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

From this school the society at Oxford was to be supplied with proper subjects by election, and the college aj; Winchester was to be always subordinate, both in government and discipline, use and design, to that at Oxford, and subject to a yearly visitation from the warden and two fellows of the latter. This visitation, and the annual elections from Winchester to New-college, generally take place in the second week of July. The warden of Winchester is elected by the fellows of New-college, who for some years chose their own warden for that office; but in Wykebam’s time, and for many years after, the wardenship of New-college was far superior in value . The first instance of-a warden of New-college being preferred to Winchester is that of Dr. Nicholas in 1679, and the last, Dr. Coxed.

Among the special privileges secured by the founder to New college, one was, that the fellows should be admitted to all degrees in the university without asking any grace of the congregation of masters, or undergoing any examination for them in the public schools, provided they were examined in their own college according to the form of the university, and had their graces given them in the same manner by the government of the house. In 1608 this was disputed; but archbishop Bancroft, then chancellor of the university, dcided in favour of the college.

Wykeham lived long enough to witness the prosperity of both his institutions, and almost to see others emanating from them. He died in 1404, in his eightieth year, leaving in his will a continuation of those acts of munificence and pious charity which he had begun in his life. He was interred in the beautiful chantry which he had built for himself in Winchester cathedral. In this cathedral we still sea the triumphs of his skill in the main body of the edifice from the tower to the west end, but more particularly in his chantry, which, with his monument, is kept in repair at the joint expence of his two colleges.

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

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

After he had regained his liberty he continued his opposition to the several administrations under which he lived, though he is believed to have altered his opinion with respect to government itself, from the Jacobite notions which he might formerly have espoused, to a more large and popular system; and that upon this ground he afterwards formed his whole Apolitical conduct. Jt was universally allowed that he possessed all the qualifications requisite to form an able senator; sagacity, to discern the strength or weakness of every question, and eloquence, to enforce the one and expose the other; skill and address, to seize every advantage in the course of a debate, without affording any; and a proper degree of warmth and vivacity in speaking, necessary to secure the attention of the audience, without such an excess of it as might embarrass himself, and expose him to the cooler observation of his antagonists. And if we descend to the consideration of him in the more familiar light of his private conversation, we shall find it equally distinguished by an unaffected civility and politeness, enlivened by an easy flow of elegant wit, and supported by a various and extensive fund of useful knowledge. To so imperfect a character of him, it will be but justice to subjoin that which has been given by Pope, with whom he lived in great intimacy.

He died at Wells, in Somersetshire, after an illness of a few days, June 17, 1740. He was twice married; first, July 21, 1708, to the lady Catharine Seymour, second daughter of Charles, duke of Somerset; by whom he had issue two sons, Charles and Percy, and two daughters, Catharine, who died in April. 1734, and Elizabeth. His. second lady was Maria Catharina, relict of the marquis of Blandford, sister to the countess of Denbigh, and daughter of M. De Jong, of the province of Utrecht, in Holland.

He was succeeded in dignity and estate by his eldest son, sir Charles Wyndham, who succeeded to the titles of earl of Egremont, and baron of Cockermouth, by the death of his grace, Algernon, duke of Somerset, without heir male, who had been created earl of Egremont, and baron of Cockermouth, in the county of Cumberland, by George II. with limitation of these honours to \r Charles Wyndham. His lordship, whilst he was a commoner, was elected to parliament as soon as he came of age, for the borough of Bridgewater in Somersetshire. He sat afterwards for Appleby, in Westmoreland, Taunton,. in Somersetshire, and Cockermouth, in Cumberland. In 1751 he was appointed lord lieutenant and custos rotulorum of the county of Cumberland. In April 1761 he was nominated the first of the three plenipotentiaries on the pnrfc of Great Britain to the intended congress at Augsburg, for procuring a general pacification between the belligerent powers; and in the same year was constituted one of the principal secretaries of state, in which it was his disadvantage to succeed Mr. Pitt (afterwards lord Chatham). In 1762 he was made lord lieutenant and custos rotulorum of the county of Sussex. He died of an apoplectic fit in June 1763. He was succeeded by his son, George, the second and present earl of Egremont.

, a learned barrister and law-writer, was born in 1734. He was the grandson of Owen Wynne, esq. LL. D. sometime umler-secretary of state to Charles II. and James II. and son of William Wynne, esq. by his wife, Grace, one of the daughters of William Brydges, esq. Serjeant at law. He followed his father’s profession, and was called to the bar; but, whatever his success, seems to have devoted a considerable portion of his time to study and to the composition of some works, which unite great elegance of style to great legal knowledge and acuteness. In his private character he was noted for many virtues, and extensive liberality and charity. He died at his house at Chelsea, of that dreadful disorder, a cancer in the mouth, Dec. 26, 1784, in the fiftieth year of his age.

His first work was printed, but not generally published, under the title of “A miscellany containing several law tracts,” 1765, 8vo. These were, 1. “Observations on Fitzherbert’s natura brcvium, with an introduction concerning writs, and a dissertation on the writ De non ponendis in assists et juratis, and on the writ De leprose amovendo, 2. An inquiry concerning the reason of the distinction the law has made in cases between things annexed to the freehold, and things severed from it. 3. Argument in behalf of unlimited extension of collateral consanguinity, with extracts from the statutes on which the question arose. 4. Account of the trial of the Fix; and observations on the nature and antiquity of the court of claims. 5. An answer to two passages in the ' Catalogue of Royal and Noble Authors. 16. Observations on the antiquity and dignity of the degree of serjeant at law.” These two last were written by his father, who in the former refuted an aspersion cast on his character by Walpole (lord Orford) in his article of Philip duke of Wharton. After: relating the story of Wharton’s cheating the minister out of his arguments against bishop Atterbury, and replying to them, by anticipation, in a speech for Atterbury, Walpole added in a note that “Serjeant Wynne served the bishop in much the same manner; being his counsel, he desired to see the bishop’s speech, and then spoke the substance of it himself.” This calumny Mr. Wynne refuted with so much spirit, that Walpole thought proper to omit the note in the subsequent editions of his “Catalogue.”

, a man of some original genius, but whose works will not entitle him to any very Jjigh rank in literature, was descended from a very respectable family in South Wales, where he was born in 1743. At what time he arrived in London, is not known, but for some time he gained his bread in the printing business, with which he became disgusted, and had interest enough to obtain an appointment in a regiment about to go abroad. Such was the perverseness of his temper while on shipboard vyith liis brother officers, that they refused to associate with him, and actually left him behind when the ship arrived at its first place of destination. From thence he contrived to return to England, where he married a young woman of some property. This was probably soon spent, as about this time he commenced author by profession, but either his works or his employers were of the lowest order, for it was with difficulty he could procure the necessaries of life by his labours. In 1770, however, he began to aim at higher fame, and published “A General History of theJBritish Empire in America: including all the countries in North America and the West-Indies ceded by the peace of Paris, 2 vols. 8vo. This as a compilation did him no discredit.In 1771 he published the” Prostitute, a Poem,“4to; in 1772” Choice Emblems, natural, historical, fabulous, moral, and divine, for the improvement of youth; in verse and prose/* 12mo. The same year appeared his principal work, “A general History of Ireland, from the earliest accounts to the present time,” 2 vols. 8vo., This was more popular, from the nature of the subject, than his History of America, but far enough removed from the merit that would enrol him among historians. Next year he published “tables of Flowers for the Female Sex,” “Evelina, a poem;” and “The Four Seasons, a poem.” In poetry he was ill -qualified to excel, although there are passages in some of his pieces that indicate superior talents, had he cultivated them at leisure, and been possessed of a mind better regulated. In 1787 he published a novel called “The Child of Chance;” and at different periods of his life supplied the magazines and newspapers with essays, poems, &c. generally with his name. All these were written to supply immediate wants, which they did but imperfectly. He died Dec. 2, 1788. It is mentioned to his honour that through a long life of poverty, he abhorred and avoided every mean and dishonest expedient to improve his finances, and was even so extravagant in his notions of independence that to do him an act of kindness unsolicited, was to incur his bitterest reproaches.

, an ancient Scottish chronicler, was most probably born during the reign of David II. king of Scotland, which commenced in 1309, and terminated in 1370. He was a canon regular of St. Andrew’s, and prior of the monastery of St. Serf, situated in the inch or island of Lochleven in the county of Kinross. In the chartulary of the priory of St. Andrew’s, there are several public instruments of Andrevr Wynton as prior of Lochleven, dated between the years 1395 and 1413. He was therefore contemporary with Barboiir; to whose merit he has on various occasions paid a due tribute of applause. His “Orygynale Cronykil of Scotland”' was undertaken at the request of sir John Wemyss, the ancestor of the present noble family of that name. Wynton’s life must have been prolonged at least till 1420, for he mentions the death of Robert, duke of Albany, which happened in the course of that year.

The Chronicle of Wynton was suffered to remain in ms. for the space of several centuries, until in 1795 a splendid edition of that part of it which relates more immediately to the affairs of Scotland, was published by the late Mr. David Macpherson, in 2 vols. 8vo. The editor has added a copious glossary, a series of learned and valuable annotations, and other useful appendages. He says, with truth, that Wynton, not inferior to Fordun in historic merit, has also an equal claim to the title of an original historian of Scotland: for, though he survived Fordun, it is certain that he never saw his work; and his Chronicle has the advantage, not only of being completed to the period which he proposed, but even of being revised and greatly improved by himself in a second copy. It has also the further advantage, for such it surely ought to be esteemed, of being written in the language of the country

whereas the information contained in all the other histories of Scotland preceding the middle of the seventeenth century, if we except the brief chronicle subjoined to some manuscripts of Wyntown, and the translations of Ballenden and Read, was effectually concealed from the unlearned part of mankind under the veil of a dead or a foreign language. In Wyntbwn’s Chronicle the historian may find what, for want of more ancient records, which have long ago perished, we must now consider as the original accounts of many transactions, and also many events related from his own knowledge or the reports of eye-witnesses. His faithful adherence to his authorities appears from comparing his accounts with unquestionable vouchers, such as the Fcedera Anglise, and the existing remains of the Register of the priory of St. Andrew’s, that venerable monument of ancient Scottish history and antiquities, generally coaeval with the facts recorded in it, whence he has given large extracts, almost literally translated. All these we have hitherto been obliged to take at second or third hand in copies by Bower and others, with such additions and embellishments as they were pleased to make to Wyntown’s simple and genuine narrative. An ecclesiastical historian of Scotland can no where find so good an account of the bishops of St. Andrew’s, with occasional notices concerning the other sees, as from Wyntown, who in describing the churches, their buildings and paraphernalia, shews himself quite at home. The compiler of a Scottish peerage may obtain from Wyntown more true information concerning the ancient noble families of Scotland, than is to be found in any work extant, except the accurate and elaborate research made by the late lord Hailes in the celebrated Sutherland case, wherein he has repeatedly had recourse to our author for proofs of the laws and customs of succession. In this view the lawyer will also find the Chronicle of Wyntown an useful addition to his library, and may consult it with advantage, when called upon to adjust a disputed inheritance in an ancient family. Mr. Ellis, who allows that Wynton is highly valuable as a historian, adds that his versification is easy, his language pure, and his style often animated.

, Rouge-Croix pursuivant, was son of Augustine of Wyrley, of Nether Seile, in the county of Leicester, by Mary his wife, daughter of William Charnells of Snareston, in that county, esq. which Augustine was second son of William Wyrley, of Handsworth, in Staffordshire, esq. of an ancient family in that county, which of late years expired in an heiress married into the family of Birch, of Birch, in Lancashire, who have since sold their ancient paternal estate in that county, and reside at the Wyrley seat in Staffordshire, having assumed the name and arms of that family. In early life he was noticed by the antiquary Sampson Erdeswick, of Sandon, who took him into his house; t and Wyrley having for many years laboured in the study of heraldry, was, upon the 15th of May, 1604, appointed Rouge-Croix pursuivant of arms, which office he held, without higher promotion, till the beginning of February 1617-18, when he died in the Heralds’ college, and was buried in the burial-place belonging to that corporation in the church of St. Bene't, Paul’s Wharf, London. In 1592, he published a book, intituled, “The true Use of Armory shewed by History, and plainly proved by example. London,” 4to; but the fame derivable from this work was somewhat injured by Erdeswick, in his dotage, laying claim to the authorship of it. Wyrley also made many collections for a history of his native county of Leicester, which Burton made use of. In 1569 he began to survey the churches there. His original ms. written by himself, containing also many churches in Warwickshire, is now in the library of the Heralds’ college, bearing the mark V. 197. It appears also, that he afterwards accompanied Burton in his survey of the churches there, in the years 1603, 1608, &c. In V. No. 127, in the same library, is a fair and beautiful copy of their labours in this way, with the arms, monuments, and antiquities, well drawn. At the end of his “True Use of Armory” are two dull creeping metrical narratives, one on the life and death of lord Chandos, the other on Sir John de Gralhy, Capitall de Buz; but it seems doubtful whether these were the production of Erdeswick or of Wyrley. It is certain they are not worth contending for.

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

, one of the most celebrated philosophers of ancient Greece, was born at Chalcedon, B. C. 400. He at first attached himself to Æschines, but afterwards became the disciple of Plato, and always retained a high degree of respect and attachment for that great man, whom he accompanied in a voyage to Sicily. When Dionysius the tyrant threatened Plato one day, saying, “that some person should behead him;” “Nobody shall do that,” said Xenocrates, “till they have first beheaded me.” This philosopher studied under Plato at the same time with Aristotle, but did not possess equal talents: for he had a slow genius and dull apprehension, while Aristotle’s genius was quick and penetrating, whence their master observed of them, “that one wanted a spur, and the other a bridle.” But however inferior Xenocrates might be to Aristotle in genius, he greatly excelled him in the practice of moral philosophy. He was grave, sober, austere, and of a disposition so serious, and so far removed from the Athenian politeness, that Plato frequently exhorted him to “sacrifice to the graces.” He always bore his master’s reproofs with great patience, and when persuaded to defend himself, replied, “He treats me thus only for my good.” Xenocrates is particularly celebrated for chastity, and is said to have acquired so great a command over his passions, that Phryne, the most beautiful courtezan of Greece, who had laid a wager that she would seduce him, could not effect her purpose. Being afterwards laughed at, and the wager demanded, she replied, “I have not lost it; for I undertook to seduce a man, and not a statue.” The conduct of Xenocrates exhibited an equal example of temperance in every other respect. He cared neither for pleasures, wealth, or fame; and was so moderate in his dietj that he often found it necessary to throw away his provisions because they were grown stale and mouldy; whence the proverb among the Grecians, of Xenocrates* s cheese, when they would describe any thing which lasted a long time. This philosopher succeeded Speusippus, who was Plato’s immediate successor in the' academy at Athens, in 339 B. C. He required his disciples to understand mathematics before they placed themselves under his care; and sent back a youth who was ignorant of that science, saying, “that he had not the key of philosophy.” So great was his reputation fqr sincerity and probity, that the magistrates accepted his testimony without an oath; a favour granted to him alone. Polemo, a rich young man, but so debauched, that his wife had begun a prosecution against him for his infamoqs conduct, rambling through the streets, one day, with his dissolute companions, after they had drank freely, entered our philosopher’s school, with an intention to ridicule and insult him. The audience were highly offended at this behaviour; but Xenocrates Continued perfectly calm, and immediately turning his discourse upon temperance, spoke of that virtue in terms so forcible, lofty, and elevated, that the young libertine made a sudden resolution to renounce his licentiousness, and devote himself to wisdom. From that moment, Polemo became the pupil of virtue, and a model of temperance, and at length succeeded Xenocrates in the philosophical chair. Hia conversion made much noise, and so increased the public veneration for Xenocrates, that when he appeared in the streets, no dissolute youths dared to remain there, but turned aside that they might avoid meeting him. The Athenians sent this philosopher on an embassy to Philip, king of Macedon, and, a considerable time after, to Antipater; neither of whom could corrupt him by their presents, which circumstance made him doubly honoured. Alexander the Great so highly esteemed Xenocrates, that he sent him fifty talents, a large sum then; and when his messengers arrived at Athens, Xenocrates invited them to eat with him, but gaVe them only his common farel Upon their inquiring, next morning, to whom they should pay the fifty talents, he replied, “Has not lak night’s supper convinced you that I want no money?” intimating that he was contented with a little, and that money was necessary to kings, not to philosophers. But at the earnest entreaties of Alexander’s messengers, he accepted a small part of the sum, lest he should appear deficient in respect to that great monarch. It is astonishing that ‘the Athenians should suffer a philosopher of such exalted merit to be so ill treated by the collectors and receivers of their taxes 5 for though they were once fined for attempting to imprison Xenocrates, because he had not paid a certain tax imposed on foreigners, yet it is certain that the same collectors and receivers sold him at another time, because he had not enough to pay them. But Demetrius Phalereus, detesting so base an action; purchased Xenocrates’, gave hirri his freedom immediately, and discharged his debt to the Athenians. This philosopher died about 314 B.C. aged eighty-two, in consequence ’of falling in the dark into a reservoir of water. He 1 wrote, at the request of Alexander, *a small tract on the Art of Reigning; six books on Nature; MX books oh Philosophy one on Riches, &c, but none of these have come down to us. There is a tract on Death, under his name, in 'the Jamblicus of Aldus, 1497, folio. Xenocrates used to say, “That we often repent of having spoken, b,ut never of having kept silence; that true philosophers are the only persons who do willingly, and by their own choice, what others are constrained to do by fear of the laws; that it is as great a crime to look into our neighbour’s house as to enter it privately J that there was more necessity for putting iron-plates over the ears of children, to defend and preserve them from hearing vicious discourse, than of gladiators, to guard them from blows,” c. As to his philosophical system, it was truly Platonic; but in his’ method of teaching he made use of the language of the Pythagoreans. He made Unity and Diversity principles in nature, or gods; the former of whom he represented as the father, and the latter as the mother, of the universe. He taught, that the heavens are divine, and the stars celestial gods; and that besides these divinities, there are terrestrial daemons, of a middle order between the gods and man, which partake of the nature both of mind and body, and are therefore, like human beings, capable of passions, and liable to diversity of character. After Plato, he probably conceived the superior divinities to be the Ideas, or intelligible forms, which immediately proceeded from the supreme Deity, and the inferior gods or daemons, to be derived from the soul of the world, and therefore, like that principle, to be compounded of a simple and a divisible substance, or of that which always remains the same, and that which is liable to change.

, an eminent philosopher, was author of the Eleatic sect, so cabled because three of its most celebrated members, Parmenides, Zeno, and Leucippus, were natives of Elea, or Velia, a town in Magna Graecia. Xenopharies was a native of Colophon, and born probably about 556 B.C. He early left his country, and went to Sicily, where he supported himself by reciting verses against the theogonies of Hesiod and Homer. Thence he passed over into Magna Graecia, where he took up the profession 6f philosophy, and became a celebrated preceptor in the Pythagorean school. Indulging, however, a greater freedom of thought than was usual among the disciples of Pythagoras, he ventured to introduce new opinions of his Own, and in many particulars to oppose the doctrines of Epimenides, Thales, and Pythagoras. This gave occasion to Timon, who was a severe satirist, to introduce him in ridicule as one of the characters in his dialogues, Xenophanes possessed the Pythagorean chair of philosophy about seventy years, and lived tp the extreme age of an hundred years, that is, according to Eusebius, till the eighty-first Olympiad, or B C. 456.

In physics, he taught, that there are innumerable worlds; 'that there is in nature no real production, decay, or change; that there are four elements, and that the earth is the basis of all things; that the stars arise from vapours, which are extinguished by day, and ignited by night; that the sun consists of fiery particles collected by humid exhalations, and daily renewed; that the course of the sun is rectilinear, and only appears curvilinear from its great distance; that there are as many suns as there are different climates of the earth; that the moon is an inhabited world; that the earth, as appears from marine shells, which are found at the tops of mountains, and in caverns, far from the sea, was once a general mass of waters; and that it will at length return into the same state, and pass through an endless series of similar revolutions.

, an illustrious philosopher, soldier, and historian, was an Athenian, the son of Gryllus, a person of high rank, and was born in the third year of the eightysecond Olympiad, or B. C. 450. Few particulars of his early life are known. Laertius tells us, that meeting Socrates in a narrow lane, after he was pretty well grown up, he stopped the philosopher with his staff; and asked him, “Where all kinds of meats were to be sold ?” To which Socrates made a serious answer: and then demanded of him, “Where it was that men were made good and virtuous?” At which Xenophon pausing, “Follow me, then,” said Socrates, “and learn:” from which time he became the disciple of that father of ancient wisdom.

He was one of Socrates’s most eminent scholars; but he did not excel in philosophy only; he was also famous for arms and military achievements. In the Peloponnesian war, he was personally engaged in the fight before Delium, the first year of the 89th Olympiad; in which the Bœotians overcame the Athenians. Here Xenophon, in the precipitation of flight, was unhorsed and thrown down; when Socrates, who having lost his horse was fighting on foot, took him upon his shoulders, and carried him many furlongs, till the enemy gave over the pursuit. This was the first essay of his military profession: afterwards he became known to the younger Cyrus, by means of Proxenus the Boeotian, who was favoured by that prince, and resided with him at Sardis. Proxenus, then Xenophon’s friend, wrote to Athens, to invite him to come to Cyrus. Xenophon shewed his letters to Socrates, desiring -his advice. Socrates referred him to the oracle of Delphi, which Xenophon accordingly consulted: but, instead of asking whether he should go to Cyrus, he inquired how he should goto him; for which Socrates reprimanded him, yet advised him to go. Being arrived at the court of Cyrus, he acquired at least as great a share of his favour as Proxenus himself; and accompanied that prince in his expedition to Persia, when he took up arms against his brother Artaxerxes, who had succeeded his father Darius in the kingdom. Cyrus was killed: and Artaxerxes sent -the day after to the Grecians, that they should give up their arms. Xenophon answered Phalinus, who brought the order, “that they had nothing left but their arms and valour; that as long as they kept their arms they might use their valour; but, if they surrendered them, they should cease to be masters of themselves.” Phalinus replied, smiling, “Young man, you look and speak like a philosopher; but assure yourself, that your valour will not be a match for the king’s power.” Nevertheless, ten thousand of them determined to attempt a retreat, and actually effected it with Xenophon at their head, who brought them' from Persia to their own homes, remaining victorious over all who attempted to oppose his passage. The history of this expedition, which happened in the 4th year of the 94th Olympiad, was written by himself; and is still extant.

After this retreat, Xenophon went into Asia with Agesilaus, king of the Lacedemonians; to whom he delivered for a sum of money the soldiers of Cyrus, and by whom he was exceedingly beloved. Cicero says, that Xenophon instructed him; apd Plutarch, that by his advice Agesilaus sent his sons to be educated at Sparta. Agesilaus passed into Asia, the first year of the 96th Olympiad, and carried on the war successfully against the Persians; but the year after, was called home by the Lacedemonians, to assist his country, which was invaded by the Thebans and their allies, whom the Persian, with a view of drawing the war from his dominions, had corrupted. During the absence of Xenophon, the Athenians proclaimed a decree of banishment against him; some say, for his going to Agesilaus; others, because he took part against the king of Persia their friend, and followed Cyrus, who had assisted the Lacedemonians against them. Whatever was the reason, he was obliged to fly; and the Lacedemonians, to require hint for Buffering in their cause, maintained him at the public charge. Then they built a town at Scilluntes in Elea, having driven the Ele.ans thence, and bestowed a fair house and lands upon Xenophon: upon which he left Agesilaus, and went thither, with his wife Philesia, and his two sons Diodorus and Qryllus. At this place of retirement, he employed himself in planting, hunting, and writing; and led a life truly philosophic, dividing his time between his friends, rural amusements, and letters.

At length, a war arising between the Eleans and Lacedemonians, the Eleans invaded Scilluntes with a great army; and) before the Lacedemonians came to their relief, seized on the house and lands of Xenophon. His sons, with some few servants, got away privately to Lepreus: Xenophon fled first to Elis, then to Lepreus to his sons, and lastly with them to Corinth, where he took a house, and continued the remainder of his life. During this time, the Argives, Arcadians, and Thebans, jointly opposed the Lacedemonians, and had almost oppressed them, when the Athenians made a public decree to succour them. Xenophoa sent his sons upon the expedition to Athens, to fight for the Lacedemonians; for they had been educated at Sparta, in the discipline of that place. This enmity ended in a great battle at Mantinea, in the 2d year of the 104th Olympiad when Epaminondas, the Theban general, though he had gained the victory, was yet slain by the hand of Gryllus. This Pausanias affirms to have been attested both by the Athenians and Thebans; but the glory was short-lived; for Gryllus himself fell in the same battle. The news of his death reached Xenophon, as he was sacrificing at Corinth, crowned with a garland; who immediately laid down the garland, and demanded in what manner he died? When being informed, that Gryllus vVas fighting in the midst of the enemy, and had slain many of them, he put on the garland again, and proceeded to sacrifice, without so much as shedding a tear, only saying, “I knew that I begot him mortal.”

Xenophon, being extremely old, died at Corinth in the firstyear of the 105th Olympiad, or B. C. 360 leaving behind him many excellent works, of which a fine collection are happily come down to us. The principal of these are, the “Cyropeedia,” or the life, and discipline, and actions, of the elder Cyrus seven books of the “Expedition of the younger Cyrus into Persia, and of the retreat of the ten thousand Greeks under himself;” seven books of the “Grecian History” four books of the “Memorabilia” of Socrates, with the “Apologia Socratis.” Cicero tells us, probably grounding his opinion upon what he had read in the third book of Plato “de legibus,” that the “Cyropaedia” is not a real history, but only a moral fable; in which Xenophon meant to draw the picture of a great prince, without confining himself to truth, except in two or three great events, as the taking of Babylon, and the captivity of Croesus: and in this he has been pretty generally followed, though some have thought otherwise. The “Hellenica,” or seven books of Grecian history, are a continuation of Thucydides to forty-eight years farther; and here is recorded an instance of Xenophon’s integrity, who freely gave the public the writings of Thucydides, which he might either have suppressed, or made to pass as his own. The smaller pieces of Xenophon are, “Agesilaus;” of which piece Cicero says, “that it alone surpasses all images and pictures in his praise;” “Oeeonomics” with which Cu cero was so delighted, that in his younger years he translated it, and when he was grown old, gave an honourable testimony of it. The other writings of Xenophon arej “The Republic of the Lacedemonians,” and “The Republic of the Athenians” “Symposium” “Hiero, or, of a Kingdom” *< Accounts of the Revenues, of Horses, of Horsemanship;“and” Epistles."

, usually mentioned with the epithet Ephesius, from the place of his birth, to distinguish him from the above Xenophon Socraticus, is the author of five books “Of the loves of Habrocomes and Anthia,” which are entitled “Ephesiaca,” although they have no more to do with the town of Ephesus than the “Ethiopics of Heliodorus,” which is a love-romance also, have with the affairs of Ethiopia. His late editor thinks that Xenophon lived about the end of the second, or the beginning of the third century of the Christian jera. It is at least very probable that he is one of the most ancient of the Authores Erotici, from the purity and simplicity of his style, in which there is little of those affected ornaments so common in writers of a later period. The only Mss. in which the history of Habrocomes and Anthia has been transmitted to posterity, is preserved in the Benedictine abbey of Monte Cassino, at Florence, and is written in so small a character, that the whole work is comprised in no more than nine leaves, 4to. The first person who copied it was Salvini, who likewise, in 1723, translated this romance into the Italian language. Of the Greek text itself, the first edition was prepared by the celebrated physician Anthony Cocchi, and published at London in 1726, 4to, although his late editor baron Locellst asserts that London was put in the title instead of Florence. But the fact was that it was printed at London by Bowyer, as is proved in Mr. Nichols’s life of that celebrated printer. Two other editions, of 1781 and 1793, have likewise appeared, but they are all incorrect. At length in 1796 the work was rendered not unworthy of the classical scholar, by baron Locella, a gentleman, not a philologist by profession, but a man of business, who dedicated the leisure of his declining years to the Greek muses. His edition, which was elegantly printed at Vienna, 4to, is entided, “Xenophontis Ephesii de Anthia et Habrooome Ephesiacorum libri quinque, Gr. et Lat. Recensuit et supplevit, emendavit, Latine vertit, ad notationibus aliorum et suis illustravit, indicibus instruxit Aloys. Emerie. Liber Baro Locella, S. C. R. A. M. a cons, aulae.”

Politian is said to have been so much pleased with this author, that he made no scruple to rank him with the Athenian Xenophou for sweetness and purity of style and manner. Fabricius speaks of him nearly in as high terms, and his style is certainly his chief merit. In regard to antiquities, little can be learnt from him, and his geographical knowledge is very limited. The admirers of the Greek language will think themselves greatly indebted to baron Locella, since, in the earlier editions, nothing had been done either to improve or illustrate the text; nor had any proper use hitherto been made of the criticisms on this work, by Hemsterhuis and Abresch, contained in the “Observat. Miscellan.” He had also access to the valuable collections of the learned Dorville, who was preparing an edition for the press.

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

Many anecdotes are related of the peculiar temper and virtues of this celebrated cardinal, by his, biographers M. FJechier and M. Marsollier, each of whom published a life of him in 2 vols. 12mo, and there is a third by Gomez in folio. His family is generally represented to have been in a low situation; yet he is said, in the midst of his greatness, to have gone one summer to the village where he was born, to have visited his kindred, and to have treated them with all the marks of kindness and affection. His humility upon this head was very unaffected, and appeared sometimes very unexpectedly. He was present once when doctor Nicolas de Pax was explaining the philosophy of Raymund Lully; and, in speaking to the question, whether that famous man had the philosopher’s stone or not, he took notice of a passage in the Psalms which has been thought to look that way: “he raiseth up the poor out of the dust, and lifteth the needy out of the dunghill, that he may set him with the princes, even with the princes of his people.” That portion of scripture, said the cardinal, may be much more naturally interpreted, for instance, in my own case; and then ran out in a long detail of his own meanness, and the wonderful manner in which he had been exalted.

He had a great contempt for what were styled the arts of a court, and would never use them. Don Pedro Porto Carrero, who was with king Charles in Flanders, wrote to him, that he had many enemies there, and advised him to make use of a cypher. He thanked him for his intelligence and friendship, but rejected the expedient: “1 have nothing,” said he, “that I desire to conceal; and, if I write any thing that is amiss, I will not deprive my enemies of their evidence.” He behaved sternly himself to the nobility; but he advised both Ferdinand and Charles not to treat them with rigour. “Ambition,” said he, “is their common crime; and you will do well to make submission their only punishment.” His coadjutor Adrian was miserably disturbed at the libels that flew about; but Ximenes, who was as little spared, bore them with great temper: “We act,” says he, “and we must give the others leave to speak; if what they say is false, we may laugh; if true, we ought to mend.” However, he sometimes searched the printers and booksellers shops; but, as he gave a previous notice, it may be presumed he did not often meet with things that could give offence.

The great object of his care was the revenue of his archbishopric; with which, however great, he did such things as could scarcely be expected from it, especially as one half of it was constantly distributed in alms, about which he was so circumspect, that no fraud could be committed. He was very plain in his habit and in his furniture; but he knew the value of fine things, and would sometimes admire them. He once looked upon a rich jewel, and asked its price. The merchant told him. “It is a very fine thing,” said he, “and worth the money; but the army is just disbanded; there are many poor soldiers; and with the value or' it I can send two hundred of them home, with each a piece of gold in his pocket.” All his foundations, and other acts of generosity, were out of the other moiety. His regulations must have cost him at least as much thought as his buildings and endowments. He saw clearly that ignorance was the bane of religion, and the only thing that made the inquisition necessary; for, if men understood the Christian religion, there could be no need to fear either Judaism or Mohammedism. Upon the whole, we have great reason to believe that he spoke truth upon his deathbed, when he said, that, to the best of his knowledge, he had not misapplied a single crown of his revenue. Philip IV. was at great pains to have procured his canonization with the popes Innocent X. and Alexander Vij. but we know not why be did not succeed.

, a German of great abilities and learning, was born at Augsburg in 1532, of very poor parents, and the love therefore of learning, which he discovered from his infancy, would have been fruitless if he had not met with a patron, in Wolfgang Relinger, a senator of Augsburg. This gentleman made him be supported at the public expence, till his progress in literature procured him admittance into the colleges, where the city maintained a certain number of students. In 1549 he was sent to the university of Tubingen, and afterwards to that of Basil, where he became an excellent Greek and Latin scholar. Melchior Adam affirms, that he took a master of arts degree at Basil in 1556; but Bayle is of opinion, that this date must be a mistake; for he thinks it improbable, that a man who had employed himself vigorously in study, and possessed such excellent natural talents, did not take that lower degree till his 24th year. Xylander certainly wrote his Latin version of Dion Cassius in 1557; at which time he was so good a scholar, that he employed but seven months in this work; for the truth of which he appeals to Mr. Herwat, a senator of Augsburg and his patron, to whom he dedicates it. Having given ample proof of his learning, and especially of his uncommon skill in the Greek tongue, he was invited in 1558 to Heidelberg, to take possession of the Greek professor’s chair, then vacant. In 1566, the elector-palatine Frederic III, and the duke of Wirtemberg, having called an assembly of the clergy to hold a conference upon the eucharist, about which there were great disputes, Xylander was chosen by the elector as secretary of the assembly, together with Osiander, who was named by the duke he executed the same office upon a similar occasion in 1581. Excessive application to study is supposed to have brought an illness upon him, of which he died in February 1576, aged forty-three years.

He had a profound knowledge of the Greek language, and employed it in translating Greek authors into Latin: but his being always very poor, and obliged to labour for bread instead of fame, is the cause of many errors having crept into his versions; since, selling his sheets as fast as he wrote them, to the booksellers, he was naturally led to be more solicitous about the quantity than the quality of what was written. Of the many authors which he translated, the chief are, Dion Cassius, Marcus Antoninus, Plutarch (the very best translation), and Strabo.

, a patriarch of Constantinople in the eleventh century, was a native of Trebisond. He distinguished himself by his learning and piety, and was raised to the see of Constantinople in 1064. He died Aug. 2, 1075. There is a sermon of his in the Bibl. Patrum. Andrew Scottus and Vossius erroneously imagined him to be the abridger of Dion Cassius: but it was a nephew of his name, as that nephew says himself in the history of Augustus. This nephew made, about the end of the eleventh century, a compendium of the last forty-five books of Dion, which contain the history of the emperors to the time of Alexander son of Mammea. It is probable he did not abridge the first five and thirty books, since there remains no trace or testimony of it: and, besides, he assures us, that even in his time there wanted something of the history of Dion. As to what remains, he has been very exact and faithful in following the sense, and often the very words of his author, as may appear by comparing the abridgment with the original. It has been printed sometimes with Dion Cassius, and sometimes separately, particularly at Paris, 1592, fol.

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

, a distinguished lawyer, is said to have been born at Easton Mauduit, in Northamptonshire, June 29, 1566, but as the register of his baptism, July 5, of that year, occurs at Islington, it is more likely that he was born there, where his father, sir Christopher (then Mr. Yelverton, and a student at Gray’s Inn) had, it is probable, country lodgings. He was educated for some time at Oxford, but removed afterwards to Gray’s Inn for the study of the law. In 1606 he was elected Lent-reader, being then, Wood says, “accounted a religious gentleman, and a person well read in the municipal laws.” In 1613 he wasappointed solicitor-general, and received the honour of knighthood by the interest of Carr, earl of Somerset, and on March 17, 1616, was advanced to the higher office of attorney general; but having given offence, as it is said, to the favourite Buckingham, he was accused in the star-chamber of illegal proceedings in his office, and by a sentence of that court deprived of his place, imprisoned in the Tower, and heavily fined. Being afterwards brought before the lords, he made a speech which was so offensive to the king and his favourite, that he was fined 10.000 marks for the reflections which he had cast on his majesty, and 5000 for the insult offered to Buckingham. But by one of those unaccountable changes which occur among politicians of all ages, he became soon afterwards in great favour with the very man whose enmity had cost him so dear, and was, through his interest, made one of the justices of the king’s bench, and afterwards of the common pleas, which last place he retained till his death; and had not the duke been untimely cut off, he would in all probability have been made lord-keeper of the great seal, as he was esteemed one of the first lawyers of his time. He died Jan. 24, 1630, at his house in Aldersgate-street, and was interred in the parish church of Easton Mauduit.

His “Reports of Special Cases in the King’s Bench, from 44 Eliz. to 10 Jac. I.” were originally published in French by sir W. Wylde, 1661, and 1674, and were afterwards carefully translated into English, and published in 1735, folio. Under his name there are extant in print, several speeches in parliament, and particularly one in Rushworth’s collection also “The Rights of the People concerning Impositions,” Lond. 1679; “Thirty- two Sermons of Mr. Edward Phillips,” a puritan preacher, taken by him in short-hand. Some additional particulars concerning our author and his family and descendants may be seen in a long note to the article of Baroness Grey de Ruthyn, in Collins’s Peerage. It is remarkable that sir Henry, who, we are inclined to think, was a man of independent spirit, fell under king James’s displeasure in 1609, by his freedom of speech and conduct in parliament. His own narrative of this affair was lately communicated to the society of antiquaries, and is printed in the “Archaeologia,” vol. XV.

, an eminent lawyer, was the son of Philip Yorke, an attorney, and was born at Dover, in Kent, December 1, 1690; and educated under Mr. Samuel Morland, of Bethnal Green, in classical and general learning, which he ever cultivated amidst his highest employments. He studied the law in the Middle Temple under the instruction of an eminent conveyancer of the name of Salkeld; and, being called to the bar in 1714, he soon became very eminent in his profession. In 1718 he sat in parliament as member for Lewes, in Sussex; and, in the two successive parliaments, for Seaford. In March 1719-20, he was promoted to the office of solicitorgeneral by the recommendation of the lord-chancellor Parker; an obligation he never forgot, returning it by every possible mark of personal regard and affection. He received also about the same time the honour of knighthood. The trial of Mr. Layer at the king’s bench for high. treason, gave him, in Nov. 1722, an opportunity of shewiug his abilities; his reply, in which he summed up late at night the evidence against the prisoner, and answered all the topics of defence, being justly admired as one of the ablest performances of that kind extant. About the same time, he gained much reputation in parliament by opening the bill against Kelly, who had been principally concerned in bishop Atterbury’s plot, as his secretary. la February 1723-4, he was appointed attorney-general, in the execution of which important office he was remarkable for his candour and lenity. As an advocate for the crown, he spoke with the veracity of a witness and a judge; and, though his zeal for justice and the due course of law was strong, yet his tenderness to the subject,- in the court of exchequer, was so distinguished, that upon a particular occasion in 1733, the House of Commons assented to it with a general applause. He was unmoved by fear or favour in what he thought right and legal; and often debated and voted against the court in matters relating to the South-Sea company, when he was solicitor; and,‘ in the affair of lord Derwentwater’s estate, when he was attorneygeneral. Upon the resignation of the great seal by Peter lord King, in October 1733, sir Philip Yorke was appointed lord chief-justice of the king^s bench. He was soon after raised to the dignity of a baron of this kingdom, with the title of lord Hardwicke, baron of Hardwicke, in the county of Gloucester, and called to the cabinet council. The salary of chief-justice of the king’s bench being thought not adequate to the weight and dignity of that high office, was raised on the advancement of lord Hardwicke to it, from 2000l. to 4000l. per ann. to the chiefjustice and his successors; but his lordship refused to accept the augmentation of it; and the adjustment of the two vacancies of the chancery and king’s bench (which happened at the same time) between his lordship and lord Talbot, upon terms honourable and satisfactory to both, was thought to do as much credit to the wisdom of the crown in those days, as the harmony and friendship, with which they co-operated in’the public service, did honour to themselves. In the midst of the general approbation with which he discharged his office there, he was called to that of lord high chancellor, on the decease of lord Talbot, February 17, 1736-7.

The integrity and abilities with which he presided in the court of chancery, during the space of almost twenty years, appears from this remarkable circumstance, that only three of his decrees were appealed from, and even those were afterwards affirmed by the House of Lords. On May 12th, 1740, he was nominated one of the lords justices for the administration of the government during his majesty’s absence: also on April 21st, 1743, and in 1745. In 1746' he was appointed lord high steward of England, for the trials of the earls of Kilmarnock and Cromartie, and lord Balmerino: and in 1747 for the trial of lord Lovat. In 1748 he was again one of the lords justices; and on July 31, 1749, was unanimously chosen high steward of the university of Cambridge, on the resignation of the duke of Newcastle, who was elected chancellor; and the year after was again one of the lords justices, and the same in 1752.

After he had executed the high office of lord high chancellor about seventeen years, in times and circumstances of accumulated difficulty and danger, he was, in April 1754, advanced to the rank of an earl of Great Britain, with the titles of viscount Royston, and earl of Hardwicke. This favour was conferred unasked, by his sovereign, who treated him through the whole of his reign with particular esteem and confidence, and always spoke of him in a manner which shewed that he set as high a value on the man as on the minister. His resignation of the great seal, in November 1756, gave ah universal concern to the nation, however divided at that time in other respects. But he still continued to serve the public in a more private station; at council, at the House of Lords, and upon every occasion where the course of public business required it, with the same assiduity as when he rilled one of the highest offices in the kingdom. He always felt and expressed the truest affection and reverence for the laws and constitution of his country: this rendered him as tender of the just prerogatives invested in the crown, for the benefit of the whole, as watchful to prevent the least incroachment upon the liberty of the subject. The part which he acted in planning, introducing, and supporting, the “Bill for abolishing the heritable Jurisdictions in Scotland,” and the share which he took, beyond what his department required of him, in framing and promoting the other bills relating to that country, arose from his zeal to the Protestant succession, his concern for the general happiness and improvement of the kingdom, and for the preservation of this equal and limited monarchy which were the governing principles of his public conduct through life. And these, and other bills which might be mentioned, were strong proofs of his talents as a legislator. In judicature, his firmness and dignity were evidently derived from his consummate knowledge and talents; and the mildness and humanity with which he tempered it, from the most amiable disposition. He was wonderfully happy in his manner of debating causes upon the bench. His extraordinary dispatch of the business of the court of chancery, increased as it was in his time beyond what had been known in any former, was an advantage to the suitor, inferior only to that arising from the acknowledged equity, perspicuity, and precision, of his decrees. The manner in which he presided in the House of Lords added order and dignity to that assembly, and expedition to the business transacted there. His talents as a speaker in the senate as well as on the bench, were universally admired: he spoke with a natural and manly eloquence, without false ornaments or personal invectives; and, when he argued, his reasons were supported and strengthened by the most apposite cases and examples which the subject would allow. His manner was graceful and affecting; modest, yet commanding his voice peculiarly clear and harmonious, and even loud and strong, for the greater part of his time. With these talents for public speaking r the integrity of his character gave a lustre to his eloquence, which those who opposed him felt in the debate, and which operated most powerfully on the minds of those who heard him with a view to information and convictions, is<

Convinced of the great principles* of religion, and steady in his practice of the duties of it, he maintained a reputation of virtue, which added dignity to the stations which he filled, and authority to the laws which he administered. His attachment to the national church was accompanied with a full conviction, that a tender regard to the rights of conscience, and a temper of lenity and moderation, are not only right in themselves, but most conducive in their consequences to the honour and interest of the church. The strongest recommendation to him of the clergy, to the ecclesiastical preferments in his disposal, was their fitness for the discharge of the duties of their profession. And that respectable body owes a particular obligation to his lordship, and his predecessor lord Talbot, for the opposition which they gave in the House of Lords to the “Act for the more easy recovery of Tithes, Church-rates, and other ecclesiastical Dues, from People called Quakers,” which might have proved of dangerous consequences to the rights and property of the clergy; though if. had passed the other house, and was known to be powerfully supported. Many facts and anecdotes which do him honour may be recollected and set down, when resentments, partialities, and contests, are forgot.

The amiableness of his manners, and his engaging address, rendered him as much beloved by those who had access to him as he was admired for his great talents by the whole nation. His character indeed was never impeached until within a few years ago by an injudicious publication of a Mr. Cooksey, who professed to be compiling a life of him: but this had little other effect than to excite a portion of indignation, and to revive the respect in which lord Hardwicke’s conduct had ^ver been held. Lord Hardwicke’s constitution, in the earlier part of his life, did not seem to promise so much health and vigour as he afterwards enjoyed for a longer period than usually falls ta the share of men of more robust habit of body. But his care to guard against any excesses secured to him an almost uninterrupted tenour of health: and his habitual mastery of his passions gave him a firmness and tranquillity of mind unabated by the fatigues ‘and an’xieties of business; from the daily circle of which, he rose, to the enjoyment of the conversation of his family and friends, with the spirits of a person entirely vacant and disengaged. Till the latter end of his seventy -third year, he preserved the appearance atrd vivacity of youth in his countenance, in which the characters of dignity and amiableness were remarkably united: and he supported the tedious disorder which proved fatal to him, and which was of the dysenteric kind, with an uncommon resignation, and even cheerfulness, till-the close of lite. He died, in his seventy-fourth year, at his house in Grosvenor-square, March 6. 1764. His body lies interred at Wimple in Cambridgeshire, by that of his lady, Margaret, daughter of Charles Cocks, esq. of Worcestershire, and niece of lord-chancellor Sommers.

Lord Hardwicke, when a very young man, wrote a paper in the Spectator, (No. 364); and in 1727 published “The Legal Judicature in Chancery stated,” which was republished with large additions in 1728.

, earl of Hardwicke, the eldest son of the preceding, was born Dec. 20, 1720. At the school of Dr. Newcome, at Hackney, he received the first rudiments of his education, and from that seminary, on 26th May, 1737, was removed to Bene'c college, Cambridge, under the tuition of the Rev. Dr. Salter. In the year following ha was appointed one of the tellers of the exchequer, in the room of sir Charles Turner, bart. deceased. In 1740 he. left college, and soon after married lady Jemima Campbel, only daughter of John lord viscount Glenorchy, by the lady Amabel Grey, eldest daughter of Henry duke -of Kent, at whose decease she succeeded to the title of marchioness Grey and baroness Lucas of Crudwell. By this marriage he became possessed of a large part of the duke’s estate, together with his seat of Wrest-house, near Silsoe, in Bedfordshire. He early engaged as a legislator. In 1741 he was chosen member for Ryegate, in Surrey, and in 1747 one of the representatives for the county of Cambridge, as he was also in 1754 and 1761. At the installation of the duke of Newcastle, as chancellor of the university of Cambridge, in 1749, he had the degree of LL.D. conferred upon him. In 1764 he succeeded his father in his title and estate; and after a strong contention for the office of lord high steward of the university, he obtained that honour against Lord Sandwich. The infirm state of his lordship’s health, combined with his attachment to literary pursuits, prevented him from attending to, or joining in, the politics of the day. He had the honour, however, of a seat in the cabinet during the existence of that short-lived administration in 1765, of which lord Rockingham was the head, but without any salary or official situation which, though repeatedly offered to- him, he never would accept. He died May 16, 1790.

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

Though a good classical scholar, yet the object to which Lord Hardwicke, from his early youth, particularly directed his attention, was modern history. Accordingly he printed, in 4to. a small impression (not for sale) of the Correspondence of sir Dudley Carlton, Ambassador to the States General during the reign of James I. and prefixed to it an historical preface, containing an account of the many important negociations that were carried on during that interesting period. A second impression of fifty copies only was printed in 1775. In 1781 he is said to have printed for private distribution, “Walpoliana, or a few anecdotes of sir Robert Walpole,”

The last publication of lord Hardwicke was entitled “Miscellaneous State Papers from 1501 to 1726,” in two volumes, 4to, containing a number of select papers, such “as mark most strongly the characters of celebrated Princes and their Ministers, and illustrate some memorable a^ra or remarkable series of events.” Collections of this kind have been frequently given to the public, but generally overladen with papers both tedious and trifling. The present avoids the errors of its predecessors, all the papers it contains being curious and important.

, a relation of the Hardwicke family, and known also in the literary world, was the son of Simon Yorke, esq. of Erthig in Denbighshire, who died in 1767, leaving the subject of the present memoir, who was born in 1743, and admitted fellow-commoner of Bene‘t college, Cambridge. 1765; created M. A. by mandamus 1765; elected F. A. S. 1768; married Elizabeth youngest daughter of the speaker of the House of Commons, sir John Cust, by whom he had a son in 1771, afterwards M. P. for Grantham, and a daughter in 1772. She died 1779; and he took to his second wife, 1782, the relict of Owen Meyrick, esq. of Dyffrynaled, co. Denbigh. Mr. Yorke died Feb. 19, 1804. He was a gentleman of superior endowments and the most benevolent disposition. His hospitality, friendship, and charity, made the ample fortune he inherited a common benefit; whilst the peculiar mildness and suavity of his manners endeared him to lire’ relatives, and to every one who had the honour of his acquaintance. He loved his country, and the constitution of its government, from conviction of their excellence; and what he loved he was always ready to support, both in his public and private capacity, although constitutional diffidence would not allow him to speak ift the House of Commons, where he sat as burgess for Helstone and Grantham. But Mr. Yorke had a cultivated as well as benevolent mind, being well versed in most branches of polite literature; which an accurate and retentive memory enabled him to apply with great advantage. Of late years he turned his attention a good deal to Welsh history and genealogy, in which, from the specimens given in his “Royal Tribes of Wales, 1799,” 4to, he appears to have made great progress. This study, rather dry in itself, was, in his hands, enlivened by a variety of authentic and entertaining anecdotes, many of which had escaped preceding historians, as well as genealogical discussions; and his book was adorned with portraits of eminent persons of Wales, well engraved by the late Mr. Bond. He had collected materials for a longer work of the same kind, which has not yet appeared. His taste for natural beauties was very correct, of which the pleasure-grounds of Erthig are a decided proof. Of a character so respectable and amiable throughout, one of the most distinguishing traits was his talent for conversation. Whatever he advanced arose naturally from the occasion; and was expressed in such a happy manner and choice of words, as made him the very life and delight of society.

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

His son was educated, on the foundation, at Winchesterschool, where he remained until the election after his eighteenth birth-day; but, for what reason his biographers have not determined, he did not succeed to a fellowship of New-college. In 1703, however, he was entered an independent member of that society, that he might live at little expence in the warden’s lodgings, who was a particular friend of his father, till he should be qualified to stand for a fellowship at All-Souls. In a few months the warden died, and Mr. Young was then removed to Corpus college, the president of which, from regard also for his father, invited him thither, in order to lessen his academical expences. In 1708, he was nominated to a law fellowship at All-Souls, by archbishop Tenison, into whose hands it came by devolution. These exertions of patronage make it probable that his father did not leave behind him much wealth.

In April 1714, Young took his degree of bachelor of civil laws, and his doctor’s degree in June 1719. His college appears to have set a value on his merit, both as a scholar and a poet, for in 1716, when the foundation of the present magnificent library of All-Souls was laid, he was appointed to speak the Latin oration, which, however, he desired to be omitted in the collection of his works published in 1741. It has been said, that when he first found himself independent, and his bAyri master at All-­Souls, he was not the ornament to religion and morality which he afterwards became. Yet he shewed a reverence for religion, and considerable warmth in defending it. The atheistical Tindal, who spent much of his time at All-­Souls, used to say, “The Other boys I can always answer, because I always know whence they have their arguments, which I have read an hundred times, but that fellow Young is continually pestering me with something of his own.”

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

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

As his connection with the proBigate duke of Wbarton has been thought a very objectionable part of his history, it is at least necessary to explain how it arose. His father had been well acquainted with lady Anne Wharton, the first wife of the marquis of Wharton, and she, who was celebrated by Burnet and Waller for her poetical talents, added some verses to dean Young’s visitation sermon. Wharton, after the dean’s death, was kind to Young, but died in 1715. Next year the young marquis, afterwards duke, began his travels, and the year following went to Ireland, and it is conjectured that our poet went with him. Whether this was the case or not, it is certain that he looked up to him afterwards as his patron.

From a paper in “The Englishman” it would appear that Young began his theatrical career so early as 1713, but his tirst play, “Busiris,” was not brought upon the stage till 1719, and was dedicated to the duke of Newcastle, “.because,” he says, “the late instances he had received ­of his grace’s undeserved and uncommon favour, in an affair of some consequence, foreign to the theatre, had taken from him the privilege of chusing a patron.” This dedication also he afterwards suppressed. In 1721 his most popular tragedy, “The Revenge,” made its appearance, and being left at liberty now to chuse his patron, he dedicated it to the duke of Wharton. That he ever had such a patron, Young took all the pains in his power to conceal from the world, by excluding this dedication from his works. He probably indeed was very soon ashamed of it, for while he was representing that wretched nobleman as an amiable character, Pope was perhaps beginning to describe him as “the scorn and wonder of his days,” and it is certain that even at this time Wharton’s real character was well known. His obligations to the duke of Wharton appear to have consisted both of promises and money. Young, about 1719, had been taken into the Exeter family as tutor to the young lord Burleigh. This circumstance transpired on a singular occasion. After Wharton’s death, whose affairs were much involved, among other legal questions, the court of chancery had to determine whether two annuities granted by Wharton to Young, were far legal considerations. One was dated March 24, 1719, and the preamble stated that it was granted in consideration of advancing the public good by the encouragement of learning, and of the love he bore to Dr. Young, &c. This, as his biographer remarks, was commendable, if not legal. The other was dated July 10, 1722; and Young, on his examination, swore that he quitted the Kxeter family, and refused an annuity of 100l. which had be^n offered him for his lite if he would continue tutor to lord BnrJeigh, upon the pressing solicitations of the duke of Wharton, and his grace’s assurances of providing for him in a much more ample manner It also appeared that the duke had given him a bond for 600l. dated March 15, 1721, in consideration of his taking several journeys, and being at great essences in order to be chosen member of parliament at the duke’s desire, and in consideration of his not taking two livings of 200l. and 400l. in the gift of All Souls’ college, on his grace’s promises of serving and advancing him in the world It was for Cirencester that Young stood the unsuccessful contest. Such were the obligations he owed to Wharton; how becoming Young’s character, may be left to the reader.

In 1719, Dr. Young published ^A paraphrase on part of the book of Job,“prefixed by a dedication to the lord chancellor Parker, which he omitted afterwards, and of whom, says his biographer, he clearly appears to have had no kind of knowledge. Of his” Satires“it is not easy to fix the dates. They probably came out between 1725 and 1728, and were afterwards published collectively under the title of” The Universal Passion.“In his preface he says that he prefers laughing at vice and folly, a different temper than that in which he wrote his melancholy” Night Thoughts.“These satires were followed by” The Installment,“addressed to sir Robert Walpote, but afterwards suppressed: and by” Ocean, an Ode,“accompanied by an” Ode to the King, pater patria“an” Essay on Lyric Poetry,“both afterwards omittedby him. Perhaps no writer ever rejected so many of his own performances, nor were the>e juvenile effusions, for he was now forty-six or forty-seven years old; and at this age, he entered into orders, April 1728, and was soon after appointed chaplain to king George II. It is said by one of the biographers of Pope, but the story is scarcely credible, that when he determined on the church, he did not address himself to any eminent divine for instructions in theology, but to Pope, who jocularly advised the diligent perusal of Thomas Aquinas, and this, Ruffhead says, had almost brought on an irretrievable derangement. But as we have seen that Young had once refused two livings in the gift of All Souls, it is surely not improbable that he had then studied in the theological faculty, although at the duke of Wharton’s persuasion, he had been induced to think of political life. One thing, after taking orders, he thought becoming his new character. He withdrew his tragedy of” The Brothers," which was already in rehearsal, and when at last it was performed in 1753, he made up the profits to the sum of iOOO/. and gave the money to the society for the propagation of the gospel in foreign parts. We know not that that society has been so honoured since, and it certainly never was so before.

Not long after he took orders, he published in prose, tf A true Estimate of Human Life,“and a sermon preached before the House of Commons on Jan. 30, 1729, entitled” An Apology for Princes, or the reverence due to government.“He soon became a very popular preacher, and was very much followed for the grace and animation of his delivery. According to his life in the” Biographia," he was pnce in his life deserted by his oratorical talents. As he was preaching in his turn at St James’s, he plainly perceived it was out of his power to command the attention ef his audience. This so affected his feelings, that he sat back in the pulpit, and burst into tears.

In 1730 he resumed his poetical publications, but one of them, his “Impfcrium Pelasgi, a naval lyric,” he afterwards disclaimed. This was followed by two epistles to Pope “concerning the authors of the age.” In July of the same year he was presented by his college to the rectory of Welwyn in Hertfordshire, and in May 1731 married lady Elizabeth Lee, daughter of the earl of Lichfield, and widow of colonel Lee. This lady died in 1741, and her death is said to have contributed to the mournful tenour of his much celebrated f Night Thoughts,“which formed his next great publication, and that which will in all probability preserve his name the longest. The” Nights“were begun immediately after his wife’s death, and were published from 174? to 1744, It has long been a popular notion that his own son was the Lorenzo of this poem, but this is totally inconsistent with the unquestionable fact that in 1741 this son was only eight years old. Other persons have been conjectured with as little probability. Why might he not have Wharton in his eye? Of this work, we know of no more eloquent eulogium than that by Dr. Johnson.” In his Night Thoughts,“says the critic,” he has exhibited a very wide display of original poetry, variegated with deep reflections and striking allusions, a wilderness of thought, in which the fertility of fancy scatters flowers of every hue and of every odour. This is one of the few poems in which blank verse could not be changed for rhime but with disadvantage. The wild diffusion of the sentiments, and the digressive sallies of the imagination, would have been compressed and restrained by confinement to rhyme. The excellence of this work is not exactness, but copiousness: particular lines are not to be regarded; the power is in the whole, and in the whole there is a magnificence like that ascribed to Chinese plantation, the magnificence of vast extent and endless diversity.“By this extraordinary poem, written after he was sixty, it was the desire of Young to be principally known. He entitled the four volumes which he published himself,” The works of the Author of the Night Thoughts."

He was now far advanced in years: but amidst the languors of age, he still occasionally employed his pen, producing in 1759, “Conjectures on original Composition.” This was followed by “Resignation, a Poem,” in which there is a visible decay of powers. In 1761 he was appointed clerk of the closet to her royal highness the princess dowager of Wales, which he did not long enjoy. He died at Welwyn, April 1765, in the eighty-fourth year of his age, and was buried under the communion-table of his parish church. After the death of his * r ite, he thought proper to entrust the whole management of his household affairs to a housekeeper, who is said to have attained an improper ascendancy over him, when his faculties began to decay. He left the bulk of his property to his son, of whom, as well as of his father, much additional information may be found in our references, and may yet be procurable perhaps elsewhere. Notwithstanding the narrative by sir Herbert Croft in Johnson’s collection, which is not always candid, nor always perspicuous, there is room for a new life of Young, and anew appreciation of his character, both as a man and a writer. In his conduct there were great inconsistencies, but the foundation appears to have been good. He sought long for happiness, but seems to have found it at last, where only it can be found.

, the very learned bishop of Clonfert and Kilmacduacb, in Ireland, was of a respectable family in the county of Hoscommon, where he was born in 1750. He was admitted of Trinity college, Dublin, in 1766, and was elected fellow of x the college in 1775, and took orders. He became early an enthusiastic admirer of the Newtonian philosophy, and even at his examination for his fellowship, displayed an unexampled knowledge and comprehension of it; but although it was his favourite subject, his actjve mind, in rapid succession, embraced the most dissimilar objects; and these he pursued with unceasing ardour, amidst his various duties as a fellow and tutor, and the freest intercourse with society, which he was formed at once to delight and instruct. His love of literary conversation, and the advantages he experienced from it. in the pursuit of science, led him early to engage in forming a society whose chief object was the improvement of its members in theological learning. It consisted of a small number of his most intimate college friends, and continued to exist for a series of years, with equal reputation and advantage. Out of this association grew another, somewhat more extensive, whose labours were directed to S'lilosophical researches, and in the formation of which r. Young was also actively engaged: and this itself became the gerrn of the royal Irish academy, which owes its existence to the zeal and exertions of the members of that society, among whom Dr. Young was particularly distinguished. In the intervals of his severer studies, he applied himself to modern languages: and the result of his labours may be seen in the transactions of the royal Irish academy, to which he also contributed largely on mathematical and philosophical subjects. Besides these he published the following learned and ingenious works: 1. “The phendmena of Sounds and Musical Strings,” 1784, 8vo. 2. “The force of Testimony,” &c. 4to. 3. “The number of Primitive Colours in Solar light on the precession of the Equinoxes; Principles of Natural philosophy,” 1800, 8vo, being his last publication, and containing the substance of his lectures in the college.

In 1786, when the professorship of philosophy in Trinity college became vacant, he had attained so high reputation in that branch of science, that he was elected to the office without opposition. His “Essay on Sounds” had been published two years, and it was known that he was engaged in the arduous task of illustrating the “Principia” of Newton. He now devoted himself to the duties of his professorship: and the college having been enriched with the excellent apparatus of Mr. Atwood, Dr. Young improved the occasion of carrying his lectures to a degree of perfection unknown in the university of Dublin, and never perhaps exceeded in any other. He proceeded in the mean time in his great work, “The method of Prime and Ultimate Ratios, illustrated by a commentary on the first two books of the Principia,” and had nearly completed it in English, when he was advised by his friends to publish it in Latin. He readily acquiesced, and thus had an opportunity, while translating it, of revising the whole, and rendering it fuller and more perfect. It was finished a year or two before his promotion to the see of Clonfert, at which time he was engaged in preparing it for the press. The^circumstances of this promotion reflect equal honour on himself and on the lord lieutenant (earl Cornwallis) who conferred it. It was a favour as unsolicited as unexpected, unless the report made to his excellency by his principal secretary, on being consulted as to the properest person to fill the vacant see, may be called solicitation. His report was, that “he believed Dr. Young to be the most distinguished literary character in the kingdom.”

His attention however was now diverted from his intended publication by the occupations incident to his new charge; and before he could return to it , a cancer in his mouth had made an alarming progress, and in about fifteen months, terminated fatally, Nov. 28, 1800. He was at this time at Whitworth in Lancashire.

, an eminent scholar, was descended of an ancient Scotch family, and was born Aug. 29, 1584, at Seaton, in Lothian, then the residence of his father, sir Peter Young, knt. who, among other honourable offices, had been assistant tutor, with the celebrated Buchanan, to king James VI. At the age of fifteen Mr. Young was sent to the university of St. Andrew’s, where having completed the usual course of academical study, he received the degree of M. A. in 1603. Soon after he accompanied his father to England, and being recommended to Dr. Lloyd, bishop of Chester, the latter assisted him in the study of divinity, as he was destined for the church. He continued about a year with the bishop, and then went to Oxford, and his merit having strongly recommended him to some of the heads of houses, he was incorporated M. A. in July 1605. He then took deacon’s orders, and was chosen chaplain of New college, which office he held for three years, and during that time he employed himself chiefly in the study of ecclesiastical history, and in cultivating the Greek language, of which he at length acquired a profound knowledge. Leaving Oxford, he went to London, where his object seems to have been advancement at court, and where his father, still living, had considerable interest. The first patron he acquired was Montague, bishop of Bath and Wells, by whose recommendation the king granted him a pension of' 50l. Having succeeded thus far, his next wish was to be appointed librarian to prince Henry, who had a very fine collection of books, and a museum of other curiosities; and although he failed in this, he succeeded in obtaining the care of the royal library newly founded by the king, chiefly by the interest of his friend and patron, bishop Montague. He had already drawn up a catalogue of the books by the king’s express command, and after he obtained the place he employed himself in forming them into classes, as well as in making additions by purchases which he recommended to the king, particularly of Isaac Casaubon’s books. With the same view he took journeys to Francfort, Holland, Paris, &c. In the mean time his partiality to the Greek language induced him to invite some of the natives of that country to England, and he contributed by himself or friends, to thenmaintenance and education here. Such was his zeal in this species of learned patronage, that bishop Montague used to call him the “patriarch of the Greeks.” He also cultivated the Latin language, which he wrote elegantly, and assisted Mr. Thomas Rhead, or Read, in translating king James’s works into that language. This volume appeared in 1619, and by his majesty’s special command Mr. Young was sent with a presentation copy to Oxford and Cambridge.

In 1620 he married, and about the same time was presented to the rectories of Hayes, in Middlesex, and Llannine, in Denbighshire, it being then lawful for persons who were only in deacon’s orders to hold parsonages. He was also collated to a prebend of St. Paul’s, of which church he was made treasurer in 1621. Although he had hitherto published nothing himself, he had been a very liberal contributor to the labours of others. Among these was Selden, whom he assisted in preparing for the press his edition of the “Arundelian Marbles,” and Selden was so sensible of the value of his aid, that he dedicated the work to him. The same year the famous Alexandrian ms. of the Old and New Testament 1 being placed in the king’s library, Mr. Young examined it with great attention, and furnished the various readings, upon collation, to Usher, Grotius, and other learned men. He had intended to have published a fac-simile of this ms; but his many avocations, and perhaps the confusions which ensued in the political world, prevented him. In 1643, however, he printed a specinrea of his intended edition, containing the first chapter of Genesis, with notes; and left at his death scholia as far as the 15th chapter of Numbers. The future progress of such a publication is noticed in our articles of Grabe and Woide.

In 1633, he published an edition of Clemens Romanus reprinted in 1637, with a Latin version “Catena Graecorum patrum in Jobum, collectore Nsceta Heraclere Metropolitaa,” to which he subjoined, from the Alexandrian ms. a continued series of the books of scripture, called Poetici. This was followed, in 1638, by the “Expositio in Canticum Canticorum Gilberti Folioti episc. Londini, una cum, Alcuini in idem Canticum compendio,” with a dedication to bishop Juxon. He made preparations for publishing several other curious Mss. while he continued in the royal library, which was till near the death of Charles I. when it was seized by the republican party, and preserved, amidst many vicissitudes, with more care than could have been expected. Mr. Young now retired to Bromfield, in Essex, to the house of Mr. John Atwood, a -civilian, who had married his eldest daughter. There he died Sept. 7, 1652, and was interred in the chancel of Brornfield church.

Respecting Mr. Young’s learning there seems to have been no dispute. It was acknowledged by all the eminent scholars of his time, both at home and abroad, particularly Fronto-Ducaeus, Sirmond, Petavius, Grotius, Salmasius, Vossius, Casaubon, Usher, Selden, &c. But it seems to be disputed whether he did not side with the republican party. Of this we have not discovered any direct proof, and his court connexions, and the friendships which subsisted between him and Juxon, Usher, Walton, Hammond, Pearson, &c. seem to afford a presumptive evidence that he was upon the whole more attached to monarchical than revolutionary principles.

, a learned and laborious Spanish writer, was born in the island of Teneriffe in 1702, and, at the age of eleven, was sent by his father to France, where he studied at Rouen and Paris for many years, till he was recalled, by the way of London, to the Canary islands, in order to be sent into Spain, where he intended him for the profession of the law. His father died before his arrival; but in pursuance of his design, Juan arrived at Madrid in 3724. Here he was admitted into the royal library, and patronized by many noblemen of the first rank. In 1729 he was appointed clerk, and in 1732, keeper of the royal library, which office he held for fifteen years, and being entrusted likewise with the augmentation of the library, be added 2000 manuscripts, and more tnan 10,000 printed volumes. At length he was appointed to the place of interpreter in the first secretaryship of state and dispatches, and chosen a fellow of the royal academy. He died at Madrid, Aug. 23, 1771.

That in his several employments he acquitted himself with great application and industry,' appears from the catalogue of his works, which consist of “Regiae Bibliothecae Matritensis codices Graeci Mss. Joan Yriarte ejusdem custos excussit, recensuit, notis, indicibus, auecdotis pluribus evulgatis illustravit,” 1769, folio, vol. I.; vol II. hr left in manuscript “Regiae Mat. Bibl. Geographica & Chronologica,” 1729; “R. M. Bibl. Mathematical 1730; corrections and improvements of Antonio’s” Bibliotheca Hispana,“and Don Miguel Casiri’s” Bibl. Arabieo-Hispana-­Escurial;“” Palseographia Graeca,“a ms. 4to; his collection of Spanish treaties of peace; near 600 articles intended for a Castilian Dictionary; a treatise on the orthography and grammar of the Castdian idiom; his immense collections of materials for a general alphabetical library, in many folios, of all the authors who have treated of the geography, history, politics, literature, biography, trade, &c. of Spain and for a history of the Canary islands, which was 10 consist of six quarto volumes at least. He wrote also a great number of articles inserted in the” Diario de los literatos,“a critical journal. In 1774, his” Select Works“were published in 2 vols. 4to,” for the benefit of literature, at the expence of several noblemen, lovers of genius and merit.“This collection,” Obras Sueltas,“contains some works of imagination, his sacred and prophane Latin poems, or translations; and his Latin translations of a number of Castilian proverbs, and of some oratorical and critical discourses. Juan de Yriarte was probably related to Don Tomas de Yriarte, whose ingenious” Literary Fables“were published at Madrid in 1782, and were lately well translated into English verse by John Belfour, esq; but of this Don Tomas we have not found any biographical memoir. His poem” La Musica" has gone through many editions, and is much admired in Spain.

, a celebrated traveller, was a native of Gluckstad in Holstem, a man of ingenuity, activity, and enterprize, whose curiosity after voyages and discoveries led him to Moscow about the beginning of the reign of the czars John and Peter Alexiewitz. The latter, better known by the name of Peter the Great, discovered the talents of Ysbraad, took him into his service, and employed him on some regulations which he was about to form, and which laid the foundation for the commercial prosperity of Russia. Peter having afterwards a dispute with the emperor of China, respecting certain boundaries, considered Ysbrand as a very proper person to conduct a negociation, and therefore sent him to China, invested with the character of ambassador. He set off in March 1692, and returned in Jan. 1695, and afterwards published an account of his voyage, at Amsterdam in 169y, reprinted in 1704 and 1710. An English translation was published at London in 1704, 4to, with maps and plates, and is deemed a work of great curiosity and considerable value. It has also been translated into other languages. We have no farther notice of the author than that he was living in 1700.

, an eminent cardinal, was born in 1339, at Padua. He taught common law in his native place and at Florence, where he acquired so much esteem, that when the archbishopric became vacant, he was chosen to fill it, but the pope had anticipated the election by giving it to another. Zabarella was afterwards invited to Rome by Boniface IX. and by John XXIII, who made him archbishop of Florence, and created him cardinal in 1411, from which time he had the title of the cardinal of Florence. The pope sent him on an embassy to the emperor Sigisrnund, who demanded a council, both on account of the Bohemian heresies, and the schism between the various candidates for the popedom; and the city of Constance having been fixed upon for this general council, Zabarella very much distinguished himself in its debates. He advised the deposition of John XXIII. and there is every reason to believe he would have been elected pope, had he not died, September 26, 1417, aged seventy-eight, six weeks before the election of Martin V. The emperor and the whole council attended his obsequies, and Poggio spoke his funeral oration, exerting the full powers of his eloquence and learning. Zabarella' s works are, “Commentaries on the Decretals and the Clementines,” 6 vols. folio. “Councils,” 1 vol. “Speeches and Letters,” 1 vol. A treatise “De Horis Canonicis” “De Felicitate, libri tres” “Varise Legum repethiones;” “Opuscula de Artibus liberalibus et de natura rerun* diversarum” * c Commentarii in naturalem et moralem Philosophiam“” Historia sui temporis“” Acta in Conciliis Pisano et Constanttensi“lastly,” Notes“on the Old and New Testament, and a treatise” On Schism,“Basil, 1565, folio, in which he ascribes all the misfortunes of the church, during his time, to the cessation of councils. This treatise” On Schism" has been frequently reprinted by the protestants, because Zabarella speaks very freely in it of the popes and the court of Rome; and for the same reason the book has been put into the index. Cardinal Zabarella had a nephew, Bartholomew Zabarella, who gave lectures in canon law at Padua, with reputation, and was afterwards archbishop of Florence, and referendary of the church under pope Eugenius IV. He died August 12, 1442, aged forty-six.

, born Sept. 5, 1533, at Padua, was the son of Bartholomew Zabarella, mentioned in the preceding article. He took great pleasure in astrology, and amused himself with drawing several horoscopes. He taught logic at Padua during fifteen years, from 1564, and afterwards philosophy till his death. He was several times deputed to Venice, and spoke with great eloquence in the senate. He died at Padua, irr October 1589, aged fiftysix. He bore the title of Count Palatine, which passed to his descendants. He left, “Commentaries on Aristotle.” “Logica,” 1597, folio. “De Anima,” 1606, folio. “Physica,” 1601, folio. “De Rebus naturalibus,” 1394, 4to from which he appears to have had much acnteness ia clearing up difficult points, and comprehending the most obscure questions. He maintains, in these commentaries, but still more particularly in a short treatise “De Inventione Æterni Motoris” (which forms part of his works, Francfort, 1618, 4to), that, according to Aristotle’s principles, no proof can be brought of the soul’s immortality whence some writers accuse him of impiety.

, an eminently learned Italian Jesuit, was born in Venice, March 27, 1714, the son of an eminent Tuscan lawyer, settled in the Venetian states. He received his education in the schools of the Jesuits in that metropolis, and, as early as the age of fifteen, evinced such uncommon powers and attainments as to be introduce'd into that society, already proverbial for its sagacity and conduct in discovering juvenile talents of every kind. In October 1731, he took the habit, went through his noviciate in Vienna, and became soon after professor of belles lettres in the college of his order at Govitz. It was not long before he was called by his superiors to Rome, ordained a priest in 1740, attached to the Roman province, and sent on a mission to the Marche of Ancona. He exercised similar functions also in Tuscany, Lombardy, and almost the whole of northern Italy, with extraordinary success and fame, and without the least diversion from his favourite pursuit the study of ecclesiastical, civil, and literary history. He availed himself of these peregrinations through the several capitals of Italy, in cultivating the friendship of all the eminent literary characters he met with, and in making every where those deep researches in literature, antiquities, -bibliography, and history, which have supplied him with a great part of his literary history of Italy, his annals of literature, and his several historical and diplomatic collections.

In 1752, he was recommended by the celebrated cardinal. Quirini as a director of the public library of Brescia, a re-< commendation which, however, had no effect. But two years after, his name being already known to the reigning duke of Modena, under whose auspices he had undertaken and continued his literary history of Italy, he was appointed director of the Ducal library, a place formerly held by Muratori, and on his death tendered to the learned father Corsini, of the university of Pisa, who had declined it, from his invincible attachment to his native place. He associated to himself, in the direction of the Ducal library, those two excellent friends and brothers, who were also co-operators in the compilation of the Literary History, father Dominic Troilo of Macerata, and father Joachim Gabardi of Carpi; who afterwards retained the same place under the celebrated father Granelli, and his successor, the illustrious Tiraboschi. Without any interruption to his higher literary pursuits, the improvements which he made in this situation are recorded highly to the honour of Zaccaria:. he enlarged the apartment devoted to the library; introduced a better classification of books, enriched it with new articles, and compiled a catalogue raisonne" of every branch, which, to the regret of many intelligent persons, was never published.

His fame was already so great that the justly celebrated count Cristiani, then Austrian governor of Mantua, desired him to repair to that city, to superintend the then proposed establishment of an imperial library. He accepted the offer, with the permission of his master; and as soon as his business in -Mantua was completed, he resumed his residence at Modena, and continued in the Ducal library, till the expulsion of the Jesuits from the several petty states of Italy obliged him to remove.

In 1768, he repaired to Rome, and was soon appointed librarian to the college of Jesus, and historiographer of the society for the literary department. Here a new field was open to his exertions. He became the champion of the holy see against the prevailing philosophy of the age, and against the encroachment of the secular powers on the church, for which he was rewarded with a pension by the then reigning and unfortunate pontiff Clement Alii. He did not long enjoy either this gift of fortune or his own tranquillity, as in 1773, by the dissolution of his order, after repeated risks of being confined in the castle of St. Angelo, he received a perpetual injunction not to go out of the gates of Rome without a licence from the magistrates. Pope Ganganelli esteemed and lamented him, though he could not restrain these violent measures. He had better days under the new pontificate, when Pius VI. not only restored liberty to Mr. Zaccaria, but increased the pension which had been formerly granted to him. He also appointed him governor to the newly established academy of noble clergymen, with a liberal salary; and as he had been, before that period, professor of ecclesiastical history in the Roman university, better known by the name of Sapienza, the pope gave him for the remainder of his life the dignity of ex-professor in that school, with the enjoyment of the same salaries as if he had retained the official post. In this situation he remained till his death, which took place October 10, 1795, in the eighty-second year of his age.

The number of his publications, original as well asothers, amounts to 106, besides many unpublished manuscripts. The best of the former class are accounted his “Literary History of Italy,” 14 vols. in 8vo; the “Litetary Annals of Italy,” 3 vols. in 8vo; the “Lapidary and Numismatic Institutions,” 2 vols. 8vo; the “Library of ancient and modern Literary History,” 6 vols. 4to. Some of his works, especially his polemic performances, were written in Latin, and it was remarked that in this language he wrote comparatively more elegantly than in Italian.

His moral character was excellent; frank, candid, humane, unassuming, and polite; cordial to his friends, and obliging to his pupils. In his opinions, however, he was too warm and passionate; and his works, especially those which he wrote for the support of the Uoman catholic church, and of the papal prerogatives, are proverbial for intemperance and asperity.

, physician to pope Innocent X. was born in 1584, at Rome, and cultivated the belles lettres, poetry, music, painting, and all the sciences; which, however, did not prevent his being one of the best physicians of his time. He died 1659, at Rome, aged seventy-five. His works are, “Queestiones Medico-legales;” of which there are several editions; among others, Lyons, 1726, i torn, folio. This is an excellent work; it contains great learning and judgment, with solid reasoning, and is very Necessary for divines and canonists, in cases where medicine and surgery are connected with the civil and ecclesiastical laws. He wrote also a treatise in Italian, entitled “La Vita quadragesimale,” for avoiding the dispensations of Lent, Rome, 1673, 8vo; and three books, in the same language, “On Hypochondriacal Diseases,” Venice, 1665, 4to, &c.

, an eminent Spanish physician, was born at Lisbon in 1575, and is usually called Lusitanus. He studied both philosophy and medicine at Salamanca and Coimbra, and took his degree of doctor in 1594 at Saguntum, now called Morvedre, a famous university in Spain. After this, he practised physic at Lisbon till 1624; when, by an edict of Philip IV. who governed Spain with a high hand, the whole race of Jews were interdicted the kingdom. Zacutus, being a Jew, retired into Holland, practising chiefly at Amsterdam and the Hague; at the former of which places he died, in 1641 or 1642, aged about sixtysix or seven. His works, written in Latin, were printed at Lyons in France, in 1649, 2 vols. fojio. Before the second is placed what he calls “Introitus ad Praxin; or, An Introduction rto Practice;” in which be displays the qualities of a physician, morale as well as intellectual; and shews, not only what are the qualifications necessary to the art, but also what are the duties necessary to the man.

, one of the most learned men of the sixteenth century, was a native of Bergamo. His real name was Peter, which he exchanged for Basil, when he became a canon regular. He was born in 1501. He appears to have studied at Rome and various other places, but resided for the greater part of his life at Rome, where he was highly honoured for his literary talents, and, as some say (but this is disputed), was made keeper of the Vatican library. He died there, however, in 1560. Paul Manutius, in a letter to Gambara, the intimate friend of Zanchius, says that he was oppressed and persecuted in a very cruel manner, and ended his days miserably, in consequence of a decree of the pope against those who did not reside in their convents, but some have conjectured that he might have probably become a convert to the reformed religion, like his cousin Jerome, of whom we are nxt to speak. It seems certain, however, that he died in prison, and that he was worthy of a better fate, being one of the most learned men, and best Latin poets of his age. His beautiful verses on the death of Sannazarius were translated into Italian by the great Torquato Tasso. His Latin poems were first printed at Rome in 1540, 4to, and were often reprinted. Serassi gave a new edition of them at Bergamo m 1747, with a life of the author. He wrote also observations on all the books of scripture, printed at Rome 1553, and twice reprinted. He is ranked among lexicographers, from having contributed to Nizolius’s observations on Cicero, and from having added a great collection of words to Calepin, from the best and purest authors. He published also “Epithetorum commentarii,” Rome, 1542, 4to, a work better known by the title of the second edition, “Dictionarium poedcum et epitheta veterum poetarum,” &c. 1612, 8vo.

, an eminent divine, and ranked among the illustrious band of reformers, was a cousin of the preceding, and most probably born at Bergamo, Feb. 2, 1516, the year before the reformation appeared in Germany under Luther. He was deprived of both his parents, by death, when very young, and resolving on a monastic life, entered the society of the canons regular, where he found some of his relations, and where he had an opportunity of improvement in literature. Here he studied philosophy, the languages, and school divinity, for nineteen years. His first departure from the tenets of the Romish church may be dated from his having an opportunity of hearing Peter Martyr’s lectures on the epistle to the Romans and on the Psalms, which he appears to have done along with count Maximinian and Tremellius, both afterwards converts to the reformed opinions. From this time he began to study the scriptures and the fathers, particularly St. Austin, and preached according to the new light he had received. In 1550, when Peter Martyr was no longer permitted to preach, and was obliged to leave Italy, eighteen of his disciples followed him, and among the rest Zanchins. He first went to the territory of the Orisons, and from that to Geneva, where, after he had resided about a year, he received invitation to fill a divinity professorship in England. This was probably at Oxford, where Peter Martyr was now settled, and had recommended him; but he preferred a similar invitation from Strasburgh, and in 1553, succeeded Caspar Hedio, as divinity professor there.

In this office he continued about eleven years, not without much opposition, which, however, was considerably moderated by the friendship of Sturmius, then at the head of the university. It was here that, in 1562, Zanchius presented to the senate the declaration of his faith concerning predestination, final perseverance, and the Lord’s supper. But as the old divines and senators dropped off, his situation at Strasburgh became more and more uncomfortable, and at length he was required to subscribe the Augsburgh confession, on pain of losing his professorship. This he did, after mature deliberation, with a salvo that " it should be understood only in the orthodox sense; 7 * but it would appear that he was not quite satisfied in his own mind, nor did his compliance prevent the divisions and dissentions which distracted the church of Strasburgh, and finally induced him to accept an invitation to become pastor of the church of Chiavenna, on the borders of Italy, and in the territory of the Grisons. Having therefore obtained the consent of the senate to resign his canonry of St. Thomas, and his professorship, he left Strasburgh in Nov. 1563, and entered on his charge at Chiavenna in January following. This he fulfilled for four years, interrupted only on one occasion by the plague, after which Frederick, elector Palatine, prevailed with him to accept a divinity professorship at Heidelberg, on the decease of Zachary Ursin. He entered on this new office in 1568, with an excellent oration on the means of preserving the pure word of God in the church. In the same year he received his doctor’s degree, the elector Palatine and his son, prince Casimir, honouring the ceremony with their presence.

He had not been long settled in the Palatinate, when the elector strongly solicited him to take up his pen against the Socinians, who had fixed their bead quarters in Poland and Transylvania, and were displaying every artifice to propagate their opinions. This produced Zanchius’ s two masterly treatises “De Dei natura,” and “De tribus Elohim uno eodemque Jehovah.” After this he retained his professorship at Heidelberg ten years, until the death of thqi elector, and the accession of a successor of different principles, who obliged him to remove to Newstadt, the residence of prince John Casimir, count Palatine. Here he remained upwards of seven years, ana when excused^ an account of his age and infirmities from public services, he removed once more to Heidelberg, where he died Nov. 1&, 1590, in the seventy-fifth year of his age, and was interred in the college chapel of St. Peter. Zanchius, while one of the most learned of the reformers, was also one of the most pious, and distinguished for great moderation in controversy, united with sufficient firmness in maintaining what he considered to be the truth. His works were printed at Geneva in 1619, 9 vols. folio, usually bound in three.

, an eminent Italian mathematician, was born at Bologna in January 1692, and was educated among the Jesuits. His first pursuit was the law, which he soon exchanged for philosophy, and particularly mathematics. In philosophy he was at first a Cartesian, but when sir Isaac Newtbn’s discoveries were divulged, he was among the first to acknowledge his great superiority, particularly in optics and astronomy. He was made librarian and secretary to the academy of Bologna, and wrote a Latin history of its transactions continued down to 1766, and he also contributed many mathematical papers of great importance. But his talents were not confined to philosophy and mathematics: he was also a distinguished poet both in the Tuscan and Latin languages, and in the latter, was thought a successful imitator of Catullus, Tibullus, Ovid, and Virgil. After a life honourably spent in those various pursuits, which procured him great fame, he died Dec. 25, 1777. He published a great many works, both in Italian and Latin, which are enumerated by Fabroni.

, called also Baramus, a monk of the sixth century, rendered himself conspicuous in the Eastern church by reviving the sect of the Monophysites, founded by Eutyches, and called from him Eutychians. Their doctrine was, that in Christ there is but one nature, that of the incarnate word. The sect was now reduced to very few, but these had ordained Zanzalus bishop of Edessa, and by his uncommon zeal and indefatigable labours, he left his sect, when he died in 588, in a most flourishing state in Syria, Mesopotamia* Armenia, Egypt, &c. and other countries, and such as exist in those countries are still called by the name of Jacobites in honour of him.

, an eminent Lutheran divine, was born in 1505, at Zegedin, a city of Lower Hungary; his family name was Kis. He studied under Luther and Melancthon, at Wittemberg; taught and preached Lutheranism afterwards, in several cities in Hungary, and was taken prisoner by the Turks, who used him with great cruelty. Having recovered his liberty, he officiated as minister at Buda, and in many other places. He died at Reven, in Hungary, May 2, 1572, aged sixty-seven, leaving, “Speculum Roman. Pontificum Historicum,” 1602, 8vo. “Assertio de Trinitate,” 1573, 8vo. “Tabulae Analyticae in Prophetas, Psalmos, et Novum Testamentum,” 1592, folio a work very highly recommended for its utility by father Simon.

, an indefatigable German geographer, was born in Stiria in 1589. His father had been pupil of Melanctbon, and minister at Uim. He was appointed inspector of the German schools, and though with the disadvantage of having but one eye, was a very arduous and successful student, and wrote many works; the most esteemed among which are those relative to the modern geography of Germany, viz. “The Itinerary of Germany;” “The Topography of Bavaria;” “The Topography of Suabia,” which is very accurate; “The Topography of Alsace;” “of the States of Brunswick;” and “of the Country of Hamburgh;” The “Itinerary of Italy,” which is much esteemed; and a pretty good “Description of Hungary,” &c. These compose almost all the whole topography of Merian, in 31 vols. folio. Zeiler also left two volumes of Historians, Geographers, and Chronologers, in which he has copied the whole of Vossius, and other authors, but without correcting their mistakes. He died Oct. 6, 1661, at Ulm, aged seventy- three.

, the founder of the Stoic sect (a branch from the Cynic, ad a far as respected morals, differing from it in words more than in reality), was a native of Cittius, a maritime town of Cyprus, and as this place was originally peopled by a colony of Phenicians, he is sometimes called a Phenician. His father, a merchant, encouraged him in the study of philosophy, and bought for him several of the writings of v the most eminent Socratic philosophers, which he read with great avidity and when he was about thirty years of age, determined to take a voyage to Athens, which was so celebrated both as a mart of trade and of science. Whether this voyage was in part mercantile, or wholly undertaken for the sake of conversing with those philosophers whose writings Zeno had long admired, is uncertain. If it be true, as some writers relate, that he brought with him a valuable cargo of Phenician purple, which was lost by shipwreck upon the coast of Pira3us, this circumstance will account for the facility with which he at first attached himself to a sect whose leading principle was the contempt of riches. Upon his first arrival in Athens, going accidentally into the shop of a bookseller, he took up a volume of the Commentaries of Xenophon, and formed so high an idea of the author, that he asked the bookseller, where he might meet with such men. Crates, the Cynic philosopher, happening at that instant to be passing by, the bookseller pointed to him, and said, “Follow that man,” which he did, and was so well pleased with his doctrine, that he became one of his disciples. But though he highly admired the general principles and spirit of the Cynic school, he could not easily reconcile himself to their peculiar manners; nor would his inquisitive turn of mind allow him to adopt their indifference to scientific inquiry. He therefore attended upon other masters, who professed to instruct their disciples in the nature and causes of things, and when Crates, displeased at this, attempted to drag him by force out of the school of Stilpo, Zeno said to him, “You may seize my body, but Stilpo has laid hold of my mind.” After continuing to attend upon the lectures of Stilpo several years, he passed over to other schools, particularly those of Xenocrates and Diodorus Cronus. By the latter he was instructed in dialectics; and at last, after attending almost every other master, he offered himself as a disciple of Polemo, who suspected that his design was to collect materials for a new system: nor was he mistaken. The place which Zeno chose for his school was called 2/rea, or the Porch, and hence the name of Stoics. Zeno had advantages as the founder of a new sect; he excelled in that kind of subtle reasoning which was at that time popular, and while he taught a system of moral doctrine, his own morals were unexceptionable. He therefore soon became much followed, and on account of his integrity the Athenians deposited the keys of their citadel in his hands, and honoured him with a golden crown and a statue of brass. In his person Zeno was tall and slender; his aspect was severe, and his brow contracted. His constitution was feeble; but he preserved his health by great abstemiousness. The supplies of his table consisted of figs, bread, and honey; notwithstanding which, he was frequently honoured with the company of great men. It was a singular proof of, his moderation, mixed indeed with that high spirit of independence which afterwards distinguished his sect, that when Democharis, son of Laches, offered to procure him some gratuity from* Antigonus, he was so offended, that from that time he declined all intercourse with him. In public company, to avoid every appearance of an assuming temper, he commonly took the lowest place. Indeed, so great was his modesty, that he seldom chose to mingle with a crowd, or wished for the company of more than two or three friends at once. He paid more attention to neatness and decorum in external appearance, than the Cynic philosophers. In his dress indeed he was plain, and in all his expences frugal, which arose from a contempt of external magnificence. He showed as much respect to the poor as to the rich; and conversed freely with persons of the meanest occupations. He had only one servant, or, according to Seneca, none. Yet with all these virtues, several philosophers of great ability and eloquence employed their talents against him, and Arcesilaus and Carneades, the founders of the middle and new academy, were his professed opponents. Towards the latter end of his life he found another powerful adversary in Epicurus, whose temper and doctrines were alike inimical to the severe gravity and philosophical pride of the Stoic sect. Hence mutual invectives passed between the Stoics and other sects, to which little credit is due. At least it may be fairly presumed that Zeno, whose personal character was so exemplary, never countenanced gross immorality in his doctrine.

Zeno lived to the extreme age of ninety-eight, and at last, in consequence of an accident, voluntarily put an end to his life. As he was walking out of his school he fell down, and in the fall broke one of his fingers; upon which he was so affected with a consciousness of infirmity, that, striking the earth, he said, “Why am I thus importuned? I obey thy summons;” and immediately went home and strangled himself. He died in the first year of the hundred and twenty-ninth Olympiad, or B. C. 264. The Athenians, at the request of Antigonus, erected a monument to his memory in the Ceramicum.

From the particulars which have been related concerning Zeno, it will not be difficult to perceive what kind of influence his circumstances and character must have had upon his philosophical system. If his doctrines be diligently compared with the history of his life, it will appear that he compiled, out of various contemporary tenets, an heterogeneous system, on the credit of which he assumed to himself the title of the founder of a new sect; and, indeed, when he resolved, for the sake of establishing a school, to desert the philosophy of Pythagoras and Plato, it became necessary, either to invent opinions entirely new, or to give an air of novelty to old systems by the introduction of new terms and definitions. Of these two undertakings Zeno prudently made choice of the easier. Cicero says, concerning Zeno, that he had little reason for deserting his masters, especially those of the Platonic school, and that he was not so much an inventor of new opinions, as of new terms. In morals, the principal difference between the Cynics and Stoics was, that the former disdained the cultivation of nature, the latter affected to rise above it.

, called the Eleatic, to distinguish from the preceding, and 'from others, flourished about 463 B.C. He was a zealous friend of civil liberty, and is celebrated for his courageous and successful opposition to tyrants; but the inconsistency of the stories related by different writers concerning him, in a great measure destroys their credit. He chose to reside in his small native city of Elea, rather than at Athens, because it afforded freer scope to his independent and generous spirit, which could not easily submit to the restraints of authority. It is related that he vindicated the warmth with which he resented reproach, by saying, “If I were indifferent to censure, I should also be indifferent to praise.” The invention of the dialecticart has been improperly ascribed to Zeno; but there can be no doubt that this philosopher, and other metaphysical disputants in the Eleatic sect, employed much ingenuity and subtlety in exhibiting examples of most of the logical arts which were afterwards reduced to rule by Aristotle and others. According to Aristotle, Zeno of Elea taught that nothing fcan be produced either from that which is similar or dissimilar; that there is only one being, and that is God; that this being is eternal, homogeneous, and spherical, neither finite nor infinite, neither quiescent nor moveable; % that there are many worlds; that there is in nature no vacuum; that all bodies are composed of four elements, heat and moisture, cold and dryness; and that the body of man is from the earth, and his soul an equal mixture of these four elements. He argued with great subtlety against the possibility of motion. If Seneca’s account of this philosopher deserves credit, he reached the highest point of scepticism, and denied the real existence of external objects. The truth is, that after all that has been advanced by different writers, it is impossible to determine whether Zeno understood the term one, metaphysically, logically, or physically; or whether he admitted or denied a nature properly divine.

, a learned poet, critic, and antiquary, was born in 1669, and descended from <an illustrious Venetian family, which had been long settled in the island of Candia. He early applied himself to literature, and the study of Italian history and antiquities. In 1696 he instituted at Venice the academy Degli Animosi, and was the editor of the “Giornale de‘ Letterati d’ltalia,” of which he published thirty volumes between the years 1710 and 1719. His first musical drama, “L'Inganni Felici,” was performed at Venice in 1695, and between that time and his quitting Vienna, whither he was invited by the emperor Charles VI. in 1718, he produced forty-six operas, and seventeen oratorios, besides eighteen dramas, which he wrote jointly with Pariati. His dramatic works were collected and published at Venice in 1744, in 10 vols. 8vo, by count Gozzi; and in 1752 his letters were printed in 3 vols. by Forcellini, in which Dr. Burney, whom we principally follow in. this article, says, much sound learning and criticism are manifested on various subjects. But one of the most useful of his critical labours seems to have been his commentary on the “Bibl. dell' Eloquenza Italiana di Foutanini,” which was published in 1753, with a preface by his friend Forcellini, chiefly dictated, however, by Zeno himself, just before his death. After he was engaged as imperial laureat, he set out from Venice for Vienna in July 1718, but having been overturned in a chaise, the fourth day of his journey, he had the misfortune to break his leg, and was confined at an inn in the little town of Ponticaba, nearTrevisa, till September. He arrived at Vienna, the 14th of that month, “safe,” as he says, “if not sound and cured,” after twelve days of excessive suffering on the road. Most of the dramas, sacred and secular, which he wrote for the imperial court, were set by Caldara, a grave composer and sound harmonist, to whose style Zeno seems to have been partial. But thii excellent antiquary and critic seems never to have been satisfied with his own poetical abilities. So early as 1722, in writing to his brother from Vienna, he says, “I find more and more every day, that I grow old, not only in body, but in mind; and that the business of writing verses is no longer a fit employment for me.” And afterwards he expressed a wish that he might be allowed a partner in his labours, and was so just and liberal as to mention the young Metastasio as a poet worthy to be honoured with -the emperor’s notice. If the musical dramas of Apostolo Zeno are compared with those of his predecessors and contemporaries, they will be found infinitely superior to them in conduct, regularity, character, sentiment, and force. But Metastasio’s refined sentiments, selection of words, and varied and mellifluous measures, soon obscured the theatrical glory of Zeno, who, after the arrival of his young colleague, seems to have attempted nothing but oratorios.

In 1731 he returned to Venice, and his place at court was entirely supplied by Metastasio, but the salaries of poet and historiographer were still continued to him. Zeno corresponded with the learned of Italy, and other countries; was an able antiquary, and had made an excellent collection of literary anecdotes. His candour, sincerity, affability, and other amiable qualities, rendered him universally esteemed, and highly agreeable in society. He died at Venice, November 11, 1750, in the eighty-second year of his age, and was buried at the convent of the Dominicans of the strict observance, to whom he had left his library. He is universally allowed to have possessed great talents for dramatic poetry, and is the first Italian poet who gave his countrymen good rules for tragedy, and taught them to consider music only as an embellishment. He discovers genius, spirit, and feeling; but his style, as has been remarked, is far inferior to that of Metastasio. Zeno also left a great number of works on Antiquities, &c. “Dissertationi Vossiani,” 3 vols. 8vo “Letters,” Venice, 1752, 2 vols. 4to.

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

, a very famous painter of antiquity, flourished about 400 years before Christ, or about the 95th Olympiad. The particulars relating to his country are a little confused: for though Tully, Pliny, and ^lian, agree in affirming that he was of Heraclea, yet they have not, among the numerous cities of that name, told us the Heraclea in which Zeuxis was born. Pliny represents the art of painting, the rudiments of which had been discovered by Apollod'orus, to have been carried to considerable perfection by this painter. Some authors relate, that he found out the manner of disposing lights and shades; and he is allowed to have excelled in colouring, Aristotle censured this defect in- his paintings, that the manners or passions were not expressed in them yet Pliny asserts the contrary with regard to the picture of Penelope “in which Zeuxis,” says he, “seems to have painted the manners.”

This painter amassed immense riches; and he once made a shew of them at the Olympic games, where he appeared in a cloak embroidered with gold letters expressing his name. When he found himself thus rich, he would not sell his works any longer, but gave them away, because, he said, no price could be set upon them. His Helen was his most celebrated picture. He wrote underneath this picture the three verses of the Iliad, in which Homer represents Priam and the venerable sages of his council confessing that the Greeks and Trojans were not to blame for having exposed themselves to so many calamities for the love of Helen; her beauty equalling that of the goddesses. It cannot be very well determined, whether this Helen of Zeuxis be the same as that which was at Rome in Pliny’s time; or that which he painted for the inhabitants of Crotona, to be hung up in the temple of Juno. They had prevailed upon him to come among them, by giving him a large sum, in order to paint a great number of pictures, with which they intended to adorn this temple; and were not a little pleased when he told them, that he intended to draw the picture of Helen, as his chief excellence lay in painting womem This extraordinary picture he executed by combining the beauties of various living models; and this method of forming perfection he learned from Homer, whose mode of ideal composition was his rule.

Many curious particulars are recorded of this painter; among others we are told that he had painted some grapes so very naturally, that the birds used to come and peck them; and Parrhasius painted a curtain so artfully, that Zeuxis, mistaking it for a real curtain, which hid his rival’s work, ordered it to be drawn aside, that he might see Parrhasius’s painting; but, finding his mistake, he confessed himself vanquished; since he had only imposed upon birds, whereas Parrhasius had misled even those who were masters of the art. Another time, he painted a boy loaded with grapes, when the birds flew again to this picture, at which he was vexed; and frankly confessed, that it was not sufficiently finished, since, had he painted the boy as perfectly as the grapes, the birds would have been afraid of him. Archelaus, king of Macedon, made use of Zeuxis’s pencil for the embellishment of his house; upon which Socrates made this reflection, as it is preserved by Æian: “Archelaus,” said he, “has laid out a vast sum, of money upon his house, but nothing upon himself: whence it is, that numbers come from all parts of the world to see his house, but none to see him; except those who are tempted by his money and presents, and who wilt not be found among the worthiest of men.”

One of Zeuxis’s finest pieces was a Hercules strangling some dragons in his cradle, in the presence of his frighted mother: but he himself esteemed chiefly his athleta, of champion, under which he made a verse that became afterwards proverbial, viz. “that it would be easier to envy than to imitate that picture.” It is probable, that he valued his Alcmena, since he presented it to the Agrigentines. He did not paint with rapidity; and used to say to those who reproached him with slowness, that “he was indeed a long time in painting, but that it was also to last a long time.” Lucian has given us a description of a picture of Zeuxis, that of a female centaur. As to his death, we are told that having painted an old woman, he laughed so heartily at his performance that he died. This circumstance is related by Verrius Flaccus, under the word Pictor but it is probably fabulous.

, a very Celebrated protestant missionary, was born at Pulnitz in Upper Lusatia, June 14, 1683. He began his education in the college of Camentz, where he first appears to have cherished that pious zeal which influenced his future conduct and labours. He then removed to Goerlitz, afterwards to Berlin, and lastly to Halle, where he studied divinity; but his excessive application to this and other learned pursuits injured his health and brought on a species of melancholy, to divert which he was advised to travel. He happened to visit Berlin in 1705, when missionaries were wanted by the king of Denmark to go to the East Indies, and resolving to be one of the number, he was recommended to Dr. Lut kens, whom his Danish majesty had employed to find out men of learning, zeal, and piety, suited to the work. Ziegenbalg being approved, and having settled his private affairs, went to Copenhagen, along with Mr. Henry Pluts­^hau, another young missionary, where they received all necessary orders and instructions. On Nov. 29, 1709, they embarked on board the Sophia-Hedwige, and arrived on April 23 following at the Cape of Good Hope, where the deplorable state of the Hottentots excited their pity, and heightened their wishes for the conversion of the heathen. They left this place on May 8, and while pursuing their voyage, Ziegenbalg employed himself on a moral treatise, which he sent afterwards to be printed at Halle, under the title of “The School of Wisdom.” They arrived at Tranquebar on July 9, but found their enterprise obstructed, by many difficulties, one of which was their ignorarrce of the languages spoken' in the country. Having, however, surmounted this by perseverance, and acquired a familiar knowledge of the Portuguese and Malabar languages, they made considerable progress in the great object of their mission, and by the month of January 1707, were enabled to teach the catechism in the Malabar language, and a few months afterwards baptised some young converts. In the same year they laid the foundation of a church for the sole use of the missionaries and their disciples, and with the assistance of some generous and charitable persons had completed it in the month of August, when it was dedicated by the name of the New Jerusalem. There they preached both in the Portuguese and Malabar, and catechised twice a week in the same languages. In Oct. 1708, Ziegenbal^; began his version of the New Testament in the Malabar tongue, which was printed in 1714, at Tranquebar, under the title of “Nov. Test. D. N. Jesu Christi, ex originali textu in linguam Tamulicam versum^ in usum gentis Malabaricce, opera et studio Barth. Ziegenbalg, et Joannis Ernesti Grundleri, &c.” <2 vols. 4to.

The opposition, however, to the labours of these missionaries, began to be very serious. Some time after he began his translation of the New Testament, he was arrested and sent as a prisoner to the castle of Tranquebar, in which he was confined about four months. During this time he was not permitted to carry on his translation, but he employed himself on some works of piety in German. In the beginning of 1709, the missionaries found themselves in a very embarrassing situation, having received no supplies from home, while the maintenance of their schools cost them fifty crowns per month. Some benevolent persons, however, having advanced about 200 crowns, they were enabled by prudent management to go on until the arrival of the fleet in July, which brought them very ample relief. They received, by these vessels, 2020 crowns from Denmark, 1700 from Germany, besides an apothecary, an ample stock of medicines, a collection of books, and three additional missionaries to assist them in their labours. The commander of Tranquebar at the same time received express orders from the king of Denmark, to protect the missionaries, and give them every aid and countenance. It was also about the same time that the missionaries received very great assistance from the London society for gating the gospel in fdreign parts.

One of Ziegenbalg' s principal objects was to disperse in all the countries along the coast treatises in the Malabar language for the instruction of the heathen. In 1711 he made a voyage to Madras, and visited all the European establishments, in that quarter. He also visited the territories of the Mogul, in which he preached the gospel, but had nearly lost his life by the bigotry of the natives on one of their festivals. The same jear the king of Denmark assigned the missionaries a perpetual yearly pension 1 of 200O crowns. They received also a fount of Malabar types, made at Halte, and thus in 1713 the phrihting-office of Malabar was in a condition to begin Works iff that fangtfage. Ziegenbatg in the mean tirhe was preparing a translation of the Old Testament. In Oct. 1714 he embarked on board a Danish vessel to retufn to Europe on business concerning the mission, and duririg the voyage -went oft with his translation, which he had finished as far as the book of Joshui before they arrived at the Cape$ in Jan. 1715. During the remainder of his voyage home, besides his labours on the Old Testament, he composed a grammar of the Malabar language, in Latin, which was printed at Halle in 1716, 4to. After the arrival of the ship, Ziegenbalg went to Copenhagen, where he was received with the highest respect by all classes, and, during his stay here, he succeeded in many necessary arrangements to place the mission on a better foundation. Before his departure the king of Denmark gave him the title of inspector of the mission. In 1^16 he came to England, and was received with the greatest respect by archbishop Wake, had an audience of George I. and of the prince and princess of Wales, who promised him every aid and protection. Collections were also made for the benefit of the mission; and the society for the propagation of the gospel in foreign parts, obtained of the directors of the East-India company a passage to India for Ziegenbalg in one of their ships, free of all expence; and presented him also with fifty-five reams of paper, and a chest of books. He embarked at Deal March 4, and arrived at Madras in August of the same year (1716), whence he went to Tranquebar, and resumed his functions, inspirited by the encouragement he had met with in Europe. In 1718 he took an extensive journey by land, and was fulfilling the grand object of his mission with great zeal and success, when he was attacked by a disorder in the howels, of which he died Feb. 23, 1719, lamented even by the heathen, whose affections he had gained, and particularly by his brethren and the friends of the mission.

, a learned philosopher, mathematician, and divine, of the sixteenth century, was born at Landshut, in Bavaria. He taught at Vienna for a considerable time, and resided afterwards near the bishop of Passau in Bavaria, where he died in 1549, leaving several works; which are different in their spirit, according as they were written before or after he quitted the Romish church. Among these, his notes on some select passages of the Holy Scriptures, Basil, 151?, folio, and his “Description of the Holy Land,” Strasburg, 1536, folio, are particularly esteemed. There is an excellent life of Ziegler in Scbelhorn’s “Amoenitates.”

, an eminent jurist, was born Septembers, 1621, at Leipsic. He was professor of law at Wittemberg, afterwards counsellor to the appeals, and to the consistory; and the court of Saxony employed him in ^sorne affairs of importance. He died April 17, 1690, at Wittemberg. His works are, “De Milite Episcopo” “De Diaconis et Diaconissis>” Vittebergae, 1678, 4to; “De Clero Renitente;” “De Episcopis,” Norimberg, 1686, 4to.; and critical notes on Grotius’a treatise on'“The Rights of War and Peace,” &c.

, an eminent physician and miscellaneous writer, was born December 8, 1728, at Brugg, a town in the German part of the canton of Bern. His father, the senator Zimmermann, was descended from a family which had been distinguished, during several ages, for the merit and integrity with which they passed through the first offices of the government. His mother, of the name of Pache, was the daughter of a celebrated counsellor at Morges, in the French part of the same canton; which accounts for the circumstance of the two languages, German and French, being equally familiar to him, although he had spent only a very short time in France. Young Zimmermann was educated at home till Jie had attained the age of fourteen, when he was sent to study the belles lettres at Bern. After three years had been thus employed, he was transferred to the school of philosophy, where the prolix comments on the metaphysics of Wolf seem to have much disgusted, without much enlightening, him. The death of both his parents leaving him at liberty to choose his destination in life, he determined to embrace the medical profession, and went to the university of Gottingen, in 1747. Here his countryman^ the illustrious Haller, took him into his own house^ directed his studies, and treated him as a son and a friend. Besides the proper medical professors, Zimmermann attended the mathematical and physical lectures, and acquired a knowledge of English literature. He spent four years in thiuniversity, part of the last of which he employed in experiments on the doctrine of irritability^ first proposed by the English anatomist Giisson, and afterward pursued with so much success by Haller. Zimmermann made this principle the subject of his inaugural thesis, in 1751; and the clearness of the style and method with which he explained the doctrine, with the strength of the experimental proofs by which he supported it, gained him great reputation.

After a few months spent in a tour to Holland and France he returned to Bern, in 1752. Here he published an account of Haller, in a short letter to a friend, inserted in the journal of Neufchatel, and written in French. Though his only work in that language, it has much elegance of style; and it was the basis of his life of Haller, in German, which was published at Zuric in 1755. While at Bern he married madam Stek, a widow, who was a relation of Haller’s, and a woman of a very amiable disposition and well-cultivated mind. Shortly after, he accepted the then vacant post of first physician to his native town. Here he earnestly devoted himself to the studies and duties of his profession; not neglecting, however, those literary pursuits which are necessary to fill up the time of a man of education, in a place which affords but few of the resources of suitable society. He amused himself occasionally with writing little pieces, which he sent to a journal published at Zuric under the title of “The Monitor.” As his pleasures were almost exclusively confined to his family and his study, he here contracted that real or supposed love for solitude, which gave such a colour to his writings if not to his life. It seems, however, to have been rather the splenetic resource of a man who was dissatisfied with an obscure situation, which was not adequate to his talents and reputation. In this place his years passed on usefully for the improvement of his mind; but, as it appears, not very happily. His natural sensibility, for want of objects to divert it, preyed upon itself; and he was rendered miserable by a thousand domestic cares and anxieties which he would have felt more lightly in the tumult of public life. He took, however, the best method in his power for relief, by employing his pen with assiduity on professional and literary topics. In 1754, he sent to the physico-medical society of Basil, a case of spasmodic quinsey, together with some observations on the hysteric tumours of Sydenham. In 1755, he composed a short poem, in German, on the earthquake at Lisbon, which was much esteemed by adequate judges, and placed him among the earliest improvers of his native language. In 1756, appeared his first “Essay on Solitude” a very short performance. Two years afterward, he began to enlarge its plan, and to coU lect materials for his more extended publication on this subject. He also formed the plan of his work on the “Experience of Medicine;” the first volume of which appeared in 1763. In 1758, he published his “Essay on National Pride;” which passed with rapidity through many editions, was translated into several foreign languages, and very much admired.

An epidemic fever, which reigned in Switzerland in 1763, 1764, and 1765, and which, in the latter year, changed into a dysentery, produced his “Treatise on the Dysentery,” which gained him great reputation. This was the last medical work that he composed, though he continued to write short treatises on occasional topics. It should not be omitted, that his friend Dr. Tissot, by addressing to him his own letters on the prevailing epidemic, contributed to extend his professional fame. Nor was he less attentive to his interest, although in some efforts to serve him he was disappointed. At length, however, the vacant pest of physician to the king of Great Britain at Hanover, which had been offered to Dr. Tissot, was, by his interest, procured for Zimmermann; and being accepted, he removed to Hanover in 1768. But this new situation was far from procuring the accession of happiness wbich was expected from it. A disorder which had commenced while he resided at Brugg (and which appears to have been a species of hernia), constantly increased, and was accompanied with acute pains, which sometimes rendered irksome the execution of his duty. Besides some incidental c\r t -> cumstances, which occasioned a number of those slight irritations he would not have felt when in health, but which the state of his nerves now rendered insupportable, he had the misfortune, in 1770, of losing his wifr-; a Deprivation which affected him very sensibly. His complaint growing worse, his friend Tissot advised him to seek the best cliirurgical assistance, and persuaded him, in 1771, to go to Berlin, and put himself under the care of the celebrated Meckel. He was received into this surgeon’s house, and underwent a, successful operation. The time of his convalescence was ope of the most agreeable in his life. He made a number of acquaintances among distinguished characters at Berlin, was presented to the king, and was honoured by him with particular notice. His reception on his return to Hanover was equally pleasing. He now again plunged into business, and again professional and domestic cares brought on hypochondriacal complaints. In 1775, by way of vacation, he made a journey to Lausanne, where his daughter was placed for education, and spent five weeks with Dr. Tissot. As this was the first time that these intimate friends, of twenty years standing, had seen each other, it will be pleasing to translate some of Tissot, his biographer’s, observations on this circumstance: “I had, at length, the pleasure of seeing him; I shall not say of knowing him. I found that I knew him already;‘ th’6 friend conversing reminded me every moment of the friend writing, and perfectly resembled the portrait which I had drawn of him. I saw the man of genius, who, with promptitude seizes an object under all its relations, and whose imagination knows how to present it under jhe most agreeable form. His conversation tfas instructive, brilliant, sprinkled with a number of interesting facts and pleasant narrations, and animated by an expressive countenance. He spoke of every thing with great precision. When medicine was our subject, as was frequently the case, I found his principles solid, and his notions clear. When I took him to see patients under severe indispositions, or read to him consultations on the mOst difficult cases, T always found in him the greatest sagacity in discovering Causes, and explaining symptoms, great justice in forming indications, and an exquisite judgment in the choice of remedies, of which he employed few, but all efficacious. In fine, on every occasion, I saw the man of sincerity, rec­”titude, a,nd virtue. His stay was much shorter than I could have wished."

Dr. Zimmermann was unhappy in the fate of his children. His amiable daughter, whom he most tenderly loved, fell in,to a lingering malady soon after she left Lausanne: it continued five years, and then carried her off. His son, who, from his infancy, was troubled with an acrid humour, after various vicissitudes of nervous affections, settled in perfect idiotcy in which state he remained at his father’s death. To alleviate these distresses^ a second marriage properly occurred to the mind of his friends, and they chose for him a most suitable companion, in the daughter of Dr. de Berger, king’s physician at Lunenberg. This union took place in 1782, and proyed the greatest charm and support of all his remaining life. Jiis l.ady was thirty years youngerthan he;but s,he perfectly Accommodated herself to his taste, and induced him to cultivate society abroad and at home more than he had hitherto done. About this time he employed himself in completing his favourite work on “Solitude,” which, at the distance of thirty years from the publication of the first essay on the subject, appeared in its new form in the years 178^ and 1786, in four volumes. His ideas of solitude had probably been softened by so long an intercourse with the world and as he now defined it, “that state of the soul in which it abandons itself freely to its reflections,” it was not necessary to become either a monk or an anchorite, in orderto partake of its benefits. Had it not been presented under such an accommodating form, a philosopher might have smiled at the circumstance of a recommendation of solitude from a court physician becoming t.he favourite wojrk of one of the most splendid and ambitious of crowned jbeads. The empress of Russia sent her express thanks to the author for the pleasure which she had derived from the work, accompanied with a magnificent present, and commenced with hjrri a regular correspondence, which subsisted, with great freedom onher part, till 1792, when she suddenly dropped it. She also gave him an invitation to settle at Petersburgh as her first physician; and, on his declining the offer, she requested his recommendation of medical practitioners for her towns and armies, and conferred on him the order of Wladomir. One of the most distinguished incidents of Zimmermann’s life was the summons which he received to attend the great Frederic in his last illness, in 1786. It was at once evident that there was no room for the exercise of his medical skill; but he improved the opportunity which he thus enjoyed of confidential intercourse with that illustrious character, whose mental faculties were pre-eminent to the last; and 'he derived from it the materials of an interesting narrative which he afterwards published. The partiality of this prince in his favour naturally disposed him to a reciprocal good opinion of the monarch; and, in 17S8, he published “A Defence of Frederic the Great against the count de Mirabeau” which, in 1790, was followed by “Fragments on Frederic the Great,” in 3 vols. 12mo. All his publications relative to this king gave offence to many individuals, and subjected him to severe criticism; which he felt with more sensibility than was consistent with his peace of mind. His religious and political opinions, likewise, in his latter years, began to be in wide contradiction to the principles that were assiduously propagated all over Europe; and this added perpetual fuel to his irritability. The society of the Illuminated, coalesced with that of Free-masons, rose about this time in Germany, and excited the most violent commotions among men of letters and reflection. It was sup­'posed to have in view nothing less than the abolition of Christianity, and the subversion of all constituted authorities; and, while its partizans expected from it the most beneficial reforms of every kind, its opponents dreaded from it every mischief that could possibly happen to mankind. Zimmerrnann was among the first that took alarm at this formidable accusation. His regard for religion and social order, and, perhaps, his connexions with crowned heads, made him see in the most obnoxious light all the principles of the new philosophers. He attacked them with vigour, formed counter associations with other men of letters, and, at length, addressed to the emperor Leopold a memoir, painting in the strongest colouring the pernicious maxims of the sect, and suggesting the means of suppressing -it; means which are said to have depended on the decisive interference of civil authority. Leopold, who was well inclined to such measures, received his memoir very graciously, and sent him a letter and splendid present in return; but his death, soon after, deprived the cause of its most powerful protection. Ziminermann, however, in conjunction with M. Hoffman of Vienna, who had instituted a periodical work on the old principles, did not relax in his zeal. They attacked, and were attacked in turn; and Zimrnermann embroiled himself with the courts of law by a paper published in Hoffman’s Journal, entitled “The Baron de Knigge unmasked as an Illuminate, Democrat, and Seducer of the People.” As this charge was in part founded on a work not openly avowed by the baron, 3, prosecution was instituted against Zimmermann as a libeller, and he was unable to exculpate himself. This state of warfare may well be imagined to have been extremely unfriendly to an irritable system of nerves; and, the agitation of the doctor’s mind was further increased by his personal fears on the approach of the French towards the electorate of Hanover in 1794; and his mancer of expressing his fears announced the greatest depression. “I saw therein,” says Tissot, “a mind whose springs began to fail, and which dared no longer say, as it could have justly done, `I carry every thing with me.‘ I neglected nothing in order to raise his spirits, and entreated him. to come to me with his wife, to a country that was his own, where he would have remained in the most perfect security, and enjoyed all the sweets of peace and friendship. He answered me in December, and one part of his letter resembled those of other times; but melancholy was still more strongly marked, and the illness of his wife, which he unfortunately thought more serious than it really was, evidently oppressed him: he had been obliged to take three days to write me details which at another time would not have occupied him an hour, and he concluded his letter with, 1I conjure you, perhaps for the last time, &c.’ The idea that he should write no more to his friend (and unfortunately the event justified him), the difficulty of writing a few pages, the still fixed idea of being forced to leave Hanover,although the face of affairs had entirely changed all, all indicated the loss I was about to sustain.” From the month of November he had lost his sleep, his appetite, his strength, and became sensibly thinner; and this stated of decline continued to increase. In January he was still able to make a few visits in his carriage; but he frequently fainted on the stairs: it was painful for him to write a prescription: he sometimes complained of a confusion in his head, and he at length gave over all business. This was at first taken for an effect of hypochondria, but it was soon perceived, that his deep melancholy had destroyed the chain of his ideas. What has happened to so many men of genius, befell him. One strong idea masters every other, and subdues the mind that is no longer able either to drive it away, or to lose sight of it. Preserving all his presence of mind, all his perspicuity, and justness of thought on other subjects, but no longer desirous of occupying himself with them, no longer capable of any business, nor of giving advice, but with pain^he had unceasingly before his eyes the enemy plundering his house, as Pascal always saw a globe of fire near him, Bonnet his friend robbing him, and Spinello the devil opposite to him, In February he commenced taking medicines, which were either prescribed by himself or by the physicians whom he consulted; at the beginning of March he desired Tissot' s advice; but he was no longer able himself to describe his disorder, and his wife wrote Tissot the account of it. Tissot answered her immediately; but there could be no great utility in the directions of an absent physician in a disorder whose progress was rapid, and with an interim of near a month between the advice asked, and the directions received. His health decayed so fast, that M. Wichman, who attended him, thought a journey and change of air would now be the best remedy. Eutin, a place in the dutchy of Holstein, was fixed upon for his residence. Ingoing through Luneburgh on his way thither, M. Lentin, one of the physicians Jn whom he placed most confidence, was consulted; but Zimmermann, who, though so often uneasy on account of health, had, notwithstanding, the wisdom to take few medicines, and who did not like them, always had a crowd of objections to make against the b.est advice, and did nothing. Arrived at Eutin, an old acquaintance and his family lavished on him all the caresses of friendship. This reception highly pleased him, and he grew rather better. M. Hensler came from Kiel to see him, and gave him his advice, which was probably very good, but became useless, as it was very irregularly followed. At last, after a residence of three months, he desired to return to Hanover, where he entered his house with the same idea with which he had left it; he thought it plundered, and imagined himself totally ruined. Tissot wrote to intreat him to go to Carlsbad;but he was no longer capable of bearing the journey. Disgust, want of sleep, and weakness, increased rapidly; he took scarcely jftiy nourishment, either on account of insurmountable Aversion, or because it was painful to him; or perhaps, as M. Wichman believed, because he imagined he had not a farthing left. Intense application, the troubles of his mind, his pains, want of sleep, and of sufficient nourishment, had on him all the effects of time, and hastened old age: at sixty -six he was in a state of complete decrepitude, and his body was become a perfect skeleton. He clearly foresaw the issue of his disorder: and above six weeks before his death be said to jthis same physician, “I shall die slowly, but very pain fu)ly;” and fourteen hours before he expired, he said, “Leave me alone, I am dying.” He expired Oct. 7, 1795. Most of the works mentioned above have been translated into English, and that on solitude particularly has acquired a considerable degree of popularity.

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

In 1737 he made a visit to his own country; and after his return, his eyes failing, he retired from business, about 1746, to South Lambeth, with a second wife, by whom he hacj three or four children. His first wife was a handsome woman, of whom he had been very fond; there is a print of him and her; he had a son by her, for whom he bought a place in the six clerks office, and a daughter, ic? lib died a little before he retired to Lambeth. After his quitting business, madanne Pompadour prevailed upon him to copy, in enamel, a picture of the king of France, which she sent over on purpose. He died in March 1767. Thus far from Walpole’s “Anecdotes.”What follows is from another authority. “When Zincke was in the greatest practice, he was in a very bad state of health; and being well respected by a number of the most celebrated physicians, had their assistance and advice. All of them pronounced that he was in a decline; but about the method of cure, they were not unanimous. Some prescribed one drug, and some another; and one of them recommended breast-milk. The drugs he swallowed; but the breast-milk he did not much relish the thought of. Finding himself grow rather worse than better; and being told that air and exercise were the best remedy for his complaint, he tasked himself to walk through the Park, and up Constitution-bill, every morning before breakfast. Tnis did Hot relieve him; but from habit rather than hope, he still continued his perambulations. One summer morning, a handsome young woman, very meanly clad, with a child about six weeks old in her arms, asked his charity. He gave her some pence, and asked her how she came into her present distressed situation. Her history was short she had been a servant she became partial to a footman in the same house, and married him they were both turned away the man had no other resource but to enlist he became a soldier; was sent abroad she had never heard from him since; had been delivered of the child now at her breast, for whose support and her own she should beg till her infant was a few months older, when she should try to get some more reputable employment. `Her frankness,' said Zincke, `pleased me; her face pleased me; her complexion pleased me; I gave her my direction she came to me I took her infant into my house I did bring myself to take her milk; it recovered me; I made inquiry after her husband, and found he was killed in the first engagement he was in, at the pillaging a village in Germany. I married her; and a better wife no man ever had/ With this woman he lived near twenty years. The soldier’s child he educated for the army, and promised to get him a commission when he was twenty-one; but the boy died at fourteen. By Zincke she had two children, each, of them were well provided for; and one of them was a very few years since alive, and well situated in a northern province.”

, count de, founder, or restorer of the sect of the Moravian brethren, was descended from an ancient and noble family in Austria; but directly sprung from that Lutheran branch of it which flourished in Misnia. He was born in 1700, and even in his childhood, had formed a resolution of becoming a minister of the gospel, designing to collects small society of Believers, who should altogether employ themselves in exercises of devotion, under his direction. Accordingly in 1721, when he became of age, he purchased the estate and village of Bertholsdorf, near Zittavv, in Upper Lusatia. Some time before this, in 1717, one Christian David visited the small remains of the church of the United Brethren, who had formed a society for religious exercises in a small village in Moravia, but finding their situation a precarious one, and them desirous of some more secure settlement, he recommended them to count Zinzendorf; and this scheme being perfectly compatible with the count’s original design, the Moravian emigrants were permitted to settle here.

The count himself superintended the rising settlement. The first houses were built near the hill called the Hutberg, i. e. the Watch-Hill; and hence the new settlement was called Herrnhut, i e. the Watch of the Lord; and the brethren were by some denominated (but very improperly) Herrnhutters. In 1724, more emigrants arrived at Herrrihut from Moravia, just as the brethren were beginning to lay the foundation of an edifice intended for the education of the children of the noblesse, for printing cheap Bibles, and preparing medicines for their neighbours, in which building was also to be a chapel.

From this period, in particular, when elders and wardens were chosen, and a union established between the brethren from Moravia, both among themselves, and with their Lutheran and Calvinistic brethren, the Moravian writers date the renewal of the “Unity of the Brethren.” The whole congregation was divided into classes, called choirs, and one of their own sex and station in life appointed to have the special care of each choir under the inspection of the elders. The ministers were appointed by lot, according to the apostolic practice, which they have continued ever since. They have adopted also other primitive practices, as the foot-washing, the kiss of charity, and the celebration of the agapæ, or love feasts. All matrimonial contracts were subject to the direction and approbation of the elders. Their worship is directed principally to Jesus Christ; and, in their religious services^ they admit of instrumental as well as vocal mtisic.

The Moravians retain the discipline of their ancient church, and make use of episcopal ordination, which has been handed down to them, in a direct line of succession for more than 300 years. In their doctrines they adhere to the confession of Augsburgh, which was drawn up by Melancthon, at the desire of the protestant princes then assembled in that city, and by them presented to the die( of the empire, in 1530. In 1732, count Zinzendorf determining to devote h is whole time to the benefit of the brethren, and to the great work of preaching the gospel among the heathens, resigned his situation as one of the council of regency at Dresden. He had been appointed in 1727, one of the wardens of the congregation. These wardens, where necessary, were to patronize the congregation, and to have an eye to the maintenance of good order and discipline. To them, and to the elders in conjunction, the direction of the congregation, both internally and externally, was committed. This office he resigned in 1730, but upon the urgent entreaties of the congregation, resumed it in 1733. He entered into holy orders in 1734, at Tubingen, in the duchy of Wirtemberg; and in 1737, he received episcopal ordination, on which occasion he received a letter of congratulation from Dr. Potter, archbishop of Canterbury, and from this time we always find him called the Ordinary of the brethren. In 1741, he laid aside his episcopal function, as he believed it would be prejudicial to his intended labours in Pennsylvania, where he purposed to appear merely as a Lutheran divine.

The count was so zealous and indefatigable in the extension of his sect, that he travelled over all Europe, and was twice in America, in consequence of which numerous settlements of the Moravians were formed, and missionaries sent to all parts of the world. In the mean time the brethren had to encounter much serious opposition. From the cbuht’s writings, it was attempted to be proved that he had advanced the most pernicious notions, and recommended the most abominable practices; and with respect to the brethren at large, the language of their devotions was said to be licentious and obscerie; and it was added, that no examples could be found of a fanaticism more extravagant, and a mysticism more gross and scandalous, than those of the Herrnhutters.

These accusations were first circulated in a pamphlet, published in 1753, entitled “A narrative of the rise and progress of the Herrnhutters, with a short account of their doctrines, c.” by Henry Rimius, Aulic counsellor- to his late majesty the king of Prussia. The representations of this writer were confided in, and the character of the brethren was exhibited in the most odious colours. Bishops Lavington and Warburton, in particular, relying principally on the authority of Rimius, were distinguished as the most formidable of their antagonists. Bishop Lavington, in a pamphlet entitled “The Moravians compared and detected,” instituted a curious parallel between the doctrines and practices of the Moravians and those of the ancient heretics; and Dr. Warburton, in his “Doctrine of Grace,” wrote some very severe invectives against them. The count was at this time (1753) in England, and resided at an old mansion (called Lindsey house) which he had purchased at Chelsea. He was here witness to numerous libels against him. “To one of the first ministers of state,” says Mr. Cranz, “who urged the prosecution of a certain libeller, and promised him all his interest in having him punished, he gave his reasons in writing, why he neither could nor would prosecute him. A certain eminent divine^ who compared the brethren to all the ancient and modern heretics, and charged them with all their errors, though ever so opposite to each other, received from him a very moderate private answer.”

Some Moravian writers, however, while they effectually refuted the calumnies against the brethren as a community or sect, very candidly acknowledged that the extravagant expressions and practices of some individuals among them, were indeed indefensible. “It may not be improper to ob-> serve,” says Mr. LaTrobe, in the preface to his translation of Spangenberg’s Exposition of Christian doctrine, “that although the brethren have been very falsely traduced by their adversaries, and by misinformed people, who meant well, and that particularly the writings of the late count Zinzendorf have been used to prove, that the church, of which he was an eminent and the most distinguished minister, held the errors of the most fanatic, yea wicked heretics; and his writings have been, for this purpose, mutilated, falsely quoted, and translated; and, although the extravagant words and actions of individuals have been unjustly charged upon the whole body; yet it were t.o be wished that there had been no occasion given, at a certain period, to accuse the brethren of improprieties and extravagance in word or practice.” Again, speaking of count Zinzendorf, he says, " He commonly delivered two or three discourses in a day, either publicly or to his family, which was generally large; and what he then uttered, was attended with a striking effect upon those who heard him. He spoke in the strictest sense extempore; and according to the state of the times in which, and the persons to whom he spbke. These discourses were commonly taken -down as he uttered therri; and the love and admiration of his brethren were so great, that they urged the publication of these discourses. His avocations were such, that he did not spend time sufficient in the revision; some were not at all revised by him, and some very incorrectly and falsely printed. Hence doctrines, of which he never thought, were deduced from his writings, and some of his transient private opinions laid to the charge of the whole brethren’s church. 1 do not, and cannot, attempt to defend such publications, but relate the real state of the case.

"The count was so convinced of the injpropriety of the above proceedings, that he requested the reverend author of this exposition to extract all the accusations of his antagonists, and the adversaries of the brethren, and lay them before him. It was done; he answered all; and the charges, and his answers, were published in Germany, in the years 1751 and 1752. He finding positions in the writings under his name which he could not avow, declared in the public papers, that he could not acknowledge any books which had been published in his name, unless they were revised and corrected in a new edition by himself. He began this work in German; but the Lord took him to himself before he could get through many books.

“True it is, that at a certain time, particularly between 1747 and 1753, many of the brethren, in their public discourses, and in their hymns, which were published about that period, used expressions that were indefensible: the count himself laboured to correct both the theory and language; and he was successful^ and they are no more in use among the brethren. The brethren’s congregations do not take the writings of the count, or of any man, as their standard of doctrine; the Bible alone is their standard of truth, and they agree with the Augustan, or Augsburgh confession, as being conformable to it.” It is evident from this acknowledgment that the objectionable language of which their opponents accused them, was actually to be found in the writings attributed to Zinzendorf, and the indignation, therefore, which they excited was just Nor have they reason to regret the expression of that indignation, since it has produced a reformation which places the sect in a more unexceptionable light. “It is no more,” says Mr. Wilberforce, “than an act of justice explicitly to remark, that a body of Christians, which, from the peculiarly offensive grossnesses of language in use among them, had, not without reason, excited suspicions of the very worst nature, have since reclaimed their character, and have excelled all mankind in solid and unequivocal proofs of the love of Christ, and of the most ardent, and active, and patient zeal in his service. It is a zeal tempered with prudence, softened with meekness, soberly aiming at great ends by the gradual operation of well adapted means, supported by a courage which no danger can intimidate, and a quiet constancy which no hardships can exhaust.”

Count Zinzendorf died at Herrnhutt, May 9, 1760, and was interred in the bury ing-ground on the Hutberg. Mr. Cranz has given the affecting particulars of his death and funeral in his History of the Brethren, p. 488 502. The count was married, about 1722, to the countess Erdmuth Dorothea Reuss, who died on the 19th of June, 1756, beloved and revered by all as a “faithful and blessed nursing- mother of the church of the Brethren.” By her he had one son and three daughters. His son, count Christian Renatus of Zinzendorf, was educated at the university of Jena; in 1744 his father introduced him at Herrnhut as a co-elder of the single brethren: he wrote many poetical soliloquies and meditations; and died at Westminster, May 28, 1752. Of the three daughters, the eldest accompanied her father to America, and married the baron Johannes de Watteville, who, in 1743, was consecrated a co-bishop, at Gnadenfrey, in Silesia.'

, whose proper name was De Trocznow, was a native of Bohemia, and was educated at the Bohemian court, in the reign of Wenceslaus. He went into the army very young, signalized himself on several occasions, and lost an eye in battle; whence he was called Zisca, which signifies one-eyed. Almost all Bohemia retaining the sentiments, and being shocked at the death of John Huss, Zisca became their leader, and soon saw himself at the head of 40,000 men, determined to rescue their country from civil and ecclesiastical tyranny; and with these troops he gained several victories over the catholics. He built a town in an advantageous situation, and named it Tabor, from which circumstance the Hussites were also called Taborites. Zisca lost his other eye, by an arrow, at the siege of Rubi; but this did not prevent his continuing the war, and obtaining great victories, particularly that of Aussig, on the Elbe, when 9000 catholics were left dead on the spot. The emperor Sigismond^ alarmed by all this, privately offered Zisca very advantageous terms. Zisca accepted theD, and set out to meet Sigismond but died of the plague on his journey, in 1424, after having ordered, as is said, that his body should be left a prev to the birds and beasts, and that a drum should be made of his skin, at the sound of which, he assured his followers, the enemy would immediately fly. The Hussites, it is added, obeyed his command; and the newsof this injunction made so strong an impression on the German catholies, who were not well disciplined, that they actually fled in several battles, on hearing the drum made of John Zisca’s skin. The whole, however, is justly considered as an absurd fiction. Zisca has been ranked among the reformers, and certainly may be considered as the successor of Huss in the propagation of his opinions, but he was more of a general than a divine, and makes a better figure in belligerent history than in that of the church. He was by no means animated with that true spirit of Christianity which his amiable master Huss had discovered on all occasions. His fierce temper, says Gilpin, seems to have been modelled rather upon the Old Testament than the New; and the genius of that religion in a great degree to have taken hold of him, which in its animosities called down fire from heaven. His military abilities were equal to what any age has produced; and as such they are acknowledged by all historians; nor was the end which he proposed unworthy of his great actions. Utterly devoid both of avarice and ambition, he had no aim but to establish, upon the ruins of ecclesiastical tyranny, the civil and religious liberties of his country.

, a celebrated hypercritic, was born at Amphipolis, a city of Thrace, and lived about the year 27O B. C. He is supposed to have been of mean extraction. He was a disciple of Polycrates, the sophist, who is said to have been a critic of the same stamp, and particularly famous for an invective against the memory of Socrates. The disposition of Zoilus appeared very early, in expressions of general malignity, which he did not affect to conceal; and being one day asked why bespoke ill of every one, said, “It is because I am not able to do them ill.” This procured him the name of the rhetorical dog. While he was in Macedon he employed his time in writing, and reciting what he had written in the schools of the sophists. His subjects were the most approved authors, whom he chose to abuse on account of their reputation. He censured Xenophon for affectation, Plato for vulgar notions, and Socrates for incorrectness; Demosthenes, in his opinion, wanted fire, Aristotle subtlety, and Aristophanes humour; but he became most notorious for his attack on Homer, in a voluminous work which he entitled “The Censure of Homer,” in the title of which are these words “ Zoilus, the scourge of Homer, wrote this against that lover of fables.” Of this work a few quotations only remain, sufficient to show the petulance of his spirit. Of his death there are various accounts, but all seem to agree that it was a violent one. Those who are desirous of farther information respecting his history, will find it in Parnell’s Life of Zoilus, extracted from the best authorities, and enlivened with many just remarks oh the descendants of the tritic, who have inherited his name as well as his temper.

, an eminent German divine, was born at St. Gall, in Switzerland, August 5, 1730.- His father, a worthy practitioner of the law, withheld no expence in his education and, after the usual progress through the school of his native town, being designed for the church, he was sent first to Bremen, and thence to the university of Utrecht, where the divinity professors are said to have been in high repute. Zollikofer was not, however, says his biographer, one of those who adhere pertinaciously to every thing instilled into them in a lecture-room, and are incapable of advancing a stej> beyond the routine of opinions, to which, from custom or articles, the tutors themselves are bound to accede. He was obliged, indeed, to attend lectures, as he once mentioned to a friend, on a systematic theology, resting solely on “unproved formularies, sophisms, technical and scholastic terms of the compendiums at that time in general use, instead of a sound exposition of the Bible, in connection with a strict investigation of ecclesiastical history:” but his sermons and books of devotion did not receive the least taint from the theology into which he became thus initiated. “The little that I know,” said he, “I was obliged to teach myself chiefly after I was come to years of maturity; for I had but a miserable education.”

Leaving the university, he became first a preacher at Murten in the Pays de Vaud, whence he was translated to Moti stein, in the Grisons, and soon after was invited to Isenburg. Kone of these places enjoyed him long; for, at the age of eight-and-twenty, he was appointed to the office of preacher to the reformed church at Leipsic. This was a theatre worthy of his abilities; and his church was soon crowded with the chief people of the city, and the members of the university. His attention was not confined to the pulpit. Psalmody and prayer formed, in his estimation, an essential part of public worship; and his selection of hymns, in which the productions of the most esteemed modern poets of Germany Gellert, Cramer, and Klopstock, were not forgotten, appeared in 1766. He was twice married; but both marriages were childless. After having fulfilled the duties of his place till within a year of his decease, he formed the resolution of resigning his office; but, at the united request of his congregation, who acceded to his preaching a discourse only once a fortnight, he was still induced to remain in his situation. A short time only elapsed before he was called from them, after an illness extremely painful, which he bore with the patience of a wise man, and the resignation of a Christian. He died Jan. 22, 1788, aged fifty-eight. The whole of his numerous congregation, together with some hundred students of the university, attended His body t6 the grave on the 25th, with every token of unfeigned sorrow.

Zollikofer, from the time that he quitted the university, studied the best models of composition, and was particularly attached to Cicero. At the same time, no part of moral or political knowledge escaped hinij and to continual study and meditation on the scriptures, he added an intimate acquaintance with profane history. His social and domestic conduct corresponded with the doctrines he taught from the pulpit. Entirely free from affected gravity, he was easy of access to all. The poor and indigent beheld in him a father and a friend; and his bounty and his kindness were not confined within the limits of his own ohurch and his own sect; they were extended to all who stood in need of his assistance. Cheerfulness reigned in his heart; his conversation was animated and entertaining; and his raillery, in which he very rarely indulged, the mildest possible. Above all, he paid the strictest regard to veracity. “Whatever he said was true; every word he uttered might be relied on, as conveying the real sentiments of his heart, and never did he commend or approve from complaisance any thing that was contrary to the conviction of his mind, or that he saw could not be approved upon the strictest rules of morality.”

was an eminent philosopher, whose history is involved in much obscurity, nor is it certain whether the name belongs to one or many. Some have maintained that there was but one Zoroaster, and that he was a Persian. Others have said that there were six eminent founders of philosophy of th'is name. Ham, the son of Noah, Moses, Osiris, Mithras, and others, both gods and men, have by different writers been asserted to have been the same with Zoroaster. Many different opinions have also been advanced, concerning the time in which he flourished. Aristotle and Pliny fix his date at so remote a period as 6000 years before the death of Plato; Hermippus says that he lived 5000 years before the Trojan war: idle tales, which are, doubtless, to be classed with the report of the Chaldeans concerning the antiquity of their astronomical observations. According to Laertius, he flourished 600 years before the Trojan war; according to Suidas, 500. In the midst of so much uncertainty, the probability may be, that there was a Zoroaster, a Perso- Median, who flourished about the time of Darius Hystaspes, and that besides him there was another Zoroaster, who lived in a much more remote period among the Babylonians, and taught them astronomy. The Greek and Arabian writers are agreed concerning the existence of the Persian Zoroaster; and the ancients unanimously ascribe to a philosopher, whom they call Zoroaster, the origin of the Chaldean astronomy, which is certainly of much earlier date than the time of Hystaspes: it seems, therefore, necessary to suppose a Chaldean Zoroaster distinct from the Persian. Concerning this Zoroaster, however, nothing more is known than that he flourished towards the beginning of the Babylonish empire, and was the father of the Chaldean astrology and magic, which was probably nothing more than the performance of certain religious ceremonies, by means of which good daemons were supposed to be prevailed upon to communicate supernatural properties and powers to herbs, stones, and other natural bodies, or to afford assistance, in other miraculous ways, to those who invoked them. In this art the kings of Chaldea and Persia were instructed, as one of the most useful instruments of government, among a people, whose ignorance and credulity rendered them proper subjects of imposture. The Chaldean magic was then a very different thing from a knowledge of the real properties of bodies; and it cannot be inferred, either from their magical or astrological arts, that the Chaldeans were eminent masters in any branch of natural science. All the writings which have been ascribed to the Chaldean Zoroaster, are unquestionably spurious.

As to the other Zoroaster, called Zardusht, who revived philosophy among the Persians, he appears to have lived at a much later period than the former. It is probable that Zardusht was of Persian extraction, and was born in Media, What the Arabian writers report concerning his having been early instructed by the Jews, seems to be a fiction invented to obtain credit among the Jews and Christians, to the doctrines which they professed to have received from him. It is not, however, improbable, that he might have learned some things from the Israelites residing in Babylon, which might be of use to him in executing his design of correcting the doctrine of the Persian Magi, though it may not be easy to specify the particulars.

Several miracles are ascribed to Zoroaster, such as an art ful impostor would naturally attempt, and would not perhaps find it difficult to perform. Having by these and other artifices established his credit, it is related that he undertook the revival and improvement of the religion of the ancient Magi, which had long before this time prevailed in Media and Persia, but which had been almost entirely supplanted by the worship of the stars, to which, the Persians, with their king Darius, were addicted. Much is also said by the Arabian writers, concerning the learning which Zoroaster acquired from the Indian Brachmans; concerning the influence which he obtained with Darius, and the success with which he propagated his system; and lastly, concerning his assassination, by Argaspis, king of the Eastern Scythia, at the siege of Bactria. But the silence of the Greeks, who were at this time well acquainted with the affairs of Persia, and after Alexander’s conquests must have become possessed of many Persian records, is a circumstance which casts a cloud of suspicion over these relations. Thus much, however, may be admitted as pro^­bable; that there was in Persia, in the time of Darius Hystaspes, a reformer, who, assuming the ancient name of Zoroaster, brought back the Persians from the worship of the stars, to their ancient worship of fire, with some innovations both in doctrine and ceremonies, and he might be acquainted with astronomy, medicine, and other branches of learning. This Lucian seems to confirm; and according to modern travellers, there is still, in the province of Carmania, a sect, who adhere to the doctrines of Zoroaster, and worship fire according to the institutions of the ancient Magi.

To Zardusht, or the Persian Zoroaster, many writings are ascribed. One of these, called the Zend, is said to be still remaining among the followers of Zoroaster, and is esteemed of sacred authority. It is written in the Persian language, and consists of two parts, one of which contains their forms of devotion and order of ceremonies; the other, the precepts of religion and morality. A portion of this book, or of a compendium of it, called the Sadder, is read to the people, on every sacred day, by their priests. There is, however, much reason to question, whether this book be of such ancient date as the time of Zoroaster: probably, it was written about the time when many Jews and Christians resided among the Persians, i. e. about the fourth or fifth century. Many other works have been attributed to Zoroaster, but they are all lost, and most of them were probably forgeries. Fragments of a work entitled “The Oracles” of Zoroaster are still extant. A small collection of them, consisting of only sixty verses, was published by Pletho, at Paris, 1538 and 1539, and at Amst. 1689. Patrizi afterwards made a much larger collection, containing 328 verses, with the commentaries of the Platonic philosophers. Several other editions of these verses have been published, and much pains has been taken by various writers to explain them. Stanley has subjoined to his account of “The Lives of Philosophers” a correct translation of them. They are quoted, with the highest respect, by all philosophers of the Alexandrian school, as genuine remains of Chaldean wisdom. But they abound so much in the ideas and language peculiar to that school, that it is probable they were written by some Platonist, about the beginning of the second century.

Hyde, Prideaux, and others, mention ancient books of Zoroaster, which are at this day extant among the Gheuri and other professors of the Zoroastriau superstition, and made use of in their sacred worship, copies from which have been brought over to England and France. A catalogue of these and other Persian Mss. lodged in the library of the king of France, was published by M. Anquetil du Perron, in his travels, and is copied in the Journal de Savans for July 1762. But these books, written partly in the Zendic or sacred, and partly in the vulgar Persian language, are, for the most part, a narrative of miracles and revelations, by which Zoroaster is said to have established his religion, or a collection of precepts for religious ceremonies. Some of them indeed treat of fundamental doctrines of theology, taught among the worshippers of fire: but it is probable, from the tenets contained in these books, many of which seem to have been borrowed from the Jews and Mahometans, from the entire silence of Greek authors who wrote after the time of Alexander concerning these books, and from other considerations, that they were writte-n at a later period, for the purpose of appeasing the resentment of their Mahometan persecutors.

, an ancient historian, who lived at the end of the fourth, and the beginning of the fifth, century, was a man of quality and place, having the title of count, and being advocate of the treasury. There are extant six books of history, in the first of which he runs over the Roman affairs in a very succinct and general manner, from Augustus to Dioclesian: the other five books are written more largely, especially when he comes to the time of Theodosius the Great, and of his children Arcadius and Honorius, with whom he was contemporary. Of the sixth book we have only the beginning, the rest being lost. Zosimus drew his narrative from historians now lost, viz. Dexippus, Eunapius, and Olympiodorus. His style is far superior to that of the writers of the age in which he lived, and he is an historian of authority for his account of the changes introduced by Constantine and Theodosius in the empire. He contains, however, many superstitious accounts, and being a zealous pagan, he must be read with caution as to what relates to the Christian princes. Photius says, “that he barks like a dog at those of the Christian religion:” and few Christian authors till Leunclavius, who translated his history into Latin, made any apology for him. “To say the truth,” says La Mothe le Vayer, “although this learned German defends him very pertinently in many things, shewing how wrong it would be to expect from a Pagan historian, like Zosimus, other sentiments than those he professed; or that he should refrain from discovering the vices of the first Christian emperors, since he has not concealed their virtues; yet it cannot be denied, that in very many places he has shewn more animosity than the laws of history permit. 7 ' Some have said that his history is a perpetual lampoon on the plausible appearances of great actions. The six books of his” History" have been published, with the Latin version of Leunclavius, at Frankfort, 1590, with other minor historians of Rome, in folio; at Oxford, 1679, in 8vo, and at Ciza the same year, under the care of Cellarius, in 8vo. This was dedicated to Graevius, and reprinted at Jena, 1714, in 8vo. But the best edition is that of Jo. Frid. Reitemeier, Gr. and Lat. with Heyne’s notes, published at Leipsic in 1784, 8vo. The prolegomena are particularly valuable.

, an eminent civilian, descended from an ancient and noble family of that name, was born at Ansley in Wiltshire about 15^0. He was educated, on the foundation, at Winchester school, whence in 1607 he was elected to New college, Oxford, and chosen fellow in 1609. Having studied the civil law, he took his bachelor’s degree in that faculty, in June 1614, and in Jan. 1618 was admitted at Doctors’ Commons, where he became an eminent advocate. In April 1619, he commenced LL. D. and upon the death of Dr. John Budden in June 1620, was appointed regius professor of law at Oxford. At the latter end of king James’s reign, he was chosen more than once member of parliament for Hythe in Kent by the interest of Edward lord Zouche, warden of the cinque ports, to whom he was nearly related. In 1625 he was appointed principal of St. Alban’s hall, being then chancellor of the diocese of Oxford, and afterwards made judge of the high court of admiralty by king Charles I. He had a considerable hand in drawing up the reasons of the university of Oxford against the solemn league and covenant and negative oath in 1647, having contributed the law part. Yet he chose to submit to the parliamentary visitors the following year, and therefore held his principal and professorship during the usurpation. In 1653, he was appointed by Cromwell to be one of the delegates in the famous cause of Don Pantaleon Sa, brother to the Portuguese ambassador, who in November of that year, had killed a gentleman in the New Exchange within the liberties of Westminster, for which he was afterwards executed. On this occasion Dr. Zouche wrote his celebrated piece, entitled “Solutio quaestionis de legati delinquents judice competente,” 1657, 8vo. In this he maintained, with Grotius, the general impunity of ambassadors, but denied the application of that rule to the case of Don Pantaleon.

On the death of Dr. Gerard Langbaine, he offered himself as a candidate against Dr. Wallis for the place of custos archivorum to the university, but was unsuccessful. (See Wallis.) On the restoration he was reinstated in his post of judge of the admiralty, and was made one of the commissioners for regulating the university, but did not survive that year, dying at his apartments in Doctors’ Commons, March 1, 1660. He was interred at Fulham church, Middlesex, near the grave of his eldest daughter, sometime the wife of William Powell, alias Huison, esq. Wood says, “He was an exact artist, a subtle logician, expert historian, and for the knowledge in the practice of the civil law, the chief person of his time, as his works, much esteemed beyond, the seas (where several of them are reprinted) partly testify. He was so well versed in the statutes of the university, and controversies between the members thereof and the city, that none after (Bryan) Twine’s death went beyond him. As his birth was noble, so was his behaviour and discourse; and as he was personable and handsome, so he was naturally sweet, pleasing, and affable.”

His works were, 1. “The Dove, or certain passages of Cosmography,” Lond. 1613, 8vo, a poem composed in his youth but he was no great favourite of the muses. 2. “Elementa jurisprudent, definitionibus, regulis, et sententiisselectioribus juris civilis illustrata,” Oxon. 1629, 8vo, 1636, 4to, and reprinted both at Leyden and Amsterdam. 3. “Descriptio juris et judicii feudalis, secundum consuetudines Mediolanae et Normanniae, pro introductione ad jurisprudentiam Anglicanam,” Oxon. 1634, 1636, 8vo. 4. 4t Descriptio juris et judicii temporalis, secundum consuetudines feudales et Normannicos,“ibid. 1636, 4to. 5.” Descriptio juris et judicii ecclesiastici, secundum canones et consuetudines Anglicanas,“ibid. 1636, 4to. These two last were reprinted with Dr. Mockefs tract” De Politia Ecclesise Anglican*,“Lond. 1683, 8vo. 6.” Descriptiones juris et judicii sacri juris et judicii militaris, et juris et judicii maritimi,“Oxon* 1640, 4to, reprinted at Leyden and Amsterdam. 7.” Juris et judicii fecialis, sive juris inter gentes, &c. explicatio,“Oxon. 1650, 4to. 8.” Cases and questions resolved in civil law,“ibid. 1652, 8vo. 9.” Solutio questionis, &c.“already mentioned, Oxon. 1657, and Lond. 1717, 8vo. 10.” Eruditionis ingenuae specimina, scilicet artium, logicoe dialecticae,“&c. Oxon. 1657. 11.” Questionum juris civilis centuria, in decem classes distributa,“Oxon. 1660, 8vo, Lond. 1682, the third edition. After his death, Dr. Timothy Baldwin, fellow of All Souls, Oxford, published a posthumous work by Dr.Zouch, entitled” The Jurisdiction of the Admiralty asserted against sir Edward Coke’s Articuli Admiralitatis, in the 22d chapter of his jurisdiction of Courts,“Lond. 1663, 8vo. This went through several editions. There is also ascribed to Dr. Zouch an anonymous piece, entitled '” Specimen questionum juris civilis, cum designationeauthorum," Oxon. 1653, 4to.

, a learned divine, was born in 1737, at Sandal, neat* Wakefield, Yorkshire; and in 1757 removed from the school of the latter place to Trinity-college, Cambridge. In 1760, he was elected into one of lord Craven’s scholarships, along with Mr. Joah Bates, celebrated afterwards for his skill in music. The year following, Mr. Zouch took his degree of B. A. and was classed as the third wrangler. Having been chosen fellow of his college in 1763, he was appointed assistant-tutor, which office he discharged with extraordinary credit; though his assiduity so much impaired his health, that he was obliged to quit the university; on which his college presented him in 1770 to the rectory of Wycliffe in the North Riding of Yorkshire. In this country retirement he continued till 1793, performing the office of a parish priest with great diligence, and augmenting his knowledge of natural history. His botanical excursions, in a pleasant and romantic part of Yorkshire, contributed not a little to invigorate his constitution. In 1791, he was appointed deputy commissary of the archdeaconry of Richmond; and in 1793 was chaplain to the master of the rolls, and rector of Scrayingham. By the death of his elder brother, the rev. Henry Zouch, in 1795, he succeeded to an estate at Sandal, where he resided till his death. On the demise of Dr. Smith, the master of Trinity college, one of the most learned mathematicians of his age, he was requested by the vice-master and senior fellows to deliver a Latin funeral oration in honour of his memory, which is said to have been much admired for the classical elegance of its language. In 1798, Mr. Pitt intended to have appointed him to the mastership of Trinity; but this design was set aside in favour of the present bishop of Bristol. On April 9, 1805, Mr. Pitt gave him the second prebend in the church of Durham, and in the same year he took his degree of D.D. In 1808, the see of Carlisle was offered to Dr. Zouch; but, in consequence of his advanced age and retired habits, he thought proper to decline the acceptance. Besides some anonymous publications, he was the author of, 1. “The Crucifixion, a Seaton prize poem,” 1765, 4to. 2. “A Sermon preached at the primary visitation of William lord bishop of Chester, held at Richmond, in Yorkshire, August 21, 1789,” 4to. 3. “An Inquiry into the Prophetic Character of the Romans, as described in Daniel viii. 23 25.” 1792, 8vo. 4. “An Address to the Clergy of the Deaneries of Richmond, Catterick, and Boroughbridge,” 1792, 4to. 5. “A Discourse delivered to the Clergy of the Deaneries of Richmond, Catterick, and Boroughbridge, within the Diocese of Chester, at the visitation held June 20 and 25, 1793, and published at their request,” 4to. 6. “The good Schoolmaster, exemplified in the character of the rev. John Clarke, M. A. formerly fellow of Trinity college, Cambridge, and successively master of the Schools of Skipton, Beverley, and Wakefield,” 1798, 4to. 7. “An Attempt to illustrate some of the Prophecies of the Old and New Testament,” 1800, 12mo. 8. “A Sermon preached in the Cathedral Church of Durham, at the Assizes holden July 30, 1806,” 4to. 9. “Memoir of the Life and Writings of sir Philip Sidney,” 1808, 4to. 10. “Memoir of the Life of John Sudbury, D. D. Dean of Durham,” 1808, 4to.

Dr. Zouch was also the editor of, 1. “Love and Truth; in two modest and peaceable letters concerning the distempers of the present times. Written from a quiet and conformable citizen of London, to two busie and factious shopkeepers in Coventry; with notes, and a preface by the editor,” 1795, 8vo. This edition of a tract written by Isaac Walton, is dedicated to Mr. Henry Zouch. 2. “The Lives of John Donne, sir Henry Wotton, Mr. Richard Hooker, Mr. George Herbert, and Dr. Robert Sanderson; by Isaac Walton; with notes, and the Life of the Author,” 1796, 4to. Of this excellent work an octavo edition appeared in 1798.

In a volume entitled “Odes on Peace and War, written by many eminent and distinguished persons,” London, 1795, are three poems, one by Henry Zouch, B. A. Trinity college, and two by Thos. Zouch, B, A. fellow of the same college, and university scholar. Mr. Henry Zouch died at Sandal, June 17, 1795; he was the author of some valuable tracts on matters of police.

, a royal academician and an excellent artist, was born at Florence about 1710. In early life he studied as an historical painter, but afierwards confined his practice to the painting of landscape, with small figures, in which he acquired a very beautiful manner, both of composing and executing his pictures. It has been remarked, that among the figures which he introduced in his landscapes, he frequently represented one with a gourd bottle at his waist, as is often seen in Italy. This is said to have been done intentionally, as a sort of pun on his own name, Zucco being the Italian word for a gourd. He is supposed to have come to England about 1752. On his way, the war raging in Europe, he was seized on the territories of one of the belligerent states, as a suspicious person. He told them his name and profession, and offered to confirm the fact by painting a picture, which was agreed to; the materials were procured, the picture painted, and Zuccarelli released.

In England he met with much encourageme/it, and several of his pictures were engraved by Vivares, By the advice of some of his friends, he executed a collection of drawings, which he disposed of by auction. They were well received, and produced a handsome sum. About 1773 he returned to Florence, and for some time relinquished his pencil, and lived upon his fortune but part of that having been lost upon bad security, he again resumed his pencil, and was much employed by the English gentlemen who visited Italy. He died at Florence, at what time is not exactly known, but the event was confirmed to the Royal Academy in 1788. He was one of the original members, and consequently considered as one of the founders of the academy. The pictures of this artist have, in Mr. Edwards’s opinion, infinite merit, particularly those which he painted in the early part of his life, when resident at Venice. They have an evident superiority over those he painted in England. He made several etchings, particularly of figures, from the originals of Andrea del Sarto, which are marked with his name, " Zuccarelli delin. et fecit.

, an Italian painter, was born at St. Angelo in Vado, in the duchy of Urbino, in 1529;. and was initiated in his art by his father, who was an ordinary painter. At fourteen years of age he was carried to Home, and placed under Pietro Calabro, whose wife was so covetous, that she almost starved him, and forced him to look out for another master. However, he went to no other, but contented himself with contemplating Raphael’s works and the antique sculptures: he improved himself alsogreatly by the study of anatomy. He excelled chiefly in a florid invention, a genteel manner of design, and in the good disposition and teconomy of his pieces but was not so much admired for his colouring, which was generally unpleasant, and rather resembled the statues than the* life. He never worked out of Italy: Rome, Tivoli, Florence, Caparola, and Venice, were the places where he distinguished himself; but he left many pieces unfinished, being snatched away in his prime in 1566.

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

, a celebrated physician of Basil, was nephew, on the mother’s side, to John Oporinus, the famous printer. He studied at Lyons, Paris, and Padua; and afterwards taught Greek, morality, politics, and physic, at his native place. He died in 1588, aged 54. His principal work is, the “Theatrum Vitae humanae,” which had been begun by Conrad Lycosthenes, his father-in-law. Of this voluminous compilation there is a most splendid copy on vellum in the British Museum. Zwiriger’s family has produced many other illustrious men, and his descendants have distinguished themselves greatly in the sciences. James Zwinger, his son, who died in 1610, was also a skilful physician; he both enlarged and improved the “Theatrum Vitae humanse,” Leyden, 1656, 8 vols. folkr; and left other works. Theodore Zwinger, son of James, a learned protestant divine, married the daughter of Buxtorf the elder. He was pastor and physician when the city of Basil was afflicted with the plague in 1629. He wrote several works, and died in 1651, leaving a son, named John Zwinger, professor of Greek, and librarian at Basil, author of several works: he died in 1696. Theodore Zwinger, his son, professor of rhetoric, natural philosophy, and physic, at Basil, died in that city, 1724, leaving “Theatrum Botanicum,” Basil, 1690, folio, in German. “Fasciculus Dissertationum,” 1710, 4to and “Triga Dissertationum,” 1716, 4to, which are esteemed. John Rodolphus Zwinger, his brother, minister of several protestant churches, and professor of divinity, died 1708, leaving also some works.

, an able and zealous reformer of the church, who laid the foundation of a division from Rome in Switzerland, at the time that Luther did the same in Saxony, was born at Wildehausen in the county of Tockenburg (a distinct republic in alliance with the Switzers, or Helvetic body) in 1487. He was sent to school at Basil, early, and thence removed to Berne, where he learned the Greek and Hebrew tongues. He studied philosophy at Vienna, and divinity at Basil, where he was admitted doctor in 1505. He began to preach with good success in 1506, and was chosen minister of Glaris, a chief town in the canton of the same name, where he continued till 1516. Then he was invited to Zurich, to undertake the principal charge of that city, and to preach the word of God there, where his extensive learning and uncommon sagacity were accompanied with the most heroic intrepidity and resolution. From his early years he had been shocked at several of the superstitious practices of the church of Rome, and now began to explain the Scriptures to the people, and to censure, though with great prudence and moderation, the errors of a corrupt church. He might have no doubt been animated by the example and writings of Luther, afterwards; but it appears that even now, he entertained very extensive views of a general reformation, while Luther retained almost the whole system of popery, indulgences excepted.

In 1519 a Franciscan of Milan, being sent from Leo X. as general visitor of his order, came to publish indulgences at Zurich, and preached according to the usual manner; namely, “That the pope had granted an absolute pardon of sins to those who. purchased such indulgences with money, and that men might by this means deliver souls infallibly from purgatory.” Zuinglius declaimed powerfully not only against the preacher, but even against the indulgences, or at least the use that was made of them. Hugh, bishop of Constance, supposing that he was displeased only with th.e abuse of them, exhorted him to go on, aad promised him his patronage; but Zuinglius went farther, and solicited the bishop, and the pope’s legate in Switzerland, to favour the doctrine he was about to establish, and which he called evangelical truth. The bishop and the legate refusing to hearken to his proposals, he told them, that he would oppose the errors of the court of Rome, and propagate his own doctrines, in defiance of them; and thus continued to preach, from 1519 to 1523, not only against indulgences, but other articles of the catholic church.

Zuinglius made no less progress with the reformation in Switzerland than Luther did in Saxony, yet, though by four years preaching he had prepared the magistrates and people, and knew that they were disposed to cast off the doctrine and discipline of the church of Rome, and to receive his new opinions, he would not attempt to make any alterations in the external worship without the concurrence of the civil powers, and to that end caused an assembly to be called of the senate of Zurich in 1523, that the differences among- preachers in matters of religion might be composed. The senate, by their edict, invited all ecclesiastics of their canton, and gave the bishop of Constance notice of it, that he might either be present by himself or his deputies; and the assembly met at the day appointed. Here Zuinglius declared, “that the light of the gospel having been much obscured, and almost extiuguished by human traditions, several persons of late had endeavoured to restore it by preaching the word of God in its purity; that he himself was one of that number; and, though he had for five years past taught nothing but what was contained in holy scripture, yet he had been treated as a heretic and seducer; that it was for this reason he had desired to give an account of his doctrines before the senate of Zurich, and the bishop of Constance, or his deputies; and, that they might the more easily understand them, he had drawn them out into sixty-seven propositions.” The doctrine contained in these propositions may be reduced to the following articles: 1. “That the gospel is the only rule of faith.” 2. “That the church is the communion of saints.” 3. “That we ought to acknowledge no head of the church but Jesus Christ.” 4. “That all traditions are to be rejected.” 5. “That there is no other sacrifice but that of Jesus Christ.” 6. “That we have need of no other intercessor with God but Jesus Christ.” 7; “That all sorts of meat may be eaten at all times.” 8. 66 That the habits of monks partake of hypocrisy.“9.” That marriage is allowed to all the world, and no man obliged to make a vow of chastity and that priests are not at all debarred from the privilege of being married.“10.” That excommunication ought not to be inflicted by the bishop alone, but by the whole church and that only notorious offenders ought to be excommunicated.“11.” That the power which the pope and bishops assume to themselves, is errant pride, and hath no foundation in scripture.“12.” That none can forgive sins but God; and that confession of sins to a priest is only to beg his ghostly advice,“13,” That the scripture teaches no such place as purgatory.“14.” That the character which the sacraments are said to impress, is a modern invention.“15.” That the scripture acknowledges none for priests and bishops but such as preach the word of God."

He also offered to deliver his judgment respecting tithes, the revenues of the church, the condition of infants not baptised, and confirmation, if any person should be willing to dispute with him upon those points. John Faber, one of the three deputies whom the bishop of Constance had seait, and his chief vicar, answered, that he was not come to dispute about ceremonials and customs, which had for many ages been used in the church; nor did he think fit to debate about that affair then, but would refer it to the general council, which was to meet shortly, according to the constitution of the diet of Nuremberg. Zuinglius replied, “that they ought not to regard how long a thing has been or has not been in use, but to observe only, whether or not it be agreeable to truth, or the law of God, to which custom could not be opposed; and that there were learned men in the present assembly who could very well determine the matters in question, without referring them to a council, since even private Christians, enlightened by the spirit of God, could discern between those that did and did not^understand the Scripture.” The result of this conference was in favour of Zuinglius; for the senate ordained by an edict, “that he should go on to teach and preach the word of God, and the doctrine of the gospel, after the same manner that he had hitherto done; and that no pastors, either in the city or country, should teach any thing that could not be proved by the gospel, and should also abstain from accusations of heresy.”

After an edict so favourable, the doctrines of Zuinglius, which most of the pastors had before embraced, were preached under the name of Evangelical Truth in almost all the churches of the canton of Zurich; but, because the outward worship was contrary to their doctrines, images still remaining, and mass being celebrated, and they durst not abolish it without authority, Zuinglius, to complete his design, engaged the senate to call a new assembly in October the same year, when the bishops of Constance, Coine, and Basil, with the university of the latter city, and the twelve cantons of Switzerland, were invited to send their deputies. The senate assembled upon the day appointed, debates were held upon the points in question; and the result was an edict, by which the priests and monks were forbidden to make any public processions, to carry the holy sacrament, or to elevate it in the church, that it might be worshipped: reliques were taken out of the churches, and it was forbidden to play upon organs, to ring the bells, to bless palm-branches, salt, waters, or tapers, and to administer the supreme unction to the sick.

He appears to have aimed at establishing in his country, a method and form of divine worship, remarkable for its simplicity, and as far remote as could be from every thing that could have the smallest tendency to nourish a spirit of superstition. His design, says the translator of Mosheim, was certainly excellent; but in the execution of it, perhaps, he went too far, and consulted rather the dictates of reason than the real exigencies of human nature in its present state. The present union between soul and body, which operate together in the actions of moral agents, even in those that appear the most abstracted and refined, renders it necessary to consult the external senses, as well as the intellectual powers, in the institution of public worship. Besides, between a worship purely and philosophically rational, and a service grossly and palpably superstitious, there are many intermediate steps and circumstances, by which a rational service may be rendered more affecting and awakening without becoming superstitious. A noble edifice, a solemn music, a well-ordered set of external gestures, though they do not, in themselves, render our prayers more acceptable to the Deity, than if they were offered up without any of these circumstances, produce, nevertheless, a ^ood effect. They elevate the mind, they give it a composed and solemn frame, and thus contribute to the fervour of its devotion.

Besides his public preaching, Zuinglius wrote several booksin defence of his doctrines, which were published betwe/en 1522 and 1525 inclusive. In April 1525, he petitioned the senate of Zurich to abolish the mass and the adoration of the elements in the sacraments; and he easily obtained what he petitioned. He explained the eucharist, and prescribed a form in celebrating the Lord’s Supper, not only different from that of the church of Rome, but that of Luther also; and this engaged him in violent disputes and animosities even with his brethren, who were jointly labouring with him in the great work of reformation. In the mean time, the other Swiss cantons, disallowing the proceedings of that of Zurich, assembled at Lucern in 1524, and decreed, that none should change the doctrines which had been established for 1400 years; that they should not teach the doctrines of Zuinglius; and that the magistrates should take care of the execution of this decree. They sent deputies at the same time to the senate of Zurich, to complain of the innovations they had made in their canton; who returned a firm answer, and stood with resolution to what they had done. They then called an assembly at Baden in 1526, where the most ingenious and able advocates of each side had the liberty of saying what they could, in justification of their respective doctrines; and accordingly Oecolampadius maintained the part of Zuinglius, while Eckius was representative for the catholics. Other assemblies were afterwards called; but things, instead of appreaching; nearer to peace and good order, tended every day more and more to tumult and civil discord.

In 1531 a civil war began in Switzerland, between the five catholic cantons, and those of Zurich and Bern. The Zurichese were defeated in their own territories, with the loss of four hundred men. Zuinglius, who accompanied them, was killed in this action, Oct. 11, 1531, in the fortyfourth year of his age. He was not present in the office of a soldier at this engagement, but with a view to encourage and animate, by his counsels and exhortations, the valiant defenders of the protestant cause. But had he, as the popish writers assert, been actually engaged, we must refer for an apology to the manners of his country, all the inhabitants of which were trained to arms, and obliged to take the field when the defence of their country required it. In the time of Zuinglius this obligation was so universal, that neither the ministers of the gospt- 1, nor the professors of theology, were exempted from military service, On receiving the mortal wound, he was heard to utter, “Can this be considered as a calamity? Well! they can indeed kill the body, but they are not able to kill the soul.”

He was a man of acute parts and uncommon learning; and, in his character of Reformer, his zeal was tempered with a good degree of prudence. He held several notions peculiar to himself, and different from those of Luther, which produced no small misunderstanding between them; for Luther was riot at all well affected to Zuinglius; nor did Zuinglius pay much deference to Luther. Their principal disagreement, however, was concerning the manner in which the body and blood of Christ were present in the eucharist. Luther and his followers, though they had rejected the doctrine of the church of Rome with respect to the transubstantiation, were still of opinion, that the partakers of the Lord’s-supper received along with the bread and wjne, the real body and blood of Christ. Zuinglius’s doctrine, first maintained, although not so ably, by Carlostadt, who was Luther’s colleague, amounted to this, that the body and blood of Christ were not really present in the eucharist;' and that the bread and wine were no more than external signs or symbols, designed to excite in the minds of Christians the remembrance of the sufferings and death of the Saviour, and of the benefits which arise from it. This opinion was embraced by all the friends of the reformation in Switzerland, and by a considerable number of its votaries in Germany, who were termed Zuinglians, in contradistinction to the Lutherans.

Zuinglius also maintained doctrines respecting the divine decrees very opposite to those of some of his brethren, and had a system of his own concerning original sin, and contended for the salvation of infants dying without baptism, as well as of virtuous Pagans, both which points were rejected generally by the Protestants of his time. His works amounted to four volumes in folio, the greatest part of which were written in German, and afterwards were translated into Latin; they were printed at Basil in 1544, at Zurich in 1581, and at Basil again in 159.T. They consist of Commentaries on various books of the Old and New Testament, and of controversial or theological tracts. His commentaries are said to have great merit, and he was one of the first of the reformers who reduced theology to a certain kind of order in his book “Concerning true and false Religion,” which contains a brief exposition of the principal doctrines of Christianity. A few of his lesser pieces were translated into English, and published not many years after his death. His doctrines were afterwards spread into France, with some alterations by Calvin, Beza, and others, who were commonly called Calvinists; while the disciples of Zuinglius, who lived in Switzerland, retained the name of Zuinglians, or Sacramentarians.