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

This small 12mo volume the author entitled “Museum Tradescantianum, or a collection of rarities, preserved at South Lambeth, near London, by John Tradescant,” 1656, dedicated to the college of physicians. It contains lists of his birds, quadrupeds, fish, shells, insects, minerals, fruits, artificial and miscellaneous curiosities, war instruments, habits, utensils, coins, and medals. These are followed by a catalogue, in English and Latin, of the plants of his garden, and a list of his benefactors. The reader may see a curious account of the remains of this garden, drawn up in 1749, by the late sir William Watson, and printed in the 46th volume of the Philosophical Transactions, and many other particulars in our authorities. Prefixed to the “Museum Tradescantianum” were the prints of both father and son, which, from the circumstance of being engraved by Hollar, has unfortunately rendered the book well known to the collectors of prints, by whom most of the copies have been plundered of the impressions.

In what year the elder Tradescant died is uncertain, though it seems to have happened most probably in 1652. The son inherited the museum, and bequeathed it by a deed of gift to Mr. Ashmole, who lodged in Tradescant’s house. (See Ashmole.) It afterwards becoming part of the Ashmolean museum, the name of Tradescant was sunk. John, the son, died in 1662, and was buried April 25 of that year. Besides the prints prefixed to the “Museum Tradescantianum,” there are several portraits of the Tradescant family in the Ashmolean Museum, both male and female, esteemed good; but there are no dates to the pictures, nor any painter’s name or mark. John’s widow erected a monument to the family in Lambeth church-yard, in 1662, which was much injured by time; but two fine drawings of it, happily preserved in the Pepysian library, came in aid of the mutilated parts, and in 1773 it was repaired by a public subscription.

, a learned divine at the period of the reformation, was supposed by Wood to have been born in Cornwall, or originally descended from an ancient family of his name in that county. This supposition seems to have been suggested to Wood by Fuller, who in his “Worthies” of Cornwall says, “The first syllable of his name, and what is added thereto by my author (Bale) parentum stemmatc clarus, and the sameness of his name with an ancient family in this country, are a three-fold cable to draw my belief that he was this countryman.” He was educated at Oxford, either in Exeter college, or Hart hall, where he attained some eminence in the Latin and Greek tongues. He afterwards, as was usual with scholars desirous of extensive improvement, travelled into Germany and Italy, and heard the lectures of the eminent men of that time. On his return to England he entered into holy orders, and was made keeper of the king’s library, which Leland’s researches had greatly enriched in the time of Henry VIII. King Edward VI. who gave Traheron this appointment with a salary of twenty marks, finding him otherwise a man of great merit, conferred on him the deanery of Chichester in 1551, as Wood says, but according to Le Neve, in 1553. This, on the accession of queen Mary in the same year, he lost, as well as his other preferments, and joined the other English exiles in Germany, where, at Francfort, he became their divinity-reader, particularly on the beginning of the Gospel of St. John, against the Arians, or, as Strype says, “against the wicked enterprises of the new start-up Arians in England.” While here he appears to have written all his works; 1. “Paraeresis, lib. 1.” addressed to his brother Thomas, persuading him to embrace the reformed religion. 2. “Carmina in mortem Henrici Dudlaei.” 3. “Analysis Scoparum Johannis Cochlaei.” 4. “Exposition of a part of St. John’s Gospel made in sundry readings in the English congregation against the Arians,” 1558, 8vo, 2d edition. 5. “Exposition on the fourth chapter of St. John’s Revelations, which treateth of the providence of God, made before his countrymen in Germany,” 1557, 8vo, reprinted 1577 and 1583. 6. “An answer made by Bar. Traheron to a private Papist,” &c. 1558, 8vo. 7. “Treatise of Repentance,” &c. Wood says he also published a translation of Vigo’s “Surgery,” and Vigo’s “Little practice.” When he died is uncertain. Wood, in his first edition, says he returned after queen Mary’s death, and was restored to all he had lost, and was living in 1662; but in his second edition he omits this, and quotes Holinshed, who gives it as a report that he died abroad in the latter end of Mary’s reign.

, an eminent divine of the church of Scotland, was descended of an ancient family that had been in possession of the estate of Blebo, in the county of Fife, from the time of Walter Traill, archbishop of St. Andrew’s, 1385, who, as some say, purchased it; but Keith calls him “a son of the laird of Blebo,” by which it would appear that the estate had been in the family before the archbishop’s time. This prelate had been a canon of St. Andrew’s, and pursued his studies on the continent, where he was honoured with the degree of doctor both of civil and canon law, and when at Rome became referendary to pope Clement VIL This pontiff had a very high opinion of him, and when the see of St. Andrew’s became vacant, preferred him to it by his authority, without any election. So excellent indeed was his character in that comparatively dark age, that even Buchanan speaks in his praise. He built the castle of St. Andrew’s, the scene afterwards of many remarkable transactions in the history of the church of Scotland, and died in 14-01. He was buried in the cathedral, near to the high altar, with an inscription characteristic of the encomiastic genius of the times:

He is said to have given the estate of Blebo to a nephew, but we are unable to trace his descendants until we arrive at the sixteenth century, when we meet with Andrew Traill, the great grandfather of our author, who was a younger brother of the family of Blebo. Following the profession of a soldier, he rose to the rank of a colonel, and was for some time in the service of the city of Bruges, and other towns in Flanders, in the wars which they carried on in defence of their liberties, against Philip II. of Spain. When he left this service his arrears amounted to 2,700l. for which he received a bond secured upon the property of the States. He then served under the king of Navarre, afterwards Henry IV. of France, in the civil wars of that kingdom, and had occasion to do that prince considerable service in taking a town by stratagem. Upon his return to Britain he was made a gentleman of prince Henry’s privychamber. When he died is not known; but he had a son, James Traill, who endeavoured to recover the sum due to him by the cities of Flanders; and, upon a petition to king James, which was referred to sir Harry Martin, judge of the admiralty, he obtained a warrant to arrest a ship belonging to the city of Bruges, which was done accordingly. But the duke of Buckingham being gained by the adverse party, the ship was soon released; nor could he ever afterwards recover any part of the debt. This circumstance, together with the expence of the prosecution, obliged him to dispose of a small estate in the parish of Deninno, in the county of Fife.

The son of this James Traill, Robert, the father of the immediate subject of this article, was minister, first of Ely, in the county of Fife, and afterwards of the Grey Friars church, in Edinburgh, and was much distinguished for his fidelity and zeal in discharging the duties of his function, until after the restoration, when being prosecuted for nonconformity before the Scotch council, he was imprisoned seven months in Edinburgh, and banished from the kingdom. He then went to Holland, whence he wrote a letter of advice to his wife and children, the only piece of his which has been published. He returned afterwards, and died in Scotland, but at what time is uncertain. He was one of the ministers who attended the marquis of Montrose on the scaffold. While in Holland, a very characteristic portrait of him was painted there, which is now in the possession of the earl of Buchan, and from which there is an engraving in Mr. Pinkerton’s “Scotish Gallery.”

His son, Robert, the subject of this memoir, was born at Ely in May 1642. After the usual course of education at home, he was sent to the university of Edinburgh, where he recommended himself to the several professors by his capacity and diligent application to his studies. Having determined to devote himself to the church, he pursued the study of divinity with great ardour for several years. Partaking with his father in zeal for the principles and discipline of the presbyterian church, he became a sufferer in its cause, unusual severity being exercised against those who would not accede to the introduction of episcopacy. In 1666 he was obliged to secrete himself, together with his mother and elder brother, because some copies of a book entitled “An apologetic Relation,” &c. which the privy council had ordered to be publicly burnt, were found in Mrs. Traill’s house; and in the following year, being suspected as having been one of those who took up arms and resisted the king’s forces, or of being a favourer of their cause, a proclamation was issued for apprehending him. This obliged him to join his father in Holland, where he resumed his divinity studies, and assisted Nethenus, professor of divinity at Utrecht, in the republication of Rutherford’s “Examination of Arminianism.” In the preface to his edition of that book, Nethenus speaks of Mr. Robert Traill as a pious, prudent, learned, and industrious young man.

In 1670 he ventured to come over to England, where he was at least free from the sanguinary tyranny which disgraced his own country about this time, and was ordained by some presbyterian divines in London. Seven years afterwards, however, he was at Edinburgh, and for preaching privately, was apprehended, and brought before the privy council. Before them he acknowledged he had kept house-conventicles, but as to field-conventicles, which was a criminal offence, he left them to prove that, and peremptorily refused to answer upon oath any interrogatories that might affect himself. On this he was sent to prison, but released by order of government in October of the same year, 1677. He then returned to England, and preached in a meeting at Cranbrook, in Kent, but was afterwards for many years pastor to a Scotch congregation in London, and at one time was colleague with the Rev. Nathaniel Mather in a meeting in Lime-street.

As he was warmly attached to the doctrines usually called Calvinistic, he took a zealous concern in the controversy that followed the publication of Dr. Crisp’s works. In 1692 he published his “Vindication of the Protestant doctrine of Justification, and of its first preachers and professors, from the unjust charge of Antinomianisrn.” In this he discovers great zeal against Arminianism, and is not a little displeased with those divines who were for adopting what they called a middle way, and who wrote against Dr. Crisp.

Mr. Traill lived to see the revolution established, and to rejoice in the settlement of the protestant succession in the illustrious house of Hanover. He died in May 1716, aged seventy-four. His works, principally sermons, which have long been popular, particularly in Scotland, were printed for many years separately, but in 1776 were published together at Glasgow in 3 vols. 8vo. In 1810a more complete edition appeared at Edinburgh in 4 vols. 8vo, with a life prefixed, of which we have partly availed ourselves. It is not mentioned in any account we have seen, where Mr. Traill died, but it is probable that he had returned to Scotland before that event, as all his descendants were settled there. His son, Robert, was minister of Panbride, in the county of Angus, and was the father of Dr. James Traill, who, conforming to the English church, was presented to the living of West Ham, Essex, in 1762. He accompanied the earl of Hertford as chaplain to that nobleman when ambassador in France, and was afterwards his chaplain when he became lord lieutenant of Ireland. In 1765 he was appointed bishop of Down and Connor, and died in Dublin in 1783.

, a learned modern Greek, was born in 1395, in the island of Crete, but took the name of Trapezuntius, or “of Trebisond,” because his family were originally of that city. In his youth he wenj; to Venice, where Francis Barbaro, who had invited him, became his patron. Having been instructed in the Latin language he went to Padua, and afterwards to Vicenza, where in 1420 his patron obtained for him the professorship of the Greek, but he did not remain long in this situation. Finding himself harassed by the intrigues of Guarino, of Verona, who regarded him with sentiments of determined hostility, he gave up his professorship, on which Barbaro recalled him to Venice, where by the interest of this steady friend he was appointed to teach rhetoric, and was enrolled among the citizens of Venice. Barbaro afterwards recommended him to the court of Rome, where we find Trapezuntius in 1442, in the pontificate of Eugenius, teaching the belles lettres and the Aristotelian philosophy. During the same time he was employed in translating several Greek authors into Latin, which induced Nicholas V. the successor of Eugenius, to make him apostolic secretary. These translations he was thought to have executed well, but his reputation declined so far on one occasion as to end in his disgrace. He had received orders from the pope to translate the Almagest of Ptolemy, and to add a commentary, or notes. This he performed in 1451, and the following year was banished from Rome on account of this work. What there was so offensive as to bring upon him this punishment is not known, or at least not clearly expressed by his biographers; but it seems not improbable, that his general temper, which was irritable, had disgusted some of his contemporaries, and that the pope had listened to the insinuations of his enemies. Many errors had been detected in his translations by some of those able scholars whom Nicholas V. had assembled at his court, and this probably rendered Trapezuntius more apt to take offence. It was probably while in this temper, that a disgraceful quarrel took place between him and the celebrated Poggio, in Pompey’s theatre, where the pontifical secretaries were assembled, for the purpose of correcting certain official papers. It was occasioned by some satiric remarks of Poggio, which provoked Trapezuntius to give him a blow on the face. Poggio returned it, and continued the battle until, as we may suppose, the combatants were parted.

Trapezuntius now retired to Naples with his family, and wrote to his old protector Barbara, but found he had been dead about a month. The good offices of Philelphus, however, made his peace with the pope, and Philelphus wrote to him, that he might not only return to Rome by permission, but that the pope even wished it; and he was accordingly reinstated in his former office. He had always defended the peripatetic philosophy against the Platonists with great vehemence and acrimony, and now wrote his “Comparison of Aristotle and Plato,” full of bitter invective. This involved him in a controversy with Gaza, and particularly with Bessarion; the particulars of which we have already given in our account of the latter. His first quarrel with Gaza was owing to their having jointly undertaken the translation of Aristotle, “On Animals,” each claiming to himself the exclusive merit of having overcome the difficulties which arose from the great number of names of animals which are found in that work.

Trapezuntius appears to have met with some reverse after this controversy, for in 1549 he was again at Venice, supplicating the aid of the State, and was in consequence appointed professor of the belles-lettres. While in this office he wrote his Art of Rhetoric, dedicated to the Venetians, which appeared under the title of “Rhetorica Trapezuntina,” but was not printed until 1470, at Venice, in folio, and then only the first book. In 1464 and 1465, he took a voyage to Crete, and another to Constantinople. On his return, being informed that one of his scholars was now pope, under the name of Paul II. he went to Rome, in hopes of being well received; but all he received was an order to be imprisoned in the castle of St. Angelo, where he remained for four months, and was afterwards under confinement in his house. The most probable cause of this treatment was his having returned to Rome without leave; but this is merely conjecture; the pope, however, at length condescended to forgive him, and he remained at Rome much respected. In his latter years his faculties began to decay, and before his death, which took place in 1484, in the ninetieth year of his age, all traces of memory and understanding were gone.

, an English divine, and voluminous translator, was the grandson of the rev. John Trapp, vicar of Weston-upon-Avon, and schoolmaster at Stratford in Warwickshire, who wrote large commentaries upon almost all the books of the Old and New Testament, published in several quarto volumes, 1646, &c. and other tracts on subjects of divinity. He never had, nor wished to have, any preferment besides his vicarage, which lay at the convenient distance of two miles from his school. His character, as a man and as a preacher, would have recommended him to higher promotion; but he always refused to accept it, as his condition was equal to his wishes. He died Oct. 17, 1669, aged sixty-eight.

Our author’s father, the rev. Joseph Trapp, rector of Cherrington in Gloucestershire, was a master of arts, and had formerly been student of Christ-church, Oxford, and was inducted into Cherrington in 1662, where he was buried Sept. 24, 1698, with a Latin inscription, immediately over his grave, in the North chancel. His son, the subject of the present account, was born, probably in November, as he was baptised on the sixteenth of that month, 1679. After some education at home under his father, he was removed to the care of the master of New-collegeschool, Oxford, and became so good a scholar, that in 1695, at sixteen years of age, he was entered a commoner of Wadham-college, and, in 1696, was admitted a scholar of the same house. In 1702, he proceeded master of arts, and in 1704, was chosen a fellow. In 1708, he was appointed the first professor of poetry, on the foundation of Dr. Birkhead, sometime fellow of All-Souls-college, and continued in the same for ten years, the period allotted by the founder. In 1709-10, he acted as a manager for Dr. Sacheverell on his memorable trial; and in 1711, was appointed chaplain to sir Constantine Phipps, lord chancellor of Ireland, and one of the lords justices of that kingdom.

In 1720, Mr. Trapp was, by the favour of the earl of Peterborough, presented to the rectory of Dauntzey, in Wiltshire, which he resigned in 1721 for the vicarage of the united parishes of Christ-ohurch, Newgate-street, and St. Leonard’s, Foster-lane. In February 1727, in consequence of the merit and usefulness of his two books, entitled “Popery truly stated,” and “Answer to England’s Conversion,” both printed in that year, he was presented by the university of Oxford with a doctor of divinity’s degree by diploma. In 1733, he was, on the demise of Robert Cooper, M. A. and archdeacon of Dorset, preferred to the rectory of Harlington, Middlesex, on the presentation of the celebrated lord Bolingbroke, to whom he had been appointed chaplain by the recommendation of dean Swift, and in defence of whose administration he had written a number of papers in the “Examiner,” during 1711 and two following years. In 1734, he was elected one of the joint-lecturers of St. Martin’s-in-the-Fields: and dying at Harlington of a pleurisy, Nov. 22, 1747, aged sixtyseven, was interred on the North side of the entrance into the chancel of Harlington-cburch. He desired in h’s will, that each of his parishioners in Christ-church and St. Leonard’s Foster-lane, and in Harlington, Middlesex, who were housekeepers, might, from the highest to the lowest, “have a copy of his little book, entitled ‘ The Four last Things,’ beseeching them, for the sake of their immortal souls, to read it, and practise it, and recommend it to their children and servants, and all others committed to their charge.” His parishioners of Christ-church had so grateful a sense of his memory, as to erect a monument by subscription in their church, with an inscription apparently taken from some lines in the poem which he bequeathed them.

Dr. Trapp was in person of a middle stature, slender habit, olive complexion, and a countenance of uncommon openness and animation, arising from the concurrence of an arched high forehead, fine eyebrows, and expressive vivid eyes, which, accompanied with an erect attitude, gave him an air of consequence and dignity, prepossessing his audience, at his first appearance in the pulpit, with a favourable expectation of what he was about to deliver. The portrait of him in the Oxford picture-gallery is a striking resemblance. In his temper, he was somewhat impatient and hasty, but in general had a considerable command over it, where professional decorum was necessary. Being a man of wit, he could unbend agreeably among his intimate friends, and had seen much of the world, and conversed with men of all parties in an age strongly marked with party-spirit. Like most divines about the commencement of the last century, he was challenged to personal controversies with those of the popish persuasion, but always resisted them. “Disputes by word of mouth,” he says, in the preface to Popery truly stated, “I always declined, and always will: I never knew any good come of them: much harm, I am sure, may, and I believe often does: much empty wrangling at the time of the debate, and much misreport and misrepresentation after it. And therefore I chose writing rather than talking.”

He was so much addicted to books, that it was the late bishop Pearce’s opinion that he studied harder than any man in England. In consequence of this he was liable to absence of mind, as it is called, and frequently ordinary matters and occurrences passed unheeded before him. When at college, according to the imperfect account of him in the Supplement to the “Biographia Britannica,” he was somewhat dissipated, and was led to pursuits not becoming his intended profession. When he applied to Dr, Robinson, bishop of London, for orders, that prelate censured him, with much warmth, for having written a play (“Abramule”); but, after taking on him the sacred profession, he was uniform in a conduct which did credit to it. And his consistency in this respect for a series of years, during the most turbulent times, both in church and state, procured him the greatest honours and respect from persons of the first order and character. The university of Oxford, who confers her honours only by the test of merit, and the rules of propriety, could not express her opinion of his merit more significantly than by presenting him with a doctor of divinity’s degree, by diploma, in full convocation. When he preached his assize sermon at Oxford, 1739, it was observed, that the late rev. Dr. Theophilus Leigh, master of Baliol-college, and then vice-chancellor of Oxford, stood up all the time of his preaching, to manifest his high sense of so respectable a character. Nor was he regarded only by those of his own church and country, for he was much esteemed by foreigners, and even by those of the Romish communion, against whom he stood foremost in controversy, and that with some acrimony. When, in 1742, his son was at Rome, he was asked by one of the cardinals, whether he was related to the great Dr. Trapp, and the cardinal being informed that he was his son, he immediately requested, that on his return to England, he would not fail to make his particular respects to the doctor.

Dr. Trapp acquired fame in his day by a great variety of writings, theological, critical, controversial, political, and poetical. He seems to have valued himself as a translator, in which he was confessedly unsuccessful. When appointed poetry professor, he gave a regular course of lectures in very elegant Latin, which were published in 1718, in three vols, octavo, under the title of “Prelectiones Poeticae.” A translation appeared afterwards: but, although he acquitted himself in these lectures as a good critic, he was not able to exemplify his own rules, and his translation of Virgil bears no resemblance to the original, owing to an imprudent choice of words and figures, and a total want of harmony. He had most success in a Latin translation of “Anacreon,” for Latin poetry was his forte; but failed when he attempted to transfuse the spirit of Milton into that language.

As his numerous publications form a sort of diary of his employments, we shall give a chronological list of them, which seems to have been drawn up with great care, omitting only some of his occasional sermons, as we believe they were afterwards collected. His earliest production was, 1. “Fraus nummi Anglicani,” in the “Musae Anglicanse,” 1699; 2. “A poem on Badminton -house, Gloucestershire.” 1700; 3. “Verses on the death of the duke of Gloucester,” Oxon. 1700; 4. “On the deaths of king William, prince George, and queen Anne,” 1702, &c. 5. “Verses on baron Spanheim,” 1706; 6. “Miscellany verses,” in vol. VI. of Dry den’s Miscellany, 1709; 7. “Odes on the Oxford Act,” 1713; 8.“Preservative against unsettled notions,” vol. I. 1715, vol.11. 1722; 9. A controversial “Sermon” against bishop Hoadly, from John xviii. 36, 1717; 10. “Virgil translated into blank verse,” 1717, 2 vols. 4to 11. “Prelectiones Poeticae, 1718, 3 vols. 8vo 12.” Treatise on Popery truly stated and briefly confuted,“1727; 13.” Answer to England’s conversion,“1727; 14.” Sermons on Righteousness overmuch, four in one,“Ecclesiastes vii. 16, ‘Be not righteous over-much, neither m.-.’ke thyself over-wise; why shouldst thou destroy thyself;' 15.” Sermon at Oxford Assizes,“‘ But it is good to be zealously affected always. in a good thing,’ 1739; 16.” Answer to the Seven Pamphlets against the said Sermon,“1740; 17.” Reply to Mr. Law’s answer to Righteousness over-much,“1740; 18.” Miltoni Paradisus Amissus, 2 vols.; 19. “Concio ad Clerum Londinensem Sion Coll. Matt. x. Coram. 16,” 1743; 20. “Sermons, No. III. from Matt. xvi. 22, 23, ‘Now all this was done,’ &c. Malachi iii. 1, ‘ Behold I will send my messenger/ &c. and from Matt. xvi. 27, 28, * For the Son of Man shall come in the glory of the Father,’ &c. prefixed to Explanatory Notes on the first of the Four Gospels,” 1747 21. “Continuation of Explanatory Notes on the Four Gospels,” finished and published by Mr. Trapp, his son, 1752 22. “Sermons on Moral and Practical subjects,” 2 vols. 8vo, published by Mr. Trapp, and printed at Reading, in 1752, His Sermons at Lady Moyer’s Lecture were published in 1731, 8vo. Besides the above he published, without his name, 23. “A Prologue to the University of Oxford,” 1703; 24. “Abramule,” a Tragedy, 1703; 25. “An ordinary Journey no Progress,” in defence of Dr. Sacheverell, 1710; 26. “The true genuine Whig and Tory Address,” in answer to a Libel of Dr. B. Hoadly, 1710; 27. < Examiners“in Vol. I. Nos. 8, 9, 26, 33, 45, 46, 48, 50, 1711; Vol. II. Nos. 6, 12, 26, 27, 37,45, 5O, 1712; Vol. III. Nos. 1, 2, 5, 13, 20, 21, 26, 29, 34, 1713; 28. The Age of Riddles,” 1710; 29. “Character and principles of the present set of Whigs,” 1711; 30. “Most Faults^on one Side,” against a sly Whig pamphlet, entitled, * Faults on both Sides,' 1710; 31. “Verses on Garth’s Verses to Godolphin,” 1710; 32. “Votes without Doors, occasioned by Votes within Doors,” 1710; 33. “Preface to an Answer to Priestcraft,” 1710; 34. “Verses on Harley’s being stabbed by Guiscard,” 1711—35. “Poem to the duke of Ormond,” 1711—36. “Character of a certain Whig,” 1711—37. “Her Majesty’s prerogative in Ireland,” 1711; 38. “Peace,” a poem, 1713 39. “A short answer to the bishop of Bangor’s great book against the Committee,” 1717 40. “The Case of the Rector of St. Andrew, Holborn,” 1722; 41. “Several Pieces in the Grub-street Journal,” viz. upon Impudence, upon Henley’s Grammars, Answering, and not answering, Books, 1726; 42. “On Budgel’s Philosopher’s Prayer,” 1726 43. “Prologue and Epilogue for Mr.Hemmings’s Scholars at Thistleworth,” 1728 44. “Grubstreet verses, Bowman,” 1731; 45. “Anacreon translated into Elegiacs,” 1732 46. “Four last Things,” a poem, 1734 47. “Bribery and Perjury;” 48. “Letter about the Quakers Tithe Bill,” 1736.

Dr. Trapp’s library, consisting of his own original collection and Dr. Sacheverell’s added, at his town house in Warwick-lane, and his country living at Harlington, together with his manuscript papers, devolved, in course, to his son, Mr. Trapp, who dying, the books, now much increased by Mr. Trapp’s elegant collection of classic authors, valuable prints, and medals, were sold altogether to Lowndes of London, and from him the library passed to Gov. Palk. The manuscripts were excepied for Mr. Awbery, at whose death they passed into the possession of some friend, common to Messrs. Trapp and Awbery.

Dr. Trapp married, in 1712, Miss White, daughter of Mr. Alderman White of Oxford, by whom he had two sons, Henry, so baptised after his godfather lord Bolingbroke, who died in infancy, and Joseph, who became in 1734 fellow of New college Oxford, and in 1751 was presented by George Pitt, esq. afterwards lord Rivers, to the living of Stratfield, near Hertford Bridge, Hampshire. He died in 1769.

, a learned judge, was born, as Wood thinks, at or near Plympton in Devonshire in 1644, and was admitted a commoner of Exeter college, Oxford, in 1660. After studying some time here, he left college without taking a degree, as, we have repeatedly had occasion te observe, was usual with young gentlemen intended for the law; and went to the Inner Temple. After being admitted to the bar, he had much practice, and was accounted a good common lawyer. In 1678 and 1679, he sat in parliament as representative for Plympton, and in the lastmentioned year was appointed chairman of the committee of secrecy for the investigation of the popish plot, and was in 1680 one of the managers in the impeachment of lord Stafford. In December of the same year, when sir George Jeffries was dismissed from the recordership of London, Mr. Treby was elected in his room, and in January 1681 the king conferred on him the honour of knighthood: but when the quo warranto issued, and the city charter, for which he pleaded along with Pollexfen, was withheld, he was deprived of the recordership in Oct. 1685. On the revolution, king William restored him to this office, and he had the honour of addressing his majesty, in the absence of the lord mayor, sir John Chapman, who was confined by sickness. His very able speech on this occasion was published in the “Fourth collection of papers relating to the present juncture of affairs in England,” 1683, 4to, and in Bohun*s “History of the Desertion,” 1689, 4to, In March 1688 he was made solicitor -general, and the following year attorney-general. In April 1692 he was called to the rank of serjeant, and in May following was promoted to be chief justice of the Common Pleas, on which he resigned the office of recorder. This learned and upright lawyer died in March 1701-2, aged fifty-six. His son and grandson, of the same names, represented Plympton and Dartmouth, and the latter was master of the household to George II. and a lord of the treasury.

Sir George Treby published “A collection of Letters and other writings relating to the horrid Popish Plot, printed from the originals,” Lond. 1681, fol. in two parts, and is supposed to have written “Truth vindicated; or, a detection of the aspersions and scandals cast upon sir Robert Clayton and sir George Treby, justices, &c. in a paper published in the name of Dr. Francis Hawkins, minister of the Tower, entitled ‘The confession of Edward Fitzharris, &c.’” Lond. 1681. His pleadings and arguments in the King’s-bench on the quo warranto, are printed with those of Finch, Sawyer, and Pollexfen, Lund. 1690, fol.

, an eminent naturalist, was born at Gen-eva in 1710, and was intended by his father for the church, for which reason he sent him to pursue his studies in Holland. There he became tutor to the children of M. Bentinck, and coming afterwards to London, had the young duke of Richmond for his pupil. On his return to Geneva in 1757, he settled there, and became most esteemed for learning and private character. He had early devoted his leisure to some branches of natural history, and when appointed one of the commissioners for providing Geneva with a granary of corn, he was enabled by his knowledge of the insects which infest grain, to prevent their ravages in a great measure. But his reputation as a naturalist was first promoted throughout Europe by his discoveries on the nature of the polypes. These animals were first discovered by Leeuwenhoek, who gave some account of them in the Philosophical Transactions for 1703; but their wonderful properties were not thoroughly known until 1740, when Mr. Trembley began to investigate them; and when he published the result of his experiments in his “Memoires sur les Polypes,” Leyden, 1744, 4to, all naturalists became interested in the surprising facts which were disclosed. Previous to this, indeed, Leibnitz and Boerhaave, by reasonings a priori, had concluded that animals might be found which would propagate by slips like plants; and their conjecture was soon verified by the observations of Mr. Trembley. At first, however, he was uncertain whether he should reckon these creatures animals or plants: and while thus uncertain, he wrote a letter on the subject to Mr. Bonnet in January 1741; but in March the same year, he had satisfied himself that they were real animals. He also made several communications to the Royal Society, of which he was elected a member in 1743, on the same subject. There are other papers on subjects of natural history by him in the Philosophical Transactions. Mr. Trembley also acquired no small fame by the publication of some valuable books for young persons, particularly his “Instructions d'un pare a ses enfans sur la nature et la religion,” 1775 and 1779, 2 vols. 8vo “Instructions sur la religion naturelle,” 1779, 3 vols. 8vo and “Recherches sur le principe de la vertu et du bonheur,” 8vo, works in which philosophy and piety are united. Mr. Trembley died in 1734.

, a protestant divine of great learning, and the editor of a Latin translation of the Bible, was born at Ferrara in 1510. He was the son of a Jew, and was educated with such care as to become a great master in the Hebrew tongue; but was converted to Christianity, first as a Roman catholic, by cardinal Pole, and secondly as a protetant by the celebrated Peter Martyr, and went with him to Lucca. Afterwards, leaving Italy altogether, he went into Germany, and settled at Strasburgh; whence he proceeded to England in the reign of Edward VI. where he lived in intimacy with the archbishops Cranmer and Parker, particularly the latter, and also taught Hebrew at Cambridge; but after the death of the king, he returned to Germany, and taught Hebrew in the school of Hornbach. Thence he was invited to Heidelberg, under the elector palatine Frederic III. where he was professor of the Hebrew tongue, and translated the Syriac Testament into Latin. There also he undertook a Latin translation of the Bible out of Hebrew, and associated Francis Junius to him in that work. His next remove was to Sedan, at the request of the duke of Builloin, to be the Hebrew professor in his new university, where he died, 1580, in his seventieth year.

His translation of the Bible was first published in 1575, and afterwards corrected by Junius in 1587. The Protestant churches received it with great approbation; and our learned Matthew Poole, in the preface to his “Synopsis Criticorum,” reckons it among the best versions; but popish writers have not spoken so favourably of it, but represent it as very faulty “As Tremellius,” says father Simon, “was a Jew, before he was a Protestant, he has retained something peculiar to himself in his translation, and deviates often from the true sense. His Latin is affected, and full of faults.”

, an English political writer, of the democratic cast, was descended of an ancient family, the son of sir John Trenchard, secretary of state to king William III. and was born in 1669. “”He had a liberal education, and was bred to the law, in which he was well skilled; but politics, and his place of commissioner of the forfeited estates in Ireland, which he had enjoyed in the reign of king William, took him from the bar, whither he had never any inclination to return. He was also rendered independent by the death of an uncle, and by his marriage, and determined to employ his time in political discussions. His first publication of this kind, in conjunction with Mr. Moyle, appeared in 1698, entitled “An Argument, shewing that a standing army is inconsistent with a free government, and absolutely destructive to the constitution of the English monarchy;” and, in 1698, “A short history of Standing Armies in England;” which two pamphlets produced several answers. In November 1720, in conjunction with Mr. Thomas Gordon, he began to publish, in the “London,' 7 and afterwards in the” British Journal,“a series of letters, under the name of” Cato,“upon various and important subjects relating to the public. These were continued for almost three years with very great reputation among those who were not very closely attached to the government or the church; but there were some papers among them, written by Mr. Trenchard, under the name of” Diogenes,“upon several points of religion, which were thought exceptionable, and animadverted upon, particularly by Mr. John Jackson, in a” Defence of human Liberty.“Dr. Clarke also wrote some animadversions upon Trenchard’s principles, but which were never published. They are inserted in the General Dictionary. Mr. Gordon afterwards collected the papers written by Mr. Trenchard and himself, and published them in four volumes, 12mo, under the title of” Cato’s Letters, or Essays on Liberty, civil or religions, and other important subjects;“the fourth edition of which, corrected, was printed in 1737. It was imagined at the time, that lord Molesworth had a chief, at least a considerable, hand in those letters; but Mr. Gordon assures us, in the dedication of them to John Milner, esq. that this noble person never wrote a line in them, nor contributed a thought towards them. As to the purport and design of them, Mr. Gordon says, that” as they were the work of no faction or cabal, nor calculated for any lucrative or ambitious ends, or to serve the purposes of any party whatsoever, but attacked falsehood and dishonesty in all shapes and parties, without temporising with any, doing justice to all, even to the weakest and most unfashionable, and maintaining the principles of liberty against the practices of boih parties; so they were dropped without any sordid composition, and without any consideration, save that it was judged that the public, after all its terrible convulsions, was become calm and safe. They had treated of most of the subjects important to the world, and meddled with public measures and public men only in great instances.“He wrote also in” The Independent Whig," another paper hostile to 'the hierarchy.

Mr. Trenchard was member of parliament for Taunton in Somersetshire, and died Dec. 17, 1723, of an ulcer in his kidneys. He is said to have thought too much, and with too much solicitude, to have done what he did too intensely and with too much vigour and activity of the head, which caused him many bodily disorders, and is supposed at last to have worn out the springs of life. He left no writings at all behind him, but two or three loose papers, once intended for Cato’s Letters. Mr. Anthony Collins, in the manuscript catalogue of his library, ascribes to him the following pieces: “The natural history of Superstition,” 1709. “Considerations on the public debts,” 1709. “Comparison of the proposals of the Bank and South-Sea Company,” 1719. “Letter of thanks, &c.” 1719. “Thoughts on the Peerage-bill,” 1719. Arid “Reflections on the Old Whig,” 1719. Mr. Gordon, who has drawn his character at large in the preface above cited, tells us in his dedication, that " he has set him no higher than his own great abilities and many virtues set him; that his failings were small, his talents extraordinary, his probity equal; and that he was one of the worthiest, one of the ablest, one of the most useful, men that ever any countrywas blessed withal.

, an excellent artist of the English school, and a member of the Royal Academy of London, and of the academies of Rome and Bologna, was a native of Ireland, which country he left at an early age; and having devoted himself to the arts, repaired to Italy, at a time when an acquaintance with the master-pieces of the arts which that country possessed, was considered as an essential requisite for completing the education of a gentleman. The friendships and acquaintance formed by Mr. Tresham while abroad, were not a little conducive to the promotion of his interests on his return to this country; and their advantages were experienced by him to the last moment of his life. As an artist, Mr. Tresham possessed very considerable talents; and, while his health permitted him to exert them, they were honourably directed to the higher departments of his art. A long residence in Italy, together with a diligent study of the antique, had given him a lasting predilection for the Roman school; and his works display many of the powers and peculiarities which distinguish the productions of those great masters whose taste he had adopted. He had much facility of composition, and his fancy was well stored with materials; but his oil pictures are deficient in that richness of colouring and spirit of execution which characterize the Venetian pencil, and which have been displayed, in many instances, with rival excellence in this country. His drawings with pen and ink, and in black chalk, evince uncommon ability; the latter, in particular, are executed with a spirit, boldness, and breadth which are not often to be found in su; a productions. In that which may be termed the erudition of taste, Mr. Tresham was deeply skilled: a long acquaintance with the most eminent masters of the Italian schools made him familiar with their merits and defects; he could discriminate between all their varieties of style and manner; and as to every estimable quality of a picture, he was considered one of the ablest criticks of his day: in the just appreciation, also, of those various remains of antiquity which come under the different classifications of virtu, his opinion was sought, with eagerness, by the connoisseur as well as the artist, and held as an authority, from which few would venture lightly to dissent. This kind of knowledge proved not a little beneficial to him. Some years since, Mr. Thomas Hope, whose choice collections of every kind are well known, had given to one of his servants a number of Etruscan vases, as the refuse of a quantity which he had purchased. Accident made Mr. Tresham acquainted with the circumstance; and the whole lot was bought by him of the new owner for \00l. It was not long before he recefved 800l. from Mr. Samuel Rogers, for one moiety; and the other, increased by subsequent acquisitions, he transferred a few years ago to the earl of Carlisle. That nobleman, with a munificence and liberality which have invariably marked all his transactions, settled on the artist an annuity of 300l. for life, as the price of this collection. With such honour was this engagement fulfilled, that the amount of the last quarter, though due only a few days before Mr. Tresham’s death, was found to have been punctually paid. When Messrs. Longman and Co. commenced their splendid publication of engravings from the works of the ancient masters, in the collections of the British nobility, and others who have distinguished themselves by their patronage of the fine arts, they, with a discernment which does them credit, deputed Mr. Tresham to superintend the undertaking. To the honour of the owners of those master-pieces it must be recorded, that every facility was afforded to this artist, not only in the loan of pictures, but in the communication of such facts relating to the respective works as they were able to furnish. The salary paid him by these spirited publishers, contributed materially to the comfort of his declining years. We should not omit to mention, to the credit of Mr. Tresham, that, regardless as he had been in early life of providing those resourses for old age which prudence would suggest, yet so high were his principles, that the most celebrated dealers in virtu, auctioneers, and others, never hesitated to deliver lots to any amount purchased by him; and we may venture to assert, that he never abused their confidence. But the talents of Tresham were not confined to objects immediately connected with his profession; he had considerable taste for poetry, and his published performances in that art display a lively fancy, and powers of versification, of no ordinary kind. In society, which he loved and enjoyed to the last, he was always considered as an acquisition by his friends; and amongst those friends were included many of the most elevated and estimable characters of the time. In conversation, he was fluent, humourous, and animated, abounding in anecdote, and ready of reply. During the latter years of his life, the contrast exhibited between the playful vivacity of his manners and the occasional exclamations of agony, produced by the spasmodic affections with which he was so long afflicted, gave an interest to his appearance that enhanced the entertainment which his colloquial powers afforded. His existence seemed to hang upon so slight a thread that those who enjoyed his society were commonly under an impression that the pleasure derived from it might not be again renewed, and that a frame so feeble could scarcely survive the exertion which the vigour of his spirit for a moment sustained. The principle of life, however, was in him so strong, as to contradict all ordinary indications; and he lived on, through many years of infirmity, as much to the surprise as the gratification of his friends: his spirits unsubdued by pain, and his mind uninfluenced by the decay of his body. Though partaking, in some degree, of the proverbial irritability of the poet and the painter, no man was more free from envious and malignant feelings, or could be more ready to do justice to the claims of his competitors. So true a relish had he for the sallies of wit -and humour, that he could enjoy them even at his own expense: and he has been frequently known to repeat, with unaffected glee, the jest that has been pointed against himself. By his death, which took place June 17, 1814, the Royal Academy was deprived of one of its most enlightened members, and his profession of a liberal and accomplished artist.

, an eminent naturalist, and liberal patpon of that science, was the son and grandson of two men of considerable note in the medical profession, and was born at Lauffen in Franconia in 1695. He studied medicine at Nuremberg with so much reputation, that hre was appointed director of the academy of the “Naturae Curiosorum,” and, in conjunction with some of the members of the society, began a periodical work at Nuremberg in 1731, called “Commercium Litterarium ad rei Medicae et Scientisc naturalis incrementum institutum.” In this he inserted many useful papers, as far as the fifteenth volume, which appeared in 1745, and published from time to time some splendid botanical works. He died in 1769.

His principal works are, 1. “De vasis linguee salivalibus,” in a letter addressed to Haller, Nuremberg, 1734, 4to. 2. “Dissertauo de differentiis quibusdam inter hominem natum et nascendum intercedentibus,” ibid. 1736, 4to. 3. “Icones posthurnse Gesnerianae,” ibid. 1748, fol. These plates of Gesner came to him by purchase, as we have already noticed in our account of that celebrated botanist. 4. “Selectarum Plantaruin Decades,” Vienna, 1750, fol. 5. “Librorum Botanicorum libri duo, quorum prior recentiores quosdam, posterior plerosque antiques ad annum 1550 usque excuses recenset,” Nuremberg, 1752, fol. 6. “Plantae selectas qnarum imagines ad exemplaria naturalia Londini in hortis curiosorum nutrita, manu artificiosa pinxit Georgius Dionysius Ehret, &c.” 1754, fol. His liberality to Ehret we have already recorded. (See Ehret.) 7. “Cedrorum Libani historia,” Nuremberg, 1757, 4to. In 1750 he engaged an artist to copy Mrs. Blackwell’s plates, and himself supplied several defects in the drawings. He also substituted some entirely new figures in the room of the originals, very considerably reformed and amplified the text, translated it into German and Latin; and planned the addition of a sixth century of plates, but he did not live to finish this. The fifth century was published in 1765, and Dr. Trew dying in 1769, the supplemental volume, exhibiting plants omitted by Mrs. Blackwell, articles newly introduced into practice, and figures of the poisonous species, was conducted by Ludwig, Bose, and Boehmer, and printed in 1773. Thus reformed, Trew’s edition surpasses any other work of the same design.

, an eminent Roman lawyer, and the object of equal praise and censure, was a native of Side in Pamphylia, and esteemed a man of extensive learning. He is said to have written, both in prose and verse, on many subjects of philosophy, politics, astronomy, &c. but none of his writings nave descended to us. From the bar of the praetorian praefects, he raised himself to the honours of questor, consul, and master of the offices. His knowledge of the Roman law induced Justinian the emperor to place him at the head of a committee of seventeen lawyers, who were to exercise an absolute jurisdiction over the works of their predecessors, from which they compiled the Digest or Pandects, which go by that emperor’s name. Tribonianus has been represented by some writers as an infidel, and by others as extremely avaricious, and tampering with the laws to gratify this propensity. The former of these charges Mr. Gibbon very naturally wishes to impute to bigotry, but the latter is generally admitted. His oppressions were at one time so much the subject of complaint as to procure a sentence of banishment, but he was soon recalled, and remained in favour with Justinian for above twenty years. Tribonianus is supposed to have died about the year 546.

, a learned divine, was born May 8, 1652, at Harlem. He acquired great skill in the Oriental languages, and the Holy Scriptures, of which he was professor at Leyden, in the place of Anthony Hulsius, and died in that' city, September 22, 1705, aged fifty-four, after having been twice rector of the university there. He left several works and “Dissertations on the sect of the Caraites,” and other curious and important subjects. He also published the “Tribus Judaeorum” of Serarius, Drusius, and Scaliger, or a dissertation on the three remarkable sects, the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes, Delphis, 1703, 2 vols. 4to.

, a very ingenious lady, and a zealous promoter of religious education, was the daughter of Joshua and Sarah Kirby, and was born at Ipswich, Jan. 6, 1741. Her father, known in the literary world as the author of Taylor’s “Method of Perspective made easy,” and “The Perspective of Architecture,” was a man of an excellent understanding, and of great piety and so high was his reputation for knowledge of divinity, and so exemplary his moral conduct, that, as an exception to their general rule, which admitted no layman, he was chosen member of a clerical club in the town in which he resided. Under the care of such a parent it may be supposed she was early instructed in those principles of Christianity, upon which her future life and labours were formed. She was educated in English and French, and other customary accomplishments, at a boarding-school near Ipswich; but at the age of fourteen she left Ipswich, with her father and mother, to settle in London, where Mr. Kirby had the honour of teaching perspective to the present king, then prince of Wales, and afterwards to her majesty.

Miss Kirby, being removed from the companions of her childhood, passed her time during her residence in London in the society of people more advanced in life, and some of thtfm persons of eminence in the literary world. Among these may be numbered, Dr. Johnson, Dr. Gregory Sharpe, Mr. Gainsborough, Mr. Hogarth, &c. By Dr. Johnson she was favoured with particular notice. The circumstance which first attracted his attention, was a literary dispute at the house of sir Joshua Reynolds, respecting a passage in the “Paradise Lost,” which could not be decided. Mr. Kirby, who, as well as his daughter, was present, inquired if she had not the book in her pocket, it being a great fatourite of hers, and he probably knowing that it then made a part of her daily studies. The book was accordingly produced, and opened at the disputed part. Dr. Johnson was so struck with a girl of that age making this work her pocket companion, and likewise with the modesty of her behaviour upon the occasion, that he invited her the next day to his house, presented her with a copy of his “Rambler,” and afterwards treated her with great consideration.

As the society in which she lived whilst in London was of rather too grave a cast for so young a person, she naturally had recourse to her favourite employment for recreation, and spent much time in reading. In this pursuit she was directed by her father, and from his conversation and instruction her mind acquired a thirst after knowledge, and was gradually opened and enlarged. Drawing was another occupation of her leisure hours: to this, however, she applied rather in compliance with the wishes of her father, than to gratify any inclination she felt tqr it. At his desire ^e went occasionally, under the care of a female friend, wit other young people, to the society for promoting Artv and once obtained a prize for the second-best drawing. Two or three miniatures, copies from larger pictures, are remaining of her painting, which, though not in the first style, are sufficiently good to show, that in this art she might have excelled, had her taste prompted her to pursue it. The knowledge of drawing, which she had acquired while young, became very useful to her when she was a mother, as it enabled her to amuse her children when in their infancy, and likewise to direct them afterwards in the exercise of their talents in that way.

About 1759, Mr. Kirby removed to Kew, upon being appointed clerk of the works in that palace, and there his daughter became acquainted with Mr. Trimmer, and at the age of twenty-one, she was united to him, with the approbation of the friends on both sides. Mr. Trimmer was a man of an agreeable person, pleasing manners, and exemplary virtues; and was about two years older than herself. In the course of their union, she had twelve children, six sons and six daughters. From the time of her marriage t?ll she became an author, she was almost constantly occupied with domestic duties; devoting herself to the nursing and educating of her children. She used to say, that as soon as she became a mother, her thoughts were turned so entirely to the subject of education, that she scarcely read a book upon any other topic, and believed she almost wearied her friends by making it so frequently the subject of conversation. Having experienced the greatest success in her plan of educating her own family, she naturally wished to extend that blessing to others, and this probably first induced her to become an author. Soon after the publication of Mrs. Barbauld’s “Easy Lessons for Children,” about 1780, Mrs. Trimmer was very much urged by a friend to write something of the same kind, from an opinion that she would be successful in that style of composition. Encouraged by this opinion, she began her “Easy Introduction to the knowledge of Nature,” which was soon completed, printed, became very popular, and still keeps its place in schools and private families. The design of it was to open the minds of children to a variety of information, to induce them to make observations on the works of nature, and to lead them up to the universal parent, the creator of this world and of all things in it. This was followed by a very valuable series of publications, some of the higher order, which met with the cordial approbation of that part of the public who considered religion as the only basis of morality. Into the notions of a lax education, independent of the history and truths of revelation, whether imported from the French or German writers, or the production of some of our own authors, misled by the vanity of being thought philosophers, Mrs. Trimmer could not for a moment enter; and therefore in some of her later publications, endeavoured with great zeal to stop that torrent of infidelity which at one time threatened to sweep away every vestige of Christianity. She was also an early supporter and promoter of Sunday-schools, and at one time had a long conference with her majesty, who wished to be made acquainted with the history, nature, and probable utility of those schools. But the fame she derived from her meritorious writings was not confined to schools. She had the happiness of hearing that her books were approved by many of our ablest divines, and that some of them were admitted on the list of publications dispersed by the Society for promoting Christian knowledge. One of her best performances was rendered very necessary by the circumstances of the times. It was a periodical work, which she continued for some years, under the title of “The Guardian of Education.” She was led to this by observing the mischief that had crept into various publications for the use of children, which occasioned her much alarm, and she feared, if something were not done to open the eyes of the public to this growing evil, the minds of youth would be poisoned, and irreparable injury be sustained. There was indeed just cause for alarm, when it was known that the two principal marts for insidious publications of this kind, were under the management of men who had only avarice to prompt them, and were notorious for their avowed contempt for religion.

This estimable woman died suddenly, in the sixty-ninth year of her age, Dec. 15, 1810. As she was sitting in her study, in the chair in which she was accustomed to write, she bowed her head upon her bosom, and expired. Her children, who were accustomed to see her occasionally take repose in this manner, could scarcely persuade themselves that she was not sunk in sleep: and it was not till after some time that they could be made to believe that it was the sleep of death. Her remains were deposited at the family vault at Ealing. She had survived her husband some years.

The following, we believe, is a correct list of her various publications, although we are not certain if in strict chronological order. 1. “A little Spelling-book for young Children;” 2. “Easy Lessons; a Sequel to the above;” 3. “LXIV Prints taken from the Old Testament; with a Description, in a Set of easy Lessons;” 4. “LXIV Prints from the New Testament, and Description;” 5. “LXIV Prints of Roman History, with Description;” 6. “LXIV Prints of English History, with Description;” 7. “A Comment on Dr. Watts’s Divine Songs for Children;” 8. “An easy Introduction to the Knowledge of Nature, and Reading the Holy Scriptures;” 9. “An Abridgment of Scripture History; consisting of Lessons from the Old Testament;” 10. “An Abridgment of the New Testament consisting of Lessons composed chiefly from the Gospels;” 11. “A Scripture Catechism; containing an Explanation of the above Lessons in the Style of Familiar Conversation,” in 2 vols. The four last articles were written originally for children in the lower classes of life; but they have been adopted into many schools and families, for the instruction of those of superior condition. 12. “An Attempt to familiarise the Catechism of the Church of England;” 13. “An Explanation of the Office of Baptism, and of the Order of Confirmation in the Common Prayer-book;” 14. The same, with “Questions for the Use of Teachers” 15. “A Companion to the Book of Common Prayer containing a Practical Comment on the Liturgy, Epistles, and Gospels.” This work, though principally intended for young persons, has proved satisfactory to persons of maturer years. 16. The same in 2 vols. with “Questions for the Use of Teachers;” 17. “Sacred History, selected from the Scriptures, with Annotations and Reflections.” This work is executed upon a peculiar plan, and was composed with a view of exciting in young minds an early taste for divine subjects, and of furnishing persons of maturer years, who have not leisure for the works of more voluminous commentators, with assistance in the study of the Scriptures. The historical events are collected from the various books of which the Sacred Volume is composed, and arranged in a regular series; many passages of the Prophetic writings, and of the Psalms, are interwoven with the respective parts of the history to which they relate; and the whole illustrated by annotations and reflections, founded on the best authorities. 18. “Fabulous Histories; designed to teach the proper Treatment of Animals;” 19. “The Guardian of Education;” in 5 vols. 20. “Sermons for Familyreading, abridged from the works of eminent divines;” 21. “The Family Magazine,” 3 vols. 12ino. Her character, her train of study and occupations, and her sentiments on many interesting topics, are amply illustrated in a work published since her death, and to Wi; we are indebted for the above particulars, entitled “fe ie Account of the Life and Writings of Mrs. Trimmer, with Original Letters, and Meditations and Prayers, selected from her Journal,” 2 vols. 1814.

, successively bishop of Norwich and Winchester, was the son of the rev. Charles Trimnell, sometime fellow of New college, Oxford, whence he was ejected in 1648 by the parliamentary visitors, and was afterwards rector of Ripton Abbots in Huntingdonshire, where he died in 1702. Of a family of fourteen children, there survived him, ). Charles, bi>hop of Winchester; 2. William, dean of Winchester 3. Hugh, apothecary to the king’s household 4. David, archdeacon of Leicester, and chantor of Lincoln 5 Mary, married to Mr. John Sturges, archdeacon of Huntingdon 6. Anne, married to Mr. Alured Clarke of Godmanchester, in the county of Huntingdon; 7. Elizabeth, married to Dr. Henry Downes, bishop of Derry in Ireland; and 8. Catherine, married to Dr. Thomas Green, bishop of Ely.

Charles, the subject of this memoir, was born at RiptonAbbots, Dec. 27, 1663, and in 1675 was admitted on the foundation at Winchester college, where his learning, morals, and respectful behaviour, recommended him to the notice of his superiors. In 1681 he removed from Winchester to New college, Oxford, to which, as the preacher of his funeral sermon says, he “brought more meekness and patience in the study of philosophy, than the generality of philosophers carry from it.” In Jan. 1688 he was admitted master of arts, and in the same year appointed preacher at the Rolls chapel by sir John Trevor, master of the Rolls. In August 1689, he attended the earl of Sunderland and his lady in their journey to Holland; and, after their return home, continued with them at Althorp, as their domestic chaplain. In Dec. 1691 he was installed prebendary of Norwich. In 1694, he was presented by the earl of Sunderland to the rectory of Bodington in Northamptonshire, which he resigned two years after on being instituted to Brington, in which parish Althorp stands, a living of no greater value than Bodington, although he was desired to keep both. In 1698 he was installed archdeacon of Norfolk, and procured leave of his noble patron to resign the rectory of Brington (at a time, when the remainder of his income did not exceed two hundred pounds per ann.) in favour of Mr. Downes (afterwards bishop of Derry in Ireland) who had married one of his sisters. On July the 4th, 1699, he was admitted doctor in divinity. In 1701 and 1702, during the controversy that was carried on in the Lower House of Convocation, he wrote some pieces in defence of the rights of the crown, and the archbishop; as, l. “A Vindication of the Proceedings of some Members of the Lower House of Convocation,” 1701, 4to. 2. “The Pretence to enter the Parliament-Writ considered,” 1701, 4to. 3. “An Answer to a third Letter to a Clergyman in defence of the entry of the Parliament- Writ,” 1702, 4to. 4. “Partiality detected,” c. a large pamphlet.

About this time he was made chaplain in ordinary to queen Anne. In 1703 he was invited to appear as a candidate for the wardenship of New college in Oxford, by a great number of the fellows, who looked upon him as the fittest person to keep up that spirit of discipline and learning, which had been exerted, with the greatest credit and advantage to the college, under their late excellent warden Dr. Traffics. But, contrary to the hopes and expectations of his friends, the election was determined in favour of Mr. Brathwait. On this occasion, thirty - one voted for Mr. Brathwait, and twenty - nine for Dr. Trimnell on which the scrutators declared Mr. Brathwait duly elected. But, according to the canon law, no mail can vote for himself in an election per scrutinium; and it being found, that Mr. Brathwait’s own vote had been given for himself, it was insisted upon, that Mr. Brathwait could not be duly elected, because he had but thirty good votes, which was not the major pars pr&sentium required by the statutes, thereb eing sixty electors- present. Upon this ground an appeal v>*as made to the visitor, Dr. Mews, bishop of Winchester, against the validity of the election. One of the bishop’s assessors gave no opinion; and the other, sir John Cooke (dean of the Arches), was clearly of opinion, that the election was void, and thereby a devolution made to the bishop, who, in consequence of such devolution, might nominate whom he pleased; but he chose rather to pronounce the election valid, and Mr. Brathwait duly elected.

In 1705, having had no parochial duty for some years, he undertook the charge of St. Giles’s parish, in the city of Norwich; and in October 1706 was instituted to St. James’s, Westminster, on the promotion of Dr. William Wake to the bishopric of Lincoln. In January 1707, he was elected bishop of Norwich in the room of Dr. John Moore, translated to Ely, and was permitted to keep the rectory of St. James’s with his bishopric for one year. In 1709 he published a charge to the clergy at his primary visitation, in which he spoke with great freedom against some prevailing opinions and practices, which he thought prejudicial to the true interest of the church of England in particular, and of religion in general. These opinions were, the “independence of the church upon the state; the” power of offering sacrifice,“properly so called; and the” power of forgiving sins: “all of them,” he says, “I am persuaded, erroneous, in the manner they have been urged, and no way agreeable to the doctrine of the church of England about them. The making more things follow our sacred function, than can fairly and plainly be grounded upon it, will never advance our character with wise and considering men, such as we should desire all men to be; but must be a real prejudice to us. Our, pretending to an independent power in things within the compass of human authority; and a right to offer sacrifice properly speaking; and a commission to forgive sins directly and immediately; may, and will weaken the grounds and occasions of the reformation; and give our adversaries of the church of Rome, as well as others, great advantage against us; but can never, I am persuaded, advance the interest of the Christian religion in general, or of our church in particular.” He added an Appendix to the charge in answer to some authorities that had been produced from ancient writers in favour of the independence of the church upon the state; which, he says, he did the rather, because he “thought the peace both of church and state more immediately concerned in it, and could not but apprehend mischief coming to both from a pretension so new among those who call themselves members of the church of England: a church that has hitherto been as much distinguished, as it has been supported, by rejecting that claim.” In a sermon preached in 1707 before the sons of the clergy, he had expressed himself in as strong a manner upon this subject, viz. “Let us take care that, while we maintain the distinction and dignity of our order, we do not suffer ourselves to be carried into a separate interest from that of those who are not of our order, or from that of the state For we cannot pretend to be a separate body, without making the worst kind of schism, and the nearest to that which is condemned in scripture, that can be imagined: nor can any thing give greater advantage to those other schisms that disturb the peace of the church, than our dividing ourselves, in any degree, from the true interest of that government to which we belong.” In his charge he censured a pa*sage in favour of a proper sacrifice from Mr. Johnson’s second part of the “Clergyman’s Vade Mecum” (in the note upon the second apostolical canon), which Mr. Johnson defended in a postscript to a pamphlet called “The Propitiatory Oblation.” The bishop replied, in vindication of what he had said on that subject; and afterwards inserted the substance of his Reply in the body of the second edition of his charge.

Besides the opinions that have been mentioned, he declared himself against the modern practice of using the bidding prayer before sermon, as not so agreeable to the nature of the service, the long and general practice of the church, or the design of the 55th canon. And he observed from authority, that “the bishops (Dr. Uavis and Dr. Fletcher) who drew up the 55th canon, always used a form of their own;” and that among the bishop of Lincoln’s articles of inquiry at his visitation in 1641, are these; "Do

pray before their sermons, but bid the people pray? or use any other new and voluntary rite or ceremony not warranted by law? You are to present them."

In 1710 he printed a speech made in the House of Lords in support of the second article of the impeachment of Dr. Sacheverel, for “suggesting and maintaining that the toleration granted by law is unreasonable, and unwarrantable, &c.” Bishop Trimnell was considered as of whig principles, and when he preached the 30th of January sermon in 1711, before the House of Lords, his sentiments, which are said to have been more moderate than usual at that time, gave so much offence, that no motion was made in the House for the usual compliment of thanks. This occasioning much animadversion, and affording many conjectures which were unfavourable to him, he printed the discourse. He published also, from 1697 to 1715, fourteen other occasional sermons.

Soon after the accession of George I. he was made clerk of the closet to his majesty, in which office he continued until his death. In August 1721 he was translated to the bishopric of Winchester; and in the same year elected president of the corporation of the sons of the clergy. After suffering long by a weak constitution, he died at Farnham castle, Aug. 15, 1723, leaving no issue. By his first wife, Henrietta Maria, daughter of Dr. William Talbot, then bishop of Oxford, and afterwards of Durham, he had two sons, who died in their infancy. This lady died in 1716 ti and in 1719 he married Mrs. Elizabeth Taylor, widow of Joseph Taylor, of the Temple, esq. and sister of sir Rowland Wynne, of Nosteil, in Yorkshire, hart, who survived him. He was interred in Winchester cathedral, under a black marble stone, with a Latin inscription.

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.

“He was not less qualified for his high station by his abilities than his conduct; for he had an excellent turn for business, and a quick apprehension. He was very well versed in the divinity controversies, and immediately discerned the point on which the dispute turned, and pared oil” all the luxuriancies or writing. He had read the ancients with great exactness; and, without quoting, ofieu mingled their finest notions with his own discourse, and had a particular easiness and beauty in his manner of conversing, and expressing his sentiments upon every occasion. With his other excellencies he had acquired a thorough knowledge of mankind; which, being adorned by an affable and polite behaviour, gained him the general esteem of the nobility and gentry. His known penetration and judgment recommended him so strongly to the favour and confidence of those who were at the head of affairs in the latter part of his life, that he was chiefly, if not solely, advised with, and entrusted by them, in matters which related to the filling up the principal offices in the church. And, though he enjoyed as much of this power as any clergyman has had since the reformation, he raised no public odium or enmity against himself on that account; because his silence, moderation, and prudence made it impossible for any one to discover the influence he had, from his conversation, or conduct; a circumstance almost peculiar to him. He was too wise a man to increase the envy, which naturally attends power, by an insolent and haughty behaviour; and too good a man to encourage any one with false hopes. For he was as cautious in making promises, as he was just in performing them; and always endeavoured to soften the disappointments of those he could not gratify, by the good-nature and humanity, with which he treated them. These separate characters (rarely blended together) of an excellent scholar, and a polite, well-bred man; a wise and honest statesman, and a devout, exemplary Christian, were all happily reconciled in this most amiable person; and placed him so high in the opinion of the world, that no one ever passed through life with more esteem and regard from men of all dispositions, parties, and denominations."

, an eminent physician, but principally deserving notice as the editor of some of the first editions of the classics, was born at Venice in 1496. He began his medical studies at Padua, and went afterwards to Bologna, where he became so distinguished for his knowledge of the Greek language, that the professors of the university would often consult him on difficult passages, and he was honoured by the name of the “Greek scholar.” After remaining seven years at Bologna, he returned to Padua to take his doctor’s degree, and then to Venice, where, his character preceding him, he was appointed successor to Sebastian Fuscareni in the chair of philosophy. His time was tehn divided between his lectures, his private studies, and his practice as a physician. The latter was so extensive as to bring him annually about three thousand crowns of gold. In 1551 he was appointed successor to John Baptist Monti, in the medical professorship at Padua, and exchanged the profits of his practice for a salary of 950 crowns, which the senate afterwards increased to 1600. While professor here, he was the first who lectured on Hippocrates in the original language. Finding the infirmities of age approach, he resigned his office, and returned to Venice, where he died in 1568, in the seventy-second year of his age.

His medical writings, most of which had been published separately, were printed together in 2 vols. fol. at Leyden, in 1586 and 1592, and at Venice in 1599. He was editor of the following principes etiitiones; 1. “Themistii Orationes,” 1534, fol. 2. “Joannes Grammaticus Philoponus,” 1534, fol. 3. “Epicteti Enchiridion, cum Arriaiii comment,” 1535, 8vo. This was the first edition with Arriari. 4. “Hes.iod,” 153-6, 4to. The scholia and text of this edition have formed the basis of every subsequent one. Trincavelli also published editions of Stobeeus and other Greek writers.

, an Italian poet, who endeavoured to reform the style of his country, was born at Vicenza, July 3, 1478, and was descended from one of the most ancient families of that place. It has been said that it was late in life before he began his studies, but as the same writer who gives us this information, adds that upon his father’s death, when he was only seven years old, he applied to them with spirit, it is evident he could not have lost much time. He was first educated at Vicenza, under a priest named Francis Gragnuola, and afterwards at Milan under the celebrated Demetrius Cbalcondylcs. To the memory of this last master, who died in 1511, Trissino erected a monument in the church of St. Mary at Milan, or us others say, in that of San Salvador, with an inscription. From the Greek and Latin language, he proceeded to the' study of mathematics, architecture, natural philosophy, and other branches which form a liberal education. In 1503 he married; and with a view to domestic happiness and literary retirement, went to reside on one of his estates, for he was left very opulent, at Criccoli on the Astego. Herv he built a magnificent house, from his own design, on which he employed one of his pupils in architecture, the afterwards justly celebrated Paliadio.

Trissino lived very happily in this retreat, cultivating the arts and sciences, and especially poetry, for which he had an early taste, until his tranquillity was disturbed by the death of his wife, who left him two sons, Francis and Julius. He now left Criccoli, and to dissipate ins grief by change of scene, went to Rome. It was perhaps with the same view that he endeavoured to amuse himself by writing his “Sophonisba,” the first tragedy of modern times in which appeared some traces of ancient style and manner. Leo X. who had received Trissino with respect, and even friendship, intended to have this tragedy represented with great magnificence, but it does not sevm certain that it was so acted In the mean time Leo perceived in the author talents of a graver kind, which he might employ with advantage. He accordingly sent him on some important diplomatic business to the king of Denmark, the emperor Maximilian, and the republic of Venice about 1516. In these respective courts, Trissino gained great credit, and during the intervals of his employments, formed connexions with the eminent men of all ranks who adorned the court of Leo.

After the death of this pontiff he returned to his own country, and married a relation, Blanche Trissina, by whom he had a third son, Ciro; but Leo’s successor, Clement VII. soon recalled him to Rome, and gave him equal proofs of his esteem a-nd confidence, by sending him as his ambassador to Charles V. and to the senate of Venice. Some of his biographers say that he was created a knight of the golden fleece, either by Charles V. or by Maximilian, but Tiraboschi thinks that he never was admitted into that order, although he might have permission to add the fleece to his arms, and even take the title of chevalier. Voltaire’s blunders about Trissino are wholly unaccountable. Hie makes him archbishop of Benevento at the time he wrote his tragedy; and having this probably pointed out to him, he endeavoured to correct the error by asserting in a subsequent publication that bishop Trissino, by the advice of the archbishop of Benevento, chose Sophonisba for a subject, although Trissino never was either bishop or archbishop, nor an ecclesiastic of any rank.

Trissino now retired to Vicenza in order to compose at more leisure a poem of which, many years before, he had laid the plan; but his peace was at this time interrupted by domestic dissentions, in consequence of which he had scarcely afterwards a happy moment. The eldest of his two sons by his first wife, died, and Julius, the second, had conceived an aversion to his step-mother on account of the preference which his father seemed to give to her son Giro. Mutual irritation ended in Trissino’s resolving to disinherit Julius and settle all upon Giro, and in Julius threatening to commence a suit at law for the recovery of his mother’s fortune. To add to Trissino’s distress, his wife Blanche died in 1540, on which he disposed of her son in marriage, and went again to Rome in hopes of tranquillity. There he remained some years, and finished and published his great poem, “Italia liberata da Gothi.” In the mean time his son Julius was carrying on the law-suit at Venice, and was supported in it by his mother’s relations. This obliged Trissino to go thither in 1548, although so much afflicted by the gout, as to travel on a litter. From Venice he went to Vicenza, where he found that Julius had begun to take possession of all his property, and he was so much enraged at this conduct, as to make a will in which he totally disinherited his unnatural son. Julius, more irritated than ever, carried on his law-suit, and having obtained a decision in his favour, without ceremony took possession of his father’s house and the greater part of his goods. Trissino now returned to Home, bidding an eternal adieu to his country, in some Latin verses, in which he said, “he would go to some country under another climate, as he had been defrauded of his paternal mansion, and as the Venetians had encouraged that fraud by a cruel sentence,” &c. &c. He did not, however, long survive this latter disappointment, but died at Rome about the end of 1550, in the seventy-second year of his age.

Trissino has the credit of having first discarded the shackles of rhyme, and employed the versi scwlti, or blank verse of the Italians. This he first tried in his “Sophonisba,” and afterwards in his “Italia liberata,” the subject of which was the liberation of Italy from the Goths by Belisarius’^ and it was his design to exhibit in this poem, which consists of twenty-seven books, a specimen of the true epic, as founded on the example of Homer, and confirmed by the authority of Aristotle: but into the merits of this poem it is not necessary to enter so minutely as Ginguene has done, since it seems universally acknowledged that of all the attempts at epic poetry which had hitherto appeared, the “Italia liberata” may be considered as the most insipid and uninteresting; nor from the time it first appeared, in 1547-8, was it ever reprinted until the Abbate Aniouini gave an edition of it in 1729, 3 vols. 8vo, and in the same year it appeared in the collected works of the author, Verona, 2 vols. folio. In this collection, besides his epic poem and the tragedy already mentioned, are, a comedy from Plautus, called “I Simillimi;” lyric poems, both Latin and Italian; and various prose treatises, almost all on grammar and on the Italian language. As most of the great poets of his time wrote an “Art of Poetry,” we find accordingly among Trissino’s works an attempt of this kind, “Delia Poetica,” which was originally published in 1529.

, a French poet and dramatic writer, was born in the castle of Souliers, in the province of la Marche, in 1601. When attached to the household of the marquis de Verncuil, natural son of Henry IV. he fought a duel, in which his antagonist, one of the guards, was killed, and fled for some time to England. Returning to Poitou, he found friends who obtained his pardon from Louis XIII.; and Gaston of Orleans made him one of his gentlemen in ordinary. His life became then divided between poetry, gallantry, and gaming, and he experienced all the reverses and vicissitudes to which such a life is exposed, many of which he had alluded to in his “Page disgracie,” a romance published in 16-13, 4to. He wrote much for the stage, and was seldom unsuccessful. His tragedy of “Mariamne” still keeps his reputation alive, although it was fatal to the actor, Mondori, who performed the character of Herod, and died of violent exertion. Tristan was admitted into the French academy in 1649, but always lived poor. He died Sept. 7, 1655, in the fifty-fourth year of his age. His dramas and other poems were primed in '') vols. 4to. There were two others of this name: John Baptist Tristan L'Hermite Souliers, who was gentleman of his majesty’s bedchamber, and brother to the preceding. He was author of the genealogies of several families; “L'Histoire geneologique cle la Noblesse de Touraine,” 1669, fol.; “La Toscane Francoise,” 1661, 4to; “Les Corses Francoise,” 1662, 12mo; “Naples Francoise,” 1663, 4to, &c. containing the history of such persons in those countries as have been attached to France. There was also John Tristan, son of Charles Tristan, auditor of accounts at Paris. He attached himself to Gaston of France, duke of Orleans, was well skilled in antiquity and medals, and published a “Historical Commentary on the Lives of the Emperors,” 1644, 3 vols. fol. a work full of curious observations; but Angeloni and father Sirmond found several faults in it, which Tristan answered with great asperity. He was living in 1656.

, a celebrated abbot of the Benedictine order, and one of the most learned men in the fifteenth century, was born February 1, 1462, at Tritenheim, in the diocese of Treves. After finishing his studies he took the Benedictine habit, and was made abbot of Spanheim in the diocese of Mentz, in 1483, which abbey ke governed till 1506, and resigned it to be abbot of St. James at Wirtzberg. He died Dec. 13, 1516. Trithemius was well acquainted both with sacred and profane literature, and left various works, historical and biographical, among which the principal are, a treatise “On the illustrious ecclesiastical Writers,” Cologn, 1546, 4to; in this book he gives some account of 870 authors; another “On the illustrious Men of Germany;” and a third on those of the “Benedictine Order,” 1606, 4to, translated into French, 1625, 4to; six books “On Polygraphy,” 1601, fol. translated into French; a treatise “On Steganography,” i.e. the various methods of writing in cyphers, 1621, 4to, Nuremberg, 1721. There is a scarce book on this work, attributed to Augustus, duke of Brunswick, entitled “Gustavi Seleni Enodatio Steganographiæ J. Trithemii,” 1624, fol. There are also various “Chronicles,” in “Trithemii Opera historica,” 1701, fol. 2 vols, published by Freher, to which we may add his works on religious subjects, 1605, fol. “Annales Hirsaugienses,” 2 vols. folio, a carious and important work, and others.

, 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 Latin historian, was born in the country of the Vocontian Gauls, in Gallia Narbonensis, and lived in the reign of Augustus, about the beginning of the Christian sera. His father enjoyed a situation under the emperor. We know, however, nothing of the personal character of Trogus, nor should have heard of his name had not Jnstin made an abridgment of his “Universal History,” comprized in for ty- four books the editions of which are noticed in our account of that classic.

, a learned protestant divine, was born at Groningen in 1633, and studied the classics, belles lettres, philosophy, and theology in that university, under Desmarets, Alting, and other eminent professors. He travelled afterwards through Germany and Switzerland, and studied Hebrew under Buxtorf. He then visited France and England, and on his return was appointed curate or minister, in the village of Haren, where he remained until 1671, when he was invited to be pastor at Groningen. In this office he continued forty-eight years, and died in 1719, aged eighty-six. In his eightieth year he was created doctor in theology at Groningen, as a testimony of respect on the part of the university. John Martinius, of Dantzick, having begun a Concordance of the Old Testament, in Flemish, Trommius completed it, and published it at Amsterdam, 1685 — 1692, 2 vols, folio. He also published a Greek Concordance of the Septusgint. He had made preparations and corrections for a second edition of the Flemish Concordance, but did not, we presume, finish it, as it has never been printed.

, a celebrated Dutch admiral, who is mentioned in our account of De Ruyter, was born at the Brille, in Holland. He rose in the naval service by his merit, after having distinguished himself on many occasions, especially at the famous engagement near Gibraltar in 1607. He was accounted one of the greatest seamen that had till that time appeared in the world; and was declared admiral of Holland, by the advice of the prince of Orange. He in that character defeated a large Spanish fleet in 1630, and gained upwards of thirty victories, of more or less importance, at sea; but was killed when under deck in an engagement with the English, in 1653. The States General caused medals to be struck to his honour, and lamented him as one or the greatest heroes of their republic. It is said that in the midst of his greatest glory, he was modest and unassuming, and never arrogated a higher character than that of a burgher, and that of being the father of the sailors. His second son, Cornelius, who died in 1691, was also a brave officer, and signalized himself in various naval engagements.

, the first of a considerable family of learned men in Geneva and France, was born at Geneva, April 17, 1582, whither his father had fled on account of religion, and narrowly escaped from the massacre of the protestants in 1572. He was then at Troyes, in Champagne, and escaped by means of a priest, his friend and neighbour, who concealed him in his house. He intended to go into Germany, and only to pass through Geneva; but he remained there by the advice of an acquaintance, obtained the freedom of the city, and soon after was admitted into the council of two hundred in acknowledgment of 'some services which he had done the State during the war with the Duke of Savoy.

His son, Theodore, was educated, by the advice of Beza^ who was his godfather, and he made a vast progress in learning. The testimony which was given him in 1600, when he went to see foreign universities, represents him as a person of very great hopes. He confirmed this character + all the learned men under whom he studied, or with whom hee became acquainted during the course of his travels, and these comprized most of the eminent men on the contii w > in England. He returned to Geneva in 1606, and gave such proofs of his learning that he was the same year chosen professor of the Hebrew language. In 1607 he married Theodora Rocca, a woman of great merit in all respects, sister to the first syndic of the commonwealth, and grand-daughter to the wife of Theodore Beza, at whose house she had been educated, and whose goddaughter she was. He was chosen minister in December 1605, and created rector of the university in 1610. In 1614 he was requested to read some lectures in divinity besides those on the Hebrew language, on account of the indisposition of one of the professors; and when the professorship of divinity became vacant in 1618, he was promoted to it, and resigned that of Hebrew. The same year he was appointed by the assembly of pastors and professors to answer the Jesuit Colon, who had attacked the French version of the Bible in a book entitled “Geneve Plagiaire.'” This he did in his “Coton Plagiaire,” which was extremely well received by the public. At the same time he was sent with Diodati from the church of Geneva to the synod of Dorr.,' where he displayed his great knowledge in divinity, and a moderation which was highly applauded. He had permission to go to the duke of Rohan for some months in 1632, and fully answered the expectation of that nobleman, who shewed him afterwards great esteem, which he returned by honouring the duke’s memory with an oration, whicij he pronounced some days after the funeral of that great man in 1638. He carried on a very extensive correspondence in the reformed countries, where he gained the friendship of the most learned men, and of several princes and great lords. He had much facility in composing oration:* and Latin verses, and his conversation was highly instructive, for he had joined to the study of divinity and of several languages, the knowledge of the law, and of other sciences, and of sacred and profane history, especially with regard to the two last centuries, particulars of which he frequently introduced, and applied when in company. In 1655 he was appointed by the assembly of pastors to confer and concur with John Dury in the affair of the rennion between the Lutherans and the reformed, on which subject he wrote several pieces. He died of a fever on the 19th. of November, 1657, having survived all the foreign divines who were present at the synod of Don. He was an open and sincere man, zealous for religion and the service of the churches, a great enemy to vices, though very mild towards persons. His advice was highly esteemed both for the civil government, and in the two ecclesiastical bodies, and by strangers, a great number of whom consulted him. He left, among other children, Lewis Tronchin, who was a minister of the church of Lyons, and was chosen four years after to fill his place in the church and professorship of divinity at Geneva. He died in 1705. He was esteemed one of the ablest divines of his time, and a man of great liberality of senti ment. He was well known to, and corresponded with our archbishops Tillotson and Tenison, and the bishops Compton, Lloyd, and Burnet, who gives him a very high character in his Tour through Switzerland.

, a celebrated physician, was apparently the grandson of Lewis Troncbin, and was born at Geneva in 1709. His father, John Robert Tronchin, having lost his property in the fatal Mississippi speculation, Theodore left home at the age of eighteen, and came to England to lord Bolingbroke, to whom he is said to have been related, we know not in what degree; but Bolingbroke had it not in his power to do much for him, and he went to Holland to study chemistry under Boerhaave, whose work on that subject had engaged his attention, and made him desiror.s of seeing the author. Boerhaave is said to have soon distinguished Tronchin from the general mass of his pupils, and in 1731 advised him to settle at Amsterdam, where he introduced him to practice, and in a, short time Tronchin was at the head of the physicians of Amsterdam. But having married a young lady of the family of the celebrated patriot De Witt, he fancied that the name would be disgraced by his accepting a place at court, and therefore he refused that of first physician to the stadtholder, and quitting Amsterdam when the stadtholderate was made hereditary, returned to Geneva, where he could live in a pure republic. Here the council gave him the title of honorary professor of medicine, but no duties were attached to it. It was not his intention, however, to be idle, and he gave lectures on the general principles of medicine, in which he endeavoured to free the science from rooted prejudices and false theories. In 1756 he was called to Paris to inoculate the children of the duke of Orleans. He bad introduced this practice both in Holland and at Geneva, and, in the former at least, without almost any opposition; and the success he had in his Hrst trial in France, on these princes of the blood, having contributed not a little to his celebrity, he rose to the highest honours of his profession, and acquired great wealth. In 1765 he was invited to Parma to inoculate the royal children of that court. Although averse to accept any situations which might form a restraint upon his time or studies, he consented to the title of first physician to the duke of Orleans, and in 1766 fixed his residence at Paris. The arrival of an eminent physician in Paris is always accompanied by a revolution in practice. Tronchin brought with him a new regimen, new medicines, and new methods of cure, and many of them certainly of great importance, particularly the admission and change of air in sick rooms, and a more hardy method of bringing up children; he also recommend-ed to the ladies more exercise and less effeminacy in thair modes of living and in diet. His prescriptions were generally simple; but perhaps his fame was chiefly owing to his introducing the practice of inoculation, which he pursued upon the most rational plan. In all this he had to encounter long established prejudices, and being a stranger, had to contend with the illiberality of some of the faculty, obstacles which he removed by a steady, humane course, and his frequent success completed his triumph. He was in person a fine figure; there was a mixture of sweetness and dignity in his countenance; his air and external demeanour inspired affection, and commanded respect; his dress, voice, and manner, were graceful and pleasing: all which no doubt gave an additional luslre to his reputation, and perhaps an efficacy to his prescriptions. His extensive practice prevented his writing or publishing more than a few papers on some medical cases, one “De colica pictorum,” 1757, 8vo. He also prefixed a judicious preface to an edition of “Oeuvres de Baillou,” 1762. This eminent practitioner died Nov. 30, 1781. He was at that time a citizen of Geneva, a title of which he was very proud, a member of the nobility of Parma, first physician to the duke of Orleans, and to the infant duke of Parma, doctor of medicine cf the universities of' Ley Jen, Geneva, and Montpellier, and a member of the academy of sciences of Paris, of that of surgery, of the Royal Society of London (elected 1762), and of the academies or colleges of Petersburgh, Edinburgh, and Berlin.

, celebrated for his learned translations, was born in 1508. He was first a canon of Laybach, and began in 1531 to preach publicly in the cathedral of that city Luther’s doctrine concerning the sacrament in both kinds; and to approve the marriage of priests; so that he embraced Luther’s party, and left Carniola to retire into the empire, where the town of Kempson chose him for their pastor. He preached there for fourteen years, and acquired much fame by his translations. He translated into the Carniolan tongue, in Latin characters, not onlv the Gospels, according to the version of Luther, with his catechism, but also the whole New Testament, and the Psalms of David in 1553. At length the States of Carniola recalled him home. He translated also into his mother tongue the confession of Augsburgb, and Luther’s German sermons. Herman Fabricius Mosemannus thus notices Truber’s translation, with the addition of some other particulars: “John Ungnad baron of Sonneck in Croatia, at the time of the Augsburgh confession, caused the Bible to be translated into the Sclavonian language at Aurach in the duchy of Wirternbergh. In this translation he employed three learned Sclavonians; the first was named Primus Truber, the second Anthony Dalmata, and the third Stephen Consul. But these books were seized on the road, and are still shut up in casks at Newstad in Austria. The character is altogether singular, almost resembling an Asiatic or Syriac character, with pretty large and square letters. A copy of this Bible may be seen in the library of the landgrave of Hesse. There are also some copies of it to be met with in Sclavonia.” These Bibles are without doubt printed in Cyrillic characters. Truber was banished Carniola a second time, and died June 29, 1586. The same year, in a letter he wrote to the deputies of Carniola, he Mjbscribes himself “Primus Truber, formerly canon in ordinary, called and confirmed at Laybach, pastor at Lack, at Tuffer near Ratschach, and at St. Bartholomew’s field, chaplain at S. Maximilian of Cilly, Sclavonian preacher at Trieste, and after the first persecution preacher at Rosemburgh on the Tauber, pastor at Kempten and at Aurais, afterwards preacher to the States of Carniola, and at Rubia in the county of Goergh, and after the second persecution pastor at CauHFen, and now at Deredingen near Tubingen.”

, a French abb of temporary fame, but who is upon the whole rather faintly praised by his countrymen, was born at St. Malo in Dec. 1697. He was related to the celebrated Maupertuis, who dedicated the third volume of his works to him. His first appearance as an author was in 1717, in his twentieth year, when he published in the French “Mercure,” his “Reflections on Telemachus,” which served to introduce him to La Motte and Fontenelle, who became afterwards not only the objects of his constant esteem, but of a species of idolatry which exposed him to the ridicule of the wits of his day. There are no memoirs of his education and early progress, but it appears that he was treasurer of the church of Nantes, and afterwards archdeacon and canon of St. Malo. For some time he lived in intimacy with cardinal Tencin, and visited Rome with him, but having no inclination to a life of dependence, whatever advantages it might bring, he returned to Paris, and employed his time in literary pursuits. His irreproachable conduct and agreeable manners procured him very general esteem as a man, but as a writer he never ranked high in the public opinion, and although very ambitious of a seat in the French academy, he did not reach that honour until 1761. About six years afterwards he retired to his native place, where he died in March 1770. His principal works were, I. “Essais de litterature et de morale,” 4 vols. 12mo, which have been often reprinted and translated into other languages. These essays, although the author was neither gifted with the elegance of La Bruyere, nor with the penetration of La Rochefoucault, contain much good sense and knowledge of books and men. 2. “Panegyriques ties Saints,” a work feebly written, but to which he prefixed some valuable reflections on eloquence. It was in this work he incurred the displeasure of Voltaire. He in general disliked the poetry of his country, and had not only the courage and imprudence to say that he thought it in general monotonous, but that he was unable to read even the “Henriade” of Voltaire without yawning. Voltaire resented this in a satire, entitled “Le Pauvre Diable,” but afterwards became reconciled to the abbe. 3. “Memoires pour servir a l'histoire de Messieurs de la Motte et de Fontenelle,” Amst. 1761. He was a contributor also to the “Journal des Savans,” and to the “Journal Chretien,” which was established in defence of religion against the infidel writers of that time.

, an estimable and upright statesman, was born at Easthampsted in Berkshire in August 1638. He was the eldest son of William Trumbull, esq. a justice of peace in Berkshire, and grandson of another William Trumbull, who was agent and envoy from James I. to the archduke Albert at Brussels, from 1609 to the end of 1625. This great man, for such he appears to have been, made a large collection of letters, memoirs, minutes, and negociations, of all the men of note in iiis time, with whom he entertained a constant and familiar correspondence. These documents, which are, or were lately, in the gallery at Easthampsted park, sufficiently show his care, industry, vigilance, and sufficiency, in the employment he served; and he appears to have been the family pattern and model which sir William Trumbull, the subject of our memoir, had in his eye, and spurred him on to an imitation of those virtues which, if they appeared so bright in the grandfather, shone forth in much greater lustre and perfection in the grandson.

Mr. Trumbull was educated partly at home and partly at Oafcingham school, to which he was sent in 1649. Jn 1654 he was admitted a gentleman commoner, under Mr. T. Wyat, in St. John’s college, Oxford, but removed three years after to Ah Souls, on being chosen a fellow. In 1659, he went out bachelor of laws. In 1664- he began his travels through France and Italy, and lived there with the lords Sunderland, Godolphin, and the bishop of London, Dr. Compton. In 1666 he returned to college, and the following year practised as a civilian in the vice-chancellor’s court. From some ms memorandums of his life written by himself, it appears that about this time he conducted an appeal to the lord chancellor Clarendon, and carried a point respecting the non-payment ojf fees for his doctor’s degree, by which he gained great credit, and all the business of the vice-chancellor’s court. In July of this year, 1667, he took the degree of LL. D. and in Michaelmas term, 1668, was admitted of Doctors’ Commons, after which he says he attended diligently the courts, and took notes.

In 1670 he married a daughter, of sir Charles Cotterell, and the same year his father settled upon him the yearly sum of 350l. which, he adds, sharpened his industry in his profession. In 1672, some deaths and promotions contributed to increase his practice, now worth 500l. per ann.; and about the same time he got the reversion of the place of clerk of the signet on sir Philip Warwick’s death, which happened in 1682. In the following year, began his career of public employment, by his accompanying lord Dartmouth to Tangiers. In this expedition he was appointed judge advocate of the fleet, and commissioner for settling the properties of the leases of houses, &c. at Tan* giers, between the king and the inhabitants. For this service we should suppose he was not very amply remunerated, as he makes here a remark on “the great difference between the value of assistance when wanted, and after it is given and done with.” In November he returned, and resumed his profession in Doctors Commons; and about the same time, refused the place of secretary of war in Ireland.

In 1684, he was presented to the king by lord Rochester, and received the honour of knighthood; and was also made clerk of the deliveries of the ordnance stores, a place worth 300l. a year. In 1685, he was appointed envoy extraordinary at the court of France, against his inclination; but the king (James II.) insisted upon it, and gave him a pension of 200l. a year, in lieu of his place of clerk of the deliveries, which he could not hold with his appointment as envoy. His conduct in this office does him much credit. Being in France when the Protestants were persecuted in consequence of the revocation of the edict of Nantz, he remonstrated against it, and spoke his opinion with a freedom which was not very acceptable, either at the court where he was, or that from which he came; and when he found his remonstrances in vain, he took every method he could, by his privilege, to harbour many of the persecuted Protestants, and assisted them in recovering their effects, and conveying them to England. It was probably on this account that he was recalled in 1636, and, as his services were too valuable to be laid aside, the king appointed him ambassador extraordinary to the Ottoman Porte; and before he embarked, the Turkey-company presented him with a gold cup, value sixty pounds. He was continued in this embassy by William III. and remained there until 1691. He then returned from Constantinople, principally by land. In 1694 and 1695 he was advanced to be one of the lords of the treasury, a member of the privy-council, and principal secretary of state. He was also governor of the Turkeycompany: and had been several times member of parliament, and once represented the university of Oxford. His opportunities to acquire diplomatic knowledge, and to understand the intrigues of negotiation, induced him once to say to king William, “Do not, Sir, send embassies to Italy, but a fleet into the Mediterranean.”

In 1697, he resigned all his employments, and retired to East Hampsted, where he died December 14, 1716, and was buried in East Hampsted church. It was in this retirement that, in 1705, he became acquainted with Pope, who then lived at Binfield. Pope informed Mr. Spence, that he “loved very much to read and talk of the classics in his retirement. We used to take a ride out together three or four days in the week, and at last almost every day.” His letters to Pope breathe'an air of uncommon good temper, good sense, candour, and tranquillity of mind. They evince the scholar, the man of taste, and the gentleman, mixed with the clearest sense of propriety. It appears that sir William was the very first person that urged Pope to undertake a translation of the Iliad. Besides these letters in Pope’s Works, several written by him while he was ambassador in France, are preserved in the paperoffice, and extracts from others have been printed by sir John Dalrymple. His well-written character of air William Dolben, archbishop of York, we have already given in our account of that prelate. We ought not to omit, that he had been a friend and patron to Dryden, who, in the postscript to his Virgil, pays him a very elegant compliment: "If the last Æneid shine among its fellows, it is. owing to the commands of sir William Trumbull, one of the principal secretaries of state, who recommended it as his favourite to my care; and for his sake particularly I have made it mine. For who would confess weariness when he. enjoined a fresh labour? I could not but invoke the assistance of a muse for this last office:

Sir William Trumbull’s first wife dying in 1704, he married Judith, daughter of Henry Alexander, fourth earl of Sterling, by whom he had a son of his own names who died in 1760, and whose daughter and sole heir married the hon. colonel Martin Sandys. Sir William had a brother, the rev. Dr. Charles Trumbull, who died Jan. 8, 1724. He was rector of Stystead in Essex, and Hadley in Suffolk, and chaplain to archbishop Sancroft, but quitted these livings at the Revolution.

, a learned surgeon, and senior surgeon of the county-infirmary, Gloucester, was descended from the ancient family of Trye, of Hardwick, co. Gloucester, and was born Aug. 21, 1757. He married Mary, elder daughter of the rev. Samuel Lysons, rector of Rodmarton, by whom he left three sons and five daughters; and was consequently related to the two celebrated antiquaries. In 1797, he succeeded to a considerable estate; consisting of the manor, advowson, and chief landed property in the parish of Leckhampton, near Cheltenham, under the will of his cousin, Henry Norwood, esq whose family had possessed them for many generations. This gentleman will be long regretted, not only as a surgeon, but as a man extremely useful in various undertakings of national concern, such as rail-roads, canals, &c. in the planning of which he evinced great genius. As a surgeon, his practice was extensive, and his success great. Many arduous and difficult operations he performed, which ended in perfect cures, after others of eminence had shrunk from the undertakings. His operations were conceived and executed from a perfect knowledge of the structure of the human body, attained by a well-grounded education, and constant intense study through life. He was educated under the eminent surgeon, Mr. Russell, of Worcester; then studied under John Hunter; was house-surgeon“to the Westminster Infirmary, and afterwards assistant to the very ingenious and scientific Sheldon. He was for some time house-surgeon and apothecary to the infirmary in Gloucester. Shortly after he quitted that situation, he was elected surgeon to that charity, an office which he filled for near thirty years, discharging its duties with great credit to himself; while those placed under his care were sensible of the advantages they possessed from his assiduous attention to their sufferings. He trained up several surgeons, many of whom are exercising the medical profession in various parts of the kingdom, with credit to their preceptor, honour to themselves, and utility to mankind. As an author he was well known to the literary part of the medical world, and published: 1.” Remarks on Morbid Retentions of Urine,“1784. 2.” Review of Jesse Foot’s Observations on the Venereal Disease,“(being an answer to his attack on John Hunter,) 1787. 3.” An Essay on the swelling of the lower Extremities incident to Lying-in Women,“1792. 4.” Illustrations of some of the Injuries to which the lower Limbs are exposed,“(with plates), 1802. 5.” Essay on some of the Stages of the Operation of Cutting for the Stone,“1811. 6.” An Essay on Aneurisms," in Latin, was far advanced in the press several years ago, but was laid aside, and not quite completed at the author’s death. He has left several interesting cases, and other observations, in manuscript; and many of his papers of a miscellaneous nature, connected with the profession, are to be found in various periodical publications. He was a steady friend and promoter of the Vaccine inoculation.

, an ancient Greek poet, as we learn from Suidas, was an Egyptian; but nothing can be determined concerning his age. Some have fancied him older than Virgil, but without the least colour of probability. Others have made him a contemporary with Quintus Calaber, Nonnus, Coluthus, and Musæus, who wrote the poem on Hero and Leander, because they fancied a resemblance between his style and theirs; but this is a precarious argument, nor is it better known when these authors lived. All therefore that can be reasonably supposed concerning the age of Tryphiodorus is, that he lived between the reigns of Severus and Anastasius; the former of whom died at the beginning of the third century, and the latter at the beginning of the sixth.

His reputation among the ancients, if we may judge from their having given him the title of grammarian, was very considerable; for, though the word grammarian be now applied to persons altogether attentive to the minutiae of language, yet it was anciently a title of honour, and particularly bestowed on such as wrote well and politely in every way. The writings of this author were extremely numerous, as we learn from their titles preserved by Suidas yet none of them are come down to us, except his “Destruction of Troy,” which he calls “A Sequel to the Iliad.” He also wrote a new Odyssey, which Addison has described with equal truth and humour. After having proposed to speak of the several species of false wit among the ancients, he says, “The first I shall produce are the Lipogrammatists, or Letter-droppers, of antiquity, that would take an exception, without any reason, against some particular letter in the alphabet, so as not to admit it once into a whole poem. One Tryphiodorus was a great master in this kind of writing. He composed an Odyssey, or epic poem on the adventures of Ulysses, consisting of four and twenty books, having entirely banished the letter A from his first book, which was called ‘ Alpha,’ as lucus a non lucendo, because there was not an Alpha in it. His second book was inscribed * Beta' for the same reason: in short, the poet excluded the whole four and twenty letters in their turns, and shewed them, one after another, that he could do his business without them. It must have been very pleasant to have seen this poet avoiding the reprobate letter, as much as another would a false quantity; and making his escape from it through the several Greek dialects, when he was pressed with it in any particular syllable. For, the most apt and elegant word in the whole language was rejected, like a diamond with a flaw in it, if it appeared blemished with a wrong letter. I shall only observe upon this head, that if the work I have here mentioned had been now extant, the Odyssey of Tryphiodorus in all probability would have been oftener quoted by our learned pedants than the Odyssey of Homer. What a perpetual fund would it have been of obsolete words and phrases, unusual barbarisms and rusticities, absurd spellings and complicated dialects! I make no question, but it would have been looked upon as one of the most valuable trcasures of the Greek tongue.” It may be necessary to add that this singular composition does not exist, and that some have good-naturedly doubted whether it was written by our Tryphiodorus.

The first edition of Tryphiodorus’s “Destruction of Troy” was published at Venice by Aldus, together with Quintus Calaber’s “Paralipomena,” and Coluthus’s Poem on the rape of Helen. It was afterwards reprinted at several places, particularly at Francfort in 1588, by Frischlinus, who not only restored many corrupted passages in the original, but added two Latin versions, one in prose, the other in verse. That in verse was reprinted with the Greek at Oxford, 1742, in 8vo, with an English translation in verse; and notes upon both the Greek and the English by J. Merrick of Trinity-college. There is another good edition more recently published by Mr. Northmore, Oxford, 1791, 8vo; and one was printed at Leipsic in 1809, in fol. amounting only to twenty-five copies.

, an ingenious mathematician, lord of Killingswald and of Stolzenberg in Lusatia, was born April 10, 1651.After having served as a volunteer in the army of Holland in 1672, be travelled into most parts of Europe, as England, Germany, Italy, France, &c. He went to Paris for the third time in 1682; where he communicated to the Academy of Sciences, the discovery of the curves called from him Tschirnhausen’s Caustics; and the academy in consequence elected the inventor one of its foreign members. On returning to Italy, he was desirous of perfecting the science of optics; for which purpose he established two glass-works, from whence resulted many new improvements in dioptrics and physics, particularly the noted burning-glass which he presented to the regent. It was to him too that Saxony owed its porcelain manufactory.

Content with the enjovment of literary fame, Tschirnhausen refused all other honours that were offered him. Learning was his sole delight. He searched out men of talents, and gave them encouragement. He was often at the expence of printing the useful works of other men, for the benefit of the public; and died, beloved and regretted, the llth of September, 1708.

Tschirnhausen wrote, “De Medicina Mentis & Corporis,” printed at Amsterdam in 1687. And the following memoirs were printed in the volumes of the Academy of Sciences: K Observations on Burning Glasses of 3 or 4 feet diameter; vol. 1699. 2. Observations on the Glass of a Telescope, convex on both sides, of 32 feet focal distance; 1700. 3. On the Radii of Curvature, with the finding the Tangents, Quadratures, and Rectifications of many curves; 1701. 4. On the Tangents of Mechanical Curves; 1702. 5. On a method of Quadratures 1702.

, one of a family of Swiss writers, and laudanum of the canton of Glarus, was born in 1505. He devoted much of his time to historical researches, and produced, among other works of less note, a “Chronicle,” which, whatever its merits, remained in manuscript until 1734, when it was published at Basle in 2 vols. fol. He died in 1572. Another of the family, Dominick Tscudi, who died in 1654, wrote in Latin, on the “Constitution of the Benedictine congregation in Switzerland,” and an account of the founders of that abbey, which was printed in 1651, 8vo. A third, John Henry Tscudi, who died in 1729, and was a zealous protestant, his predecessors being equally zealous catholics, was the author of an account of the abbes of St. Gall, 1711, 4to; a “Chronicle” of the canton of Claris, 1714, 8vo, both in German. He also conducted a literary journal from 1714 to 1726, which was ordered to be burnt by the public executioner in consequence of the freedoms he took with popery. There was also a John Peter Tscudi, who wrote in German a “History of Werdenberg,” published in 1126.

, an ingenious English writer, was born in London Sept. 2, 1705, of a Somersetshire family; his father was a merchant, his mother was Judith, daughter of Abraham Tillard, esq. Both his parents died before he was two years old, and left him under the care of his grandmother Tillard and his maternal uncle sir Isaac Tillard, a man of strict piety and morality, of whose memory Mr. Tucker always spoke with the highest veneration and regard, and who took the utmost pains to give his nephew principles of integrity, benevolence, and candour, with a disposition to unwearied application and industry in his pursuits. He was educated at Bishop’s Stortford, and in 1721 was entered as a gentleman commoner in Merlon-college, Oxford, where his favourite studies were metaphysics and the mathematics. He there engaged masters to teach him French, Italian, and music, of which last he was very fond. In 1726 he was entered of the Inner Temple. Soon afterwards, and just before he came of age, he lost his guardian sir Isaac. He studied enough of the law to be useful to himself and his friends; but his fortune not requiring it, and his constitution not being strong, he was never called to the bar. He usually spent the summer vacations in tours through different parts of England, Wales, and Scotland, and once passed six weeks in France and Flanders. In 1727 he purchased Betchworth-castle with its estate. He then turned his attention more to rural affairs, and with his usual industry wrote down numberless observations which he collected in discourses with his farmers, or extracted from various authors on the subject. On the 3d of February, 1736, he married Dorothy, daughter of Edward Barker, esq. afterwards cursitor baron of the exchequer, and receiver of the tenths. By her he had three daughters, Dorothy, who died under three years old, Judith, and Dorothea- Maria, who, on the 27th of October, 1763, married sir Henry Paulett St. John, bart. and died on the 5th of May, 1768, leaving one son. Mrs. Tucker died the 7th of May, 1754, aged 48. As they had lived together in the tenderest harmony, the loss was a very severe stroke to Mr. Tucker. His first amusement was. to collect all the letters which had passed between them whenever they happened to be absent from each other, which he copied out in books twice over, under the title of “The Picture of artless Love;” one copy he gave to her father, who survived her five years, and the other he kept to read over to his daughters frequently. His principal attention then was to instruct his daughters; he taught them French and Italian, and whatever else he thought might be useful to them to know. In 1755, at the request of a friend in the west of England, he worked up some materials which he sent him into the form of a pamphlet, then published under the title of “The Country Gentleman’s Advice to his Son on the Subject of Party Clubs,” printed by Owen, Temple-bar; and he soon after began writing “The Light of Nature pursued,” of which he not only formed and wrote over several sketches before he fixed on the method he determined to pursue, but wrote the complete copy twice with his own hand; but thinking his style was naturally still and laboured, in order to improve it, he had employed much time in studying the most elegant writers and orators, and translating many orations of Cicero, Demosthenes, &c. and, twice over, “Cicero de Oratore.” After this he composed a little treatise called “Vocal Sounds,” printed, but never published; contriving, with a few additional letters, to fix the pronunciation to the whole alphabet in such manner, that the sound of any word may be conveyed on puper as exactly as by the voice. His usual method of spending his time was to rise very early to his studies, in winter bu ‘ning a lamp in order to light his own fire before his servants were stirring. After breakfast he returned to his studies for two or three hours, and then took a ride on horseback, or walked. The evenings in summer he often spent in walking over his farms and setting down his remarks; and in the winter, while in the country, reading to his wife, and afterwards to his daughters. In London, where he passed some months every winter and spring, he passed much time in the same manner, only that his evenings were more frequently spent in friendly parties with some of his relations who lived near, and with some of his old fellow collegiates or Temple friends. His walks there were chiefly to transact any business he had in town, always preferring to walk on all his own errands, to sending orders by a servant, and frequently when he found no other, would walk, he said, to the Bank to see what it was o’clock. Besides his knowledge in the classics and the sciences, he was perfectly skilled in merchant’s accompts, and kept all his books with the exactness of an accompting-house; and he was ready to serve his neighbours by acting as justice of peace. His close application to his studies, and writing latterly much by candle and lamp-light, weakened his sight, and hrought on cataracts, which grew so much worse after a fever in the spring, 1771, that he could no longer amuse himself with reading or writing, and at last could not walk, except in his own garden, without leading. This was a great trial on his philosophy, yet it did not fail him i he not only bore it with patience, but cheerfulness, frequently being much diverted with the mistakes his infirmity occasioned him to make. His last illness carried him off on the 20th of November, 1774, perfectly sensible, and as he had lived, easy and resigned, to the last. He published a pamphlet entitled a Man in quest of himself,“in reply to some strictures on a note to his” Free Will.“He had no turn for politics or public life, and never could be induced to become a candidate to represent the county of Surrey, to which his fortune, abilities, and character gave him full pretensions.” My thoughts,“says Mr. Tucker of himself,” have taken a turn, from my earliest youth, towards searching into the foundations and measures of right and wrong; my love for retirement has furnished me with continual leisure; and the exercise of my reason has been my daily employment." He once, however, was induced to attend a public meeting at Epsom in the beginning of the present reign, when party ran very high, and when sir Joseph Mawbey began to exercise his talent for poetry by a ballad on the occasion, in which he introduced Mr. Tucker and other gentlemen who differed from him in their opinions. So far from being hurt by this, Mr. Tucker was highly amused at the representation given of himself, and actually set the ballad to music.

Having before provided for his younger daughter, he left his estate at Betchworth to his eldest daughter, who was unmarried, and a more worthy successor could not have been found. With the strong understanding of her father, she inherited his good and amiable qualities; and though possessed of learning which is not often found in a lady, it was never obtruded in conversation. Friendly to her neighbours, kind to her tenants, benevolent to the poor, she died unmarried Nov. 26, 1794, respected and regretted by all who were acquainted with her, leaving sir Henry Paulet St. John Mildmay, her sister’s only son, heir to her estates, who, in 1798, sold the manor, mansion-house, &c. to Henry Peters, esq. banker in London, the present owner, who has made great improvements, and enlarged the estate by purchases.

Mr. Tucker’s “Light of Nature pursued,” a work not now much read, was published in 7 vols. 8vo, of which the first three were published by himself in 1768, under the assumed name of Edward Search, esq. and the four last, after his death, as “The posthumous work of Abraham Tucker, esq.” It consists of disquisitions on most disputed points and obscure theories in metaphysics, politics, divinity, &c. in which are many bold and original thoughts, but conveyed in a style and manner which has prevented the work from being much a favourite with the public. Although in general praised for liberality of sentiment, he has been by one party censured on account of his servile adherence to the doctrines of the established church, and by another has been claimed as a supporter of what is called unitarianism.

, a learned English divine, but more celebrated as a political writer, was born at Laugharn, in Carmarthenshire, in 1712. His father was a farmer, and having a small estate left him near Aberystwith, in Cardiganshire, he removed thither; and perceiving that his son had a turn for learning, he sent him to Ruthin school in Denbighshire, where he made so great progress in the classics that he obtained an exhibition at St. John’s college, Oxford. The journey from his native place to the university was long, and at that time very tedious, on account of the badness of the roads. He travelled therefore for some time on foot, until old Mr. Tucker, feeling for his son’s reputation, as well as for his ease, gave him his own horse. But upon his return, young Josiah, with true filial affection, considered that it was better for him to walk to Oxford than for his father to repair on foot to the neighbouring markets and fairs, which had been the case, owing to this new regulation. The horse was accordingly returned; and our student, for the remainder of the time he continued at the university, travelled on foot backward and forward with his baggage at his back.

At the age of twenty-three he entered into holy orders, and served a curacy for some time in Gloucestershire. About 1737 he became curate of St. Stephen’s church, Bristol, and was appointed minor canon in the cathedral of that city. Here he attracted the notice of Dr. Joseph Butler, then bishop of Bristol, and afterwards of Durham, who appointed Mr. Tucker his domestic chaplain. By the interest of this prelate Mr. Tucker obtained a prebendal stall in the cathedral of Bristol; and on the death of Mr. Catcott, well known by his treatise on the deluge, he became rector of St. Stephen. The inhabitants of that parish consist chiefly of merchants and tradesmen, a circumstance which greatly aided his natural inclination for commercial and political studies. When the famous bill was brought into the House of Commons for the naturalization of the Jews, Mr. Tucker took a decided part in favour of the measure, and was, indeed, its most able advocate; but for this he was severely attacked in pamphlets, newspapers, and magazines; and the people of Bristol burnt his effigy dressed in canonicals, together with his letters on. behalf of naturalization . In 1753 he published an able pamphlet on the “Turkey Trade,” in which he demonstrates the evils that result to trade in general from chartered companies. At this period lord Clare (afterwards Ccirl Nugent) was returned to parliament for Bristol, which honour he obtained chiefly through the strerruous exertions of Mr. Tucker, whose influence in his large and wealthy parish was almost decisive on such an occasion. In return for this favour the earl procured for him the deanery of Gloucester, in 1758, at which time he took his degree of D. D. So great was his reputation for commercial knowledge, that Dr. Thomas Hayter, afterwards bishop of London, who was then tutor to his present majesty, applied to Dr. Tucker to draw up a dissertation on this subject for the perusal of his royal pupil. It was accordingly done, and gave great satisfaction. This work, under the title of “The Elements of Commerce,” was printed in quarto, but never published. Dr. Warburton, however, who, after having been member of the same chapter with the dean, at Bristol, became bishop of Gloucester, thought very differently from the rest of mankind, in respect to his talents and favourite pursuits; and said once, in his coarse manner, that “his Dean’s trade was religion, and religion his trade.” The dean on being once asked concerning the coolness which subsisted between him and ^Varburton, his answer was to the following purpose: “The bishop affects to consider me with contempt; to which I say nothing. He has sometimes spoken coarsely of me; to which I replied nothing. He has said that religion is my trade, and trade is my religion. Commerce, and its connections have, it is true, been favourite objects of my attention, and where is jthe crime? And as for religion, I have attended carefully to the duties of my parish: nor have I neglected my cathedral. The world knows something of me as a writer on religious subjects; and I will add, which the world does not know, that I have written near three hundred sermons, preached them all, again and again. My heart is at ease on that score, and my conscience, thank God, does not accuse me.” The fact is, that although there is no possible connection between the business of commerce and the duties of a clergyman, he had studied theology in all its branches scientifically, and his various publications on moral and religious subjects show him to be deeply versed in theology.

In 1771, when a strong attempt was made to procure an abolition of subscription to the thirty-nine articles, Dr. Tucker came forward as an able advocate of the church of England, yet admitted that some reformation of the liturgy was wanted, and instanced particularly the Athanasian creed, which he considered as too scholastic and refined for a popular confession of faith. About this time he published “Directions for Travellers,” in which he lays down excellent rules, by which gentlemen who visit foreign countries may not only improve their own minds, but turn their observations to the benefit of their native country. This has become extremely scarce, but there is a part of it reprinted in Berohtold’s “Essay to direct the inquiries of Travellers,” an excellent work, published in 178i>, 2 vols.

In 1772, the dean printed a small volume of sermons, in which he explains the doctrines of election and justification, in reference to a very violent dispute then carried on between the Calvinistic and the Arminian methodists, the former headed by Messrs. Toplady and Hill, and the latter by the Messrs. Wesleys and Fletcher. The year following he published “Letters to the rev. Dr. Kippis, wherein the claim of the Church of England to an authority in matters of faith, and to a power of decreeing rites and ceremonies, is discussed and ascertained,” &c.

When the dispute arose between Great Britain and the American colonies, the dean was an attentive observer of the contest, examining the affair with a very different eye from that of a party-man, or an interested merchant, and discovered, as he conceived, that both sides would be benefited by an absolute separation. The more he thought on this subject, the more he was persuaded that extensive colonies were an evil rather than an advantage to any commercial nation. On this principle, therefore, he published his “Thoughts upon the Dispute between the Mother Country and America.” He demonstrated, that the latter 1 could, not be conquered, and that, if it could, the purchase would be dearly bought. He warned this country against commencing a war with the colonies, and advised that they should be left to themselves. This advice startled all parties, and by all the dean was considered as a sort of madman, who had rambled out of the proper line of his profession to commence political quack. Our author, however, went on vindicating and enforcing his favourite system, in spite of all the obloquy with which it was treated both in the senate and from the press. As the war proceeded, some intelligent persons began to see more truth and reason in his sentiments, and time, perhaps, may be thought to have demonstrated that he was right. He printed several essays in the newspapers under the title of Cassandra.

When the terrors of an invasion were very prevalent in 1779, the dean circulated, in a variety of periodical publications, some of the most sensible observations that were ever made- on the subject, in order to quiet the fears of the people. He states at length, and with great accuracy, the numerous difficulties that must attend the attempt to invade this country, and the still greater ones that must be encountered by the invaders after their landing. Those observations were reprinted, with good effect, in the course of the late war.

In 1781, he published what he had printed long before, “A treatise on Civil Government,” in which his principal design is to counteract the doctrines of the celebrated Locke and his followers. This book made a considerable noise, and was attacked by several of the best writers on the democratic side of the question. The year following he closed his political career with a pamphlet entitled “Cui Bono?” in which he balances the profits and loss of each of the belligerent powers, and recapitulates all his former positions on the subject of war and colonial possessions. His publications after that period consisted of some tracts on the commercial regulations of Ireland, on the exportation of woollens, and on the iron trade.

In 1777 he published seventeen practical sermons, in one vol. 8vo. After he resigned his rectory in Bristol he resided mostly in Gloucester, where, in 1781, he married Mrs. Crowe, his housekeeper. He died of the gradual decays of age, November 4, 1799, and was interred in the South transept of Gloucester cathedral, where a monument has since been erected to his memory. It should be recorded to his praise, that though enjoying but very moderate preferment (for to a man of no paternal estate, or other ecclesiastical dignity, the deanery of Gloucester is no very advantageous situation), he was notwithstanding a liberal benefactor to several public institutions, and a distinguished patron of merit. About 1790 he thought of resigning his rectory in Bristol, and, without communicating his design to any other person, he applied to the chancellor, in whose gift it is, for leave to quit it in favour of his curate, a most deserving maq, with a large family. His lordship was willing enough that he should give up the living, but he refused him the liberty of nominating his successor. On this the dean resolved to hold the living himself till he could find a fit opportunity to succeed in his object. After weighing the matter more deliberately, he communicated his wish to his parishioners, and advised them to draw up a petition to the chancellor in favour of the curate. This was accordingly done, and signed by all of them, without any exception, either on the part of the dissenters or others. The chancellor, being touched with this testimony of love between a clergyman and his people, yielded at last to the application; in consequence of which the dean cheerfully resigned the living to a successor well qualified to tread in his steps.

, 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 divine, usually, but perhaps not very strictly, classed among nonconformists, was born in September 1599, at Kirton, near Boston in Lincolnshire, where his father was minister. He was, at fourteen years of age, matriculated of the university of Cambridge, being admitted of Emmanuel college there. His biographer, Dr. Salter, remarks that this circumstance “shews that he had been educated hitherto in a dislike to the church establishment; for that college, though it abounded for many years in most excellent scholars, and might therefore very justly be esteemed and flourish on their account, yet was much resorted to for another reason about this time; viz. its being generally look'd on, from its first foundation, (which Tuckney himself acknowledges) as a seminary of Puritans.” To this class Dr. Tuckney certainly belonged; he was a Calvinist, and so far a doctrinal puritan, but we find fewer symptoms of nonconformity about him than in the case of any man of his time.

Mr. Tuckney took his first degree in arts before he was seventeen years old, and was chosen fellow of his college three years after. In 1620 he proceeded M. A. and was some time in the earl of Lincoln’s family, before he resided on his fellowship. When he returned he became a very eminent tutor, and had many persons of rank admitted under him. In 1627 he took his degree of B. D.; after which he accepted the invitation of his countrymen, and went to Boston, as assistant to the famous vicar of that town, John Cotton, for whom, though a very zealous nonconformist, his diocesan bishop Williams, when lord keeper, procured a toleration under the great seal, for the free exercise of his ministry, notwithstanding his dissenting in ceremonies, so long as done without disturbance to the church. But this was probably not very long: for Mr. Cotton quitted his native country, before the rebellion, and withdrew to New England. On his departure the corporation of Boston chose Mr. Tuckney, who was now married, into this vicarage, and he kept it, at their request, till the restoration; or rather his title to it, for he took no part of the profit after he ceased to reside. Calamy mentions a Mr. Anderson as having been ejected at the restoration; he probably officiated there, but never was vicar, and Dr. How succeeded Mr. Tuckney in 1660.

When the Assembly of Divines met at Westminster, Mr. Tuckney was one of the two nominated for the county of Lincoln, and on this removed to London, and was appointed minister of St. Michael Querne in Cheapside. In 1645, when the earl of Manchester turned out Dr. Holdsworth, master of Emmanuel college, Mr. Tuckney was appointed to succeed him, but did not entirely reside on this employment until 1648, when being: chosen vice-chancellor he removed with his family to Cambridge, served that office with credit, and commenced D.D. the year after. While vicechancellor, Mr. Baker informs us, that he was very zealous for the conversion of the Indians, and the propagation of the gospel in America, and promoted these designs very vigorously with the assistance of the heads of the other colleges. In 1653, Dr. Hill master of Trinity dying, Dr. Tuckney preached his funeral sermon, and on the removal of Dr. Arrowsmith to Trinity college, was chosen master of St. John’s, and two years after regius professor of divinitv. But although thus legally possessed of these two considerable preferments, and although, Dr. Salter says, his behaviour in both was irreproachable and even highly commendable; though he ever consulted the interest both of the university and his college, and the honour of the chair, yet he was dvilly turned out of both, at the restoration, on pretence of his great age, which was only sixty-two.

Mr. Baker thus represents the treatment Dr. Tuckney met with: “A set of young men (for the old ejected members seem to have been content with their commons) were so intoxicated with the return of the king, and flushed with warmer expectations, as to forget all reverence and gratitude that was due to a venerable old man, and to turn upon their benefactor, to whom most of them owed encouragement, and some of them preferment. The same person, that had been so much reverenced by them, was now neglected. Complaints were brought by them, and preferred at court against him, where meeting with countenance, the good old man, partly awed with the terrors of the higher powers, and partly grieved and vexed with the ingratitude of his fellows; or possibly foreseeing a consequent necessity upon his non-compliance, was easily prevailed with to resign his preferments. He accordingly resigned his mastership of St. John’s and professorship June 22, 1661, a pension of 100l. per annum being reserved to him out of the emoluments of his professorship, which was duly paid him to his dying day.”

“The rest of his life,” adds Mr. Baker, “he spent in retirement, most part at London, where he had been pastor of St. Michael le Querne, and where he had been commissioner at the conference at the Savoy: but, either through diffidence of himself, or for other reasons, although he had filled the chair at Cambridge so many years with reputation, by acquitting himself extremely well, yet he never could be prevailed with to appear and act in that conference; whilst Mr. Baxter, who knew nothing of an university, nor was acquainted with any other chair save that of the pulpit, only in the strength of natural logic ventured to engage in mood and figure with some of our best and most experienced divines, with such success as usually attends rash undertakings.”

The Savoy conference Dr. Tuckney certainly never attended, which, Dr. Salter says, Mr. Baxter observes “with some indignation;” but this we cannot discover in Baxter’s account. Still less would he have hinted, as a cause for Dr. Tuckney’s absence, that he was silenced by the 1 Oo/. a year given him, which Dr. Salter, although otherwise his admirer, has done. According to Calamy, he preached sometimes in his own house, and occasionally in the families of several friends. In the time of the plague he lived at Colvvich hall near Nottingham, the seat of Robert Pierrepoint, esq. where he was soon troubled and confined, but was treated very civilly, and in a few months discharged. Upon the five-mile act, he removed to Oundle, and thence to Warmington, in Northamptonshire. After the fire of London (in which his library was burnt) he removed to Stockerston in Leicestershire, and then to Tottenham near London, whence in 1669-70 he removed to Spital-yard, where he continued until his death, February 1670, in the seventy-first year of his age. He was buried March 1, in the church of St. Andrew Undershaft, London.

Calamy says, he had the character of an eminently pious and learned man, a true friend, an indefatigable student, a candid disputant, and an earnest promoter of truth and godliness. A remarkable proof of his candour, and of his zeal for truth, may be seen in his letters to Dr. Whichcote, who had been one of his pupils, published in 1753 by Dr. Salter, under the title of “Eight Letters concerning the use of reason in religion; the differences of opinion among Christians; the reconciliation of sinners unto God; and, the studies and learning of a minister of the gospel.” These were written in 1651, and were appended by Dr. Salter to his edition of Whichcote’s “Aphorisms.” Dr. Tuckney’s other works were, “Forty Sermons” published by his son the Rev. Jonathan Tuckney, 1676, 4to; and a collection of Latin pieces, consisting of sermons ad clerum, positions, determinations in the chair and for his own degree, lectures, &c. Amst. 1679, with a short account of the Doctor by W. D. supposed to be Dr. William Diliingham, his successor in the headship of Emmanuel college.

From these writings, Dr. Salter remarks, that “our professor appears to have been a man of great reading and much knowledge; a ready and elegant Laiinist but narrow, stiff, and dogmatical no enemy to the royal or episcopal power, as it should seem but above measure zealous for church power and ecclesiastical discipline which such men as Tuckney, Arrowsmith, &c. very sincerely wished and hoped to have established, by authority of the parliament, following the repeated advice of the assembly; and they sadly regretted their disappointment; their new masters constantly turning a deaf ear to all such admonitions.” In his elections at St. John’s, when the president would call upon him to have regard to the godly, the master answered, “No one should have a greater regard to the truly godly than himself, but he was determined to choose none but scholars” adding, “They may deceive me in their godliness: they cannot in their scholarship.”

“One thing,” Mr. Baker adds, “may be said in favour of Dr. Tuckney, and his predecessor (Arrowsmith), or rather it is a right owing to their memory, that though they were not perhaps so learned as some of those that have before and since filled that post and station, yet their government was so good, and the discipline under them so strict and regular, that learning then flourished: and it was under them that some of those great men had their education who were afterwards the ornaments of the following age. I need not name them. Stillingfleet, Beveridge, Cave, &c. are names well known; names that will live in future ages, when their first instructors will perhaps be forgot.”

, an eminent canonist, was a native of Sicily, and commonly called Panormitanus, from his being at the head of a Benedictine abbey in Palermo, and afterwards archbishop of that city. He was born probably towards the close of the fourteenth century, some say in 1336, and became one of the most celebrated canonists of his time. He was present at the council of Basil, and had a considerable hand in the proceedings there against pope Eugenius; in recompense for which service he was made a 1 cardinal by Felix V. in 1440. He was afterwards obliged, by the orders of the king of Arragon his master, to return to his archbishopric, where he died of the plague in 1445. There is a complete edition of his works, Venice, 1617, in 9 vols. fol. Dupin mentions as his principal work a treatise on the council of Basil, which was translated into French about the end of the seventeenth century by Dr. Gerbais, of the Sorbonne, and printed at Paris.

, a gentleman of an ancient family in Yorkshire, deserves honourable mention in this work, although we can say little as to his biography, as the first inventor of the drill-plough, and the first Englishman, perhaps the first writer ancient or modern, who attempted with any tolerable degree of success to reduce agriculture to certain and uniform principles. After an education at one of our universities, and being admitted a barrister of the Temple, he made the tour of Europe, and, in every country through which he passed, was a diligent observer of the soil, culture, and vegetable productions. On his return to England he married, and settled in a paternal farm in Oxfordshire, where he pursued an infinite number of agricultural experiments, till by intense application, vexatious toil, and too frequently exposing himself to the vicissitudes of heat and cold in the open fields, he contracted a disorder in his breast, which, not being found curable in England, obliged him a second time to travel, and to seek a cure in the milder climates of France and Italy. Here he again attended more minutely to the culture of those countries; and, having little else to do, he employed himself, during three years residence abroad, to reduce his observations to writing, with a view of once more endeavouring to introduce them into practice, if ever he should be so happy as to recover his health, and be able to undergo the fatigues of a second attempt. From the climate of Montpelier, and the waters of that salutary spring, he found in a few months that relief which all the power of physic could not afford him at home; and he returned to appearance perfectly repaired in his constitution, but greatly embarrassed in his fortune. Part of his estate in Oxfordshire he had sold, and before his departure had settled his family on a farm of his own, called Prosperous Farm, near Hungerford in Berkshire, where he returned with a firm resolution to perfect his former undertaking, having, as he thought, devised means during his absence to obviate all difficulties, and to force his new husbandry into practice by the success of it, in spite of all the opposition that should be raised by the lower class of husbandmen against it. He revised and rectified all his old instruments, and contrived new ones proper for the different soils of his new farm; and he now went on pretty successfully, though not rapidly, nor much less expensively, in the prosecution of his new system. He demonstrated to all the world the good effects of his horsehoeing culture; and by raising crops of wheat without dunging for thirteen years together in the same field, equal in quantity, and superior in quality, to those of his neighbours in the ordinary course, he demonstrated the truth of his own doctrine, that labour and arrangement would snpply the place of dung and fallow, and would produce more corn at an equal or less expence. But though Mr. Tull was successful in demonstrating that this might be done, he was not so happy in doing it himself. His expences were enhanced various ways, but chiefly by the stupidity of workmen in constructing his instruments, and in the awkwardness and wickedness of his servants, who, because they did not or would not comprehend the use of them, seldom failed to break some essential part or other, in order to render them useless. These disadvantages were discernible only to Mr. Tull himself; the advantages attending the new husbandry were now visible to all the world; and it was now that Mr. Tull was prevailed upon, by the solicitations of the neighbouring gentlemen who were witnesses of its utility, to publish his theory, illustrated by a genuine account of the result of it in practice, which he engaged to do, and faithfully performed at no trivial expence.

His first publication was a “Specimen” only, in 1731; which was followed in 1733 by “An Essay on Horse-hoeing Husbandry,” 1733, folio; a work of so much refutation, that it was translated into French by Mr. Du Hamel. From this time to 1739, he continued to make several improvements in his method of cultivating wheat; and to publish at different times answers to such objections as had been made to his husbandry by “those literary vermin that are as injurious to the agriculture of England, as the fly is to our turnips.” We use here the words of a noble writer, vvho condescended to prefix an advertisement to a posthumous publication of the late Mr. Francis Forbes, entitled “The extensive Practice of the New Husbandry,” 1778, 8vo, a work which endeavoured to revive the ideas and practice of Mr. Tull, who died Jan. 3, 1740, at his seat at Prosperous,

Mr. Tull had a son, John, who in his early years travelled to France, Italy, and other parts of the continent. On his return, being a good mechanic, he was led to various inventions, which had various success. He was, among other schemes, the first who introduced post-chaises, and posttravelling by them, in England, for which he obtained a patent in 1737. He then appears to have gone into the army, and was an officer in the train of artillery, and aidde-camp to general James Campbell, who fell at the battle of Fontenoy, where Mr. Tull attended him. After his return he resumed his schemes, one of which was the bringing of fish to London by land-carriage. This he introduced in July and August 1761; but, failing for want of capital, he was arrested, and died in prison in 1764.

, 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.

Wood says, Dr. Tully “was a pious man, and many ways very learned, chiefly read in the more ancient writers, yet not so wholly addicted to the perusal of them, but that at some times-he took delight to converse with later authors. He was a person of severe morals, puritanically inclined, and a strict Calvinist,” which Wood thinks was some hindrance to him in the way of promotion, but his promotions were certainly not inconsiderable. His principal works are, 1. “Logica Apodeictica, sive Tractatus brevis et dilucidus de demonstratione; cum dissertatiuncula Gassendi eodem pertinente,” Oxon. 1662, 8vo. 2. “A Letter to a friend in Wilts (his patron Mr. Gore) upon occasion of a late ridiculous pamphlet, wherein was inserted a pretended prophecy of Thomas Becket,” Lond. 1666, 4to. 3. “Enchiridion didacticum, cum appendice de coena Domini, expositione Symboli apostolici et orationis Dominica;,” London, 1673. According to Wood, some of the contents of this volume had been published separately. 4. “Justificatio Paulina sine Operibus, cum dissertat. ad Rom. vii. 14.” Oxon. 1674, 4to. This was levelled chiefly at Bull’s “Harinonia Apostolica,” (See Bull, vol. VII. p. 267), and Baxter’s “Aphorisms on Justification;” and both replied to Dr. Tully, Bull in his “Apology for the Harmony,” and Baxter in a “Treatise on Justifying Righteousness, &c.” To the latter Dr. Tully rejoined in “A Letter to Mr. Richard Baxter, &c.” Oxon. 1675, 4to. He also translated from French into English “A brief relation of the present troubles in England,” Oxon. 1645, 4to.

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.

, an eminent physician, was the son of Peter Dirx, a rich merchant of Amsterdam, where he was born Oct. 11, 1593. He rarely went by his father’s name, having rather whimsically changed it to de Tulp, the name, or probably the sign of a house in which he lived on the emperor’s canal. He was at first a surgeon’s apprentice, but having a perfect acquaintance with the Latin language, and a turn for science, he determined to extend his studies to every thing connected with medicine, to which he accordingly applied at the university of Leyden. After taking his doctor’s degree he returned to Amsterdam, and carried on practice for fifty-two years with the greatest reputation. But his fame was not confined to his profession only. Possessing an accurate knowledge and much judgment in the political history of his country, he was raised to civic honours; in 1622 he was elected of the council of Amsterdam, and six times served the office of sheriff. In 1652 he was made burgomaster, an office which he filled also in 1656, 1660, and 1671. In 1672, when Louis XIV. attacked Holland, Tulp had a principal hand in exciting that spirit of resistance among his fellow-citizens by which Amsterdam was saved. Nor were they unmindful of his services, for when he died in 1674, aged eighty, a medal was struck to his memory.

In the medical world he is principally known by his “Observationum medicarum Libri tres,” Amst. 1641, 1652, 12mo, with engravings, reprinted with a fourth book, Amst. 1672, 1685, and Leyden, 1716. In these cases, which are very curious, and written in a Latin style, which is pure without affectation, and concise without obscurity, are some valuable anatomical remarks; and, according to Haller, Tulp was the first, or one of the first, who observed the lacteal vessels.

, a very learned, and in many respects a very excellent prelate of the church of Rome, was born at Hatchford, near Richmond, Yorkshire, about 1474. He was a natural son of a gentleman named Tunstall or Tonstal, by a lady of the Conyers family. He became a student at Baliol college, Oxford, about 1491, but, on the plague breaking out, went to Cambridge, where he became a fellow of King’s hall, now part of Trinity college. After having for some time prosecuted his studies there, he went to the university of Padua, which was then in high reputation, studied along with Latimer, and took the degree of doctor of laws. According to Godwin, he was by this time a man of extensive learning, a good Hebrew and Greek scholar, an able lawyer and divine, a good rhetorician, and skilled in various branches of the mathematics. These accomplishments, on his return, recommended him to the patronage of archbishop Warham, who constituted him vicar-general or chancellor, in August 1511. The archbishop also recommended him to Henry VIII. and in December of the same year, collated him to the rectory of Harrow-on-the hill, Middlesex; which he held till 1522.

In 1514 he was installed prebendary of Stow-Ionga, in the church of Lincoln, and the following year admitted archdeacon of Chester. In 1516 he was made master of the rolls, a post for which his extensive knowledge of the laws had well qualified him. The same year he was sent on an embassy, with sir Thomas More, to the emperor Charles V. then at Brussels, and there had the satisfaction of living in the same house with Erasmus, who said of him that he not only excelled all his contemporaries in the knowledge of the learned languages, but was also a man of great judgment, clear understanding, and uncommon modesty, and of a cheerful temper, but without levity. In the performance of his duty at the Imperial court, he made himself well acquainted with such circumstances as were of importance to his royal master and the interests of his country, and gave such satisfaction to the administration at home, that about ten days after his arrival in London in 1517, he was a second time sent on an embassy to the emperor.

On his return, apparently in 1519, he was rewarded by a succession of preferments, in this year by the prebend of Botevant, in the church of York; in May 1521 by another, that of Combe and Hornham, in the church of Sarum by the deanery of Salisbury; and in 1522 he wa promoted to the bishopric of London. In 1523 he was made keeper of the privy seal: and in 1525, he and sir Richard Wingfield went ambassadors into Spain, in order to confer with the emperor, after the king of France, Francis I was taken prisoner at the battle of Pavia.

In 1527, we find bishop Tunsiall employed in prosecuting several persons in his diocese for heresy; for he was strongly attached to the principles of the Romish church, but he never carried his zeal so far as to put any person to death for their opinions. On the contrary he was always an advocate for milder methods of reclaiming them from what he thought erroneous. Still his principles, the example of his contemporaries, and the spirit of the age in which he lived, were ajl too powerful for the natural mildness of his disposition; and although he shed no blood, he took many unjustifiable steps to obstruct the progress of the reformation, and that being at present but partial, he probably thought he might succeed without proceeding to the last extremities.

In July 1527, Tunstall attended cardinal Wolsey in his pompous embassy into France; and in 1529 was one of the English ambassadors employed to negociate the treaty of Camhray. It was on his return from this last place, that he exerted himself to suppress Tyndale’s edition of the New Testament, by means which will be noticed in our account of that celebrated reformer and martyr. Even in this matter, bishop Burnet observes that judicious persons discerned the moderation of Tunstall, who would willingly put himself to a considerable expence in burning the books of the heretics, but had too much humanity to be desirous, like many of his brethren, to burn the heretics themselves.

In the mean time he acquired great reputation by the political knowledge and talents which he displayed in his different embassies and negociations, and no promotion was thought too great for him. In 1530 he was translated to the rich bishopric of Durham. Before his removal from the see of London, he had bestowed a considerable sum of money in furnishing a library in Cambridge with valuable books, both printed and ms. which he had collected abroad; and now at Durham, he laid out large sums in adorning the city with public buildings, and in repairing, and improving his episcopal houses.

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.

In December 1551, Tunstall was committed to the Tower, upon an accusation of misprision of treason. What the particulars were, is not known; but Burnet thinks that the secret reason was that, if he should be attainted, the duke of Northumberland intended to have had the dignities and jurisdiction of that principality conferred on himself, and thus he count palatine of Durham. It appears, however, that Tunstall was charged by one Vivian Menville, with having consented to a conspiracy in the north for exciting a rebellion; and it is said, that something of this kind was proved, by a letter in the bishop’s own hand-writing, found when the duke of Somerset’s papers were seized. It has been conjectured, that he, being in great esteem with the popish party, was made privy to some of their treasonable designs against king Edward’s government: but which he neither concurred in, nor betrayed. However, on March 28, 1552, a bill was brought into the House of Lords, to attaint him for misprision of treason. Archbishop Cranmer spoke warmly and freely in his defence, but the bill passed the Lords. When, however, it came to the Commons, they were not satisfied with the written evidence which was produced, and having at that time a bill before them, that there should be two witnesses in case of treason, and that the witnesses and the party arraigned should be brought face to face, and that treason should not be adjudged by circumstances, but plain evidence, they therefore threw out the bill against Tunstall. This method of proceeding having been found ineffectual, a commission was granted to the chief justice of the King’s bench, and six others, empowering them to call bishop Tunstall before them, and examine him concerning all manner of conspiracies, &c. and if found guilty, to deprive him of his bishopric. This scheme, in whatever manner it might be conducted, was effectual, for he was deprived, and continued a prisoner in the Tower during the remainder of Edward’s reign. In 1553 also, the bishopric of Durham was converted into a county palatine, and given to the duke of Northumberland, which certainly favours bishop Burnet’s conjecture that there was a secret as well as an open cause for the deprivation of our prelate.

While in the Tower, Tunstall was frequently visited by his nephew, the celebrated Bernard Gilpin, who had probably been brought up to the church with a view of being advanced by this prelate, but he was now in no capacity to serve him otherwise than by his advice, and the advice he gave him about this time, places Tunstall in a very favourable point of view. When Gilpin, just entered on his parochial duties in the north, found that his mind was not quite settled in his religious opinions, he wrote to his uncle Tunstall, who told him, in answer, that he should thiuk of nothing till be had fixed his religion, and that, in his opinion, he could not do better than put his parish into the hands of some person in whom he conld confide, and spend a year or two in Germany, France, and Holland; by which means he might have an opportunity of conversing with some of the most eminent professors on both sides of the question. To this admirable advice, for such it surely is, from a popish bishop of that age, Giipin had but one objection, namely the expence; but the bishop wrote, that his living would do something towards his maintenance; and he would supply deficiencies. When they parted, the bishop gave him some books he had written while in the Tower, particularly one" on the Lord’s supper, which he wished to be printed under his inspection at Paris.

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.

Bishop Tunstall did not continue long in this state of retirement, for he died Nov. 18, 1559, aged eighty-five, and was handsomely buried in the chancel of Lambeth church, at the expence of archbishop Parker, with a Latin epitaph by the learned Dr. Haddon. The character of Tunstall may in part he collected from the preceding particulars. Gilpin, who has frequently introduced notices of him in his Lives of Bernard Gilpin, Latimer, &c. says “he was a papist only by profession; no way influenced by the spirit of popery; but he was a good catholic, and had true notions of the genius of Christianity. He considered a good life as the end, and faith as the means; and never branded as an heretic that person, however erroneous his opinions might be in points less fundamental, who had such a belief in Christ as made him live like a Christian. He was just therefore the reverse of (his early patron) Warham, and thought the persecution of protestants one of the things most foreign to his function. For parts and learning he was very eminent: his knowledge was extensive, and his taste in letters superior to that o- most of his contemporaries. The great foible of which he stands accused in history, was the pliancy of his temper. Like most of the bishops of those times, he had been bred in a court; and was indeed too dextrous in the arts there practised.” On this last failing, Mr. Gilpin seems to us to lay too much stress, for even the particulars which, in the preceding sketch we have extracted from his life of Bernard Gilpin, shew decidedly that Tnnstall was no courtly complier in those measures which were particularly characteristic of the times, and which have been more or less the test of the worth of every eminent man who lived in them.

Bishop Tunstall’s writings that were published, were chiefly the following: 1. “In Laudem Matrimonii,” Lond. 1518, 4to. 2. “De Arte Supputandi,” Lond. 1522, 4to, dedicated to sir Thomas More. This was afterwards several times printed abroad. 3. “A Sermon on Palm Sunday” before king Henry the 8th, &c. Lond. 1539 and 1633, 4to. 4. “De Veritate Corporis & Sanguinis Domini in Eucharistia,” Lntet. 1554, 4to. 5. “Compendium in decem Libros Ethicorum Aristotelis,” Par. 1554, 8vo. 6. “Contra impios Blasphematores Dei praedestinationis,” Antw. 1555, 4to. 7. “Godly and devout Prayers in English and Latin,” 1558, in 8vo.

Several of his letters and papers are published in Burnet’s History of the Reformation, Strype’s Memorials, Collier’s Ch. History, Lodge’s Illustrations, &c.

, a learned and amiable divine, was born about 1710, and educated at St. John’s college in Cambridge, of which he became fellow and a principal tutor. He was instituted to the rectory of Sturmer in Essex, in 1739, and, in 1741, elected public orator of the university. He afterwards became chaplain to Potter, abp. of Canterbury; and was there a person of such uniform meekness and humility as to make it said, after he left Lambeth, that “many a man came there, as chaplain, humble, but that none ever departed so except Dr. Tunstall.” He was created D. D. at Cambridge in 1714; was collated by the archbishop to the rectory of Great Chart in Kent, and to the vicarage of Minster in the Isle of Thanet, both which he resigned in 1757, for the valuable vicarage of Rochdale in Lancashire, given him by abp. Hutton, who married his wife’s aunt; but the exchange, from many circumstances, di i not answer his expectation; he wished for a prebend of Canterbury. It is supposed that either family uneasinesses, or the above disappointment, hastened his death, which took place March 28, 1772.

His writings are, 1. “Epistola ad virum eruditum Conyers Middleton, c.” Cant. 1741, 8vo. In this work, he calls in question the genuineness of the letters between. Cicero and Brutus, of which Dr. Middleton had made great use in his elegant “History of Cicero’s Life;” and shews, that he had not paid sufficient attention to the letters to Atticus and his brother Quintus. 2. “Observations on the present collection of Epistles between Cicero and Brutus.” This was to confirm what he had before advanced, and by way of answer to a preface of Miduleton’s to an edition of the epistles. Mr. Markland, in a private letter, says, “I have read over Mr. Tunstall’s book, twice more, since I came hither; and am more and more confirmed, that it can never be answered.” 3. “Sermon before the House of Commons, May 29, 1746.” 4. “A Vindication of the Power of the State to prohibit Clandestine Marriages, &c.” 1755. 5. “Marriage in Society stated, &c. in a second Letter to Dr. Stebbing,” 1755. 6. “Academica: part the first, containing Discourses upon Natural and Revealed Religion, a Concio, and a Thesis.” The second part be did not live to publish; but it is supposed to be included in “The Lectures on Natural and Revealed Religion,” published after his death, in 4to, hy the rev. Mr. Dodsworth, treasurer of Salisbury, ancl his brother-in-law.

Among Dr. Birch’s Mss. in the British Museum, is a collection of letters from Dr. Tunstall to the earl of Oxford, in 1738 and 1739, on Ducket’s Atheistical Letters, and the proceedings thereon.

, 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.

His other works were, translations of the “Heroical Epistles of Ovid,” of which four editions were printed; and the “Eclogues of B. Mantuan,” published in 1567. The only copy known of this volume is in the Royal Library. Wood, who appears to have seen it, informs us that one Thomas Harvey afterwards translated the same eclogues, and availed himself of Turbervile’s translation, without the least acknowledgment. Among the discoveries of literary historians, it is to be regretted that such tricks are to be traced to very high antiquity. Another very rare production of our author, although twice printed, in 1576 and 1587, is entitled “Tragical Tales, translated by Turbervile, in time of his troubles, out of sundrie Italians, with the argument & L'Envoye to each tale.” What his troubles were, we are not told. To the latter edition of these tales were annexed “Epitaphs and Sonets, with some Other broken pamphlettes and Epistles, sent to certain e of his friends in England, at his being in Moscovia, anno 1569.” Wood has mistaken this for his “Epitaphs, Epigrams, Songs, and Sonets,” from which it totally differs.

Our author was living in 1594, and in great esteem, but we have no account of his death. There appear to have tieen two other persons of both his names, both natives of Dorsetshire and nearly contemporaries, one of whom was a commoner of Gloucester-hall in 1581, aged eighteen, and the other a student of Magdalen-hall in 1595, aged seventeen. Wood was not able to tell which of the three was the author of“Essays, politic and moral,” which were published in 1608, nor of the “Booke of Falconrye and Hawking, heretofore published by G. Turbervile, gent, and now revived, corrected, and augmented by another hand,” Lond. loll. But the intelligent editor of “Phillips’s Theatrum” is of opinion that this work was the production of our poet, from its having commendatory verses prefixed by Gascoigne; and the curious biographical tract of Whetstone, lately reprinted in the edition of the English Poets, before Gascoigne’s works, notices a production of that author on hunting, which Mr. Park thinks is the one printed with the above “Booke of Falconrye,” and usually attributed to Turbervile. Besides these, our poet wrote commendatory verses to the works of several of his contemporaries.

Turbervile was a sdnnetteer of great note in his time, although, except Harrington, his contemporaries and successors appear to have been sparing of their praises. It is probably to some adverse critics that he alludes, in his address to Sycophants. Gascoigne also used to complain of the Zoilus’s of his time. There is a considerable diversity of fancy and sentiment in Turbervile’s pieces: the verses in praise of the countess of Warwick are ingenipusly imagined, and perhaps in his best style, and his satirical effusions, if occasionally flat and vulgar, are characteristic of his age. Many of his allusions, as was then the fashion, are taken from the amusement of hawking, and these and his occasional strokes on large noses, and other personal redundancies or defects, descended afterwards to Shakspeare, and other dramatic writers. He entitles his pieces Epitaphs and Epigrams, Songs and Sonnets, but the reader will seldom recognize the legitimate characteristics of those species of poetry. His epitaphs are without pathetic reflection, being stuffed with common-place railing against “the cursed cruelty” of death; and his epigrams are often conceits without point, or, in some instances, the point is placed first, and the conclusion left “lame and impotent.” His love sonnets, although seemingly addressed to a real mistress, are full of the borrowed passion of a translator, and the elaborate and unnatural language of a scholar. The classics in his age began to be studied very generally, and were no sooner studied than translated. This retarded the progress of invention at a time when the language was certainly improving; and hence among a number of authors who flourished in this period, we seldom meet with the glow of pure poetry. It may, however, be added in favour of Turbervile, that he seldom transgresses against morals or delicacy.

, 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.

, a French minister of state, was born at Paris, May 10, 1727, of a very ancient Norman family. His father was, for a long time, provost of the corporation of merchants. He was intended for the church, and went through the requisite preparatory studies; but whether he disliked the catholic religion, or objected to any peculiar doctrines, is not certain. It is generally supposed that the latter was the case, and the intimacy and correspondence he had with Voltaire, Diderot, D'Alembert, &c. afford very probable ground for believing him entirely of their opinion in matters of religion. He looked, however, to the political department, as that which was best adapted to his acquisitions, and the rer sources which he found in his ingenuity and invention. For this purpose he studied the sciences suited to his destination, and mixed experimental philosophy with mathematics, and history with political disquisition. He embraced the profession of the law, and at once displayed his views by fixing on the office of master of the requests, who is the executive officer of government, in operations of commerce and finance. His panegyrist, M. Condorcet, tells us, that a master of requests is rarely without a considerable share of influence respecting some one of the provinces, or the whole state; so that it seldom happens that his liberality or his prejudices, his virtues or his vices, do not, in the course of his life, produce great good or great mischief. About this period Turgot wrote some articles for the Encyclopedic, of which the principal were, Etymology, Existence, Expansibility, Fair, and Foundation. He had prepared several o.thers; but these five only were inserted. All these his biographer praises with more zeal than judgment; the article on Expansibility being very exceptionable, and that on Existence being little more than an ingenious commentary on the first principles of Des Cartes, and by no means deserving to be called the “only improvement in the science of the human mind since the days of Locke.”

In 1761, Turgot was appointed intendant of Limoges. The intendant is the confidential officer of the government. He carries their orders on the subject of commerce and finance into execution; and has occasionally the right of making provisional decisions. In this office, which Turgot discharged with great attention and ability for thirteen years, he spent the most useful, though not the most conspicuous, part of his life. He conferred many advantages on his province, corrected many abuses, and opposed many mistaken opinions. In particular, he gave activity to the society of agriculture established at Limoges, by directing their efforts to important subjects: he opened a mode of public instruction for female professors of midwifery: he procured for the people the attendance of able physicians during the raging of epidemic diseases: he established houses of industry, supported by charity, &c. &c. and during all this time he meditated projects of a more extensive nature, such as an equal distribution of the taxes, the construction of the roads, the regulation of the militia, the prevention of a scarcity of provisions, and the protection of commerce.

At the death of Louis XV. the public voice called M. Turgot to the first offices of government, as a man who united the experience resulting from habits of business, to all the improvement which study can procure. After being at the head of the marine department only a short time, he was, in August 1774, appointed comptroller-general of the finances. In this office he introduced a great many regulations, which were unquestionably beneficial, but it has been remarked, that he might have done more, if he had attempted less. He does not appear to have attended closely to the actual state of the public mind in France. He would have been an enlightened minister for a sovereign, where the rights of the people were felt and understood. He endeavoured, it is true, to raise them from the abject state in which they had long continued, but this was to be done at the expence of the rich and powerful. The attempt to establish municipalities probably put a period to his career. This scheme consisted in the establishment of many provincial assemblies for the internal government, whose members were elected according to the most rigorous rules of representation. These little parliaments, by their mutual contests, might, and indeed did, lay the foundation of great confusion, and created a spirit of liberty which was never understood, and passed easily into licentiousness. The nobility, whom he attempted to controul the clergy, whom he endeavoured to restrict; and the officers of the crown, whom he wished to restrain, united in their common cause. All his operations created a murmur, and all his projects experienced an opposition, which ended in his dismissal from office in 1776, after holding it about twenty months. From that period, he Jived a private and studious life, and died March 20, 1781, in the fifty-fourth year of his age. Condorcet has written a long life of him, but it is throughout the whole a pane-­gyric His countrymen now do not seem agreed in his chara< ter. By some it is considered that he might have saved the state by others he is classed among those who precipitated the revolution.

, an eminent critic and translator, was born at Andeli, a small village near Rouen in Normandy, in 1512. Two nations have contended for the honour of his hirth; the trench, who say he was descended of a noble but decayed family in Normandy; and the Scotch, who have discovered (Dempster, and after him Mackenzie) that his French name Tourncbceuf is no other than Turnbully and that he was the son of a Scotch gentleman of that name who married in Normandy. Whatever may be in this, Turnebus, for that is the name he took in his writings and correspondence, came to Paris at the age of eleven, and soon made such progress in classical and polite literature as to surpass all his fellow-students, and even, we are told, his masters. He had every qualification indeed to form an accomplished scholar, great memory, indefatigable application, and both taste and judgment far beyond his years. Before these all difficulties vanished, and his avidity and knowledge knew no intermi-sion in his after-life. Even on the day of his marriage, it is said, he devoted some hours to study.

The progress of his pursuits are not particularly detailed, but he is reported to have taught the classics at Toulouse, and afterwards, in 1547, was appointed Greek professor at Paris, where he had for his colleagues Buchanan and Muretus, whose joint reputation brought scholars from all parU of Europe. In 1552, Turnebus was appointed super* intendant of the royal printing-house for Greek books, and had William Morel for his associate, whom he left in sole possession of this office about four years after; on being appointed one of the royal professors. Such was his fame, that he had invitations and large offers from Italy, Spain, Portugal, Germany, and England, on condition of settling in. either of those countries; but he preferred the moderate circumstances enjoyed in his own country to the most tempting offers of riches elsewhere. He died June 12, 1565, in the fifty-third year of his age, and was buried on the evening of the same day, agreeably to his desire, in a very private manner, in the burial-place belonging to the college of Montaign, being followed to his grave by only a few friends. He was supposed to have embraced the doctrines of the Reformation; but this was not generally known; and so much was he admired, that both papists and protestants endeavoured to claim him as their own. It was his singular fate, that all who knew him, and all who read his works, loved him. This gave rise to some ingenious lines by Henry Stephens, in which, after putting the question, “Why does Turnebus please every body?” in various ways, he answers, that “he pleaded every body, because he did not please himself,” alluding to his extreme diffidence and modesty, and his very amiable manners. Such was the esteem in which he was held, that some of the German professors, when in their lectures they quoted the authority of Turnebus (or Cujacius, to whom the same compliment was paid) they used to move their right hand to their cap, as a token of veneration. He directed his studies chiefly to philological researches, and to translating the Greek authors. His translations have always been approved, and his criticisms were not less admired in his own and the succeeding age. It has been, indeed, sometimes objected, that he was too fond of conjectural emendations, and that, notwithstanding the constitutional gentleness of his temper, he displayed more than necessary warmth in his controversies with Ramus, and with Bodin but in general his style, as well us his sentiments, were liberal and he is said to have discovered nothing of the pedant but in his dress. His works were collected and published in three volumes, folio, which generally make but one, at Strasburg, 1600, and consist of his commentaries on various parts of Cicero, Varro, Horace, Pliny, &c.; his translations of Aristotle, Theophrastus, Plutarch, &c. and his miscellaneous pieces, letters, and poems. His “Adversaria” went through man)' editions, first in quarto, from 1564 to 1599, when the last was printed in folio. Niceron enumerates a few other separate publications, and comments contributed by him to some of the classics. Of his translations, Huetius says, that “he had every quality which is necessary for a perfect translator; for ho understood Greek thoroughly, and turned it into elegant Latin, closely and without departing in the least from his author, yet in a clear and pleasant style.”

, a dissenting minister of the baptist persuasion, was born at Blackwater-farm, in the parish of St. Michael, and district of St. Alban’s, Hertfordshire, on March 1, 17 10. He appears to have had some classical education, which he afterwards diligently improved, but was not regularly educated for the ministry. In 1738 he published “An abstract of English grammar and rhetoric,” and an advertisement at the end of this volume intimates that he then kept a boarding school. Two of his pupils have been ascertained, Dr. Hugh Smith, an alderman and eminent physician in London, and Dr. William Kenrick. He commenced preacher, without any of the usual forms of admission, but merely because he was thought capable of preaching, when he was about twenty years old; and having been approved of at his outset, he continued and was settled as minister of the baptist congregation at Reading. From this he was invited to become pastor of a similar congregation at Abingdon in 1748, where he spent the remainder of his long life. He began to preach and to print early in life, and he preached and printed to the last. Many of his publications were much approved, and produced occasional correspondence between him and some eminent men of his time, particularly Dr. Watts, Dr. Kennicott, and Dr. Lowth, bishop of London. He was a man of great piety, and of a disposition peculiarly candid, liberal, and benevolent. He died Sept. 5, 1798, in the eightyninth year of his age, and was interred in the baptist burying-ground at Abingdon.

He published, 1. “An Introduction to Psalmody,” 1737. 2. “An abstract of English grammar,” 1738. 3. “The balance of the merits of the whigs and tories,” 1753. 4. “.A summary of facts relative to the election at Abingdon,” 1768. 5. “A friendly monitor to the hardened sinner,” &c. 1770. 6. “An Introduction to rhetoric,” 1771. 7. “A Compendium of social religion,” 1758, reprinted in 1778. 8. “Remarks on Mr. Lake’s sermon on Baptism,” 1781. 9. “Meditations on select portions of Scripture,” 2d edit. 1785. 10. “Devotional poetry vindicated against Dr. Johnson,” 1785. 11. “A serious address to Chris­ tians on the duty of prayer,” 1786. 12. “Essays on important subjects,” 1789, 2 vols. 13. “Exhortations to loyalty and peace,” 1792. 14. “Free thoughts on the spirit of free inquiry in religion,” 1792. 15. “Letters religious and moral, addressed to young persons,” 1793, 2d edit. 16. “Several pieces of poetry,” printed, but not published, in 1794. 17. “The Monitor, or friendly address to the people of Great Britain,” 1795. 18. “Common sense, or the plain man’s answer to the question, whether Christianity be a religion worthy of our choice?” 1797. He also printed a few occasional sermons.

, dean of Canterbury, was the son of Thomas Turner of Heckfield in Hampshire, alderman and mayor of Reading in Berkshire; and was born in the parish of St. Giles’s in that borough, in 1591. In 1610 he was admitted on the foundation at St. John’s college, Oxford, and had for his tutor Mr. Juxon, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury. His application to learning was assiduous and successful, and having entered into holy orders, he immediately distinguished himself as a divine of merit. Ira 1623 he was presented by his college to the vicarage of St. Giles’s in Oxford, which he held with his. fellowship, but relinquished it in 1628. Laud, when bishop of London, made him his chaplain, and in 1629, at which time Mr. Turner was B. D. collated him to the prebend of Newington in the church of St. Paul, and in October following to the chancellorship of the same church, in which also he was appointed by Charles I. a canon-residentiary. The king likewise made him one of his chaplains in ordinary, and gave him the rectory of St. Olave, Southwark, with which he held the rectory of Fetcham in the county of Surrey. In 1633, when Charle> I. resolved on a progress to Scotland for his coronation, Turner was commanded to attend his majesty; previous to which he was, April 1, 1633-4, created D D. by the university of Oxford. In 1641 he was preferred to the deanery of Rochester, and on the death of Ur. Eglionby to that of Canterbury, but of this last he could not obtain possession until the restoration. After the death of the king, to whom he had adhered with inflexible loyalty and attachment, he shared the fate of the other loyal clergymen in being stript of his preferments, and treated with much indignity and cruelty. On the restoration, in August 1660, he entered into full possession of the deanery of Canterbury, and might have been rewarded with a mitre, but he declined it, “preferring to set out too little rather than too much sail.” Instead of seeking further promotion, he soon resigned the rectory of Fetcham, “desiring to ease his aged shoulders of the burthen of cure of souls; and caused it to be bestowed upon a person altogether unacquainted with him, but recommended very justly under the character of a pious man, and a sufferer for righteousness.”

Having enjoyed an uninterrupted share of good health, during thirty years, he was at length attacked with that severe disease the stone; the sharpness of which he endured with exemplary fortitude and resignation. Nor did the “innocent gayety of his humour,” which made his company so agreeable to all, forsake him to the last. He reached the age of eighty-one, and died in Oct. 1672, with “the greatest Christian magnanimity, and yet with the deepest sense imaginable of godly sorrow, working repentance unto salvation not to be repented of.” He was buried in the dean’s chapel in Canterbury cathedral, and his funeral sermon, since printed, was preached by Dr. Peter du Moulin, prebendary of the church, who gives him a very high and apparently very just character. It is not known that dean Turner published more than a single sermon on Matt. ix.

13. mentioned by Wood. Prynne censures him as an Arnrinian, yet Du Moulin, who enters so fully and so affectionately into his character, in all respects both as a man and as a divine, was a zealous Calvinist.

Dean Turner married Margaret, daughter of sir Francis Windebank, knt. secretary of state to Charles I. By her he had three sons, each of whom attained distinguished situations, and of whom some account will now be given.

, 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.

Previously, however, to his retirement, Burnet informs us that he was concerned in a very ill-concerted plot to restore the abdicated king, for which some of his party were imprisoned, and he thought it prudent to abscond. His abilities were not considered as of the first order, but li was of great sincerity and integrity in private life, and it is impossible not to respect the character, whatever we may think of the opinions of a man whom neither gratitude nor interest could seduce from what he considered as his duty. He published a “Vindication of the late archbishop Sancroft and his brethren, the rest of the deprived bishops, from the reflections of Mr. Marshall, in his defence of our. Constitution.” “Animadversions on a pamphlet entitled The Naked Truth,” which were answered by Andrew Marvell, under the name of Rivet; and “Letters to the Clergy of his diocese.”

, brother to the above, was born a Bristol in 1645, and educated at Corpus Christi college, Oxford, of which he was elected. fellow; he afterwards became chaplain to Dr. Henry Compton, bishop of London, who collated him, Nov. 4, 1680, to the rectory of Thorley in Hertfordshire, and Dec. 20 following, to the archdeaconry of Essex; and in 1682, to the prebend of Mapesbury in St. Paul’s. He commenced D. D. at Oxford, July 2, 1683, was collated by his brother to a prebend of Ely, March 26, 1686, and elected president of Corpus, March 13, 1687-8. The same year, May 7, he was instituted to the sinecure rectory of Fulham, on the presentation of his brother, to whom the advowson, for that turn, had been granted (the bishop of London being then under suspension), and at length was made precentor and prebendary of Brownswood in St. Paul’s, Jan. 11, 1689. What his political principles were at the revolution, we are not told, although, by keeping possession of his preferments, it is to be presumed, he did not follow the example of his brother, but took the oaths of allegiance. However, we are informed, that after the act passed in the last year of king William III. requiring the abjuration oath to be taken before Aug. 1, 1702, under penalty of forfeiting all ecclesiastical preferments, Dr. Turner went down from London to Oxford, July 28, seemingly with full resolution not to take the oath, and to quit all his preferments; but, on better, advice, he made no resignation, knowing that if he was legally called upon to prove his compliance with the act, his preferments would be void in course; and so continued to act, as if he had taken the oath, by which means he retained his preferments to his death, without ever taking it at all. He died April 30, 1714, and was buried in the chapel of Corpus Christi college, where there is a monument, and an inscription written by Edmund Chishull, B. D.

Dr. Turner has left only one sermon in print, preached before the king, May 29, 1685, but he is memorable on another account. He was a single man, and remarkable for his munificence and charity in his life-time. By his will, he left the bulk of his fortune, which was very considerable, in public and charitable uses; for, besides 4000l. in legacies to his relations and friends, he gave or left to his college 6000l. for improving the buildings, and other purposes; to the dean and chapter of Ely 1000l. for augmenting the singing-men’s stipends and 100l. the interest of which was to be expended in putting out children of tha town of Ely apprentices, at the nomination of his successors in the stall he held; and the remainder of his effects, which amounted to 20,000l. his executors were directed to lay out" in estates and lands, and settle them on the governors of the charity for the relief of poor widows and children of clergymen. His executors accordingly purchased the manor of Stow in Northamptonshire, and other estates there, and at West-Wratting in Cambridgeshire, amounting to above 1000l. a year, and settled them in 1716, agreeably to his will. They also erected a sumptuous monument to his memory in Stow church, with an inscription. William Turner, the third son of the dean of Canterbury, was archdeacon of Durham, and rector of Stanhope in that county. He died at Oxford in 1635, and was buried in St. Giles’s church, and near his remains were deposited those of his mother, who died in 1692.

, a very eminent naturalist and divine, was born at Morpeth, in Northumberland, and was educated under the patronage of sir Thomas Wentworth, at the university of Cambridge, where he was chosen a fellow of Pembroke Hall, about 1531. He acquired great reputation for his learning, and about 1536 was admitted to deacon’s orders, at which time he was master of arts. He applied himself also to philosophy and physic, and early discovered an inclination to the study of plants, and a wish to be well acquainted with the materia medico, of the ancients. He complains of the little assistance he could receive in these pursuits. “Being yet a student of Pembroke Hall, where I could learn never one Greke, neither Latin, nor English name, even amongst the physicians, of any herhe or tree such was the ignorance of that time; and as yet there was no English herbal, but one all full of unlearned cacographies and falsely naming of herbes.”

At Cambridge, Turner imbibed the principles of the reformers, and afterwards, agreeably to the practice of many others, united the character of the divine to that of the physician. He became a preacher, travelling into many parts of England, and propagated, with so much zeal, the cause of the reformation, that he excited persecution from bishop Gardiner. He was thrown into prison, and detained for a considerable time; and on his enlargement submitted to voluntary exile during the remainder of the reign of Henry VIII. This banishment proved favourable to his advancement in medical and botanical studies; he resided at Basil, Strasburgb, and at Bonn, but principally at Cologn, with many other English refugees. He dwelt for some time at Weissenburgh; and travelled also into Italy, and took the degree of doctor of physic at Ferrara. As at this period the learned were applying with great assiduity to the illustration of the ancients, it was a fortunate circumstance for Dr. Turner, that he had an opportunity of attending the lectures of Lucas Ghinus, at Bologna, of whom he speaks in his “Herbal” with great satisfaction; and frequently cites his authority against other commen* tators. Turner resided a considerable time at Basil, whence he dates the dedication of his book “On the Baths of England and Germany.” During his residence in Switzerland he contracted a friendship with Gesner, and afterwards kept up a correspondence with him. Gesner had a high opinion of Turner, as a physician and man of general learning, whose equal, he says, he scarcely remembered. This encomium occurs in Gesner’s book “De Herb;s Lunariis.”

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.

Dr. Turner seems to have divided his time between his deanery, where he had a botanical garden, of which frequent mention is made in his “Herbal,” and his house in Crutched Friars, London. He speaks also of his garden at Kew, and from the repeated notices he takes of the plants in Purbeck, and about Portland, Dr. Pulteney infers that he must have had some intimate connections in Dorsetshire. He died July 7, 1568, a few months after the publication of the last part of his “Herbal,” and was buried in the chancel of St. Olave’s church, Hart-street, London, where a monument was erected to his memory by his widow.

Dr. Turner was the author of many controversial treatises, chiefly written against popery. Among these were, 1. “The hunting of the Romish 'Fox,” c. Basil, 1543. 2. “Rescuing of the Romish Fox,” 1545. 3. “The hunting of the Romish Wolf,” 8vo all these were published under the name of William Wraughton. 4. “Dialogue, wherein is contained the examination of the Mass,” Loncl. 8vo. 5. “A preservative, or triacle against the Poison of Pelagius, lately renewed and stirred up again, by the furious secc of the anabaptists,” ibid. 1551, 12mo. 6. “A new book of spiritual physic for divers diseases,” 1555. 7. “The hunting of the Fox and Wolf, because they did make havock of the sheep of Jesus Christ,” 8vo. Tanner mentions a few other articles, and there are several of his tracts yet in manuscript, in various libraries. He collated the translation of the Bible with Hebrew, Greek, and Latin copies, and corrected it in many places. He procured to be printed at Antwerp a new and corrected edition of William of Newburgh’s “Historia gentis nostrse,” from a ms. he found in the library at Wells; but complains that the printer not only omitted certain articles sent by him, but left out the preface he sent him, and substituted one of his own. Our author also translated several works from the Latin, particularly “The comparison of the Old Learning and the New,” written by Urbanus Regius, Southwark, 1537, 8vo, and again 1538 and 1548.

His first work on the subject of plants was printed at Cologn, under the title of “Historia de naturis herbarum, scholiis et notis vallata,” 1544, 8vo. Bumaldus is the only writer who mentions this work, and it probably was not reprinted in England. It was followed by a small volume under the title of “Names of Herbes, in Greek, Latin, English, Dutch and French,” Lond. 1548. As his knowledge in natural history was not confined to botany, he published a treatise on birds, entitled “Avium praecipuarum, quarum apud Plinium et Aristotelem mentio est, brevis et succincta historia,” Cologn. 1543, 8vo. By a letter of his prefixed to Gesner’s “Historia Animalium,” edit. 1620, relating to the English fishes, it appears that he had no inconsiderable degree of knowledge in that part of zoology. But the work which secured his reputation to posterity, and entitles him to the character of an original writer on that subject, in England, is his “History of Plants,” printed at different times, in three parts, in fol. with cuts, under the title of a “New Herbal,” Lond. 1551, part first; part second at Cologn, in 1562; with this was reprinted the first part, and his “Book on the Bathes of England and Germany.” These were reprinted, with a third part, in 1568. Dr. Pulteney has given a minute account of the contents and progress of this work, and observes, that when we regard the time in which Dr. Turner lived, and the little assistance he could derive from his contemporaries, he will appear to have exhibited uncommon diligence, and great erudition, and fully to deserve the character of an original writer. He also paid early attention to mineral waters, and to wines; and wrote on both subjects.

It appears that at one time there was a design of placing Dr. Turner at the head of Oriel college. Kennet mentions a letter to that college (1550, July 5) “to accept Dr. Turner for master of the same, appointed by the king;” but this appointment certainly did not take place. But from a passage in his “Spiritual Physic,” he appears to have been once a member of the House of Commons. Fox speaks of Turner with great respect, as “a man whose authority neither is to be neglected, nor credit to be disputed.” He married Jane, daughter of George Ander, an alderman of Cambridge, who after his death married Cox, bishop of Ely. In memory of her first husband, she left some money and lands to Pembroke Hall.

By this lady Dr. Turner had a son, Peter, who was a physician, and practised in London, and resided the latter part of his life in St. Helen’s, Bishopsgate-street, London. He died in 1614, and was buried near his father in St. Olave’s church, where there is a monument to his memory. He married Pascha, sister to Dr. Henry Parr, bishop of Worcester, by whom he had eight children, one of whom is the subject of the following article.

, son to the preceding Dr. Peter, and grandson to Dr. William Turner, was born in 1585, and was admitted a probationer fellow of Merton college, Oxford, in 1607, where he proceeded in arts, and not being restricted to any particular faculty, as the fellows of other colleges are, became, according to Wood, versed in all kinds of literature. His first preferment was the professorship of geometry in Gresham college, in July 1620, but he continued to reside mostly at Oxford, and held this place together with his fellowship. In 1629, by the direction of Laud, then bishop of London, he drew up a scheme for the annual election of proctors out of the several colleges at Oxford in a certain order, that was to return every twenty-three years, which being approved of by his majesty, Charles I. was called the Caroline cycle, and is still followed, and always printed at the end of the “Parecbolae sive Excerpta, e corpore statutorum universitatis Oxon.” In the same year he acted as one of the commissioners for revising the statutes, and reducing them to a better form and order. In 1630, on the death of Briggs, Mr. Turner was chosen to succeed him as professor of geometry at Oxford, and resigned his Gresham professorship. How well he was qualified for his new office appears by the character archbishop Usher gives of him, “Savilianus in academia Oxoniensi inatheseos professor eruditissimus.” In 1634 the new edition of the statutes was printed in fol. with a preface by Mr. Turner; and to reward him for his care and trouble, a new office was founded, that of “custos archivorum,” or keeper of the archives, to which he was appointed, and made large collections respecting the antiquities of the university, which were afterwards of great use to Anthony Wood. In 1636, on a royal visit to Oxford, Mr. Turner was created M. D. but having adhered to his majesty in his troubles, and even taken up arms in his cause, he was ejected from his fellowship of Merton, and his professorship. This greatly impoverished him, and he went to reside with a sister, the widow of a Mr. Watts, a brewer in Southwark, where he died in Jan. 1651, and was interred in St. Saviour’s church. He was a man of extensive learning, and wrote much, but being fastidious in his opinion of his own works, he never could complete them to his mind. We have mentioned the only writings he published, except a Latin poem in the collection in honour of sir Thomas Bodley, called the “Bodleiomnema,” Oxf. 1613. Wood also mentions “Epistolae variae ad doctissimos viros;” but we know of no printed letters of his Dr. Ward, however, gives extracts from three ms letters in English to Selden, chiefly relating to some Greek writers on the music of the ancients.

, a pious English divine, was a native of Flintshire, and born near Broadoak, in that county, but in what year we have not discovered. Our particulars indeed of this gentleman are extremely scanty, he having been omitted by Wood. Previously to his going to Oxford, he was for some time an inmate in the house of the celebrated Philip Henry, partly as a pupil, and partly as an assistant in the education of Mr. Henry’s children, one of whom, Matthew, the commentator, was first initiated in grammar-learning by Mr. Turner. This was in 1668, after which Mr. Turner entered of Edmund hall, Oxford, where he took his degree of M.A.June 8, 1675. He became afterwards vicar of Walberton, in Sussex, and resided there in 1697, at the time he published his principal work, but the date of his death we have not been able to ascertain. In 1695 he published a “History of all Religions,” Lond. 8vo; but the work by which he is best known is his “Cornpleat history of the most remarkable Providences, both of Judgment and Mercy, &c. to which is added, whatever, is curious in the works of nature and art. The whole digested into one volume, under proper heads; being a work set on foot thirty years ago, by the rev. Mr. Pool, author of the ‘ Synopsis Criticorum;’ and since undertaken and finished by William Turner,” &c. 1697, fol. This curious collection ranks with the similar performances of Clark, and Wanley in his “History of the Little World,” but is superior, perhaps, to both in selection and conciseness. Dunton, in his “Life,” gives Mr. Turner the character of “a man of wonderful moderation, and of, great piety,” and adds, what it is very natural for a, bookseller to praise, that “he was very generous, and would not receive a farthing for his copy till the success was known.”

, the first of a celebrated family of protestant divines, was the son of Francis Turretin, descended from an ancient family at Lucca, who was obliged to fly his country for the cause of religion, and resided partly at Antwerp and Geneva, and lastly at Zurich, where he died. His son Benedict was born Nov. 9, 1588, and in his thirty-third year (1621) was appointed pastor, and professor of theology at Geneva. The same year the republic of Geneva being alarmed at the hostile preparations making by the duke of Savoy, sent Mr. Turretin to the States General of the United Provinces and to the prince of Orange, and he prevailed on their high mightinesses to advance the sum of 30,000 livres, and 10,000 livres per month, for three months, in case of a siege. He also obtained other pecuniary aid from the churches of Hamburgh, Embden, and Bremen. During his being in Holland, he had interviews with the French and English ambassadors, and had an audience of the king of Bohemia, to whom he communicated the sympathy which the state of Geneva felt on his reverse of fortune. In 1622 he returned to Geneva, and was received with all the respect due to his services. He died at Geneva, March 4, 1631, with the character of a very learned divine, and a man of great moderation and judgment. His works are, 1. A defence of the Geneva translation of the Bible, against the attack of father Colon in his “Geneve Plagiaire.” This extended to three parts, or volumes, printed from 1618 to 1626. 2. “Sermons,” in French, “sur rutilite” des chatiments.“3.” Sermons," in Italian, &c.

, son to the preceding, was born at Geneva, Oct. 17, 1623. After pursuing his studies in the classics and philosophy with great credit, he entered on the study of divinity, under the celebrated Calvinistic professors, John Diodati, Theodore Tronchin, Frederick Spanheim, &c. While a student he supported in 1640 and 1644, two theses, “De felicitate morali et politica,” and “De necessaria Dei gratia.” He afterwards went to Leyden, and formed an acquaintance with the most eminent scholars there; and afterwards to Paris, where he lodged with the celebrated Daille", and studied geography under Gassendi, whose philosophical lectures he also attended. He then visited the schools of Saumur and Montauban, and on his return to Geneva in 1647 was ordained, and in the following year served both in the French and Italian churches of that city. In 1650 he refused the professorship of philosophy, which was offered to him more than once, but accepted an invitation to the pastoral office at Lyons, where he succeeded Aaron Morus, the brother of Alexander. In 1653 he was recalled to Geneva to be professor of divinity, an office which Theodore Tronchin was now about to resign from age, and Turretin continued in it during the rest of his life. In 1661 he was employed on a similar business as his father, being sent to Holland to obtain assistance from the States General to fortify the city of Geneva. Having represented the case, he obtained the sum of 75,000 florins, with which a bastion was built, called the Dutch bastion. He had an interview with the prince and princess dowager of Orange at Turnhout in Brabant; a.nd having often preached while in Holland, he was so much admired, that the Walloon church of Leyden, and the French church at the Hague, sent him invitations to settle with them; but this he declined, and returned to Geneva in 1662. He had not been here long before the states general of Holland wrote most pressingly to the republic, requesting that Turretin might be permitted to settle in Holland and similar applications were made from Leyden, &c. in 1666 and 1672 but he could not be reconciled to the change, and resuming his functions, acquired the greatest fame, both as a divine and professor. He died Sept. 28, 1687.

Besides some sermons dedicated to madam de Schomberg, he wrote an answer to a piece published by a canon of Aneci, in order to render the protestants odious, among other things, upon the doctrine of the obedience of subjects to their lawful princes. He wrote also an answer to the letter, which the bishop of Lucca sent to the families at Geneva, which were originally of his diocese, to exhort them to the profession of the catholic religion, which their ancestors had abandoned. But what will chiefly perpetuate our author’s memory is his “Institutio Theologiae Elencticae,” in three volumes 4to, his theses “De satisfactione Christ!” against the Socinians, and “De necessaria secessione ab Ecclesia Romana.” There is an excellent abridgment of his “Institutio,” by Leonard Riissen, which has gone through several editions; the best, if we mistake not, is that of Amsterdam, 1695, 4to.

, the most celebrated of the family, was the son of Francis Turretin, and was born at Geneva, Aug. 24, 1671. From his infancy he shewed a great ardour for study, which his father took every pains to improve and direct. Some of his early preceptors were divines who had fled from France for religion, and one of them, a Mons. Dautun, was particularly serviceable in correcting the exuberances of his compositions, and habituating him to revise and reconsider what he wrote. This at first was rather troublesome to the lively spirits of our author, but he soon saw that Dautun had reason on his side. He studied the Cartesian philosophy under Chouet, a very able professor. Bishop Burnet, who passed the winter at Geneva in 1685, conceived a very high opinion of young Turretin, often examined him on his tasks, and in the course of many conversations inspired him with that taste which Turretin always afterwards indulged for English literature. In 1687 he lost his father, but continued to pursue his theological studies under Louis Tronchin, Calendrini, and Pictet. Tronchin admired in him a great love for truth and peace, and said, “that young man begins where others end.” Turretin had many advantages on his side, an uncommon share of natural understanding, a great memory, a facility in discovering the important parts of a question; an aversion to idleness and frivolous amusements; learned friends, an ample library, and a patrimony which set him at ease from anxiety or precipitation in his studies. At the age of twenty, with these advantages, we are told he was “almost a great man,” (presque un grand homme).

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.

After leaving England, which he did with much regret, in the spring 1693, he went to Paris, where he had equal reason to be pleased with his reception, being in the same manner caressed by Bossuet, Huet, Bignon, Nicaise, Mabillon, IVlalehranche, &c. &c. and in short all the learned men. of the day. On his return home he was ordained to the ministry in 1694, when only twenty-two years of age, a special mark of respect, as twenty-four is the lowest age appointed by law. For some time he had no fixed charge, but preached in the Italian church, with which his father and grandfather had always been connected, and he was a perfect master of the language. In 1697 the magistrates founded for him a professorship of ecclesiastical history, but without any salary, and M. Turretin was in a condition to accept it on such terms. He entered on his office in May, with a discourse on the utility and excellence of sacred antiquities, and afterwards began a course of ecclesiastical history, comprised in about three hundred lectures. He was often requested to print these, but pleaded that they were merely collections formed for the direction of the students, and were not sufficiently polished for publication.

In 1699 he embraced a favourable opportunity to make the tour of Swisserland, in the course of which he added considerably to the number of his friends and admirers. After his return, the commencement of a new century directed his attention to the secular games of the ancients, and produced from his pen a treatise entitled “De ludis ssECularibus Academicae Questiones,” Gen. 1701, 4to.In the same year he was chosen rector of the academy, in which office he remained until 1711, and delivered ten orations on the academic anniversary of each year. In 1702, he wrote a panegyric on William III, which was reprinted in England, and much admired. On the death of Tronchin, in 1705, he was appointed to succeed him in the divinity professorship, which he held with that of ecclesiastical history, but did not deliver a regular, systematic course of divinity lectures, for which he was blamed. In 1706 he joined those Geneva divines who sought to be excused from subscribing the form called the consensus, which had been introduced about thirty or forty years before. It appears from this that his notions were rather more latitudinarian than those of his ancestors; and it was remarked as rather singular that the son should be so zealous to abolish, what the father had been equally zealous to establish. We are assured, however, that friendly as he was to toleration, and somewhat inclined to Arminianism, he was a constant advocate for uniformity in all essential doctrines. In 1707, when the re-union of the protestant churches was agitated, the king of Prussia made Turretin a present of a gold medal, and he was chosen a member of the royal society of Berlin, as he had before of that of London. On the subject of any junction with the church of Rome, Turretin held that to be wholly impracticable, and his opinion had great weight. Such was indeed his reputation, that no strangers, of whatever rank, ever visited Geneva without a desire to be introduced to him, and to consult him on matters of importance.

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.

In 1708 he married, and left a son, who did not follow his father’s profession, but died in 1754. There were two Lives of Turretin written, one in French, by Vernet, which is inserted in the “Bibliotheque raisonnee,” vol. XXI.; the other in Latin by Tronchin, inserted in the “Tempe Helvetica,” vol. III. From these Chaufepie has compiled an excellent article, as indeed all his additional articles are, from which we have taken the above particulars.

, a learned and indefatigable Jesuit of Rome, was born in 1545, and taught rhetoric in that city with reputation during twenty years, and was afterwards rector of several colleges. He promoted the study of the belles lettres in his society, and died at Rome, April 6, 1599, aged 54. His principal works, are, 1. “The Life of St. Francis Xavier;” the best edition of this is that of 1596, 4to. On this work we shall have occasion to make some remarks in our article of Xavier. 2. “The History of Loretto,” 8vo. 3. A treatise on the Latin Particles. 4. “An Abridgment of Universal History,” from the creation to 1598, &c. All the above are in elegant Latin. The best editions of his Universal History are those which have a continuation by father Philip Briet, from 1618 to 1661. The best French translation of it is by the abbe Lagneau, Paris, 1757, 4 vols. 12mo, with notes.

, an English poet of the sixteenth century, and styled the British Varro, was born, as it is supposed, about the year 1515, at Rivenhall near Witham in Essex. His father, William Tusser, married a daughter of Thomas Smith, of Rivenhall, esq. by whom he had five sons and four daughters; and this match appears to have been the chief foundation of “the gentility of his family,” for which he refers his readers to “the Heralds’ book.” The name and race, however, have long been extinct. At an early age, much against his will, he was sent by his father to a music-school; and was soon placed as a chorister or singing-boy in the collegiate chapel of the castle of Wallingford; and after some hardships, of which he complains, and frequent change of place, he was at length admitted into St. Paul’s, where he arrived at considerable proficiency in music, under John Redford, the organist of that cathedral, a man distinguished for his attainments in the science. From St. Paul’s he was sent to Eton school, and was some time under the tuition of the famous Nicholas Udall, of whose severity he complains, in giving him fiftythree stripes at once for a trifling fault. Hence he was removed to Cambridge, and, according to some, was first entered of King’s college, and afterwards removed to Trinity hall; but his studies being interrupted by sickness, he left the university, and was employed about court, probably in his musical capacity, by the influence of his patron, William lord Paget. He appears to have been a retainer in this nobleman’s family, and he mentions his lordship in the highest terms of panegyric.

In this situation, which must have been during the latter part of the reign of Henry VIIL and the first years of Edward VI. when his patron was in great favour, he remained ten years, and then retiring into the country, and marrying, turned farmer at Katwade, now Cattiwade, a hamlet of the parish of Brantham, in Sanfort hundred, Suffolk, near the river Stour. Here he composed his book of Husbandry, the first edition of which was published in 1557, and dedicated to his patron lord Paget. It is probable that he must have been acquainted with rural affairs, for several years at least, before he could produce even the rude essay which forms the germ of his future and more elaborate work. He appears to have suffered some reverse in his farming business, as we find him afterwards successively at Ipswich, where his wife died, at West Dereham, and at Norwich. He married, however, a second wife, of the name of Moon, which affords him a play of words; but this match did not add to his happiness, apparently from a disparity in age, she being very young. He then obtained, by the interest of Salisbury, dean of Norwich, a singing-man’s place in that cathedral. After this he tried farming again, at Fairsted, near his native place; but again failing, he repaired to London, which he mentions with due commendation, until being driven from it by the plague in 1574, he went to Cambridge. When the scourge abated he returned to London, and died there, as is generally supposed, about 1580, and was interred in St. Mildred’s church in the Poultry, with an epitaph, recorded by Stow.

For an author, the vicissitudes of his life present an uncommon variety of incident. “Without a tincture of careless imprudence,” saysWarton, “or vicious extravagance, this desultory character seems to have thriven in no vocation.” There are no data, however, to account for his frequent changes of life and his failures. Farming was his leading pursuit, and in that, although he was a good theorist for the time, he was unsuccessful in practice. Stillingfleet says, “He seems to have been a good-natured cheerful man, and though a lover of ceconomy, far from meanness, as appears in many of his precepts, wherein he shews his disapprobation of that pitiful spirit, which makes farmers starve their cattle, their land, and every thing belonging to them; choosing rather to lose a pound than spend a shilling. Upon the whole, his book displays all the qualities of a well-disposed man, as well as of an able farmer.” Mr. Stillingfleet adds, “Googe set Tusser on a level with Varro and Columella and Palladius; but I would rather compare him to old Hesiod. They both wrote in the infancy of husbandry; both gave good general precepts, without entering into the detail, though Tusser has more of it than Hesiod; they both seem desirous to improve the morals of their readers as well as their farms, by recommending industry and economy; and that which perhaps may be looked upon as the greatest resemblance, they both wrote in verse, probably for the same reason, namely, to propagate their doctrines more effectually.”

Tusser’s “Five Hundred Points of Good Husbandry” appears to have obtained a very favourable reception from the public, above twelve editions having appeared within the first fifty years, and afterwards many others were printed. The best editions are those of 1580 and 1585, but they are very scarce. In 1812 the public was favoured with a new edition, carefully collated and corrected by Dr. William Mavor, of whose biographical sketch we have availed ourselves in the present article. Dr. Mavor has rendered his edition highly valuable by a series of notes, georgical, illustrative, and explanatory, a glossary, and other improvements.

, a party writer in the reign of king James the second, very early in life became obnoxious to the government from the virulence of his writings. He was prosecuted for a political performance on the side of Monmouth, and being found guilty, was sentenced by Jefferies to be whipped through several market- towns in the west. To avoid this severe punishment he petitioned the king that the sentence might be changed to hanging. At the death of this unfortunate monarch he wrote an invective against his memory, which even the severity of his sufferings can hardly excuse. He was the author of “The Observator,” which was begun April I, 1702. Becoming obnoxious to the tories, he received a severe beating in August 1707, and died in much distress in the Mint, the 23d of September following, at the age of forty-seven. In some verses on his death he is called captain Tutchin. Besides political and poetical effusions, he wrote a drama entitled “The unfortunate Shepherd,” 1685," 8vo, which is printed in a collection of his poems.

, an eminent merchant in Pudding-lane, is said to have united to the integrity and skill of a man of business the accomplishments of a polite scholar and an intelligent antiquary. He was elected a member of the Society of Antiquaries June 26, 1755. In 1771 he married a cousin, but had not any issue. On the 5th of July, 1785, presently after supper, he received a sudden and unexpected paralytic strokej which in a few hours deprived him of speech and senses; in which state he lay till the 9th of July, being the day on which he had accomplished fifty-two years and eleven months. By his will he ordered his coins, medals, books, and prints, to be sold by auction (which was done from the llth of January to the 18th of February, 1786, inclusive) the produce to be added to the principal part of his estate, which his industry and extreme frugality had increased to a considerable fortune, the interest of which he bequeathed to his widow for her life; and after her to a female cousin of the same condition; the ultimate reversion equally amongst the children of his brother. Few of his survivors understood better the rare secret of collecting only what was truly valuable; a circumstance which invincible modesty alone prevented from being more generally known. To those who were favoured with his intimacy his treasures and his judicious communications were regularly open. His select and valuable library was remarkable for the neatness of the copies; and many of the books were improved by notes written in his own small but elegant hand-writing.

an enterprizing scholar of uncommon talents and, attainments, was born June I, 1769, at Threepwood, near Hexham, in the county of Northumberland. He was the son of Francis Tweddell, esq. an able and intelligent magistrate. His earlier years were passed under the care and instruction of a most pious and affectionate mother; and at the age of nine years he was sent to school at Hartforth, near Richmond, in the North Riding of Yorkshire, under the superintendance of the Rev. Matthew Raine (father of the late learned Dr. Raine, of the Charter-house), who early discovered those rare endowments which were shortly to win high distinction, and were cherished by him with a kind solicitude, and treated with no common skill. Previously to his commencing residence at the university of Cambridge he spent some time under the immediate tuition of the Rev. Dr. Samuel Parr, whose pre-eminent learning opened not its stores in vain to an ardent and capacious mind; and whose truly affectionate regard for his pupil spared no pains to perfect him in all the learning of Greece and Rome; nor is it too much to say, that the tutor saw his pains requited, and gloried in his charge; whilst he secured the grateful respect and lasting attachment of his accomplished scholar. Mr. Tweddell’s proficiency in his academical course procured him unprecedented honours. The “Prolusiones Juveniles,” which were published in the year 1793, furnish an ample and unequivocal testimony to the extent and versatility of his talents. Professor Heyne, of Goettingen, in a letter addressed to Dr. Burgess (the truly learned and venerable bishop of St. David’s), thus speaks of Mr. Tweddell’s productions “Redditos mihi his diebus sunt litters? tuae, missae ex urbe Dresdse, Saxoniae, inclusse litteris elegantissimis Jbannis Tweddell, juvenis ornatissimi; cujus visendi et compellandi copiam 'mihi haud obtigisse vehementer doleo; spirant litteroe ejus indolem ingenuam, ingenium venustum, mores amabiles et jncundos. Eruditionem autem ejus exquisitam ex prolasionibus ejus juvcnilibus perspexi, quas litteris adjunxerat; una cum generoso libertatis sensu, quern cum ipsa libertate sibi eripi haud videtur pati velle.”

In 1792 Mr. Tweddell was elected fellow of Trinity college; and, soon afterwards, entered himself a student of the Middle-Temple. By those who were acquainted with the vivacity and playfulness of his mind, and who remember with what an exquisite feeling he relished the beauties of poetic fiction and the graces of classical composition, it will not be thought surprising that the study of the law should be in a more than common degree distasteful; yet, such was his deference to the wishes of his father, that, although he could never overcome the prevailing aversion of his mind, he paid considerable attention to his professional studies. It appears, both from the records of his private sentiments, as well as from his large and constant intercourse with the best sources of English history, and his predilection for political economy, that he would have wished to employ his talents and cultivated address in diplomacy at the courts of foreign powers.

It was not without a view to this that Mr. Tweddell determined to travel, and employ a few years in acquiring a knowledge of the manners, policy, and characters of the principal courts and most interesting countries of Europe, which were not yet become inaccessible to an Englishman through the overwhelming dominion of republican France. He accordingly embarked on the“24th September 1795, for Hamburg; where that” Correspondence" commences which was lately published, and which may serve to illustrate, though very imperfectly, the progress, pursuits, and indefatigable researches of this traveller in Switzerland, the North of Europe, and various parts of the East, until the period of his arrival in the provinces of Greece: here, after visiting several of the islands in the Archipelago, he fixed his residence for four months in Athens, exploring with restless ardour, and faithfully delineating, the remains of art and science, discoverable amidst her sacred ruins. The hand of a wise but mysterious Providence suddenly arrested his career, on- the 25th of July, 1799.

The regret and regard expressed on this melancholy occasion were universal; and many honours have in consequence been paid to Mr. TweddelPs memory, by various distinguished travellers, who have since visited Athens, where his remains are deposited in the Theseum, with a beautiful Greek inscription by the rev. Robert Walpole, A.M. of Carrow abbey, near Norwich, a gentleman whose taste and classical erudition are well known, and particularly in the sources of Grecian literature and antiquities.

The learned have looked with wearied expectation, and the friends of Mr. Tweddell with disappointed anxiety, to receive from the press some portion at least of the very large and choice materials which he had prepared for publication, both from his own pen, and from the pencil of an eminent artist, Mons. Preaux, acting under his immediate direction; these, it may be presumed, coming from a traveller so accomplished and so indefatigable, must have shed new and extraordinary light on the antiquities of Greece, and more particularly on those of Athens; whilst the journals of his travels in some of the mountainous districts of Switzerland, rarely, if ever before, visited, and in the Crimea, on the borders of the Euxine, could not have failed to impart much novel information. But notwithstanding the most urgent and diligent endeavours made by Mr. Tweddell’s friends notwithstanding the arrival at Constantinople of his papers and effects from Athens, and the actual delivery of his Swiss journals, with sundry other manuscripts, and above three hundred highlyfinished drawings, into the official custody of the British ambassador at the Othman court, it remains at this time a mystery, what is actually become of all these valuable manuscripts and drawings. Neither have all the investigations set on foot by his friends, nor the more recent representations addressed to the ambassador, obtained any explicit or satisfactory elucidation of the strange and suspicious obscurity which hangs over all the circumstances of this questionable business.

Mr. Tweddell, in his person, was of the middle stature, of a handsome and well-proportioned figure. His eye was remarkably soft and intelligent. The profile, or frontispiece to the volume, lately published, gives a correct and lively representation of the original, though it is not in the power of any outline to shadow out the fine expression of his animated and interesting countenance. His address was polished, affable, and prepossessing in a high degree; and there was in his whole appearance an air of dignified benevolence, which pourtrayed at once the suavity of his nature and the independence of his mind. In conversation, he had a talent so peculiarly his own, as to form a very distinguishing feature of his character. A chastised and ingenious wit, which could seize on an incident in the happiest manner a lively fancy, which could clothe the choicest ideas in the best language — these, supported by large acquaintance with men and books, together with the further advantages of a melodious voice, and a playfulness of manner singularly sweet and engaging, rendered him the delight of every company: his power of attracting friendships was, indeed, remarkable; and in securing them he was equally happy. Accomplished and admired as he was, his modesty was conspicuous, and his whole deportment devoid of affectation or pretension. Qualified eminently to shine in society, and actually sharing its applause, he found his chief enjoyment in the retired circle of select friends; in whose literary leisure, and in the amenities of female converse (which for him had the highest charms) he sought the purest and the most refined recreation. “Of jhe purity of Mr. Tweddell’s principles, and the honourable independence of his character of his elevated integrity, his love of truth, his generous, noble, and affectionate spirit, the editor might with justice say much, but the traces and proofs of these, dispersed throughout the annexed correspondence, he cheerfully leaves to the police and sympathy of the intelligent reader.” Such is the language of his brother, the rev. Robert Tweddell, and the editor of a very interesting volume, entitled “Remains of the late John Tweddell, &c. being a selection of his Letters, written from various parts of the continent, together with a republication of his Prolusiones Juveniles,” 1815, 4to. It has been justly remarked on this volume, that, though some letters in the collection, and parts of others, would have been perhaps judiciously omitted, there are few instances of a private correspondence, written without the least view to publication, which will bear a severer scrutiny, either in point of good sense, elegant taste, or honourable sentiments. Full of candour and discrimination, Tweddell pourtrays with great spirit the manners and customs, and characters of the different nations he visited imbued with classical lore, and blessed with a fine imagination, he paints in glowing colours the magnificent scenery of nature in her wildest regions, and throws a double interest over the deserted relics of ancient art: educated in the strict principles of morality and religion, by the most excellent of parents, he repays their care and solicitude by the strong and vivid sentiments of attachment displayed throughout his whole correspondence, which is undefiled by a single sentence of a licentious tendency.

, a learned English divine, was educated at Jesus college, Cambridge, where he proceeded B. A. in 1704-. In 1733 the university of Oxford conferred on him the degree of M. A. by diploma, in approbation, as we presume, of his “Critical Examination, &c.” hereafter mentioned. He was at that time vicar of St. Mary’s at Marlborough; but in 1737 was presented to the united rectories of St. Matthew, Friday-street, and St. Peter, Cheap. He was also a prebendary of St. Paul’s, and one of the lecturers of St. Dunstan’s in the West. Some of these promotions came late, nor had he more than 100l. a year to support a family of five children till within five years of his death, which took place Feb. 19, 1741-2. By the advice of some friends, two volumes of his sermons at Boyle’s and lady Moyer’s lectures were published for the benefit of his family, 1743, in 2 vols. 8vo. His publications in his life-time were, 1. “A Critical Examination of the late new text and version of the Testament, in Greek and English, in three parts;” the first two were printed in 1731, and the last in 1732, 8vo. The work here examined was entitled “The New Testament in Greek and English, containing the original text corrected, from the authority of authentic Mss. and a new version formed agreeably to the illustrations of the most learned commentators and critics, with notes and various readings, &c.” Mr. Twells’s object is to prove that the editor’s text is corrupt, his version false, and his notes fallacious, and that the tendency of the work is to injure Christianity in general, and the tenets of the Church of England in particular. Mr. Twells also published, 2. “A Vindication of the gospel of St. Matthew,” 1735, 8vo; and “A Supplement to the Vindication.” 3. “Answer to the Inquiry into the meaning of the Demoniacks in the New Testament,” 1737, 8vo. 4. “Answer to the ‘ Further Inquiry,’ 1738,” 8vo. 5. “The Theological Works of Dr. Pocock,” 1740, 2 vols. fol. with a life of Pocock, to which we have already referred, replete with curious information respecting that great orientalist, his contemporaries, and the times in which he lived. Mr. Twells, we are sorry to add, gained little by this pub-. Hcation. He himself states that his reward for writing the life, compiling indexes, collating and correcting the errors of the old edition, which with soliciting for subscriptions, travelling to London, Oxford, &c. more or less employed his time and exercised his patience for five years, would be in all probability not more than 50l.

, a learned divine, was the only son of an eminent tea-merchant by his first marriage, and born in 1734. He was intended by his father to succeed him in that house, which he had so well established; but the son, feeling an impulse towards literature and science, entreated his father to let him devote himself to study and a classical education; and, being indulged in his wish, he was matriculated at Sidney-college, Cambridge. Mr. T. was contemporary in that university with Gray, Mason, and Bate; and so able a musician, that, besides playing the harpsichord and organ in a masterly manner, he was so excellent a performer on the violin as to lead all the concerts, and even oratorios, that were performed in the university during term-time, in which Bate played the organ and harpsichord. His taste in music was enlarged and confirmed by study as well as practice, as few professors knew more of composition, harmonics, and the history of the art and science of music, than this intelligent and polished Dilettante.

In 1760 he took his degree of B. A. and that of A. M. in 1763. He became rector of White Notley, Essex, in private patronage, 1788, and of St. Mary’s, Colchester, to which he was presented by the bishop of London, on the death of Philip Morant, 1770. He died Aug. 6, 1804, in the seventieth year of his age. Sound learning, polite literature, and exquisite taste in all the fine arts, lost an ornament and defender in the death of this scholar and worthy divine. His translation of the “Poetics of Aristotle” must convince men of learning of his knowledge of the Greek language, of the wide extent of his classical erudition, of his acute and fair spirit of criticism, and, above all, of his good taste, sound judgment, and general reading manifested in his dissertations. Besides his familiar acquaintance with the Greek and Roman classics, his knowledge of modern languages, particularly French and Italian, was such as not only to enable him to read but to write those languages with facility and idiomatic accuracy. His conversation and letters, when science and serious subjects were out of the question, were replete with wit, humour, and playfulness. In the performance of his ecclesiastical duties Mr. T. was exemplary, scarcely allowing himself to be absent from his parishioners more than a fortnight in a year, during the last forty years of his life, though, from his learning, accomplishments, pleasing character, and conversation, no man’s company was so much sought. During the last 12 or 14 years of his life he was a widower, and has left no progeny. His preferment in the church was inadequate to his learning, piety, and talents; but such was the moderation of his desires, that he neither solicited nor complained. The Colchester living was conferred upon him by Dr. Lowth, bishop of London, very much to his honour, without personal acquaintance or powerful recommendation; but, from the modesty of his character, and love of a private life, his profound learning and literary abilities were little known till the publication of his Aristotle.

, 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.

His stay abroad, however, was not long. In about two months he was called back to England, but on his arrival took a final leave of the court, and devoted himself to a learned retirement at Newbury, the place of his birth, of which he obtained the curacy. Here, such was his attachment to the quiet enjoyment of his studies, and the discharge of his parochial duties, that he refused some valuable preferments offered him entirely on the score of merit; among these were the wardenship of Winchester college, a prebend of Winchester, and a valuable living. This last he had some thoughts of accepting, provided the people of Newbury could be furnished with a suitable successor. With this view he waited upon the archbishop of Canterbury, who received him very kindly, granted his request, an'd added, that he would mention him to the king as a pious and learned divine, and no puritan. Twiss seems to have been alarmed at this last compliment, which he knew he did not deserve, and upon more mature consideration, remained at Newbury. About the same time he refused a professor’s chair at Oxford, and another in the university of Franeker.

Upon the publication of the “Book of Sports,” which did so much mischief to the royal cause, Dr. Twiss decidedly declared his opinion against it, and refused to read it, yet he was still such a favourite with king James that he forbade his being molested on this account. During the rebellion he suffered considerably by the violence of the soldiery; but when prince Rupert came to Newbury he entertained Dr. Twiss very courteously, wishing him to forsake the parliamentary cause, and write in defence of the king, which he refused. In 1640 he was chosen one of the sub-committee, to assist the committee of accommodation appointed by the House of Lords to consider the innovations introduced into the church, and to promote a more pure reformation. In 1643 he was nominated, by an order of the parliament, prolocutor to the assembly of divines. This appointment he repeatedly declined, but having at length been prevailed upon to accept it, he preached (the assembly opening on July 1.) before both Houses of parliament, in Henry VIHth’s chapel. “In his sermon,” says Fuller, “he exhorted his auditory to a faithful discharge of their duty, and to promote the glory of God and the honour of his church; but he was sorry that they wanted the royal assent. He hoped, however, that in due time it might be obtained, and that a happy union would be obtained between the king and parliament.” He appears to have been dissatisfied with the conduct of both of the great contending parties: “whilst some would have nothing reformed, others would have all things changed, and turned upside down.” These melancholy prospects gradually impaired his health, and some time after he sunk down in the pulpit while preaching, and being carried home, languished until July 20, 1646, when he expired, in the seventieth year of his age. During his illness the parliament voted him lOOl. as he had lost all his property while at Newbury, and had in London only one of the lectureships of St. Andrew’s, Holborn; and after his death \000l. to his family; but this, it is said, they never received *. Respecting his

others, were dug up and thrown into was nothing inDr.Twiss’s conduct to rena pit, in St. Margaret’s churchyard, derhis memory particularly obnoxious. personal character, there seems no difference of opinion among historians. Fuller denominates him “a divine of great abilities, learning, piety, and moderation;” and Wood says, “his plain preaching was esteemed good; his solid disputations were accounted better; but his pious life was reckoned best of all.” Nor less favourably does bishop Sanderson speak of him, even while differing greatly from some of his opinions. Mr. Clark says, that he “had his infirmities, whereof the most visible was this: that he was of a facile nature, and too prone to be deceived by giving too much credit to those, whom, by information from others, or in his own opinion, he judged to be godly. Whence it came to pass that he was often imposed upon, especially by certain crafty heads, who solemnly professed that their chiefest care was the preservation of the purity of doctrine, and reformation of discipline, whereas, in deed and truth, they sought the utter subversion of both.”

His writings are all controversial, and more or less directed against Arminianism, of which, it seems to be agreed, even by his adversaries, he was the ablest and most successful opponent of his time. The authors against whom he wrote were, principally, Dr. Thomas Jackson, Mr. Henry Mason, Dr. Thomas Godwin, Mr. John Godwin, Mr. John Cotton, Dr. Potter, Dr. Heylin, and Dr. Hammond. His works were, 1. “Vindiciae gratioe,” Amst. 1632 and 164S, fol. against Arminius. 2. “A discovery of Dr. Jackson’s Vanity,” &c. 1631, 4to, printed abroad. 3. “Dissertatio de scientia media tribus libris absoluta,” &c. Arnheim, 1639, fol. 4. “Of the Morality of the Fourth Commandment,” Lond. 1641, 4to. 5. “Treatise of Reprobation,” ibid. 1646, 4to, with some other works printed after his death. There are fifteen of his letters in Mr. Joseph Mede’s Works, and he, left many Mss. in the hands of his son, who, WoocJ says, was a minister, but these are probably lost.

, one of a family of Oxford antiquaries, was the grandson of sir Brian Twyne, of Long Parish, in Hampshire, knight, and was born at Bolingdon, in the same county. He was educated at New Inn hall, Oxford, and admitted to the reading of the institutions in 1524, at a time when that society could boast of many excellent civilians. After he left the university he was appointed head master of the free-school at Canterbury, and in 1553 rose to be mayor of the city, in the time of Wyat’s rebellion. By the school he became so rich as to be able to purchase lands at Preston and Hardacre, in Kent, which he left to his posterity. He was a good Greek and Latin scholar, and devoted much of his time to the study of history and antiquities. He was held in great esteem by men able to judge of his talents, particularly by Leland, who introduces him among the worthies of his time in his “Encomia,” and by Camden, who speaks of him in his “Britannia” as a learned old man. Holinshed also mentions him as a learned antiquary, in the first edition of hia “Chronicle;” but this notice is for some reason omitted in the edition of 1587. It is said he was a violent papist, but Tanner has produced evidence of a charge more disgraceful to his character as a tutor and magistrate. This appears in a ms. in Bene't college library, Cambridge, No. CXX. “Anno 1560, Mr. Twyne, school- master, was ordered to abstain from riot and drunkenness, and not to intermeddle with any public office in the town.” He died in an advanced age, Nov. 24, 1581, and was buried in the chancel of the church of St. Paul, Canterbury, with an inscription, in which he is styled armiger. His only publication, which, however, did not appear until after his death, was his work “De rebus Albionicis, Britannicis atque Anglicis commentariorum libri duo,” Lond. 1590, 8vo. His Mss. which are on subjects of history and antiquities, were given by his grandson, Brian Twyne, to the library of Corpus Christi college, Oxford. Mr. Gough mentions his collections for a history of Canterbury, as being lost. Bishop Kennet says that he wrote an epistle prefixed to the“History of king Boccus and Sydracke,” 1510, 4to, a very rare book, of which there is a copy in St. John’s library, Oxford.

By his wife Alice, daughter of William Piper of Canter* bury, whom he married in 1524, which, according to Wood, must have been when he was at Oxford, he had three sons. The first, Lawrence, was a fellow of All Souls college, and bachelor of civil law, and an ingenious poet, but ventured no farther than some encomiastic verses prefixed to books. He lived and probably died on his father’s estate at Hardacre in Kent. He had a brother John, who also wrote verses prefixed to books; and a third, Thomas, of whom Wood has given us some farther particulars, although perhaps they are not very interesting. He was born in Canterbury, and admitted scholar of Corpus Christi college, Oxford, in 1560, and probationer fellow in 1564, being then bachelor of arts. He afterwards proceeded in arts, and then studied medicine, and in 1581 took his doctor’s degree, and practised at Lewes in Sussex, under the patronage of Thomas lord Buckhurst. He died in 1613, aged seventy, and was buried in the chancel of St. Anne’s church, Lewes. He wrote and translated many tracts, enumerated by Wood, but of very little value. He was an admirer of the mysterious philosophy of John Dee. Among his other publications tie completed Phaer’s translation of the Æneid, with Maphaeus’s thirteenth book, in 1583; translated Lhuyde’s “Breviary of Britayne, &q.;” and was editor of his father’s work “De rebus Albionicis,” which he dedicated to lord Buckhurst. He also wrote some contemptible rhirnes, then called poetry.

, son of Thomas, and grandson of John Twyne, was born in 1579, and admitted a scholar of Corpus Christi college in December 1594. After he had taken the degrees in arts, he was admitted probationer fellow in 1605, and entering into holy orders took the degree of bachelor of divinity in 1610. In 1614 he was made Greek reader of his college, in which office he acquitted himself with credit, but about 1623 left college to avoid being involved in some dispute between the president and fellows; because in this affair, Wood informs us, he could not vote on either side without the hazard of expulsion, having entered college on a Surrey scholarship, which, it seems, was irregular. He was afterwards presented to the vicarage of Rye in Sussex by the earl of Dorset, but seldom resided, passing most of his time in Oxford, where he had lodgings in Penverthing or Pennyfarthing street, in the parish of St. Aldate. He lived here in a kind of retirement, being, as Wood says, of a melancholy temper, and wholly given to reading, writing, and contemplation. Laud had a great regard for him, and employed him in drawing up the university statutes, all of which he transcribed with his own hand, and was rewarded with the place of custos archivorum, founded in 1634. He died at his lodging^ in St. Aldate’s, July 4, 1644, aged sixty-five, and was buried in Corpus chapel.

Twyne, who was an indefatigable collector of every document or information respecting the history and antiquities of Oxford, produced the first regular account of it, which was published in 1608, under the title of “Antiquitatis Academioe Oxoniensis Apologia, in tres libros divisa,” Oxon. 4to. The chief object of this work was to refute what Kaye or Caius had asserted in his history of Cambridge on the antiquity of that university, proving it to be 1267 years older than Oxford. So absurd an assertion would scarcely now be thought worthy of a serious answer, but Twyne was an enthusiast on the question, and mere antiquity was thought preferable to every other degree of superiority. He therefore produced his “Apologia,” in which he revives and endeavours to prove that Oxford was originally founded by some Greek philosophers, the companions of Brutus, and restored by King Alfred in 870. Smith, in his history of University college, has very ably answered his principal arguments on this question, which indeed has nothing more than tradition on its side. He was a young man when he wrote this book, and intended a new edition; but his interleaved copy for this purpose, with his additions, &c. was unfortunately lost in a fire at Oxford, which happened some time after his death. He left, however, several volumes of ms collections to the university, of which Wood availed himself in his history.

, the second baronet of the family, of Roydon hall, East Peckham, in Kent, was born in 1597. His father, William Twysden, esq. was one of those who conducted king James to London, when he first came from Scotland, to take possession of the English crown, and was first knighted and afterwards created a baronet by his majesty. Sir William had a learned education, understood Greek and Hebrew well, and accumulated a valuable collection of books and Mss. which he made useful to the public, both in defence of the protestant religion and the ancient constitutions of the kingdom. He died in January 1627-8. Sir Roger, his eldest son, had also a learned education, and was a good antiquary. He assisted Mr. Philpot in his Survey of Kent, who returns him acknowledgments, as a person to whom, “for his learned conduct of these his imperfect labours, through the gloomy and perplexed paths of antiquity, and the many difficulties that assaulted him, he was signally obliged.” He was a man of great accomplishments, well versed in the learned languages, and exemplary in his attachment to the church of England. He made many important additions to his father’s library, which seems seldom to have been unemployed by his family or his descendants. His brother, Thomas, was brought up to the profession of the law, and became one of the justices of the King’s Bench after the restoration, and was created a baronet, by which he became the founder of the family of Twisdens (for he altered the spelling of the name) of Bradbourn in Kent. Another brother, John, was a physician, and a good mathematician, and wrote on both sciences.

Sir Roger was loyal to his unfortunate sovereign, and detesting the undutiful behaviour of many of his subjects, was not content to sit still, but was one of the first to oppose their arbitrary proceedings, which drew on him a severe persecution. He was confined seven years in prison, his estate sequestered, his timber cut down, and paid a fine of 1300l. when he was restored to his estate. When he came again to his seat he lived retired, and his greatest comfort was, conversing with the learned fathers of the primitive church, and the ancient laws and constitution of his country, which he lived to see restored. The appearance of the “Decem Scriptores,” with other collections, were owing to his endeavours, and he wrote a learned preface to them. He was also the author of “The Historical Deience of the Church of England.” This worthy baronet died June 7, 1672, in the seventy-fifth year of his age.

, 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.

In an old comedy, or scenical history, whichever it is proper to call it, with the following whimsical title, “When you see me you know me,” by Samuel Rowley, printed in 1623, wherein are represented in the manner of a drama some of the remarkable events during the reign of Henry VIII. is a conversation between prince Edward and Dr. Tye on the subject of music, which, for its curiosity, sir John Hawkins has transcribed at length. The “Acts of the Apostles,” mentioned in this dialogue, were never completed; but the first fourteen chapters thereof were, in 1553, printed by Wyllyam Seres, with the following quaint title: “The Actes of the Appostles, translated into Englyshe metre, and dedicated to the kynges most excellent majestye by Christofer Tye, doctor in musyke, and one of the Gentylmen of hys graces moste honourable Chappell, wyth notes to eche Chapter, to syng and also to play upon, the Lute, very necessarye for studentes after theyr studye, to fyle theyr wyttes, and alsoe for all Christians that cannot synge to reade the good and godlye storyes of the Hues of Christ hys Apostles.” The dedication is, “To the vertuous and godlye learned prynce Edwarde the VI.” and is in stanzas of alternate metre. The reader will find some account of it in the “Bibliographer,” vol. I.

The “Acts of the Apostles,” set to music by Dr. Tye, were sung in the chapel of Edward VI. and probably in other places where choral service was performed; but the success of them not answering the expectation of their author, he applied himself to another kind of study, the composing of music to words selected from the Psalms of David, in four, five, and more parts; to which species of harmony, for want of a better, the name of Anthem, a corruption of Antiphon, was given. In Dr. Boyce’s collection of cathedral music, lately published, vol. II. is aa anthem of this great musician, “I will exalt thee,” a most perfect model for composition in the church-style, whether we regard the melody or the harmony, the expression or the contrivance, or, in a word, the general effect of the whole. In the Ashmolean ms. fol. 189, is the following note in the hand-writing of Antony Wood “Dr. Tye was a peevish and humoursome man, especially in his latter days and sometimes playing on the organ in the chapel of Qu. Eliz. which contained much music, but little delight to the ear, she would send to the verger to tell him that he played out of tune; whereupon he sent word, that her ears were out of tune.” The same author adds, that Dr. Tye restored church-music after it had been almost ruined by the dissolution of abbeys. What sir John Hawkins, from whom this article appears to have been taken by our predecessors, has said of Tye, is confirmed by Dr. Burney, who says that he was doubtless at the head of all our ecclesiastical composers of that period. This eminent musical historian adds, that Dr. Tye, “if compared with his contemporaries, was perhaps as good a poet as Sternhold, and as great a musician as Europe then could boast; and it is hardly fair to expect marc perfection from him, or to blame an individual for the general defects of the age in which he lived.”