Pretender’s Declaration and Commission,” 1745, 8vo. 3. “Remarks on the Pretender’s eldest Son’s second Declaration, dated the 10th of October 1745, by the author of the Remarks on his first Declaration,” 1745, 8vo. Of these

It was about 1760 that he began his improvements in the Staffordshire potteries, and not only improved the composition, forms, and colours of the old wares, but likewise invented, in 1763, a new species of ware, for which he obtained a patent, and which being honoured by her majesty’s approbation and patronage, received the name of queen’s ware. Continuing his experimental researches, Mr. Wedgwood afterwards invented several other species of earthen-ware and porcelain, of which the principal are: 1. A terra cotta; resembling porphyry, granite, Egyptian pebble, and other beautiful stones of the siliceous or crystalline order. 2. Basaltes, or black ware; a black porcelain biscuit of nearly the same properties with the natural stone, receiving a high polish, resisting all the acids, and bearing without injury a very strong fire. 3. White porcelain biscuit; of a smooth wax-like appearance, of similar properties with the preceding. 4. Jasper; a white porcelain of exquisite beauty, possessing the general properties of basaltes; together with the singular one of receiving through its whole substance, from the admixture of metallic calces, the same colours which those calces give to glass or enamels in fusion; a property possessed by no porcelain of ancient or 1 modern composition. 5. Bamboo, or cane-coloured biscuit porcelain, of the same nature as the white porcelain biscuit. And 6. A porcelain biscuit remarkable for great hardness, little inferior to that of agate; a property which, together with its resistance to the strongest acids, and its impenetrability to every known liquid, renders it well adapted for the formation of mortars, and many different kinds of chemical vessels. The above six distinct species of ware, together with the queen’s ware first noticed, have increased by the industry and ingenuity of different manufacturers, and particularly by Mr. Wedgwood and his son, into an almost endless variety of forms for ornament and use. These, variously painted and embellished, constitute nearly the whole of the present fine earthen-wares and porcelains of English manufacture.

, an industrious antiquary, is supposed to have been born in Lancashire in 1576; but the exact place of his birth does not appear to have been ascertained by his biographers. He was educated at Queen’s college, Cambridge, where he was admitted April 30, 1594, under doctor Robert Pearson, archdeacon of Suffolk, and shortly after went abroad in search of antiquities, a study to which he was peculiarly attached. He appears to have been at Liege and at Rome. At his return to England he travelled over most parts of that country, and of Scotland, under the protection and encouragement of sir Robert Cotton and the learned Selden. In 1631 he published his “Funeral Monuments,” and the next year died at his house in Clerkenwell-close, aged fifty-six. He was buried in St. James’s, Clerkenwell, with an inscription, In Strype’s Survey. The following epitaph is of his own composition:

, an English divine, of whom some account may be acceptable, preparatory to that of his more celebrated son, was the son of a nonconformist minister, ejected in 1662. He was born about 1662. He was educated in nonconformist sentiments, which he soon relinquished, owing to the violent prejudices of some of his sect in favour of the murder of Charles I. He spent some time at a private academy, and at the age of sixteen walked to Oxford, and entered himself of Exeter college, as a servitor. He had at this time no mure than two pounds sixteen shillings, nor any prospect of 'future supply but from his own exertions. But by industry, and probably by assisting his fellow students, he supported himself until he took his bachelor’s degree, without any preferment or assistance from ^his friends, except five shillings. He now came to London, having increased his little stock to 10l. 15s. Here he was ordained deacon, and obtained a curacy, which he held one year, when he was appointed chaplain of the Fleet. In this situation he remained but a year, and returned to London, where he again served a curacy for two years, during which time he married and had a son. He now wrote several pieces which brought him into notice and esteem, and a small living was given him in the country, that, if we mistake not, of South Ormesby, in the county of Lincoln. He was strongly solicited by the friends of James II. to support the measures of the court in favour of popery, with promises of preferment if he would comply with the king’s desire. But he absolutely refused to read the king’s declaration; and though surrounded with courtiers, soldiers, and informers, he preached a bold and pointed discourse against it, from Daniel iii. 17, 18. “If it be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver us out of thine hand, O king. But if not, be it known unto thee, O king, that we will not serve thy gods, nor worship the golden image which thou hast set up.” When the revolution took place he wrote a work in defence of it, dedicated to queen Mary, who, in consequence of it, gave him the living of Epworth, in Lincolnshire, about 1693; and in 1723 he was presented to the living of Wroote, in the same county, in addition to Epworth, which last he held upwards of forty years.

In the beginning of 1705 he printed a poem on the battle of Blenheim, with which the duke of Marlborough was so well pleased, that he made him chaplain to colonel Lepelle’s regiment, which was to remain in England some time. In consequence of the same poem, a noble lord sent for him to London, promising to procure him a prebend; but unhappily he was at this time engaged in a controversy with the dissenters, who being in favour at queen Anne’s court, and in parliament, had influence enough to obstruct his promotion, and even to procure his removal from the chaplaincy of the regiment.

As he had received much applause, and even promotion for his poetical efforts, we are not to wonder that he exercised this talent rather frequently, producing “The Life of Christ, an heroic poem,” 1693, folio, dedicated to the queen, and reprinted with large additions and corrections in 1697; “The History of the Old and New Testament attempted in verse, and adorned with three hundred and thirty sculptures, engraved by J. Sturt,” 1704) 3 vols. 12mo, addressed to queen Anne in a poetical dedication; “Maggots, or Poems on several subjects,” 1685, 8vo; and “Elegies on Q. Mary and Abp. Tillotson,” 1695, folio. His poetry, which is far from excellent, has been censured by Garth and others, but all concur in the excellence of his private character. His last moments, says Dr. Whitehead, were as conspicuous for resignation and Christian fortitude, as his life had been for zeal and diligence. He died April 30, 1735, leaving a numerous family of children, among whom were his sons Samuel, John, and Charles, and a daughter Mehetabel, a young lady of considerable literary talents and poetical fancy, who was unfortunately married to a Mr. Wright, a low man, who broke her heart. Some of her poems are printed in the sixth volume of the " Poetical Calendar.

At Oxford he resided from Nov. 172y to Oct. 1735, and it was during this period that the first Methodist society was established, or rather begun. In the mean time he obtained pupils, and became a tutor in Lincoln college; he also presided in the hall a* moderator in the disputations, beld six times a week, and had the chief direction of the religious society, which, as we have already observed, had at first no other view than their own benefit. By the advice of one f the number, Mr. Morgan, a commoner of Christ Church, they began to visit some prisoners in the jail, and thence extended their visits to the sick poor in the city. In this they first 'met with some degree of encouragement, but afterwards had to encounter considerable opposition and much ridicule; and, among other names, were called Saoramentarians, because they partook of the sacrament once a week. But their principal name was Methodists^ alluding to a sect of ancient physicians so called, who were the disciples of Themison, and boasted that they found out a more easy method of teaching and practising the art of physic. In the mean time the society, which consisted only of John and Charles Wesley, Mr. Morgan before-mentioned, Mr. Kirkman of Merton college, Mr. Ingham of Queen’s, Mr. Broughton of Exeter, Mr. Clayton of Brasenose, Mr. James Hervey, and George Whitfield, continued to visit the prisoners, and some poor families in the town when they were sick; and that they might have wherewith to relieve their distress, they abridged themselves of all the superfluities and of many of the conveniences of life. They also took every opportunity of conversing with their acquaintance, to awaken them to a sense of religion; and by argument defended themselves as well as they could against their opponents, who attacked them principally because they thought all this superfluous, mere works of supererogation. But it does not appear that either they or the society itself had fear or hope of the important consequences that would follow.

On the accession of queen Anne, his lordship was removed from his employments, and in December 1702 he was one of the managers for the lords in the conference with the House of Commons relating to the bill against occasional conformity, which he opposed on all occasions with great vigour and address. In April 1705 he attended the queen at Cambridge, when her majesty visited that university, and was admitted, among other persons of r.ank, to x the honorary degree of doctor of laws. In the latter end of that year, his lordship opened the debate in the House of Lords for a regency, in case of the queers demise, in a manner which was very much admired. He had not been present at the former debate relating to the invitation of the princess Sophia to come over and live in England; but, he said, he was much delighted with what he heard concerning it; since he had ever looked upon the securing a Protestant succession to the crown, as that which secured the nation’s happiness. His proposition for the regency contained these particulars, that the regents should be empowered to act in the name of the successor, till he should send over orders: that, besides those whom the parliament should name, the next successor should send over a nomination, sealed up, and to be opened when that accident should happen, of persons who should act in the same capacity with the persons named by parliament. This motion being supported by all the Whig lords, a bill was ordered to be brought into the House upon it.

In 1706, he was appointed one of the commissioners for the union with Scotland; which being concluded, he was one of the most zealous advocates for passing the bill enacting it; and in December the same year, he was created earl of Wharton in the county of Westmorland. Upon the meeting of the parliament in Oct. 1707, the earl supported the petition of the merchants against the conduct of the admiralty, which produced an address to the queen on that subject. In the latter end of 1708, his lordship was appointed lord lieutenant of Ireland, where he arrived April 2, 1709, and opened a session of parliament there, with a speech reminding them of the inequality with respect to numbers, between the protestants and papists of that kingdom, and of the necessity of considering, whether any new bills were wanting to inforce or explain those good laws already in being, for preventing the growth of popery and of inculcating and preserving a good understanding amongst all protestants there. He shewed likewise his tenderness for the dissenters, in the speech which he made to both Houses at the close of the session Aug. 30, in which he told them, that he did not question, but that they understood too well the true interest of the protestant religion in that kingdom, not to endeavour to make all such protestants as easy as they could, who were willing to. contribute what they could to defend the whole against the common enemy; and that it was not the law then past to “prevent the growth of popery,” nor any other law that the wit of man could frame, which would secure them from popery, while they continued divided among themselves; it being demonstrable, that, unless there be a firm friendship and confidence amongst the protestants of Ireland, it was impossible for them either to be happy, or to be safe. And he concluded with declaring to them the queen’s fixed resolution, that as her majesty would always maintain and support the church, as by law established, so it was her royal will and intention, that dissenters should not be persecuted or molested in the exercise of their religion. His lordship’s conduct was such, as lord lieutenant of Ireland, that the Irish House of Peers, in their address to the queen, returned their thanks to her majesty for sending a person of “so great wisdom and experience” to be their chief governor. His lordship returned thither on May 7. 1710, but in Oct. following, delivered up his commission of lord lieutenant, which was given to the duke of Ormond.

The earl continued in a vigorous opposition to the measures of the court during the last four years of queen Anne’s reign, and particularly against the schism bill; and in June 1713, moved the address in the House of Lords, that her majesty should use her most pressing instances with the duke of Lorrain, and with all the princes and states in amity and correspondence with her majesty, that they would not receive the Pretender, or suffer him to continue within their dominions. In Sept. 1714, soon after the arrival of king George I. in England, his lordship was made lord privy seal, and in the beginning of January following, was created marquis of Wharton and Malmsbury in England, and earl of Rathfarnham and marquis of Catherlough, in Ireland. But he did not long enjoy these distinctions, as he died at his house in Dover-street, April 12, 1715, in the seventy-sixth year of his age.

When the marquis was at Lyons, he took a very strange step, little expected from him. He wrote a letter to the chevalier de St. George, then residing at Avignon, to whom he presented a very fine stone-horse. Upon receiving this present, the chevalier sent a man of quality to the marquis, who carried him privately to his court, where he was received with the greatest marks of esteem, and had the title of duke of Northumberland conferred upon him. He remained there, however, but one day; and then returned post to Lyons, whence he set out for Paris. He likewise made a visit to the queen-dowager of England, consort to James II. then residing at St. Germain*, to whom he paid his court, pursuing the same rash measures as at Avignon. It was reported that he told the queen he was resolved to atone by his own services for the faults of his family, and would exert all his endeavours to subvert the Hanover suecession, and promote the interest of the exiled prince; but as he complained that being underage, and kept out of his estate, he wanted money to carry on the design, the dowager-queen, though poor, pawned her jewels to raise him 2000l. We shall afterwards find that the chevalier accommodated him with the same sum long after the dowager’s death.

While thus employed abroad, his duchess, who had been neglected by him, died in England, April 14, 1726, and left no issue behind her. Soon after this, he fell vio-r lently in love with madam Obyrne, then one of the maids of honour to the queen of Spain. She was daughter of an Irish colonel in that service, who being dead, her mother lived upon a pension the king allowed her; so that this lady’s fortune consisted chiefly in her personal accomplishments. Many arguments were used, by their friends on both sides, to dissuade them from the marriage. The queen of Spain, when the duke asked her consent, represented to him, in the most lively terms, that the consequence of the match would be misery to them both; and absolutely refused her consent. Having now no hopes of obtaining her, he fell into a deep melancholy, which brought on a lingering fever. This circumstance reached her majesty’s ear: she was moved with his distress, and sent him word to endeavour the recovery of his health; and, as soon as he was ahle to appear abroad, she would speak to him in a more favourable manner than at their last interview. The duke, upon receiving this news, ima-> gined it the best way to take advantage of the kind disposition her majesty was then in; and summoning to his assistance his little remaining strength, threw himself at her majesty’s feet, and begged of her either to give him M. Obyrne, or order him not to live. The queen consented,' but told him he would soon repent it. After the solemnization of his marriage, he passed some time at Rome; where he accepted of a blue ribband, affected to appear with the title of duke of Northumberland, and for a while enjoyed the confidence of the exiled prince. But, as he could not always keep himself within the bounds of Italian gravity, and having no employment to amuse his active temper, he soon ran into his Usual excesses; which giving offence, it was thought proper for him to remove from that city for the present, lest he should at last fall into actual disgrace.

Accordingly, he quitted Rome, and went by sea to Barcelona; and then resolved upon a new scene of life, which few expected he would ever have engaged in. He wrote a letter to the king of Spain, acquainting him, that he would assist at the siege of Gibraltar as a volunteer. The king thanked him for the honour, and accepted his service: but he soon grew weary of this, and set his heart on Rome. In consequence of this resolution, he wrote a letter to the chevalier de St. George, full of respect and submission, expressing a desire of visiting his court; but the chevalier returned for answer, that he thought it more advisable for his grace to draw near England. The duke seemed resolved to follow his advice, set out for France in company with his duchess, and, attended by two or three servants, arrived at Paris in May 1728. Here he made little stay, but proceeded to Rouen, in his way, as some imagined, for England; but he stopped, and took up his residence at Rouen, without reflecting the least on the business that brought him to France. He was so far from making any concession to the government, in order to make his peace, that he did not give himself the least trouble about his personal estate, or any other concern in England. The duke had about 600l. in his possession when he arrived at Rouen, where more of his servants joined him from Spain. A bill of indictment was about this time preferred against him in England for high treason. The chevalier soon after sent him 2000l. for his support, of which he was no sooner in possession than he squandered it away. Asa long journey did not well suit with his grace’s finances, he went for Orleans; thence fell down the river Loire to Nantz, in Britany; and there he stopt some time, till he got a remittance from Paris, which was dispersed almost as soon as received. At Nantz some of his ragged servants rejoined him, and he took shipping with them for Bilboa, as if he had been carrying recruits to the Spanish regiments. PYorn Biiboa he wrote a humorous letter to a friend at Paris, giving a whimsical account of his voyage, and his manner of passing his time. The queen of Spain took the duchess to attend her person.

, an English divine, of most uncommon abilities, was born Nov. 9, 1664, at Worstead in Norfolk; of which parish his father Edmund, who survived him, was vicar. He was educated under his father; and made such a progress in the Greek and Latin tongues, that, from his first entrance into the university, he was thought an extraordinary young man. On Feb. 17, 1679—80, he was admitted into 'Caius-college, Cambridge, of which his father had been fellow, under the tuition of John, afterwards sir John Ellys, one of the senior fellows. Here he prosecuted his studies with the greatest vigour, and was instructed in the mathematics by Mr. (afterwards sir) Isaac Newton, then fellow of Trinity-college and Lucasian professor, amongst a select company, to whom that great man read lectures in his own private chamber. He took a bachelor of arts degree in 1683-4, and resided in the college till 1686, was a scholar on the foundation of his great uncle Stockys, but, observing no probability of a vacancy among the fellowships, he left it, and was recommended by Dr. Barker, afterwards chaplain to archbishop Tillotson, to Dr. Cave, whom he assisted in compiling his “Historia Literaria.” Of the nature of that assistance, and the manner in which he conducted himself, we shall have occasion to speak afterwards. In 1687 he was ordained deacon; and the same year proceeded master of arts by proxy; which favour was indulged him on account of being then dangerously ill of the small-pox at Islington. About this time the reputation he had acquired recommended him to the notice of Dr. Tenison, vicar of St. Martin’s in the Fields, London, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury, who employed him to prepare for the press a manuscript on “The incurable Scepticism of the Church of Rome,” written in Latin by Placette of Hamburgh. This Wharton translated into English and epitomized. Tenison also recommended him to lord Arundel of Trerice, as tutor for his son. Soon after being presented to archbishop Sancroft, his grace put into his hands, in April 1788, the manuscript of archbishop Usher’s dogmatical history of the Holy Scriptures, which he published, in 4to, under the title, “J. Usserii, &c. Hist. Dogmatica controversial inter orthodoxos et pon-r tificios de scripturis, &c.” to which he added an “auctarium,” or supplement. He also published before and about this time several treatises against popery, among which are, 1. “The Speculum Ecclesiasticum considered, inits false reasonings and quotations,” Lond. 1687, 4to. The “Speculum Ecclesiasticum” was a production of Thomas. Ward, whom we have noticed already. 2. “A treatise proving Scripture to be the rule of Faith, writ by Reginald Pecock, bishop of Chichester, before the reformation, about 1450,” Lond* 1688, 4to. This, to which Mr. Wharton prefixed a preface on the same subject, is the only production of that learned prelate which has been pub-, lished. 3. “A treatise of the Celibacy of the Clergy, wherein its rise and progress are historically considered, 7 * ibid. 1688, 4to. In this he proves that the celibacy of the clergy was not enjoined either by Christ or his apostles; that it has nothing excellent in itself; that the imposition of it is unjust, and that, in point of fact, it was never universally imposed or practised in the ancient church. 5. A, translation of Dellon’s” History of the Inquisition of Goa. n 6. About the same time he translated some homilies of St. Macarius, the prologue and epilogue of Euronius to his “Apologetic Treatise” (formerly transcribed by him out of a manuscript of Dr. Tenison) with a treatise of “PseudoDorotheus,” found by Mr. Dodwell jn the Bodleian library, out of Greek into Latin, and the famous Bull “in Ccena Domini” out of Latin into English annexing a short preface containing some reflections- upon the Bull, and animadversions on the account of the proceedings of the parliament of Paris. 7. He gave his assistance likewise to a new edition of Dr. Thomas James’s “Corruption of the Scriptures, Councils, and Fathers, by the Prelates of the Church of Rome for the maintenance of Popery;” and at the request of Mr. Watts he revised the version of “Philalethe & Philirene,” fitting it for the press. 8. “A brief declaration of the Lord’s Supper, written by Dr. Nicholas Ridley, bishop of London, during his imprisonment. Witfo some other determinations and disputations concerning the same argument, by the same author. To which is annexed an extract of several passages to the same purpose out of a book entitled * Diallecticon,' written by Dr. John Poynet, bishop of Winton in the reigns of Edward VI. and queen Mary,” 1688, 4to. 9. “The Enthusiasm of the Church of Rome demonstrated in some observations upon the Life of Ignatius Loyola,” 1688, 4to.

In Jan. 1709, he took the degree of B. A. and proceeded M. A. in March 1713. Soon after taking his master’s degree, he resigned his fellowship, and in August of the same year, married Mary, daughter of Dr. William Findall. Not Jong after his marriage he removed to a curacy in London, and in 1717 was chosen lecturer of St. Mildred’s in the Poultry. He afterwards was presented hy Dr. Astry, treasurer of St. Paul’s, to the vicarages of Brent and Furneaux Pelham, in Hertfordshire, at which last he built at his own expence a vicarage house, and as his livings lay contiguous, he supplied them both himself. Having procured several benefactions for them, he obtained their augmentation from queen Anne’s bounty, and as a farther increment left them at his death 2OO/. He spent the last fourteen years of his life at Furneaux Pelham, and died there of a dropsy and asthma, May 13, 1742. He left some valuable books and Mss. to the library of St. John’s college.

“He was much esteemed by the-late queen Caroline, who generously made him a present of 50l. every year from the time she became queen, which pension his late majesty continued to him so long as he lived. The queen usually sent for him once in the summer, whilst she was out of town, to spend a day or two with her. At Richmond it happened she who loved his free conversation, asked him what people in general said of her. He replied, that they justly esteemed her as a lady of great abilities, a patron of learned men, and a kind friend to the poor. * But,‘ says she, < no one is without faults, pray what are mine’ Mr. W. begged to be excused speaking on that subject; but she insisting, he said, her majesty did not behave with proper reverence at church. She replied, the king would talk with her. He said a Greater than kings was there only to be regarded. She acknowledged it, and confessed her fault. < Pray,‘ says she, * tell me what is my next?’ He replied, < When I hear your majesty has amended of that fault, I will tell you of your next;' and so it ended.” This last anecdote Whiston often repeated.

In 1773 we find Mr. Whi taker the morning preacher of Berkeley chapel, London; to which office he had been appointed in November, by a Mr. Hughes; but in less than two months he was removed from that situation. This gave occasion to “The Case between Mr. W. and Mr. Hughes, relative to the Morning Preachership of Berkeley Chapel;” in which Mr. W. declares himself “unalterably determined to carry the matter into Westminster-hall.” But the fervour of his resentment threw him off his guard; and he expressed himself so indiscreetly, that his Case was considered as a libel by the Court of King’s Bench. During his residence in London, he had an opportunity of conversing with several of our most celebrated writers; among whom were Dr. Johnson, and Gibbon, the historian of the Roman Empire. It does not appear, indeed, that Johnson was much attached to Whitaker. Both strong in understanding, equally tenacious of opinion, and equally impassioned in conversation, it is not probable that they should amicably coalesce on all occasions. In the Ossianic controversy they were decidedly hostile. With Gibbon Mr.Whitaker was well acquainted; and the ms. of the first volume of “The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire” was sub r rnitted to his inspection. But he was greatly surprised when, as he read the same volume in print, that chapter which has been so obnoxious to the Christian world, was then first introduced to his notice! That chapter Gibbon had suppressed in tjie ms. overawed by Mr. Whitaker’s high character, and afraid of his censure. And, in fact, that the deist should have shrunk from his indignant eye, may well be conceived, when we see his Christian principle and his manly spirit in the rejection of a living of considerable value, which was at this time offered him by an Unitarian patron. Of his integrity, however, some recompense was now at hand: and about 1778, he succeeded as fellow of Corpus Christi college, to the rectory of RuanLanyhorne, one of the most valuable livings in the gift of that College; and into Cornwall he went, to reside upon his rectory. There, it might have been expected that retirement and leisure would greatly favour the pursuits of literature; and that, though “the converser” (to use an expression of Mr. Whitaker’s) had disappeared, the author would break forth with new energies. But Ruan-Lany-r home was, for several years, no tranquil seat of the muses. That pleasant seclusion was now the scene of unavoidable contest. Mr. W. had proposed a tithe-composition with his par shiontTs, by no means unreasonable. This they refused to pay: but he was steady to his purpose. A rupture ensued between the parties; the tithes were demanded in kind; disputes arose upon disputes; animosities were kindled; and litigations took place. That Mr. Whitaker was finally victorious, afforded pleasure to the friends of the rector, and to the friends of justice and truth; yet it was long before harmony was restored to Ruan-Lanyhorne. That his literary schemes had been so sadly interrupted, was the subject of general regret. But the conscientious pastor looked with a deeper concern to the spiritual welfare of his parishioners. He saw with sorrow their aversion to his preaching; their indifference to his instructions; their repugnance“to his authority; and” he laboured more abundantly;“till, after a few years, he had the satisfaction to perceive a visible alteration in the behaviour of the principal parishioners; and a mutual good understanding was established between the pastor and his flock. His cordial, his familiar manner, indeed, was always pleasing to those whom prejudice had not armed against him; and, in proportion as they became acquainted with his kind disposition, the transitoriness of his resentments, and, after injuries, his promptness to forgive, and anxious wish to be forgiven; they endeavoured more and more to cultivate his friendship, and at length loved and revered him as their father. Kothing can more fully display the warmth of his affections, his zeal as a minister of Christ, or his impassioned style of eloquence, than those” Sermons“upon death, judgment, heaven, and hell, which he published in 1783, after having preached them to his parishioners, we doubt not, with a voice and manner calculated to penetrate the conscience. That he should have published so little in the line of his profession, is perhaps to be regretted. His” Origin of Arianism,“however, is a large volume, full of erudition and ingenious argumentation. We have read no other work of Mr. W. in divinity, except” The Real Origin of Government“(expanded into a v considerable treatise, from a sermon which he had preached before bishop Buller, at his lordship’s primary visitation), and” The Introduction to FlindelPs Bible.“This has been much admired as a masterly piece of eloquence. In the mean time the antiquary was not at rest. His” Mary, queen of Scots,“published in 1787, in three octavo volumes; his” Course of Hannibal over the Alps“his” Ancient Cathedral of Cornwall;“and his” Supplement to Polwhele’s Antiquities of Cornwall;“furnish good evidence of an imagination continually occupied in pursuits which kindled up its brightest flame; though not always of that judgment, discretion, or candour, which (if human characters had been ever perfect) we should have expected from a Whitaker. But not even here were his antiquarian stores exhausted.” The Life of St Neot,“”The History of Oxford,“and” The History of London," were works all at once projected, and no sooner projected than executed in imagination, and more than half executed in reality.

, one of the most eminent divines of the sixteenth century, was born at Holme, in the parish of Burnley in Lancashire, in 1547, and was the descendant of an ancient family. His mother was Elizabeth Nowell, sister to the celebrated Dean of St. Paul’s, who married Thomas Whitaker, gentleman, in 1530, and sur* vived her marriage the wonderful period of seventy-six years. He acquired the elements of grammar at Burnley, where Mr. William Hargrave was at that time master, to whom in his declining years he was a kind benefactor. He was sent for, in his thirteenth year, by Dean Nowell, who maintained him in his own house, and placed him at St. Paul’s school, where he made snch rapid and satisfactory progress that, at the age of eighteen, his pious kinsman sent him to Trinity college, Cambridge, under the tuition of Mr. afterwards Dr. Robert West. His progress here being equally admired, he was first chosen scholar and then fellow. He soon procured high esteem and great fame by his learned disputations and other exercises, which afforded a proof both of his talents and application. It was his practice, and that of several other eminent persons of his time, to stand while employed in study. In 1569 he published the Prayers of the Church of England in Greek, a small volume printed by Reynold Wolf; a circumstance which requires to be mentioned, because most of his biographers assert that he was first known by his translation of Nowell’s catechism; but that translation was not printed till 1573, four years after this version of the Prayers. He had about this time suffered long and severely by a quartan ague; and as he could not live without some literary employment, he made choice of this. The book contains the morning and evening prayers, the litany, the catechism, the collects, and, to fill a vacant page or two, the prayer after receiving the holy communion, accompanied with the Latin version, (the work, as is supposed, of Walter Haddon,) which had been published by the queen’s authority a fewyears before. It is dedicated, in a prefatory address in Latin, to his uncle and patron, the dean of St. Paul’s; from whom he had received, from his childhood, innumerable favours; to whom therefore, he says, of right belonged whatsoever he could perform; and he intreats him to protect his labours, and expresses a hope, that, if he is indulgent in this his first attempt, he may one day produce something not unworthy of his acceptance. The translation achieved under such circumstances, when the author, a bachelor of arts, had barely entered his twenty- first year, must have raised great hopes, which his future progress and celebrity did not disappoint.

In the same year (1579) the queen gave him the chancellorship of St. Paul’s, and he was afterwards preferred to the mastership of St. John’s college, Cambridge, by mandamus, although not without opposition from some of the members, whom he soon reconciled to his administration. He governed the college with great prudence and moderation, and sacrificed his own interest for the advantage of the public. He also greatly revived the reputation of the house, and increased the number of its members, which led to an increase in the buildings. He was now again involved in controversy with the popish writers, particularly Bellarmine and Stapieton; and some of his pieces on the subjects in dispute were printed. Having arrived at great celebrity, he is mentioned by Baker and other historians as being concerned in most of the public transactions of the university of Cambridge.

, bishop of Winchester, was the son of Robert White, of Farnham in Surrey, and was born there in 1511. He was educated at Winchester school, and thence removed to New college, Oxford, of which he became perpetual fellow in 1527. In 1534 he completed his degrees in arts, and being esteemed for his classical knowledge, was about that time appointed master of Winchester school. He was soon after made warden of Winchester college, and appears to have been principally instrumental in saving it, when the adjoining college of St. Elizabeth, the site of which he purchased, and so many others, were utterly destroyed. He was in 1551 promoted to the rectory of Cheyton in that neighbourhood; but in the preceding year, being suspected of corresponding with persons abroad, who opposed king Edward’s proceedings, he was examined by the council, and committed to the tower. After continuing some months in confinement, he pretended compliance with the reformed religion, and was set at liberty. Such is Strype’s account; but the historian of Winchester says that he lay in prison till the reign of queen Mary. However this may be, it is certain that on her accession, he was in such favour, as a zealous Roman Catholic, that she promoted him in 1554 to the bishopric of Lincoln. In the following year he was incorporated D. D. at Oxford, and in 1557 was translated to the see of Winchester, which, on account of his predilection for his native county, appears to have been the object of his wishes. This dignity, however, was granted him upon condition of his paying 1000l. yearly, out of the revenue of his see, to cardinal Pole, who complained that the temporalities of Canterbury (of which he was then archbishop) were so ruined by his predecessor, that he could not live in a manner suitable to his rank.

On the accession of queen Elizabeth, bishop W T hite was deprived of his dignity, generally because he retained his attachment to the popish religion, but more particularly for his open contempt of the queen and the queen’s authority, on two remarkable occasions. The first was, when appointed to preach queen Mary’s funeral sermon, or oration. His text was, “Wherefore I praised the dead, which are already dead, more than the living which are yet alive,” Eccles. iv. 2. In this sermon, after exhausting his powers of oratory in celebrating his saint of a mistress, whose knees he affirmed were hard with kneeling, he burst into a flood of tears Then, recovering himself, he said, “She has left a sister to succeed her, a lady of great worth also, whom we are now bound to obey, for melior est canis vivus leone mortuo (better is a live dog than a dead lion), and I hope so shall reign well and prosperously over us, but I must still say with my text, laudavi mortuos magis quam viventes (I praised the dead more than the living), for certain it is Maria optimam partem elegit (Mary hath chosen tfce better part).” It is easy to suppose that queen Elizabeth would not be much pleased with these complimentary innuendos. The other offence was of a more serious nature, for at the public disputation in Westminster Abbey, with some of the reformers in 1558, he even threatened the queen with excommunication. He was therefore committed to the tower in 1559, after he had appeared in public, though deprived, in his pontifical vestments. His health afterwards declining, he was released, and permitted to retire to his sister’s house at South Warnborough, where he died Jan. 11, 1560, and was interred, agreeably to his will, in Winchester cathedral.

White was a benefactor to both Wykeham’s colleges, and was a man of learning and eloquence, and no inelegant Latin poet, as appears by his “Diacosio-martyrion, sive ducentorum virorum testimonia de veritate corporis et sanguinis Christi in eucharista, adversus Petrum Martyrem,” Lond. 1553, 1554, 4to. He was the author also of “Epigrammatum lib. I.” “Carmina in matrimon. Philippi Regis, cum Maria Regina Anglise,” (See Holingshed’s Chron. 111. 1120); and the memorable “Sermon preached at the funeral of queen Mary, Dec. 13, 1558,” a ms. now in the British Museum, and printed in Strype’s Memorials, but from an incorrect copy. There are many of his orations, &c. preserved in Fox’s Acts and Monuments.

, an English historian, was born at Basingstoke, in Hampshire, of the great part of which place his ancestors had been proprietors. He was educated at Winchester school, whence he was admitted fellow of New college, Oxford, in 1557. In the beginning of queen Elizabeth’s reign he obtained leave of absence for a set time, but his attachment to the Roman catholic religion being discovered, his fellowship was declared void, in 1564. He had gone abroad, and after Remaining some time at Louvain, settled at Padua, where he studied the canon and civil law, and received his doctor’s decree in both those faculties. Afterwards, being invited to Douay, he was made regius professor, and taught civil and canon law nearly twenty years. The universityappointed him their chancellor, or rector magnificus, not only on account of his own merit, but in consequence of the particular recommendation of the pope. At length he was created count palatine, a title conferred by the emperor upon lawyers that have distinguished themselves in their profession. He had married two wives, by both of whom he had fortunes, and when the last died, being desirous of entering into the church, he obtained a dispensation from the pope for that purpose. He was now ordained priest, and made a canon of St. Peter’s church, in Douay. He died in 1612, and was buried in St. James’s hurch, the cemetery of most of the English catholics.

Sir Thomas White was sheriff of London in 1546, and lord mayor in 1553, when he was knighted by queen Mary for his services, in preserving the peace of the city during the rebellion of sir Thomas Wyatt. Of the rest of his history, or personal character, sentiments, and pursuits, no particulars have been recovered, except what may be inferred from his many and wise acts of liberality. He must have been no common man who showed the first example of devoting the profits of trade to the advancement of learning. He died at Oxford, Feb. 11, 1566, in the seventysecond year of his age, and was buried in the chapel of his college.

, founder of Sion college, London, the.son of John White, was born in Temple parish, in the city of Bristol. His family was a branch of the Whites of Bedfordshire. He was entered of Magdalen Hall, Oxford, about 1566, took his degrees in arts, was ordained, and became a noted and frequent preacher. He afterwards settled in London, where he had the living of St. Gregory’s, near St. Paul’s, and in 1575 was made vicar of St. Dunstan’s, Fleet-street, where his pulpit services were much admired. In 1584 he was licensed to proceed in divinity, and commenced doctor in that faculty. In 1588 he had the prebend of Mora/ in the church of St. Paul, conferred upon him, and in 1590 was made treasurer of the church of Sarum by the queen’s letters. In 1591 he was made canon of Christ Church, and in 1593, canon of Windsor. He died March 1, 1623-4, according to Reading, but Wood says 1622-3; and was buried in the chancel of St. DunStan’s church. In his will he ordered a grave-stone to be placed over his remains, with a short inscription, but this was either neglected, or has been destroyed. As soon as an account of his death arrived at Oxford, the heads of the university, in honour of his memory as a benefactor, appointed Mr. Price, trie first reader of the moral philosophy lecture, to deliver an oration, which, with several encomiastic verses by other members of the university, was printed under the title of “Schola Moralis Philosophise Oxon. in funere Whiti pullata,” Oxon. 1624, 4to.

Dr. White published, 1. “Two Sermons at St. Paul’s in the lime of the Plague,” 8vo. 2. “Funeral Sermon on sir Henry Sidney,” Lond. 1586, 8vo. 3. “Sermon at St. Paul’s Cross on the queen’s day (Nov. 17) 1589,” ibid. 1589, 8vo. But his memory Js chiefly to be venerated for his works of charity, and his liberal encouragement of learning. In 1613 he built an hospital in Temple parish, Bristol, endowing it with 92l. per ann. He also founded the moral philosophy lecture at Oxford, for the maintenance of which he gave the manor of Langdon Hills, in the county of Essex, which was conveyed by him to the university, under the form of a purchase, by his deed enrolled, bearing date June 2.0, 1621. Out of the revenues of this manor, besides an anriuttl stipend of 100l. to the philosophy lecturer, he appointed several sums to be paid to other uses as, to Christ Church library to the Tuesday’s preachers of the university to the Easter sermons to the prisoners in the castle, &c. He founded also small exhibitions for four poor scholars, and for five divinity students of Magdalen Hall, most of which are still continued. But his greatest benefaction was to Sion college. He directed in his will that 3000l. should be applied in building a college and alms-house on the ruins of Elsynge priory, London- wall. His executors accordingly purchased the site of this priory for 2,450l. and erected Sion college. The charters of incorporation are dated July 3, 6 Charles I. and June 20, 16 Charles II. By these authorities, a president, two deatis, and four assistants, with all the rectors, vicars, &c. of the city of London and suburbs, were constituted a corporation. At the same time, alms-houses for ten men, and as many women, were established. Dr. White had appropriated by will separate funds for the maintenance of these poor people. The library, now the most copious in the city of London, was principally the foundation of the rev. Thomas Wood, rector of St. Michael’s, Crooked-lane. Dr. White left his own library to the dean and canons of Windsor.

, an English philosopher, and Roman catholic priest, who obtained considerable celebrity abroad, where he was usually called Thomas Anglus, or Thomas Albius, was the son of Richard White, esq. of Hatton, in the county of Essex, by Mary, his wife, daughter of Edmund Plowden, the celebrated lawyer in queen Elizabeth’s reign. His parents being Roman catholics, he was educated, probably abroad, in the strictest principles of that profession, and at length became a secular priest, in which character he resided very much abroad. He was principal of the college at Lisbon, and sub-principal of that at Douay; but his longest stay was at Rome and Paris. For a considerable time he lived in the house of sir Kenelm Digby; and he shewed his attachment to that gentleman’s philosophy by various publications. His first work of this kind was printed at Lyons, in 1646. It is entitled “Institutionum Peripateticarum ad mentem summi clarissimique Philosophi Kenelmi Equitis Digbaei.” “Institutions of the Peripatetic Philosophy, according to the hypothesis of the great and celebrated philosopher sir Kenelm Digby.” Mr. White was not contented with paying homage to sir Kenelm on account of his philosophical opinions, but raised him also to the character of a divine. A proof of this is afforded in a book published by him, the title of which is “Quaestio Theologica, quomodo secundum principia Peripatetices DigbsEanae, sive secundum rationem, et abstrahendo, quantum materia patitur, ab authoritate, human! Arbitrii Libertas sit explicanda, et cum Gratia efficaci concilianda.” “A Theological question, in what manner, according to the principles of sir Kenelm Digby’s Peripatetic Philosophy, or according to reason, abstracting, as much as the subject will admit, from authority, the freedom of a man’s will is to be explained and reconciled with efficacious grace.” Another publication to the same purpose, which appeared in 1652, was entitled “Institutiones Theologicae super fundamentis in Peripatetica Digbacana jactis exstructae.” “Institutions of Divinity, built upon the foundations laid down in sir K. Digby’s Peripatetic Philosophy.” By his friend sir Kenelm Mr. White was introduced, with large commendations, to the acquaintance of Des Cartes, who hoped to make a proselyte of him, but without success. White was too much devoted to Aristotle’s philosophy to admit of the truth of any other system. In his application of that philosophy to theological doctrines, he embarrassed himself in so many nice distinctions, and gave such a free scope to his own thoughts, that he pleased neither the Molinists nor the Jansenists. Indeed, though he had a genius very penetrating and extensive, he had no talent at distinguishing the ideas which should have served as the rule and foundation of his reasonings, nor at clearing the points which he was engaged to defend. His answer to those who accused him of obscurity may serve to display the peculiarity of his disposition. “I value myself,” says he, “upon such a brevity and conciseness, as is suitable for the teachers of the sciences. The Divines are the causg that my writings continue obscure; for they refuse to give me any occasion of explaining myself. In short, either the learned understand me, or they do not. If they do understand me, and find me in an error, it is easy for them to refute me; if they do not understand me, it is very unreasonable for them to exclaim against my doctrines.” This, observes Bayle, shews the temper of a man who seeks only to be talked of, and is vexed at not having antagonists enough to draw the regard and attention of the public upon him. Considering the speculative turn of Mr. White’s mind, it is not surprising that some of his books’ were condemned at Rome by the congregation of the “Index Expurgatorius,” and that they were disapproved of by certain universities. The treatises which found their way into the “Index Expurgatorius” were, “Institutiones Peripatetica?;” “Appendix Theologica de Origine Mundi” “Tabula suffragialis de terminandis Fidei Litibus ab Ecclesia Catholica Fixa;” and “Tessera3 Romanae Evulgatio.” In opposition to the doctors of Douay, who had censured two-and-twenty propositions extracted from his “Sacred Institutions,” he published a pieoe entitled “Supplicatio postulativa Justitiae,” in which he complains that they had given a vague uncertain censure of him, attended only with a respective, without taxing any proposiiion in particular; and he shews them that this is acting like prevaricating divines. Another of his works was the “Sonitus Buccina?,” in which he maintained that the church had no power to determine, but only to give her testimony to tradition. This likewise was censured. Mr. White had a very particular notion concerning the state of souls separated from the body, which involved him in a dispute with the bishop of Chalcedon. Two tracts were written by him upon this subject, of which a large and elaborate account is given in archdeacon Blackburne’s Historical View of the controversy 'concerning an intermediate state. The conclusion drawn by the archdeacon is, that Mr. White entered into the questibn with more precision and greater abilities than any man of his time; and that it is very clear, from the inconsistencies he ran into to save the reputation of his orthodoxy, that if the word purgatory had been out of his way, he would have found no difficulty to dispose of the separate soul in a state of absolute unconscious rest.

, an eminent divine of the sixteenth century, was of the family of Whiteheads of Tuderiey in Hampshire, and was educated at Oxford, but whether at All Souls or Brasenose colleges, Wood has not deter* mined. He was chaplain to queen Anne Boleyn. Wood says, he was “a great light of learning, and a most heavenly professor of divinity.” Archbishop Cranmer says that “he was endowed with good knowledge, special honesty, fervent zeal, and politic wisdom,”' for which, in 1552, he nominated him as the fittest person for the archbishopric of Armagh. This nomination, however, did not succeed. lit the beginning of the tyrannic reign of queen Mary, he retired, with/many pf his countrymen, to Francfort, where he was chosen pastor to the English congregation of exiles, and when differences arose respecting church discipline, endeavoured to compose them by the moderation of his opinions. On the accession of queen Elizabeth, he “returned to England, and was one of the committee appointed to review king Edward’s liturgy; and in 1559 was also appointed one of the public disputants against the popish bishops* In this he appeared to so much advantage, that the queen is said to have offered him the archbishopric of Canterbury, but this he declined, as well as the mastership of the Savoy, excusing himself to the queen by saying that he could live plentifully by the preaching of the gospel without any preferment. He was accordingly a frequent preacher, and in various places where preaching was most wanted. He remained a single man, which much pleased the queen, who had a great antipathy against the married clergy. Lord Bacon informs us that when Whitehead was one day at court, the queen said,” I like thee better, Whitehead, because thou livest unmarried.“” In troth, madam,“he replied,” I like you the worse for the same cause.“Maddox, in his examination of Neal’s History of the Puritans, thinks that” Whitehead ought to be added to the number of those eminent pious men, who approved of the constitution, and died members of the church of England;“but it appears from Strype’s life of Grindal, that he was deprived in 1564 for objecting to the habits; how long he remained under censure we are not told. He died in 1571, but where buried, Wood was not able to discover. The only works attributed to his pen are,” Lections and Homilies on St. Paul’s Epistles“and in a” Brief Discourse of the Troubles begun at Francfort,“1575, 4to, are several of his discourses, and answers to the objections of Dr. Home concerning matters of discipline and worship. In Parkhurst’s” Epigram. Juvenil." are some addressed to Whitehead; and from the same authority we learn that he had been preceptor to Charles Brandon, duke of Suffolk.

, son of the preceding, by Elizabeth his wife, daughter of Edward Bulstrode, of Hugeley, or Hedgley Buistrode, in Buckinghamshire, esq. was born August 6, 1605, in Fleet-street, London, at the house of sir George Crooke, serjeant-at-law, his mother’s uncle. He was educated at Merchant Taylors’ school, and in 1620 went to St. John’s college, Oxford, of which Dr. Laud, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury, was then president. Laud was his father’s contemporary and intimate friend, and shewed him particular kindness; and Whitelocke afterwards made an acknowledgment of it, in refusing, when that prelate was brought to trial for his life, to be one of the commissioners appointed to draw up a charge against him. He left the university before he had taken a degree, and went to the Middle Temple, where, by the help of his father, he became eminent for his skill in the common law as well as in other studies. We find him also one of the chief managers of the royal masque which was exhibited by the inns of court in February 1633,^ before Charles I. and his queen, and their court, at Whitehall.

In vSept. 1651 Whitelocke was appointed, with three other members of parliament, to go out of town to meet Cromwell, then on his way to London, and congratulate him upon his victory at Worcester. Shortly after Whitelocke was. present at a; meeting at the speaker’s house, where several members of parliament, and principal officers of the army were assembled, by Cromwell’s desire, to consider about settling the affairs of the kingdom (See Cromwell, p. 57), and soon after he had a private conference in the Park with the usurper, who seemed to pay much regard to his advice, but, not finding him so pliable as he could wish, contrived to get him out of the way by an ap< parently honourable employment, and therefore procured him to be sent ambassador to Christina, queen of Sweden. This appointment was preceded by some singular circumstances very characteristic of the times. Whoever has looked into Whitelocke' s “Memorials” will perceive the language of religion and devotion very frequently introduced. That in this he was sincere, we have no reason to doubt,“' but it would appear that he had not come up exactly to the standard of piety established under the usurped government. When the council of state reported to the parliament that they had fixed upon Whitelocke as a fit person for the Swedish embassy, a debate arose in the house, and one of the members objected,” that they knew not whether he were a godty man or not,“adding, that” though he might be otherwise qualified, yet, if he were not a godly man, it was not fit to send him ambassador.“To this another member, who was known not to be inferior in godliness to the objector, shrewdly answered,” that godJiness was now in fashion, and taken up in form and words for advantage sake, more than in substance for the truth’s sake; that it was difficult to judge of the trees of godliness or ungodliness, otherwise than by the fruit; that those who knew Whitelocke, and his conversation, were satisfied thathe lived in practice as well as in a profession of godliness; and that it was more becoming a godly man to look into his own heart, and to censure himself, than to take upon him the attribute of God alone, to know the heart of another, and to judge him.“After this curious debate, it was voted,” that the lord commissioner Whitelocke be sent ambassador extraordinary to the queen of Sweden."

Whitelocke accordingly set out from London on this embassy Nov. 2, 1653, and a very few weeks after his departure, Cromwell assumed the supreme authority under the title of lord protector. Whitelocke was received in Sweden with great respect, and supported his character with dignity. Queen Christina, who shewed him many civilities, entertained him not only with politics, but with philosophy; and created him knight of the order of Araarantha, and hence he is sometimes styled sir Bulstrode. He displayed great abilities for negotiation, and concluded a firm alliance between England and Sweden about the beginning of May 1654. In 1772, Dr. Morton, secretary of the Royal Society, published the history of this embassy, under the title of “'A Journal of the Swedish Ambassy, in the years 1653 and 165 4-. From, the commonwealth of England, Scotland, and Ireland. Written by the ambassador the lord commissioner Whhelockv. With an Appendix of Original Papers,” 2 vols. 4to, These papers Dr Morton received from Whitelocke’s grandson, Carieton Whitelocke, of Prior’s wood, near Dublin, esq. This very cunious work may be considered as a necessary addition to his “Memorials,” and contains a large assemblage of facts and characteristic anecdotes illustrative of the times and the principal personages, printed literally from the author’s manuscript.

, archbishop of Canterbury in the reigns of queen Elizabeth and king James, and one of the most intrepid supporters of the constitution of the church, of England, was descended of the ancient family of Whitgift in Yorkshire. His grandfather was John Whitgift, gent, whose son was Henry, a merchant of Great Grimsby in Lincolnshire. Another of his sons was Robert Whitgi ft, who was abbot de Wellow or Welhove juxta Grimsby in the said county, a monastery of Black Canons dedicated to the honour of St. Augustin. He was a man memorable, not only for the education of our John Whitgift, but also for his saying concerning the Romish religion. He declared in the hearing of his nephew, that “they and their religion could not long continue, because,” said he, “I have read the whole Scripture over and over, and could never find therein that our religion was founded by God.” And as a proof of this opinion, the abbot alleged that saying of our Saviour, “Every plant that my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up.” Henry, the father of our archbishop, had six sons, of whom he was the eldest, and one daughter, by Anne Dy newel, a young gentlewoman of a good family at Great Grimsby. The names of the other five sons were William, George, Philip, Richard, and Jeffrey; and that of the daughter Anne.

He now returned home to his father in Lincolnshire; and his uncle, the abbot, finding that he had made some progress in grammatical learning, advised that he should be sent to the university. Accordingly he entered of Queen’s college, Cambridge, about 1548, but soon after removed to Pembroke- hall, where the celebrated John Bradford, the martyr, was his tutor. He had not been here long before he was recommended by his tutor and Mr. Grindal (then fellow, and afterwards archbishop of Canterbury) to the master, Nicholas Ridley, by which means he was made scholar of that house, and chosen bibleclerk. These advantages were the more acceptable to him, as his father had suffered some great losses at sea, and was less able to provide for him. When Bradford left Cambridge in 15.50, Whitgift was placed under the care of Mr. Gregory Garth, who continued his tutor while he remained at Pensbroke-hall, which was until he took his degree of bachelor of arts in 1553-4. The following year, he was unanimously elected fellow of Peter-house, and commenced master of arts in 1557.

Soon after this he joined his brother professor, Hutton, and several heads of colleges, in a petition to sir William Cecil, their chancellor, for an order to regulate the election of public officers, the want of which created great disturbance in the university at that time. Two years after this he distinguished himself so eminently in the pulpir, that sir Nicholas Bacon, then lord- keeper, sent for him to court to preach before the queen, who heard him with great satisfaction, and made him her chaplain. The same year (1565) being informed that some statutes 'were preparing to enjoin an uniformity of habits, particularly to order the wearing of surplices in the university, he promoted the writing of a joint letter privately to Cecil, earnestly desiring him to stop (if possible) the sending down any such orders, which he perceived would be very unacceptable to the university. But this letter gave so much offence at court, that he found.it necessary to make, an apology for the share he had in it. In the mean time he was so highly esteemed at Cambridge, both as avpreacher and a restorer of order and discipline there, that in June of the following year, the university granted him a licence under their common seal, to preach throughout the realna, and in July following the salary of his professorship was raised, out of respect to him, from twenty marks to twenty pounds.

He had the year before been a considerable benefactor to Peter-house, where, in 1567, he held the place of president, but was called thence in April to Pembroke-hall, being chosen master of that house, and not long after was appointed regius professor of divinity. In both these prejfertnents he succeeded his old frrend Dr. Hutton, now made dean of York, and to the first was recommended, as Dr. Hutton had been, by Grindal, then bishop of London. But he remained at Pembroke-hall only about three months, for upon the death of Dr. Beauchamp, the queen promoted him to the mastership of Trinity-college. This place was procured for him, chiefly by the interest of sir William Cecil, who, notwithstanding some objections had been made tq his age, secured the appointment. The same year he took his degree of doctor in divinity; and in 1570, having first applied to Cecil for the purpose, he compiled a new body of statutes for the university, which were of great service to that learned community.

In 1671 Dr. Whitgift served the office, of vice-chancellor. The same year an order was made by the archbishop and bishops, that all those who had obtained faculties to preach, should surrender them before the third of August; and that upon their subscription to the thirty-nine articles, and other constitutions and ordinances agreed upon, new licences shouldbe granted. This being signified to the university, and an order sent, requiring them to call in all the faculties granted before, Whitgift surrendered his former licence, obtained in 1566, and had another granted him in September 1571, in which he was likewise constituted one of the university preachers. In June, in consequence of the queen’s nomination, he had been appointed dean of Lincoln, and in October the archbishop granted him a dispensation to hold with it his prebend of Ely and rectory of Teversham, and any other benefice whatsoever; but in the following year he resigned the rectory of Teversham.

The queen, as we noticed in our account of archbishop Grindal, had some thoughts of placing Whitgift in that worthy prelate’s room, even in his life-time, and Grindal certainly would have been glad to resign a situation in which his conduct had not been acceptable to the court, and he had at the same time such an opinion of Whitgift as to be very desirous of him for a successor. But Whitgift could not be prevailed upon to consent to an arrangement of this kind, and requested the queen would excuse his acceptance of the office on any terms during the life of Grindal. Grindal, however, died in July 1533, and the queen immediately nominated Whitgift to succeed him as archbishop of Canterbury. On entering on this high office he found it greatly over-rated as to revenues, and was obliged to procure an order for the abatement of lOOl. to him and his successors, on the payment of first fruits, and he shortly after recovered from the queen, as part of the possessions of the archbishopric, Long-Beach Wood, in Kent, which had been many years detained from his predecessor by sir James Croft, comptroller to her majesty’s household. But that in wbich he-was most concerned was to see the established uniformity of the church in so great disorder as it was from thenon-compliance of the puritans, who, taking advantage of his predecessor’s easiness in that respect, were possessed of a great many ecclesiastical benefices and preferments, in which they were supported by some of the principal men at court. He set himself, therefore, with extraordinary zeal and vigour, to reform these infringements of the constitution, for which he had the queen’s express orders. With this view, in December 1583, he moved for an ecclesiastical commission, which was soon after issued to him, with the bishop of London, and several others. For the same purpose, in 1584, he drew up a form of examination, containing twenty-four articles, which he sent to the bishops of his province, enjoining them to summon all such clergy as were suspected of nonconformity, and to require them to answer those articles severally upon oath, ex officio mero, likewise to subscribe to the queen’s supremacy, the book of Common Prayer, and the thirty-nine articles.

At the same time he held conferences with several of the puritans, and by that means brought some to a compliance; but when others appealed from the ecclesiastical commission to the council, he resolutely asserted his jurisdiction., and vindicated his proceedings, even in some cases agahist the opinion of lard BuHeigh, who was his chief friend there. But as archbishop Whitgiit’s conduct has been grossly misrepresented by the puritan historians and by their successors, who are still greater enemies to the church, it may be necessary to enter more io detail on his correspondence with Burleigh, &c. at this time. Some ministers of Ely being suspended for refusing to answer the examination above mentioned, applied to the council, who wrote a letter to the archbishop in their favour, May 2.6, 1583. To this he sent an answer, in the conclusion of which, so well was he persuaded in his own mind of the propriety of his conduct, he told the council, “that rather than grant them liberty to preach, he would chuse to die, or live in prison all the days of his life, rather than be an occasion thereof, or ever consent unto it.” Lord Burleigh, thinking these ministers hardly used in the ecclesiastical commission, advised them not to answer to the articles, except their consciences might suffer them; he at the same time informed the archbishop that he had given such advice, and intimated his dislike of the twenty-four articles, and their proceedings in consequence of them, in several letters. To these the archbishop answered separately, in substance as follows: In a letter dated June 14, from Croydon, he declares himself content to be sacrificed in so good a cause; and that the laws were with him, whatever sir Francis Knollys (who, he said, had little skill) said to the contrary. This alludes to a paper written by sir Francis, treasurer to the queen’s household, in defence of the recusants, and sent to the archbishop. Burleigh, in a second letter, dated July 1, expressing himself in stronger terms against these proceedings, concludes with saying that the articles were branched out into so many circumstances, that he thought the inquisitors of Spain used not so many questions to trap others; and that this critical sifting of ministers was not to reform, hut to insnare: but, however, upon his request, he would leave them to his authority, nor “thrust his sickle into another man’s harvest.”

In 1585, we find Whitgift, by a special order from the queen, employed in drawing up rules for regulating the press, which were confirmed and published by authority of the Star-chamber in June. As he had been much impeded in his measures for uniformity by some of the privycouncil, he attached himself in a close friendship with sir Christopher Hatton, then vice-chamberlain to the queen, to whom he complained of the treatment he had met uith from some of the court. The earl of Leicester, in particular, not content with having made Cartvvright master of his hospital, newly built at Warwick, attempted, by a most artful address, to procure a license for him to preach without the subscription; but the archbishop peremptorily refused to comply. About the beginning of next year, the archbishop was sworn into the privy-council, and the next month framed the statutes of cathedral-churches, so as to make them comport with the reformation. In 1587, when the place of lord-chancellor became vacant by the death of sir Thomas Bromley, the queen made the archbishop an offer of it, which he declined, but recommended sir Christopher Hatton, who was accordingly appointed.

This year (1595) he obtained letters patent from her majesty, and began the foundation of his hospital at. Croydon. The same year he protected the hospital of Harbledown, in Kent, against an invasion of their rights and property: and the queen having made him a grant of all the revenues belonging to the hospital of Eastbridge, in Canterbury, he found out, and recovered next year, some lands fraudulently withheld from it. In 1599, his hospital at Croydon being finished, was consecrated by bishop Bancroft. The founding of this hospital (then the largest in the kingdom) having given rise to an invidious report of the archbishop’s immense wealth and large revenues, he drew up a particular and satisfactory account of all his purchases since he had been bishop, with the sums given for the same, and the yearly value of the lands, and to what and whose uses, together with the yearly value of the archbishoprick.

On the death of queen Elizabeth, in 1602, the archbishop sent Dr. Nevile, dean of Canterbury, into Scotland W king James, in th name of the bishops and clergy of England, to tender their allegiance, and to understand life majesty’s pleasure in regard to the government of the church; and though the dean brought a gracious message to him from the king, assuring his grace that he would maintain the settlement of the church as his predecessor left it, yet the archbishop was for some time not without his fears. The puritans, on the death of the queen, conceived fresh hopes of some countenance, and began to speak with more boldness of their approaching emancipation from ecclesiastical authority. A book had been printed the year before, by some of their party, entitled “The Plea of the Innocents,” and in this year, 163, appeared “The humble Plea of the thousand Ministers for redressing offences in the Church,” at the end of which they required a conference. In October a proclamation was issued concerning a meeting for the hearing aivd determining things said to be amiss in the church. This issued in the famous conference held at Hampton-court, Jan. 14, 16, and 18, an account of which was drawn up by bishop Bariow. It only served to shew the puritans that the king was decidedly against them. vU

, the puritan dean of Durham, the son of William Whittingham, esq. by a daughter of Haughton, of Haughton Tower, was born in the city of Chester, in 1524. In his sixteenth year he became a commoner of Brasenose college, Oxford, where he made great proficiency in literature. After taking his degree of bachelor of arts, he was elected fellow of All Souls in 1545, and two years afterwards was made one of the seniors of Christ-church, on the foundation oi Henry VIII. In May 1550, having obtained leave to travel for three yearsj he passed his time principally at Orleans, where he married the sister of Calvin. He returned to England in the latter end of the reign of Edward VI. but, as he was a staunch adherent to the doctrines of the reformation, he found it necessary to leave home, when queen Mary came to the throne, and joined the exiles at Francfort. Here he became one of those who took part against the ceremonies of the Church of England being observed among the exiles, and afterwards became a member of the Church of Geneva. On the Scotch reformer, Knox, leaving that society to return to his own country, Whittingham was prevailed upon by Calvin to take orders in the Geneva form, and was Knox’s successor. While here, he undertook, along with other learned men of the same society, an English translation of the Bible, which was not completed when those employed upon it had an opportunity to return to England, on the accession of queen Elizabeth. Whittingham, however, remained at Geneva to finish the work, during which time he translated into metre five of the Psalms, inscribed W. W. of which the 119th was one, together with the ten commandments, and a prayer, all which make part of the collection known by the names of Sternhold and Hopkins. Soon after his return to England, he was employed to accompany Francis, earl of Bedford, on his embassy of condolence for the death of the French king, in 1560. And he attended Ambrose, earl of Warwick, to Havre de Grace, to be preacher there, while the earl defended it against the French; and Wood says, he preached nonconformity in this place. Warwick appears to have had a very high opinion of him, and it was by his interest that Whittingham was promoted to the deanery of Durham in 1563, which he enjoyed for sixteen' years. During this time he was one of the most zealous opponents of the habits and ceremonies, and so outrageous in his zeal against popery, as to destroy some of the antiquities and monuments in Durham cathedral, and even took up the stone coffins of the priors of Durham, and ordered them to be used as troughs for horses to drink in.

Notwithstanding his opposition to the habits, when in 1564 the order issued for wearing them, he thought proper to comply, and being afterwards reproached for this by one who was with him at Geneva, he quoted a saying of Calvin’s, “that for external matters of order, they might not neglect their ministry, for so should they, for tithing of mint, neglect the greater things of the law.” It had been well for the church had this maxim more generally prevailed. Whittingham did essential service to government in the rebellion of 1569, but rendered himself very obnoxious at court, by a zealous preface, written by him, to Christopher Goodman’s book, which denied women the right of government. He was probably in other respects obnoxious, generally as a nonconformist, which at last excited a dispute between him and Dr. Sandys, archbishop of York. In 1577 the archbishop made his primary visitation throughout the whole of his province, and began with Durham, where a charge, consisting of thirty- five articles, was brought against Whittingbam, the principal of which was his being ordained only at Geneva. Whittingham, refused to answer the charge, but denied in the first place the archbishop’s power to visit the church of Durham. On this Sandys proceeded to excommunication. Whittingbam then appealed to the queen, who directed a eowimission to the archbishop, Henry earl of Huntington, lord president of the north, and Dr. Hutton, dean of York, to hear and determine the validity of his ordination, and to inquire into the other misdemeanours contained in the articles; but, this commission ended only in some countenance being given to Whitaker by the earl and by Dr. Hutton, the latter of whom went so far as to say, that “Mr. Whittinghgm wasordained in a better sort than even the archbishop himself.” Sandys then obtained another opmmission directed to himself, the bishop of Durham, and 10rd president, the chancellor of the diocese, and some others. This was dated May 14, 1578, and maybe seen in Rymer’s Feedera, vok XV. Here, as Whittingham had Bothing to produce but a certinqate or call from the church of Geneva, it was objected to, but the lord president said that “it would be ill taken by all the godly and learned, both at home and abroad, that we allow of popish massing priests in our ministry, and disallow of ministers leade in the reformed church.” It does not appear that any thing was determined, and Whittingham’s death put an end to the question. He died June 10, 1579, in the sixty-fifth year of his age, and his remains were interred in the cathedral of Durham, with a monumental inscription, which was afterwards destroyed by another set of innovators. He appears to have been a man of talents for business, as well as learning, and there was a design at one time of advancing him at court. He published little except some few translations from foreign authors to promote the cause of the reformation, and he wrote ome prefaces.

, author of a very curious account of the Russian empire, was son of Richard Whitwonh, esq. of Blowerpipe, in Staffordshire, who, about the time of the revolution, had settled at Adbaston. He married Anne Moseley, niece of sir Oswald Moseley, of Cheshire, by whom he had six sons and a daughter: Charles; Richard, lieutenant-colonel of the queen’s own royal regiment of horse; Edward, captain of a man of war; Gerard, one of the chaplains to king George the First; John, captain of dragoons; Francis, surveyor-general of his majesty’s woods, and secretary of the island of Barbadoes, father of Charles Whitworth, esq. member of parliament in the beginning of the present reign for Minehead in Somersetshire; and Anne, married to Tracey Pauncefort, esq. of Lincolnshire.

Charles, the eldest son, was bred under that accomplished minister and poet Mr. Stepney; and, having attended him through several courts of Germany, was, in 1702, appointed resident at the diet of Ratisbon. In 1704 he was named envoy -extraordinary to the court of Petersburg!), as he was sent ambassador-extraordinary thither on a more solemn and important occasion, in 1710. M. de Matueof, the Czar’s minister at London, had been arrested in the public street by two bailiffs, at the suit of some tradesmen, to whom he was in debt. This affront had like to have been attended with very serious consequences. The Czar demanded immediate and severe punishment of the offenders, with threats of wreaking his vengeance on all English merchants and subjects established in his dominions. In this light the menace was formidable, and the Czar’s memorials urged the queen with the satisfaction which she had extorted herself, when only the boat and servants of the earl of Manchester had been insulted at Venice. Mr. Whitworth had the honour of terminating this quarrel. In 1714, he was appointed plenipotentiary to the diet of Augsbourg and Ratisbon; in 1716, envoy-extraordinary and plenipotentiary to the king of Prussia; in 1717, envoy-extraordinary to the Hague. In 1719, he returned in his former character to Berlin; and in 1721 the late king rewarded his long services by creating him baron Whitworth of Galway, in the kingdom of Ireland. The next year his lordship was entrusted with the affairs of Great Britain at the congress of Cambray, in the character of ambassador-extraordinary and plenipotentiary. He returned home in 1724, and died the next year at his house in Gerard street, Londou. His body was interred in Westminster-abbey.

, Wicliff, de Wyclif, or Wiclef (John), a very learned English divine in the fourteenth century, and the first champion of that cause which was afterwards called Protestantism, was born at a village then called Wickliffe, from which he took his surname, near Richmond in Yorkshire, in 1324. Of the parents of one who lived in so remote a period, it cannot be expected that we should be able to procure any account. He was sent early to Oxford, and was first admitted commoner of Queen’s college, and afterwards of Merton, where he became probationer, but not fellow, as has been usually reported. While he resided here, he associated with some of the most learned men of the age who were members of that college, and it is said that Geoffry Chaucer was at one time his pupil. Among his contemporaries, he was soon distinguished both for study and genius. He acquired all the celebrity which a profound knowledge of the philosophy and divinity then in vogue could confer, and so excelled in wit and argument as to be esteemed more than human. Besides the learning of the schools, he accumulated a profound knowledge of the civil and canon law, and of the municipal laws of our own country, which have been rarely an object of attention until the establishment of the Vinerian professorship. He also not only studied and commented upon the sacred writings, but translated them into English, and wrote homilies on several parts of them; and to all this he added an intimate acquaintance with the fathers of the Latin church, with St. Austin and St. Jerome, St. Ambrose and St. Gregory.

The persecution which followed plainly proves this to be the case. After the death of the queen, Anne of Luxemburg, in 1394, who was a favourer of the Wickiffites, the archbishop, Courtney, assembled a court of bishops, in the monastery of the preaching friars, London, who declared fourteen conclusions of Wickliffe and others, heretical and erroneous. It is said that Wickliffe was prevented from appearing at this court by his friends, who thought that a plot was laid to seize him on the road. His cause, however, was undertaken by the chancellor of Oxford, the two proctors, and the greatest part of the senate, who, in a letter, sealed with the university seal, and sent to the court, highly commended his learning, piety, and orthodox faith. His particular friends and followers, Dr. Nicholas Hereford, Dr. Philip Rapingdon, and John Ayshton, M. A. defended his doctrines both in this court and in the convocation. The archbishop still persisted in his endeavours to punish the Wickliffites, but their doctrines increased, while Wickliffe himself, although obliged to quit his professorship at Oxford, lived peaceably at Lutterworth, still divulging his principles, and increasing the number of his followers. In 1382, soon after he left Oxford, he was seized with the palsy; and about the same time the pope cited him to appear at Rome, to which he sent an excuse, pleading, that “Christ had taught him to obey God rather than man.” He was seized with a second stroke of palsy on Innocent’s day 1384, as he was in his church of Lutterworth, and soon after expired, in the sixtieth year of his age.

He published, in Latin, various “Condones,” and “Orationes,” delivered at Oxford on public occasions; and several English sermons, besides the following, 1. “Catalogus librorum in I3ibl. Aul. Magd. Oxon.” Oxford, 1661, 8vo. 2. “The doctrine of contentment briefly explained, &c.” Lond. 1671, 8vo. 3. “Characters of a sincere heart, and the comforts thereof,” ibid. 1674, 8vo. 4. “Two Treatises concerning God’s Atl-Sufficiency, &c.” ibid. 1681, 8vo. In this last work we find a singular anecdote, which he says was communicated to him by archbishop Usher, with whom he was well acquainted. Our readers probably know that the Marian persecution never reached Ireland, and if the following be true, the Irish protestants had a very narrow escape from that tyranny. “A commission de Hereticis comburendis (for burning of heretics) was sent to Ireland from queen Mary, by a certain doctor, who, at his lodgings at Chester, made his boast of it. One of the servants in the inn, being a well-wisher to protestants, took notice of the words, and found out a method to get away the commission, which he kept in his own hands. When the commissioner came to Ireland, he was entertained with great respect. After some time he appeared before the lords of the council, and then opened his box to shew his commission, but there was nothing in it but a pack of cards. On this he was committed to prison and threatened exceedingly; but upon giving security he was released, returned to England, and obtained a new commission; as soon, however, as he came to Chester, the report arrived of queen Mary’s death, which stopt his farther journey.”

, a learned divine, was born in the city of Ely in 1562. His father, Mr. Thomas Willet, was sub-almoner to Edward VI. and a sufferer during the persecutions in queen Mary’s reign; but in that of queen Elizabeth, was preferred to the rectory of Barley in Hertfordshire, and to a prebend in the church of Ely. His son, who had been a very diligent and successful student while at school, was sent in his fourteenth year to Peter-house, Cambridge, whence he afterwards removed to Christ’s college, and obtained a fellowship. After passing thirteen years in the university, during which he afforded many proofs of extraordinary application and talents, queen, Elizabeth gave him his father’s prebend in Ely, about 1598, the year his father died. One of his name was also rector of Reed, in Middlesex, in 1613, and of Chishall Parva$ in Essex, in 1620, but it is doubtful whether this was the same person. It seems more certain, however, that he had the rectory of Childerley, in Cambridgeshire, and in 1597 that of Little Grantesden, in the same county, for which he took in exchange the rectory of Barley, vacant by his father’s death. He was also chaplain to prince Henry. About this time he married a relation to Dr. Goad, by whom he had eleven sons and seven daughters.

Dr. Willet was usually called a living library, from the great extent of his reading and. of his memory. He was also not less admired as a preacher, not only in his parish, but at court. He also obtained a great, degree of celebrity by his numerous publications, particularly his “Synopsis Papismi; or a general view of papistrie,” a work dedicated to the queen, which, although a folio of 1300 pages, passed through five editions, and was much admired in both universiyes, and by the clergy and laity at large, aa the best refutation of popery, which had then appeared. He died of the consequences of a fall from his horse, at Hoddesdon, in Hertfordshire, Dec. 4, 1621, in the fifty-eighth year of his age. He was interred in the chancel of Barley church, where there is a representation of him at full length, in a praying attitude, and with an inscription, partly Latin and partly English.

In the latter end of queen Anne’s reign, our author appears to have had extraordinary fears respecting the protestant succession, and that he corresponded very freely with the earl of Oxford upon that subject, who, however, discovering that he had been yet more free in his sentiments in another and more 'private correspondence, withdrew his friendship from him. Soon after, the accession of George I. dispelled his fears, and he was at the head of a body of the dissenting ministers, who addressed his majesty on that auspicious occasion.

When the earl of StrafFord came to be impeached in parliament, Williams defended the rights of the bishops, in a very significant speech, to vote in case of blood, as Racket relates; but lord Clarendon relates just the contrary. He says, that this bishop, without communicating with any of his brethren, very frankly declared his opinion, that '< they ought not to be present; and offered, not only in his own name, but for the rest of the bishops, to withdraw always when that business was entered upon:“and so, adds the noble historian, betrayed a fundamental right of the whole order, to the great prejudice of the king, and to the taking away the life of that person, who could not otherwise have suffered. Shortly after, when the king declared, that he neither would, nor could in conscience, give his royal assent to that act of attainder; and when the tumultuous citizens came about the court with noise and clamour for justice; the lord Say desired the king to confer with his bishops for the satisfaction of his conscience, and with bishop Williams in particular, who told him, says lord Clarendon, that” he must consider, that as he had a private capacity and a public, so he had a public conscience as well as a private: that though his private conscience, as a man, would not permit him to do an act contrary to his own understanding, judgment, and conscience, yet his public conscience as a king, which obliged him to do all things for the good of his people, and to preserve his kingdom in peace for himself and his posterity, would not only permit him to do that, but even oblige and require him; that he saw in what commotion the people were; that his own life, and that of the queen and the royal issue, might probably be sacrificed to that fury: and it would be very strange, if his conscience should prefer the right of one single private person, how innocent soever, before all those other lives and the preservation of the kingdom. This,“continues lord Clarendon,” was the argumentation of that unhappy casuist, who truly, it may be, did believe himself:“yet he reveals another anecdote, which shews, at least if true, that bishop Williams could have no favourable intentions towards the unfortunate earl of Strafford. It had once been mentioned to the bishop, when he was out at court, whether by authority or no was not known, says the historian, that” his peace should te made there, if he would resign his bishopric and deanery of Westminster, and take a good bishopric in Ireland:“which he positively refused, and said,” he had much to do to defend himself against the archbishop (Laud) here; but, if he was in Ireland, there was a man (meaning the earl of Strafford) who would cut off his head within one month."

After the king was beheaded, the archbishop spent hig days in sorrow, study, and devotion; and is said to have risen constantly every night out of his bed at midnight, and to have prayed for a quarter of an hour on his bare knees, without any thing but his shirt and waistcoat on. He lived not much above a year after, dying the 25th of March 1650 he was buried in Llandegay church, where a monument was erected to him by his nephew and heir, sir Griffith Williams. Besides several sermons, he published a book against archbishop Laud’s innovations in church-matters and religious ceremonies, with this title, “The Holy Table, Name, and Thing, more antiently, properly, and literally, used under the New Testament, than that of Altar. Written long ago by a minister in Lincolnshire, in answer to D. Coel, a judicious divine of queen Marie’s dayes. Printed for the diocese of Lincoln, 1637;” in quarto. Lord Clarendon, though far from being favourable 10 this prelate, yet represents this “book so full of good learning, and that learning so closely and solidly applied, tnough it abounded with too many light expressions, that it gained him reputation enough to be able to do hurt; and shewed, that in his retirement he had spent his time with his books very profitably. He used all the wit and all the malice he could, to awaken the people to a jealousy of these agitations, and innovations in the exercise of religion; not without insinuations that it aimed at greater alterations, for which he knew the people would quickly find a name: and he was ambitious to have it believed, that the archbishop Laud was his greatest enemy, for his having constantly opposed his rising to any government in the church, as a man whose hot and hasty spirit he had long known.”

, an able divine, and bishop of Chichester, was born in Northamptonshire in 1634. In 1651 he entered a commoner of Magdalen-hall, Oxford, where in 1658 he completed his degrees in arts, and was ordained. In 1673 he was collated to the rectory of St. Mildred in the Poultry, London, and in 1683 to the prebend of Reymere in the cathedral of St. Paul. After the revolution he became chaplain to king William and queen Mary, and was preferred to a prebend of Canterbury, and in December 1696 advanced to the bishopric of Chichester, in which he died in 1709. He was a considerable writer in the controversies with the papists and dissenters, and preached the lectures founded by Mr. Boyle, his sermons on that occasion being published in 1695, 4to, under the title of “The characters of Divine Revelation.” He wrote also a “History of the Gunpowder Treason,” and many controversial pamphlets enumerated by Wood. He lived in great intimacy with Tillotson, who says of him, “Mr. Williams is really one of the best men I know, and most unwearied in doing good, and his preaching is very weighty and judicious.” When Firmin, the Socinian, published his “Considerations on the explications of the doctrine of the Trinity,” Pr. Williams wrote the same year (1694) a “Vindication of archbishop Tillotson’s Four Sermons (concerning the divinity and incarnation of our blessed Saviour) and of the bishop of Worcester’s sermon on the mysteries of the Christian faith.” In this, which was not published till 1695, after 'Tillotson’s death, Dr. Williams observes that it was not without the archbishop’s direction and encouragement, that he entered upon it, and that had he lived to have perused the whole, as he did a part of it a few days before his last hours, it had come with greater advantage into the world, &c.

, a brave officer in the reign of queen Elizabeth, was the son of Thomas Williams, of Penrose in Monmouthshire, and educated at Oxford, probably in Brasenose college. After leaving the university, he became a volunteer in the army, and served under the duke of Alva. In 1581, he was in the English army commanded by general Norris in Friesland, where Camden says the enemy’s troops were defeated by sir Roger Williams at Northern, who probably therefore was knighted for his gailant exploits before this time, although Wood says that honour was not conferred upon him until 1586. In this lastmentioned year he appears again in the army commanded by the earl of Leicester in Flanders. When the prince of Parma laid siege to Venlo in Guelderland, Williams, with one Skenk, a Frieslander, undertook to pierce through the enemy’s camp at midnight, and enter the town. They penetrated without much difficulty, as far as the prince of Parma’s tent, but were then repulsed. The attempt, however, gained them great reputation in the army.* In 1591, Williams was sent to assist in the defence of Dieppe, and remained there beyond August 24, 1593. What other exploits he performed, we know not, but it is probable that he continued in the service of his country during the war in the Low Countries, of which war he wrote a valuable history. He died in London in 1595, and was buried in St. Paul’s, attended to his grave by the earl of Essex, and other officers of distinction. “He might,” says Camden, “have been compared with the most famous captains of our age, could he have tempered the heat of his warlike spirit with more wariness and prudent discretion.” Wood calls him a colonel, but it does not clearly appear what rank he attained in the army. From his writings, which are highly extolled by Camden, he appears to have been a man of strong natural parts, and sound judgment. His principal writing is entitled “The Actions of the Low Countries,” Lond. 1618, 4to, which has lately been reprinted in Mr. Scott’s new edition of the Somers’s Tracts. He wrote also “A brief discourse of War, with his opinion concerning some part of military discipline,” ibid. 1590, 4to, in which he defends the military art of his country against that of former days. He mentions in his “Actions of the Low Countries,” a “Discourse of the Discipline of the Spaniards;” and in Rymer’s Fcedera is his “Advice from France, Nov. 20, 1590.” Some of his Mss. and Letters are in the Cotton Library in the British Museum.

, an eminent statesman and benefactor to Queen’s college, Oxford, was son of Joseph Williamson, vicar of Bridekirk in Cumberland from 1625 to 1634. At his first setting out in life he was employed as a clerk or secretary by Richard Tolson, esq.; representative in parliament for Cockermouth; and, when at London with his master, begged to be recommended to Dr. Busby, that he might be admitted into Westminsterschool, where he made such improvement that the master recommended him to the learned Dr. Langbaine, provost pf Queen’s college, Oxford, who came to the election at Westminster. He admitted him on the foundation, under the tuition of Dr. Thomas Smith (for whom sir Joseph afterwards procured the bishopric of Carlisle), and provided for him at his own expence; and when he had taken his bachelor’s degree, February 2, 1653, sent him to France as tutor to a person of quality. On his return to college he was elected fellow, and, as it is said, took deacon’s orders. In 1657 he was created A. M. by diploma. Soon after the restoration he was recommended to sir Edward Nicholas, and his successor Henry earl of Arlington, principal secretary of state, who appointed him clerk or keeper of the paper-office at Whitehall (of which he appointed Mr. Smith deputy), and employed him in translating and writing memorials in French; and June 24, 1677, he was sworn one of the clerks of the council in ordinary, and knighted. He was under-secretary of state in 1665; about which time he procured for himself the writing of the Oxford Gazettes then newly set up, and employed Charles Perrot, fellow of Oriel college, who had a good command of his pen, to do that office under him till 1671. In 1678, 1679, 1698, 1700, he represented the borough of Thetford in parliament. In 1685, being then recorder of Thetford, he was again elected, but Heveningham the mayor returned himself, and on a petition it appeared that the right of election was in the select body of the corporation before the charter; and in 1690 he lost his election by a double return. Wood says he was a recruiter for Thetford to sit in that parliament which began at Westminster May 8, 1661. At the short treaty of Cologne, sir Joseph was one of the British plenipotentiaries, with the earl of Sunderland and sir Leolin Jenkins, and at his return was created LL.D. June 27, 1674, sworn principal secretary of state September 11, on the promotion of the earl of Arlington to the chamberlainship of the household, and a privy counsellor. On November 18, 1678, he was committed to the Tower by the House of Commons, on a charge of granting commissions and warrants to popish recusants; but he was the same day released by the king, notwithstanding an address from the House. He resigned his place of secretary February 9, 1678, and was succeeded by the earl of Sunderland; who, if we believe Kapin, gave him 6000l. and 500 guineas to induce him to resign. In December that year he married Catherine Obrien, baroness Clifton, widow of Hen/y lord Obrien, who died in August. She was sister and sole heiress to Charles duke of Richmond, and brought sir Joseph large possessions in Kent and elsewhere, besides the hereditary stewardship of Greenwich. Some ascribe the loss of the secretary’s place to this match, through the means of lord Danby, who intended this lady for his son. She died November 1702. Sir Joseph was president of the Royal Society in 1678. Under 1674, Wood says of him that “he had been a great benefactor to his college, and may be greater hereafter if he think fit,” Upon some slight shewn by the college, he had made a will by which he had given but little to it, having disposed of his intended benefaction to erect and endow a college at Dublin, to be called Queen’s college, the provosts to be chosen from its namesake in Oxford, But soon after his arrival in Holland 1696, with. Mr. Smith, his godson and secretary, (afterwards, 1730, provost of Queen’s college, Oxford,) being seized with a violent fit of the gout, he sent for his secretary, who had before reconciled him tothe place of his education, and calling him to his bedside, directed him to take his will out of a drawer in the bureau, and insert a benefaction of 6000l. When this was done and ready to be executed, before the paper had been read to him, “in comes sir Joseph’s lady.” The secretary, well knowing he had no mind she should be acquainted with it, endeavoured to conceal it; and on her asking what he had got there, he answered, “nothing but news, Madam;” meaning, such as she was not to know: and by this seasonable and ready turn prevented her further inquiries.

, a statesman and divine in the reign of queen Elizabeth, celebrated for the politeness of his style and the extent of his knowledge, was the son of Thomas Wilson of Stroby in Lincolnshire, by Anne daughter and heir of Roger Comberwortb, of Comberworth in the same county. He was educated at Eton, and atKing’scollege, Cambridge; and went thence into the family of Charles Brandon, duke of Suffolk, who intrusted him with the education of his two sons. During the reign of Mary, to whose persecution many fugitives owed their qualifications for future honours, he lived abroad, received the degree of doctor of laws at Ferrara, and was for some time imprisoned by the inquisition at Rome, on account of his two treatises on rhetoric and logic, which he had published in England, and in the English language, several years before. He is said to have suffered the torture, and would have been put to death, on refusing to deny his faith, had not a fire happened, which induced the populace to force open the prison, that those confined there might not perish > by which means he escaped; and, returning to England, after queen Mary’s death, was appointed one of the masters of requests, and master of St. Katherine’s hospital near the Tower. This was in the third year of queen Elizabeth, at which time he was her majesty’s secretary; but finding his patent for the mastership of St. Catherine’s void, because he was not a priest, according to queen Philippa’s charter, he surrendered the office, and had a new patent, with a non obstante, Dec. 7, 1563. According to Dr. Ducarel, his conduct in this office was somewhat objectionable, as he sold to the city of London the fair of St. Katherine’s, for the sum of 700 marks, surrendered the charter of Henry VI. and took a new one 8. Elizabeth, leaving out the liberty of the aforesaid fair; and did many other things very prejudicial to his successors. In 15lhe had been admitted a civilian; and in 1576 he was sent on an embassy to the Low Countries, where he acquitted himself so well, that in the following year he was named to succeed sir Thomas Smith as secretary of state; and in 1579 obtained a deanery of Durham. He died in 1581, and was buried in St. Katherine’s church. He was endowed with an uncommon strength of memory, which enabled him to act with N remarkable dispatch in his negociations. Yet he was more distinguished as a scholar than as a minister, and was perhaps unfortunate in having served jointly with the illustrious Walsingham, whose admirable conduct in his office admitted of no competition. Sir Thomas Wilson married Anne, daughter of sir William Winter, of Lidney in Gloucestershire, and left three children: Nicholas, who settled at Sheepwash in Lincolnshire; Mary, married, first, to Robert Burdett, of Bramcote in Warwickshire, secondly to sir Christopher Lowther, of Lowther in Westmoreland; and Lucretia, wife of George Belgrave, of Belgrave in Leicestershire.

Sir Thomas Wilson wrote, 1. “Epistola de vita et obita duorum fratrum SufFolciensium, HenricietCaroli Brandon,” Lond. 1552, 4to, prefixed to a collection of verses written on their deaths by several scholars of Oxford and Cambridge. Of this rare book there are only three copies known, one in the Bodleian, another in the British museum, and a third in the magnificent library of earl Spencer. 2. “The rule of Reason, containing the art of Logic,” 1551, 1552, 1553, 1567, 4to. 3. “The art of Rhetoric,” 1553, 4to, often reprinted. 4. “Discourse upon Usury,” Lond. 1572, a work much praised by Dr. Lawrence Humphrey, the queen’s professor of divinity at Oxford, in his life of Jewell. Wilson also translated from Greek into English, <c The three Orations of Demosthenes, chief orator among the Grecians,“Lond. 1570. Of his” Art of Logic,“Mn Warton says that such a” display of the venerable mysteries of this art in a vernacular language, which had hitherto been confined within the sacred pale of the learned tongues, was esteemed an innovation almost equally daring with that of permitting the service of the church to be celebrated in English; and accordingly the author, soon, afterwards happening to visit Rome, was incarcerated by the inquisitors of the holy see, as a presumptuous and dangerous heretic.“Of his” Art of Rhetoric," Mr. Wartori says, it is liberal and discursive, illustrating the arts of eloquence by example, and examining and ascertaining the beauties of composition with the speculative skill and sagacity of a critic. It may therefore be justly considered as the first book or system of criticism in our language. This opinion Mr. Warton confirms by very copious extracts.

After this absence from his diocese of eighteen months, which he had spent mostly in London, where he was beloved and admired to a degree of enthusiasm by all classes of people, he returned to the island, and resumed his ex^ emplary course. In 1735 he came to England for the last time, to visit his son, the subject of the following article; and being introduced at the court of George II. he was much noticed by their majesties, and particularly by queen Caroline, who was very desirous of keeping him in England, but he could not be prevailed upon to quit his poor diocese, the value of which did not exceed 3QO/. a year. On his return he visited the province of York at the request of archbishop Blackburn, and confirmed upwards-of fifteen thousand persons.

, whom Dr. Hutton pronounces one of the clearest writers on arithmetic, &c. in the English language, was the son of Roger Wingate, esq. of Bornend and Sharpenhoe, in Bedfordshire, but was born in Yorkshire in 1593. In 1610 he became a commoner of Queen’s-college, Oxford, and after taking a degree in arts, removed to Gray’s -Inn, London, where he studied the law. His chief inclination, however, was to the mathematics, which he had studied with much success at college. In 1624 he was in France, where he published the scale, or rule of proportion, which had been invented by Gunter, and while in that country gave instructions in the English language to the princess Henrietta Maria, afterwards wife of Charles I. and to her ladies. After his return to England, he became a bencher of Gray VInn; and on the breaking out of the great rebellion, he joined the popular party^ took the covenant, was maxle justice of the peace for the county of Bedford, where he resided at Woodend in the parish of Harlington. His name occurs in the register of Anipthill church, as a justice, in 1654, at which period, according to the republican custom, marriages were celebrated by the civil magistrate. In 1650 he took the oath, commonly called the engagement, became intimate with Cromwell, and was chosen into his parliament for Bedford. He was also appointed one of the commissioners, for that county, to eject from their situations those loyal clergymen and schoolmasters who were accused as being scandalous and ignorant. He died in Gray’s- Inn, in 1656, and was buried in the parish church of St. Andrew Holborn.

In 1614, Winwood was made secretary of state; in which office he continued till his death, which happened Oct. 27, 1617. He was interred in the parish church of St. Bartholomew the Less, London. Lloyd tells us, that “he was a gentleman well seen in most affairs, but most expert in. matters of trade and war.” But although others acknowledge his abilities and integrity, they add that he was nol; sufficiently polished as a courtier, as there was something harsh and supercilious in his demeanour. He left a son named Richard, afterwards of Ditton Park in Bucks, who dying without issue in 1688, his estate went to a son of Edward earl of Montague, who had married his sister. In 1725, were published at London, in 3 vols. folio, “Memorials of Affairs of State in the Reigns of queen Elizabeth and king James I. collected chiefly from the original papers of the right honourable sir Ralph Winwood, knight, some time one of the principal secretaries of state. Comprehending likewise the negotiations of sir Henry Neville, sir Charles Cornwallis, sir Dudley Carlton, sir Thomas Edmonds, Mr. Trumble, Mr. Cottington, and others, at the courts of France and Spain, and in Holland, Venice, &c. wherein the principal transactions of those times are faithfully related, and the policies and the intrigues of those courts at large discovered. The whole digested in an exact series of time. To which are added two tables, one of the letters, the other of the principal matters. By Edmund Sawyer, esq.” then one of the masters in chancery.

, bishop of Edinburgh, was born in East Lothian in 1609, and educated in the university of Edinburgh; where he took his degrees, and entered into holy drders. He became minister of North Leith, but was deposed in 1638, for refusing to take the covenant, and was also imprisoned for his loyalty. On his release he accompanied the marquis of Montrose as his chaplain. When the marquis was defeated by general Lesley in 1645, Wishart was taken prisoner, and would have suffered death along with several noblemen and gentlemen whom the covenanters condemned, had not his amiable character endeared him to some of the leading men of the party. He then went abroad, and became chaplain to Elizabeth, queen of Bohemia, sister to Charles I. with whom he came over into England in 1660, to visit her royal nephew Charles II. Soon after, Mr. Wishart had the rectory of Newcastle upon Tyne conferred upon him; and upon the restoration of episcopacy in Scotland, was consecrated bishop of Edinburgh, June I, 1662. In that station he gave a most striking proof of that benevolence which should ever characterise a real Christian; for, when some of the presbyterians who had persecuted him were committed to prison for rebellion, he assisted them with every necessary, and procured them a pardon. He died in 1671, and was buried in the abbey of Holyrood-bouse, under a magnificent tomb, with a long Latin inscription. Keith says, “he was a person of great religion; and having been a prisoner himself, it is reported of him that he was always careful at each dinner, to send off the first mess to the prisoners.” He wrote the history of the war in Scotland under the conduct of the marquis of Montrose, in elegant Latin, ijmler the title of “J. G. de rebus auspiciis serenissimi et potentissimi Caroli, Dei gratia Mag. Brit. regis, &c. sub imperio illustrissimi Montisrosarum marchionis, &c. anno 1644, et duobus sequentibus, praeclare gestis, comtuentarius, mterprete A. S.” This was first published in 1646, and there have been several English translations of it from that time to 1720, when it was printed with a second part, which Keith says the author left in manuscript.

, an excellent portrait painter, was born at Amsterdam in 1656, and bred up under Dodaens, an historical painter at the Hague. On coming to England, he worked some time for sir Peter Lely, whose manner he successfully imitated, and after whose death he came into fashion. He painted Charles II. and his queen, James II. and his queen, and the prince and princess of Denmark; and was sent over to Holland, by king James, to draw the prince and princess of Orange. What recommended him to the esteem of Charles II. was his picture of the duke of Monmouth, whom he drew several times and in several attitudes. He drew most of the then court, and became competitor with sir Godfrey Kneller, whose fame was at that time increasing every day. It is said that, in drawing portraits of the fair sex, when any lady came to sit, whose complexion was rather pale, he would commonly take her by the hand, and dance about the room till she became warmer and her colour increased. This painter died much lamented at Burleigh-house, in Northamptonshire, Sept. 10, 1687, aged only thirty-one; and was buried in St. Martin’s church, Stamford, where a marble tablet, with a Latin inscription, was placed by John earl of Exeter. There is a mezzotinto print of him, under which are these words, “Gulielmus Wissingus, inter pictores sui saeculi celeberrimus, nulli secundus, artis suse non exiguuai decus & ornamentum. Immodicis brevis est aetas.”

, a learned compiler, was born Aug. 10, 1537, at Bergzabern in the duchy of Deux Fonts, and was educated in law and philosophy at Strasburgli, Wirtemberg, Tubingen, and other celebrated academies, and afterwards was entrusted with the education of some noblemen’s sons, with whom he travelled in France, &c. from 1564 to 1567. Returning then to Dol, he took the degree of licentiate in civil law, and settled in practice at Spire, where two years after he was admitted into the number of assessors. In 1569 he attended Wolfgang, the elector Palatine, who came with an army to the assistance of the French protestants, and his highness dying a few months afterwards, Wolfe conducted his corpse back to Germany by sea, and it was interred at Meisenheim. For this melancholy duty and his other faithful services he grew in esteem with Philip Lewis and John, the electors Palatine, who thought him worthy of being sent twice on important'business to queen Elizabeth of England, and once to the king of Poland. In 1573 Charles marquis of Baden made him one of his counsellors, and in 1575 appointed him governor of Mundlesheim, which office he held for twenty years, and received many honours and marks of favour from the Baden family. In 1594, finding his health exhausted by official fatigues, he retired to Hailbrun, where he passed the remainder of his days in study, and died of a very short illness, as had always been his wish, May 23, 1600, in the sixty-third year of his age. He wrote “Clavis Historiarum;” and a larger work entitled “Lectionum memorabilium et reconditarum Centuriae XVI.” 2 vols. fol. printed first in the year he died, but there is an edition of 1671, which is not so much valued. Mr. Dibdin has accurately described this curious work in his “Bibliomania,” to which the reader is referred.

Of the ingenuity of this work as a composition no doubts have been entertained, but its tendency was soon thought liable to suspicion. Some objected that he had injured Christianity by laying too much stress upon the obligations of truth, reason, and virtue; and by making no mention of revealed religion, nor even so much as dropping the least and most distant hints in its favour. This made him pass for an unbeliever with some; and the late lord Bolingbroke supposes Dr. Clarke to have had him in his eye when he described his fourth sort of theists. Wollaston held and has asserted the being and attributes of God, natural and moral a providence, general and particular; the obligations to morality the immateriality and immortality of the soul a future state and Clarke’s fourth sort of theists held and asserted the same. But whether Wollaston, like those theists, rejected all above this in the system of revelation, cannot with any certainty be concluded, though at the same time the contrary perhaps may not appear; because, whatever might have been thought necessary to prevent offence from being taken, it was not essential to Wollaston’s design to meddle with revealed religion. In the mean time, lord Bolingbroke has treated “The Religion of Nature delineated,” as a system of theism; which it certainly is, whether Wollaston was a believer or not. His lordship calls it “strange theism, as dogmatical and absurd as artificial theology,” and has spent several pages to prove it so; yet allows the author of it to have been “a man of parts, of learning, a philosopher, and a geometrician.” The seventh edition of this work was printed in 1750 in 8vo, to which are added an account of the author, and also a translation of the notes into English. There is prefixed an advertisement by Dr. John Clarke, late dean of Salisbury, which informs us, that this work was in great esteem with her late majesty queen Caroline, who commanded him to translate the notes into English for her own use. Pope, who has taken some thoughts from it into his “Essay on Man,” informs Mr. Bethel in one of his letters how much this work was a favourite with the ladies, but accompanies his information with a sneer at the sex, which we dare not transcribe.

In 1518, he attended queen Catherine to Oxford, and intimated to the university his intention of founding lectures on theology, civil law, physic, philosophy, mathematics, rhetoric, Greek, and Latin; and in the following year three of these, viz. for Greek, Latin, and rhetoric, were founded and endowed with ample salaries, and read in the hall of Corpus Christi college. He appointed for his lectures the ablest scholars whom the university afforded, or whom he could invite from the continent. The members of the convocation, about this time, conferred upon him the highest mark of their esteem by a solemn decree that he should have the revisal and correction of the university statutes in the most extensive sense, and it does not appear that they had any reason to repent of this extraordinary instance of their confidence. The same power was conferred upon him by the university of Cambridge, and in both cases, was accompanied by documents which proved the very high opinion entertained by these learned bodies of his fitness to reform what was amiss in the republic of letters.

Of the immense riches which he derived from his various preferments, some were no doubt spent in luxuries which left only a sorrowful remembrance, but the greater part was employed in" those magnificent edifices which have immortalized his genius and spirit. In 1514 he began to build the palace at Hampton Court, and having finished it, with all its sumptuous furniture, in 1528, he presented it to the king, who in return gave him the palace of Richmond for a residence. In this last mentioned year, he acceded to the bishopric of Winchester by the death of Fox, and resigned that of Durham. To Winchester, however, he never went. That reverse of fortune which has exhibited him as an example of terror to the ambitious, was now approaching, and was accelerated by events, the consequences of which he foresaw, without the power of averting them. Henry was now agitated by a passion not to be controuled by the whispers of friendship, or the counsels of statesmen, and when the cardinal, whom he had appointed to forward his divorce from queen Catherine and his marriage with Anne Boleyn, appeared tardily to adhere to forms, or scrupulously to interpose advice, he determined to make him feel the weight of his resentment. It happened unfortunately for the cardinal that both the queen and her rival were his enemies, the queen from a suspicion that she never had a cordial friend in him, and Anne from a knowledge that he had secretly endeavoured to prevent her match with the king. But a minute detail of these transactions and intrigues belongs to history, in which they occupy a large space. It may suffice here to notice that the cardinal’s ruin, when once determined, was effected in the most sudden and rigorous manner, and probably without his previous knowledge of the violent measures that were to be taken.

, bishop of Exeter in queen Elizabeth’s reign', was born at Wigan in Lancashire, in 1535; he was nephew to the celebrated dean Nowell. He entered a student of Brasen-nose college, Oxford, in 1553, whence in 1555 he fled to his uncle and the other exiles in Germany. On Iris return in the- beginning of queen Elizabeth’s reign, he was made canon residentiary of Exeter, where he read a divinity lecture twice a week, and preached twice every Lord’s day; and in the time of the great plague, he only with one more remained in the city, preaching publicly as before, and comforting privately such as were infected with the disease. Besides his residentiaryship, he had the living of Spaxton in the diocese of Wells, and in 1575 became Warden of Manchester college. In 1579 he was consecrated bishop of Exeter, and, as he had been before esteemed a pious, painful, and skilful divine, he was now a vigilant and exemplary prelate. His character in this last respect excited some animosity, and a long string of accusations was presented against him to archbishop Parker, which Strype has recorded at length in his appendix to the life of that celebrated primate, all which bishop Woolton satisfactorily answered.

, an Englishman, eminent for learning and politics, was descended from a gentleman’s family by both parents, and was born at Boughton-hall in Kent, March ^0, 1568. The Wottons were of no inconsiderable distinction, having possessed this lordship for nearly three centuries. Sir Edward Wotton,“our statesman’s grandfather, was treasurer of Calais, and of the privycouncil to king Henry VIII. and was elder brother to the celebrated Dr. Nicholas Wotton, dean of Canterbury, the subject of our next article. Sir Robert Wotton, the father of these, was entrusted by king Edward i V. with the lieutenancy of Guisnes, and was knight-porter and comptroller of Calais; where he died and lies buried. Sir Henry’s elder brother, who was afterwards raised by king James J. to the peerage by the title of lore) Wotton, was in 1585 sent by queen Elizabeth ambassador to that monarch in Scotland; and Dr. Robertson speaks of him, as” a man, gay, well-bred, and entertaining; who excelled in all the exercises, for which James had a passion, amused the young king by relating the adventures which he had met with, and the'obseYvations h,e had made during a long residence in foreign countries; but under the veil of these superficial qualities,“Dr. Robertson adds, that” he concealed a dangerous and intriguing spirit. He soon grew in favour with James, and while he was seemingly attentive only to pleasure and diversions, he acquired influence over the public councils, to a degree, which was indecent for strangers to possess."

Sir Henry was the only son of the second marriage of his father Thomas Wotton, esq. with Eleanora, daughter of sir William Finch, of Eastwell in Kent (ancestor to lord Winchelsea), and widow of Robert Morton, of the same county, esq. He was educated first under private tutors, and then sent to Winchester-school whence, in 1584, he was removed to New- college in Oxford. Here he was entered as a gentleman-commoner, and had his chamber in Hart-hall adjoining; and, for his chamber-fellow, Richard Baker, his countryman, afterwards a knight, and author of the well known “Chronicle” which goes by his name. Wotton did not continue long there, but went to Queen’s-college, where he became well versed in logic Uid philosophy-, and, being distinguished for his wit, was solicited to write a tragedy for private acting in that society, The name of it was “Tancredo” and Walton relates, “that it was so interwoven with sentences, and for the method and exact personating those humours, passions, and dispositions, which he proposed to represent, so performed, that the gravest of the society declared^ he had in a slight employment given an early and solid testimony of his future abilities.” In 1588 he supplicated the congregation of regents, that he might be admitted to the reading of any of the books of Aristotle’s logic, that is, be admitted to the degree of bachelor of arts; but “whether he was admitted to that or any other degree doth not appear,” says Wood, ^from the university registers;“although Walton tells us, that about his 20th year he proceeded master of arts, and at that time read in Latin three lectures de oculo, on the blessing of sight, which he illustrated by some beautiful passages aud apt reflexions. In 1589 he lost his father, and was left with no other provision than a rent-charge of 100 marks a-year. Soon after, he left Oxford, betook himself to travel, and went into France, Germany, and Italy. He stayed but one year in France, and part of that at Geneva; where he became acquainted with Beza and Isaac Casaubon. Three years he spent in Germany, and five in Italy, where both in Rome, Venice, and Florence, he cultivated acquaintance with the most eminent men for learning and all manner of fine arts; for painting, sculpture, chemistry, and architecture; of all which he was an amateur and an excellent judge. After having spent nine years abroad, he returned to England highly accomplished, and with a great accumulation of knowledge of the countries through which he had passed. His wit and politeness so effectually recommended him to the earl of Essex that he first admitted him into his friendship, and afterwards made him one of his secretaries, the celebrated Mr. Henry Cuff being the other. (See Cuff.) He personally attended all the councils and employments of the earl, and continued with him till he was apprehended for high treason. Fearing now lest he might, from his intimate connexion, be involved in his patron’s ruin, he thought proper to retire, and was scarcely landed in France, when he heard that his master Essex was beheaded, and his friend Cuff hanged. He proceeded to Florence, and was received into great confidence by the grand duke of Tuscany. This place became the more agreeable to him, from his meeting with signor Vietta, a gentleman of Venice, with whom he had been formerly intimately acquainted, and who was now the grand duke’s secretary. It was during this retreat that Mr. Wotton drew up his” State of Christendom, or a most exact and curious discovery of many secret passages, and hidden myteries of the times." This was first printed, a thin fol. in 1657, and afterwards in 1677, with a small alteration in the title. It was here also that the grand duke having intercepted letters which discovered a design to take away the life of James VI. of Scotland, dispatched Wouon thither to give him notice of it. Wotton was on this account, as well as according to his instructions, to manage this affair with all possible secrecy: and therefore, having parted from the duke, he took the name and language of an Italian; and to avoid the line of English intelligence and danger, he posted into Norway, and from that country to Scotland, He found the king at Stirling, and was admitted to him under the name of Octavio Baldi. He delivered his message and his letters to the king in Italian: then, stepping up and whis^ pering to his majesty, he told him he was an Englishman, requested a more private conference with him, and that he might be concealed during his stay in Scotland. He spent about three months with the king, who was highly entertained with him, and then returned to Florence, where, after a few months, the news of queen Elizabeth’s death, and of king James’s accession to the crown of England, arriyep!.

Sir Henry Wotton then returned to England, and, as it seems, not sooner than welcome, for king James, finding, among other officers of the late queen, sir Edward, who was afterwards lord Wotton, asked him, “if _he knew one Henry Wotton, who had spent much time in foreign travel?” Sir Edward replied, that “he knew him well, and that he was his brother.” Then the king asking, “Where he then was” was answered, “at Venice, or Florence; but would soon be at Paris.” The king ordered him to be sent for, and to be brought privately to him; which being done, the king took him into his arms, and saluted him by the nanie of Octavio Baldi. Then he knighted him, and nominated him ambassador to the republic of Venice; whither he went, accompanied by sir Albertus Morton, his nephew, who was his secretary, and Mr. William Bedel, a man of great learning and wisdom, and afterwards bishop of Kilrnore in Ireland, who was his chaplain. He continued many years in king James’s favour, and indeed never entirely forfeited it, although he had once the misfortune to displease his majesty, by an apparently trifling circumstance. In proceeding as ambassador to Venice, he passed through Germany, and stayed some days at Augsburg; where, happening to spend a social evening with some ingenious and learned men, whom he had before known in his travels, one Christopher Flecamore requested him to write some sentence in his Album, a paper book which the German gentry used to carry about with them for that purpose. Sir Henry Wotton, consenting to the motion, took occasion from some incidental discourse of the company, to write a definition of an ambassador in these words: “Legatus est vir bonus peregre missus ad memiendum Reipublicae causa:” which Walton says he would have interpreted thus; “An ambassador is an honest man sent to lie abroad for the good of his country.” The word lie was the hinge on which this conceit turned, yet it was no conceit at all in Latin, and therefore could not bear the construction sir Henry, according to Walton, wished to have put upon it: so that when the Album fell afterwards into the hands of Caspar Scioppius (See Sciop­pjus), he printed it in his famous hook against king James, as a principle of the religion professed by that king, and his ambassador sir Henry Wotton; and in Venice it was presently after written in several glass windows, and spitefully declared to be sir Henry’s. This coming to the knowledge of king James, he apprehended it to be such an oversight, such weakness, or worse, that he expressed much anger against him; which caused sir Henry to write two apologies in Latin; one to Velserus at Augsburg, which was dispersed into the cities of Germany, and another to the king “de Gaspare Scioppio.” These gave such satisfaction that the king entirely forgave sir Henry, declaring publicly, that “he had commuted sufficiently for a greater offence.”

During the reign of Edward, the abilities of Wotton were exercised not only abroad, but also in his own country; as he held, for a short time, the distinguished office of principal secretary of state, to which he was appointed in 1549, but resigned it in 1550 to Cecil. He was one of the council who, on Oct. 6, 1549, seceded from the protector, and who addressed a memorial to the young king on the encroachments of that unfortunate nobleman. In 1551, he was sent ambassador to the emperor, in order to explain that no absolute assurance had ever been made to the lady Mary, in respect to the exercise of her religion, but that only a temporary connivance had been granted under the hope of her amendment. Mary had been threatened, as well as pressed, on the point of conformity, and she did not fail to represent in the most odious lights these proceedings to her kinsman Charles, who, by his ambassador, remonstrated to the English court on her behalf, and Edward, prevailed upon by his council, sent Wotton to continue a good correspondence with his imperial majesty. At the death of Edward, Wotton, sir William Pickering, and sir Thomas Chaloner, were ambassadors ifi France, whence they wrote to Mary on her accession to the throne, acknowledging her queen, and ceasing to act any further in their public character. But in this capacity she thought proper to continue Wotton, with whom she joined sir Anthony St. Leger.

From France the dean is said to have written to the queen in 1553, on the following subject. He dreamed that his nephew Thomas Wotton was inclined to be a party in such a project, as, if he were not suddenly prevented, would turn out both to the loss of his life, and the ruin of his family. Accordingly he resolved to use such a preventive, as might be of no inconvenience either to himself or his nephew. He therefore wrote to Mary, requesting that his nephew might be sent for out of Kent, and that he might be interrogated by the lords of the council in some such feigned speeches, as would give a colour to his commitment to a favourable prison. He added, that he would acquaint her majesty with the true reason of his request, when he should next become so happy as to see and speak to her. It was accordingly done as he desired, but whether he gave her majesty “the true reason,” we are not informed. The subject dwelling much on the dean’s mind, he might have had a dream, yet the whole was probably an ingenious precaution to prevent his nephew from being involved in Wyat’s rebellion (which broke out soon after), and which he was afraid might be the case, from the ancient friendship that had subsisted between the families of Wotton and Wyat.

The last important service Wotton performed in the reign of queen Mary was in 1557, when he detected the rebellious plot of Thomas Stafford, the, consequence of which was Stafford’s defeat and execution, and a declaration of war against France. At the queen’s death he was acting as one of the commissioners to treat of a peace between England, Spain, and France, and in this station queen Elizabeth retained him (having also appointed him a privy-counsellor), and after much negociation peace was concluded at Chateaif-Camhresis April 2, 1559. He was afterwards commissioned with lord Howard and sir Nicholas Throgmorton to receive from the French king the confirmation of the treaty. This peace, however, was of short duration. The ambitious proceedings of the French court in 1559, and the success of their arms against the Scotch protestants, were sufficient to excite the vigilance of Elizabeth. Her indignation at the claim of Mary (queen of Scots) to the English crown, a claim which the French hoped to establish, and the declining affairs of the reformers who solicited her assistance, at length determined her to send a powerful force to Scotland. In the event of this quarrel the French were obliged to capitulate, and commissioners were appointed to treat of peace. Those on the part of England were dean Wotton and sir William Cecil; on that of France, Mouluc bishop of Valence, and the Sieur de Randan. The interests of the English and French courts were soon adjusted; but to a formal treaty with the Scots, the French ambassador considered it derogatory from the dignity of their sovereign to accede. The redress of their grievances was, however, granted in the name of Francis and Mary, and accepted by the Scots, as an act of royal indulgence. And whatever concessions they obtained, whether in respect to their personal safety, or their public demands, the French ambassadors agreed to insert in the treaty with Elizabeth; so that they were sanctioned, though not with the name, yet with all the security of the most solemn negociation. The treaty was signed at Edinburgh, July 6, 1560.

, a man of taste and learning, was born Nov. 28, 1701, in the parish of St. Botolph, Aldersgate. His father, sir Daniei Wray, was a London citizen, who resided in Little Britain, made a considerable fortune in trade (as a soap-boiler), and purchased an estate in Essex, near Ingatestone, which his son possessed aftr r him. Sir Daniel served the office of sheriff for that county, and was knighted in 1708 on presenting a loyal address to queen Anne. His son was educated at the Charter-house, and was supposed in 1783 to have been the oldest survivor of any person educated there. In 1718 he went to Queen’s college, Cambridge, as a fellow commoner. He took his degree of B. A. in 1722, after which he made the tour of Italy, accompanied by John, earl of Morton, and Mr. King, the son of lord chancellor King, who inherited his title. How long he remained abroad between 1722 and 1728 is not precisely ascertained, except by the fact that a cast in bronze, by Pozzo, was taken of his profile, in 1726, at Home. It had this inscription upon the reverse, “Nil actum reputans, si quid superesset agendum,” which line is said to have been a portrait of his character, as he was in all his pursuits a man of uncommon diligence and perseverance. After his return from his travels, he became M.A.-in 1728, and was already so distinguished in philosophical attainments, that he was chosen a fellow of the Royal Society in March 1728-9. He resided however generally at Cambridge, though emigrating occasionally^ to London, till 1739, or 1740, in which latter year, January 1740-41, he was elected F. S. A. and was more habitually a resident in town. In 1737 commenced his acquaintance and friendship with the noble family of Yorke; and in 1745, Mr. Yorke, afterwards earl of Hardwicke, as teller of the exchequer, appointed Mr.Wray his deputy teller, in which office he continued until 1782, when his great punctuality and exactness in any business he undertook made the constant attendance of the office troublesome to him. He was an excellent critic in the English language; an accomplished judge of polite literature, of virtft, and the fine arts; and deservedly a member of most of our learned societies; he was also an elected trustee of the British Museum. He was one of the writers of the “Athenian Letters” published by the earl of Hardwicke; and in the first volume of the Archaeologia, p. 128, are printed “Notes on the walls of antient Rome,” communicated by him in 1756; and “Extracts from different Letters from Rome, giving an Account of the Discovery of a most beautiful Statue of Venus, dug up there 1761.” He died Dec. 29, 1783, in his eighty. second year, much regretted by his surviving friends, to whose esteem he was entitled by the many worthy and ingenious qualities. which he possessed. Those of his heart were as distinguished as those of his mind; the rules of religion, of virtue, and morality, having regulated his conduct from the beginning to the end of his days. He was married to a lady of merit equal to his own, the daughter of Barrel, esq. of Richmond. This lady died at Richmond, where Mr.Wray had a house, in May 1803. Mr. Wray left his library at her disposal and she, knowing his attachment to the Charter-house, made the governors an offer of it, which was thankfully accepted and a room was fitted up for its reception, and it is placed under the care of the master, preacher, head schoolmaster, and a librarian. The public at large, and particularly the friends of Mr. Wray, will soon be gratified by a memoir of him written by the lare George Hardinge, esq. intended for insertion in Mr. Nichols’s “Illustrations of Literature.” This memoir, of which fifty copies have already been printed for private distribution, abounds with interesting anecdotes and traits of character, and copious extracts from Mr. Wray’s correspondence, and two portraits, besides an engraving of the cameo.

sir.Christopher, that Louis XIV. had better taste, which queen Mary wished

Sir Christopher was succeeded in his estate by his son and only surviving child, Christopher Wren, esq. This gentleman was born Feb. 16, 1675 (the year St. Paul’s was founded), and was educated at Eton school and Pembroke hall, Cambridge. In 1694, sir Christopher procured him the office of deputy-clerk engrosser; but this preferment did not prevent him from making a tour through Holland, France, and Italy. On his return from the continent he was elected member of parliament for Windsor in 1712 and 1714. He died Aug. 24, 1747, aged seventy-two, and was buried in the church of Wroxhall, adjoining to his seat at Wroxhall in Warwickshire. He was a man very much esteemed, and was equally pious, learned, and amiable. He had made antiquity his particular study, well understood it, and was extremely communicative. He wrote and published in 1708, in 4to, a work entitled “Numismatum antiquorum sylloge, populis Graecis, municipiis et coloniis Romanis cusorum, ex chimeliarcho editoris.” This, which he dedicated to the Royal Society, contains representations of many curious Greek medallions in four plates, and two others of ancient inscriptions; these are followed by the legends of imperial coins in the large and middle size, from Julius Caesar to Aurelian, with their interpretations: and subjoined is an appendix of Syrian and Egyptian kings, and coins of cities, all collected by himself. He also collected with so much care and attention, as to leave scarcely any curiosity ungratifiecl, memoirs of the life of bishop Wren, Dr. Christopher Wren, dean of Windsor, and his illustrious father; with collections of records and original papers. These were published in fol. under the title of “Parentalia,” by his son Stephen, a physician, assisted by Mr. Ames, in 1750, and are illustrated by portraits and plates. Mr. Wren married twice; in May 1706 to Mary, daughter of Mr. Musard, jeweller to queen Anne, who died in 1712; he afterwards married in 1715 dame Constance, widow of sir Roger Burgoyne, bart. and daughter of sir Thomas Middleton, of Stansted Montfitchet, Essex, who died in 1734. By each marriage he had one sbn, Christopher, and Stephen. Christopher, the eldest, an eccentric humourist, was the poetical friend of lady Luxborough and Shenstone. Displeasing his father, all the unentailed estates were given from him to sir Roger Burgoyne, bart. son of sir Roger. Wroxall is still in the family, and owned by Christopher Wren, esq. now (1806) in the East Indies, who is the sixth Christopher Wren in succession from the father of sir Christopher.

He left a son, James Wright, known to dramatic antiquaries, as one of the earliest historians of the stage, and perhaps one of the first collectors of old plays after Cartwright, whbse collection was at Dulwich-college. His work on this subject, which is extremely scarce, is entitled “Historia Histrionica; an historical account of the English stage, shewing the ancient use, improvement, and perfection, of dramatic representations in this nation. In a dialogue of plays and players,” Lond. 1699, 8vo. It was-first brought forward by Oldys, who quoted it in his life of Alleyn the player in the Biographia Britannica, By Warburton’s recommendation it was prefixed to Dodsley’s “Old Plays,” but the preface has been omitted which Warton says is a sensible one, and certainly points out the only use of most old plays, 'as exhibiting the manners of the times. Wright wrote likewise “Country conversations, being an account of some discourses that happened on a visit to the country last summer, on divers subjects; chiefly, of the modern comedies, of drinking, of translated verse, of painting and painters, of poets and poetry,” Lond. 1694, 12mo. He appears also to have been a skilful antiquary, and had formed a very curious collection, which was unfortunately consumed in a fire in the Middle Temple in 1698. Among his Mss. was an excellent transcript of Leland’s “Itinerary,” of the age of queen Elizabeth, and consequently made before the present mutilations and corruptions. On this he had much correspondence with Hearne. His other works were, 1. “A poem, being an Essay on the present ruins of St. Paul’s cathedral,” Lond. 1663, 4to. 2. “History and Antiquities of the county of Rutland,” ibid. 1634, fol. soon followed by “Additions” in 1687, and “Farther Additions,” 1714. This is a work of much labour and research, although not perfect. '6. “A new der scription of the city of Paris, in two parts, out of the French,” ibid. 1687, 8vo. 4. “Verses anniversary to the venerable memory of his ever honoured father, &c.” 1690, 8vo. 5. “Monasticon Anglicanum, &c.” an accurate epitome in English of Dugdale’s “Monasticon,” ibid. 1693, fol. 6. “Three poems of St. Paul’s cathedral, viz. The Ruins (mentioned above), The re-building, The Choir,” 1697, fol. 7. “Phcenix Paulina, a poem on St. Paul’s cathedral,” 1709, 4to. 8. “Burley on the hill, a poem,” 4to, no date, but reprinted in his last additions to his Rutlandshire. Hearne, who knew and respected Wright, informs us, that he wrote strictures on Wood’s “Athenæ,” but that they remained in manuscript. Wright, a few years before his death, gave Hearne a complete catalogue of his works, which on application he had refused to Wood, “as an injudicious biographer.”

, a noted English mathematician, who flourished in the latter part of the sixteenth century and beginning of the seventeenth, is thus characterised in a Latin paper in the library of Gonvile and Caius college, Cambridge: “This year (1615) died at London, Edward Wright, of Garveston, in Norfolk, formerly a fellow of this college; a man respected by all for the integrity and simplicity of his manners, and also famous for his skill in the mathematical sciences; so that he was not undeservedly styled a most excellent mathematician by Richard Hackluyt, the author of an original treatise of our English navigations. What knowledge he had acquired in the science of mechanics, and how usefully he employed that knowledge to ths public as well as to private advantage, abundantly appear both from the writings he published, and from the many mechanical operations still extant, which are standing monuments of his great industry and ingenuity. He was the first undertaker of that difficult but useful work, by which a little river is brought from the town of Ware in apew canal, to supply the city of London with water but by the tricks of others he was hindered from completing the work he had begun. He was excellent both in contrivance and execution, nor was he inferior to the most ingenious mechanic in the making of instruments, either of brass or any other matter. To his invention is owing whatever advantage Hondius’s geographical charts have above others; for it was Wright who taught Jodocus Horn dius the method of constructing them, which wa.s till then unknown; but the ungrateful Hondius concealed the name of the true author, and arrogated the glory of the invention to hjmself. Of this fraudulent practice the good man could nqt help complaining, and justly enough, in the preface to his treati.se of the” Correction of Errors in the art of Navigation;“which he composed with excellent judgment and after long experience, to the great advancement of naval affairsi For the improvement of this art he was appointed mathematical lecturer by the East India company, and read lectures in the house of that worthy knight sir Thomas Smith, for which he had a yearly salary of fifty pounds, This office he discharged with great reputation, and much to the satisfaction of his hearers. He published in English a book on the doctrine of the sphere, and another concerning the construction of sun-dials. He also prefixed an ingenious preface to the learned Gilbert’s book on the loadstone. By these and other his writings, he has transmitted his fame to latest posterity. While he was yet a fellow of this college, he could not be concealed in his private study, but was called forth to the public business of the nation by the queen, about 1593. He was ordered to attend the earl of Cumberland in some maritime expeditions. One of these he has given a faithful account of, in the manner of a journal or ephemeris, to which he has prefixed an elegant hydrographical chart of his own contrivance. A little before his death he employed himself about an English translation of the book of logarithms, then lately discovered by lord Napier, a Scotchman, who had a great affection for him. This posthumous work of his- was published soon after by his only son Samuel Wright, who was also a scholar of this college. He had formed many other useful designs, but was hindered by death from bringing them to perfection. Of him it may truly be said, that he studied more to serve the public than himself; and though he was rich in fame, and in the promises of the great, yet he died poor, to tfie scandal of an ungrateful age.” So far the memoir; other particulars concerning him are as follow:

, of Barwell, Leicestershire, barrister at law, was elected recorder of Leicester in 1680; called by Writ, April 11, 1692, to take the degree of serjeant at law; knighted Dec. 30, 1696, and made king’s serjeant. On the refusal of the lords chief justices Holt and Treby, and Trevor the attorney-general, to accept the great seal, which was taken from lord Somers, it was delivered to sir Nathan, with the title of lord-keeper, May 21, 1700. As he was raised to this situation by the tories, so he seems to have acted in conformity to the views of that party. Burnet says, that many gentlemen of good estates and ancient families were put out of the commission of the peace by him, for no other visible reason but because they had gone in heartily to the revolution, and had continued zealous for king William; and, at the same time, men of no worth nor estate, and known to be ill-affected to queen Anne’s title, and to the protestant succession, were put in. He adds, that the lord-keeper was a “zealot to the party, and was become very exceptionable in all respects. Money, as was said, did every thing with him; only in his court, I never heard him charged for any thing but great slowness, by which the chancery was become one of the heaviest grievances of the nation.” The same author likewise says, that the lord-keeper “was sordidly covetous; and did not at all live suitable to that high post: he became extremely rich, yet I never heard him charged with bribery in his court.” One of the most remarkable events that happened while he was in office, was his sentence for dissolving the Savoy, July 13, 1702; and in the same year, Nov. 30, he reversed a decree of his great predecessor, lord Somers. Sir Nathan’s removal, however, which happened in May 1705, is said to have “been a great loss to the church.” He passed the remainder of his days in retirement, beloved and respected, at Chaldecot-Hall, in Warwicksbire,"wbere he died Aug. 4, 1721.

But his wit was not evanescent. We are told that he brought about the reformation by a bon mot, and precipitated the fall of Wolsey by a seasonable story. When the king was perplexed respecting his divorce from queen Catherine, which he affected to feel as a matter of conscience, sir Thomas exclaimed, Lord! that a man cannot repent him of his sin without the pope’s leave!“A truth thus wittily hinted was afterwards confirmed by the opinion of Cranrner and of the universities, and became a maxim of church and state. The story by which he promoted the fall of Wolsey has not descended to our time*; Lloyd merely says that when the king happened to be displeased with Wolsey,” sir Thomas ups with the story of the curs baiting the butcher’s dog, which contained the whole method of that great man’s ruin," alluding to the common report of Wolsey’s being the son of a butcher at Ipswich.

In the early state of the reformation, the clergy were discontented, because afraid of losing their valuable lands. “Butter the rooks nests,” said sir Thtfmas, “and they will never trouble you.” The meaning, not very obvious, was that the king should give the church lands to the great families, whose interest it would then be to prevent the reestablishment of popery. The wit, however, of this advice is more remarkable than the wisdom, for notwithstanding the robbery of the church, which has hept her poor ever since, popery was effectually re-established in queen Mary’s reign. The liberality of the only other bon 'mot recorded of sir Thomas may be questioned. One day he told the king that he had found out a living of 100l. a year more than enough, and prayed him to bestow it on him, and when the king answered that there was no such in England, sir Thomas mentioned a the provost-ship of Eaton, where a man hath his diet, his lodging, his horsemeat, his servant’s wages, his riding charge, and an hundred pounds per annum besides."

Amidst this prosperous career, he had the misfortune, like most of the eminent characters of this reign, to fall under the severe displeasure of the king, and was twice imprisoned, but for what offences his biographers are not agreed. Fuller says he had heard that he fell into disfavour about the business of queen Anne Bullen. Lloyd insinuates the same, and some have gone so far as to accuse him of a criminal connection with her, but all this is in part erroneous. From the oration which he delivered on his second trial, and which lord Orford has printed in his “Miscellaneous Antiquities,” he expressly imputes his first imprisonment to Charles Brandon, duke of Suffolk. “His first misfortune flowed from a court-cabal; the second from the villainy, jealousy, and false accusation of that wretch Bonner, bishop of London, whose clownish manners, lewd behaviour, want of religion, and malicious perversion of truth, sir Thomas paints with equal humour and asperity.” Bonner accused him of a treasonable correspondence with cardinal Pole, and this, with some treasonable expresssions concerning the king, formed the principal charges against him, which he repelled with great spirit, ease, and candour. The words which he was accused of having uttered were, "that the king should be cast out of. a cart’s a e;-and that by God’s blood, if he were

Lord Orford informs us that in Vertue’s manuscript collections he found that Vertue was acquainted with a Mr. Wyat, who lived in Charterhouse-yard, and was the representative descendant of that respectable family. In 1721, and at other times, Vertue says, at that gentleman’s house, he saw portraits of his ancestor for seven descents, and other pictures and ancient curiosities . Sir Thomas has usually been termed sir Thomas Wyat the elder, to distinguish him from sir Thomas Wyat, his son, who suffered death for high treason in the reign of queen Mary., His lady, according to Wood, was Elizabeth, daughter of Thomas Brooke, lord Cobham . His son left issue, by Jane his wife, daughter and co-heir of William Hawte of Bourne, knight, a son named George Wyat of Boxley in Kent, restored 13 Elizabeth.

, an English comic poet, eldest son of Daniel Wycherley, of Cleve, in Shropshire, esq. was born about 1640. At fifteen years. of age he was sent to France, in the western parts of which he resided, upon the banks of the Charante, where he was often admitted to the conversation of one of the most accomplished ladies of the court of France, madame de Montausier, celebrated by Voiture in his “Letters.” A little before the restoration of Charles II. he became a gentleman-commoner of Queen’s-college in Oxford, where he lived in the provost’s lodge, and was entered in the public library, under the title of “Philosophic Studiosus,” in July 1660. He left the university without being matriculated, or any degree conferred on him; having, according to Wood, been by Dr. Barlow, reconciled to the Protestant Religion, which he bad a little before deserted in his travels. He afterwards entered himself of the Middle Temple; but, making his first appearance in town in a reign when wit and gaiety were the favourite distinctions, he soon quitted the dry study of the law, and pursued things more agreeable to his own genius, as well as to the taste of the age. As nothing was likely to succeed better than dramatic performances, especially comedies, he applied himself to the writing of these and in about the space of ten years published four: “Love in a Wood, or St. James’s Park,” in 1672; “The Gentleman-Dancing-Master,” 1673; “Plain Dealer,” in 1678; and “Country-Wife,” in 1683. These were collected and printed together in 1712, 8vo.

On the death of king Edward, the queen sent a messenger to her brother earl Rivers, desiring him to assemble a body of troops in Wales, and with them to bring the young king immediately to London to be crowned; but this design was defeated by the intrigues of Richard duke of Gloucester, afterwards Richard III. who by treachery got possession of the earl’s person, as well as that of the young king, and next day earl Rivers, with lord Richard Gray, and sir Thomas Vaughan, was conveyed as a prisoner to the castle of Pontefract. They were all soon after beheaded by order of the usurper, and without any form of trial, on the very same day that lord Hastings was by the same order beheaded in the Tower of London.

Earl Rivers was at this time (1483) in the forty-first year of his age. He was without dispute one of the most accomplished noblemen of his time. Sir Thomas More asserts that “Vir haud facile discernas, manuve aut consilio promptior,” equally able to advise, and to execute in affairs of state. Lord Orford observes, that “the credit of his sister (the queen), the countenance and example of his prince, the boisterousness of the times, nothing softened, nothing roughened the mind of this amiable lord, who was as gallant as his luxurious brother-in-law, without his weaknesses; as brave as the heroes of either Rose, without their savageness; studious in the intervals of business, and devout after the manner of those whimsical times, when men challenged others whom they never saw, and went barefoot to visit shrines, in countries of which they scarce had a map.”

During the progress of the building, he established in form that society at Winchester which was to supply New college with its members. The charter of foundation is dated Oct. 20, 1382, and the college named Seinee Marie College of Wynchestrea. The year after New college was finished he began this other upon the scite where stood the school at which he received his early education. This, likewise, was completed in six years, with a magnificence scarcely inferior to that of New college, and was opened for the reception of its intended inhabitants, March 28, 1393. The society resembles that of his other institution, consisting of a warden, seventy scholars, to be instructed in grammatical learning, ten secular priests, perpetual fellows, three priests, chaplains, three clerks, and sixteen choristers: and for the instruction of the scholars, a schoolmaster, and an undermaster or usher. The founder of Queen’s college, by his twelve fellows, and seventy scholars, intended to allude to the apostles and disciples. The historian of Winchester informs us that the same design entered into the contemplation of Wykeham. The warden and ten priests represented the apostles, with the omission of Judas. The head master and second master, with the seventy scholars, denoted the seventy-two disciples, as in the vulgate, for the English bible, which is translated from the Greek, has only seventy the three chaplains, and three inferior clerks marked the six faithful deacons Nicholas; one of the number, having apostatized, has therefore no representative; and the sixteen choristers represented the four greater, and the twelve minor prophets.

, an eminent statesman, chancellor of the exchequer in the reign of queen Anne, was descended from a very ancient family, which derives its descent from Ailwardus, an eminent Saxon, in the county of Norfolk, soon after the Norman conquest, who being possessed of lands in Wymondham, or Wyndham, in that county, assumed his surname thence. Sir John Wyndham, who was knighted at the coronation of king Edward VI. had the estate of Orchard, in the county of Somerset, in right of his wife, Elizabeth, daughter and co-heir of John Sydenham, of Orchard, esq. His great grandson John married Catharine, daughter of Robert Hopton, esq. sister and co-heir to Ralph lord Hopton, by whom he had issue sir William Wyndham, advanced to the dignity of a baronet by king Charles II. whose eldest son, Edward, married Catharine, daughter of sir William Levison Gower, bart. and by that lady had one daughter, Jane, wife of sir Richard Grosvenor, of Eton, in Cheshire, bart. and an only son, the subject of this article, who was born about 1687; and upon the decease of his father, while he was very young, succeeded to the title and estate. He was educated at first at Eton school, and thence removed to Christ Church, Oxford, where his excellent genius soon discovered itself, and afterwards received great advantage from his travels into foreign countries. Upon his return to England he was chosen knight of the shire for the county of Somerset, in which station he served in the three last parliaments of queen Anne, and all the subsequent ones till his death. This public scene of action soon called forth his eminent abilities, and placed him in so conspicuous a point of light, that, after the change of the ministry under that queen in the latter end of 1710, he was first appointed master of her majesty’s hart and buck hounds, then secretary at war, and at last, about August 1713, was advanced to the important post of chancellor of the exchequer. In this station he had an opportunity of appearing in his judicial capacity in a cause of Dr/Hooper, bishop of Bath and Wells, in which he gave sentence, and at the same time explained the grounds of it with a perspicuity, force of reasoning, and extent of knowledge worthy the most experienced judge. In May the year following he brought into the House of Commons, and carried successfully through it, the “Bvll to prevent tae growth of schism, and for the future security of the Church of England,” &c. and was appointed to carry it up to the House of Lords, where also it passed. Upon the breach between the earl of Oxford, lord high treasurer, and lord Bolidgbroke, secretary of state, in July 1714, sir William adhered to the interests of the latter.

Upon the death of (jueen Anne, on the 1st of August 1714, he signed with others the proclamation of his majesty king George I. and on the 13th of that month seconded a motion made in the House of Commons by Horatio Walpole, esq. for the payment of the arrears due to the Hanoverian troops in the English service. However, in October following he was removed from his post of chancellor of the exchequer, which was conferred upon sir Richard Onslow. In the next parliament, which met on the 17th of March 1714-15, he appeared very vigorous in opposition to the measures of the administration, and in defence of the peace of Utrecht; and on the 6th of April made a motion, that the House would appoint a day to take into consideration his majesty’s proclamation of the 15th of January, for calling a new parliament, which reflected on the conduct of the last ministry of queen Anne, and which he represented as unprecedented and unwarrantable, and even of dangerous consequence to the very being of parliament; expressions which gave such offence to the majority of the house, that he was ordered to receive a reprimand from the speaker. He spake likewise in favour of the duke of Orrnond and the earls of Oxford and Strafford, when they were impeached in that house. But, upon the breaking out of the rebellion in Scotland under the earl of Mar, in August 1715, sir William. fell under suspicion; on which account he was seized oil the 21st of September at his house at Orchard Wyndham, in Somersetshire, by colonel Huske, and one of his majesty’s messengers; from whom making an escape, a proclamation was issued out for his apprehension. Soon after this he surrendered himseif to the government; and, being examined by the privy council, was committed to the Tower, but was never brought to a trial.

, commonly called the Apostle of the Indies, was born April 7, 1506, in Navarre, at the castle of Xavier. His father, Don John de Jasso, was one of the chief counsellors of state to John III. king of Navarre. Among their numerous family of children, of which Francis was the youngest, those that were elder bore the surname of Azpilcueta, the younger that of Xavier. Francis was sent to the university of Paris, in the eighteenth year of his age. He was afterwards admitted master of arts, and tauglit philosophy in the college of Beauvais, with an intention of entering the society of the Sorbonne; but having formed a friendship with Ignatius Loyola, he renounced all establishments, and became one of his first disciples. Xavier then went to Italy, where he attended the sick at the hospital of incurables at Venice, and was ordained priest. Some time after, John III. king of Portugal, having applied to St. Ignatius for some missionaries to preach the gospel in the East Indies, Xavier was chosen for that purpose, who, embarking at Lisbon, April 7, 1541, arrived at Goa, May 6, 1542. In a short time he spread the knowledge of the Christian religion, or, to speak more properly, of the Romish system, over a great part of the continent, and in several of the islands of that remote region. Thence in 1549 he passed into Japan, and laid there, with amazing rapidity, the foundation 'of the famous church which flourished during so many years in that vast empire. His indefatigable zeal prompted him to attempt the conversion of the Chinese, and with this view he embarked for that extensive and powerful kingdom, but died on an island in sight of China, Dec. 2, 1552. The body of this missionary lies interred at Goa, where it is worshipped with the highest marks of devotion. There is also a magnificent church at Cotati dedicated to Xavier, to whom the inhabitants of the Portuguese settlements pay the most devout tribute of veneration and worship. In 1747, the late king of Portugal obtained for Xavier, or rather for his memory, the title of protector of the Indies, from Benedict XIV. There are two lives of this saint, the one by Tursellinus, and the other by Bouhours, but the latter is little more than a translation from Latin into French of the former, dressed out in a more elegant manner. They both contain the miracles ascribed to this saint, which are among the most absurd and incredible in the annals of superstition. For this, however, Xavier, who appears to have been only a zealous enthusiast, ought not to be censured. He claims no miracles for himself, nor were any such heard of for many years after his death; on the contrary, in his correspondence with his friends, during his mission, he not only makes no mention of miracles, but disclaims all supernatural assistance. For the miracles, therefore, his biographers must be accountable, and we know of no evidence they have produced in confirmation of them. The life of Xavier is not unknown in this country. No less a person than our celebrated poet Dryden published a translation of Bouhours’s Life of Xavier, in 1688, in consequence qf the queen of James II. having, when she solicited a son, recommended herself to Xavier as her patron saint. Besides this, a Wesleyan preacher published, in 1764, anabridgment of Bouhours, as if he had intended to assist bishop Lavington in proving the alliance between the enthusiasm of the methodists and papists. Xavier’s Letters were published at Paris, 1631, 8vo, with some lesser works ascribed to him.

, an eminent statesman and patron of literature, was born in 1437, at Torrelaguna, in Old Castille, and was the son of Alphonso de Cimeros de Ximenes, procurator of that city. He was educated for the church, at Alcala and Salamanca, and then went to Rome, but having been robbed on his journey home, brought nothing back with him, except a bull for the first prebend which should be vacant. This the archbishop of Toledo refused to grant, and confined him in the tower of Uceda, where it is said a priest, who had long been prisoner there, foretold to him that he should, one day, be archbishop of Toledo. Having recovered his liberty, he obtained a benefice in the diocese of Siguenza, and cardinal Gonsalez de Mendoza, who was bishop there, made him his grand vicar. Ximenes entered soon after among the Franciscans of Toledo, and took the vows; but finding himself embarrassed by visits, he retired to a solitude called Castauel, where he studied the Oriental languages and divinity. On his return to Toledo, queen Isabella of Castille appointed him her confessor, and nominated him to the archbishopric of Toledo, 14.95, without his knowledge. When Ximenes received the bulls from the hand of this princess, he only kissed them, returned them to her, unopened, saying, “Madam, these letters are not addressed to me,” and went immediately back to his convent at Castanel, being determined not to accept the archbishopric. The queen was much pleased with this refusal; but when Ximenes still persisted in his refusal, an express command from the pope became necessary to overcome his resolution. Nor would he even then yield but upon the following conditions: “That he should never quit his church of Toledo; that no pension should be charged on his archbishopric (one of the richest in the world); and that no infringement of the privileges and immunities of his church should ever be attempted.” He took possession of it in 1498, being received with unusual magnificence at Toledo. This prelate’s first care was to provide for the poor, visit the churches and hospitals, and clear his diocese from usurers and licentious houses. Those judges who neglected their duty, he degraded, supplying their places with persons whose probity and disinterestedness were known to him. He held a synod afterwards at Alcala, and another at Talavera, where he made very prudent regulations for the clergy of his diocese, and laboured at the same time to reform the Franciscans throughout Castille and Arragon, in which he happily succeeded, notwithstanding the obstacles he had to encounter. Ximenes established a celebrated university at Alcala, and founded there in 1499, the famous college of St. Ildephonsus, built by Peter Gumiel, one of the best architects of that time. Three years after he undertook the great plan of a Polyglot Bible, for the execution of which he invited many learned men from Alcala to Toledo, who were skilled in Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Arabic, and other languages necessary for the perfect understanding the holy scriptures. This Bible, though began in 1502, was not printed till 1517, 6 vols. folio, at Alcala. It contains the Hebrew text of the Bible, the version of the LXX. with a literal translation, that of St. Jerome, and the Chaldee paraphrases of Onkelos on the Pentateuch only. In the original preface, addressed to pope Leo X. the learned archbishop says, “It is doing great service to the church to publish the scriptures in their original language, both because no translation cati give a perfect idea of the original, and because, according to the opinion of the holy fathers, we should refer to the Hebrew text for the Old Testament, and to the Greek for the New Testament.” The work was above fifteen years in finishing. Ximenes himself assisted in it with great assiduity, and paid the whole expence, which amounted to an immense sum. He purchased seven Hebrew copies, that cost four thousand crowns, and gave vast prices for ancient Mss. To the above-mentioned Bible, which is called the Polyglot of Ximenes, he added a dictionary of the Hebrew and Chaldee words in the Bible. In 1507 pope Julius II. gave him a cardinal’s hat; and Ferdinand the catholic entrusted him with the administration of state affairs, from which moment cardinal Ximenes became the soul of all that was done in Spain. He began his ministry by delivering the people from an oppressive tax, which had been continued on account of the war of Grenada; and he laboured so zealously and successfully in the conversion of the Mahometans, that he made near three thousand proselytes, among whom was the prince of the blood royal of Grenada. This great multitude he baptized in a spacious square, awd ordering all the copies of the Koran to be brought thither, set them on fire; which memorable day was afterwarda kept as a festival in Spain. Cardinal Ximenes extended Ferdinand’s dominion over the Moors, 1509, by the conquest of Oran, a city in the kingdom of Algiers. He undertook this conquest at his own expence, and marched himself at the head of the Spanish army in his pontifical habit, accompanied by a great number of ecclesiastics and monks, and at his return was met within four leagues of Seville by Ferdinand, who alighted to embrace him. Foreseeing afterwards an uncommon dearth, he ordered public granaries to be built at Toledo, Alcala, and Torrelaguna, and stored them with corn at his own cost; which made him so generally beloved, that his eulogy was engraved in the senate-house at Toledo, and in the public square, to perpetuate the memory of this noble action. King Ferdinand dying in 1516, appointed him regent of his dominions, and the archduke Charles (afterwards the emperor Charles V.) confirmed this appointment. No sooner was cardinal Ximenes established in the regency, than he became intent on exerting his authority. He introduced a reformation among the officers of the supreme council, and those of the court, ordered the judges to repress all extortions of the rich and of the nobility, and dismissed prince Ferdinand’s two favourites. These changes excited murmurs among the grandees, and some officer’s asked the cardinal, by what authority he thus acted? Ximenes immediately showed them the soldiers who composed his common guard, and replied, that his power consisted in their strength; then shaking his cord of St. Francis, said, “This suffices me to quell my rebellious subjects.” At the same time he ordered the cannon, which he kept behind his palace, to be fired, and concluded with these words: “Haec est ratio ultima regis;” i. e. This is the decisive argument of kings. He opposed the reformation of the inquisition; devoted himself, with indefatigable ardour, to the affairs of the church and state; and omitted nothing that he thought could contribute to the glory of religion, and the advantage of his sovereigns. At length, after having governed Spain twenty -two years, in the reigns of Ferdinand, Isabella, Jane, Philip, and Charles of Austria, he died November 8, 1517, as some think, by poison, in the eighty-first year of his age. His remains were interred in the college of Ildephonsus, at Alcala, where his tomb may be seen. This cardinal had settled several excellent foundations; among others, two magnificent female convents; one for the religious education of a great many young ladies of high rank, but destitute of fortune the other to be an asylum; for such poor maidens as should be found to have a real call to the monastic life. He also founded a chapel in his cathedral for the performance of divine service according to the Mozarabic rites. If we add the fountain of springwater, which he conveyed to the town of Torrelaguna, for public use, to the other sums he expended there, it will appear that he laid out nearly a million in that one place.

, a divine and poet, the sixth son of Mr. John Yalden, of Sussex, was born at Exeter in 1671. Having been educated in the grammar-school belonging to Magdalen college, Oxford, he was, in 1690, at the age of nineteen, admitted commoner of Magdalen Hall, under the tuition of Josiah Pullen, a man whose name is still remembered in the university. He became next year one of the scholars of Magdalen college, where he was distinguished by a declamation, which Dr. Hough, the president, happening to attend, thought too good to be the speaker’s. Some time after, the doctor, finding him a little irregularly busy in the library, set him an exercise, for punishment; and, that he might not be deceived by any artifice, locked the door. Yalden, as it happened, had been latelyreading on the subject given, and produced with little difficulty a composition which so pleased the president that he told him his former suspicions, and promised to favour him. Among his contemporaries in the college were Addison and Sacheverell, men who were in those times friends, and who both adopted Yalden to their intimacy. Yalden continued throughout his life to think, as probably he thought at first, yet did not lose the friendship of Addison. When Namur was taken by king William, Yalden made an ode . He wrote another poem, on the death of the duke of Gloucester. In 1700 he became fellow of the college, and next year entering into orders, was presented by the society with the living of Willoughby, in Warwickshire, consistent with his fellowship, and chosen lecturer of moral philosophy, a very honourable office. On the accession of queen Anne he wrote another poem; and is said, by the author of the “Biographia,” to have declared himself one of the party who had the distinction of high-churchmen. In 1706 he was received into the family of the duke of Beaufort. Next year he became D. D. and soon after he resigned his fellowship and lecture; and, as a token of his gratitude, gave the college a picture of their founder. The duke made him rector of Chalton and Cleanville, two adjoining towns and benefices in Hertfordshire; and he had the prebends, or sinecures, of Deans, Hains, and Pendles, in Devonshire. In 1713 he was chosen preacher of Bridewell Hospital, upon the resignation of Dr. Atterbury. From this time he seems to have led a quiet and inoffensive life, till the clamour was raised about Atterbury’s plot. Every loyal eye was on the watch for abettors or partakers of the horrid conspiracy; and Dr. Yalden, having some acquaintance with the bishop, and being familiarly conversant with Kelly his secretary, fell under suspicion, and was taken into custody. Upon his examination he was charged with a dangerous correspondence with Kelly. The correspondence he acknowledged; but maintained that it had no treasonable tendency. His papers were seized; but nothing was found that could fix a crime upon him, except two words in his pocket-book, f< thorough- paced doctrine.“This expression the imagination of his examiners had impregnated with treason; and the doctor was enjoined to explain them. Thus pressed, he told them that the words had lain unheeded in his pocket-book from the time of queen Anne, and 'that he was ashamed to give an account of them; but the truth was, that he had gratified his curiosity one day by hearing Daniel Burgess in the pulpit, and these words were a memorial hint of a remarkable sentence by which he warned his congregation to” beware of thorough-paced doctrine, that doctrine, which, coming in at one ear, paces through the head, and goes out at the other.“Nothing worse than this appearing in his papers, and no evidence arising against him, he was set at liberty. It will not be supposed that a man of this character attained high dignities in the church; but he still retained the friendship, and frequented the conversation of a very numerous and splendid body of acquaintance. He died July 16, 1736, in the sixty-sixth year of his age. Of his poems which have been admitted into Dr. Johnson’s collection, his” Hymn to Darkness“seems to be his best performance, and is, for the most part, imagined with great vigour, and expressed with great propriety. His” Hymn to Light" is not equal to the other. On his other poems it is sufficient to say that they deserve perusal, though they are not always exactly polished, though the rhymes are sometimes very ill sorted, and though his faults seem rather the omissions of idleness than the negligences of enthusiasm.

His lordship through life was attentive to literature, and produced several useful works, besides the assistance which he rendered on various occasions to authors who have acknowledged their obligations to him. On the death of queen Caroline, in 1738, he inserted a poem amongst the Cambridge verses printed on that occasion. Whilst a member of the university of Cambridge, he engaged with several friends in a work similar to the celebrated Travels of Anacharsis into Greece, by Monsieur Barthelemi. It was entitled “Athenian Letters; or the Epistolary Correspondence of an Agent of the Kin r of Persia residing at Athens during the Peloponnesian War,” and consisted of letters supposed to have been written by contemporaries of Socrates, Pericles, and Plato. A few copies were printed in 1741 by Bettenbam, and in 1782 a hundred copies were reprinted; but still the work was unknown to the public at large. At length, an elegant, correct, and authenticated edition, under the auspices of the present earl of Hardwicke, was published in 1798, in two volumes, 4to, and an advertisement prefixed to the first volume, attributes its having been so long kept from the public to an ingenuous diffidence which forbad the authors of it, most of them extremely young, to obtrude on the notice of the world what they had considered merely as a preparatory trial of their strength, and as the best method of imprinting on their own minds some of the immediate subjects of their academical studies. The friends who assisted in this publication were, the hon. Charles Yorke, afterwards baron Morden, who died in 1770; Dr. Rooke, master of Christ’s college, Cambridge; Dr. Green, afterwards bishop of Lincoln; Daniel Wray, esq., the rev. Mr. Heaton, of Bene't college; Dr. Heberden, Henry Coventry, esq., the rev. Mr. Laury, Mrs. Catherine Talbot, Dr. Birch, and Dr. Salter.

, a very celebrated and popular English poet, was born at Upham, near Winchester, in June 1681. He was the son of Edward Young, at that time fellow of Winchester college, and rector of Upham: who was the son of John Young of Woodhay, in Berkshire, styled by W T ood, gentleman. In September 1682 the poet’s father was collated to the prebend of Gillingham Minor, in the church of Sarum, by bishop Ward. When Ward’s faculties were impaire'd by age, his duties were necessarily performed by others. We learn from Wood, that at a visitation of bishop Sprat, July 12, 1686, the prebendary preached a Latin sermon, afterwards published, with which the bishop was so pleased, that he told the chapter he was concerned to find the preacher had one of the worst prebends in their church. Some time after this, in consequence of his merit and reputation, and of the interest of lord Bradford, to whom, in 1702, he dedicated two volumes of sermons, he was appointed chaplain to king William and queen Mary, and preferred to the, deanery of Salisbury, where he died in 1705, in the sixtythird of his age.

His first poetical flight was when queen Anne added twelve to the number of peers in one day. In order to reconcile the people to one at least of the new lords, Young published in 1712 “An Epistle to the Right Hon. George Lord Lansdowne.” in which his intentions are said to have been of the ambitious kind; but, whatever its intentions or merits, it is one of those of which he afterwards became ashamed, and rejected it from the collected edition of his works, He also declined republishing the recommendatory verses which he prefixed to Addison’s “Cato” in 1713. In the same' year appeared Young’s “Poem on the Last Day,” which is said to have been finished as early as 1710, before he was thirty, for. part of it is printed in the “Tatler.” It was inscribed to the queen, in a dedication, the complexion of which being political, he might have his reasons for dropping it in the subsequent edition of his works. From some lines of Swift’s it has been thought that Young was at this time a pensioned writer at court:

and we have seen already, that either prudence, or more mature consideration, induced him to suppress a considerable part of what he had published. Before the queen’s death appeared his “Force of Religion or,Vanquished Love,” a poem founded on the execution of lady Jane Grey and her husband lord Guilford, This was ushered in by a flattering dedication to the countess of Salisbury, which he afterwards omitted, as he did soon after his extravagant panegyric on king George I.

, queen of Palmyra, and one of the most illustrious women that have swayed the sceptre, declared herself to be descended from the Ptolemies and Cleopatras. She was instructed in the sciences by the celebrated Longinus, and made such progress, that she spoke the Egyptian tongue in perfection, as well as the Greek. She also understood the Latin, although she scrupled to speak it. She protected learned men; and was so well acquainted with the history of Egypt, and that of the East, that she wrote an epitome of it. This princess had also read the Greek and Roman history, and was justly admired for her beauty, chastity,-sobriety, and extraordinary courage. She married Odenatus, a Saracen prince, and contributed greatly to the most signal victories he gained over the Persians, which preserved the East to the Romans, when, after the taking of Valerian, it was highly probable that Sapr would dispossess them of all that country. Gallienus, in return for such important services, declared her Augusta, and, in the year 264, created Odenatus emperor. After her husband’s death, Zenobia reigwed with great bravery and glory; for, her sons Herennianus and Timor laus, on account of their tender age, had only the name and ornaments of emperor. She preserved the provinces that had been under the obedience of Odenatus, conquered Egypt, and was preparing to make other conquests, when the emperor Aurelian made war against her; and, having gained two battles, besieged her in Palmyra, where r!enobia defended herself with great bravery; but at length, finding that the city would be obliged to surrender, she quitted it privately; but the emperor, who had notice of her escape, caused her to be pursued with such diligence, that she was overtaken just as she got into a boat to cross the Euphrates. This happened in the year 272. Aurelian spared her life, although he made her serve to adorn his triumph, and gave her a country-house near Rome, where she spent the remainder of her life in tranquillity with her children. Her daughters formed noble alliances, and her race was not extinct in the fifth century. All histonsnl bestow the most magnificent praises on this princess; and yet they suspect her of having consented that Maeonius should assassinate Odenatus, her husband, for shewing [ess fondness for her sons than for Herod, his son by another wife. She has also been censured for protecting Paulus Samosatenus, who had been condemned in the council of Antioch, and by that means preventing his being driven from his church so long as she reigned. But P. Jouve, who published her Life, 1753, 12mo, endeavours, not unsuccessfully, to clear her from all these imputations. She must be distinguished from Zenobia, wife of Hhadamistus, king of Iberia, who fled from the Armenians, and took her with him. This princess being near the time of her delivery, begged Rhadamistus to kill her. He reluctantly yielded to Zenobia’s earnest entreaties, and wounded her with a sword; but she was found by some shepherds, who saved her life, in the year 51. Zenobia being afterwards conducted to Tiridates, he ordered her to be treated as a queen.

, an excellent enamel painter, was born at Dresden about 1684, and came to England in 1706, where he studied under Boit, and not only surpassed him, but rivalled Petitot. For a great number of years Zincke had as much business as he could execute; and when at last he raised his price from twenty to /thirty guineas, it was occasioned by his desire of lessening fus fatigue; for no man, so superior in his profession, was less intoxicated with vanity. He was particularly patronized by George II. and his queen, and was appointed cabinet-painter to Frederick, prince of Wales. Her late foyal highness, the princess Amelia, had ten portraits of the royal family by him of a larger than his usual size. These she presented in 1783 to the prince of Wales, now Prince Regent. William, duke of Cumberland, bought several of his best works, particularly his beautiful copy of Dr. Mead’s queen of Scots by Isaac Oliver.

, an eminent painter, and brother of the preceding, was born in 1543, and carried to the Jubilee at Rome in 1550; when he was placed under his brother Taddeo, then in high reputation. He afterwards set up for a master -painter* and finished many of his brother’s pieces. Pope Gregory XIII. employed him; when Zncchero, having a difference with some of his officers, drew a picture of Slander, afterwards engraved by Corneliu^ Cort, in which he represented those who had offended him with ass’s ears. He exposed it publicly over the door of St. Luke’s chnrch; but was obliged to leave Rome, in order to avoid the Pope’s indignation. He worked in France for the cardinal of Lorrain, and in the Escurial for Philip II. without giving content to either the one or the other. He was more fortunate in England, where he drew the picture of queen Elizabeth, and of some other great personages, which gave great satisfaction. At last, returning to Italy, and having worked some time in Venice, Pope Gregory recalled and pardoned him. Soon after, he set up the academy of painting, by virtue of a brief obtained from this pope; of which being chosen the first president himself, he built a noble apartment for their 4 meeting. Hewent afterwards to Venice, to print some books he had written on painting thence passed on to Savoy and, in a journey to Loretto, died at Ancona in 1616. He differed but little from his brother in his style and manner of painting; though in sculpture and architecture he was far more excellent.