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

, a French writer, Lorn in 1594 at Angouleme. When about seventeen years of age he went to Holland, where he composed a discourse on the state of the United Provinces. He accompanied also the duke d'Epernon to several places. In 1621 he was taken into the service of the cardinal de la Valette, with whom he spent eighteen months at Rome. Upon his return he retired to his estate at Balzac, where he remained for several years, till he was drawn thence by the hopes he had conceived of raising his fortune under cardinal llichelieu, who had formerly courted his friendship but being in a few years tired of the dependent state of a court- life, he went again to his country retirement all he obtained from the court was a pension of two thousand livres, with the addition of the titles of counsellor of state and historiographer of France, which he used to call magnificent trifles, He was much esteemed as a writer, especially for his letters, which went through several editions, but there were in his own time some critics who started up against him the chief of these was a young Feuillant, named Andre de St. Denis, who wrote a piece entitled, “The conformity of M. de Balzac’s eloquence, with that of the greatest men in the past and present times.” Although this piece was not printed, yet it was circulated very extensively, which made Balzac wish to have it publicly refuted, which was accordingly done by prior Ogier in 1627, with the assistance of Balzac himself. Father Goulu, general of the Feuillants, undertook the cause of brother Andre, and, under the title of Phyllarchus, wrote two volumes of letters against Balzac. Several other pieces were also written against him, but he did not think proper then to answer his adversaries he did, indeed, write an apology for himself, but this was never made public till it appeared witli some other pieces of his in 1645. The death of his chief adversary father Goulu having happened in 1629, put an end to all his disputes, and restored him to a state of tranquillity for father Andre de St. Denis, who had been the first aggressor, became heartily reconciled, and went to pay him a visit at Balzac.

Balzac had a very infirm constitution, insomuch that, when he was only 30 years of age, he used to say he was older than his father and that he was as much decayed as a ship after her third voyage to the Indies yet -he lived till he was 60, when he died Feb. 18, 1654, and was interred in the hospital of Notre Dame des Anges. He bequeathed twelve thousand livres to this hospital, and left uu estate of an hundred franks per annum, to be employed eveiy two years for a prize to him who, in the judgment of the French academy, should compose the best discourse ou some moral subject. The prize is a golden medal, representing on one side St. Lewis, and on the other a crown of laurel, with this motto, A P Immortality which is the device of the academy.

His works are, 1. “Letters,” 1624, 8vo. 2. “Le Prince,” 1631, 4to. 3. “Discours sur une tragedie, Herodes Infanticitla,” 1636. 4. “Discours politique sur l'etat des Provinces Unies,” Leyde, 1638. 5. “Oeuvres diverses,” 1644, 4to. 6. “Le Barbon,” 164S, 8vo. 7. “Cavminum libri iii. ejusdem epistolae selectse,” Paris, 1650. 8. “Socrate Chretienne, et autres oeuvres,” 1652. 9. “Lettres familiaires a M. Chapelain,” 1656. 10. “Entretiens,” 1657. 11. “Aristippe,” 1658, 4to. All the above works were collected, and printed at Paris in 1665, with a preface by abbe de Cassagnes.

Of all these, his Letters, of which there is an English translation, and which passed through many editions in French, contributed most to his reputation. During his time he was not only deemed the most eloquent, but the only eloquent writer, and Maynard, a contemporary poet, pronounced him not mortal who could speak like Balzac. It was not only by such praises that he was encouraged. It became a fashion to write to Balzac, in hopes of an answer, which was a treasure worth boasting of. “1 am,” says he, “the butt of all the aukward compliments in Christendom, not to speak of the genteel ones, which give me still more trouble. I am harassed I am teazed to death with encomiums from the four quarters of the globe yesterday, there lay upon the table tir'ty letters requiring answers and oh unconscionable! well turned, eloquent answers answers it to be shewn, copied, and printed. At this instant, I see before me not less than a hundred letters, which must all have their answers; I am in arrears to crowned heads.” As he seems, therefore, to have suspected the use that would be made of his letters, we cannot be surprised at the artificial and inflated style which frequently occurs, Voltaire, however, allows that he contributed to the harmony of French prose. But the magic which gave them for many years an unprecedented popu<­larity was dispelled probably in Boileau’s time, who asserts that what Balzac employed himself most upon, viz. writing letters, was what he least understood in them all, he adds, we meet with the two faults that are the most inconsistent with the epistolary style affectation, and bombast. Boileau, also, in his two letters to the marechal de Vivonne, very successfully imitates the style of Balzac and Voiture but Dr. Warton considers Balzac as much superior to Voiture, and adds, that although he was affectedly turgid, pompous, and bloated on all subjects and on all occasions alike, yet he was the first that gave form and harmony to the French prose.

, an eminent Butch, or perhaps rather Italian, painter, was born at Laeren, near Narden, in 1613. His name was Peter Van Laer, but in Italy they gave him the name of Bamboccio, on account, either of the uncommon shape of his body, the lower being one third longer than the upper, and his neck buried between his shoulders or, as Mr. Fuseli conjectures, he might acquire this name from the branch of painting in which he excelled for his usual subjects, the various sports of the populace, and transactions of vulgar life, harvest-homes, drolleries, hops, &c. are by the Italians comprised under the name of Bambocciate. Baldinucci seems to be of the same opinion, He had, however, an ample amends for the unseemliness of his limbs, in the superior beauties of a mind endowed xvith extensive powers of perception and imitation. He resided at Rome for sixteen years successively, and was held in the highest esteem by all ranks of men, as well as by those of his own profession, not only on account of his extraordinary abilities, but also for the amiable qualities of his mind.

He studied nature incessantly, observing with a curious exactness every effect of light on different objects, at different hours of the day and whatsoever incident afforded pleasure to his imagination, his memory for ever perfectly retained. His style of painting is sweet and true, and his touch delicate, with great transparency of colouring. His figures are always of a small size, well proportioned, and correctly designed and although his subjects are taken but from the lower kind of nature, such as plunderings, playing at bowls, inns, farriers shops, cattle, or conversations, yet whatever he painted was so excellently designed, so happily executed, and so highly finished, that his manner was adopted by many of the Italian painters of his time. His works are still universally admired, and he is justly ranked among the first class of the eminent masters. His hand was as quick as his imagination, so that he rarely made sketches or designs for any of his works he only marked the subject with a crayon on the canvas, and finished it without more delay. His memory was amazing for whatever^objects he saw, if he considered them with any intention to insert them in his compositions, the idea of them was so strongly impressed on his mind, that he could represent them with as much truth as if they were placed before his eyes. Sandrarfc observes, that although painters, who are accustomed to a small size, are frequently inaccurate in the disposition of the different parts of their subjects, seeming content if the whole appears natural, yet Bamboccio was as minutely exact in having his figures, trees, grounds, and distances, determined with the utmost precision and perspective truth, as the best masters usually are in pictures of the largest size; which is one circumstance that causes the eye to be so agreeably deluded by the paintings of Bamboccio.

The earnest requests of his family and friends induced him to leave Italy in 1639, after which he resided for some time at Amsterdam and Harlem, where his pieces were as much admired as in Italy, which makes us doubt Houbraken’s assertion that he became jealous of the popularity of Wouvermans. Bamboccio, however, was a bad manager, and often in distress, and in the latter part of his life he was afflicted with an asthmatic complaint, which became insupportable, and brought on fits of melancholy, during one of which he threw himself into a canal, and was drowned. This happened in 1675. His disciples are not known, except Andrew Both, who imitated his manner. His elder brother Roeland Van Laer, who died in 1640, aged only thirty, painted in the same style and manner as his brother; being not much-inferior-to him, either in colouring, pencil, or design. He travelled to Italy along with Peter, and they resided together at Rome for several years Roeland painting the same subjects, and following his profession with very great success. He left Rome to visit Genoa, perhaps with a view to avoid all competition with his brother; and it is highly probable that he would have made a considerable figure, if he had not been cut off in the prime of his years in that city.

, archbishop of York, and cardinal-priest of the Roman church, was born at Hilton near Appleby in Westmorland, and educated at Queen’s college in Oxford. Having taken holy orders, he became rector of Aller in the diocese of Bath and Wells. He enjoyed three prebends successively in the cathedral church of Salisbury that of South-Grantham in 14&5, that of Chardstock the same year, and that of Horton in 1486i He was elected provost of Queen’s college in 1495, and about the same time created doctor of laws. On September 28, 1503, he was admitted prebendary of Strenshall in the cathedral church of York, void by the consecration of Jeoffrey Blyth to the see of Litchfield and Coventry and on the 2 1st of December following, he was installed in the deanery of that church, in the room of the said Blyth. In 1505 he was made dean of Windsor, and the same year master of the rolls, and one of the king’s privy council. In 1507, he was advanced to the see of Durham, and received the temporalities the 1.7th of November. The next year he was translated to the archbishopric of York, and received the temporalities the 12th of December. Pits assures us, that Bambridge had been very intimate with Morton archbishop of Canterbury, and shared in that prelate’s sufferings during the usurpation of Richard III. after whose death, his affairs took a more prosperous turn, as he was appointed almoner to king Henry VII. and employed by that prince on several embassies to the emperor Maximilian, Charles VIII. king of France, and other potentates of Europe. But he distinguished himself chiefly by his embassy from king Henry VIII. to pope Julius II. who created him a cardinal, with the title of St. Praxede, in March 1511, and, eight days after, appointed him legate of the ecclesiastical army, which had been sent into the Ferrarese, and were then besieging the fort of Bastia. In return for which marks of honour, our new cardinal and legate prevailed with the king his master, to take part with his holiness against the king of France, nor was he less zealous in the service of that pontiff during his life, than in honouring and defending his memory after his death. There are extant in Rymer’s Fœdera, &c, two letters; one from cardinal Barnbridge, during his residence at Home, to king Henry VIII. concerning the pope’s bull giving him the title of mostChristian king and another from the cardinal de Sinigallia, to the king, acquainting his highness that he had delivered that instrument to cardinal Bamhridge. This prelate died at Rome July 14, 1514, being poisoned by one of his domestics, whom he had chastised, and was buried there in the English church of St. Thomas. Pits commends him for his extensive learning, and adds, that he wrote some treatises on subjects of civil law, but that biographer erroneously calls him Urswic, which was the name of his predecessor in the deanery of.Windsor.

, a native of Florence, and a Dominican of Fiesoli, and doctor of divinity, gained the esteem and friendship of Ferdinand I. grand duke of Tuscany, and was sent by him into France during the troubles, that he might give an account of them. Being at Lyons 1593, Peter Barnere, a young man of twentyseven, consulted him upon the horrid design of assassinating Henry IV. Banchi, zealous for France and the royal family, directly mentioned it to a lord of the court, pointed out the young man to him, and entreated him to ride off, with all possible speed, to acquaint the king with the danger which threatened him. The nobleman, going to Melun for that purpose, met Barriere, who had just entered the palace to perpetrate his crime. He was arrested, and being put to the torture, confessed all. The king, to reward Banchi, appointed him bishop of Angouleme, but he either resigned it 1608, in favour of Anthony de la Rochefoucauld, or declined it with the reserve of a moderate pension. He appears to have passed the rest of his life at Paris, in the convent of St. James; he was living in 1622, and was a great benefactor to that convent, among other things, by finishing the beautiful Salle des Artes at his own expence he was also very liberal to the convent at Fiesoli. His works are, “Histoire prodigieuse du Parricide de Barriere,” 1594, 8vo. “Apologie contre les Jug-emeus temeraires de ceux, qui out pense conserver la Religion Catholiqtie en faisant assassiuer les tres Chretiens Rois de France,” Paris, 1596, 8vo. “Le Rosaire spirituel de la sacree Vierge Marie,” &c. Paris, 1610, 12mo. Pere Banchi justifies himself in this work againsl some historians who had accused him of abusing Peter Barriere’s confession. He never confessed that young man, and the detestable project was only discovered to him by way of consultation.

, a Swedish lawyer, was born at Norcopin, and was professor of civil law in the university of Franeker for fifteen years, a place conferred upon him on account of his high reputation when a scholar. He died Oct. 13, 1662. In 1649 he published at Franeker a work, “De tyrannide papae in reges et principes Christianos,” and seven years after, “Roma triumphans, seu inauguratio Innocentii X.” also some writings, “de Bancse ruptoribus,” “de Duellis,” “de conciliis et consiliariis principum” but his most celebrated work was an edition of the Taxes of the Roman Chancery, on the sums paid for absolution for crimes, even of the most atrocious kind. It was published at Franeker in 1651, in 8vo, after he had consulted the most ancient copies, printed or manuscript, and by comparing them word for word, supplied by means of one what was wanting in others. He made use of the edition of Cologne in 1523, of that of Wittembergin 1538, of that of Venice in 1584, and of a manuscript, which had been communicated to him by John Baptista Sibon, a Bernardine monk, and reader in the college of Rome. By this means he has made his edition somewhat larger than all that had been published before, and he has added notes, in which he explains a great many terms, which are difficult to be understood it is a kind of glossary. He has likewise joined to it a small Italian tract, which contains the lax which was made use of under pope Innocent X. and he has explained the value of the money as it was at that time. It is almost unnecessary to add, that this work was soon added to the list of prohibited books.

, archbishop of Canterbury in, the reign of king James I. the son of John Bancroft, gentleman, and Mary daughter of Mr. John Curvvyn, brother of Dr. Hugh Curvvyn, archbishop of Dublin, was born at Farnworth in Lancashire, in September 1544. After being taught grammar, he became a student of Christ college, Cambridge, where, in 1566-7, he took the degree of B. A. and thence he removed to Jesus’ college, where, in 1570, he commenced M. A. Soon after, he was made chaplain to Dr. Cox, bishop of Ely, who, in 1575, gave him the rectory of Teversham in Cambridgeshire. The year following he was licensed one of the university preachers, and in 1580 was admitted B. D. September 14th, 1584, he was instituted to the rectory of St. Andrew, Holborn, at the presentation of the executors of Henry earl of Southampton. In 1585 he commenced D. D. and the same year was made treasurer of St. Paul’s cathedral in London. The year following he became rector of Cottingham in Northamptonshire, at the presentation of sir Christopher Hatton, lord chancellor, whose chaplain he then was. Feb. 25th, 1589, he was made a prebendary of St. Paul’s, in 1592 advanced to the same dignity in the collegiate church of Westminster, and in 1594 promoted to a stall in the cathedral of Canterbury. Not long before, he had distinguished his zeal for the church of England by a learned and argumentative sermon against the ambition of the Puritans, preached at St. Paul’s cross. In 1597, Dr. Bancroft, being then chaplain to the archbishop of Canterbury, Whitgift, was advanced to the see of London, in the room of Dr. Richard Fletcher, and consecrated at Lambeth the 8th of May. From this time he had, in effect, the archiepiscopal power: for the archbishop, being declined in years, and unfit for business, committed the sole management of ecclesiastical affairs to bishop Bancroft. Soon after his being made bishop, he expended one thousand marks in the repair of his house in London. In 1600, he, with others, was sent by queen Elizabeth to Embden, to put an end to a difference between the English and Danes but the embassy had no effect. This prelate interposed in the disputes between the secular priests and the Jesuits, and furnished some of the former with materials to write against their adversaries. In the beginning of king James’s reign^ he was present at the conference held at Hampton court, between the bishops and the Presbyterian ministers. The same year, 1603, he was appointed one of the commissioners for regulating the affairs of the church, and for perusing and suppressing books, printed in England, or brought into the realm without public authority. A convocation being summoned to meet, March 20, 1603-4, and archbishop Whitgift dying in the mean time, Bancroft was. by the king’s writ, appointed president of that assembly. October 9tb, 1604, he was nominated to succeed the archbishop in that high dignity, to which he was elected by the dean and chapter, Nov. 17, and confirmedin Lambeth chapel, Dec. 10. Sept. 5, 1605, he was sworn one of his majesty’s most honourable privy council. This year, in Michaelmas term, he exhibited certain articles, to the lords of the council, against the judges. This was a complaint of encroachment, and a contest for jurisdiction between the temporal and ecclesiastical judges, and as Collier has well observed, ought to be decided by neither side but the decision was against him. In 1608 he was elected chancellor of the university of Oxford, in the room of the earl of Dorset. In ] 6 10 thisarchbishop offered to the parliament a project for the better providing a maintenance for the clergy, but without success. One of our historians pretends, that archbishop Bancroft set on foot the building a college near Chelsea, for the reception of students, who should answer all Popish and other controversial writings against the church of England. This prelate died Nov. 2, 1610, of the stone, in his palace at Lambeth. By his will he ordered his body to be interred in the chancel of Lambeth church, and besides other legacies, left all the books in his library to the archbishops his successors for ever. He was a rigid disciplinarian, a learned controversialist, an excellent preacher, a great statesman, and a vigilant governor of the church, and filled the see of Canterbury with great reputation but as he was most rigid in his treatment of the Puritans, it is not surprising that the nonconformist writers and their successors have spoken of him with much severity; but whatever may be thought of his general temper and character, his abilities appear to have been very considerable. In his famous sermon against the Puritans, there is a clearness, freedom, and manliness of style, which shew him to have been a great master of composition. It was printed with a, tract of his, entitled “Survey of the pretended Holy Discipline.” He wrote also another tract, entitled “Dangerous Positions,” and there is extant, in the Advocates’ library at Edinburgh, an original letter from him to king James I. containing an express vindication of pluralities. This letter has been printed by sir David Dalrymple, in the first volume of his Memorials. Dr. Bancroft is also the person meant as the chief overseer of the last translation of the Bible, in that paragraph of the preface to it beginning with “But it is high time to leave them,” &c. towards the end.

, bishop of Oxford in the reigo of king Charles I. and nephew of the preceding Dr. Richard Bancroft, archbishop of Canterbury, was born at Asteli, or Estwell, a small village between Whitney and Burford ^n Oxfordshire, and admitted a student of Christ-church in Oxford in 1592, being then about eighteen years of age. Having taken the degrees in arts, and entered into holy orders, he became a preacher tur some years in and near Oxford. In 1609, being newly admitted to proceed in divinity, he was, through the interest and endeavours of his uncle, elected head of University college, in which station he continued above twenty years, and was at great pains and expence in recovering and settling the ancient lands belonging to that foundation. In 1632 he was advanced to the see of Oxford, upon the translation of Dr. Corbet to that of Norwich, and consecrated about the 6th of June. This prelate died in 1640, and was buried at Cuddesden in Oxfordshire, the 12th of February, leaving behind him, among the Puritans or Presbyterians, the character of a corrupt, unpreaching, Popish prelate. This bishop Bancroft built a house or pakce, for the residence of his successors, at Cuddesden. Before his time the bishops of Oxford had no house left belonging to their see, either in city or country, but dwelt at their parsonage-houses, which they held in commendam; though Dr. John Bridges, who had no commendam in his diocese, lived for the most part in hired houses in the city. For though, at the foundation of the bishopric of Oxford, in trie abbey of Osney, Gloucester college was appointed for the bishop’s palace, yet, when that foundation was inspected into by king Edward VI. that place was left out of the charter, as being then designed for another use. So that afterwards the bishops of Oxford had no settled house or palace, till Bancroft came to the see, who, at the instigation of archbishop Laud, resolved to build-one*. In the first place, therefore, in order to improve the slender revenues of the bishopric, he suffered the lease of the impropriate parsonage of Cuddesden aforesaid, live miles distant from Oxford (which belonged to the bishop in right of his see) to run out, without any more renewing. In the mean time, the vicarage of his own donation becoming vacant, he procured himself to be legally instituted and inducted thereunto and afterwards, through the archbishop’s favour, obtained an annexation of it to the episcopal see, the design of the iinpropriatioa'i falling in still going on. Soon after, with the help of a large quantity of timber from the forest of Shotover, given him by the king, he began to build a fine palace, which, with a chapel in it, was completely finished in 1634. The summer after, it was visited out of curiosity by archbishop Laud, who speaks of it in his Diary thus " September the second, an. 1635, I was in attendance with the king at Woodstock, and went thence to Cudsden, to see the house which Dr John Bancroft, then lord bishop of Oxford, had there built, to be a house for the bishops of that see for ever he having built that house at my persuasion/' But this house, which cost 3500l. proved almost as shortlived as the founder for, in the latter end of 1644, it was burnt down by colonel William Legg, then governor of the garrison of Oxford, to prevent its being garrisoned by the parliament forces. It lay in ruins till 1679, when Dr. John Fell, bishop of Oxford, at his own expence, and with the help of timber laid in for that purpose by Dr. William Paul, one of his predecessors, rebuilt it upon the old foundation, with a chapel in it, as at first.

, a celebrated Italian novelist, was born at Castelnuovo in the district of Tortona, where he remained for some years, under the patronage of his uncle Vincenzio Bandello, general of the order, of Do^ minicans, with whom he also travelled through various parts of Italy, France, Spain, and Germany, where it was the 4uty of the general to inspect the convents of his order. After the death of his uncle, at the convent of Altomonte in Calabria, in 1506, Bandello passed a considerable part of his time at the court of Milan, where he had the honour of instructing the celebrated Lucretia Gonzaga, in whose praise he wrote an Italian, poem, which still remains, and where he formed an intimacy with many eminent persons of the age, as appears from the dedicatory epistles prefixed to his novels. Having early enrolled himself in the order of Dominicans, in a fraternity at Milan, he entered deeply into the ecclesiastical and political affairs of the times, and after various vicissitudes of fortune, obtained at length, in 1550, the bishopric of Agen in France, conferred on him by Henry II. but being fond of the poets, ancient and modern, addicted himself much more to the belles lettres than to the government of his diocese. He filled the episcopal chair of Agen for several years, and died about 1561, at the chateau de Bazens, the country seat of the bishops of Agen. His monument was erected in the church of the Jacobins du port St. Marie. He had resigned the bishopric of Agen in 1555, when his successor, Janus Fregosa, son of the unhappy Cæsar, assassinated by the marquis de Guast, had attained his twenty-seventh year. Henry II. who had a regard for the Fregosas, Jiad agreed with the pope, on the death of the cardinal de Lorraine, bishop of Agen, to give, by interim, this bishopric to Bandello, till Janus should arrive at the age required. Bandello consented to this arrangement, and gave up the see according to promise. The best edition of his novels is that of Lucca, 1554, 3 vols. 4to, to which belongs a fourth volume, printed at Lyons in 1573, 8vo. This edition is scarce and dear. Those of Milan, 1560, 3 vols. 8vo, and of Venice, 1566, 3 vols. 4to, are curtailed and little esteemed but that of London, 1740, 4 vols. 4to, is conformable to the first. Boaisteau and Belleforest translated a part of them into French, Lyons, 1616, et seq. 7 vols. 16mo. It is entirely without reason that some have pretended that these novels are not by him, but were composed by a certain John Bandello, a Lucchese, since the author declares himself to be of Lombardy, and even marks Castelnuovo as the place of his nativity. On the other hand, Joseph Scaliger, his contemporary and his friend, who calls him Bandellus Insuber,. positively asserts that he composed his novels at Agen. Fontanini is likewise mistaken in making him the author of a Latin translation of the history of Hegesippus, which he confounds with the novel of Boccace entitled Sito e Gisippo, which Bandello did really translate into Latin. We have by him likewise the collection of poems beforementioned, entitled “Canti xi. composti del Bandello, ilelle lodi della signora Lucrezia Gonzaga,” &c. printed at Agen in 1545, 8vo, which is excessively scarce, and sought after by the curious.

“Whilst he was engaged,” says Mr. Roscoe, “in frequent journeys and public transactions, he omitted no op. portunity of collecting historical anecdotes and narratives of extraordinary events, as materials for his novels, which were composed at different periods of his life, as occasion and inclination concurred. These tales bear the peculiar character which in general distinguishes the literary productions of the ecclesiastics of that age from those of the laity, and are. no less remarkable for the indecency of the incidents than for the natural simplicity with which they are related. In point of composition, these novels, although much inferior to those of Boccaccio, are written with a degree of vivacity and nature, which seldom fails to interest the reader, and which, combined with the singularity of the incidents, will probably secure a durable, although not a very honourable reputation, to the author.” It may be added, that Shakspeare took his Romeo and Juliet from one of his novels, which was acpordingly translated in the “Shakspeare illustrated.”

, an eminent sculptor, was born at Florence in 1487, and died in 1559. He was intended by his father, who was a goldsmith, to follow that business, but discovered an early and much higher relish for sculpture. It is said that at the age of nine he made a statue of snow, which was remarkable for justness of proportion. He attempted also painting, but was deficient in colouring, and wanted perseverance to acquire execution and handling. He was, however, a great designer, and his compositions of the Martyrdom of St, Lawrence, and the Massacre of the Innocents, shew exuberance of fancy. In the former, the draped figures that compose the upper rank of spectators, are equally admirable for simplicity and elegance, whilst the saint' himself, and those around him, exhibit little more than clumsiness, or barefaced contrast. The Massacre of the Innocents, with a display of anatomic prowess, presents a scene, not of terror and pity, but loathsomeness and horror. As a sculptor, however, he was esteemed the greatest after Michael Angelo. Among his most admired "works is the copy of the Laocoon, in the garden of the Medicis at Florence. This was intended by pope Clement VII. as a present to Francis I. but when he saw it, he was so much pleased that he could not part with it, and in its stead sent a present of antique statues to the king of France. Another of his admired productions was a bas relief of a Descent from the Cross, which he presented to Charles V. who rewarded him with a commandery of St. James and to this, not inferior in excellence, maybe added his Hercules and Cacus, a colossal groupe, and his statues of Leo X. and Clement VII. Vasari, who has written his life, justlv censures his envious disposition, and particularly his jealous hatred of Michael Angelo.

, a celebrated antiquary, was born at Ragusa, a small republic situated in Dalmatia, on the coast of the Adriatic, and entered when young into the Benedictine order, in Meleda or Melita, an island not far from Ragusa. After taking the vows at Naples, he travelled over part of Italy, and intended to have settled at Florence, a place favourable for literary pursuits. During this journey his musical Skill, particularly on the organ, procured him a favourable reception at the different convents in his way, and enabled him to travel agreeably and without expense. On his arrival at Florence, although still ft very young man, he was found so able a linguist, that he was appointed to teach the learned languages in various religious houses of his order. The celebrated Montfaucon happening to visit Florence in 1700, he employed Banduri to examine the manuscripts which he wished to consult for a new edition of the works of St. Chrysostom, and conceived such an opinion of him as to recommend him to Cosmo II. grand duke of Tuscany, who then had a design of restoring the fame of the university of Pisa. But representing, at the same time, that it would be advantageous for so young a man to pass some years at Paris, in the abbey of St. Germain, for farther improvement, the grand duke consented, and Banduri arrived at Paris about the end of 1702, and was lodged in the abbey, where his patron Cosmo supplied him with every thing necessary and useful. His first studies here, agreeably to his original design, were turned to divinity, and ecclesiastial history, and in May 1705, he published the prospectus of an edition of the works of Nicephorus, patriarch of Constantinople, with prefaces, dissertations, and notes. This he intended to be followed by an edition of Thfodoriis of IVIopsuesta’s commentary on the minor prophets, and other ancient commentators. Happcning, however, in the course of his researches, to meet with several documents relative to the antiquities of Constantinople, he was advised to publish them, along with ethers already published and this gave rise to his most celebrated work, “Imperium Orientale, sive Antiquitatis Constantinopolitanae,” &c. Paris, 1711, 2 vols. folio. This work, which forms a valuable, and indeed necessary, supplement to Du Gauge’s works on the same subject, is divided into four parts, and illustrated with commentaries, geographical and topographical tables, medals, &c. Casiniir Oudin made a feeble attack on the merit of this work, but without acquiring any credit. In preparing this work Banduri discovered Du Gangers defects in the medallic history, and therefore began to collect all the medals of the Roman emperors to the last Palaeologus, or the taking of Constantinople, which he published at Paris, under the title “Numismata Imperatorum Romanorum, cum Bibliotheca nummaria, sive auctorum qui de re nummaria scripserunt,” 2 vols. folio, 1718, reprinted by John Albert Fabricius at Hamburgh in 1719, 4to. In both these works Banduri was assisted by the abbe Lama, of Naples, and yet more by M. de la Barre, who was his associate in the academy of the belles lettres. In 1715 he was elected an honorary academician, and was very assiduous in his attendance on that learned body. In 1723 he announced his new edition of Nicephorus and Theodorus of Mopsuesta, as being ready for publication in 4 vols. folio, but they never appeared. In 1724 he was appointed librarian to the duke of Orleans, with apartments in the palace, and there he died of an attack of the gout, Jan. 14, 1743, aged about seventy-two or seventy-three years. His eloge, by M.Freret, is inserted in the Memoirs of the academy of inscriptions and belles lettres, vol. XVI.

, doctor and professor of divinity in the university of Copenhagen, was born in 1600, and was educated first in the college of Ottensee in the isle of Funen, and then at Copenhagen. Caspar Brochmand, professor of divinity and bishop of Selande, made him tutor to his son and he was preceptor at the same time to Christian Friis, eldest son to the chancellor of Denmark. After he had continued in that employment above five years, he obtained a pension from the king, and went to Rostoch, from whence he returned to Copenhagen, when the emperor’s troops drew near to the Baltic sea. He finished his course of divinity under professor Brochmand, and afterwards went to Franeker, where he learned rabbinical and Chaldee learning under Sixtinus Amama, by whom he was greatly esteemed. He studied afterwards at Wittemberg, and received there, in 1630, a letter from the rector and academical council of Copenhagen, with an offer of the professorship in Hebrew, which he accepted, on condition that he should be permitted to employ the revenue of that place in studying for some years the Arabic and Syriac tongues under Gabriel Sionita. He discharged the professorship with great advantage to students till 1652, when he was raised to the professorship of divinity, vacant by the death of Mr. Brochmand. He was promoted to the doctorship in the same faculty in 1653, in the presence of the king and queen. In 1656 he was* appointed librarian of the academy. He died Oct. 27, 1661, of an illness of only six days, leaving a widow atid fourteen children. He was the author of several learned works on the Hebrew language and criticism, among which are, “Observationes Philologicce,” Copenhagen, 1640, 8vo a treatise on the origin of diversity of Languages, and on the excellence of the Hebrew, 1634, 8vo; and a “Hebrew Lexicon,” 1641, 4to.

, licentiate in laws, member of the academy of inscriptions and belles lettres, and an ecclesiastic in the diocese of Clermont, in Auvergne, where he applied himself to his several studies, except philosophy, to pursue which he went to Paris, was born in 1673. His parents being too poor to maintain him in this city, commanded him to return home but the friendships he had contracted, and the pleasure they gave him, were more irresistible than the authority of his relations; for he told them, that he was determined to remain where he was, and seek, in the exertion of his abilities, far those resources which, from their indigence, he had not any reason to expect. He was very shortly afterwards received into the family of Monsieur du Metz, president of the chamber of accounts, who intrusted to him the education of his sons, who always honoured him with their patronage and esteem. The exercises which he had set for these young gentlemen gave birth to his “Historical Explanation of Fables,” and, in some measure, determined the author to make mythology the principal object of his studies during the remainder of his life. This work appeared at first only in two volumes 12mo; but the uncommon taste and erudition discovered through the whole were the causes of his obtaining, in the year 1714, an admission into the academy of inscriptions and belles lettres, as one of their scholars. In 1716, this order was suppressed, and that of the associates augmented to ten, of which number was B&nier. In 1729, he was elected one of their pensioners. In 1715, he published a new edition of his “Explanation of Fables,” in dialogues, to which he annexed a third volume so great was the difference between this edition and the former, that it became justly entitled to all the merits of a new performance. Besides the five dialogues, which he added on subjects either not treated of in his former undertaking, or else very slightlymentioned, there is scarcely a single article which has not been retouched, and enriched by new conjectures or rendered more valuable by the multitude of proofs which are advanced in its support. “Until that time,” says the abbe du Fresnoy, in his catalogue of historians, “the origin of ancient fables had never been explained with such knowledge and discernment mythology is sought after at its first source, profane history. Here are no endeavours to mark out its affinity to the sacred writings and it is more than probable that the ill success which Huet bishop of Avranches, Bochart, and many others, met with in their attempts of this kind, was the chief reason to induce Banier to drop so fruitless an undertaking. This, however, is a work in which the author, without losing himself in the labyrinth of a science which is but too often less replete with use than ostentation, has not only unravelled all the notions which the ancients, even of the remotest times, had entertained of their deities, but traced out, with equal judgment and precision, the progress of their religious worship in the succeeding ages of the world.”

The turn which Banier had for researches of this nature, perpetually incited him to carry them to their utmost stretch his knowledge of the learned languages made him, perhaps of all others, the most equal to the task nor can there be more convincing instances of his excellence as a writer, than his historical explanation, and his thirty dissertations before the academy of belles lettres, which are now printed in the memoirs of that body, either entire or by extracts. The lists may be seen in the third volume of the panegyrics upon their deceased members, printed in 12mo, at Paris, 1740. There are also to be found the titles of many other essays, on subjects different from mythology, and which prove in how extensive a circle the abilities of Banier were capable of moving. In 1725, he gave new life to “The treatises on History and Literature,” under the fictitious name of Vigneul Marville, but whose real author was Bonaventure d'Argonne, a carthusian friar. Three editions of this work had been already published, and in the third volume of the third edition, which was an appendix to the whole, scarce any thing appeared but articles relating to the former part of it, and an index referring to the pages in which the principal matters were contained. Banier added those articles to their proper subjects in the two first volumes, which were injudiciously designed to have been read as detached pieces in the third. And in return for having stripped this last volume, the able editor has replaced it by a new one which is filled with tracts of history, anecdotes of literature, critical remarks, comparisons, extracts from scarce and valuable books, sentiments on various authors, refutations of errors and ridiculous customs; together with memorable sayings and lively repartees.

Of equal service was Banier to the third voyage of Paul Lucas into Egypt; and that of Cornelius Bruyn, or Le Brun. That of Paul Lucas appeared in 1719, at Rouen, in 3 vols. 12mo. With regard to Corn. Le Brun, his voyage to the Levant was published in 1714, at Amsterdam, in folio and his voyage to the East Indies came also out in folio, at the same place, 1718. Some booksellers at Rouen, choosing to reprint them both, intrusted the revising of them to Banter, who made several alterations, and added some remarks. This republication appeared in 1725, in 5 vols. 4to, but the Dutch edition is the best. His engagements with this work were however unable to prevent his application to mythology, his favourite study, the fruits of which appeared during the last ten years of his life, in his translation of the metamorphoses of Ovid, with historical remarks and explanations, published 1732, at Amsterdam, in folio, finely ornamented with copper plates, by Picart. and reprinted at Paris, 1738, in 2 vols. 4to and in his “Mythology, or Fables explained by 'history,” a work full of the most important matter, printed at Paris, 1740, in two different forms, the one in 3 vols. 4to, and the other in several, 12mo. The eighth volume of this extensive work treats of those public and solemn ceremonies of the Greeks, which composed a part of the religion of the ancients, and which were instituted in their age of heroes.

The abbe already began to perceive the attacks of a distemper, which seemed to be conducting him insensibly to the grave, when some booksellers at Paris prevailed upon him to superintend the new edition, which they designed to give^ of “A general History of the ceremonies, manners, and religious customs of all the nations in the world;” a magnificent edition of which had made its appearance, about twenty years before, in Holland. Banier embarked in this attempt, with l'abbe le Mascrier, a Jesuit, who had assisted in the French translation of Thuanus. This, which was finished in 1741, in seven volumes folio, is much more valuable than the Dutch edition as there are in it numberless corrections, a larger quantity of articles, and several new dissertations, written by these ingenious compilers. The Dutch author, particularly where he mentions the customs and ceremonies of the Roman church, is more occupied in attempting to make his readers laugh, than solidly to instruct them. The new editors, whilst they retained these passages, were also careful to amend them. The abbe Banier died on Nov. 19, 1741, in the 69th year of his age. An English translation of his Mythology and Fables of the Ancients, was published in London, 1741, in 4 vols. 8vo.

, an eminent physician of the sixteenth century, studied philosophy for some time at Oxford, and afterwards having entered upon the department of physic, applied himself entirely to that faculty and surgery. In July 1573, he took the decree of bachelor in physic, and was admitted to practice. He removed from Oxford to Nottingham, where he lived many years, and was in high esteem for his skill in physic and surgery. The time of his death is not known. His works are: 1 “A needfull, new, and necessary treatise of Chirurgery, briefly comprehending the general and particular curation of ulcers,” 1575, 8vo. 2. “Certain experiments of his own invention,” &c. 3. “History of man, sucked from the sap of the most approved anatomists, &c. in nine books,” 1578. 4. “Compendious Chirurgery, gathered and translated especially out of Wecker,” &c. 1589, 8vo. 5. “Antidotary chirurgical, containing variety of all sorts of medicines,” &c. 1589, 8vo. Several years after his death, in 1663, his works were published at London in 4to, in six books. The first three books, Of tumours, wounds, and ulcers in general and particular. 4. Of fractures and luxations. 5. Of the curation of ulcers and 6. The antidotary above-mentioned.

There was another physician named Richard Banister, who wrote, “A treatise of one hundred and thirteen Diseases of the Eyes and Eyelids” commonly called Banister’s Breviary of the Eyes and “An appendant part of a treatise of one hunched and thirteen Diseases of the Eyes and Eyelids, called Cewisia Medicata, Purging Ale, with divers Aphorisms and Principles.” From this book it appears that the author was living in 1617, and 1619, and probably in 1622, when the second edition was published. When it was first published, cannot be found. But in 1622, “The treatise of the one hundred and thirteen Diseases, &c.” was reprinted. In Chapter IV. of the “Appendant part, &c.” he says “In my treatise of the Eyes I have named the best oculists that have been in this land for fifty or sixty years, who were no graduates, either in Cambridge or Oxon.”

, mentioned by Mr. Ray in very high terms, as a man of talents in natural history, first made a voyage to the East Indies, about the close of the seventeenth century, and remained there some time but was afterwards fixed in Virginia. In that country he industriously sought for plants, described them, and himself drew the figures of the rare species he was also celebrated for his knowledge of insects and meditated writing the natural history of Virginia, for which, Mr. Ray observes that he was every way qualified. He sent to Ray. in 1680, “A catalogue of Plants observed by him in Virginia,” which was published in the second volume of Ray’s history, p, 1928. The world was deprived of much of the fruit of his labours, by his untimely death. Banister increased the martyrs to natural history. In one of his excursions in pursuit of his object, he fell from the rocks, and perished. His herbarium came into the possession of Sir Hans Sloane, who thought it a considerable acquisition. Four papers by him, on subjects of natural history, peculiar to Virginia, are inserted in the Philosophical Transactions, No. 198, and 247.

, lord chief justice of the common pleas, in the reign of king Charles I. was descended from a good family seated at Keswick, in Cumberland, where he was born, in A. D. 1589. The first part of his education he received at a grammar-school in his own county, whence, in 1604, he removed to Queen’s college, in Oxford, being then about fifteen, -and there, for spine time, pursued his studies. He left the university without a degree, and taking chambers in Grays inn, he applied himself to the law, in which science he quickly became eminent. His extraordinary diligence in his profession, his grave appearance, and excellent reputation, recommended him early to his sovereign, Charles I. by whom he was firsi made attorney to the prince. He was next year, 1630, lent-reader at Gray’s inn, and in 1631, treasurer of that society. In August 1634, he was knighted, and made attorney -general, in the place of Mr. Noy, deceased. He discharged this arduous employment, in those perilous times, with great reputation, till in hilary term 1640, he was made chief justice of the common pie.as, in the room of Sir Edward Littleton, now lord keeper. In this high station he acted also with universal approbation, remaining at London after the king was compelled to leave it, in order to discharge the duties of his office. But when he once understood that his continuance amongst them was looked on by some as owning the cause of the Parliamentarians, he retired to York. So just an idea the king had of this act of loyalty, that when he had thoughts of removing the lord-keeper, he at the same time was inclined to deliver the great seal to the lord chief-justice Bankes, whose integrity was generally confessed; but he was by some suspected (though wrongfully as it afterwards appeared) in point of courage. He subscribed the declaration made June 15, 1642, by the lords and gentlemen then with his majesty at York; and yet his conduct was so free from aspersion, that even the Parliament in their proposals to the king, in January 1643, desired he might be continued in his office. Beforethis, viz January 31, 1642, the university of Oxford, to manifest their high respect for him, created him LL. D. His majesty also caused him to be sworn of his privy council, and always testified a great regard for his advice. In the summer circuit he lost all his credit at Westminster, for having declared from the bench at Salisbury, that the actions of Essex, Manchester, and Waller, were treasonable, the commons voted him, and the rest of the judges in that sentiment, traitors. In the mean time, lady Bankes with her family being at Sir John’s seat, Corffe-castle, in the Isle of Purbeck, in Dorsetshire, the friends of the Parliament, who had already reduced all the sea coasts but that place, resolved tft reduce it likewise. The courageous lady Bankes, though she had about her only her children, a few servants and tenants, and little hopes of relief, yet refused to surrender the fortress. Upon this*, sir W. Earl, and Thomas Trenchard, esq. who commanded the Parliament forces, had recourse to very rough measures. Thrice they attempted the place by surprize, and as often were repulsed with loss, though the first time lady Bankes had but five men in the place, and during the whole time her garrison never exceeded forty. Then they interdicted her the markets, and at length formally besieged the house with a very considerable force, a train of artillery, and a great quantity of ammunition. This forced the little town dependant on the castle to surrender, which inclined the besiegers to be remiss, of which lady Bankes taking advantage, procured a supply of provision an-d ammunition, which enabled her still to hold out. At last, the gallant earl of Carnarvon, having with a considerable body of horse and dragoons, cleared a great part of the west, came into the neighbourhood of Purbeck, and sir W. Earl raised his siege, August 4, 1643, so precipitately, that he left his tents standing, together with his ammunition and artillery, all which fell into the hands of lady Bankes’s household. There is no question but this action was very pleasing to the king, at Oxford, where sir John continued in the discharge of his duty, as a privy counsellor, till the last day of his life, vis. December 28, 1644. But that be ever had any other preferment, much less was chief-­justice of the king’s bench, as Wood has affirmed, is certainly erroneous. He was interred with great solemnity in the cathedral of Christ-church, and a monument erected to his memory, with an inscription, signifying his titles, &c. and that he was distinguished by his knowledge, integrity, and fidelity. He left a numerous posterity, both male and female. By his will, he gave Carious sums to pious and charitable uses.

, an English miscellaneous writer of some note, was born at Sunning, in Berkshire, in 1709, and put apprentice to a weaver at Reading but accidentally breaking his arm before the expiration of his time, he was unable to follow his trade, and for some time, probably, lived upon charity. Ten pounds, however, being left him by a relation, he came up to London, and set up a book-stall in Spital-nelds, hoping to be as lucky as Duck, who about this time raised himself to notice by his poem called “The Thresher,” in imitation of which Banks wrote “The Weaver’s Miscellany,” but without success, which he afterwards acknowledged was not unjust. He then quitted this settlement, and lived some time with Mr. Montague, a bookseller and bookbinder, employing his leisure hours in the composition of small poems, for a collection of which he solicited a subscription, and sent his proposals, with a poem, to Mr. Pope, who answered him in a letter, and subscribed for two copies. He was afterwards concerned in a large work in folio, intituled the “Life of Christ,” which was drawn up with much piety and exactness. He also wrote the celebrated “Critical Review of the Life of Oliver Cromwell,” 12mo, which has been often printed, and is, upon the whole, an impartial work. Towards the end of his life he was employed in writing the Old England and Westminster Journals, and was now enabled to live in easy circumstances. He died of a nervous disorder at Islington, April 19, 1751. His biographer represents him as a pleasing and acceptable companion, and a modest and unassuming man, free from every inclination to engage in contests, or indulge envy or malevolence.

, an English dramatic writer, was bred an attorney at law, and belonged to the society of New-inn. The dry study of the law, however, not being so suitable to his Natural disposition as the more elevated flights of poetical imagination, he quitted the pursuit of riches in the inns of court, to attend on the muses in the theatre, but here he found his rewards hy no melins adequate to his deserts. His emoluments at the best were precarious, and the various successes of his pieces too feelingly convinced him of the error in his choice. Yet this did not prevent him from pursuing with cheerfulness the path he had taken his thirst of fame, and warmth of poetic enthusiasm, alleviating to his imagination many disagreeably circumstances, into which indigence, the too frequent attendant on poetical pursuits, often threw him. His turn was entirely to tragedy his merit in which is of a peculiar kind. For at the same time that his language must be confessed to be extremely unpoetical, and his numbers uncouth and inharmonious nay, even his characters, very far from being strongly marked qr distinguished, and his episodes extremely irregular yet it is impossible to avoid being deeply affected at the representation, and even at the reading of riis tragic pieces. This is owing in general to a happy choice of his subjects, which are all borrowed from history, either rpal or romantic, and most of them from circumstances in the annals of our own country, which, not only from their being familiar to our continual recollection, but even from their having some degree of relation to ourselves, we are apt to receive with a kind of partial prepossession, and a predetermination to be pleased. He has constantly chosen as the basis of his plays such tales as were, in themselves and their wellknown catastrophes, best adapted to the purposes of the drama. He has, indeed, seldom varied from the strictness of historical facts, yet he seems to have made it his constant rule to keep the scene perpetually alive, and never suffer his characters to droop. His verse is not poetry, but prose run mad, Yet will the false gem sometimes approach so near in glitter to the true one, at least in the eyes of all but the real connoisseurs, that bombast frequently passes for the true sublime and where it is rendered the vehicle of incidents in themselves affecting, and in which the heart is apt to take an interest, it will perhaps be found to have a stronger power on the human passions, than even that property to which it is in reality no more than a bare succedaneum. On this account only Mr. Banks’s writings have in general drawn more tears from the eyes, and excited more terror in the breasts even, of judicious audiences, than those of much more correct ariid more truly poetical authors. The tragedies he has left behind him are seven in number, yet few of them have been performed for some years past, excepting “The Unhappy Favourite, or Earl of Essex,” which continued till very lately a stock tragedy at both theatres. The writers on dramatic subjects have not ascertained either the year of the birth, or that of the death of this author. His last remains, however, lie interred in the church of St. James, Westminster.

, an eminent English sculptor, born in 1735, was the son of Mr. William Banks, land-steward to the then duke of Beaufort, a situation which he occupied with honour and credit to himself, and from which he derived very handsome emolument. His eldest son Thomas, evincing a strong partiality for the arts, was placed with Mr. Kent, whose name is well known in the architectural annals of that period but, shewing afterwards a preference for sculpture, he studied that art with greater success in the royal academy, then lately instituted, and obtained the geld medal and other prizes for his productions he was also elected to be sent for three years to pursue his studies on the continent, at the expence of that establishment which was one of its regulations previous to the French revolution, when the disturbances in Italy rendered it difficult, if not impossible, for Englishmen to travel in that country. The residence of Mr. Banks was prolonged beyond the limits allowed by the academy for his enthusiastic admiration of the antique, which could then be seen only in perfection in that now despoiled country, and his eager endeavours to imitate the simplicity and elegance of its best specimens, made him unwilling to quit a spot where he could contemplate its beauties with unremitting delight. He met with some patronage from his countrymen who visited Rome and among others of his productions which were sent to this country, was a basso-relievo in marble, representing Caractacus with his family broughtprisoners before Claudius which now ornaments the entrance-hall at Stowe, the seat of the marquis of Buckingham a beautiful little figure of Pysche stealing the golden fleece, in marble also, which was intended as a portrait of the princess Sophia of Gloucester, and is still in her family and an exquisite figure of Cupid catching a butterfly, an emblem of loye tormenting the soul, the size of life, which perhaps for grace, symmetry of form, and accuracy of contour, has scarcely been equalled by a modern hand, and might almost vie with those productions of the ancients, to which his admiration, as well as emulation, had been so constantly directed.

Finding, at length, that it was impossible on the Continent to meet with that patronage which, with just ambition, he aspired to, he determined on returning to his native country from which, however, he was soon after again enticed, by very favourable prospects held out to him by the court of Russia, whither he repaired, taking with him the above-mentioned figure of Cupid, which was purchased by the empress Catherine, and placed in a temple constructed for the purpose in her gardens at Czarscozelo. After a residence of nearly two years, in a climate which proved very destructive to his health, an,d disappointed in his hopes, he returned to his family in England, there to wait the tide of favour, which was not long in turning its course towards him. In that branch which the profession of a sculptor chiefly embraces, that of monumental subjects, there is not so much scope for fancy and variety, as in the productions of an historical painter, but whenever an opportunity offered of deviating from the established rules usually adopted in these cases, our artist did not omit to avail himself of it, of which there is a striking instance in a monument to the memory of a daughter of sir Brooke Boothby, in Ashbourne church. The first great work which was to have been executed by Mr. Banks, on his return from Petersburg, was a colossal statue of Achilles bewailing the loss of Brise'is on the sea shore, for col. Johnes, of Hafod, in Cardiganshire but, as it was likely to be a work of immense labour and expence, other smaller things were undertaken for the same distinguished gentleman, some of which unfortunately perished in the conflagration which destroyed his unique abode of classic taste and elegance, in 1807. Various events afterwards combined to prevent the completion of this magnificent statue, in marble and since Mr. Banks’ s death, it has been presented, by his family, to the British institution in Pall Mall, where it forms a grand and simple ornament to the entrance-hall. The exterior of tnat building, which was originally the Shakspeare gallery, is also a specimen of our artist’s varied talents the whole front of it having been designed by him, as well as the beautiful groupe of figures over the entrance, which are allusive to its original destination. In the latter years of Mr. Banks’s career, his monument for sir Eyre Coote in Westminster abbey, and those in St. Paul’s to the memory of the captains (Hutt, Westcott, and Rundle Burges), who fell in some of our great naval victories, are the most conspicuous and, as they are within the reach of general observation, may be duly appreciated by persons of taste. Mr. Banks’ s election to be one of the members of the royal academy took place not long after after his return from Russia. On this occasion, he presented that body with a piece of sculpture, representing one of the fallen Titans, which is placed among the deposits in the council chamber of that institution, and is a striking example of the knowledge he possessed in anatomy, which enabled him to execute a subject of this nature with as much correctness and energy, as the elegance of his taste led him to represent tender and pathetic subjects with that peculiar delicacy and feeling which so eminently characterize his works.

Mr. Banks’ s manners were simple and unaffected, and though generally reserved and silent, his temper was uniformly serene occasionally he would unbend in social intercourse with a friend, when the intellectual stores of his mind would improve as well as delight his hearers. He took peculiar pleasure in promoting the improvement of young people and wherever he observed a ray of talent, would give it every encouragement in his power, although attended with unrepaid trouble and loss of time from himself. The chief delight and pride of his leisure hours, was in advancing tfre education of his only and favourite daughter, for whose superior accomplishments he spared neither expence nor attention and a sniile of happiness on her countenance appeared to be his greatest reward. He terminated a life of arduous exertion, attended by a well-earned reputation, on the 2d of February, 1805 His virtues and his talents are recorded on a stone placed to his memory in Westminster abbey.

, who was also surnamed Monnoyer, a painter of some note, who resided many years in England, was born at Lisle, in Flanders, in 1635. He was brought up at Antwerp, where his business was 'history painting but finding that his genius more strongly inclined him to the painting of flowers, he applied his talents, and in that branch became one of the greatest masters. When Le Brim had undertaken to paint the palace of Versailles, he employed Baptist to do the flower part, in which he displayed great excellence. The duke of Montague being then ambassador in France, and observing the merit of Baptist’s performances, invited him over into England, and employed him, in conjunction with La Fosse and Rousseau, to embellish Montague house, which is now the British museum and contains many of the finest productions of Baptist. “His pictures (says Mr. Pilkington in his Dictionary of Painters) are not so exquisitely finished as those of Van Huysum, but his composition and colouring are in a bolder style. His flowers have generally a remarkable freedom and looseness, as well in the disposition, as in pencilling together with a tone of colouring, that is lively, admirable, and nature itself. The disposition of his objects is surp'risingly elegant and beautiful and in that respect his compositions are easily known, and as easily distinguished from the performances of others.” A celebrated performance of this artist is a looking-glass preserved in Kensington palace, which he decorated with a garland of flowers, for queen Mary and it is mentioned as a remarkable circumstance, that her majesty sat by him during the greatest part of the time that he was employed ia painting it. He painted, for the duke of Ormond, six pictures of East India birds, after nature, which were in that nobleman’s collection at Kilkenny in Ireland, and afterwards came into the possession “of Mr. Pilkington. He died in Pall Mall, in the year 1699. There is a print of Baptist, from a painting of sir Godfrey Kneller, in Mr. Walpole’s” Anecdotes." He had a son, named Anthony Baptist, who also painted flowers and, in the style and manner of his father, had great merit. There was also another painter known by the name of John Baptist, whose surname was Caspars, and who was commonly called Lely’s Baptist. He was born at Antwerp, and was a disciple of Thomas Willebores Boschaert. During the civil war he came to England, and entered into the service of general Lambert; but after the restoration he was employed by sir Peter Lely, to paint the attitudes and draperies of his portraits. He was engaged in the same business under Riley and sir Godfrey Kneller. The portrait of Charles II. in Painters’ Hall, and another of the same prince, with mathematical instruments, in the hall of St. Bartholomew’s Hospital, were painted by this Baptist, who died in 1691, and was buried at St. James’s.

, a Barnabite monk, born at Serravalle, in the environs of Verceil in Piemont, in 1590, was chosen professor of philosophy and mathematics at Anneci, where he was much distinguished by the acuteness of his genius. The general of his order having sent him into France to form some establishments, he proceeded to Paris, where he acquired reputation both as a philosopher and as a preacher. He was one of the first that had the courage to abandon the trammels of Aristotle. He died at Montargis the 23d of December, 1622, aged only thirtythree. La Mothe le Vayer classes him among the foremost of the learned in his time. He adds, that Baranzano had several times assured him that he would appear to him, if he should depart the first out of this world, but that he did not keep his word. Lord chancellor Bacon had as great an esteem for him as la Mothe le Vayer, as appears by a letter he wrote to him in June 1622, which Niceron has printed. His works are, 1. “Campus Philosophicus,” Lyons, 1620, 8vo. 2. “Uranoscopia, seu universa doctrina de Coelo,” 1617, folio. 3. “Novae Opiuiones Physicx,” Lyons, 1617, 8vo.

, a celebrated lawyer of the fifteenth century, was a native of Placentia, and professor of feudal law at Pavia and Ferrara. He made a new arrangement of the law of Lombardy, and sent it to the duke of Mila,n, who placed it in the library of Pavia, and ordered that the professors of Pavia should use it as a textbook. This manuscript, as well as the library in which it was deposited, was removed to France under the reign of Louis XII. Nicolas Rigault printed it at Paris in 1612, under the title “De Feudis liber singularis,” and John Schilter reprinted it in 1695, 4to, under its proper title of “Libeilus feudorum reformatus.”

, a very extraordinary German scholar, and whom Baillet, if he had lived in his time, would have placed at the head of his “Enfans Celebres,” was born at Schwoback, in the margravate of Brandenburg- Anspach, the 19th of January 1721. His father Francis had quitted France, for the sake of professing the religion of Calvin, and was then pastor of the Calvinist church of Schwoback. He took upon himself the care of his son’s education, and taught him languages without study, and almost without his perceiving that he was learning them, by only introducing words of different languages as it were casually into conversation with him. By this means, when he was but four years old, he spoke every day French to his mother, Latin to his father, and German to the maid, without the least perplexity to himself, or the least confusion of one language with another.

The other languages of which he was master, he learnt by a method yet more uncommon, which was by only using the bible in the language he then proposed to learn, accompanied with a translation. Thus he understood Greek at six, and Hebrew at eight years of age insomuch that, upon opening the book, and without a moment’s hesitation, he could translate the Hebrew bible into Latin or French. He was now very desirous of reading the Rabbins, and prevailed upon his father to buy him the great Rabbinical bible published at Amsterdam, 1728, in 4 vols. folio, which he read with great accuracy and attention, as appears from his account of it, inserted in the 26th volume of the Bibliotheque Germanique. In his eleventh year he published the travels of Rabbi Benjamin, translated from Hebrew into French, which he illustrated with notes, and accompanied with dissertations, that would have done honour to an adept in letters.

He afterwards applied himself to the study of the fathers and the councils, of philosophy, mathematics, and above all, of astronomy. This boy, as he really was, formed schemes for finding the longitude, which he sent in January 1735, to the royal society at London; and, though these schemes had been already tried and found insufficient, yet they exhibited such a specimen of his capacity for mathematical learning, that the royal society of Berlin admitted him, the same year, as one of their members. Notwithstanding these avocations and amusements, he published, in 1735, the fourteenth year of his age, a learned theological work, entitled “Anti Artemonius” written against Samuel Crellius, who had assumed the name of Artemonius, and the subject is the text at the beginning of St. John’s gospel. In 1735 too, he went with his father to Halle, at which university he was offered the degree of M. A. or (as it is there termed) doctor in philosophy. Baratier drew up that night fourteen theses in philosophy and the mathematics, which he sent immediately to the press, and which he defended the next day so very ably, that all who heard him were delighted and amazed he was then admitted to his degree. He went also to Berlin, and was presented to the king of Prussia as a prodigy of erudition, who shewed him remarkable kindness, and conferred upon him great honours, but, not being very fond of men of letters, treated him, as some write, with a small tincture of severity. He asked him, for instance, by way of mortifying him, whether he knew the public law of the empire which being obliged to confess that he did not, “Go,” says the king, “and study it, before you pretend to be learned.” Baratier applied himself instantly to it, and with such success, that at the end of five months he publicly maintained a thesis in it.

He continued to add new acquisitions to his learning, and to increase his reputation by new performances he was, in his nineteenth year, collecting materials for a very large work concerning the Egyptian antiquities, but his constitution, naturally weak and delicate, and now impaired by intense application, began to give way, and his health to decline. Cough, spitting of blood, fever on the spirits, head-ach, pains at the stomach, oppressions at the breast, frequent vomitings, all contributed to destroy him, and he died at his father’s at Halle the 5th of October 1740, in the twentieth year of his age. He was naturally gay, lively, and facetious, and he neither lost his gaiety, nor neglected his studies, till his distemper, ten days before his death, deprived him of the use of his limbs. He was a wonderful proof how much in a short time may be performed by indefatigable diligence and yet it is remarkable, that he passed twelve hours in bed till he was ten years old, and ten hours from thence to the time of his death so that he spent nearly half his life in sleeping.

He was not only master of many languages, but skilled almost in every science, and capable of distinguishing himself in every profession except that of physic," towards which, having been discouraged by the diversity of opinions among those who consulted upon his disorders, and also by the inefficacy of their applications, he had conceived a dislike, and even an aversion. His learning, however vast, had not depressed or overburdened his natural faculties, for his genius appeared always predominant; and when he inquired into the various opinions of the writers of all ages, he reasoned and determined for himself, having a mind at once comprehensive and delicate, active and attentive. He was able to reason with the metaphysicians on the most abstruse questions, or to enliven the most unpleasing subjects by the gaiety of his fancy. He wrote with great elegance and dignity of style. He was no imitator, but struck out new ideas, and formed original systems. He had a quickness of apprehension and firmness of memory, which enabled him to read with incredible rapidity, and at the same time to retain what he had read, so as to be able to recollect and apply it. He turned over volumes in an instant, but seldom made extracts, being always able at once to find what he wanted. He read over, in one winter, twenty vast folios, and the catalogue of the books which he had borrowed comprised forty-one pages in 4to, the writing close, and the titles abridged. He was a constant reader of literary journals.

With regard to common life he had some peculiarities he could not bear music, and if ever he was engaged at play, could not attend to it. He neither loved wine nor entertainments, nor dancing, nor sports of the field, nor relieved his studies with any other diversion than that of walking and conversation. He ate little flesh, and lived almost wholly upon milk, tea, bread, fruits, and sweetmeats. He had great vivacity in his imagination, and ardour in his desires, yet was always reserved and silent except among his favourites, who were few and the delicacy of his habit, together with his constant application, suppressed those passions which often betray others of his age into irregularities. The last of his works was entitled “Disquisitio historico-chronologica de successione antiquissima episcoporum Romanorum, cum quatuor dissertationibus,” c. 1740, 8vo.

, curate of St. Bernard de Potosi, at the contmen cement of the seventeenth century, is the author of a very scarce book entitled “Arte de loa metallos,” Madrid, 1640, 4to. It was reprinted in 1729, in 4to, and to that edition was added, the Treatise of Alonzo Carillo Lasso, on the ancient mines of Spain, printed before at Cordova in 1624, in 4to. There is an abridgment of Barba in French, 1 vol. 1730, 12mo, to which is added, a “Recueil d'Ouvrages” on the same subject; also in 12mo, in very great esteem.

, born at Madrid, died about 1630, composed several comedies highly applauded in Spain. His style, being pure and elegant, contributed greatly to the improvement of the Spanish language. His theatrical pieces are lively, and abound in moral sentiments. There is likewise, by him, the adventures of don Diego de Noche, 1624, 8vo.

, the son of Candiano Barbaro, was an accomplished soldier and a man of letters. He was a scholar of the celebrated Chrysoloras, under whom he studied Greek and Latin. His character raised him to the highest offices in the republic of Venice, and he acquired great reputation on account of the bravery with which he defended the city of Brescia, when governor, against the forces of the duke of Milan. It was riot less to his credit that he was able to reconcile the two opposite factions of the Avogadri and the Martinenghi, and prevailed on them to support the common cause. He died procurator of St. Mark, in 1454. Rewrote a Latin treatise on marriage, which was published by Badius Ascensius, in Paris, 1513, 4to, entitled “F. Barbari patricii Veneti oratorisque clarissimi de Re Uxoria libelli duo.” It is a work of pure morality, and contains excellent advice, in a very perspicuous style, and has been often reprinted, and translated into French. Barbaro also translated the lives of Aristides and Cato from Plutarch, and his letters were printed at Brescia, 1743, 4to. Bayle has a long note, by which it appears somewhat doubtful, whether the defender of Brescia and the writer of the “De Re Uxoria,” were the same person.

, grandson of the preceding, was born in 1454. After a slight education at Venice, he was placed, when very young, under the tuition of Matteo Bosso, then resident at Verona. At the age of eight he became the scholar of Pomponius Lactus at Rome, and studied under him for the space of ten years, commencing an intimacy with the most celebrated literati of the age, and in particular with Theodore Gaza, who formed the most honourable opinion of his talents. On his return to Venice, by his father’s advice he went to reside at Padua, in order to finish his education in that university. Here he first applied himself to the version of “Themistii Paraphrasis,” which was finished in the nineteenth, but not published until (1473) the twenty-sixth year of his age. The following year he was nominated to pronounce the funeral oration of the doge Niccolo Marcello, a composition which is at present extant. Retiring again to Padua, he was authorised, by a special faculty from the senate, to read lectures on philosophy, and with great public approbation expounded Aristotle’s Ethics, and drew up an epitome of them for the benefit of his hearers. Hermolaus spent five years uninterruptedly at this seat of learning, and having attained his twenty-third year, was, by the general approbation, created a doctor of the civil and canon law. In 1479 he returned to his native city, where he was speedily admitted to all those honours which were compatible with his rank and age. Yet persevering in his studies, he this year interpreted “Aristotelis Rhetorica,” published his “Themistius” in the following in 1482 he translated tf Dioscorides,“and in 1484,” Aristotelis Dialecticen," besides a number of poems and other occasional productions.

In June 1484, having again retired to Padua, to avoid the plague then raging at Venice, he undertook, at the earnest request of several of the students, to expound some of the Grecian poets and orators, particularly Theocritus and Demosthenes. He had already borne two important offices in the republic, and was exulted to the dignity of senator in 1484, in the thirtieth year of his age. In the same year he opened, at his own house at Venice, a private school of philosophy, delivering his lectures at an early hour in the morning, and although he meant to admit only a few friends, his audience speedily increased, and he continued this employment until June 1485, when he was appointed on an embassy to congratulate the archduke Maximilian, who had recently been elected king of the Romans. On this occasion, Maximilian, whom he addressed in a complimentary oration, conferred on him order of knighthood. In 1488, the senate again interrupted his favourite studies, by appointing him ambassador to Ludovico Sforza, duke of Milan, an office which his grandfather and father had both formerly filled. At Milan, his house became the general resort of the learned, and he contrived, amidst his public labours, to resume his criticisms on Aristotle and Dioscorides. In 1490, he returned to his native city, and about a year after, was appointed ambassador in ordinary to pope Innocent VIII. who conferred the patriarchate upon Hermolaus, and he accepted it, notwithstanding he knew that the republic of Venice had made an express law forbidding all the ministers they sent to Rome to accept of any benefice. Hermolaus excused himself by saying the pope forced him to accept of the prelacy but this availed nothing with the council of ten, who signified to him that he must renounce the patriarchate, and if he refused to comply, that Zachary Barbarus his father should be degraded from all his dignities^ and his estate confiscated. Zachary was a man much advanced in years, and filled one of the chief posts in the commonwealth. He employed all the interest in his power to gain the consent of the republic to his son’s being patriarch but his endeavours proved ineffectual, and Hernaolaus was condemned by the Venetians to perpetual exile.

From this time he resided at Rome, where, in 1491, he began a work of great erudition, his “Castigationes PliniansE,” the first part of which was published in the following year, and the second in 1493. Erasmus assigns him the most honourable place among those critics who have undertaken to illustrate Pliny the naturalist but his labours have not wholly escaped censure, particularly that of father Harduin, who accuses him of too frequently indulging conjecture, from which, and other charges, Apostolo Zeno defends him with great ability. Hermolaus died of the plague in July 1493. Besides the works already mentioned, he is said to have left some volumes of letters in manuscript, and to have written at least twelve thousand Latin verses, of which only two short epigrams remain.

, probably of the same family with the preceding, coadj utor of the patriarchate of Aquileia, bora in 1513, acquired a reputation for his learning and his capacity in the management of public affairs, which caused him to be chosen by the senate of Venice to be ambassador from the republic to England, where he remained till 1551. He died in 1570, and left behind him several works in good repute, the chief of which are, 1 A Treatise of Eloquence, by way of dialogue, printed at Venice, in 1557, 4to. 2. “Pratica della Perspectiva,” Venice, 1568, folio. 3. An Italian translation of Vitruvius, with annotations, Venice, 1584, 4tOj fig. Bayle and several other lexicographers after him, have been mistaken in regard to the dates of the birth and death of this illustrious person, as well as about his works.

, a French antiquary, was born at St. Fargeau in Puisay, in the diocese of Auxerre, in 1696, and died at Paris in 1770, after having passed the greater part of his life in the study of the ancient French writers, from the twelfth to the fifteenth century. This pursuit recommended him to many of the literati, who invited him to Paris, and there the abbe La Porte and Graville engaged him to assist them, in a prolix, but curious work, entitled “Recueil alphabetique depuis la lettre C jusqu‘a la fin de l’alphabet,” which was begun by the abbe Perau, and printed in 24 vols. 12mo, Paris, 1745, &c. He published afterwards, 1. “Fabliaux et contes des poetes Franc,ais des 12, 13, 14,et 15 siecles,” Paris, 1756, 3 vols. 12mo. 2. “L'Ordene de chivalerie,” ib. 1759, 12mo. This is preceded by a dissertation on the origin of the French language, an essay on its etymologies, and a glossary. 3. “Le Castoiement, ou instructions d' une pere a son fils,” a moral work of the thirteenth century, ib. 1760, 12mo, to which are added several pieces, historical and moral, of the same period in verse, a dissertation on the Celtic, and some remarks on its etymologies. These three works were reprinted at Paris in 1808, 4 vols. 8vo. Barbazan had read the ancient authors with great attention, and wa$ zealous to rescue them from the oblivion to which they had been unjustly consigned. Before his death he had prepared several other works for the press, the manuscripts of which are not known, except one entitled “Glossaire du nouveau tresor de Borel,” the manuscript of which is in the library of the French arsenal, with the exception of the first part, which has been lost.

, born at Paris in 1710, was the son of a woodmonger, and originally intended for his father’s trade but nature had given him a taste for literature, and in order to be able to cultivate it, he at first embraced the ecclesiastical profession, which he quitted some time afterwards, and retired to Holland, where he passed ten or fifteen years. He carried with him from that country charts but little known in France, which he communicated to M. Bauche, who kept him with him above twenty-three years, and in whose workshe had the greatest share. In 1759, however, a production appeared under his name. This was “Mappe-monde Historique” an ingenious and novel chart, in which the author has had the skill to combine geography, chronology, and history into one system. He had intended to particularize this general chart in distinct maps but he was forced to abandon this idea by the necessity he laboured under of gaining his bread by rapid publications. The world is indebted to him for the “Tablettes Chronologiques” ofthe abbe Lenglet, 1763 and 1778 for the “Geographic IVJoderne” of the abbe la Croix, the substance of which is properly his the two last volumes of the “Bibliotheque de France,” of father le Long; and he furnished great assistance to M. de Fontette in the publication of the three first. We have likewise by him a Description of the empire of Russia, published in German by baron de Strahlemberg, 1757, and translated into French, but this is a very inaccurate work and “Vie de M. Francois Paris, diacre,” 1751, 12mo. Barbeau died of a stroke of the apoplexy, at Paris, the 20th of November 1781. He married about two years before, for the sake of having a companion to mitigate the sorrows and infirmities of age. He was one of the few modest scholars, who, without having either literary titles or pensions, are often more useful than others decorated and endowed with both. No one was ever more obliging no one less avaricious of his knowledge, or had more to communicate on the subjects of geography and history. His memory was a kind of living library, and he was always consulted with advantage, either for the exact tlates of events, or for t.he best editions of good or scarce books,

, an old Italian poet, was born in 1264, in the chateau of Barberino in Tuscany, and having gone to Florence, became one of the scholars of Brunetto Latin i. He afterwards studied law with great reputation at Bologna, Padua, and Florence, and was a celebrated practitioner. But these graver studies did not check his inclination for poetry, as we may conjecture from his principal work, “I Documenti d'Amore,” written in verse of various measures. This is not, as the title seems to imply, a poem on the subject of love, but of morality and philosophy. Although Ihe style is often deficient in ease and elegance, and is often mixed with Provencal turns and expressions, the academicians of de la Crusca rank Barberino among their classics. It remained long in manuscript, but was printed at Rome in 1640, with beautiful engravings, a life of the author by Ubaldini, and a glossary. He died at Florence of the plague, in 1348.

, a physician, and member of the academy of Stockholm and of Philadelphia, was born at Mayenne or Mayne, Feb. 15, 1709, and died Dec. 16, 1779. In his youth he was an able linguist, particularly in Greek and Hebrew. He published several works, the earliest of which was a Medical Gazette, the first number of which appeared in 1761. He afterwards wrote, I. “Le Botaniste Francis,” 1767, 2 vols. 12mo. 2. “Elemens de Medicine, en forme d'Aphorismes,” 1780, 12mo. 3. “Chronographie,” with a chart of the revolutions of empires. 4. “Code de la Raison humaine,” 12mo, which Dr. Franklin reprinted in England, and sent to America. 5. “Eloge du medicin Charles Gillet,” 8vp and 6. “Petit Calendrier de Philadelphe.” He also published a French translation of Dr. Franklin’s works, and of Bolingbroke’s Letters on history. His biographer says that he was intimate with Bolingbroke, who permitted him to make this translation on condition it was not published in his lordship’s life-time.

, an eminent French physician of the seventeenth century, was born at Cereste in Provence, and studied at Aix and Montpellier, at which last university he took his doctor’s degree in 1649, and in this place he settled, and acquired very great reputation as a practitioner and a man of learning. In his practice he appears to have attained the simplicity and sound principles of modern times, founded on experience. The celebrated Locke, who visited him at Montpellier, compared him to cur Sydenham in manners and opinions. He died in 1699. The only works he published are, 1. “Traites de Medicine,” 12mo, 1654. 2. “Questiones Medicae duodecim,” 1658, 4to.

, nephew of the preceding, was born the 15th of March 1674, at Bariers, a city of Lower Languedoc, in France. He went to Lausanne in 1686, with his father: and, in 1697, was at Berlin, where he taught philosophy at the French college. At the desire of his father, he applied himself at first to divinity, but afterwards quitted it, and gave himself up to the study of the law, especially that of nature and nations. In 1710 he was invited to Lausanne, to accept of the new professorship of law and history, which the magistrates of Bern had instituted, and he enjoyed it for seven years, during which time he was thrice rector. In 1713, he was elected a member of the royal society of sciences at Berlin and in 1717, chosen professor of public and private law at Groningen. He translated into French the two celebrated works of Puffendorf, his “Law of nature and nations,” and his “Duties of a man and citizen” he wrote excellent notes to both these performances, and to the former he gives an introductory preface. He translated also the two discourses of Mr. Noodt, concerning the power of a sovereign and liberty of conscience, and Tillotson’s sermons, in 6 vols. 8vo, 1709, &c. The piece entitled “Traite de jeu,” printed at Amsterdam, in 1709, is also of his composition and the following “Traite sur la morale des peres,” 1728, 4to. This was written against Mr. Ceillier, who had attacked what Barbeyrac had said upon that subject in his Preface to Puffendorf, “A translation, with notes, of a treatise of M. Bynckershoek,” 1723. 2. “La defence du droit de la compagnie Hollandoise des Indes Orientales, contre les nouvelles pretensions des habitans des Pais Bas Autrichiens, &c.” 1725; b.esides several critical and Ute^ tary remarks, inserted in different journals, and some academical discourses published at Geneva, Lausanne, and Amsterdam. He published also in 1724, a translation into French of Grotius’s treatise, “De jure belli ac pacis,” with large and excellent notes. He died in 1744.

, advocate in the parliament of Paris, and member of the French academy, was born at Langres, of poor parents, and drew himself out of obscurity by his talents. He was at first repetiteur in the college of Lisieux. He then applied himself to the bar but his memory having failed him at the outset of his first pleading, he promised never to attempt it again, though it was thought he might have pleaded with success. Colbert having given him charge of fhe education of one of his sons, Barbier lengthened his name by the addition of d'Aucour. But this minister dying without having done any thing for his advancement, he was obliged to return to the bar. Here he acquired great honour by the eloquent and generous defence he made for a certain le Brun, the valet of a lady in Paris, falsely accused of having assassinated his mistress, but this was his last cause. He died Sept. 13, 1694, at the age of 53, of an inflammation of the breast. The deputies of the academy, who went to see hirn in his last sickness, were concerned to find him so badly lodged “It is my comfort,” said he, “and a very great comfort it is, that I leave no heirs of my misery.” The abbe* de Choisi, one of them, having said, “You leave a name that will never die” “Alas, T do not flatter myself on that score,” returned cl'Aucour “if my works should have any sort of value in themselves, I have been wrong in the choice of my subjects. I have dealt only in criticism, which never lasts long. For, if the book criticised should fall into contempt, the criticism falls with it, since it is immediately seen to be useless and if, in spite of the criticism, the book stands it ground, then the criticism is equally forgotten, since it is immediately thought to be unjust.” He was no friend to the Jesuits, and the greater part of his works are against that society, or against the writers of it. That which does him the most honour is entitled “Sentirnens de Cleanthe sur les Entretiens d‘Ariste et d’Eugene, par le pere Bouhours,” Jesuit, in 12mo. This book has been often quoted, and with good reason, as a model of just and ingenious criticism. D‘Aucour here distributes his bon-mots and his learning, without going too great lengths in his raillery and his quotations. Bouhours was supposed never to have recovered this attack. The abbe Granet gave an edition of this work in 1730, to which he has added two circumstances, which prove that Barbier would have been as good a lawyer as a critic. The other writings of d’Aucour are more frivolous, “Les Gaudinettes, l'Onguent pour la brdlure,” against the Jesuits “Apollon vendeur de Mithridate,” against Racine two satires in miserable poetry. It is not easy to conceive that he could rally Bouhours in so neat, and the others in so coarse a manner. It is said that his antipathy to the Jesuits arose from his being one day in their church, when one of the fathers told him to behave with decency, because locus erat sacer. D'Aucour immediately replied, Si locus est sacrus. This unfortunate blunder was repeated from mouth to mouth. The regents repeated it it was echoed by the scholars and the nickname of Lawyer Sacrus was fixed upon him.

, a French lady, a native of Orleans, became celebrated for her dramatic productions. She cultivated literature and poetry at Paris, and took for her models, Racine and Quinaut. Her tragedy, entitled “Arria & Paetus,” dedicated by an epistle, in verse, to the duchess de Bouillon, was represented at the theatre in 1702. “Cornelie Mere des Greques,” appeared on the stage in the ensuing year. “Tomyris, Reine des Mussagetes,” dedicated to the duchess du Maine, was acted in 1707. “La Mort de Cesar,” was dedicated to M. d'Argenson, counsellor of Metz. These pieces were printed soon after their representation as was also “La Faucon,” a comedy, inverse, represented in 1719. Mademoiselle Barbier composed a fifth tragedy, entitled “Joseph,” which was neither acted nor printed. She wrote also three operas, which were acted with success; “Les Fetes de FEte,” the music by Montclair, represented in 1716; “Le Jugement de Paris,” an heroic pastoral, in three acts, which appeared in 1718; and “Les Plaisirs de la Campagne,” a ballet, played in 1719. It has been said that her name was only borrowed by the abbe Pellegrin but he merely revised her performances, and might in some instances correct them. She compiled also ' Saisons litteraires," a collection of poetry, history, and criticism, which was not printed until 1774, 12mo. She died in 1745. The conduct of the tragedies of mademoiselle Barbier is tolerably regular, and the scenes not ill connected, and the subjects are in general judiciously chosen, but nothing can be more unskilful than the manner in which she treats them. In endeavouring to render the heroines of her pieces generous and noble, she degrades all her heroes. We perceive the weakness of a timid pencil, which, incapable of painting objects in large, strives to exaggerate the virtues of her sex and these monstrous pictures produce an interest that never rises above mediocrity. Nevertheless, we meet with so me' affecting situations, and a natural and easy versification but too much facility renders it negligent, diffuse, and prosaic.

, a native of Aveiro in Portugal, one of the restorers of learning in Spain, in the end of the fifteenth century, was the son of Ferdinand Barbosa, and of Catherine Figuera, who took great pains with his education-. After studying for some time in the Spanish universities, he went into Italy, and at Florence studied under the celebrated Politian. Here he made great progress in the languages, particularly the Greek, which he had an opportunity of acquiring more perfectly from those Greeks, who, at the taking of Constantinople, came into Italy. About the year 1494, Barbosa returned to Spain in order to teach Greek, which had long been forgotten in that country. After teaching it at Salamanca, with Antony of Lebrixa, for twenty years, he was invited to the court of Portugal, to be preceptor to the two young princes Alphonsus and Henry, who were afterwards cardinals, and the latter, king of Portugal in 1578. He remained in this employment for seven years, and afterwards went home, and died of a very advanced age in 1540. Barbosa, with Lebrixa and Resendius, contributed very successfully to the restoration of classical and polite literature in Spain. His works are, 1. “In Aratoris presbyter! poema de Apostolorum rebus gestis commentarium,” Salamanca, 1515, fol. 2. “De Prosodia, relectio, seu de re poetica, ac recte scribendi ratione” and with it, “ Epometria, sive relectio alia,” Salamanca, 4to. 3. “QuodJibeticae questiones,” a work mentioned by Valerius Andreas, but unknown to Antonio. 4. “Epigrammatum li^ bellus,” 8vo.

, a Portuguese lawyer, a native of Guimaraens, in the diocese of Brague, was king’s advocate in the province of Alentejo. In 1618, he published at Lisbon, “Remissiones doctorum ad contractus, ultimas voluntates, &c. constitutionum Lusitanarum,” fol. and in 1638, “De postestate Episcopi.” He died seven or eight months after, in his ninetieth year.

, bishop of Ugento, and son of the preceding, studied the civil and canon law under his father, and continued the same pursuit at Rome, passing his days in reading at the public libraries, and his nights in writing, and living, according to Erythraeus, on a very scanty income. The same biographer informs us that one day his servant brought him a piece of fish wrapped up in a sheet of manuscript, which he discovered to be part of a work on the canon law. He immediately went to the market, and was so fortunate as to purchase the whole with the loss of only four or five leaves; and it is added, that this was the book “De officio Episcopi,” which he published under his own name. He published also many other works, of which a very copious catalogue is given by Antonio, but certain critics were of opinion that he was very much indebted to his father’s manuscripts for some of these. In 1632, he returned to Spain, and at Madrid was employed partly in judging of ecclesiastical affairs, and partly in preparing his writings, until 1648, when king Philip IV. appointed him bishop of Ugento, the duties of which office he performed with care and piety for the short remainder of his life. He died about the latter end of 1649. Besides his writings on the civil and canon law, he compiled a “Dictionario Lusitanico- Latino,” 1611, fol. Others of this family distinguished themselves as able canonists, but there is little in their history very interesting.

, an ancient Scotch poet, was born about 1316, but of his personal history few memorials have been recovered. He was brought up to the church, and in 1357, is styled archdeacon of Aberdeen. Quring the same year, the bishop of his diocese appointed him one of the commissioners to deliberate concerning the ransom of the captive king o f Scotland, David II. In 1365, he appears to have visited St. Denis, near Paris, in company with six knights, the object of which visit was probably of a religious kind, as the king of England granted them permission to pass through his dominions on their way to St. Denis and other sacred places. About ten years afterwards he was engaged in composing the work upon which his lame now principally rests, “The Bruce.” As a reward of his poetical merit, he is said to have received a pension, but this is doubtful. From some passages in Winton’s Chronicle, it would appear, that Barbour also composed a genealogical history of the kings of Scotland, but no part of this is known to be extant. He died in 1396, of an advanced age, if the date of his birth which we have given be correct, but that is not agreed upon. His celebrated poem, “The Bruce, or the history of Robert I. king of Scotland,” was first published in 1616, 12mo, again in 1648, both at Edinburgh, at Glasgow in 1665, 8vo, and at Edinburgh in 1670, 12mo, and often afterwards in meaner forms but a valuable, and the only genuine edition, as to purity of text, was edited by Mr. Pinkerton, in 1790, 3 vols. 12 mo, from a ms. in the advocate’s library, dated 1489. The learned editor says that “taking the total merits of this work together, he prefers it to the early exertions of even the Italian muse, to the melancholy sublimity of Dante, and the amorous quaintness of Petrarca.” Barbour is not only the first poet, but the earliest historian of Scotland, who has entered into any detail, and from whom any view of the real state and manners of the country can be learned. The obscure and capricious spelling may perhaps, deter some readers from a perusal of “The Bruce,” but it is very remarkable that Barbour, who was contemporary with Gower and Chaucer, is more intelligible to a modern reader than either of these English. Some assert that he was educated at Oxford, but there is no proof of this, and if there were, it would not account for this circumstance.

, an eminent physician, was born at Home, in the county of Lippe, March 16, 1666. After applying to classical studies for some years, chemistry and pharmacy became his favourite pursuits, and in improving himself in them, he attended the instructions of the most famous practitioners at Berlin, Mentz, and other places ii> Germany. After ten years spent in this manner, he returned to his native country in 1693, but after a short stay, set out again for improvement in various parts of Germany, Hungary, and Italy. At the expedition of the Morea, he acted as physician to the general of the Venetian army, but on the death of this commander, he came to Etolland, took up his residence at Utrecht, and obtained permission of the magistrates to teach chemistry. Their decree for this purpose is dated Sept. 17, 1694, and on Oct. 3, 1698, he was created M. D. and lecturer on chemistry. In March 1703 3 he was elected professor extraordinary of chemistry, which office he filled with great reputation until his death, Oct. 1, 1723. Barchausen was a man of worth and probity, liberal and public-spirited. By his will, he bequeathed to the public library, a valuable collection of works on botany and natural history, and his own writings remain a monument of his skill in those branches, and in pharmacy, chemistry, and medicine. The principal are, 1. “Synopsis pharmaceutica,” Francfort, 1690, 12mo, Utrecht, 1696, 8vo. 2. “Pyrosophia,” Leyden, 1698, 4to, and a new edition in 1717, under the title “Elementa chemise, &c.” 3. “Acroamata, in quibus complures ad iatrochemiam, atqne physicam spectantia jucunda rerum varietate explicantur,” Utrecht, 1703, 8vo. 4. “Historia Medicinge,” Amst. 1710, 8vo, in nineteen dialogues, which he enlarged and changed to dissertations in an edition published at Utrecht, 1723, 4to, entitled “De Medicinae origine et progressu.” 5. “Compendium ratiocinii chetnici more geometrarum concinnatum,” Leyden, 1712, 8vo. 6. “Collecta medicines practicue generalis,” Amst. 1715. Manget gives analyses of all these works.

, was an elegant writer in the sixteenth century but whether he was English or Scotch by birth is disputed. It seems most probable that he was Scotch, but others have contended that he was born in Somersetshire, where there is both a village called Barcley, and an ancient family of the same name, yet there is no such village, except in Gloucestershire, and Mr. Warton thinks he was either a Gloucestershire or Devonshire man. But of whatever country he was, we know nothing of him, before his coming to Oriel college in Oxford, about 1495, when Thomas Cornish was provost of that house. 'Having distinguished himself there, by the quickness of his parts, and his attachment to learning, he went into Holland, and thence into Germany, Italy, and France, where he applied himself assiduously to the* languages spoken in those countries, and to the study of the best authors in them, and made a wonderful proficiency, as appeared after his return home, by many excellent translations which he published. His patron was now become bishop of Tyne, and suftragan under the bishop of Wells, who first made him his chaplain, and afterwards appointed him one of the priests of St. Mary, at Ottery in Devonshire, a college founded by John Grandison bishop of Exeter. After the death of this patron, he became a monk of the order of St. Benedict, and afterwards, as some say, a Franciscan. He was also a monk of Ely, and upon the dissolution of that monastery in 1539, he was left to be provided for by his patrons, of which his works had gained him many. He seems to have had, first, the vicarage of St. Matthew at Wokey, in Somersetshire, on the death of Thomas Eryngton, and afterwards was removed from that small living to a better, if indeed he received not both at the same time. It is more certain, that in Feb. 1546, being then doctor of divinity, he was presented to the vicarage of Much-Badew, or, as it is commonly called, Baddow-Magna, in the county of Essex and diocese of London, by Mr. John Pascal, on the death of Mr. John Clowes; and the dean and chapter of London, upon the resignation of William Jennings, rector of Allhallows, Lombard-street, on the 30th of April 1552, presented him to that living, which he did not however enjoy above the space of six weeks. He was admired in his lite-time for his wit and eloquence, and for a fluency of style not common in that age. This recommended him to many noble patrons though it does not appear that he was any great gainer by their favour, otherwise than in his reputation. He lived to a very advanced age, and died at Croydon in Surrey, in month of June, 15-52, and was interred in the church there. Bale has treated his memory with great indignity he says, he remained a scandalous adulterer under colour of leading a single life but Pits assures us, that he employed all his study in favour of religion, and in reading and writing the lives of the saints. There is probably partiality in both these characters but that he was a polite writer, a great refiner of the English tongue, and left behind him many testimonies of his wit and learning, cannot be denied.

Of his works, we have not a complete catalogue, but the following are best known. 1. “The Castell of Labour, wherein is Rychesse, Vertue, and Honour,” an allegorical poem, in seven- line stanzas, translated from the trench, printed by Wynken de Worde, 1506. 2. “The Shyp of Folys,” or the Ship of Fools, printed by Pynson, in 1509, and Cawood in 1570. 3. “A right frutefu 11 treatyse, intituled, the myrrour of good maneYs, conteyning the four vertues, called cardinal!,” printed by Pynson. 4. “Egloges,” or the miseries of courts and courtiers, five in number, printed by Pynson. 5. His “Answer to John Skelton the poet,” probably in poetry, but not printed, or known to exist in manuscript. Bale and Pits also mention what are as little known, the lives of St. George, of St. Catherine, and other saints, all translations, and a translation of Sallust, which was printed in 1557. His Ship of Fools, an excellent satire on the follies of all ranks, is partly a translation, or imitation of a work of the same title, published in 1494, by Sebastian Brandt, afterwards translated into French, and then into Latin. From this original and the two translations Barclay formed his poem, in the octave stanza, with considerable additions gleaned from the follies of his countrymen. Mr. Warton has given an elaborate account of the whole of Barclay’s writings.

, a learned and eminent Civilian, was born in Aberdeenshire, in 1541, and descended from one of the best families in Scotland. He was in favour with Mary queen of Scots but, after that princess was dethroned, and detained in captivity in England, finding that he had no prospect of making his fortune in the court of her son James, he resolved to retire into France, which. he did about 1573. He was then more than thirty years of age, and went to Bourges, in order to study law. He there took his doctor’s degree in that faculty, and had applied himself so closely to his books, that he was qualified to fill a chair. Edmund Hay, the Jesuit, who was his countryman, and is said to have been related to him, procured him accordingly a professorship in civil law in the university of Pontamousson, by his interest with the duke of Lorrain, who had lately founded that seminary. And the duke not only conferred upon Barclay the first professorship, but also appointed him counsellor of state, and master of requests. In 1581, Barclay married Anne de Malleville, a young lady of Lorrain, by whom he had his son John, who afterwards became a writer of considerable note, and whom the Jesuits endeavoured to prevail on to enter into their society. But Barclay opposing their scheme, the Jesuits resented it so highly, and did him so many ill offices with the duke, that he was obliged to leave Lorrain. He then went to London, where king James I. is said to have offered him a place in his council, with a considerable pension but he declined these offers, because it was made a necessary condition of his accepting them, that he should embrace the protestant religion. In 1604, he returned into France, and accepted the professorship of the civil law, which was offered him by the university of Angers. He taught there with reputation, and is said to have been fond of making a splendid appearance in his character of professor. But he did not hold this office long, dying in 1606. He was buried in the church of the Franciscans. He appears to have been much prejudiced against the Protestants and was a zealous advocate for passive obedience, and the divine right of kings, as appears from his writings, of which the following are “the principal, 1.” De Reguo et llegali Potestate ad versus Buchananum, Brutum, Boucherium, et reliquos Monarchoniachos,“Paris, 1600, dedicated to Henry IV. 2.” De Potestate Papse, quatenus in Reges et Principes seculares Jus et Imperium habeat,“Franco!'. 1609, 1613, 1621, Hannovias, 1612, in 8vo, and Lond. in English, 1611, in 4to, Mussiponti, 1610, 8vo, and Parisiis, 1600, 4to. In this he proves that the pope has no power, direct or indirect, over sovereigns in temporals, and that they who allow him, any such power, whatever they may intend, do very great prejudice to the Roman catholic religion. 3.” A commentary upon the Title of the Pandects de Rebus creditis et de Jure] urando,“Paris, 1605, 8vo. 4.” Prcemetia in vitam Agricolse," Paris, 1599, 2 vols. 8vo. This last is said to be an excellent commentary on Tacitus. There are two letters from him to Lipsius in Burman’s Sylloges Epistolarum, and four from Lipsius to him.

, son of the preceding, was born at Pontamousson, Jan. 28, 1582. He was educated at the college of the Jesuits in his native place, and when only nineteen years old, published notes on the Thebais of Statins. The Jesuits, as already noticed in his father’s life, remarked his genius for literature, and attempted to win. him to their order, but his father looked on that attempt as a breach of trust. Hence there arose a quarrel between him and the Jesuits, who at that time were in high credit with the duke of Lorraine. He therefore quitted Lorraine in disgust, and conducted his son to London. This was in 1603, just after the accession of his native sovereign to the English throne. In 1604 young Barclay presented to the king a poetical panegyric, as a new year’s gift, and soon after dedicated to him the first part of the Latin satire entitled “Euphormion.” “I had no sooner left school,” says Barclay in his Apology prefixed, “than the juvenile desire of fame incited me to attack the whole world, rather with a view of promoting my own reputation, than of dishonouring individuals,” a candid and singular confession, but which, in the opinion of his biographer, he ought to have made before he had learnt that his satires disgusted the public. In the dedication to Euphormion he intimated his wish to enter into the service of king James, and professed himself alike ready in that service, “to convert his sword into a pen, or his pen into a sword.” To excel was his ruling passion and youthful self-sufficiency led him to hope that he might, excel in every department but his flatteries, and even his confidence, availed not. His father was conscientiously attached to the church of Rome, and his son professed the same.

In 1604, his father carried him to France, and was himself chosen professor of civil law at Angers. It is said that John attended his father’s lectures, and indeed it appears from many passages in his works, that he was conversant in that science which his father taught. In 1605, allured by some proffers of countenance and advancement, the sou returned to England, and remained there about a year. On his father’s death in 1606, he went to Paris, married Louisa Debonnaire, and soon after settled with his family in London. There he published the second part of his “Euphormion,” dedicated to that able and unpopular minister, the earl of Salisbury, in a style of gross flattery. The same writer, adds lord Haiies, who could discover no faults in Salisbury, aimed the shafts of his ridicule at Sully. Perhaps it was to conciliate favour with king James, that in this second part of “Euphormion,” he satirized tobacco and the puritans. In this year he also published a brief narrative of the gunpowder-plot, which he had composed a few weeks after the dfscovery of that treason, entitled “Series patefacti divinitus parricidii contra Maximum Regem regnumque Britanniae cogitati et instructi.” It is hard to say what could have induced him to withhold this narrative from the public, while the events which it relates were peculiarly interesting from their strange nature: and then, after so long an interval, to send it abroad without the addition of a single circumstance that was not already known throughout Europe.

During the course of three years residence in England, Barclay received no token of the royal liberality. Sunk in indigence, he only wished to be indemnified for his English journies, and to have his charges defrayed into France. At length, he was relieved from those urgent distresses by his patron Salisbury. Of these circumstances we are informed by some allegorical and obscure verses written by Barclay at that sad season. (Delit. Poet. Scot. I. 92 100.) Never did dependent offer incense to a patron more liberally than he did. Burleigh, he admits, was a wise man, but, he adds, “that the wisdom of Burleigh bore the like proportion to that of his son, as the waters of the Thames do to the ocean.” In 1610 he published his Apology for Euphormion, the severity of which satire had excited enemies against him in every quarter of Europe. In this year also he, published his father’s work, “De Potestate Papse,” and when it was attacked by cardinal Bellarmin, be published a treatise entitled “J. Barclaii Pietas, sive, publics pro regibus ac principibus, et privates pro Gulielmo Earclaio parente vindici*, adversus Roberti Bellarmini tractatum, de Potestate summi Pontificis ia rebus temporal!­bus,” Paris, 4to. In 1614 he published his “Icon animarum,” perhaps the best, although not the most renowned of his compositions. It is a delineation of the genius and manners of the European nations, with remarks, moral and philosophical, on the various tempers of men. Mr. Malone observes, as a curious circumstance, that in this work, Barclay has suggested an expedition against the Turkish empire, similar in the most material circumstances to that undertaken in 1798 by the French republic, (particularly in the number of the troops employed) though it was proposed to be directed against a different part of the Turkish dominions from that which was assailed by the French, In 1615, invited, as it is said, by pope Paul V. Barclay determined to fix his residence under the immediate power of a pontiff whose political conduct he had reprobated, and of a court whose maxims he had censured with extraordinary freedom. About the end of that year he quitted England, but not clandestinely, as his enemies reported, and having hastily passed through France, he settled at Rome with his family, in the beginning of the year 1616. In the “Paraenesis,” or “Exhortation to the Sectaries,” he mentions two reasons which induced him to quit England, and take up his abode in Italy. His first was, lest his children, by remaining in England, should have been perverted from the faith. But he could have obviated that danger, by removing into France, in which country he had for his friends Du Vair (president of the parliament of Provence, afterwards keeper of the great seals, and lastly, bishop of Lisieux), and M. Peiresc. His second reason was more singular he perceived that his “Pietas,” or vindication of his father, was pleasing to heretics, and that it disgusted many persons of the Romish communion. He repented of having written it: he then found that it contained erroneous propositions, and he wished to settle in Italy that he might have leisure and freedom to refute them.

In 1617 he published his “Parsenesis ad Sectarios,” Rome, 8vo. It is probable, that by this exhortation to the sectaries he meant to give evidence of his own orthodoxy, and to atone for the liberties, almost heretical, which he had taken, as well with the papal court, as with its most faithful adherents. But that court, adds his biographer, which had cardinal Bellarmin for its champion, required not the feeble and suspicious aid of the author of Euphonnion.

Although Barclay found much civility at Rome, yet it does not appear that he obtained any emolument. Inctimbered with a wife and family, and having a spirit above his fortune, he was left at full leisure to pursue his literary studies. It was at that time that he composed his Latin romance, called “Argenis.” He employed his vacant hours in the cultivating of a flower-garden. Rossi (or Erythrsfeus) relates, in the turgid Italian style, that Barclay cared not for those bulbous roots which produce flowers of a sweet scent; and that he cultivated such as produced flowers void of smell, but having variety 6f colours. Hence we may conclude, that he was among the first of these who were infected with that strange disease, a passion for tulips, which soon after overspread Europe, and is still remembered under the name of the Tulipo-mania. Barclay had it to that excess, that he placed two mastiffs, as centinels, in his garden and rather than abandon his favourite flowers, chose to continue his residence in an ill- aired and unwholesome habitation.

He died at Rome Aug. 12, 1621, of the stone, a disease^ for which, in his Euphormion, he had vainly pronounced the plant golden rod to be a specific. At that time, his friend M. de Peiresc was engaged in superintending the publication of Argenis, at Paris. His widow erected a monument for him, with his bust in marble, at the church of St. Laurence, on the road to Tivoli but she caused the bust to be removed as soon as she learnt that cardinal Francis Barberini had, in the same place, erected a monument altogether similar, in honour of his preceptor Bernardus Guilielmus a monte Sancti Sabini. “My husband,” said that high-spirited lady, “was a man of birth, and one famous in the literary world and I will not suffer him to remain on a level with a base and obscure pedagogue.” The inscription on the monument of Barclay was erased but by whom, or on what account, is not certainly known. Frehef, the biographer, ascribes this to the malevolence of the Jesuits, who, indeed, had no great cause to be studious of preserving the memory of Barclay. But Tomasini says, that he heard, from undoubted authority, that the only cause for effacing the inscription was, that the widow of Barclay proposed to erect a more sumptuous monument for him in another place. This, however, has much the air of an affected pretence; for why disfigure one monument, because another, more sumptuous, might be erected hereafter

The first edition of the Argenis was printed at Paris in 8vo, in 1621. It has since passed through many editions, and been translated into several languages. The first English translation was published in 4to, by Kingsmill Long, gent, in 1625, 4to. The poetical part was translated by Thomas May, esq. The second edition was published in 1636. There was also an edition in 1628, by sir Robert Le Grys, said to be by command of king Charles I. Another translation appeared in 1772, in 4 vols. 12 mo, under the following title “The Phoenix or, the History of Polyarchus and Argenis, translated from the Latin, by a Lady.” In the preface to this it is observed, that the editor has made use of both the former translations occasionally, and whenever a doubt arose, had recourse to the original.

Barclay’s Latin style, in his Argenis, has been much praised, and much censured but upon the whole it is elegant. It is said, that cardinal Richelieu was extremely fond of reading this work, and that from thence he derived many of his political maxims. It is observed in the preface to the last English translation, that “Barclay’s Argenis affords such variety of entertainment, that every kind of reader may find in it something suitable to his own taste and disposition the statesman, the philosopher, the soldier, the lover, the citizen, the friend of mankind, each may gratify his favourite propensity while the reader, who comes for his amusement only, will not go away disappointed.” It is also remarked of this work in the same preface, that “it is a romance, an allegory, and a system of politics. In it the various forms of government are investigated, the causes of faction detected, and the remedies pointed out for most of the evils that can arise in a state.” Cowper, the celebrated poet, pronounced it the most amusing romance ever written. “It is,” he adds in a letter to Sam. Rose, esq. “interesting in a high degree; richer'trt incident than can be imagined, full of surprizes, which the reader never forestalls, and yet free from all entanglement and confusion. The style too appears to me to be such as would not dishonour Tacitus himself.” In this political allegory, “by the kingdom of Sicily, France is described during the time of the civil wars under Henry the Third. and until the fixing the crown upon the head of Henry the Fourth. By the country over-against Sicily, and frequently her competitor, England is signified. By the country, formerly united under one head, but now divided into several principalities, the author means Germany; i. e. Mergania. Several names are disguised in the same manner, by transposing the letters.” As to the principal persons designed, “by Aquilius is meant the emperor of Germany, Calvin is Usinulca, and the Hugenots are called Hyperephanii, Under the person and character of Poliarchus, Barclay undoubtedly intended to describe that real hero, Henry of Navarre, as he has preserved the likeness even to his features and complexion. By his rivals are meant the leaders of the different factions’; by Lycogenes and his friends, the Lorrain party, with the duke of Guise at their head. Some features of Hyanisbe’s character are supposed to resemble queen Elizabeth of England Radirobanes is the king of Spain, and his fruitless expedition against Mauritania is pointed at the ambitious designs of Philip the Second, and his invincible armada. Under Meleander, the character of Henry the Third of France seems intended though the resemblance is very flattering to him.”

, the celebrated apologist for the Quakers, and one of the ablest writers of that sect, was born at Gordonstown, in the shire of Murray, Scotland, in 1648, of an ancient and very honourable family. The troubles in Scotland induced his father, colonel Barclay, to send him while a youth to Paris, under the care of his uncle, principal of the Scots college who, taking advantage of the tender age of his nephew, drew him over to the Romish religion. His father, being informed of this, sent for him in 1664. Robert, though now only sixteen, had gained a perfect knowledge of the French and Latin tongues, and had also improved himself in most other parts of knowle_dge. Several writers amongst the quakers have asserted that colonel Barclay had embraced their doctrine before his son’s return from France, but Robert himself has tixed it to the year 1666. Our author soon after became also a proselyte to that sect, and in a short time distinguished himself greatly by his zeal for their doctrines. His rirst treatise in defence of them appeared at Aberdeen, 1670. It was written in so sensible a manner, that it greatly raised the credit of the quakers. The title runs thus “Truth cleared of calumnies, 'wherein a hook entitled, A dialogue between a Quaker and a stable Christian (printed at Aberdeen, and, upon good ground, judged to be writ by William Mitchel, a preacher near by it, or at least that he had a chief hand in it), is examined, and the disingenuity of the author in his representing the Quakers is discovered here is also their case truly stated, cleared, demonstrated, and the objections of their opposers answered according to truth, scripture, and right reason to which are subjoined queries to the inhabitants of Aberdeen, which might (as far as the title tells us) also be of use to such as are of the same mind with them elsewhere in the nation.” The preface to this performance is dated from the author’s house at Ury, the 19th of the second month, 1670. In a piece he published in 1672, he tells us that he had been commanded by God to pass through the streets of Aberdeen in sackcloth and ashes, and to preach the necessity of faith and repentance to the inhabitants he accordingly performed it, being, as he declared, in the greatest agonies of mind till he had fulfilled this command. In 1675, he published a regular and systematical discourse, explaining the tenets of the quakers; which was well received. This was called “A Catechism and Confession of Faith, &c.” Many of those who opposed the religion of the quakers, having endeavoured to confound them with another sect called the ranters, our author, in order to shewr the difference between those pi his persuasion and this other sect, wrote a very sensible and instructive work called “The Anarchy of the Ranters and other Libertines, &e.” In 1676, his famous < e Apology“for the Quakers was published in Latin at Amsterdam, 4to. His” Theses theologies,“which are the foundation of this work, had been published some time before. He translated his Apology into English, and published it in 1678. The title in the English edition runs thus” An apology for the true Christian divinity as the same is held forth and preached by the people called in scorn Quakers being a full explanation and vindication of their principles and doctrines, by many arguments deduced from scripture and right reason, and the testimonies of famous authors both ancient and modern, with a full answer to the strongest objections usually made against them presented to the king: written and published in Latin for the information of strangers, by Robert Barclay; and now put into our own language for the benefit of his countrymen.“This work is addressed to Charles II. and the manner in which he expresses himself to his majesty is very remarkable. Amongst many other extraordinary passages, we meet with the following:” There is no king in the world, who can so experimentally testify of God’s providence and goodness; neither is there any who rules so many free people, so many true Christians which thing renders thy government more honourable, thyself more considerable, than the accession of many nations rilled with slavish aud superstitious souls. Thou hast tasted of prosperity and adversity thou knowest what it is to be banished thy native country, to be over-ruled as well as to rule and sit upon the throne and being oppressed, thou hast reason to know how hateful the oppressor is both to God and man if, after all those warnings and advertisements, thou dost not turn unto the Lord with all thy heart, but forget him who remembered thee in thy distress, and give up thyself to follow lust and vanity, surely, great will be thy condemnation.“These pieces of his, though they greatly raised his reputation amongst persons of sense and learning, yet they brought him into various disputes, and one particularly with some considerable members of the university of Aberdeen an account of which was afterwards published, entitled” A true and faithful account of the most material passages of a dispute between some students- of divinity (so called) of the university of Aberdeen, aud the people called Quakers, held in Aberdeen in Scotland, in Alexander Harper his close (or yard) before some hundred of witnesses, upon the 14th day of the second month, called April, 1675, there being John Lesly, Alexander Sherreff, and Paul Gellie master of arts, opponents and defendants upon the Quakers’ part, Robert Barclay and George Keith praeses for moderating the meeting, chosen by them, Andrew Thompson advocate; and by the quakers, Alexander Skein, some time a magistrate of the city published for preventing misreports by Alexander Skein, John Skein, Alexander Harper, Thomas Merser, and John Cowie to which is added, Robert Barclay’s offer to the preachers of Aberdeen, renewed and reinforced.“It appears also that he suffered imprisonment for his principles, which he bore with the greatest meekness. In 1677, he wrote a large treatise on” universal love.“Nor were his talents entirely confined to this abstracted kind of writing, as appears from his letter to the public ministers of Nimeguen. In 1679, a treatise of his was published in answer to John Brown he wrote also the same year a vindication of his Anarchy of the Ranters. His last tract was published in 1686, and entitled” The possibility and necessity of the inward and immediate Revelation of the Spirit of God towards the foundation and ground of true faith, proved in a letter written in Latin to a person of quality in Holland, and now also put into English.' 7 He did great service to his sect by his writings over all. Europe. He travelled also with the famous IVlr. Penn through the greatest part of England, Holland, and Germany, and was every where received with great respect. When he returned to his native country, he spent the remainder of his life in a quiet and retired manner. He died at his own house at Ury, on the 3d of October 1690, in the forty-second year of his age, leaving seven children, all of whom were alive in October 1740, fifty years after their father’s death, and the last survivor, Mr. David Barclay, a merchant of London, died in March 1769, in his eighty-eighth year, a gentleman still remembered for having had the singular honour of receiving at his house in Cheapside, three successive kings, George I. II. and III. when at their accession they favoured the city with their presence. From his windows they witnessed the procession, previous to dining with the lord-mayor and citizens at Guildhall on the lord-mayor’s day.

Mr. Barclay vyas in private life a man of a very amiable character, and may justly be celebrated by those of his sect, as their ablest defender. In this respect, however, the editors of the Biographia Britannica, from which the present sketch is taken, have surely gone too far, in asserting that his defence of quakerism was unanswerable. It is necessary, says a recent and acute writer, to enter into the true spirit of Barclay’s writings. This ingenious man appeared as a patron and defender of quajcerism, and not as a professed teacher or expositor of its various doctrines and he interpreted and modified the opinions of this sect after the manner of an advocate, who undertakes the defence of an unpopular cause. In the first place, he obeervep an entire silence in relation to those fundamental principles of Christianity, concerning which it was of great consequence to know the real opinions of the Quakers and thus he exhibits a system of theology that is evidently lame and imperfect. Secondly, he touches, in a slight and superficial manner, some tenets, the explanation of which had exposed the Quakers to severe censure and, lastly, he employs the greatest dexterity and art in softening and modifying those invidious doctrines which he cannot conceal, and presumes not to disavow for which purpose he carefully avoids all those phrases and terms which are used by the Quakers, and are peculiar to their sect, and expresses their tenets in ordinary language, in terms of a vague and indefinite nature, and in a style that casts a sort of mask over their natural aspect. And with all the reputation he acquired, it has been thought that Perm and Whitehead declared the sentiments of the sect with far more freedom, perspicuity, and candour.

, or Barcochab, an impostor, who involved his nation in a dreadful calamity under the emperor Adrian, was a Jew, who proclaimed himself the Messiah, and found a famous rabbi, Akiba, who applauded this impious pretension. This false Messiah accommodated himself wonderfully to the prejudices of his people he spoke of nothing but wars, battles, and triumphs and the first lesson of his gospel was that they must rise against the Romans. He had so much the less difficulty in persuading them to this doctrine, because he took the opportunity, when the zeal of the Jews for their religion had enraged them against the emperor. This prince had lately settled a colony near Jerusalem, and established idolatry. The Jews considered this as an insupportable abomination, and a prodigious profanation of their holy place upon which account they were disposed to rise. Some writers pretend, that circumcision was forbid them, which was a violation of their conscience. Barcochebas fortified himself in divers places; but he chose the city of Bitter for his place of arms, and the seat of his empire. He ravaged many places, and massacred an infinite number of people, but his chief cruelty was against the Christians. The emperor being informed of these ravages, sent troops to llufus, governor of Judea, with orders to suppress this sedition immediately. Rufusin obedience to these orders exercised many cruelties, yet without effect. The emperor was therefore obliged to send for Julius Severus, the greatest general of that time, and to intrust him with the whole care of this war. This general chose to fall upon them separately, to cut off their provisions, to shut them up, and streighten them and at last the whole affair was reduced to the siege of Bitter ia the eighteenth year of Adrian. The vast number of Jews, who threw themselves into that city, was the cause that they defended themselves a long while, and that they were reduced by famine to the greatest -extremities. After the taking of this city, the war was not entirely concluded but it did not continue much longer. Barcochebas perished there, and it is supposed that about fifty thousand Jews were killed in the course of this rebellion.

, a native of Bayonne, of the seventeenth century, descended from one of the first families in that city. The celebrated abbot of St. Cyran, who was his mother’s brother, educated him, sent him to Louvain, that he might study under the famous Jansenius and some years after entrusted him with the tuilion of the son of M. Arnauid d'Andilly. M. de Barcos at last returned with the abbot de St. Cyran, who employed him as a secretary, undertook nothing without consulting him, and they jointly composed the book, entitled “Petrus Aurelius.” It was at this time that the abbot de Barcos formed a strict friendship with M. Arnauid the doctor, with whom he was afterwards involved in the controversy respecting Frequent Communion. Upon the death of the abbot de St. Cyran, the queen mother gave that abbey to M. de Barcos, who took possession of it, May 9, 1644, went to reside there, re-established and reformed it he nevertheless always retained his ecclesiastical habit, and took no solemn vows. He died there, August 22, 1678. His works are: 1. “A censure of- the Predestinatus of pere Sirmond,” 8vo. 2. “La grandeur de TEglise Romaine, etablie sur Fautorite de St Pierre et de St. Paul, &c.” 4to. 3. “Traitc de Pautorite* de St. Pierre et de St. Paul, qui reside dans le Pape, successeur de ces deux Apotres,” 1645, 4to. 4. “Eclaircissemens de quelques Objections, que l‘on a forme’es contre la Grandeur de TEglise Romaine,” 1646, 4to. These three last were written by the abbot de Barcos, in defence of the follownig proposition, which had been censured by the Sorbonne that “St. Peter and St. Paul are two heads of the Roman church, which form but one.” This proposition he had inserted in the preface to M. Arnauld’s book on Frequent Communion, without his consent. He also left “De la Foi, de I'Esperance, et de la Charite,” 2 vols. 12mo. “Exposition de la Foi de l'Eglise Romaine, touchant la Grace et la Predestination,” 8vo. or 12 mo. and several other anonymous works. This last was condemned by de Noailles, archbishop of Paris

, counsellor of state, marquis of Marolles upon the Seine, was ambassador from France to Switzerland under the reign of Lewis XIV. He had been chief deputy of monsieur de Chavigni, secretary of state, and assisted at the conferences at Munster, as a minister of the second rank, when endeavours were made to procure him the title of excellency, which did not succeed. He had been already named for the embassy in Switzerland, and served France with great integrity and address, during the whole course of this embassy. He wrote in Latin the History of France from the death of Lewis XIII. to the year 1652. This work was printed in 1671, and well received by the public. The style is excellent; affairs are related without flattery, and with great skill in the intrigues of the cabinet. The author has latinised his name by that of Labardicus. He had made a French translation of this history, which in the opinion of good judges was much inferior to the original Latin. As he was very learned in points of divinity, he wrote a book of Controversy in Latin, against the opinion of protestants concerning the Eucharist, which was not published. It is thought he destroyed it himself. He died in 1692, ninety years of age.

, a native of Edessa, a city in Syria, in the country of Mesopotamia, flourished in the second century. He is held up to us as a man of very acute genius, and acquired a shining reputation by his numerous writings. He first followed the doctrine of Valentine, and afterwards retracted from it. He gave rise to a considerable sect known in ecclesiastical history by the name of the Barclesanists. His sentiments were, that there is one supreme God, perfectly good and benevolent, who made the world and all its inhabitants in a state of perfection, all souls being clothed with bodies celestial and pure but the prince of darkness, having seduced men into sin, God permitted them to fall into gross bodies, formed of malignant and corrupt matter by the evil principle, and hence permitted the inward disorder of their breasts, as the punishment of their sin. At last, Jesus Christ, the son of God, descended to this world, clothed with an aerial body, and taught men how to subdue their bodies, and by abstinence, fasting, and contemplation, disentangle themselves from the dominion of malignant matter, that at death they may ascend to immortal happiness. His followers continued in these opinions for a considerable time He was a man of acute genius, and acquired great reputation by his writings, which were numerous and learned.

, a late eminentFrench historical painter, was born in 1732, at Montbar, and died at Orleans October 6, 1809. His parents, who were not rich, sent him to Paris to be brought up to some trade; 'but his taste and genius guided him to the profession in which he lived to make a distinguished figure. In 1764, while a pupil of Lagrenee, he carried off the prize his subject on this occasion was, Tullia driving her chariot over the body of her father. He also made a beautiful design of the “Rape of the Sabines,” and others of “St. Charles Borromeo,” and the “Massacre of the Innocents.” He passed some time at Rome, and on his return to France, painted some pieces which fully established his reputation. Among these are “The Immaculate Conception,” “the Apotheosis of St. Theresa,” and “St Catherine disputing with the Doctors,” the merit of which last procured him admission into the royal academy of painting. In 1795, he was elected a corresponding member of the national institute, and was professor of design in the central school of the Loiret, which took the name of the Orleans Lyceum. His death was much regretted by his family, friends, and scholars.

, a member of the French academy, was born at Rouen in 1590, of poor parents. He received his education among the Jesuits, and employed his time chiefly in studying philosophy, mathematics, and poetry. His first work was a paraphrase on Ecdesiastes, to which he gave the name of “Pensces morales.” He afterwards wrote the two first parts of his “Lycee,” in which he described his own character, as the portrait of an honest man. He was preparing the third part, when he was drowned, 1637, while endeavouring to save one of his pupils from that fate. His principal works, which are written rather in a diffuse style, are, 1. “Le grand Chambellan de France,” 1623, fol. 2. “Essai sur l'Ecclesiaste de Salomon,” a different work from his “Pensees morales.” “La Lycee, ou en plusieurs promenades il est traite des connoissances, des actions, et des plaisirs d'un Honnete Homrne,” 2 vols. 8vo. His eloge was pronounced in the academy by M. Godeau.

, was an English artist of the last century, but known rather as a copyist than an original painter. He painted a picture of the celebrated Dr. Ward relieving his sick and lame patients, from which there is a print dated 1748-9, which appears to be the work of Baron. There is also a mezzotinto of admiral Vernon, from a picture by Bard well in 1744. At what time he died is not known, but it is probable that he was living in 1773, as a second edition of his treatise was published in that year. Whatever his merits as a painter, he certainly thought himself qualified to give instructions in the practical part of the art, and published a quarto pamphlet of sixty-four pages, entitled the “Practice of Painting and Perspective made easy,” 1756, which was elaborately but severely criticised in the Monthly Review. Mr. Edwards’s opinion is, that the instructions, so far as they relate to the process of painting, are the best that have yet been published, and many young artists at that time found them useful but the perspective of the work does not deserve equal praise, as no part is properly explained, and some of the figures are false. The principal part of Bard well’s pamphlet was re-published in 1795, 8vo. as an original publication.

, was born at Turin about the year 1716. His father was an architect under don Philip Invara, the famous Sicilian, who left many specimens of his abilities in and about Turin. From this parent he appears to have received a good education, and had some little property left him, which he tells us himself he gamed away at faro by which means he was forced to have recourse to his wits, and thus turned author in spite of his teeth, as he phrases it, to keep them going. To the early part of his life we are strangers, except that we learn from himself, that he had been employed two years at Cuneo assisting at the fortifications there, but left the place a few days before the siege of it, by the combined powers of France and Spain, commenced in 1744. What became of him after this period we are not informed, except that in 1748 he was at Venice a teacher of Italian to English gentlemen. From circumstances scattered through his works, we can collect that he had travelled much had experienced some vicissitudes of fortune had encountered several difficulties and at length, with little money in his pocket, with a very imperfect knowledge of the English tongue, and without any recommendations, he bent his course towards England, where he arrived in 1750, and where he continued to reside (with a short interval) during the rest of his life.

A facility to acquire languages he possessed in a very extraordinary degree, and his perseverance was not inferior to his natural genius. With such advantages he soon overcame those difficulties which obstruct a foreigner on his arrival in England. In a short time he was sufficiently master of the English language to be enabled to write in it; and in 1753 published, what we apprehend td have been his first performance, a defence of the poetry of his native country against the censures of Voltaire, who had treated it with too great contempt. About the same time accident brought him acquainted with a person who was the means of introducing him to the notice of Dr. Johnson, who to the end of his life regarded him with great esteem. The origin of this intimacy has been frequently mentioned by Mr. Baretti to have happened in the following manner Mrs. Lennox, the authoress of “The Female Quixote,” having an intention to publish a translation of the novels from whence Shakspeare had taken some of his plays, wished to acquire a sufficient knowledge of the Italian language to enable her to execute the work with some degree of credit. To accomplish this point Mr. Lennox, her husband, went to the Orange coffee house to learn whether any foreigner was desirous of improving himself in the English language, and by that means receive the same advantage as he should communicate. Mr. Baretti happened to be present when the inquiry was made, and eagerly accepted the offer. After some time he was introduced to Dr. Johnson, when an intimacy commenced, which appears to have continued until nearly the end of Dr. Johnson’s life.

From the time of Mr. Baretti’s arrival in England he subsisted by teaching the Italian language, and by his writings. Through the means of Dr. Johnson he was introduced to the family of Mr. Thrale, in which he passed much of his time and his employment of teacher, added to some agreeable and some useful qualities, gave him access to the houses of other persons of distinction. As he possessed nothing but what his industry enabled him to obtain, he was under the necessity of exerting himself, and his efforts were not unsuccessful. What his avocations procured him, his ccconomy rendered sufficient and he was never charged with' meanness or servility. By his writings he certainly procured both money and reputation, though he appears to have set but little value on his literary performances. Very late in life he said, “Whatever I have written in the long course of my life was all done out of necessity rather than choice.” Again “As want was incessantly pushing and pushing at my back, whatever I scribbled was always done in a most confounded hurry and it is a miracle greater, I think, than St. Anthony ever performed, how I came to get bread and cheese, and now and then a beef-steak, by my ill-chopt performances. Conscious of the numberless and supreme faults and imperfections of all my poor doings that way, I wish now, and to my sorrow I wish it in vain, that every page I have sent to the press in Italy or in England were at the bottom of the sea.” “After this declaration, drawn from the very core of my heart, I give you most ample leave to massacre all my literary offspring.”

Mr. Baretti, it is said, received his first encouragement to come to England from lord Charlemont, to whom he became known in Italy, and to whom he afterwards dedicated his Account of the manners and customs of his native country. “Upon your arrival in Italy several years ago,” he says, addressing himself to this nobleman, “a lucky chance brought me within the sphere of your notice and from that fortunate moment a friendship began on your lordship’s side, that has never suffered any abatement; and an attachment on mine, which will never cease as long as I have. life.” During his stay in London, he met with much kindness from its inhabitants. To most of the first persons both for rauk and literature he procured himself to be introduced, with many he lived on terms of friendship, and with some he was permitted to make a part of their family during their seasons of retirement. At length he resolved on his return to Italy, and accordingly left London on the 13th of August 1760. In his first letter to his brothers, he thus speaks of the kingdom he was about to leave. “Now therefore, England, farewell I quit thee with less regret, because I am returning to my native country, after a very long absence, considering the shortness of life. Yet I cannot leave thee without tears. May heaven guard and prosper thee, thou illustrious mother of polite men and virtuous women Thou great mart of literature I thou nursery of invincible soldiers, of bold navigators and ingenious artists, farewell, farewell I have now forgotten all the crosses and anxieties I have undergone in thy regions for the space of ten years but never will I forget those many amongst thy sons who have assisted me in my wants, encouraged me in my difficulties, comforted me in my adversities, and imparted to me the light of their knowledge in the dark and intricate mazes of life Farewell, imperial England, farewell, farewell”

His journey home was taken through Portugal and Spain. Previous to his setting out, he was recommended by Dr. Johnson to write a daily account of the events that might happen, and with all possible minuteness, and by him were pointed out the topics which would most interest and most delight in a future publication. To those who have read the narrative which he afterwards gave the world, it will be unnecessary to applaud Dr. Johnson’s suggestion. It must be admitted to be one of the most entertaining journals which the public had then received, containing a description of places then little known, and placing the character of the writer (as far as any dependence can be had on an author’s character, as drawn from his writings) in a very amiable point of view. During the progress of his tour, good sense and good humour, a playfulness not inconsistent with youth, nor yet unworthy of age, seem always to have attended him. He arrived at Genoa on the 18th of November.

He had been settledbut a short time in Italy, before he projected a periodical paper which was published in Venice under the title of “Frusta Literaria,” written in the name and character of an old, ill-natured, and ferocious soldier, who was supposed to have quitted his native try when scarcely fifteen years old, and to have returned home no less than fifty years after his departure. In this the satire was very pointed and severe, and the publication had great success. One who appears to have known him asserts, that it brought him in a considerable profit, but raised such a flame in Venice, as to make his stay in that country at least disagreeable, if not dangerous. After six yeans absence he returned to England, and almost immediately dipped his pen in a controversy with Mr. Sharp, who had just then published “Letters from Italy, describing the customs and manners of that country in the years 1765 and 1766.” Mr. Sharp’s representation was certainly extravagant, and perhaps taken on too slight grounds. It excited Mr. Baretti’s resentment, and it is well known that he seldom expressed himself in gentle terms when he felt himself entitled to shew his anger.

To Mr. Baretti’s defence of his country Mr. Sharp published a reply, and from the writings of his opponent endeavoured to justify the fidelity of his representation. This produced a rejoinder from Mr. Baretti, which concluded the controversy. If the picture drawn by Mr. Sharp was extravagant in some particulars, it certainly did not arise from a design to misrepresent. Ill health, which prevented him from viewing the scenes he described, and some misrepresentation from interested people, seem to have contributed to the mistakes into which he was led in his account of Italy. The dispute was productive of this consequence it destroyed the reputation of Mr. Sharp’s work, which since that time has been totally neglected.

After Mr. Baretti’s return to England he made several excursions abroad. He particularly attended Dr. Johnson and the Thrale family to Paris; and in February 1769 he made a second tour through part of Spain, from whence he had but just returned, when an accident happened which hazarded his life at the time, and probably diminished, in the event, some of the estimation in which, until then, he had been held amongst his friends. On the 6th of October, returning from the Orange coffee-house between six and seven o'clock, and going hastily up the Haymarket, he was accosted by a woman, who behaving with great indecency, he was provoked to give her a blow on the hand (as he declared) accompanied with some angry words. This occasioned a retort from her, in which several opprobrious terms were used towards him and three men, who appeared to be connected with the woman, mimed lately interfering, and endeavouring to push him from the pavement, with a view to throw him into a paddle, in order to trample on him, he was alarmed for his safety, and rashly struck one of them with a knife. He was then pursued by them all, and another of them collaring him, he again struck the assailant, Evan Morgan, with his knife several times, and gave him some wounds, of which he died in the Middlesex hospital the next day. Mr. Baretti was immediately taken into custody, and at the ensuing sessions tried at the Old Bailey. He refused to accept the privilege of having a jury of half foreigners. The, evidence against him were the woman, the two men, the constable, a patient in Middlesex hospital, and the surgeon. When called upon for his defence, he read a paper which contained a narrative of the unfortunate transaction, with the reasons which obliged him to act with so much violence. “This, my lord, and gentlemen of the jury,” he concluded, “is the best account I can give of my unfortunate accident for what is done in two or three minutes, in fear and terror, is not to be minutely described, and the court and jury are to judge. I hope your lordship, and every person present, will think that a man of my age, character, and way of life, would not spontaneously quit my pen to engage in an outrageous tumult. I hope it will easily be conceived, that a man almost blind could not but be seized with terror on such a sudden attack as this. I hope it will be seen, that my knife was neither a weapon of offence or defence I wear it to carve fruit and sweet-meats, and not to kill my fellowcreatures. It is a general custom in France not to put knives upon the table, so that even ladies wear them in their pockets for general use. I have continued to wear it after my return, because I have found it occasionally convenient. Little did I think such an event would ever have happened let this trial turn out as favourable as my innocence may deserve, still my regret will endure as long as life shall last. A man who has lived full fifty years, and spent most of that time in a studious manner, I hope, will not be supposed to have voluntarily engaged in so desperate an affair. I beg leave, my lord and gentlemen, ta add one thing more. Equally confident of my own innocence, and English discernment to trace out truth, I resolved to wave the privilege granted to foreigners by the laws of this kingdom nor was my motive a compliment to this nation my motive was my life and honour that it should not be thought I received undeserved favour from a jury, part my own countrymen. I chose to be tried by a jury of this country; for, if my honour is not saved, I cannot much wish for the preservation of my life. I will wait for the determination of this awful court with that confidence, I hope, which innocence has a right to obtain. So God bless you all.”

In his defence he had the testimony of several persons of two of his friends to the effects of the attack on him of an accidental passenger to the assault; of justice Kelynge and major Alderton to the frequency of such kind of practices on the spot where He was attacked of Mr. Beauclerk, sir Joshua Reynolds, Dr. Johnson, Mr. Fitzherbert, Mr. Burke, Mr. Garrick, Dr. Goldsmith, and Dr. Hallifax, to the quietness of his general character. These, added to the bad reputation of his prosecutors, impressed the court much in his favour. He was acquitted of the murder., and of the manslaughter the verdict was self-defence.

After this unfortunate transaction he again sat down to his studies, and in 1770 published his Travels, for which, it is said, he received 500/, He procured the Mss. of the History of Friar Gerund, which he caused to be translated and he superintended a magnificent edition of Machiavel’s works. For some years he was domesticated at Mr. Thrale’s house, and lived on terms of friendship with that family.

With the indolence which sometimes accompanies old age, he became negligent, inattentive to the state of his finances, spent the principal of his 500l. and, at the conclusion of his life, felt himself scarce out of the gripe of poverty. His pension, from circumstances of public embarrassment well known, was in arrear, and he had received from the booksellers, by whom he was employed to revise his dictionary, as much money as they conceived he was entitled to expect, considering the state the work was then in. An application to them for an immediate supply had not met with a ready acquiescence, and the vexation occasioned by his disappointment is supposed to have had an ill effect on his health. A fit of the gout ensued, which he at first neglected, and apprehended himself to be in no danger until the middle of the day preceding his death, when he consented that the vultures, as he called the medical people, might be called in. He acknowledged his obligations to Dr. Blane who attended him, and by whose means he would probably have been restored to health, if he had continued to follow his prescriptions, as he had before much recovered under his management, until he relapsed in consequence of drinking cold water. Ice and cold water had alone been used by him as medicine for a giddiness in his head.

He expressed his concern at the contempt with which he had been accustomed to speak of the faculty, as it might he prejudicial, he feared, to many young persons who had heard his opinions, and who might be induced by them to neglect medical assistance. On the morning of his death he said, that he had often dreaded that day, and expected it would be a very melancholy one. On his barber’s calling to shave him, he desired he would come the next day, when he should be better able to undergo the operation. He took leave about four o'clock, with the greatest cheerfulness, calmness, and composure, of Dr. Vincent, Mr. Milbanke, Mr. Turner, and Mrs. Collins, and expressed an earnest wish to see Mr. Cator. On their leaving the room he desired the door to be shut, that he might not be disturbed by the women, who would perhaps be frightened at seeing him die. He expired about a quarter before eight, on May 5, 1789, without a struggle or a sigh, the moment after taking a glass of wine. He preserved his faculties to the last moment

He was buried on the 9th of May in the new buryingground Marybone, followed by Dr. Vincent, sir William Chambers, John Milbanke, esq. Mr. Wilton, and Mr. Richards.

“The person of Baretti,” says one who appears to have known him, “was athletic, his countenance by no means attractive, his manners apparently rough, but not unsocial his eye, when he was inclined to please or be pleased, when he was conversing with young people, and especially young women, cheerful and engaging he was fond of conversing with them, and his conversation almost constantly turned upon subjects of instruction: he had the art of drawing them into correspondence, and wished by these means to give them the power of expression and facility of language, while he himself conveyed to them lessons on the conduct of life and the best answer that can be given to all those accounts which have represented him as a man of a brutal and ferocious temper, is the attachment which many of his young friends felt while he was living, and preserve to his memory now he is no more. He was not impatient of contradiction, unless where contempt was implied but alive in every feeling where he thought himself traduced, or his conduct impeached. In his general intercourse with the world he was social, easy, and conversible his talents were neither great nor splendid but hvs knowledge of mankind was extensive, and his acquaintance with books in all modern languages which are valuable, except the German, was universal his conduct in every family, where he became an inmate, was correct and irreproachable; neither prying, nor inquisitive, nor intermeddling, but affable to the inferiors, and conciliatory between the principals in others which he visited only, he was neither intrusive nor unwelcome; ever ready to accept an invitation when it was cordial, and never seeking it where it was cold and affected. In point of morals he was irreproachable with regard to faith, he was rather without religion than irreligious the fact was, possibly, that he had been disgusted with the religion of Italy before he left it, and was too old when he came to England to take an attachment to the purer doctrines of the protestant church but his scepticism was never offensive to those who had settled principles, never held out or defended in company, never proposed to mislead or corrupt the minds of young people. He ridiculed the libertine publications of Voltaire, and the reveries of Rousseau he detested the philosophy of the French pour lesfemmes de cJiambre^ and though too much a philosopher (in his own opinion) to subscribe to any church, he was a friend to church establishments. If this was the least favourable part of his character, the best was his integrity, which was, in every period of his distresses, constant and unimpeached. His regularity in every claim was conspicuous his wants he never made known but in the last extremity and his last illness, if it was caused by vexation, would doubtless have been prevented by the intervention of many friends who were ready to supply him, if his own scruples, strengthened by the hopes of receiving his due from day to day, had not induced him to conceal his immediate distress till it was too late to assist him.”

To this character, his biographer adds, that he was chaVitable in the extreme and, like Goldsmith, would divide the last shilling he possessed with a friend in distress. He also kept small money of various kinds in a pocket by itself to relieve distress. He was improvident enough to be always anticipating his income, and spent a good deal of it in post-chaise hire, in travelling through the country. He was no dealer in compliment. Avoiding the practice of it himself, he would not knowingly permit it to be used towards him. He would not receive money from any one, and actually refused 6l. from his brother at a time when he was in want, though he accepted from him some wine and macaroni. Immediately after his death, his legal representatives (for no other persons could be authorised to interfere in so extraordinary a manner) either as executors or administrators burnt every letter in his possession without inspection an instance of gothic precipitation which ignorance itself would blush to avow, and which, with the papers of a man of letters, may be attended with very mischievous consequences. We hope the practice is not frequent. Among these letters were several from Dr. Johnson, which Mr. Baretti a few weeks only before his death had promised to make known to the public and from the value of those that have already been published, the world may form some judgment of their loss. The following is a correct list of Mr, Baretti’s works 1. “A Dissertation upon the Italian poetry in which are inter^ spersed some remarks on Mr. Voltaire’s essay on the epic poets,” 1753, 8vo. 2. “An Introduction to the Italian language,; containing specimens both of prose and verse. Selected from Francisco Redi, Galileo Galilei, &c. &c. &c. With a literal translation and grammatical notes, for the use of those who being already acquainted with grammar, attempt to learn it without a master,” 1755, 8vo,

3. “The Italian Library containing an account of the lives and works of the most valuable authors of Italy with a preface exhibiting the change of the Tuscan language from the barbarous ages to the present time,” 1757, 8vo.

4. “A Dictionary of the English and Italian languages; improved and augmented with above ten thousand words omitted in the last editio*n of Altieri. To which is added, an Italian and English grammar,” 1760, 2 vols. 4to.

5. “A Grammar of the Italian language with a copious praxis of moral sentences. To which is added an English grammar for the use of the Italians,” 1762, 8vo. 6. “The Frusta Literaria, published in Italy in 1763, 1764, and 1765.” 7. f An Account of the manners and customs of Italy with observations on the mistakes of some travellers with regard to that country,“1768, 2 vols. 8 vo. 8.” An Appendix in answer to Mr. Sharp’s Reply,“1769, 8vo. 9. < 6 A Journey from London to Genoa, through England, Portugal, Spain, and France,” 1770, 4 vols. 8vo. 10. “Proposals for- printing the Life of friar Gerund,' 7 1771, 4to. This was for printing the original Spanish. The scheme was abortive but a translation by Dr. Warner was printed in 2 vols. 8vo. 11.” An Introduction to the most useful European languages consisting of select passages from the most celebrated English, French, Italian, and Spanish authors with translations as close as possible, so disposed in columns, as to give in one view the manner of expressing the same sentence in each language,“1772, 8vo. 12.” Tutte Topere di Machiavelli,“1772, 3 vols. 4 to with a preface, and several- pieces omitted in former editions. 13.” Easy Phraseology for the use of young ladies who intend to learn the colloquial part of the Italian language,“8vo, 1776. 14.” Discours sur Shakespeare et sur Mons. de Voltaire,“1777, 8vo. 15.” Scelta di Lettere familiari“or, a selection of familiar letters, for the use of students in the Italian tongue, 1779, 2 vols. 12mp. 16.” Carmen Seculare of Horace, as performed at Free-Masons’ Hall,“1779, 4to. 17.” Guide through the Royal Academy,“1781, 4to. 18.” Dissertacion Epistolar accrea unas Obras de la Real Academia Espanola su auctor Joseph Baretii, secretaria por la correspondencia estrangera de la Real Academia Britannica di pintura, escultura, y arquitectura. Al senor don Juan C****,“4to. 19.” Tolondron. Speeches to John Bowie about his edition of Don Quixote together with some account of Spanish literature," 1786, 8vo.

, D.D. was educated at Eton school, and was admitted into King’s college, Cambridge, in 1737, where he proceeded B. A. 1742, M. A. 1746, and D.D. 1771. He was tutor of his college, and presided as moderator in the Soph’s school, in 1747, 1751, and 1756 and was of course one of the taxors of the university in each of the years succeeding. He was public orator in 1761-2, which office he resigned in 1768, and a candidate for the Greek professorship on the death of Fraignean, but was unsuccessful. He was presented by his college to the living of Fordinbridge, in Hampshire, in that year, which he ceded in April 1773, on being instituted to the rectory of Kimpton, in Hertfordshire, which he held during life, along with the living of Allhallows, Lombard-street, London. In June 1770, he was installed 9. prebendary of Canterbury, in consequence of his having been chaplain to the house of commons, on the appointment of sir John Cust, the speaker. But he did not continue in this office above one session sir Fletcher Norton the succeeding speaker, making choice of another clergyman for that office. It was supposed there was some design to prevent his receiving the usual recompense for his service, but his friends contended, that he was not to be considered as the chaplain of the speaker, but of the house, and Mr. Thomas Townsend, afterwards lord Sydney, moved, on May 9th, to address the king to confer upon Mr. Barford, as chaplain, some dignity in the church. He was ordered to preach before the house of commons on Jan. 30 of that year, which sermon he printed. He published also “In Pindari primum Pythium dissertatio habita Cantabrigiae in Scholis publicis,” 1751, 4to; a “Latin Oration” at the funeral of Dr. George, provost of King’s college, 1756; and a “Concio ad Clerum,” 1784, on the first meeting of the convocation at St. Paul’s cathedral. The learned Mr. Bryant, in the preface to the third volume of his System of Mythology, bears honourable testimony to the merits of Dr. Barford, as a scholar and a friend. He died as he had lived, universally respected by all learned and good men, in Nov. 1792, at his rectory of Kim p ton.

, dean of Canterbury, was the sixth son of Robert Bargrave, of Bridge, in Kent, esq. by Joan, the daughter or John Gilbert, of Sandwich, esq. and was born in 1586. He was entered early at Clare-hall, in Cambridge, of which society he was probably a fellow, where he took his degrees in arts. He was incorporated M. A. at Oxford, in 16*11, and in 1612 he undertook the office of taxor in the university of Cambridge. In March 1614-15, when king James visited Cambridge, Bargrave was one of those who performed a part in the celebrated comedy of “Ignoramus,” written by Ruggle, his fellowcollegian, in order to entertain his majesty. He was at this time a beneficed clergyman, having been inducted to the rectory of Eythorne, in Kent, in October preceding. He became soon afterwards minister of St. Margaret’s, Westminster, and chaplain to Charles prince of Wales, whom he served in the same quality after his accession to the throne. In his church of St. Margaret’s, he often preached before the house of commons, and with much approbation. In 1622, at which time he was D. D. he was promoted by the crown to the fifth prebend in the church of Canterbury. In Feb. 1623, in a sermon before the house of commons, he inveighed with honest warmth against the influence of popery, bad counsellors, and corruption, which displeased king James, but Charles I. soon after his accession, nominated him to the deanery of Canterbury. Other promotions followed, some of which he exchanged, and in 1629 he was commissioned by archbishop Abbot, together with archdeacon Kingsley, to enforce the instructions from the king concerning the regularity of lecturers in the diocese, and the due attendance at divine worship. When the rebellion broke out, he shared the sufferings of the rest of the loyal clergy, and, jn 1641 was fined a thousand pounds by the house of commons, for being a member of a convocation of the clergy in the preceding year. In 1642, when the parliamentary colonel Sandys came to Canterbury, he and his troops treated the dean and his family with the most brutal behaviour, without regard to age or sex his son was then sent prisoner to Dover, and himself to the Fleet prison, London. It does not appear, however, that the dean was either examined or called before the house, nor did his confinement last above three weeks, yet what he bad suffered so much affected him, that he died in January following, (1643). It is worthy of notice, although shocking to relate, that this Sandys owed his escape from an* ignominious death, when he was indicted at Maidstone for a rape, to the interest of dean Bargrave. The dean had been a great traveller, and his connexions ii> foreign countries were such as prove his discernment as well as testify his merit. He attended sir Henry Wotton in one of his embassies, as his chaplain, and sir Henry appointed him one of the supervisors of his will, with a legacy of books: during his residence at Venice, he enjoyed the intimate acquaintance of the celebrated father Paul, who once said to him that he thought the hierarchy of the church of England the most excellent piece of discipline in the whole Christian world. Bargrave was a firm defender of our civil and religious rights. He published only three sermons, printed at London in 1624 and 1627. He was interred in the dean’s chapel, Canterbury, and a monument was erected in the same place by Dr. John Bargrave, in 1679.

, was born in 1690 in Hildesheim, and obtained the place of sub-librarian of the royal library of Hanover. He was particularly eminent for historical and diplomatic researches, and was the first who collected materials to form a diplomatic library. His first publication was “Succincta Notitia Scriptorum rerum Brunsvicensium ac Luneburgensium, cum recensione legum atque constitutionurn terrarum Brunsvico-Luneburgica'rum,” Hanover, 1729, 8vo. But his chief work was his “Clavis diplomatica, specimina veterum scripturarum tradens, &c.” Hanover, 1737, 4to, of which was published a much enlarged and improved edition in 1754, 4to, with a life of the author, by his son Daniel. Baring died in 1753.

, an artist of great ingenuity, deserves notice as having contributed to “the harmless stock of public pleasure,” although the particulars of his early life may not be interesting. He was the inventor and patentee of the now well-known species of exhibition called a Panorama, by which bird’s-eye views of large cities anti other interesting subjects, taken from a tower, or some other elevated situation, and painted in distemper round the wall of a circular building, produce a very striking effect, and a greater resemblance to reality than was ever before invented, a strong light being thrown on the painting, whilst the place from whence it proceeds is concealed. The deception is also aided by the picture having no frame or apparent boundary. The first picture of this kind was a view of Edinburgh, exhibited to the public in that city by Mr. Barker, in 1788, and in the following year in London, where it did not attract much attention nor was the invention popular, until Mr. Barker named his exhibition a Panorama, a compound word which was not ill contrived to excite curiosity. The first view, under this new title, was one of London from the top of the Albion Mills, which Mr. Barker exhibited at a house in Castle-street, Leicester Fields and although this was confined, Tor want of room, to a half circle, he was soon patronised and encouraged by the liberal praises of sir Joshua Reynolds and other eminent artists. Soon after, partly by means of a subscription, Mr. Barker was enabled to build a large and commodious house in Leicester Fields, calculated to give his exhibition every advantage. Since that time, "views of Dublin, Paris, Constantinople, Cairo, and other cities, with some of the most remarkable sea-fights of the present eventful war, have been exhibited with the greatest success. A more rational, or in many respects a more useful, public exhibition, it would be difficult to conceive. Mr. Barker died in April 1806, at his house in West-square, Southwark, leaving two sons, one of whom continues the exhibition in Leicester-square, with all his father’s skill.

, esq. the descendant of an ancient and respectable family at Lyndon in Rutlandshire, was the son of Samuel Barker, esq. of Lyndon, by a daughter of the celebrated Whiston, who often acknowledges the assistance he received from his son-in-law in his ecclesiastical researches. Mr. Samuel Barker was long employed in preparing a Hebrew grammar, which he probably did not live to finish, but in 1761 was published “Poesis vetus He^ braica restitutus. Accedunt quasdam de carmine Anacre^ ontis. De accentibus Graecis. De Scriptura vetere lonica, De literis consonantibus et vocalibus, et de pronuntiatione >inguae Hebraicoe,” 4to. He was then dead. His son, the subject of the present article, was the author of several tracts on religious and philosophical subjects among the former were, “The duty, circumstance, and benefits of Baptism, determined by evidence,” 1771, 8vo “The Messiah, being the prophecies concerning him methodized, with their accomplishment,” 1780, 8vo “The nature and circumstances of the Demoniacs in the Gospel,” 1780, 8vo. In some of these he is said to depart from the received opinions of the church. Of his philosophical works, which have done him far more credit, we may notice his meteorological journals, which were for many years published in the Philosophical Transactions, where likewise he wrote, 1. “An account of a Meteor seen in Rutland,” 1756. 2. “On the return of the Comet expected in 1757 or 1755, ibid. 1759. 3.” On the mutations of the Stars,“ibid. 1761. 4.” Account of a remarkable Halo,“ib. 1762, 5.” Observations on the quantity of rain fallen at Lyndon for several years, with observations for determining the latitude of Stamford,“ib. 1771. He published also separately,” Account of the discoveries respecting Comets," 1757, 4to. This contains a table of the Parabola, much valued by competent judges, and reprinted by sir Henry Englefield, in his excellent treatise on the same subject. Mr. Barker, by a course of uninterrupted abstemiousness, particularly from animal food, which he was under the necessity of leaving off in his infancy, prolonged his life and faculties to an unusual period, dying at Lyndon, Dec. 29th, 1809, in his eighty-eighth year. It ought to have been noticed, that he drew up the history of the parish of Lyndon, one of the few parts given to the public of a new edition of Wright’s history and antiquities of Rutland.

, a very learned divine and antiquary, in the end of the sixteenth, and part, of the seventeenth century, was born in the parish of St. Mary the More, in the city of Exeter, about 1572. He was the second son of Lawrence Barkham, of St. Leonard’s, near that city, by Joan his wife, daughter of Edward Bridgeman of Exeter, a near relation of John Bridgeman, bishop of Chester. In Michaelmas term, 15^7, he was entered a sojourner.of Exeter college in Oxford; and on the 24th of August, the year following, admitted scholar of Corpus Christi college in the same university. He took the degre of B. A. February 5 1590-1, and that of M. A. December 12, 1594. On “the 21st of June, 1596, he was chosen probationer fellow of Corpus Christi college, being then in orders and July 7, 1603, took the degree of B. D. Some time after, he became chaplain to Ric. Bancroft, archbishop of Canterbury: and, after his death, to George Abbot, his successor in that see. On the llth of June, 1608, he was collated to the rectory of Finchleyin Middlesex, and on the 31st of October, 1610, to the prebend of Brownswood, in the cathedral of St. Paul’s on the 29th of March, 1615, to the rectory of Packlesham; the 27th of May following to the rectory of Lachingdon and, the 5th of December, 1616, to the rectory and deanery of Bocking, all in the county of Essex. But, in 1617, he resigned Packlesham, as he had done Finchley in 1615. March 14, 1615, he was created D. D. He had great skill and knowledge in most parts of useful learning, being an exact historian, a good herald, an able divine, a curious critic, master of several languages, an excellent antiquarian, and well acquainted with coins and medals, of which he had the best collection of any clergyman in his time. These he gave to Dr. Laud, archbishop of Canterbury, who presented them to the university of Oxford. He died at Bocking, March 25, 1642, and was buried in the chancel of that church. He was a man of strict life and conversation, charitable, modest, and reserved, but above all, exemplary in his duties as a clergyman. Dr. Barkham wrote nothing in his own name, but assisted others in their works, particularly Speed in his history of Great Britain, which that author gratefully acknowledges. In this work Barkham wrote” The life and reign of king John,“one of the most valuable in the book and” The life and reign of king Henry II.“in the same history. He is likewise the author of” The display of Heraldry,“&c. first published at London in 1610, folio, under the name of John Guillim. The learned author having mostly composed it in his younger years, thought it too light a subject for him (who was a grave divine) to own, and gave Guillim the copy, who, adding some trivial things, published it, with the author’s leave, under his own name. He published also Mr. Ric, Crakanthorpe’s book against the archbishop of Spalato, entitled” Defensio Ecclesiie Anglicanee,“Lond. 1625, 4to, with a preface of his own. It is said also that he wrote a treatise on coins, which was never published. Fuller, in his usual, way, says, that he was <fr a greater lover of coins than of money; rather curious in the stamps than covetous for the metal thereof.”

, a biographical and miscellaneous writer of the seventeenth century, was born at Winchcombe in Gloucestershire, Nov. 23, 1609, and educated first at Abingdon school, whence he entered as a servitor in Merton college, Oxford, in 1625, and in a short time removed to Gloucester hall (novy Worcester college) under the tuition and patronage of Dr. Gregory Whear, the principal. Here he studied with great assiduity for several years, took his degrees in arts, and entered into holy orders. In 1637 he supplied the place of chaplain of Lincoln college at the church of All-Saints, for a short time, and was the same year appointed master of the freeschool at Hereford, vicar-choral there, and not long after was promoted to the vicarage of All-hallows in that city. When the garrison of Hereford was surprised by the parliamentary forces in 1646, he was rescued out of the danger, and placed at Sudeley castle, doubtless by the Bridges family, where he exercised his ministry. After that he taught a private school at Hawling in Cotswold, and on the restoration his majesty gave him the living of Naunton near Hawling in Gloucestershire, which he retained until his death, Jan. 6, 1687-8. He was buried in the chancel of Naunton church, leaving behind him the character of a frequent and edifying preacher, and a good neighbour. Wood further adds, that he was a good disputant, a great admirer of Grotius, and a great pretender to poetry but poetry is one of those subjects with which Wood is seldom to be trusted. Barksdale was certainly more than a pretender to poetry. His works are very numerous, both original and translated; but the greater part of the former are small pious tracts on various subjects, little known now, although no doubt very useful in the time they were published. His biographical works, mostly compilations from very scarce tracts and funeral sermons, were published under the title of “Memorials of Worthy Persons.” Of these, two decades were published, London, 1661, 12mo; a third at Oxford, 1662 a fourth there, 1663 and a fifth under the title of “A remembrancer of Excellent Men,” London, 1670. These are now scarce. But a more rare work is his “Nympha Libaethris or the Cotswold Muse, presenting some extempore verses to the imitation of young scholars; in four parts,” London, 1651, 12mo. Of this curious volume the reader may see an ample account, by Mr. Park, in the “Ccnsura Literaria,” vol. VI. Of Barksdale’s other writings it may be sufficient to mention,

1. “Monumenta Literaria,” the characters of eminent men from Thuanus, Lond. 1640, 4to, and often reprinted in 8vo.

2. “Life of Hugo Grotius,” ibid. 1652, 12mo, 3. The disputation at Winchcombe," Oxford, 1653, 8vo, respecting points of discipline and church government. 4. Several sermons enumerated by Wood, and translations of parts of the works of Grotius, Cuneus, Castalio, and others.

, a monk of the order of St. Basil, in the fourteenth century, was in 1339 sent by the Greek emperor Andronicus the younger, as ambassador to Philip king of France, and Robert king t)f Sicily, to solicit assistance against the Mahometan power; and as there was little prospect that this would be granted without a previous union between the Greek and Latin churches, he was also instructed to treat of this measure. These two princes gave him letters to pope Benedict XII. to whom he proposed the assembling of a general council; but as he desired, in the mean time, that a reinforcement might be sent to the Greek emperor, the pope replied that the procession of the Holy Ghost was a point already settled, and therefore did not require a new council, and as for the assistance required, it could not be granted unless the Greek church would shew more sincerity in its wishes for a junction. Barlaam, at his return from Constantinople, had a controversy with the monks called Quietists, who were charged with reviving the Messalian heterodoxy. These monks pretended to see the light which appeared upon Mount Tabor at our Saviour’s transfiguration. They asserted this light to be uncreated and incorruptible, though not part of the divine essence and held other strange opinions, which induced Barlaani to accuse Palamas and his disciples of this sect, to the emperor and to the patriarch of Constantinople, on which a council was called in that city in 1340, but BarJaain failed in maintaining his charges, and was himself censured. Barlaam beinp; thus condemned in the east, retired to the west, joined himself to the Latins, and was made bishop of Hieracium or Gerace in Calabria, where he died about 1348. As he changed from the Greeks to the Latins, his writings will be found to be both for and against the latter. Against them he wrote a treatise on the pope’s primacy, printed first in Gr. and Lat. at Oxford, 1592, 4to, by Lloyd, and afterwards at Hainault, 1608, 8vo, with notes by Sahnasius, who again reprinted it, along with his own treatise of the primacy of the pope, Amsterdam, 1645. Barlaam wrote also a treatise of the procession of the Holy Ghost, containing eighteen articles, of which Ailatius gives the titles. For the Latins he wrote a discourse of the union of the two churches, and five letters, published by Bzovius, Canisius, and in the Bibl. Patrnm separately also at Strasburgh, 1572; and a treatise on arithmetic and algebra from his pen was published at Paris, 1600.

, a modern Latin poet of great reputation, was born at Antwerp, 1584, and studied eight years at Leyden. Bertius, the sub-principal of his college, having been appointed principal, recommended Barlseus to be his successor, who was accordingly named sub-principal, and some time after made professor of logic in the university of Leyden; but he interested himself so much in the disputes of the Armiaians, that he lost his professorship as soon as the opposite party prevailed in the synod of Dort. He now applied himself to physic, and in two years took a doctor’s degree at Caen, but scarce ever practised. In 1631, the magistrates of Amsterdam having erected a seminary, offered him the professorship of philosophy, which he accepted, and discharged with great honour. He pubiished several sharp controversial pieces against the adversaries of Arminius; and being looked upon as a favourer of that sect, many people murmured against the magistrates of Amsterdam for entertaining such a professor. He was continued, however, in his professorship till his death, which happened in 1648. We have a volume of orations of his, which he pronounced on different occasions, and which are admired for their style and wit but his poetical compositions are what chiefly raised his reputation. His letters were published after his death in two volumes. The following are the dates of his principal works, 1. “Britannia triumphans,” Leyden, 1626, fol. 2. “Poemata,” ib. 1631, 12mo. 3. “Mercator sapiens,” Amst. 1632, fol. 4. “De Cceli admirandis, oratio,” ib. 1636, fol. 5. “Oratio de victa Hispanorum regis classe,” ib. 1639, fol. 6. “Laurus Flandrica,” ib. 1644, fol. 7. “Mauritius Redux,” ib. 1644, fol. 8. “Hist. Rerum in Brasilia et alibi nilper gestarum, sub praefectiira Mauritii principis Nassoviae,” “ib. 1647, fol. 9.” Orationes,“ib. 1661^ 12mo. 10.” Faces Sactae," Lond. 4to.

, brother of the preceding, was born in 1595, and became professor of Greek in the university jrf Leyden. It is said that he spoke that language as fluently as his mother-tongue a qualification which procured him, from the states of the Low Countries, the commission to translate into Dutch the confession of the reformed churches, in conjunction with James Revius. He died June 16> 1655. We have of him the Timon of Lucian, with useful annotations; and a good commentary on the Theogony of Hesiod.

, a learned and voluminous writer, was born Sept. 28, 1488, at Barland, a village of Zealand, from which he took his name. His father sent him to Ghent at the age of eleven, where he studied the classics under Peter Scot, a man eminently skilled in the ancient orators and poets, who, discovering his pupil’s promising talents, and that he excelled all his schoolfellows, bestowed particular care in cultivating his mind. At the expiration of four years, he went, in compliance with his father’s wish* to Loitvaine, an university which Barland allows to be very celebrated* but where, he says, he passed his time, without much acquisition of knowledge, and had nearly forgot what he had learned at Ghent. Representations of this kind, from young men, are generally to be suspected. Barland does not inform us how he was employed during the four years he passed at this university. It is certain, however, that he was admitted master of arts in his twentieth year, r and soon after returned to his classical studies, which he cultivated with such success, that he was enabled to teach and for more than nine years had a very flourishing school. According to Andreas Valerius, he taught Latin in the college of the three languages, called Busleiden, at Louvaine. In 1518 he went into England, but soon after, we find him at Afflinghem, superintending the studies of one of his Lonvaine pupils. In 152G he was invited to the professorship of rhetoric at Louvaine, which he continued to hold until his death in 1542. In 1603, a collection of some of his works was published at Cologne, under the title of “Historica,” all of which had been published separately, except a letter to one of his friends, in which he gives an account of his early studies. Besides these, he published, 1. “In omnes Erasmi Adagiorum chiliados epitome,” Colon. 1524, fol. 2. “Historica narratio Papiensis obsidionis anni 1525,” printed in the second volume of Schardius’s German writers. 3. “Dialogi ad profligandam e scholis barbariem,” the best edition of which is that of 1530. 4. “De Litteratis urbis Roma principibus opusculum. Elysii Calentii oppido quam elegantes epistolse, a Barlando recognitas et argumentis auctae. Menandri dicta eximia, adnotationibus illustrata,” Louvaine, 1515, 4to. 5. “Epistola de ratione studii.” 6. “Commentarii in Terentii comedias,” added to the Paris editions of Terence, 1522, 1552, and that of Francfort, 1637, fol. 7. “Enarrationes in quatuor libros Eneidos Virgilianse,” Antwerp, 1529 and 1535, 4to. He also published scholia, on some of Pliny’s epistles, and other classical authors.

, a very learned divine and bishop in the seventeenth century, was born at Langhill, in the parish of Orton, in Westmorland, in 1607; being the son <*f Mr. Richard Barlow, descended from the ancient family of Barlow-moore in Lancashire. He had his first education at the free-school at Appleby, in his own country. From thence being removed, in the sixteenth year of his age, to Queen’s college in Oxford, he took his degrees in arts, that of master being completed the 27th of June, 1633, and the same year was chosen fellow of his college. In 1635, he was appointed metaphysic-reader in the university; and his lectures being much approved of, were published in 1637 for the use of the scholars. When the garrison of Oxford surrendered to the parliament in 1646, he submitted to the persons then in power and by tb-^ interest of colonel Thomas Kelsey, deputy governor of that garrison, or more likely by that of Selden or Dr. Owen, preserved his fellowship, notwithstanding the parliamentary visitation, of which he gave a ludicrous account, in a pamphlet entitled “Pegasus.” In 1652 he was elected keeper of the Bodleian library and about the same time, was made lecturer of Church-hill, near Burford, in Oxfordshire. July 23, 1657, he took his degree of bachelor in divinity and, in the latter end of the same year, was chosen provost of his college, on the death of the learned Dr. Langbaine. After the restoration of king Charles II. he procured himself to be one of the commissioners, appointed first by the marquis of Hertford, chancellor of the university, and afterwards by the king, for restoring the members which were ejected in 1648. The 2d of August, 1660, he was not only created doctor in divinity among the royalists, but also chosen Margaret professor of divinity, the 1st of September following, upon the ejection of Henry Wilkinson, senior. He wrote, the same year, “The case of a Toleration in matters of religion,' 7 addressed to the famous Rob. Boyle, esq. in which that subject fs handled with great candour. In 1661, he was appointed archdeacon of Oxford, in the room of Dr. Barten Holiday, deceased but he was not installed till June 13, 1664, owing to a contest between him and Dr. Thomas Lamplugh about thut dignity, which, after having lasted some time, was at length decided in favour of Dr. Barlow, at the assizes held at Oxford, March 1, 1663-4. Being eminent for his skill in the civil and canon law, he was often applied to as a casuist, to resolve cases of conscience, about marriage, &c. And on one of these occasions, in 1671, he wrote” Mr. Cottington’s case of Divorce,“in which is discussed the validity of his marriage with a lady whose former husband was living and some years after, another case of marriage, inserted in his” Genuine remains.“Upon the death of Dr. W. Fuller, bishop of Lincoln, which happened April 22, 1675, he obtained, the same day, a grant of that bishopric, at the recommendation of some of the nobility, and chiefly through the interest of the two secretaries of state, Henry Coventry, esq. and sir Joseph Williamson, both some time of his college, and the first formerly his pupil. The 27th of June following, he was consecrated at Ely-house chapel. Archbishop Sheldon opposed his promotion, though the reasons of it are not assigned. After his advancement to this see, bishop Barlow wrote several curious things. They were generally short, and most of them by way of letter. The most considerable are these: In 1676,” The original of Sine Cures >“concerning” Pensions paid out of Churchlivings“and a” Survey of the numbers of Papists within the province of Canterbury” in 1679, “A letter concerning the Canon Law, allowing the whipping of heretics.” But he was most distinguished by his writings against popery the chief of which were, “Popery, or the principles and positions approved by the Church of Rome, &c. are very dangerous to all,” and “A discourse concerning the Laws ecclesiastical and civil, made against heretics by popes, emperors, and kings, provincial and general councils, approved by the Church of Rome,” evidently levelled against the duke of York. He expressed his zeal against the papists, not only in writing, but in action. For when, in 1678, after the discovery of the popish plot, a bill was brought into parliament, requiring all members of either house, and all such as might come into the king’s court, or presence, to take a test against popery our bishop appeared for that bill in the house of lords, and spoke in favour of it. Notwithstanding which we are told, that after king James II.'s accession to the throne, bishop Barlow took all opportunities to express his affection, or submission, to him for he sent up an address of thanks to him, for his first declaration for liberty of conscience, signed by six hundred of his clergy. He wrote reasons for reading that king’s second declaration for liberty of conscience he caused it to be read in his diocese , nay, he was prevailed upon to assert and vindicate the regal power of dispensing with penal laws, in an elaborate tract, with numerous quotations from canonists, civilians, and divines. And yet, after the revolution, he was one of those bishops who readily voted that king James had abdicated his kingdoms. He took the oaths to his successors and no bishop was more ready than he, to fill the places of such clergymen as refused to take the oaths to king William and queen Mary. There was nothing in this, however, inconsistent in one who held his sentiments *in favour of toleration. It is more doubtful that he was entirely addicted to the Aristotelian philosophy, and a declared enemy to the improvements made by the royal society, and to what he called in general the new philoso'phy. He was, however, a rigid Calvinist, and the school divinity was that which he most admired but when his attachment to Calvin’s notions engaged him in a public opposition to some of Mr. Bull’s works, he declined a public disputation on the subject. He has also been blamed for never appearing in his cathedral, nor visiting his diocese in person, but residing constantly at his manor of Bugden but against this he appears to have vindicated himself. His enemies are willing to allow that he was a good casuist, a man of very exten^ sive learning, an universal lover and favourer of learned me if, of what country or denomination soever, and a great master of the whole controversy between the Protestants and Papists. He died at Bugden, October 8, 1691, in the eighty-fifth year of his age; and was buried the llth of the said month, on the north side of the chancel belonging to that church, near the body of Dr. R. Sanderson, some time bishop of Lincoln, and, according to his own desire, in the grave of Dr. William Barlow, formerly bishop of the same see to whose memory, as well as his own, is erected a monument, with an inscription which he composed himself a few days before his death. He bequeathed to the Bodleian library, all such books of his own, as were not in that noble collection at the time of his death and the remainder he gave to Queen’s college in Oxford, on which the society erected, in 1694, a noble pile of buildings, on the west side of their college, to receive them. All his manuscripts, of his own composition, he left to his two domestic chaplains, William Otfley and Henry Brougham, prebendaries of Lincoln, with a particular desire that they would not make any of them public after his decease. Besides the works already mentioned, he wrote against popery, 1.'“Confutation of the infallibility of the church of Rome,” written in 167S. 2. “A letter to J. Evelyn, esq. concerning invocation of Saints, and adoration of the Cross,” London, 1679, 4 to. 3. The same year he reprinted in 8vo, “The Gun-powder Treason, with a discourse of the manner of its discovery, &c.” printed at first in 1606, and placed in the beginning of it, “A preface touching that horrid conspiracy, dated Feb. 1, 1678-9.” 4. “Brutum Fulmen, or the bull of pope Pius Sextus against queen Elizabeth,” 1681, 4tn. 5. “Whether the pope be Antichrist, &c.” 6. “A few plain reasons why a Protestant of the church of England should not turn Roman catholic,” 1688. Some sheets of this, not being licensed, were omitted. Besides these, he is the author of the following 7. “Pietas in Patrem, or a few tears upon the lamented death of his most dear and loving Father Richard Barlow, late of Langhill in Westmorland, who died December 29, 1636,” Oxford, 1637, 4to. 8. “A letter to Mr. John Goodwin, concerning Universal Redemption, by J. Christ,” 1651. 9. “For toleration of the Jews,” 3655. 10. “A letter to Mr. John Tombes in defence of Anabaptism, inserted in one of Tombes’s books.” 11. “A tract to prove that true grace doth not lie so much in the degree, as in the nature.” This also is inserted in a book, entitled Sincerity and Hypocrisy, &c. written by William Sheppard, esq. 12. “The Rights of the Bishops to judge in capital eases in parliament cleared, &c.” Lond. 1680. Dr. Barlow did not set his name to this, and it was by some ascribed to Tho. Turner of Gray’s-inn. 13. “A letter (to his clergy) for the putting in execution the Laws against Dissenters, written in concurrence to that which was drawn up by the justices of the peace of the county of Bedford, at the quarter-sessions held at Ampthill for the said county, Jan. 14, 1684.” After his decease, sir Peter Pett lisbed in 1692, 8vo, “Several miscellaneous and weighty cases of conscience, learnedly and judiciously resolved by the right rev. father in God, Dr. T ho. Barlow, late lord bishop of Lincoln.” Sir Peter published also in 1693, Lond. 8vo, 14. “The genuine Remains of that learned prelate, Dr. Thomas Barlow, late lord bishop of Lincoln, containing divers discourses, theological, philosophical, historical, &c. in letters to several persons of honour and quality.” But these two volumes being published without the knowledge or consent of the bishop’s two chaplains above-mentioned, to whom he had left all his manuscripts, with orders that they should not be published, they severely Reflected upon the publisher, for the unwarrantable liberty he had taken.

, bishop of Rochester and Lincoln, was a native of Lancashire, and became fellow of Trinity hall, Cambridge. He was afterwards chaplain to queen Elizabeth, and to archbishop Whitgift, who collated him to the rectory of St. Dunstan’s in the East, and he occurs likewise as a prebendary of St. Paul’s. He was installed prebendary of Westminster, in 1601, and the next year, dean of Chester, and in 1605, a prebendary of Canterbury. In the same year, May 23, he was elected bishop of Rochester, which he held for three years, and was translated to Lincoln, May 21, 1608. He died suddenly at his palace at Buckden, Sept. 7, 1613, where he was buried. In his will he appointed to be buried in Lincoln cathedral, or Westminster abbey, if he died near them, and gave several charities, and was, according to Wood, a benefactor to St. John’s college, Cambridge, where he founded the London fellowships and scholarships, but his will, in this respect, being only conditional, St. John’s college never derived any benefit from it. He was reputed a learned and excellent preacher, and when dean of Chester, was employed by archbishop Whitgift to draw up an authentic relation of the famous conference between the bishop and the Puritans, held at Hampton court, Jan. 14, 15, 16, 1603, before king James, which was published at London, 1604, 4to, and 1638, and reprinted in the Phoenix, vol. I. He published also some controversial tracts, and a life of Dr. Richard Cosin, an eminent civilian, in whose house he had been brought up in his youth.

, a learned bishop in the sixteenth century, descended of the ancient family of the Barlowes in Wales, and was born in the county of Essex. He was at first a monk in the Augustin monastery of St. Osith in Essex, and was educated there, and at Oxford, where the religious of that order had an abbey and a priory and, arriving to a competent knowledge of divinity, Was made doctor in that faculty. He was afterwards prior of the canons of his order at Bisham in Berkshire, and by that title was sent on an embassy to Scotland, in 1535. At the dissolution of the monasteries, he readily resigned his house, and prevailed upon many abbots and priors to do the same. Having by this means ingratiated himself with the king, he was appointed bishop of St. Asaph and the temporalities being delivered to him on February 2, 1535, he was consecrated the 22d of the same month. Thence he was translated to St. David’s, in April 1536, where he formed the project of removing the episcopal see to Caerniardhyn, as being more in the midst of the diocese, but without success. In 1547, he was translated to Bath and Wells, of which he alienated most of the revenues; but being a zealous professor and preacher of the Protestant religion, he was, in 1553, upon queen Mary’s accession to the throne, deprived of his bishopric, on pretence of his being married. He was, likewise, committed to the Fleet, where he continued prisoner for some time at length, finding means to escape, he retired, with many others, into Germany, and there lived in a poor condition, till queen Elizabeth’s happy inauguration. Tanner says that he went early in life to Germany, and heard Luther, and some other of the reformers. On his return now to his native country, he was not restored to his see, but advanced to the bishopric of Chichester, in December 1559; and, the next year, was made the first prebendary of the first stall in the collegiate church of Westminster, founded by queen Elizabeth which dignity he held five years with his bishopric. He died in August, 1568, and was buried in Chichester cathedral. What is most particularly remarkable concerning him is, that by his wife Agatha Wellesbourne, he had five daughters, who were all married to bishops, namely, 1. Anne, married first to Austin Bradbridge, anc| afterwards to Herbert Westphaling, bishop of Hereford, 2. Elizabeth, wife of William Day, dean of Windsor, afterwards bishop of Winchester. 3. Margaret, wife of William Overtoil, bishop of Lichfield and Coventry. 4. Frances, married first to Matthew Parker, younger son of Matthew Parker, archbishop of Canterbury, and afterwards to Toby Matthew, archbishop of York. 5. Antonia, wife of William Wick ham, bishop of Winchester. He had also a son, of whom we shall give an account in the next article; and five more, of whom nothing memorable is recorded.

His works, are, 1. “Christian Homilies,” 2. “Cosmography.” 3. He was one of those bishops who compiled “The godly and pious institution of a Christian man,” commonly called “The bishop’s book,” London, 1537. 4. There is in bishop Burnet’s History of the Reformation, “His answers to certain, Queries concerning the Abuses of the Mass.” 5. In Edward Vlth’s reign, he is said to have translated into English, “The Apocrypha,” as far as the book of Wisdom. He is also said to have written “A dialogue describing these Lutheran factions, and many of their abuses,” of which a second edition was published in 1553. This was no doubt written before he became entirely converted to the reformed religion, which was not the case until Mary’s time. He had written, indeed, some pieces against popery in Henry Vlllth’s time, but it appears from a letter in the Cotton library, which he wrote to that monarch, that he was not steady in his belief, and he seems to apologize to Henry for having published “The burial of the Masse,” and some other tracts in favour of protestantism. It is to be remarked too, that Cranmer had very little dependance on Barlowe at that time. He was so indiscreet, so totally unguarded, and his conversation so full of levity, that the primate was always afraid of any communication with him on matters of business, and would sometimes say, on the conclusion of a long debate, “This is all very true but my brother Barlowe, in half an hour, will teach the world to believe it is but a jest.”

, son of the above, an eminent mathematician and divine, in the sixteenth century, was born in Pembrokeshire. In 1560 he was entered commoner of Baliol college in Oxford; and in 1564, having taken a degree in arts, he left the university, and went to sea; but in what capacity is uncertain however, he thence acquired considerable knowledge in the art of navigation, as his writings afterwards shewed. About the year 1573, he entered into orders, and became prebendary of Winchester, and rector of Easton, near that city. In 1588 he was made prebendary of Lichneld, which he exchanged for the office of treasurer of that church. He afterwards was appointed chaplain to prince Henry, eldest son of king James the first and in 1614, archdeacon of Salisbury. Barlowe was remarkable, especially for having been the first writer on the nature and properties pf the loadstone, twenty years before Gilbert published his book on that subject. He was the first who made the inclinatory instrument transparent, and to be used with a glass on both sides. It was he also who suspended it in a compass-box, where, with two ounces weight, it was made fit for use at sea. He also found out the difference between iron and steel, and their tempers for magnetical uses. He likewise discovered the proper way of touching magnetical needles and of piecing and cementing of loadstones and also why a loadstone, being double-capped, must take up so great a weight.

Barlowe died in the year 1625. His works are as follow: 1. “The Navigator’s Supply, containing rnaiw things of principal importance belonging to Navigation, and use of diverse Instruments framed chiefly for that purpose,” Lond. 1597, 4to dedicated to Robert earl of Essex. 2. “Magnetical Advertisement, or diverse pertinent observations and improved experiments concerning the natnre and properties of the Loadstone,” Lond. 1616, 4to. 3. “A Brief Discovery of the idle animadversions of Mark Ridley, M. D. upon a treatise entitled Magnetical Advertisement,” Lond. 1618, 4to.

In the first of these pieces, Barlowe gave a demonstration of Wright’s or Mercator’s division of the meridian line, as communicated by a friend observing that “This manner of carde has been publiquely extant in print these thirtie yeares at least [he should have said twenty-eight only], but a cloude (as it were) and thicke miste of ignorance doth keepe it hitherto concealed and so much the more, because some who were reckoned for men of good knowledge, have by glauncing speeches (but never by any one reason of moment) gone about what they could to, disgrace it.” This work of Barlowe’s contains descriptions of several instruments for the use of navigation, the principal of which is an azimuth compass, with two upright sights and as the author was very curious in making experiments on the loadstone, he treats well and fully upon the sea- compass. And he treated still farther on the same instrument in his second work, the Magnetical Advertisement.

, i.e. Son of the Prophet, an apostle, and one of the first preachers of the Gospel in the first century, was born in Cyprus, of the tribe of Levi. It is supposed that he went to Jerusalem, and studied with St. Paul, under Gamaliel. Upon embracing the Christian faith he sold his land, and laid the price of it at the apostles’ feet. He was appointed to be an apostle of the Gentiles with St. Paul, travelled with him, and accompanied St. Mark into the island of Cyprus. It is said, that he suffered martyrdom, after having founded the church of Milan, and that his body was found in the year 488, with the gospel of St. Matthew upon the breast. An epistle, attributed to St. Barnabas, was published 1645, by Dom. Luke d'Acheri, 4to. It is in the library of the fathers, and in the Patres Apostclici of Cotelier; but in all probability it was the production of some Jew, whose mean talents and attachment to Jewish fables point him out as a very different person from the companion of St. Paul. Yet Dupin labours hard to give it a kind of authenticity.

, an English divine, was the son of Mr. John Barnard, of Castor, a market town in Lincolnshire. He had his education in the grammar-school of that place; from whence he was sent to Cambridge, where he became a pensioner of Queen’s college. After that he went to Oxford, to obtain preferment from the visitors appointed by act of parliament, and there took the degree of B.A.April 15, 1648; and on Sept. 29 following, was, by order of the said visitors, made fellow of Lincoln college. Feb. 20, 1650, he took the degree of M. A. At length, having married the daughter of Dr. Peter Heylyn, then living at Abingdon, he became rector of Wadding-ton, near Lincoln, the perpetual advowson of which he purchased, and held it for some time, together with the sinecure of Gedney, in the same county. After the restoration he conformed, and was made prebendary of Asgarby in the church of Lincoln. July 6, 1669, he took the degree of B. D. and the same year was created D. D. being then in good repute for his learning and orthodoxy. He died at Newark, on a journey to Spa, Aug. 17, 1683, and was buried in his own church of Waddington. His works are: 1. “Censura Cleri, against scandalous ministers, not fit to be restored to the church’s livings, in point of prudence, piety, and fame,” Lond. 1660, in three sheets, 4to his name is not prefixed to this piece. 2. “TheoJogo-historicus, or the true life of the most reverend divine and excellent historian Peter Heylyn, D. D. subdean of Westminster,” Lond. 1683, 8vo. This was published, as the author says, to correct the errors, supply the defects, and confute the calumnies of George Vernon, A- M. rector of Bourton on the Water, in Gloucestershire, who had published a life of Dr. Heylyn; and Heylyn’s life will certainly be best understood by a comparison of the two. To it is added, 3. “An Answer to Mr. Baxter’s false accusation of Mr. Heylyn.” 4. “A catechism for the use of his parish.” The purpose of the “Censura Cleri” was to prevent some clergymen from being restored to their livings who had been ejected during the interregnum, but, according to Wood, when affairs took a different turn, he did not wish to be known as the author.

, an eminent citizen and alderman of London of the last century, and many years one of its representatives in parliament, will not probably be thought undeserving of a lengthened notice, in these days of political delusion and imposture. He was born at Heading, in Berkshire, in 1685. His parents, who were of the people called Quakers, put him to a school at Wandsworth, in Surrey, which was solely appropriated to the education of persons of that profession. From this school, the master of which was of the same religious principles, young Barnard is said to have derived very iittle advantage in point of classical and polite literature. This loss, however, his native good sense, and love of knowledge, soon led him to supply, as far as possible, by carefully reading, in our own tongue, the best writers of Greece and Rome. By these means, though he could not be fully sensible of the elegance of the classic authors, which was, for the most part, lost in the translations of them, he became well acquainted with every remarkable sect, character, and action, in profane history. Such were the integrity and candour of his mind, when he was a boy, that his playmates used to choose him for their chancellor, in the disputes which they had with each other, and readily submitted to his decisions. When in the fifteenth year of his age, his father, who appears to have been settled in London, and had long been afflicted with bad health, determined to take him into his comptinghouse and, from observing his natural turn, assiduity, and talents, scrupled not to commit to his care the management of a great business in the wine trade, nor was he disappointed in the early confidence which he placed in his son. At this time our young gentleman took peculiar pleasure in the study of figures, which he pursued with such success, that his judgment was afterwards highly valued in affairs which required profound skill in calculation, and his knowledge as an able financier became undisputed. In the midst of these pursuits and engagements, he did not neglect the subject of religion. Some scruples having arisen in his mind with regard to the principles wherein he had been educated, he determined to apply himself to the devout study of the Bible, which he firmly believed to be the sole repository of divine truth. The result of his inquiries was, that he found himself called upon, by the dictates of his conscience, to make the painful sacrifice of openly renouncing the distinguishing tenets of his revered parents. For this purpose, he was introduced to doctor Compton, then bishop of London and, after several conferences with that prelate, was baptized by him, in his chapel at Fulham, 1703. Mr. Barnard was under nineteen years of age when he quitted the society of the Quakers; and from that time he continued, till his death, a member of the established church, an admirer of her liturgy, and an ornament to her communion. There was a peculiarity of character in the early part of his life, which deserves to be noticed. When he was a youth himself, he never chose to associate with those of his own age. Being convinced that he could derive no improvement from an acquaintance with them, he sought out companions among men distinguished by their knowledge, learning, and religion; and such men received, with open arms, a young person who discovered so much good sense and discernment.

Mr. Barnard, till the thirty-sixth year of his age, was only known by the excellencies of his private character, and the esteem in which he was held as a man of reading and strong parts. But about this time, the following incident laid the foundation of his public fame. A bill seriously affecting the wine trade, had passed through the house of commons, and was depending in the upper house. The principal merchants, who would have been injured by the operation of the bill, united in presenting a petition to the lords, praying to be heard against it, by themselves, -or counsel. Their request being granted, Mr. Barnard, without his knowledge, was made choice of, as the fittest person to prove the grievance alleged, and to answer every objection to the petition. Through some unaccountable negligence, he was not acquainted with the business assigned him, till the afternoon before he was to be heard by the peers. This singular disadvantage, when it came to be known, made his speech appear the more extraordinary. By the extent of his acquaintance with, commerce, and the perspicuity and force of his reasoning, accompanied with a becoming modesty, he contributed in so high a degree to carry the point aimed at, that all his friends considered themselves as principally indebted to his talents for their success. So signal an instance of Mr. Barnard’s abilities drew the attention of the public towards him, andprepared the way for his appearing in a more honourable and important station. The admiration he had acquired, made it wished, that he might be employed in the service of his fellow- citizens and countrymen at large. Accordingly, at an anniversary meeting in 1721, his friends proposed, without his knowledge, that he should be put up as a candidate to represent the city of London in Parliament at the next election, which was expected to happen in that year, though it did not take place till the year following. When Mr. Barnard was informed of the honour intended him, he urged hisinvincible dislike to the soliciting and canvassing for votes. But this objection was over-ruled by the proposers, who pledged themselves to undertake that trouble and so effectually did they perform their promise, that he was chosen member, though the contest between the competitors was one of the warmest ever known in London. The candidates were Child, Lockwood, Godfrey, Barnard, Parsons, and Heyshaw the four former of whom were elected. Seven thousand six hundred and seventy-three liverymen polled a number, it is said, which had never before been equalled. All who knew Mr. Barnard, conceived great expectations that he would acquit himself to the honour of his constituents nor were their expectations disappointed. From his first -taking his seat in the house of commons, he entered with penetration into the merits of each point under debate defended with intrepidity what he apprehended to be our constitutional rights; withstood every attempt to burden his country with needless subsidies; argued with remarkable perspicuity and strength and crowned all with such a close attendance upon parliament, that he was never absent by choice, from the time the members met, till they were adjourned. It is difficult to say, whether out of the house he was more popular, or within it more respectable, during the space of nearly forty years.

Of the regard sir Robert Walpole had for him, the following instance has been given riding out on the same day in two parties, they happened to come where only a narrow lane prevented their view of each other. Mr. Bar-­nard, talking with his company, was overheard. And a gentleman of the other party said, Whose voice is that Sir Robert replied, do you not know it is one I shall never forget I have often felt its power. Upon meeting at the end of the lane, sir Robert Walpole, with that enchanting courtesy he possessed, saluting Mr. Barnard, told him what had passed.

As Mr. Barnard was so assiduous in discharging his duty to his constituents, and took so constant a part in every important affair that occurred during a very interesting period, of the British annals, were we to take particular notice of all the business wherein he was engaged, and of all the debates in which he spoke, we should run too far into the general history of the time, but the more distinguished instances of his parliamentary conduct will unavoidably be mentioned in the course of our narrative. Violent disputes having arisen in the city of London, about the choice of sheriffs and aldermen, it was thought necessary to ascertain more clearly than they were then understood, the rights and modes of election for the future. Accordingly, in 1725, a bill was brought into parliament to effect that important purpose. But the citizens apprehending that it invaded their just privileges, formed a strong opposition to it, in which they were supported by three of their representatives, Child, Lock wood, and Barnard. Mr. Barnard objected to it, that, by its making an alteration in the city charter, it established a bad precedent for the crown to violate corporation charters at their pleasure; that.it took away from a number of honest citizens the right they had enjoyed, from time immemorial, of voting at wardmote elections that it abridged the privileges of the common -council and that, by transferring too great a weight of authority and influence to the court of mayor and aldermen, it subverted, in a considerable degree, the ancient constitution of the metropolis. The formal thanks of the citizens were presented, by a deputation of four aldermen and eight commoners, to Mr. Barnard and his two colleagues, for their cgnduct in this affair. The bill, notwithstanding all opposition, passed into a layv and it is the statute by which all elections in the city are now regulated. However, the most obnoxious part of the act, which granted a negative power to the lord mayor and aldermen, was repealed in 1746 and to this sir John Barnard greatly contributed. On the 4th of January 1728, Mr. Barnard was chosen alderman of Dowgate Ward, upon the death of John Crawley, esq. On the 14th of April, 1729, he presented a bill to the house of commons, for the better regulation and gove'rnment of seamen in the merchants service which, having passed in that house on the 6th of May, was sent up to the lords, and received the royal assent on the 14th of the same month. About this time, likewise, he took an active part in the inquiry, which, in consequence of the iniquitous and cruel conduct of Thomas Bambridge, warden of trie Fleet, was made into the state of the gaols in this kingdom. When Bambridge and his agents were committed to Newgate, and the attorney-general was ordered to prosecute them, alderman Barnard was very assiduous as a magistrate, in procuring information concerning the several abuses which had been practised in the Fleet to the oppression of the debtors and he so pathetically represented the grievances under which they laboured, as to be greatly instrumental in obtaining the act of insolvency, and the act for the relief of debtors, with respect to the imprisonment of their persons, which were assented to by the king, at the close of the session, on the 14th of May, 1729. Another occasion which he had of displaying his parliamentary abilities, was, when on the 24th of February 1729-30, the bill was read a second time, “To prevent any persons, his majesty’s subjects, or residing within this kingdom, to advance any sum of money to any foreign prince, state, or potentate, without having obtained licence from his majesty under his privy seal, or some greater authority.” The bill had taken its rise from a negotiation which had been set on foot by the emperor of Germany, to obtain a loan in England, of 400,000/1 Mr. Barnard, who opposed the passing of the act, alleged in the course of the debate, several important reasons against it; which, however, were answered in a masterly manner by sir Philip Yorke. The opposition so far prevailed, that the bill was modified in a certain degree and an expla^ natiort was given by the ministry, that it was not his majesty’s intention to prevent his subjects from lending money to the king of Portugal, or any other prince in alliance with England and that the only reason for not naming the emperor in the bill was, that by making it general, there could be no foundation for an open rupture between the courts of London and Vienna. On the 28th of September, 1732, Mr. Barnard having attended Francis Child, esq. then lord mayor, to Kensington, with an address of congratulation to king George the Second, received from his majesty the honour of knighthood. Towards the beginning of the following year, the famous excise scheme, which met with so vigorous an opposition, was proposed by sir Robert Walpole. As a particular account of this arTair will more properly come under the article of that celebrated statesman, we shall take no other notice of it here than what may be necessary to complete the history of sir John Barnard. No one could exceed him in the ability and zeal with which he oppose^ the design. He spoke several times against it, and condemned it both in a commercial and political light. He considered it as introductory to such general and arbitrary laws of excise as would be absolutely inconsistent with the freedom of the constitution and thought that the question upon the scheme would be, “Whether we shall endeavour to prevent frauds in the collecting of the public revenues, at the expence of the liberties of the people” “For my own part,” said sir John, “I never was guilty of any fraud: I put it to any man, be he who he will, to accuse me of so much as the appearance of a fraud in any trade I was ever concerned in I am resolved never to be guilty of any fraud. It is very true, that these frauds are a very great prejudice to all fair traders and, therefore, I speak against my own interest, when I speak against any methods that may tend towards preventing of frauds. But I shall never put my private interest in balance with the interest or happiness of the nation. I had rather beg my bread from door to door, and see my country flourish, than be the greatest subject of the nation, and see the trade of my country decaying, and the people enslaved and oppressed.” On the 14th of March, 1732-3, in the grand committee of the house of commons “To consider of the most proper methods for the better security and improvement of the duties and revenues, already charged upon, and payable from tobacco and wines,” the excise scheme was proposed. In the course of the long and violent debate which took place on this occasion, sir John Barnard, among other arguments, alledged that the scheme was such as could not, even by malice itself, be represented to be worse than it really was; that it was a pill, which, if the people of England were obliged to swallow, they would find as bitter a pill v as ever was swallowed by them since they were a people that the intended remedy for preventing frauds in the collection of the revenue, was far more desperate than the disease that the constitution of our government, and the liberty of the subject, were never more nearly or more immediately concerned in any question and that it was a dangerous encroachment upon the ancient birthright of Englishmen, the right of trial by jury. A great number of the citizens having come down to the lobby of the house of commons, and some of the crowd who had mixed with them having behaved tumultuously, sir Robert Walpole took notice of the extraordinary concourse of people who were collected together at the door, and declared his disapprobation of the methods which had been used to bring them thither. In doing this, he so far lost the usual moderation of his temper, as to drop an expression which gave the highest offence to the city of London, and was long remembered to his disadvantage. “Gentlemen,” he observed,” might say what they pleased of the multitudes at the door, and in all the avenues leading to the house; they might call them a modest multitude if they would they might give them what names they thought fit; it might be said that they came as humble supplicants but,“added sir Robert,” I know whom the law calls Sturdy Beggars and those who brought them hither could not be certain but that they might have behaved in the same manner.“Sir John Barnard rising up to answer this reflection, the committee, for a while, were in some confusion, in consequence of the question’s being loudly called for. At length, however, order being restored, sir John made the following reply” Sir, I know of no irregular or unfair methods that were used to call people from the city to your door. It is certain, that any set of gentlemen or merchants may lawfully desire their friends, they may even write letters, and they may send those letters to whom they please, to desire the merchants of figure and character to come down to the court of requests, and to our lobby, in order to solicit their friends and acquairitance ngainst any scheme or project, which they think may be prejudicial to them. This is the undoubted right: of the subject, and what has been always practised upon all occasions. The honourable gentleman talks of Sturdy Beggars I do not know what sort of people may be now at our door, because I have not lately been out of the house. But I believe they are the same sort of people that were there when I came last into the house and then, I can assure you, that I saw none but such as deserve the name of Sturdy Beggars as little as the honourable gentleman himself, or any gentleman whatever. It is well known that the city of London was sufficiently apprized of what we were this day to be about. Where they got their information, I do not know but I am very certain that they had a right notion of the scheme which has been now opened to us and they were so generally and zealously bent against it, that whatever methods may have been used to call them together, I am sure it would have been impossible to have found any legal method to have prevented their coming hither." When four resolutions had been formed by the committee, in pursuance of sir Robert WalpoleV motion, relating to the excise-scheme, and were reported to the house on the 16th of March, sir John Barnard took the lead with his usual spirit, in the fresh debate which arose upon the question of agreeing to the first resolution. And the same vigorous opposition was continued by him through the whole progress of the bill, till, as is well known, sir Robert Walpole himself found it necessary to move, on the 11th of April, 1733, that the second reading of it should be deferred for two months.

On 5th of March 1734-5, a motion was made by sir John Barnard, for leave to bring in a bill “For restraining the number of houses for playing of interludes, and for the better regulating common players of interludes.” In support of his motion, he represented the mischief that was done to the metropolis by the effect which the play-houses had in corrupting the youth, encouraging vice and debauchery, and prejudicing the spirit of industry and trade and he urged that these evils would be much increased, if, according to a project which was then set on foot, another play-house should be erected in the very heart of the city. He was seconded by Mr. Sandys, and was so ably sustained by Mr. Pulteney, sir Robert Walpole, sir Joseph Jekyll, sir Thomas Saunderson, and Mr. James Erskine, that it was ordered, nemine eontradicente, that a bill should be brought in, pursuant to sir John Barnard’s motion. This was accordingly done; but the affair was afterwards dropped, on account of a clause which was offered to be inserted in the bill, for enlarging the power of the lord chamberlain, with regard to the licensing of plays. At midsummer, 1735, sir John Barnard was chosen, together with his brother-inlaw, alderman Godschall, to the office of sheriff for the city of London and county of Middlesex. When, on the 2d of February, 1736-7, Mr. Pulteney moved in the house of commons for an address to his majesty, that he would graciously be pleased to settle 100,000l. a year upon his royal highness Frederick prince of Wales, sir John was one of the gentlemen who spoke in its favour.

Hitherto our upright and excellent magistrate and senator had been singularly popular in his undertakings. But in the next great affair he was engaged in, though his purposes were as wise and upright as in any part of his former conduct, he met with a very different fate. On the 14th of March, 1736-7, he made a motion for enabling his majesty to raise money towards redeeming old and new South Sea annuities. This was done with a view of reducing the interest of these annuities from four to three per cent, and thereby to prepare a way for a like reduction of interest with regard to the other funds. In consequence of the debates which arose on this occasion, several resolutions were formed by the committee of the whole house and a bill was ordered in for converting all the public funds, redeemable by law, into an interest or an^ nuity not exceeding three per cent, per annum. The matter, however, was so altered, modified, and refined upon, and rendered so unacceptable, by the artifices of those in power, that, after long and violent debates, it came to nothing. The integrity of sir John Barnard appeared in his moving, about the same time, that the house would, as soon as the annual interest of all the national redeemable debt should be reduced to three per cent, take off some of the heavy taxes which oppress the poor and manufacturers but this proposition was rejected by a considerable majority. Notwithstanding the undeniable uprightness of his intentions, he became, whMe his attempt to reduce the yearly dividends of the funds was depending, very obnoxious to the“public. Instead of receiving the applause which he justly merited, he was insulted with revilings, and exposed to the resentment of the populace. A young man belonging to a public office, headed a mob, who endeavoured to break into sir John Barnard’s house. Though farther violence was prevented, the disturbance continued for some hours. The leader of the rioters, conscious that the assault might easily be proved upon him, consulted his safety by flight into another country. After several months, sir John Barnard was entreated to suffer the criminal to return without molestation to which he generously answered,” that he felt no resentment against the youth that it was enough, if he was sensible or' his fault that no prosecution was ever intended; and that allowances should be made for the effect which inflammatory speeches have upon young minds, from those whom it is their duty to respect and love.“The odium which was excited by the plan of our faithful senator soon subsided. His character shone the brighter from the cloud which had been cast upon it. And when, some years afterwards, Mr. Henry Pelham adopted and carried into execution the scheme which was now rejected, he was greatly aided and encouraged in the undertaking by sir John Barnard. Indeed, sir John was so fully convinced of the wisdom and utility of the design, that he published, though without his name, in February 1749-50, a small tract in defence of it, entitled” Considerations on the Proposal fur reducing the Interest on the National Debt.“This piece is written with great perspicuity and good sense; and the arguments of it were by no means invalidated by an answer to it, called” Annotations on a late pamphlet, entitled Considerations on the Proposals for reducing the Interest on the National Debt.' 7

In 1737, he was raised to the dignity of chief magistrate of the city of London and no one ever discharged the office with greater reputation to himself, or advantage to the public. During his whole mayoralty, he paid a paternal attention to the welfare of his fellow citizens. Though he was enthusiastically devoted to a country evening retirement, he would not sleep a single night in his house at Clapham, lest any person should be injured by his indulging himself even with a short absence from the metropolis. He gave such strict injunctions to remove the nuisance of common beggars out of the City, and took such care to have his injunctions observed, that scarcely a vagrant was to be seen within the walls. When young delinquents were brought before him, he was an advocate, in every instance where it could be done with propriety, for softening the penalties they had incurred. If prosecutors were of a severe temper, he would labour to dissuade them from sending a petty offender, for the first trespass, to a prison, where surrounding prostitutes, and wretches hardened in vice, might induce a total corruption of manners. There were not wanting, it is said, several instances in which his prudence and seasonable lenity became happily successful in restoring deluded youths to regularity of conduct, and the order of society. But where severity was necessary, sir John Barnard well knew how to exercise it with a becoming firmness. As the regard he bore to the clergy was generally spoken of, an offender of that order thought that he should hence be treated with greater gentleness. Accordingly, he appeared before the lord mayor in his canonical robes. But his lordship strongly represented to him that the sanctity of the clerical profession was a high aggravation of the fault and, without paying the least deference to his religious garb, punished the reverend delinquent according to his crime. Among other methods which our active magistrate took to promote virtuous manners, and the good government of the city, one was the issuing of a strict order for the decent observance of the Lord’s day. The edict was so diligently enforced, as effectually to awe the offenders against whom it was levelled. The Sunday was observed throughout the city with a decency which hath never since been equalled and it must be acknowledged that sir John Barnard, by his conduct in this respect, consulted not only the honour of religion, but the political welfare and happiness of the community.

There was an excellent rule laid down by sir John Barnard for himself in his mayoralty, and which well deserves to be imitated. He would not permit, if it could possibly be avoided, any persons to be committed to the Compter, even for a single night, without the accusation’s being heard. He thought that the confinement of a single night might, if they were innocent, be very injurious to the parties put into custody it might hurt their morals, or otherwise be very distressing to themselves or families. He sat up, therefore, every evening, till after eleven o'clock, to hear the cases of those who were laid hold of by the constables. One night, when he was gone up stairs to bed, a woman was brought, who had been seized as a street-walker. Though the lord mayor was nearly undressed, he readily came down again. The woman alledged in her defence, that she was a person of honesty, who lived in a remote part of Wapping, and had been kept out late by necessary and unavoidable business. As she said that her neighbours would testify to her character, Jiis lordship waited patiently to past three in the morning, until some of them came for that purpose. During his mayoralty, he had the misfortune of losing his lady, whose funeral procession to Clapham was attended, through the city, by the children belonging to Christ’s hospital, of which he was many years president.

In 1745, the whole kingdom was indebted to the weight and influence of sir John Barnard, in assisting to prevent the public confusion. The successes of the rebels in Scotland, at that time, and their march into the heart of England, had spread such a terror through the city, that public credit began to be shaken, and there was a run upon the Bank, the notes of which had sunk to ten per cent, below their value. In this crisis, sir John Barnard took the lead at the head of one thousand and six hundred merchants and principal traders, who, at Garraway’s coffeehouse, signed the following agreement

“We, the undersigned merchants, and others, being sensible how necessary the preservation of public credit is, at this time, do hereby declare, that we will not refuse to receive Bank notes in payment of any sum of money to be paid to us, and ttyat we will use our utmost endeavours to make all our payments in the same manner.” This happy expedient removed the jealousies which the enemies of the constitution, or the fears of the people, had excited, and restored public credit to its usual vigour. Sir John Barnard, having disapproved of the method of raising the supplies for the service of the year 1.746, and having made some other proposals for that purpose, a pamphlet was addressed to him, which blamed his conduct in this respect, and objected to the schemes he had offered. To this he thought proper to reply, in a tract to which he prefixed his name, entitled “A Defence of several Proposals for raising of three millions for the service of the Government, for the Year 1746 with a postscript, containing some notions relating to public credit 1J and whoever peruses it, will be sensible how well skilled he was in matters of finance. Upon the death of sir John Thompson, in 1749, sirJolm Barnard took upon him the office of alderman of Bridgeward Without; and thus became in name, as before he might be deemed in reality, the Father of the City. The sense of the many advantages, which he had been active in procuring for the nation in general, and the metropolis in particular, induced the body of London merchants to testify their veneration for him, by erecting his statue, during his lifetime, in the Royal Exchange an honour which had never before been conferred on any beneath a crowned head. Sir John Barnard’s modesty engaged him sincerely to object to this signal mark of the gratitude and esteem of his fellow-citizens. He thought that such a testimony of regard ought not to be paid to any character, till its perseverance in integrity had been sealed by death and he said that he could not, consistently with decorum and delicacy, appear in the Royal Exchange, when his statue was there. Accordingly, he never afterwards used to ' go within-side of it, but contented himself with transacting his business in the front of that building. In 1754, without his solicitations, and, indeed, contrary to his wishes, he was chosen, for the last time to a seat in parliament for the city of London on which occasion, he made the following speech to hk electors” The honour you have done me in choosing me six times one of your representatatives in parliament, calls for my sincere and hearty thanks; the rather, as I look upon the present election to be the last favour I can expect. I have not of late presumed to offer my service, knowing my inability to give that attendawce in parliament, which this honourable city has a right to require from its members. But the continuance of your polling for me, is a proof of your kindness in overlooking my failings, and of your affectionate regard for me. The impression which this hath made upon my heart can never be effaced, of which I beg leave to assure you, and of my best endeavours to promote the good of this city in particular, and of the nation in general."

Sir John Barnard finding, some few years afterwards, that the infirmities of age advanced fast upon him, and having always disliked the thought of retaining a trust when the duties of it could no longer be fulfilled, thought proper to resign his alderman’s gown. This resolution, which took place in July 175$, was received with the sincere concern of his brethren, and his fellow-citizens. The subsequent record of his worth, at the motion of John Paterson, esq. was ordered to be entered upon their books, by the court of common-council. “Sir John Barnard, so justly and emphatically styled the Father of this City, having lately, to the great and lasting regret of this court, thought proper to resign the office of alderman, it is unanimously resolved, that the thanks of this court be given him, for having so long and so faithfully devoted himself to the service of his fellow-citizens for the honour and influence which this city has, upon many occasions, derived from the dignity of his character, and the wisdom, steadiness, and integrity of his conduct, both in church and state; his noble struggles for liberty and his disinterested, invariable pursuits of the true glory and prosperity of his king and country, uninfluenced by power, unawed by clamour, and unbiassed by the prejudices of party.” An equally honourable resolution was passed by the court of aldermen.

Sir John Barnard, after resigning the office of alderman, retired in a great measure from public business, and Jived in a private manner, at his house at Clapham, for the remainder of his days. The persons he commonly associated with were his neighbours, most of them merchants, whom he used to meet at a weekly club. It was his custom, likewise, to go, once a week, to the common bowling-green. When he rode out on the Saturdays and Mondays, the principal gentlemen of Clapham attended him, and esteemed themselves highly honoured in being of his party. After some years of honourable retirement, he departed this life on the 29th of August, 1764, at Clapharn in Surrey, and was buried at Mortlake in the same county.

All who have written concerning sir John Barnard, and all who were acquainted with him, have united in testifying to the universal excellence of his character. He was not only blameless, but eminently exemplary^ as a son, a husband, a father, a master, a benefactor, a merchant, a magistrate, and a senator. To the faithful and active discharge of the personal and social duties, he added a most devout sense of religion. The first hour, at least, of every day was employed in prayer, and the study of the scriptures. He attended public worship twice on a Sunday, and was constant in receiving the communion. He had such a high reverence for the Bible, that he always expressed a great dislike of any attacks which were made upon its sacred original and authority. Sir John Barnard did not, in leaving the Quakers, lay aside the simplicity of his manners. He was plain in his dress and address clear, unaffected, and concise in his language. Though modest in his deportment, he feared no man in the discharge of his duty. Once, when he had risen in a debate, sir Robert Walpole, then in the height of his power, was whispering to the speaker, who leaned towards him, over the arm of his chair. Upon this sir John Barnard cried out, “Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, I address myself to you, and not to your chair. I will be heard. I call that gentleman to order.” The speaker turned about, dismissed sir Robert, asked sir John’s pardon, and desired him to proceed. Another time, when sir Robert Walpole had taken a roll of paper from off the table, and was reading it, sir John Barnard obliged him to lay it down, and attend to the business of the house.

When, during lord Granville’s being secretary of state, any applications were made by the merchants to administration, his lordship was accustomed to ask, “What does sir John Barnard say what is his opinion” That celebrated nobleman and Mr. Pulteney used frequently to visit him at Clapham, to request his advice with regard to any important affairs in which they were engaged. Lord Chatham, when Mr. Pitt, hath been known to style him the great Commoner and lord Palmerston requested his youngest daughter for his eldest son, as an honour done to his family.

Sir John Barnard left one son, and two daughters. His son John Barnard, esq. of Berkeley square, well known for his taste in the polite arts, and for his admirable collection of pictures, died about 1784. Of sir John Barnard’s daughters, the eldest was married to Thomas Hankey, esq. afterwards sir Thomas Hankey, knt. and the youngest to the honourable Henry Temple, esq. the second lord viscount Palmerston.

, one of the active agents in the French revolution, was born in 1761, the son of an opulent attorney of Grenoble. He was educated to the profession of the law, and being appointed deputy to the States-General in 1789, became one of the most implacable enemies of the court, and in other respects betrayed that sanguinary spirit which at that time raised many more obscure men into popular reputation. He joined in most of the extravagant measures of the assembly, and argued in particular for confiscating the property of the clergy, and abolishing religious orders. In order to catch popularity from whatever quarter, he declared himself the advocate of protestants, actors, Jews, and executioners, and solicited their admission to the rights of citizenship. He was likewise for the suppression of all feudal rights and titles, and in general for all the measures of the Jacobin party but amidst all this violence, he ventured to think for himself on some points, which proved his ruin. On one occasion, he insisted that no law shouJd be passed concerning people of colour, until the motion had been made by the colonies and pointed out the certain resistance of the planters to innovations of this nature. Such an appearance of justice could not be acceptable at that time. It was even attributed to corruption, of which a more direct proof appeared soon after. On the news of the king’s being arrested in his flight, Barnave, with Petion, and another, were appointed to escort the royal family to Paris. He returned in the carriage of their majesties, and conducted himself with all proper respect and attention. What had happened to produce this change is not known it might be compunction, or he might have discovered that the unfortunate monarch was not the monster he had represented him but from this hour Barnave became a suspected character; and he increased this suspicion, by giving in the assembly a simple recital of his mission, without adding any reflection. He did worse he even spoke for the inviolability of the king’s person, and repelled, with looks of contempt, the hootings of the populace. He still continued, however, to enjoy some influence in the assembly, to which his talents justly entitled him, and even was powerful enough to procure a repeal of the decree respecting the colonies, which he had before opposed against the voice of the majority. At the end of the session he was appointed mayor of Grenoble, where he married the only daughter of a lawyer, who brought him a fortune of 700,000 livres but all this he did not enjoy long. When the jacobin party obtained possession of the court, in consequence of the events of August 1792, they found, or created, proofs of his connection with the cabinet of the Thuileries. After a long imprisonment at Grenoble, he was brought before the revolutionary tribunal of Paris, where he made an able defence, and probably impressed even his enemies with a favourable opinion of his conduct. He was, however, condemned to be guillotined, which was executed Nov. 29, 1793. Barnave was unquestionably a man of abilities, whatever may be thought of their direction. Mirabeau, to whom he was a rival, and whom he often opposed, was astonished that a young man should speak so rapidly, so long, and so eloquently and said of him, “It is a young tree, which will mount high if it be let to grow.”

, was an English Roman Catholic, of the seventeenth century, whose history has been imperfectly related. According to Moreri (who refers to “Memoires du temps”) he was an Englishman by birth, and studied with great success at Lou vain. Wood savs he was of a Lancashire family, and educated for some time at Oxford, whence he went to Spain, and studied divinity and philosophy under the famous Dr. J. Alph. Curiel, who, adds Wood, was wont to call Barnes by the name of John Hiiss, because of a spirit of contradiction which was always observed in him, but which, it appears by his writings, was a spirit of thinking for himself that could not be very acceptable to his superiors. He is said to have been young when he entered among the English Benedictines near Douay, for fear of the inquisition, with which he was threatened at Louvain and some time after he was obliged to leave the Benedictines, under the same alarm, for holding some sentiments they did not approve. Wood says, that before this he was sent into England on a mission, but being discovered there, he was imprisoned and sent to Normandy with certain priests and Jesuits. Moreri says, that on leaving Douay, he took refuge in Paris, where he was protected by some persons of distinction, and admitted into the friendship of several men of learning. In 1625, at which time he was one of the confessors of the abbey of Chelles, he published a work against mental reservation, entitled “Dissertatio contra equivocationes,” Paris, 8vo, of which a French translation was published at the same time. In the approbation of the faculty of theology at Paris prefixed to this work, he is styled doctor of arts and divinity, professor of the English mission, and first assistant of the congregation of Spain. This work made a considerable noise, and was attempted to be answered by father Theophilus Raynaud in 1627. His next work, entitled “Catholico-Romanus Pacificus,” gave yet more offence, and the pope wrote to the king of France, and to cardinal Richelieu, desiring they would send the author of these publications to Rome. Barnes was accordingly taken up in December 1625. He wrote also an answer to Clement Reyner’s “Apostolatus Benedictinorum in Anglia,” which Wood makes to precede the former. It appears certain, however, that in consequence of the moderation of his opinions, he was hurried like a malefactor from place to place through Germany. While confined at Mechlin, he contrived to make his escape from the room by means of the strings of a bass viol, of which he had procured a quantity under pretence that the dampness of the place had injured what belonged to his instrument; but he was discovered while stepping into a vessel at Antwerp, and conveyed to Rome. Here he was put into the prison belonging to the inquisition, in which he died, after thirty years confinement. During part of this time, his sufferings had brought on insanity. An edition of his “CatholicoRomanus Pacificus” was printed at the theatre at Oxford in 1680, 8vo, and part of it had been before made use of by Dr. Basire in his “Ancient Liberty of the Britannic church.” Wood mentions other writings by Barnes, but without specifying their titles.

, a learned divine and professor of Greek at Cambridge, was the son of a tradesman of London, where he was born Jan. 10, 1654. He was educated in Christ’s hospital, where he distinguished himself by his early knowledge of Greek, and by some poems in Latin and English, written before he went to the University. On Dec. 11, 1671, he was admitted a servitor in Emanuel college, Cambridge. In 1675 he published at London, his “Gerania;” and in June 1678 was elected fellow of his college. The following year, he published his “Poetical paraphrase on the History of Esther.” In 1686 he took the degree of B. D. and in 1688, published his life of Edward III. dedicated to king James II. In 1694, came out his edition of Euripides, dedicated to Charles duke of Somerset; and in 1695, he was chosen Greek professor of the university of Cambridge. In 1705, he published at Cambridge, his edition of Anacreon, dedicated to the duke of Marlborough and in 1710 his Homer, the Iliad dedicated to the earl of Pembroke, and the Odyssey to the earl of Nottingham. He died Aug. 3, 1712, and was buried at Hemingford, where there is a monument erected to him by his widow.

Mr. Barnes’s character has been variously represented, but always with a preponderance of the good. He had a great deal of enthusiasm in his temper, which discovered itself in various circumstances of his life. He constantly maintained, that spiritual sins, such as pride, defamation, &c. were more offensive in the eyes of God, than those which arise from a too great indulgence of the senses. He believed, that charity seldom or never passes without its reward in this life. And this opinion prevailed so far with him, that he has given his only coat to a vagrant begging at the door; and he used to relate some extraordinary retributions conferred upon him by unknown persons for his charities of this kind. He was remarkable rather for the quickness of his wit, and the happiness of his memory, than for the solidity of his judgment; upon which somebody recommended this pun (which, by the way, Menage used in his satire upon Pierre Montmaur) to be inscribed upon his monument

He bad a prodigious readiness in writing and speaking the Greek tongue and he himself tells us in the preface to his Esther, that “he found it much easier to him to write in that language, than* in Latin or even English, since the ornaments of poetry are almost peculiar to the Greeks, and since he had for many years been extremely conversant in Homer, the great father and source of the Greek Poetry However, that his verses were not mere Cantos from that poet, like Dr. Duport’s, but formed, as far as he was able, upon his style and manner since he had no desire to be considered as a rhapsodist of a rhapsody, but was ambitious of the title of a poet.” Dr. Bentley, we are told, used to say of Joshua Barnes, that “he understood as much Greek as a Greek cobler.” This bon mot, which was first related by Dr. Salter of the Charter-house, has been explained by an ingenious writer, as not insinuating, that Barnes had only some knowledge of the Greek language. Greek was so familiar to him that he could offhand have turned a paragraph in a newspaper, or a hawker’s bill, into any kind of Greek metre, and has often been known to do so among his Cambridge friends. But with this uncommon knowledge and facility in that language, being very deficient in taste and judgment, Bentley compared his attainments in Greek, not to the erudition of a scholar, but to the colloquial readiness of a vulgar mechanic. With respect to his learning, it seems agreed that he had read a great many books, retained a great many words, and could write Greek in what is called the Anacreontic measure readily, but was very far from being a judicious or an able critic. If he had some enemies at first, his abuse and vanity did not afterwards lessen their number, though it is probable, more men laughed at, than either envied or hated him. They said he was ovo$ trfo$ *v%<xv 9 Asinus ad Lyram and perhaps it is not the worst thing Barnes ever said in reply, that they who said this of him, had not understanding enough to be poets, or wanted the b vug Ts%Q$ huqav.

In 1700, he married Mrs. Mason, a widow lady of Hemingford, near St. Ives, in Huntingdonshire, with a jointure of c200 per annum. The common report is, that this lady, who was between forty and fifty, having for some time been a great admirer of Mr. Barnes, came to Cambridge, and desired leave to settle an hundred pounds a year upon him after her death which he politely refused, unless she would condescend to make him happy in her person^ which was none of the most engaging. The lady was too obliging to refuse any thing to “Joshua, for whom,” she said, “the sun stood still” and soon after they were married. This jointure was probably a help to him, but he had no church preferment, and bore a considerable part in the printing of some of his works, particularly his Homer. It appears that he was much involved with the expence of this work, and wrote two supplicating letters on the subject to the earl of Oxford, which are now in the British Museum, and weiae copied some years ago, and printed in the St. James’s Chronicle by George Steevens, esq. What the effect of them was, we know not but it is said that he at one time generously refused c2000 a year which was offered to be settled upon him. Upon the same authority we are told that a copy of verses which he wrote to prove that Solomon was the author of the Iliad, was not so much from the persuasion of his own mind, as to amuse his wife and by that means engage her to supply him with money towards defraying the expences of the edition. On his monument is a Latin inscription, and some Greek anacreontics by Dr. Savage, rather extravagant, but composed by way of pleasantry, and which his widow requested might be inscribed. The English translation, often reprinted, is professedly burlesque but one curious-fact is recorded on this monument, that he “read a small English Bible one hundred and twenty-one times at his leisure,” which, Mr. Cole remarks, is but once more than the learned duke de Montausier had read the Greek Testament. In one of the above-mentioned letters to Harley, he says, “I have lived in the university above thirty years fellow of a college, now above forty years standing, and fifty-eight years of age am bachelor of divinity, and have preached before kings.” How Mr. Barnes was neglected in church preferment cannot now be ascertained, but it seems not improbable that he did not seek it, his whole life being spent in study, and his only wants, those which arose from the expense of his publications. His pursuits were classical, and although from his constant perusal of the Bible, we may infer his piety, we know little of him as a divine. The following is a Jist of Mr. Barnes’s works, published and unpublished; and from the latter, we may at least form a very high opinion of his industry. It is unnecessary, perhaps, to add that his editions of the classics are not now in the highest reputation. Their errors were pointed out in his life-time, and superior critics have in a great measure superseded the use of them. While at Christ-church he published, 1. "Sacred Poems, in five books, viz. I. Κοσμοποὖα, or the Creation of the World. II. The Fall of Adam and the Redemption by Christ. III. An Hymn to the Holy Trinity. IV. A Pastoral Eclogue upon the Restoration of King Charles II. and an Essay upon the Royal Exchange. V. Panegyris, or the Muses, &c.“These pieces are in English, with a Latin dedication, an. 1669. 2.” The Life of Oliver Cromwell, the Tyrant,“an English poem, 1670. 3. Several dramatic pieces, viz. Xerxes, Pythias and Damon, Holofernes, &c. some in English and some in Latin; the former written entirely by himself, the latter in conjunction with others. Also some tragedies of Seneca translated into English. 4.” Upon the Fire of London and the Plague,“a Latin poem in heroic verse. 5.” A Latin Elegy upon the beheading of St. John the Baptist.“He afterwards published, 6.” Gerania, or a new discovery of a little sort of people called Pigmies," 1655, 12mo. 7. Αυλιχοχάτοπτρον, sive Esthers Historia, Poetica Paraphrasi, idque Græco carmine, cui versio Latina opponitur, exornata; una cum Scholiis, seu Annotationibus Græcis; in quibus (ad sacri textus dilucidationem) præter alia non pauca, Gentium Orientalium Antiquitates, Moresque reconditiores proferuntur. Additur Parodia Homerica de eadem hac Historia. Accessit Index rerum ac verborum copiosissimus,“1679, 8vo. 8.” The History of that most victorious monarch Edward III. king of England and France, and lord of Ireland, and first founder of the most noble order of the Garter; being a full and exact account of the Life and Death of the said King; together with that of his most renowned son, Edward Prince of Wales and Acquitain, surnamed the Black Prince; faithfully and carefully collected from the best and most ancient authors domestic and foreign, printed books, manuscripts, and records,“Cambridge, 1688, fol. a very elaborate collection of facts, but strangely intermixed with long speeches from his own imagination, which he thought was imitating Thucydides. Of his judgment as an antiquary, it may be a sufficient specimen that he traced the institution of the order of the garter to the Phenicians, following his predecessor Aylet Sammes, who derives all our customs from the same ancient people. 9. His” Euripides,“1694, fol. 10.” His Anacreon,“1705 and 1721, 8vo, which he dedicated to the duke of Marlborough, who, it has been observed, knew nothing of Anacreon, or of Greek. 11. His Homer,” 2 vols. 1711, 4to. The verses he wrote proving that Solomon wrote the Iliad, are in ms. in the library of Emanuel college.

There is subjoined to the first edition of his Anacreon at Cambridge, 1705, a catalogue of works, which Mr. Barnes had either published, or intended to publish; which is omitted in the second edition of that poet, printed after his death in 1721, though it is mentioned in the contents and the prolegomena. In this catalogue, besides the books already mentioned, we find the following 1. The Warlike Lover, or the Generous Rival; an English dramatic piece upon the war between the English and Dutch, and the death of the earl of Sandwich, an. 1672. 2. ψονθομφανεὰχ, or Joseph the Patriarch a Greek heroic poem in one book. The author designed twelve books, but finished only one. 3. Ὀρειολογία, or our Saviour’s Sermon upon the Mount, the Decalogue, the Apostles Creed, the Lord’s Prayer, the Magnificat, with other hymns from the Old and New Testament, in Greek verse. 4. Thuribuluna, or the hymns and festivals in Greek verse. 5. Miscellanies and epigrams in Latin and Greek verse. 6. Αγγλα Βελγομαχία, or the death of Edward Montague, earl of Sandwich, in Greek, Latin, and English verse. 7. Ἀγεκτρυομαχία, or a poem upon Cock-fighting, an, 1673. 8. The Song of Songs, containing an hundred Hexastics in English heroic verse, an. 1674. 9. Σῶειδηριάδος; a ludicrous poem, in Greek macaronic verse, upon a battle between a Spider and a Toad, an. 1673. 10. Φληϊάδος, or a supplement to the old ludicrous poem under that title, at Trinity-house in Cambridge, upon a battle between the Fleas and a Welshman. 11. A Poetical Lexicon, Greek and Latin to which is added a Lexicon of proper names, 1675, fol. 12. A treatise on the Greek Accents, in answer to Henry Christian Heninius and others, with a discourse upon the Points now in use. 13. Humorous Poems upon the 9th by ok of the; Iliad, and the ninth of the Odyssey, in English published in 1681. 14. Franciados an heroic poem, in Latin, upon the Black Prince. The whole was to consist of twelve books, eight of which were finished. 15. The Art of War, in four books, in English prose, 1676. 16. Hengist, or the English Valour; an heroic poem in English, in seven books. 17. Landgarth, or the Amazon Queen of Norway and Denmark an English dramatic poem in heroic verse, designed in honour of the marriage between prince George of Denmark and princess Anne. 18. An Ecclesiastical History from the beginning of the world to the ascension of our Saviour, in Latin, to I. 19. Miscellaneous Poems in English. 20. Philosophical and Divine Poems, in Latin, published at different 'times at Cambridge. 21. Poems, and sacred daily Meditations, continued for several years in English. 22. A dissertation upon Pillars, Obelisks, Pyramids, &c. in Latin, 1692. 23. A discourse upon the Sibyls, in three books, in Latin. 24. The Life of Pindar in four lectures, and thirty-two lectures upon his first Olympic Ode. 25. The Life of Theocritus, and lectures upon that poet. 26. The Lives of David, Scanderbeg, and Tamerlane. These lives, he tells us, he never actually begun, but only made considerable collections for them. 27. The Life of Edward the Black Prince. 28. The University- Calendar, or directions for young students of all degrees, with relation to their studies, and general rules of ethics, and a form of prayer, anno 1685. 29. Thirty-two lectures upon the first book of the Odyssey. 30. Above fifty lectures upon. Sophocles. 31. Lectures upon Bereshith, with an oration recommending the study of the Hebrew language. 32. Three Discourses in Jtnglish. I. The Fortunate Island, or the Inauguration of Queen Gloriana. II. The Advantage of England, or a sure way to victory. III. The Cause of the Church of England defended and explained published in 1703. 33. Concio ad Clerum, for his degree of bachelor of divinity, at St. Mary’s in Cambridge, 1686. 3*. Occasional Sermons, preached before the lord-mayor, &c. 35. An Oration, recommending the study of the Greek language, spoken in the public schools at Cambridge before the vice-chancellor, March 28, 1705. 36. A Greek Oration, addressed to the most reverend father Neophytus, archbishop of philippopolis, spoken in the Regent-house at Cambridge, September 13, 1701, 37. A Prevaricator’s Speech, spoken at the commencement at Cambridge, 1680. 38. A Congratulatory Oration in Latin, spoken at St. Mary’s, September 9, 1683, upon the escape of king Charles Ji. and the duke of York from the conspiracy. 39. Sermons, orations, declamations, problems, translations, letters, and other exercises, in English, Latin, and Greek. 40. A Satire in English verse upon the poets and critics. 41. An imitation of Plautus’s Trinummi in English. 42. Interpretations, illustrations, emendations, and corrections of many passages, which have been falsely translated, with explications upon various passages of scripture, from Genesis to Revelations. 43. Common-places in divinity, philology, poetry, and criticism and emendations of various Greek and Latin authors, with fragments of many of the poets.

, professor of divinity, and chaplain to Henry VIII. king of England, was sent to Germany by his master in 1535, where he held a conference with the protestant divines upon the affair of the divorce after that he had several audiences of the elector of Saxony, and joined with the English ambassadors, who proposed to this elector an alliance against the pope, and desired that Henry VIII. might be associated in the league of Smalcalde. He gave them hopes of a reformation in England but in fact, they had no other design than to obtain their doctors approbation of the divorce of their master, and a political alliance, in order to find the emperor more employment, who threatened to revenge the injury upon king Henry for divorcing his aunt. They carried away with them the opinion of the divines of Witternberg which was not entirely favourable to them but they suppressed the conclusion, wjien they shewed it to the king. Barnes’s conduct however pleased the king, and induced him to employ him in carrying on a correspondence with the princes of Germany. He was sent several times to those courts and among other negociations, he w r as the first who was employed in the project of the marriage with Anne of Cleves. He was a zealous Lutheran, which he did not conceal in his sermons for in Lent in 1540 he confuted the sermon, which bishop Gardiner had preached against Luther’s doctrine. He took the same text as Gardiner had done, and taught a doctrine absolutely contrary to what this prelate had laid down concerning justification nay he even attacked the bishop personally, and jested upon the name of Gardiner. Gardiner’s friends complained to the king of this, who ordered 'Barnes to give him satisfaction, to sign certain articles, and to make a formal recantation in the pulpit. All this was done, but in such a manner, that there was a complaint, that in one part of his sermon he artfully maintained what he had retracted in the other. Upon these complaints he was sent to the Tower by the king’s command, which he never came out of but to suffer death in the midst of the flames for he was condemned* as an heretic by the parliament, without being permitted to make his defence. He declared his belief a little before his death he rejected justification by works, invocation of saints, &c. and desired that the king would undertake a thorough reformation. His freedom of speech had for a long time before exposed him to trouble. While Wolsey was in favour, he preached so vehemently at Cambridge against the luxury of prelates, that every body saw immediately that he designed it against the cardinal. Upon that account he was carried to London, where by the solicitations of Gardiner and Fox, he was rescued from that prosecution, having agreed to abjure some articles which were proposed to him. Afterwards he was again committed to prison upon some newaccusations and then it was generally believed that he would be burnt, but he escaped, and went over into Germany, where he applied himself entirely to the study of the bible and divinity in which he made so great a progress, that he was very much esteemed by the doctors and princes. When the king of Denmark sent ambassadors to England, he desired Barnes to accompany them, or even to be one of them. We have at least two books written by Barnes, one, the “Articles of his Faith,” published in Latin, with a preface by Pomeranus, and again in Dutch in 1531. The other is his “Lives of the Popes,” from St. Peter to Alexander II. published, with a preface by Luther, at Wirtemberg, 1536, and afterwards at Leyden, 1615; together with Bale’s Lives of the Popes. Luther also published an account of his martyrdom.

, D. D. a learned dissenter, was born at Warrington in Lancashire, Feb. 13, 1747. His lather died when he was only three years old; but he had the happiness to be instructed in the principles of piety by a sensible and affectionate mother, and early discovered an inclination to study with a view to the ministerial function. He was accordingly placed at the grammar school of Warrington, under the Rev. Mr. Owen, an able classical scholar, and afterwards became a boarder at a school kept by the Rev. Philip Holland, at Bolton. From this he removed in 1764 to the academy at Warrington, where Dr. Aikin and Dr. Priestley were tutors. In 1769 he was ordained a preacher, and settled at Cockey Moor, near Bolton, for twelve years, during which he became highly acceptable to his congregation, and more than trebled their number. In May 17 So, he removed to Manchester, and became connected there as co-pastor, with one of the largest and most wealthy congregations among the Protestant dissenters, of the presbyterian denomination, and here he remained during the space of thirty years, preaching from 1782, twice each Sunday. In the beginning of 1784, the degree of D. D. was conferred upon him by the university of Edinburgh, on the recommendation of his friends, particularly the late learned Dr. Percival. Not long after, Dr. Barnes was induced, by the solicitations of his friends,' to undertake, in conjunction with his colleague in the ministry, the Rev. Ralph Harrison, the charge of an academical institution at Manchester. On this he entered in the summer of 1786, and presided as principal, with great reputation, until 1798, when he determined to resign it, in consequence of the difficulty which he had for some time experienced, in maintaining in so large a town as Manchester, where there are many temptations to dissipation, that regular and strict discipline which he wished to support. His active mind, however, was alxvays ready to embrace every opportunity of usefulness and after his retirement from the academy, he began to take a lively interest in the concerns of the Manchester infirmary, which continued to be a favourite object of his attention to the time of his death and in the conduct of which his assistance has been generally considered and acknowledged to be of great use. He was also one of the first promoters of the Manchester literary and philosophical society, anjd wrote several papers in the early volumes of its memoirs, which his friend Dr. Percival, a very competent judge, repeatedly urged him to revise and enlarge for separate publication, but he appears to have been unambitious of literary fame, althou/h he had undoubted claims; and never published any thing, but “A Discourse upon the commencement of the Academy,” 1786, which he undertook to conduct a funeral sermon on the death of the Rev. Thomas Threlkeld, of Rochdale and some smaller pieces, without his name, in the periodical journals. This is the more to be regretted, as he was a man of uncommon activity and diligence with his pen, and is said to have written many hundred sermons which he never preached, a fact very extraordinary, if we consider the number he must have been obliged to preach in the course of fortytwo years. One of his last labours was the establishment of a bible society at Manchester, as auxiliary to that of London. In his private character, Dr. Barnes was truly amiable and exemplary. What his religious principles were, is not very clearly stated in our authority, but if we are not misinformed, they were of that kind to which the epithet liberal has been annexed. He died June 28, 1810.

, the celebrated Dutch statesman, and one of the founders of the civil liberty of Holland, was born in 1547. His patriotic zeal inducing him to limit the authority of Maurice prince of Orange, the second stadtholder of Holland, the partisans of that prince falsely accused him of a design to deliver his country into the hands of the Spanish monarch. On this absurd charge he was tried by twenty-six commissaries, deputed from the seven provinces, condemned, and beheaded in 1619. His sons, William and Réné, with a view of revenging their father’s death, formed a conspiracy against the usurper, which was discovered. William fled; but Réné was taken and condemned to die; which fatal circumstance has immortalized the memory of his mother, of whom the following anecdote is recorded. She solicited a pardon for Réné, upon which Maurice expressed his surprise that she should do that for her son, which she had refused to do for her husband. To this remark she replied with indignation, “I would not ask a pardon for my husband, because he was innocent. I solicit it for my son, because he is guilty.”

, a learned divine, born at Estampes in France, was of the Protestant religion, and. obliged to leave his native country in order to avoid persecution. He removed to England, where he was kindly received and generously supported by lord treasurer Burleigh, who admitted him into his family. He afterwards settled in Cambridge, upon the invitation of Dr. Pierce, master of Peterhouse. In 1574, he was chosen the lady Margaret’s professor at Cambridge, which he enjoyed for some years very quietly; but, on account of some opinions which he held, a party was at length formed against him in the university. At this time absolute predestination in the Calvinistical sense was held as the doctrine of the church of England. The chief advocates for it at Cambridge were Dr. Whitacre, regius professor of divinity, Dr. Humphry Tindal, and most of the senior members of the university. Dr. Baro had a more moderate notion of that doctrine: and this occasioned a contest between him and Mr. Laurence Chadderton, who attempted to confute him publicly in one of his sermons. However, after some papers had passed between them, the affair was dropped.

The next dispute he was engaged in, was of much longer continuance. Dr. Whitacre and Dr. Timlal were deputed by the heads of the university to archbishop Whitgift to complain that Pelagianism was gaining ground in the university; and, in order to stop the progress of it, they desired confirmation of some propositions they had brought along with them. These accordingly were established and approved by the archbishop, the bishop of London, the bishop elect of Bangor, and some other divines; and were afterwards known by the title of the Lambeth articles. They were immediately communicated to Dr. Baro; who, disregarding them, preached a sermon before the university, in which however he did not so much deny, as moderate those propositions: nevertheless his adversaries judging of it otherwise, the vice-chancellor consulted the same day with Dr. Clayton and Mr. Chadderton, what should be done. The next day he wrote a letter to the archbishop of Canterbury; who returned for answer, that they should call Baro before them, and require a copy of his sermon, or at least cause him to set down the principal heads thereof. Baro, finding what offence was taken at his sermon, wrote to the archbishop; yet, according to his grace’s directions, was cited before Dr. Goad, the vicechancellor in the consistory; when several articles were exhibited against him. At his last appearance the conclusion against him was, “That whereas Baro had promised the vice-chancellor, upon his demand, a copy of his sermon, but his lawyers did advise him not to deliver the same the vice-chancellor did now, by virtue of his authority, peremptorily command him to deliver him the whole and entire sermon, as to the substance of it, in writing: which Baro promised he would do the next day, and did it accordingly. And lastly, he did peremptorily and by virtue of his authority command Buro, that he should wholly abstain from those controversies and articles, and leave them altogether untouched, as well in his lectures, sermons, and determinations, as in his disputations and other his exercises. The vice-chancellor, who had proceeded thus far without the knowledge of the lord Burleigh their chancellor, thought fit to acquaint him with their proceedings, and to desire his advice. The discountenance lord Burleigh gave to this affair, stopped all farther proceedings against Baro; who continued in the university, but with much opposition and trouble: and though he had many friends and adherents in the university, he met with such uneasiness, that, for the sake of peace, he chose to retire to London, and fixed his abode in Crutched Friars; where he died about 1600, and was buried in the church of St. Olave, Hart-street. He left the following works: 1.” In Jonam Prophetam Prcelectiones xxxix.“2.” Conciones tres ad Clerum Cantabrigiendem habitae in templo B. Mariae.“3.” Theses publics in Scholis peroratse et disputatac.“[These Theses, being only two, were translated into English by John Ludham, under these titles; First,” God’s purpose and dtecree taketh not away the liberty of man’s corrupt will.*' The second, “Our conjunction with Christ is altogether spiritual,” London 1590, 8vo.] 4. “Precationes quibus usus est author in suis pnclectionibus inchoandis & finiendis.” All these were published at London 1579, fol. by the care of Osmund Lake, B. D. fellow of King’s college, Cambr. who corrected them before they went to the press. 5. “De Fide ejusque ortu et natura plana et dilucida explicatio,” &c. Lond. 1580, 8vo. 6. “De prsestantia &. dignitate divinse Legis, lib. 2,” 1586, 8vo. 7. “Tractatus in quo docet expetitionem oblati a mente boni et fiduciam ad fidei justificantis naturam pertinere.” 8. “Sumina trium sententiarum de Praedestinatione,” &c. Hardr. 1613, 8vo. printed with the notes of Joh. Piscator, disquisition of Franc. Junius, and prelection of Will. Whitacre. 9. “Special treatise of God’s providence, and of comforts against all kind of crosses and calamities to be fetched from the same; with an exposition, on Psalm cvii.” 10. Four Sermons; the first on Psalm cxxxiii. 1, 2, 3 the second, on Psalm xv. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, &c. 1560, 8vo.

, whose true name was Fitz-Gerald, was descended from a branch of the FitzGcralds of Burnchurch in the county of Kilkenny, a family settled in Ireland soon after the English acquisitions in that country, which has produced several men of figure in the church. But he has been more remarkable in the learned world for his maternal genealogy, being the son of a sister of Luke Wadding, that eminent Franciscan friar, who, in the seventeenth century, demonstrated his great abilities and industry, by many voluminous treatises of genius and labour. His uncle Wadding took great care of his education in his youth, which he saw rewarded by an uncommon diligence: and when he was of a proper age procured his admission into the Franciscan order, and sent for him toRome; where he lived under his own eye in the college of St. Isidore, a society of thut order founded by himself in 1625, for the education of Irish students in the study of the liberal arts, divinity, and controversy, to serve as a seminary, out of which the mission into England, Scotland, and Ireland, might be supplied. Baron, after some time, grew into high reputation, and became especially remarkable for the purity of -his Latin style, which procured him great reputation. He was for a considerable time lecturer on divinity in the above-mentioned college, and in all resided at Rome about sixty years, where he died, very old, and deprived of sight,. March 18, 1696, and was buried at St. Isidore’s. His works are, 1. “Orationes Panegyricce Sacro-Prophanre decem,” Romae, 1643, 12mo. '. <; Mctra Miscellanea, sive Carminum diversoruin libri duo; Epigrammatum unus alter Silvulte quibus adduntur Elogiaillustriumvirorum,“Romse, 1645, 24to. 3.” Prolusiones Philosophicee,“Romae, 1651, 12mo. 4. a Harpocrates quinque Ludius; seu Diatriba silentii,” Romce, 1651, 12mo. 5. “Obsidio et Expugnatio Arcis Duncannon ia Hibernia, sub Thoma Prestono.” 6. “Boetius Absolutus; sive de ConsolationeTheologiae, lib. iv.” Roma-, 1653, 12mo. 7. “Controversial et Stratagemata,” Lug'­duni, 1656, 8vo. 8. “Scotus Defensus,” Colonize, 1662, folio. 9. “Cursus Philosophicus,” Colonise, 1664, folio. 10. “Epistolæ Familiares Parceneticse,” &c. These are among his 11. “Opuscula varia Herbipoli,” 1666, folio. 12. “Theologia,” Paris, 1676, 6 vols. 13. “Johannes Duns Scotus, ordinis minorum, Doctor subtilis de Angeiis contra adversantes defensus, nunc quoque Novitate amplificatus,” FlorentitE, 1678. 14. “Annales Ordinis S. S. Trinitatis Redemptions Captivorum, Fundatoribus 8. S. Johanne de Matha, et Felice de Valois,” in vols. folio. The first volume was printed at Rome in 1686, and begins with the year 1198, in which pope Innocent the Third gave habit to the founders, and is carried down to the year 1297, just one hundred years. In this volume we have an account of the foundations of their convents, their privileges, and benefactions, the eminent fathers of their order, their miracles and actions; as also, the number of slaves delivered by them from bondage.

, a patrician or senator of Venice, distinguished for his knowledge in mathematics, flourished about the middle of the sixteenth century. Some of his translations, as well as original works, were published in his life-time, as 1. “Heronis liber de machinis bellicis, necnon liber de Geodiesia, ex Graeco Latine,” Venice, 1572, 4to. 2. “Procli in primuin elementorum Euclidis libri quatuor,” translated into Latin, Padua, 1560, fol. He was only twenty-two years of age, when he published this work. 3. A commentary on Plato, “de numero geometrico,” Boulogne, 1556; and 4. A system of Cosmography, Venice, 1585, 8vo. We have an account likewise of one of his writings, entitled “Cryptographia,” (or according to the Dict. Hist. “Rytmomachia,”) describing an ancient game attributed to Pythagoras. This was translated by Augustus duke of Brunswick and Lunenburgh, under the name of Gustavus Seienus. On Barocci’s death, his manuscripts were sold by his heirs, and came to the Bodleian library, as part of Langbaine’s collection.

, an eminent Italian artist, was born at Urbino, in 1528, and was the disciple of Battista Venetiano, by whom he was carefully instructed in the principles of painting, but he derived his knowledge of perspective from his uncle Bartolomeo Genga. Under those preceptors he practised assiduously, till he was in his twentieth year; and then visited Rome, where, under the patronage of cardinal della Rovere, he pursued his studies incessantly, and proved one of the most graceful painters of his time. At his return to his native city Urbino, he painted several pictures which procured him great applause; but that of a St. Margaret raised his reputation to the highest pitch, and induced pope Pius IV. to invite him to Home, where he employed him in the decorations of his palace of Belvedere, in conjunction with Federigo Zucchero. He excelled equally in history and portrait, but his genius inclined him more particularly to the painting of religious subjects; and his works sufficiently evince, that the utmost of his ambition was to imitate Correggio in his colouring, and Raphael in his manner of designing. But Correggio has somewhat so natural, so grand, so unaffectedly graceful, that Baroccio was far inferior to him, although perhaps more correct in the outlines. Sir Joshua Reynolds, who thought him, upon the whole, one of Correggio’s most successful imitators, says, that sometimes in endeavouring at cleanness or brilliancy of tint, he overshot the mark, and falls under the criticism that was made on an ancient painter, that his figures looked as if they fed upon roses. It is, however, singular to see colours of such variety coalesce so sweetly under his pencil, that perhaps no music reaches the ear with purer harmony, than his pictures the eye; an effect produced, in a great measure, by his attention to chiaroscuro, which he may be said to have introduced to the schools of Lower Italy, and which to obtain he rarely painted any historical figure without having either modelled it in wax, or placed some of his disciples in such attitudes as he wished to represent, it is sajd that when young, he was attempted to be poisoned at a dinner &ivc.5i by some of his rival artists, and that although he escaped with his life, he continued long in an infirm state. He must, however, have completely recovered from this attack, as his life was prolonged to the advanced age of eighty-four. He died at Urbino in 1612. Baroccio was also an engraver from some of his own compositions, and his plates, although slight, and not well managed, with respect to the mechanical part of the workmanship, are nevertheless most admirable, on account of the expression, and excellent drawing, which is discovered in them. His heads are very beautiful and characteristic; and the other extremities of his figures finely marked. Amidst all the difficulties he appears to have met with, in biting his plates with the aquafortis, after he had etched them, and his unskilfulness in handling-the graver, to harmonize and finish them, the hand of the master appears so evident, that the beauties we discover in them far overbalance the defects.

, an engraver of considerable fame in this country, was a native of France, and there first learned his art. He was brought into England by Duhosc, with whom he went to law respecting the plates for the storyof Ulysses, engraven from die designs of Rubens in the collection of Dr. Meacle. Being afterwards reconciled, Baron accompanied Dubosc to Paris in 1729, and engraved a plate from Watteau, and engaged to do another from Titian in the king’s collection, for Mons. Crozat, for which he was to receive 60l. sterling. While at Paris, they both sat to Vanloo. How soon afterwards he returned to England, is not known, but he died in Panton-square, Piccadilly, Jan. 24, 1762. His manner of engraving seems to have been founded on that of Nicholas Dorigny. It is slight and coarse, 2 without any great effect; and his drawing is frequently very defective. He executed, however, a great number of works, a few portraits, and some considerable pictures after the best masters; as the family of Cornaro, at Northumberland house; Vandyke’s family of the earl of Pembroke, at Wilton; Henry VIII. giving the charter to the barber surgeons, from Holbein; the equestrian figure of Charles I. by Vandyke, at Kensington; its companion, the king, queen, and two children; and king William on horseback with emblematic figures, at Hampton-court. His last considerable work was the family of Nassau, by Vandyke. This, and his St. Cecilia from Carlo Dolce, he advertised in 1759, by subscription, at a guinea the pair.

, ancient professor and dean of the faculty of medicine at Paris, the place of his birth, died July 29, 1758, at about the age of 72. He had a great share in the Pharmacopoeia of Paris, for 1732, 4to; and in 1739, gave an academical dissertation in Latin on chocolate, “An senibus Chocolate potas?” which has been often reprinted. His son, of the same name, war also dean of the faculty at Paris, where he died in 1787, at the age of eighty. He was long a surgeon in the armies of Italy and Germany, and published some medical works. There was a Theodore Baron before these, probably their ancestor, who, in 1609, published a curious work entitled “De operationis meiendi triplici lacsione et curatione,” of which Haller gives a brief analysis.

, an eminent French player, who appears to have had his full share in the annals of biography, was the son of a merchant of Issondun, and was born at Paris in 1652. He entered first into the company of la Raisin, and some time afterwards in that of Moliere, and quitted the stage in 1696, either from dislike or from some religious scruples, with a pension of a thousand crowns granted him by the king. He took up the profession again, however, in 1720, at the age of 68; and was as much applauded, notwithstanding his advanced age, as in the early period of his life. At those lines of Cinna,

he was seen within a minute to turn pale and red, in conformity to the verse. He was styled with one consent, the Roseius of his times. He said himself, in one of his enthusiastical fits of vanity, that once in a century we might see a Cæsar, but that two thousand years were requisite to produce a Baron. One day his coachman and his lacquey were soundly chastised by those of the marquis de Biran, with whom Baron lived on those familiar terms which young noblemen frequently allow to players. “Monsieur le marquis,” said he to him, “your people have ill treated mine; I must have satisfaction of you.” This he repeated several times, using always the same expressions, your people and mine. M. de Biran, affronted at the parallel, replied: “My poor Baron, what wouldst thou have me say to thee? why dost thou keep any people?” He was on the point of refusing the pension bestowed on him by Louis XIV. because the order for it ran: “Pay to the within-named Michael Boyrun, called Baron, &c.” This actor, born with the choicest gifts of nature, had perfected them by thq utmost exertions of art: a noble figure, a sonorous voice, a natural gesticulation, a sound and exquisite taste. Racine, versed as he was in the art of declamation, wanting to represent his Andromache to the actors, in the distribution of the parts, had reserved that of Pyrrhus for Baron. After having shewn the characters of several of the personages to the actors who were to represent it, he turned towards Baron:“As to you, sir, I have no-instruction to give you; your heart will tell you more of it than any lessons of mine could explain.” Baron would affirm that the force and play of declamation were such, that tender and plaintive sounds transferred on gay and even comic words, would no less produce tears. He has been seen repeatedly to make the trial of this surprising effect on the well-known sonnet,

Baron, in common with all great painters and great poets, was fully sensible that the rules of art were not invented for enslaving genius. “We are forbid by the rules,” said this sublime actor, “to raise the arms above the head; but if they are lifted there by the passion, it is right: passion is a better judge of this matter than the rules.” He died at Paris, Dec. 22, 1729, aged 77, Three volumes in 12mo of theatrical pieces were printed in 1760, under the name of this comedian; but it is doubted whether they are all his. “L'Andrienne” was attributed to pere de la Rue, at the very time when it was in full representation. It was to this that Baron alluded in the advertisement he prefixed to that piece. “I have here a fair field,” said he, “for complaining of the injustice that has been intended me. It has been said that I lent my name to the Andrienne. I will again attempt to imitate Terence; and I will answer as he did to those who accused him of only lending his name to the works of others (Scipio and Lselius). He said, that they did him great honour to put him in familiarity with persons who attracted the esteem and the respect of all mankind.” The other pieces that merit notice are, “L'homme à bonne fortune,” “La Coquette,” “L'Ecole des Peres,” &c. The dramatical judgment that reigns in these pieces, may perhaps be admitted as a proof that they are by Baron. The dialogue of them is lively, and the scenes diversified, although they rarely present us with grand pictures: but the author has the talent of copying from nature certain originals, not less important in society than amusing on the stage. It is evident that he had studied the world as well as the drama. As to the versification, if Baron was an excellent actor, he was but an indifferent poet. The abbé d'Alainval published the “Lettres sur Baron et la le Couvreur.” The father of this famous actor possessed also in a superior degree the talent of declamation. The manner of his death is remarkable. Playing the part of Don Diego in the Cid, his sword fell from his hand, as the piece requires; and kicking it from him with indignation, he unfortunately struck against the point of it, by which his little toe was pierced. This wound was at first treated as a trifle; but the gangrene that afterwards appeared requiring the amputation of his leg, he would not consent to the operation. “No, no,” said he; “a theatrical monarch would be hooted if he should appear with a wooden leg” and he preferred the gentle expectation of death, which happened in 1655.

, a dissenting minister, but most noted for his zeal as a political writer, was born at Leeds in Yorkshire, and educated at the university of Glasgow, which he quitted in 1740, with very honourable testimonies to his learning and personal character, from the celebrated Hutchinson, and the mathematical professor Simpson. Where he passed his time after this, we know not; but in 1753, he was ordained pastor of the dissenting meeting at Pinners’ hall, Broad-street, London, a congregation, if we are not mistaken, of the Baptist persuasion. What he was as a divine, is not very clear, but tho whole bent of his studies was to defend and advance civil and religious liberty. This zeal led the famous Thomas Hollis, csq. to engage his assistance in editing some of the authors in the cause of freedom, whose works he wished to reprint with accuracy, and in an elegant form. Toland’s Life of Milton, Milton’s Iconoclastes, and afterwards an Edition of Milton’s prose works, were prepared and corrected by Mr. Baron. For this task he was well qualified, being an industrious collector of books on the subject of constitutional liberty, several of which he communicated to Mr. Hollis, with ms notes, or memorandums of his own in the blank pages, in which, we are told, he was not always in the right. Still he was indefatigable in searching for what he reckoned scarce and valuable liberty-tracts, many of which Mr. Hollis bought of him while he lived, and others he bought at the sale of his books after his death. Mr. Baron, we are likewise told, “only breathed, he did not live, in his own estimation, but whilst he was in someway or other lending his assistance to the glorious cause of religious and civil liberty. He wrote, he published, and republished perpetually in its defence. His character was one of the most artless and undisguised in the world. He was a man of real and great learning of fixed and steady integrity and a tender and sympathizing heart.” Yet with such a heart, we are told, not very consistently, that had he been mindful of his domestic concerns, he might have left a competency behind for his wife and family, but his whole soul was engaged in the cause, and he neglected every other concern. For this absurd and unjust train of feeling, we are referred to the natural impetuosity of his temper, and his eccentricities, which indicated occasional derangements of mind. With many virtues, it is added, and a few faults, which must have been of a peculiar kind, since “they only wanted the elevation of a higher station and a better fate to have assumed the form of virtues,” Mr. Baron passed the greatest part of his life in penurious circumstances, which neither abated the generous ardour, or overcame the laudable independency of iiis spirit. These virtues, “with their blessed effects,” were all he left behind him, for the consolation and support of a widow and three children. He died at his house at Blackheath, Feb. 22, 1768. His principal publication was a collection of what he called liberty-tracts, first published in 2 vols. 1752, under the title of “The pillars of Priestcraft and Orthodoxy shaken.” In 1767, he prepared another edition, enlarged to four volumes, to be published by subscription. In his advertisement he describes himself as a man “who has been made a sacrifice to proud bigots, religious rogues, and psalm-singing hypocrites:” and flatters himself that his subscribers will “enable him to express his utter contempt, and everlasting abhorrence of them all.” To this meek wish, he adds an assurance that the *' names of the subscribers shall not be printed." This edition appeared after his death, and was published for the benefit of his family, along with a-new edition of Milton’s Eikonoclastes, and his manuscript sermons and papers.

, a learned father of the Romish church, and a monk of the Benedictine order, was born at Martres in the diocese of Rieux in Gascony, and entered into the order of the preaching friars at Toulouse in 1622. He taught divinity several years with applause in the convent of the same city, and was made prior there; as he was likewise at Avignon, and in the general novitiate of the suburb of St. Germain at Paris. He was definitor for his province in the general chapter held in 1656, in which he presided at the theses dedicated to pope Alexander VII. which gained him the esteem of all the city and his whole order. He was present at the assembly, in which the pope ordered the definitors and fathers of the chapter to be told, from him, that he was extremely grieved to see the Christian morality sunk into such a deplorable relaxation, as some of the new casuists had reduced it to, and that he exhorted them to compose another system of it, which should be conformable to the doctrine of St. Thomas. This was what engaged father Baron to undertake the works which he wrote upon that subject. He was again chosen provincial; and afterwards sent by the father general as commissary to Portugal, upon important affairs, which he managed with such success, that the queen, the court, and all the monks gave testimony of his merit by a public act. He returned to Paris to the general novitiate, and died there, Jan. 21, 1674, aged seventy years. Besides several Latin poems, which he left as instances of his capacity in polite literature, he published the following works: 1. “Theologia Moralis,” Paris, 1665, in 5 vols. 8vo, and again in 1667. 2. “Libri Apologetici contra Theophilum Rainaudum,” Paris, 1666, in 2 vols. 8vo. 3. “Mens sancti Augustini & Thorn ae de Gratia & Libertate,” 1666, 8vo. 4. “Ethica Christiana,” Paris, 1666, 2 vols. 8vo. 5. “Responsio ad Librum Cardense,” ibid, in 8vo. 6. “L'Heresie Convaincue,” Paris, 1668, 12mo. 7. “Panegyriques des Saints,” ibid. 1660, '4to. The first two volumes of his Moral Theology were prohibited. It relates to the principal points in dispute between the Dominicans and Jesuits.

, an eminent ecclesiastical writer, and a cardinal of the Roman church, was born at Sora, an episcopal city in the kingdom of Naples, October the 30th, 1538, of Camillo Baronio and Porcia Phebonia, who educated him with great care. He went through his first studies at Veroli, and afterwards applied himself to divinity and civil law at Naples. But the troubles of that kingdom obliged his father to remove him in 1557 to Rome, where he finished his studies in the law under Cesar Costa, afterwards archbishop of Capua, and put himself under the discipline of St. Philip de Neri, founder of the congregation of the oratory, who employed him in the familiar instructions which his clerks gave to the children. After he was ordained priest, St. Philip de Neri sent him, with some of his disciples, in 1564, to establish his congregation in the church of St. John the Baptist. He continued there till 1576, when he was sent to 8,t. Mary in Vallicella, and in both houses he was much admired for his pious zeal and charity. St. Philip de Neri having, in 1593, laid down the office of superior of the congregation of the oratory, thought he could not appoint a more worthy successor than Baronius, and pope Clement VIII. who knew his merit, in compliance with the desires of the founder and his congregation, approved the choice, and some time after made him his confessor. The esteem which that pope had for him, increased as he had an opportunity of growing more intimately acquainted with him, and induced him to appoint our author apostolical prothonotary in 1595, and to advance him to the dignity of cardinal, June 5th, 1596, to which he afterwards added the post of library-keeper to the see of Rome. Upon the death of Clement VIII. m 1605, Baronius had a great prospect of being chosen pope, one and thirty voices declaring for him; but the Spaniards strongly opposed his election on account of his treatise, “Of the Monarchy of Sicily,” in which he argued against the claim of Spain to Sicily. His intense application to his studies weakened his constitution in such a manner, that towards the end of his life he could not digest any kind of food. He died June the 30th, 1607, aged sixtyeight years and eight months, and was interred in the church of St. Mary in Vallicella, in the same tomb where his intimate friend cardinal Francesco Maria Taurusio was buried the year following. Dupin observes, that “an high regard ought to be paid to the memory of Baronius, who was a man of sincere religion, probity, learning, and extensive reading, and laboured with success for the service of the church, and the clearing up of ecclesiastical antiquity. But it were to be wished that he had been exempt from the prejudices which his education and country inspired him with*” In a book of lather Parsons, printed in 1607, and entitled “I)e sacris alienis non adeundis qusestiones du; ad usum praximque Angliae breviter explicate,” is published the judgment of Baronius, together with that of cardinal Bcllarmin and others, declaring that it was absolutely unlawful for the Roman Catholics to be present at the religious worship of the Protestants in England. The work for which Baronius was most celebrated, and which is certainly a wonderful monument of industry and research, was his “Ecclesiastical Annals.” He undertook this work at the age of thirty, and laboured for thirty years in collecting and digesting the materials for it, by reading over carefully the ancient monuments of the church, as well in printed books as in manuscripts, in the Vatican library. He published in 1588 the first volume, which contains the first century after the birth of Christ. The second, which followed after, contains two hundred and five years. These two volumes are dedicated to pope Sixtus V. The third, dedicated to king Philip 11. of Spain, comprehends the history of fifty-five years immediately following. The fourth, dedicated to Clement VIII. contains the history of thirty-four years, which end in the year 395. The fifth, dedicated to the same pope, as well as the following volumes, extends to the year 440. The sixth ends in the year 518. The seventh contains seventy-three years. The eighth extends to the year 714. The ninth, dedicated to king Henry IV. of France, concludes with the year 842. The tenth, dedicated to the emperor Rodolphus II. begins with the year 843, and reaches to 1000. The eleventh, dedicated to Sigismond III. king of Poland, and published in 1605, continues the history to the year 1099. The twelfth, printed under the pontificate of Paul V. in 1607, concludes with 1198. So that we have, in these twelve volumes, the history of the twelve first ages of the church. Henry Spoudunns informs us, that Baronius had left memoirs for three more volumes, which were used by Odoricus Kaynaldus in the continuation of his work. The first edition of Baronius’ s Annals, begun in 158S, and continued the following years, was printed at Rome, where the first volumes were reprinted in 1593. It was followed by some others, with alterations and additions. The second edition was that of Venice, and was begun in 1595. The third was printed at Cologne in 1596, and the foil owing years. The fourth at Antwerp in 1597, &c. The fifth at Mentz in 1601, The sixth at Cologne in 1609. There were several other editions published afterwards, at Amsterdam in 1610, at Cologne in 1624, at Antwerp in 1675, at Venice in 1705, and at Lucca in 1738—1759, by far the best. Before this, the best editions, according to the abbe Longlet de Fresnoy, in his “New method of studying History,” were that of Home, as the original, and that of Antwerp, and the most convenient for study, is that of Mentz, because the authorities of the ecclesiastical writers are marked in it by a different character from the text of Baronius, and the impression is in two columns. The edition of Cologne has the same advantage, though ill printed.

Baronins’s design in these Annals was, as he tells us himself in his preface, to refute the Centuriators of Magdeburg, or rather to oppose to their work, which was written against the church of Rome, another work of the same kind in defence of that church. “It were to be wished,” says Monsieur Dupin, “that he had contented himself with a mere narration of facts of ecclesiastical history, without entering into controversies and particular interests. However, it must be owned that his work is of a vast extent, well digested, full of deep researches, written with care, and as much exactness as can be expected from a man who first undertakes a work of such extent and difficulty as that. It is true that a great number of mistakes in chronology and history have been remarked in it; that many facts have been discovered not at all known to him; that he made use of several supposititious or doubtful monuments; that he has reported a considerable number of false facts as true, and has been mistaken in a variety of points. But though, without endeavouring to exaggerate the number of his errors with Lucas Holstenius, who declared that he was readyto shew eight thousand falsities in Baronins’s Annals, it cannot be denied that the number of them is very great; yet it must be acknowledged that his work is a very good and very useful one, and that he is justly styled the father of church history. It must be remarked, that he is much more exact in the history of the Latins than in that of the Greeks, because he was but very indifferently skilled in the Greek, and was obliged to make use of the assistance of Peter Morin, Metius, and father Sinnond, with regard to the monuments which had not been translated imo Latin. His style has neither the purity nor elegance xvhich were to be wished for in a work of that nature-, and it may be saidj that he writes rather like a clissertator than an historian; however, he is clear, intelligible, and methodical.'”

Cardinal de Laurea drew up an index to this work for his own private use, which he afterwards left to the public “Index alphabeticus rerum et locorum omnium memorabilium ad Annales Cardinalis Baronii. Opus posthumum Rev. Cardinalis de Laurea,” Rome, 1694, in 4to. This is a posthumous work, for being put to the press during the author’s life, the impression was not finished till after his death, which happened November the 30th, 1693. These annals were begun to be translated into various languages, but probably owing to the vast expense, none of the translators proceeded farther than the iirst volume. Several abridgments, however, have been published. The most extensive is that of Henry Spondanus, Paris, 1612, 1622, 1630, 1639, and often afterwards. They were also abridged byAurelio, Bzovius, Bisciola, Scogli, Sartorius, Schuhingius, &c. &c. and in various languages. The continuators are also numerous. Bzovius published a continuation from 1199 to 1572, Rome, 9 vols. fol. 1616 1672, which, however, are rather the annals of the Dominicans than of the church. Raynaldns’ continuation from 1199 to 1567, also 9 vols. folio, is said to be worse than the former; the best is Spondanus, extending to the year 1639, and printed at Paris in that year, 2 vols. folio. The great fame of Baroaius excited the attention of many Protestant writers, who criticised his work with acuteness. Among the best of these is Isaac Casaubon, in his “Exercitationes contra Baronium,” London, 1614, folio, but perhaps Dupin’s opinion, which we have quoted, is sufficient to point out the leading errors of the work. Besides these annals, Baronius wrote, 1. “Marty rologium Romanum restitutum,” 1586, folio. These notes on the Roman martyrology, for these are all which Baronius contributed, were intended as a prelude to his Annals. This work was often reprinted, and as often corrected by the author, but it is still erroneous in many points. 2. “Tractatus de Monarchia Siciliae,” Paris, 1609, 8vo. 3. “Parsenesis ad RempublicamVenetam,” Rome, 1606, 4to, written on occasion of the interdict of Venice. 4. “Contra ser. Rempublicam Venetam Votum,” not published by Baronius, but containing his opinion in the consistory. 5. “Historica relatio de Legatione Ecelesise Alexanclrinse ad Apostolicam sedem,” 1598, 8vo, respecting the re-union of the church of Alexandria to the see of Home, which did not last long. And some other works of less reputation.

, a Jesuit and eminent Portuguese divine, was born at Lisbon, 1542. After entering among the Jesuits, he taught a long time at Coimbra and other places; and, applying himself to preaching, gained the title of “The apostle of Portugal.” He died April 14, 1615, in great reputation for sanctity. All his works were printed at Cologn, 1628, 4 vols. fol. under the title of “Commentaria in concordiam et historiarn Evangelicam.” The most particularly esteemed among them is, “Itinerarium filiorum Israel ex Ægypto in terram repromissionis,” Paris, 1620, fol.

, born at Grenoble, and died at Paris, July 21, 1772, came early in life to that metropolis, where he took up the employment of a schoolmaster. He wrote, in conjunction with fathers Gaubile and Varra, a “Dictionnaire historique, litteraire, et critique, des homines celebres,” 1758, 6 vols. 8vo, in which he is said to have betrayed too much of the spirit of party. A French wit called it the Martyrdogy of Jansenism, compiled by a Convulsionnaire. Notwithstanding this, his dictionary has some merit, as in the articles of poets, orators, and literary men, he writes with spirit, and generally gives his judgment with taste. There is likewise by him, 1. An abstract of the letters of madame de Sevigne in 12mo, under the title of “Sevigniana.” 2. An abridgment, much esteemed, of the “Dictionnaire des Antiquities Romaiues,” by Pitiscus, in 2 vols. 8vo. 3. “Dictionnaire hist, geographique et moral de la Bible,” 1758, 2 vols. 8vo. 4. “Maximes sur le devoir des Hois, et le bon usage de leur authorité,” Paris, 1754, and reprinted twice. under different titles and 5. “Memoires historiques et litteraires de Pabbe Gouget,” with a correct list of his works. The abbé Barral was a man of erudition, of a lively conversation, and the style of his writings is vigorous and manly, though sometimes negligent and incorrect.

, was born July 1647, at Paris. He applied himself to studying the Scriptures and councils, and conceived so great a contempt for scholastic divinity, as to give up the design he had entertained of being a doctor of the Sorbonne. He was curate of Flamingrie, in the diocese of Laon, 1680; but imbibing the tenets of the Protestants, and fearing lest he should be arrested for the opinions which he propagated in his sermons and discourses, he went to Paris, 1688, and afterwards took refuge at Geneva, where he married, 1690. He at first taught French to the foreign nobility; but was afterwards declared a citizen, and admitted into one of the first classes of the college at Geneva, in which city he died May 1723. His best works are those which he published in France before his retiring to Geneva, they are, “Un traite de l'Egalite des deux sexes,” 1673, 12mo. “Traite de l‘ Education des Dames, pour laconduite de l’esprit dans les sciences et dans les mceurs,” 12mo. “De Texcellence des Hommes contre l'Egalite des Sexes,” 12mo. “Rapports de la Langue Latine a la Franchise,” 12mo. John James de la Barre, his son, was author of “Pensees philosophiques et theologiques,” 1714 et 1717, 2 vols 8vo. They are theses.

, a learned French historian, antiquary, and biographer, was born at Tournay, March 9, 1688. His father, Paul Joseph de la Barre, an eminent lawyer, sent him early to Paris, where he made great proficiency in classical studies, particularly Greek, which he not only studied critically, but acquired considerable skill in the collation of ancient manuscripts, and the antiquities of the language. When Banduri came to Paris, with some works for the press, young de la Barre was recommended to him as an assistant in transcribing and comparing manuscripts, and it was by his aid that Banduri was enabled to publish his “Imperiwm Orientate,' 12 vols. folio, and his” Medals“(see Banduri) for which services Banduri prevailed on the grand duke of Tuscany to grant him a pension, which was punctually paid to de la Barre, until the death of the last sovereign of the house of Medici. As soon as de la Barre was at leisure from his eugagements with Bandnri, the booksellers employed him on a new edition of D'Acheri’s” Spicilegium,“which he accordingly undertook, and which was published in 1723, 3 vols. folio, in a very much improved state. He next contributed to the edition of Moreri’s dictionary of 1125. In 1727 he was admitted a member of the academy of inscriptions and belles lettres, a choice whjch the many learned papers he published in their memoirs fully justified. In the same year he undertook to continue the literary journal of Verdun, which he did during his life, and added much to its character. In 1729 he published a work very interesting to French historians,” Mcmoircs pour servir a l'histoire cie France et de Bourgogne.“In 1732 he published new editions of the” Secretaire du Cabinet,“and the” Secretaire dn Cour,“2 vols. 12mo; improving both very essentially, although we may be allowed to doubt whether” Letter-writing“can be effectually taught by models. In 1733 he revised and corrected an edition of M. cie Larrey’s” L'histoire de France, sous le regne de Louis XIV." 12 mo. In 1735 appeared a new history of Paris, in 5 vols, taken from that of father Lobineau, but la Barre wrote only the fifth volume. A very few months before his death he had projected a dictionary of Greek and Itoman antiquities, which was to form four folio volumes, and had executed some parts of it with great care and accuracy, at the time of his death, May 23, 1738. Hiseloge was pronounced by M. de Boze.

, a canon regular of St. Genevieve, and chancellor of the university of Paris, was born in 1692, and died at Paris in 1764. He joined his order early in life, and became distinguished for his knowledge and researches in civil and ecclesiastical history, and his numerous works afford a considerable proof of his industry. The principal are, 1. “Vindicise librorum deutero-canonicorum veteris Testamenti,” 1730, 12mo, a very ingenious attempt. 2. “Histoire generate cTAllemagne,” 1748, 11 vols. 4to, a work of vast labour, but has few of the elegant and fascinating charms of modern history, and is in many respects inaccurate. 3. “”Vie de rnarechal de Fabert,“1752, 2 vols. 12mo. 4.” Examen des defauts theologiques," Amst. 1744, 2 vols. 12mo. He also wrote notes to the edition of Bernard Van Espen’s works, 1753, 4 vols. fdrio; and about the time of his death had made some progress in a history of the courts of justice, of which he had published a prospectus in 1755.

, was born at Paris in 1606 and after having gone through a course of study, and taken the degree of licentiate in medicine, he entered into the order of Dominicans in 1635. His talents and his prudence were so conspicuous, that in 1646 he was elected assistant to the general, with whom he made the tour of France, Spain, and Italy. Amidst the avocations of this post, and without neglecting his duties, he found the means of applying himself to the study of botany, to which he seemed to have a natural propensity. He collected a great number of plants and shells, and made drawings of several that had not been known, or but very imperfectly described. He had undertaken a general history of plants, which he intended to entitle “Hortus Mundi,” or “Orbis Botanicus,” and was employed on it with the utmost diligence, when an asthma put an end to his labours in 1673, at the age of sixty-seven. All that could be collected of this “work was published by Ant. de Jussieu, with a life of the author, under the title” Plantæ per Galliam, Hispaimim, et Italiani observatæ, et iconibus reneis exhibitce," Paris, 1714, folio, a valuable contribution to a botanical library, but by no means correct.

, physician of Perpignan, who practised some time at Cayenne, and died in 1755, was well versed both in the theory and practice of his art, and had the reputation of being an accurate observer. His principal works are, 1. “Relation et essai sur Phistoire de la France equinoxiale,” with a catalogue of plants collected at Cayenne, 1748, 12mo. 2. “Dissertation sur la couleur drs” N ogres,“1741, 4to. 3.” Observations sur Torigine des pierres figurees," 1646, 4to, &c.

, an English landscape painter, was born about 1728, in the city of Dublin. It is not known that he received any regular instructions in painting. He began his attempts in the very humble line of colouring prints, in which he was employed by one Silcock, in Nicholas street, Dublin. From this feeble commencement he rose to considerable powers as a landscape painter, by studying from the scenes of nature in the Dargies, and in the park at Powerscourt, places near Dublin, and is said to have received patronage and encouragement from the noble owner of Powerscourt. About this time a premium was offered by the Dublin society for the best landscape in oil, which Mr. Barret won. In 1762 he visited London, where he soon distinguished himself; and, the second year after his arrival, gained the premium given by the society for the encouragement of arts, &c. for the best landscape in oil. The establishment of the royal academy was in a great measure indebted to the efforts of Mr. Barret, who formed the plan, and became one of its members.

He had two decided manners of painting, both with regard to colour and touch; his first was rather heavy in both, his latter much lighter. Scarcely any painter equalled him in his knowledge or characteristic execution of the detuils of nature. His attention was chiefly directed to the true colour of English scenery, its richness, dewy freshness, and that peculiar verdure, especially in the vernal months, which is so totally different from the colouring of those masters who have formed themselves on Italian scenery or Italian pictures. This strong desire sometimes tempted him to use colours rich and beautiful when first applied, but which no art could render permanent; which, in some of his slighter works, prevailed to such a degree as to leave scarcely any traces of the original colouring.

The best pictures in his first manner are to be found in the houses of the dukes of Buccleugh and Portland, c. &c. and those of his latter, in his great work, at Mr. Lock’s, at Norbury-park, Surrey, consisting of a large room painted with a continued scene entirely round. The idea in general characterizes the northern part of this country; and for composition, breadth of effect, truth of colour, and boldness of manner in the execution, has not been equalled by any modern painter. He exerted his powers to the utmost in this work, as he entertained the warmest sense of Mr. Lock’s great kindness and friendly patronage. He also painted in water-colours, in which he excelled.

As a man he was remarkably kind and friendly, gentle in manners, with a vast flow of spirits, even to playfulness, and a strong turn to wit and humour. For the last ten years of his life, he was obliged, on account of his health, to retire to Paddington, near London, where he painted (in conjunction with Mr. Gilpin, the celebrated animal-painter) some of his best easel-pictures. He died in March 1734, and was interred in Paddington church-yard, leaving a widow and nine children. In the latter part of his life he enjoyed the place of master painter to Chelsea hospital, an appointment conferred Oh him by Edmund Bnrke, esq. during his short administration. Barret left some etchings of his performances, the best of which is a view in the Dargles near Dublin. The plates of his etchings were purchased by Mr. Paul Sand by, but no impressions have been taken from them.

, a scholar of Cambridge of the sixteenth century, who had travelled various countries for languages and learning, is known now principally as the author of a triple dictionary in English, Latin, and French, which he entitled an “Alvearie,” as the materials were collected by his pupils in their daily exercise, like so many diligent bees gathering honey to their hive. When ready for the press, he was enabled to have it printed by the liberality of sir Thomas Smith, and Dr. Nowell, dean of St. Paul’s, whose assistance he gratefully acknowledges. It was first printed by Denham in 1573, with a Latin dedication to the universal Maecenas, lord Burghlev, and various recommendatory verses, among which the Latin of Cook and Grant, the celebrated masters of St. Paul’s and Westminster schools, and the English of Arthur Golding, the translator of Ovid’s Metamorphoses, have chief merit. This book was more commodious in size than in form, for as there is only one alphabet, the Latin and French words are to be traced back by means of tables at the end of the volume. In the then scarcity of dictionaries, however, this must have been an useful help, and we find that y, second and improved edition, with the title of a “Quadruple Dictionarie,” (the Greek, thinly scattered in the first impression, being now added) came out after the decease of the author in 1580, and is the only edition of which Ames and Herbert take any notice, nor does Ainsworth, who speaks of it in the preface to his dictionary, seem to be aware of a prior edition. Of Baret’s life we have not been able to discover any particulars. In the Ashmole Museum is his patent by queen Elizabeth, for printing this dictionary for fourteen years.

, a classical teacher of considerable eminence, was born at Bent, in the parish of Kildwick in Craven, Yorkshire, in 1713, and was educated at the grammar school of Skipton, where he distinguished himself by his poetical compositions and classical knowledge. From thnt school he was removed to a scholarship in Universitycollege, Oxford, where he took his master’s degree, June l, 1714, and was admitted into holy orders. Soon after he quitted the university, he was nominated by the late sir V/yndham Knatchbull, hart, to the mastership of the free grammar school of Ashford in Kent, over which he presided during a very long period, and advanced the school to great reputation. He was also rector of the parishes of Pirton and Ickleford in Hertfordshire. In 1773 he was appointed, by the late earl of Thanet, to the rectory of Hothfield in Kent, where he rebuilt the parsonage house, to which he retired, and resigned the school of Ashford, to the endowment of which he was a liberal benefactor. He married Mary, the only daughter of Edward Jacob, esq. of Canterbury, and by her had an only daughter, Mary, the wife of Edward Jeremiah Curteis, esq. at whose house, at Northiam in Sussex, he died Nov. 26, 1801, in his eighty-third year.

Early in life Mr. Barret was an intimate friend of Dr. Johnson, and of Edward Cave, the founder of the Gentleman’s Magazine, to which he became a frequent contributor. One very interesting letter, signed by his name, appears in vol. XXIV. on a new method of modelling the tenses of verbs, which he defends on the authority of Varro and Dr. Clarke. This judicious scheme, and his elegant translation of Pope’s pastorals into Latin verse, fully established Mr. Barret’s reputation as a Latin scholar; and he also discovered some poetical talent in “War,” a satire, but was less fortunate in his translation of “Ovid’s Epistles into English verse.” This had critical essays and notes, and was said in the title (1759) to be “part of a poetical and oratorial lecture, read in Ashford school, calculated to initiate youth in the first rudiments of taste.”

, first lord viscount Harrington, a nobleman of considerable learning, and author of several books, was the youngest son of Benjamin Shute, merchant (youngest son of Francis Sbute, of Upton, in the county of Leicester, esq.) by a daughter of the Kev. Jos. Caryl, author of the commentary on Job. He was born at Theobalds in Hertfordshire, in 1678, and received part of his education at Utrecht, as appears from a Latin oration which he delivered at that university, and published there in 1698, in 4to, under the following title “Oratio de studio Philosophise conjungendo cum studio Juris Roman!; habita in inclyta Academia Trajectina Kalendis Junii, 1698, a Johanne Shute, Anglo, Ph. D. et L. A. M.” He published also three other academical exercises; viz. 1. “Exercitatio Physica, de Ventis,” Utrecht, 1696, 4to. 2. “Dissertatio Philosophica, de Theocratia morali,” Utrecht, 1697. 3, “Dissertatio Philosophica Inauguralis, de Theocratia civili,” Utrecht, 1697. The second of these tracts has been cited, with great commendation, by two eminent writers on the civil law, Cocceius and Heineccius. After his return to England, he applied himself to the study of the law in the Inner Temple. In 1701 he published, but without his name, “An essay upon the interest of England, in respect to Protestants dissenting from the Established Church,” 4to. This was reprinted two years after, with considerable alterations and enlargements, and with the title of “The interest of England considered,” &c. Some time after this he published another piece in. 4to, entitled “The rights of Protestant Dissenters,” in two parts. During the prosecution of his studies in the law, he was applied to by queen Anne’s whig ministry, at the instigation of lord Sorners, to engage the Presbyterians in Scotland to favour the important measure then in agitation, of an union of the two kingdoms. Flattered at the age of twenty-four, by an application which shewed the opinion entertained of his abilities, and influenced by the greatest lawyer and statesman of the age, he readily sacrificed the opening prospects of his profession, and undertook the arduous employment. The happy execution of it was rewarded, in 1708, by the place of commissioner of the customs, from which he was removed by the Tory administration in 1711, for his avowed opposition to their principles and conduct. How high Mr. Shute’s character stood in the estimation even of those who differed most widely from him in religious and political sentiments, apyears from the testimony borne to it by Dr. Swift, who writes thus to archbishop Kitig, in a letter dated London, Nov. 30, 1708. “One Mr. Shute is named for secretary to lord Wharton. He is a young man, but reckoned the shrewdest head in England, and the person in whom the Presbyterians chiefly confide; and if money be necessary towards the good work, it is reckoned he can command as far as 100,000l. from the body of the dissenters here. As to his principles, he is a moderate man, frequenting the church and the meeting indifferently.” In the reign of queen Anne, John Wildman, of Becket, in the county of Berks, esq. adopted him for his son, after the Roman custom, and settled his large estate upon him, though he was no relation, and said to have been but slightly acquainted with him. Some years after, he had another considerable estate left him by Francis Harrington, of Tofts, esq. who had married his tirst cousin, and died without issue. This occasioned him to procure an act of parliament, pursuant to the deed of settlement, to assume the name and bear the arms of Barrington. On the accession of king George he was chosen member of parliament for the town of Berwick-upon-Tvveed. July 5, 1717, he had a reversionary grant of the office of master of the rolls in Ireland, which. he surrendered Dec. 10, 1731. King George was also pleased, by privy seal, dated at St. James’s, June 10, and by patent at Dublin, July 1, 1720, to create him baron Barrington of Newcastle, and viscount Barrington of Ardglass. In 1722 he was again returned to parliament as member for the town of Berwick; but in 1723, the house of commons, taking into consideration the affair of the Harburgh lottery, a very severe and unmerited censure of expulsion was passed upon his lordship, as sub-governor of the Harburgh company, under the prince of Wales.

It is said that a vindication of lord Barrington was published at the time, in a pamphlet which had the appearance of being written by him, or at least of being published under his direction but as we have not been able to discover this pamphlet, we shall subjoin a very curious history of the Harburgh company, and of his lordship’s conduct in that affair, from a manuscript of sir Michael Foster, communicated by his nephew, Mr. Dodson, to the editor of the Biographia Britannica. "His late majesty king George I. was desirous to introduce trade and manufactures into his German dominions; and the town of Harburgh being thought a proper place for that purpose, a scheme was offered to him, which met with his approbation, for making the port of Harburgh capable of receiving ships of burden, and for carrying on the intended trade and manufactures principally at that place. Accordingly his majesty, by charter under the great seal of the electorate, about Midsummer 1720, incorporated a number of gentlemen and merchants of London, for setting up and carrying on certain manufactures by a joint stock at Harburgh; and divers privileges were granted to the company, whose capital was to be 500,000l. and a charter for commerce was promised to that company. As soon as the manufacture charter was passed, and subscriptions taken in for raising the stock, shares sold at an exorbitant price, 50l. being commonly given for a share on which only 2l. had been advanced, and I think that some shares were sold at 50l. a-share. So great was the madness of that memorable year!

"This exorbitant rise upon the stock put some gentlemen and merchants of London, who thought themselves not enough considered in the manufacture charter, upon soliciting for a separate charter, for opening the port of Harburgh, and carrying on the foreign commerce there; and agents on behalf of the manufacture company, with others on behalf of the separate charter, followed his Majesty to Hanover, each party for some time endeavouring to carry their respective points; the manufacture company to get likewise the charter for commerce, the other party to get a separate charter for commerce, exclusive of the manufacture company. At length both sides agreed to accept one charter for commerce and manufactures, which should take in the members of the old company, and those who solicited for the separate commerce charter; and that the capital of the united company should be 1,500,000l. It was likewise agreed, that the members of the old company should, over and above the 500,000l. already subscribed, be entitled to a certain share of the new stock, upon advancing, as before, 2l. upon each share, and that the residue of the stock should be divided amongst the new members and their friends. One gentleman in particular secured to himself, as I am informed, no less than 300,000l. to be disposed of by him amongst his friends.

"At this time shares were commonly sold at 20l. a share but before the end ofthe year, Harburgh stock sunk, as all other projects of that kind did and no money having been paid on the new stock, and no charter for commerce being passed, the gentlemen who solicited the new charter refused to be any farther concerned in the affair, since the opportunity for exorbitant profits was lost; and a new set of gentlemen and merchants, with the members of the old company, undertook to carry it on, and were incorporated by charter under the great seal of the electorate, for opening the port and carrying on the trade and manufactures at Harburgh.

"It was, as I have been informed, part of the original scheme, that the expence of opening the port, which was computed at 100,000l. should be defrayed by the profits of a lottery, to be drawn at Harburgh. Accordingly, after the new charter was passed, his majesty, by warrant under his sign manual and the privy seal of the electorate, empowered and required the company to lay before him a scheme for the lottery, which they did; and sometime afterwards his majesty, by a second warrant under his sign manual and privy seal of the electorate, signed his approbation of the scheme, and empowered the company to proceed upon it, and to deliver out tickets here for the lottery, and he named trustees to manage and direct the drawing at Harburgh. Before the lottery was opened, lord Barrington, who was sub-governor of the company, (his royal highness the present prince of Wales being named governor) thought it necessary to procure a British charter of incorporation, and measures were taken for that purpose with the British ministers; for hitherto everything touching the company had been transacted with the German ministers.

"His lordship, as I have reason to believe, was persuaded that the ministers intended that the company should have a British charter; and things went so far in that way, that a draught of a British charter was prepared and laid before the attorney-general. While things were in this state, some of the gentlemen in London concerned in the affair opened a subscription for the lottery, lord Barrington being then in the country. This step they took, contrary to 'his lordship’s opinion and advice.

"Within a few clays after the subscription for the lottery was opened, advertisements were published by some of the gentlemen who had formerly solicited the commerce charter, and afterwards when the price of stock fell, had refused to accept their shares, treating the affair as a public cheat; and the matter was soon brought before the house of commons.

"While it was there depending, I was, in lord Barrington’s absence, consulted by the gentlemen concerned touching the best method for avoiding the storm which seemed to be gathering, and threatened the ruin of the company. My advice was, that the company should, without any hesitation, lay. their charter, with the two warrants for the lottery, before the house; and submit their case upon the foot of those powers; since it would appear by those powers, thut what they had done in the affair was done by virtue of powers received from his majesty. But this advice was soon laid aside, and the secretary (Mr. Ridpath) was instructed to acquaint the house, as he did, that the company having acted under powers received from his majesty as elector, in an affair concerning his electorate, they did not think themselves at liberty to lay such powers before the house without his majesty’s permission. This answer exactly suited the views of those people who intended to ruin the company, without seeming to do a thing which reflected dishonour on his majesty. Accordingly the houss was satisfied with the answer, so far as not to insist on a sight of the charter and warrants; and immediately came to a resolution, that the persons concerned in the affair, had acted therein without any authority from his majesty; and lordBarrington, who then served for Berwick upon Tweed, was expelled the house.

“This matter was made an occasion for bringing this severe censure on lord Barrington who was suspected to have formerly taken some steps very disagreeable to the reigning minister, sir Robert Walpole. His lordship was firmly attached to the administration during the time of lord Sunderland’s ministry, and employed all his credit and influence with the dissenters, which was then very great, to keep that body in the same interest but upon the death of lord Sunderlandj sir Robert Walpole, who, for many years during lord Sunderland’s administration, had opposed every public measure, succeeded him, as pi-hue minister, and could not forget the part which lord B irrington had acted again-st him.”

In 1725 he published in 2 vols. 8vo, his “Miscellanea Sacra: or, anew method of considering so much of the history of the Apostles as is contained in scripture; in an abstract of their history, an abstract of that abstract, and four critical essays.” In this work the noble author has traced, with great care and judgment, the methods taken by the apostles, and first preachers of the gospel, for propagating Christianity; and explained with great distinctness the several gifts of the spirit, by which they were enabled to disciiarge that office. These he improved into an argument for the truth of the Christian religion; which is said to have staggered the infidelity of Mr. Anthony Collins. In 1725 he published, in 8vo, “An Essay on the several dispensations of God to mankind, in the order in which they lie in the Bible; or, a short system of the religion of nature and scriptwre,” &c. He was also author of several other tracts, of which the principal were, 1. “.A Dissuasive from Jacobitism; shewing in general what the nation is to expect from a popish king; and, in particular, from the Pretender.” The fourth edition of this was printed in 8vo, in 1713. 2. “A Letter from a Layman, in communion with the church of England, though dissenting from her in some points, to the right rev. the bishop of ———, with a postscript, shewing how far the bill to prevent the growth of schism is inconsistent with the act of toleration, and the other laws of this realm.” The second edition of this was printed in 1714, 4to. 3. “The Layman’s Letter to the bishop of Bangor.” The second edition of this was published in 1716, 4to. 4. “An account of the late proceedings of the Dissenting-ministers at Salters’-hall; occasioned by the differences amongst their brethren in the country: with some thoughts concerning imposition of human forms for articles of faith;” in a letter to the rev. Dr. Gale, 1719, 8vo. 5. “A Discourse of natural and revealed Religion, and the relation they bear to each other,” 1732, 8vo. 6. “Reflections on the 12th query, contained in a paper, entitled Reasons offered against pushing for the repeal of the corporation and test-acts, and on the animadversions on the answer to it,” 1733, 8vo. A new edition of his “Miscellanea Sacra” was published in 1770, 3 vols. 8vo, under the revision of his son, the present learned and munificent bishop of Durham. Lord Barrington sometimes spoke in parliament, but appears not to have been a frequent speaker. He died at his seat at Becket in Berkshire, after a short illness, Dec. 4, 1734, in the 6Gth year of his age. He generally attended divine worship among the dissenters, and for many years received the sacrament at Pinner’s-hall, when Dr. Jeremiah Hunt, an eminent and learned non-conformist divine, was pastor of the congregation. He had formerly been an attendant on Mr. Thomas Bradbury, but quitted that gentleman on account of his zeal for imposing unscriptural terms upon the article of the Trinity. His lordship was a disciple and friend of Mr. Locke, had a high value for the sacred writings, and was eminently skilled in them. As a writer in theology, he contributed much to the diffusing of that spirit of free scriptural criticism, which has since obtained among all denominations of Christians. As his attention was much turned to the study of divinity, he had a strong sense of the importance of what is called free inquiry in matters of religion. In his writings, whenever he thought what he advanced was doubtful, or that his arguments were not strictly conclusive, though they might have great weight, he expressed himself with a becoming diffidence. He was remarkable for the politeness of his manners, and the gracefulness of his address. The only virulent attack we have seen against his lordship, occurs in lord Orford’s works, vol. I. p. 543, which from its contemptuous and sneering notice of the Barrington family, and especially the present worthy prelate, may be safely left to" its influence on the mind of any unprejudiced reader.

Lord Barrington married Anne, eldest daughter of sir William Daines, by whom he left six sons and three daughters. William, his eldest son, succeeded to his father’s honours; was elected, soon after he came of age, member for the town of Berwick, and afterwards for Plymouth; and, in the late and present reigns, passed through the successive offices of lord of the admiralty, master of the wardrobe, chancellor of the exchequer, treasurer of the navy, and secretary at war. He died in 1793. Francis, the second, died young. John, the third, was a majorgeneral in the army, commanded the land forces at the reduction of the island of Guadaloupe in 1758, and died in 17CM-. Of Daines and Samuel some notice will follow; Shutc, the sixth, is now bishop of Durham. Of the three daughters, who survived their father, Sarah married Robert Price, esq. of Foxley in Herefordshire Anne, Thomas Clarges, esq. only son of sir Thomas Clarges, bart. and Mary died unmarried.

, fourth son of the preceding, was born in 1727, studied some time at Oxford, which he quitted for the Temple, and after the usual course was admitted to the bar. He was one of his majesty’s counsel learned in the law, and a bencher of the lion society of the Inner Temple, but, although esteemed a very sound lawyer, he never rose to any distinguished eminence as a pleader. He was for some time recorder of Bristol, in which situation he was preceded by sir Michael Foster, and succeeded by Mr. Dunning, afterwards lord Ashburton. In May 1751 he was appointed marshal of the high court of admiralty in England, which he resigned in 1753, on being appointed secretary for the affairs of Greenwich hospital; and was appointed justice of the counties of Merioneth, Carnarvon, and Anglesey, 1757, and afterwards second justice of Chester, which he resigned about 1785, retaining only the place of commissary-general of the stores at Gibraltar. Had it been his wish, he might probably have been promoted to the EngU&h bench, but possessed of an ample income, having a strong bias to the study of antiquities, natural history, &c. he retired from the practice of the law, and applied his legal knowledge chiefly to the purposes of investigating curious questions of legal antiquity. His first publication, which will always maintain its rank, and has gone through several editions, was his “Observations on the Statutes,” 1766, 4to. In the following year he published “The Naturalist’s Calendar,” which was also favourably received. In 1773, desiring to second the wishes of the Rev. Mr. Elstob to give to the world the Saxon translation of Orosius, ascribed to king Alfred, in one vol. 8vo, he added to it an English translation and notes, which neither give the meaning, nor clear up the obscurities of the Latin or Saxon authors, and therefore induced some severe observations from the periodical critics. His next publication was, “Tracts on the probability of reaching the North Pole,” 1775, 4to. He was the first proposer ofthe memorable voyage to the north pole, which was undertaken by captain Phipps, afterwards lord Mulgrave: and on the event of it, he collected a variety of facts and speculations, to evince the practicability of such an undertaking. His papers were read at two meetings of the royal society, and not being admitted into their “Philosophical Transactions,” were published separately. -It must be allowed that the learned author bestowed much time and labour on this subject, and accumulated an amazing-quantity of written, traditionary, and conjectural evidence, in proof of the possibility of circumnavigating the pole; but when his testimonies were examined, they proved rather ingenious than satisfactory. In 1781 he published “Miscellanies on various subjects,” 4to, containing some of his papers in the Philosophical Transactions, and other miscellaneous essays composed or compiled by him, on various subjects of antiquity, civil and natural history, &c. His contributions to the Philosophical Transactions and to the Archaologia are numerous, as may be seen in the indexes of these works. He was a -member of both societies, and a vicepresident of that of the antiquaries, which office he resigned in his latter days on account of his bad state of health. He died after a lingering illness, at his chambers in the King’s Bench walk, Temple, March 11, 1SOO, aged 73, and was interred in the vault of the Temple church. Mr. Barrington was a man of amiable character, polite, communicative, and liberal.

, brother to the preceding, and fifth son of the first lord viscount Harrington, was born in 1729, and entered very young into the service of the British navy, passing through the inferior stations of midshipman and lieutenant with great reputation. He first went to sea in the Lark, under the command of lord George Graham, and in 1744, he was appointed a lieutenant by sir William Rowley, then commanding a squadron in the Mediterranean. In 1746, he had the rank of master and commander in the Weazcl sloop, in which he took a French privateer off Flushing. During the same year, or in 1747, he became post-captain, by being appointed totheBellona frigate (formerly a French privateer) in which he took the Duke de Chartres outward bound East India ship, of 800 tons, and of superior force, after a severe engagement, in which the French lost many killed and wounded. After the peace of 1748, he had the command of the Sea-horse, a twenty-gun ship in the Mediterranean, and while there, was dispatched from Gibraltar to Tetuan, to 'negociate the redemption of some British captives, in which he succeeded. He had afterwards the command of the Crown man of war, on the Jamaica station, and was in commission during the greater part of the peace. When the war broke out again between Great Britain and France, in 1756, he was appointed to the command of the Achilles of 60 guns. In 1759, he signalized his courage in an engagement with the Count de St. Florentin, French man of war, of equal force with the Achilles she fought for two hours, and had 116 men killed or wounded, all her masts shot away, and it was with difficulty she was got into port. The Achilles had twenty-five men killed or wounded. In the Achilles, captain Barrington was after this dispatched to America, from whence she returned about the close of the year 1760. In the Spring of the ensuing year, captain Barrington served under admiral Keppel, at the siege of Belleisle. To secure a landing for the troops, it became necessary to attack a fort and other works, in a sandy bay, intended to be the place of debarkation; three ships, one of which was the Achilles, were destined to this service. Captain Barrington got first to his station, and soon silenced the fire from the fort and from the shore, and cleared the coast for the landing the troops, and although, soon obliged to re-embark, they were well covered by the Achilles, and other ships. Ten days after the troops made good their landing, at a place where the mounting the rock was, as the commanders expressed it, barely possible, and captain Barrington was sent home with this agreeable news. After the peace of 1763, captain Barrington in 1768 commanded the Venus frigate, in which ship the late duke of Cumberland was entered as a midshipman. In her he sailed to the Mediterranean, and as these voyages are always intended both for pleasure and improvement, he visited the most celebrated posts in that sea. Soon after his return, the dispute between Great Britain and Spain, respecting Falkland’s Island, took place, and on the fitting out of the fleet, captain Barrington was appointed to the command of the Albion, of 74 guns, and soon after made colonel of marines. He found some little difficulty, from a scarcity of seamen, in manning his ship, and had recourse to a humourous experiment. He offered a bounty. for all lamp-­lighters, and men of other trades which require alertness, who would enter; and soon procured a crew, but of such a description that they were, for some time, distinguished by the title of Barrington‘ s blackguards. He soon, however, changed their complexion. He had long borne the character of being a thoroughrbred seaman, and a rigid disciplinarian. His officers under him were the same, and they succeeded in making the Albion one of the best disciplined ships in the royal navy. The convention between the two courts putting an end to all prospect of hostilities, the Albion was ordered, as a guardship, to Plymouth; and in this situation captain Barrington commanded her for three years, made himself universally esteemed, and shewed that he possessed those accomplishments which adorn the officer and the man. In the former capacity he had so completely established his character, as to be looked up to as one who, in case of any future war, would be intrusted with some important command. In the latter, the traits of benevolence which are known, exclusive of those which he was careful to keep secret, shew, that with the roughness of a seaman, he possessed the benevolence of a Christian. An economical style of living enabled him to indulge his inclination that way, with a moderate income. On the breaking out of the war with France, captain Barrington, having then been thirty-one years a post-captain in the navy, was promoted to the rank of rear-admiral, and dispatched with a squadron to the West Indies. He found himself, on his arrival, so much inferior to the enemy, that he could riot preserve Dominica from falling into their hands. However, before the French fleet under D’Estaing could reach the West Indies, he was joined at Barbadoes by the troops under general Grant from America. He then immediately steered for St. Lucia, and the British troops had gained possession of a part of the island, when the French fleet, under the command of count D‘Estaing, appeared in sight. ’ Barrington lay in the Grand Cul de Sac, with only three ships-of the line, three of fifty guns, and some-frigates, and with this force, had not only to defend himself against ten sail of the line, many frigates, and American armed ships, but also to protect a large fleet of transports, having on board provisions and stores for the army, and which there had not yet been time to land; so that the fate of the army depended on that of the fleet. During the night the admiral caused the transports to be warped into the bay, and moored the men of war in a line without them. D'Estaing, elated with the hopes of crushing this small naval force under Barrington, attacked him next morning, first with ten sail of the line, but failing, he made a second attack with his whole force, and was equally unsuccessful, being only able to carry off one single transport, which the English had not time to warp within the line. This defence is among the first naval atchievements of the war. In an attack by land, on general Meadows’s intrenchments, the count was equally repulsed, and the island soon after capitulated. Admiral Byron shortly after arriving in the West Indies, Barrington, of course, became second in command only. In the action which took place between the British fleet and the French on the 6th of July, 1775, admiral Barrington, in the Prince of Wales, commanded the van division. The enemy were much superior to the English, but this discovery was not made till it was too late to remedy it. Admiral Barrington, in the Prince of Wales, with the Boyne and Sultan, pressed forward, soon closed with the enemy’s fleet, and bravely sustained their attack until joined by other ships. It was not, however, the intention of the French admiral to risk a general engagement, having the conquest of Grenada in view, and his ships being cleaner than those of the English, enabled him to choose his distance. The consequence was, that several of the British ships were very severely handled, whilst others had no share in the action. Barrington was wounded, and had twenty-six men killed, and forty-six wounded, in his own ship. Soon after this engagement, admiral Barrington, on account of ill-health, returned to England. These two actions established our admiral’s reputation, and he was looked on as one of the first officers in the English navy. The ferment of parties during the close of that war occasioned many unexpected refusals of promotion; and as admiral Barrington was intimately connected with lord Shelburne, col. Barre, and several other leading men in opposition, it was probably owing to this circumstance that he refused the command of the channel fleet, which was offered to him after the resignation of admiral Geary in 1780, and on his declining to accept it, conferred on admiral Darby. In 1782, he served, as second in command, under lord Howe, and distinguished himself at the memorable relief of Gibraltar. The termination of the war put a period to his active services. In February 1786, he was made lieutenant-general of marines; and on Sept. 24, 1787, admiral of the blue. During the last ten years of his life, his ill state of health obliged him to decline all naval command. He died at his lodgings in the Abbey Green, Bath, August 16, 1800.

, a Portuguese historian, was born at Viseu in 1496, and brought up at the court of king Emanuel, with the younger branches of the royal family. He made a rapid progress in Greek and Latin learning. The infant Juan, to whom he was attached, in quality of preceptor, having succeeded the king his father in 1521, de Barros had a place in the household of that prince. In 1522 he became governor of St. George de la Mine, on the coast of Guinea in Africa. Three years afterwards, the king having recalled him to court, appointed him treasurer of the Indies: this post inspired him with the thought of writing the history of those countries, and in order to finish it, he retired to Pombal, where he died in 1570, with the reputation of an excellent scholar and a good citizen. De Barros has divided his History of Asia and the Indies into four decads. He published the first under the title “Decadas d'Asia,” in 1552, the second in 1553, and the third in 1563. The fourth did not appear till 1615, by command of king Philip III. who purchased the manuscript of the heirs ofde Barros. This history is in the Portugueze language. Possevin and the president de Thou speak more favourably of it than la Boulaye-le Goux, who considers it as a very confused mass; but certainly Barros has collected a great many facts that are not to be found elsewhere, and with less love of the hyperbole, and a stricter attachment to truth, he would have deserved a place among the best historians. Several authors have continued his work, and brought it down to the xiiith decad. There is an edition of it, Lisbon, 1736, 3 vols. folio. Alfonso Ulloa translated it into Spanish. Barros also wrote “Chronica do imperador Clarimando,” a species of romance in the style of Amadis, and some treatises on subjects of morality, religion, and education, for the use of the young princes.

, bishop of St.Asaph in the reign of Charles II. was the son of Isaac Barrow of Spiney Abbey irt Cambridgeshire, and uncle of the celebrated mathematician, who will form the subject of the next article. He was born in 1613, admitted July 1639 of Peterhouse, Cambridge, next year chosen scholar, and in 1631, librarian. In Dec. 1641, he was presented to the vicarage of Hin ton, by his college, of which he was a fellow, and resided there until ejected by the presbyterians in 1643. He then removed to Oxford, where his learning and abilities were well known, and where he was appointed one of the chaplains of New College, by the interest of his friend, Dr. Pink, then warden. Here he continued until the surrender of Oxford to the parliamentary army, when he was obliged to shift from place to place, and suffer with his brethren, who refused to submit to the usurping powers. At the restoration, however, he was not only replaced in his fellowship at Peterhouse, but chosen a fellow of Eton college, which he held in commendam with the bishopric of Mann. In 1660, being then D. D. he was presented by Dr. Wren, bishop of Ely, to the rectory of Downham, in the Isle of Ely; and, in 1662, resigned his fellowship of Peterhouse. In July 1663, he was consecrated bishop of Mann, in king Henry Vllth’s chapel, Westminster, on which occasion his nephew, the mathematician, preached the consecration sermon. In April 1664, he was appointed governor likewise of the Isle of Mann, by his patron, Charles earl of Derby; and executed his office with the greatest prudence and honour during all the time in which he held the diocese, and for some months after his translation to the see of St. Asaph. He was ever of a liberal, active mind; and rendered himself peculiarly conspicuous as a man of public spirit, by forming and executing good designs for the encouragement of piety and literature. The state of the diocese of Mann at this time was deplorable, as to religion. The clergy were poor, illiterate, and careless, the people grossly ignorant and dissolute. Bishop Barrow, however, introduced a very happy change in all respects, by the establishment of schools, and improving the livings of the clergy. He collected with great care and pains from pious persons about eleven hundred pounds, with which he purchased of the earl of Derby all the impropriations in the island, and settled them upon the clergy in due proportion, He obliged them all likewise to teach schools in their respective parishes, and allowed thirty pounds per annum for a free-school, and fifty pounds per annum for academical learning. He procured also from king Charles II. one hundred pounds a year (which, Mr. Wood says, had like to have been lost) to be settled upon his clergy, and gave one hundred and thirty-five pounds of his own money for a lease upon lands of twenty pounds a year, towards the maintenance of three poor scholars in the college of Dublin, that in time there might be a more learned body of clergy in the island. He gave likewise ten pounds towards the building a bridge, over a dangerous water; and did several other acts of charity and beneficence. Afterwards returning to England for the sake of his health, and lodging in a house belonging to the countess of Derby in Lancashire, called Cross-hall, he received news of his majesty having conferred on him the bishopric of St. Asaph, to which he was translated March 21, 1669, but he was permitted to hold the see of Sodor and Mann in commendam, until Oct. 167 1, in order to indemnify him for the expences of his translation. His removal, however, from Mann, was felt as a very great loss, both by the clergy at large, and the inhabitants. His venerable, although not immediate, successor, Dr. Wilson, says of him, that “his name and his good deeds will be remembered as long as any sense of piety remains among them.” His removal to St. Asaph gave him a fresh opportunity to become useful and popular. After being established here, he repaired several parts of the cathedral church, especially the north and south ailes, and new covered them with lead, and wainscotted the east part of the choir. He laid out a considerable sum of money in repairing the episcopal palace, and a mill belonging to it. In ] 678 he built an alms-house for eight poor widows, and endowed it with twelve pounds per annum for ever. The same year, he procured an act of parliament for appropriating the rectories of Llanrhaiader and Mochnant in Denbighshire and "Montgomeryshire, and of Skeiviog in the county of Flint, for repairs of the cathedral church of St. Asaph, and the better maintenance of the choir therein, and also for the uniting several rectories that were sinecures, and the vicarages of the same parishes, within the said diocese. He designed likewise to build a free-school, and endow it, but was prevented by death; but in 1687, Bishop Lloyd, who succeeded him in the see of St. Asaph, recovered of his executors two hundred pounds, towards a free-school at St. Asaph.

Bishop Barrow died at Shrewsbury, June 24, 1680, and was interred in the cathedral church-yard of St. Asaph, on the south side of the west door, with two inscriptions, one of which seeming to favour the popish doctrine of praying for the dead, gave some offence, especially as it was said, we know not on what authority, that it was drawn up by the bishop himself.

, an eminent mathematician and divine of the seventeenth century, was descended from an ancient family of that name in Suffolk. His father was Mr. Thomas Barrow, a reputable citizen of London and linen-draper to king Charles I.; and his mother, Anne, daughter of William Buggin of North-Cray in Kent, esq. whose tender care he did not long experience, she dying when he was about four years old. He was born at London in October 1630, and was placed first in the Charterhouse school for two or three years, where his behaviour afforded but little hopes of success in the profession of a scholar, for which his father designed him, being quarrelsome, riotous, and negligent. But when removed to Felstead school in Essex, his disposition took a more happy turn, and he quickly made so great a progress in learning, that his master appointed him a kind of tutor to the lord viscount Fairfax of Emely in Ireland, who was then his scholar. During his stay at Felstead, he was admitted, December the 15.th 1643, being fourteen years of age, a pensioner of Peter-house in Cambridge, under his uncle Mr. Isaac Barrow, then fellow of that college. But when he was qualified for the university, he was entered a pensioner in Trinity-college, the 5th of February 1645; his uncle having been ejected, together with Seth Ward, Peter Gunning, and John Barwick, who had written against the covenant. His father having suffered greatly in his estate by his attachment to the royal cause, our young student was obliged at first for his chief support to the generosity of the learned Dr. Hammond, to whose memory he paid his thanks, in an excellent epitaph on the doctor. In 1647, he was chosen a scholar of the house; and, though he always continued a staunch royalist, and never would take the covenant, yet, by his great merit and prudent behaviour he preserved the esteem and goodwill of his superiors. Of this we have an instance in Dr. Hill, master of the college, who had been put in by the parliament in the room of Dr. Comber, ejected for adhering to the king. One day, laying his hand upon our young sflident’s head, he said, “Thou art a good lad, ‘tis pity thou art a cavalier;’ 7 and when, in an oration on the Gunpowder-treason, Mr. Barrow had so celebrated the former times, as to reflect much on the present, some fellows were provoked to move for his expulsion but the master silenced them with this,” Barrow is a better man than any of us.“Afterwards when the engagement was imposed, he subscribed it; but, upon second thoughts, repenting of what he had done, he applied himself to the commissioners, declared his dissatisfaction, and prevailed to have his name razed out of the list. He applied himself with great diligence to the study of all parts of literature, especially natural philosophy; and though he was yet but a young scholar, his judgment was too great to rest satisfied with the shallow and superficial philosophy, then taught and received in the schools. He applied himself therefore to the reading and considering the writings of the lord Verulam, M. Des Cartes, Galileo, &c. who seemed to offer something more solid and substantial. In 1648, Mr. Barrow took the degree of bachelor of arts. The year following, he was elected fellow of his college, merely out of regard to his merit; for he had no friend to recommend him, as being of the opposite party. And now, finding the times not favourable to men of his opinions in matters of church and state, he turned his thoughts to the profession of physic, and made a considerable progress in anatomy, botany, and chemistry: but afterwards, upon deliberation with himself, and with the advice of his uncle, he applied himself to the study of divinity, to which he was further obliged by his oath on his admission to his fellowship. By reading Scaliger on Eusebius, he perceived the dependance of chronology on astronomy; which put him upon reading Ptolemy’s Almagest: and finding that book and all astronomy to depend on geometry, he made himself master of Euclid’s Elements, and from thence proceeded to the other ancient mathematicians. He made a short essay towards acquiring the Arabic language, but soon deserted it. With these severer speculations, the largeness of his mind had room for the amusements of poetry, to which he was always strongly addicted. This is sufficiently evident from the many performances he has left us in that art. Mr. Hill, his biographer, tells us, he was particularly pleased with that branch of it, which consists in description, but greatly disliked the hyperboles of some modern poets. As for our plays, he was an enemy to them, as a principal cause of the debauchery of the times; the other causes he thought to be, the French education, and the ill example of great persons. For satires, he wrote none his wit, as Mr. Hill expresses it, was” pure and peaceable."

In 1652, he commenced master of arts, and, on the 12th of June the following year, was incorporated in that degree at Oxford. When Dr. Duport resigned the chair of Greek. professor, he recommended his pupil Mr. Barrow to succeed him; who justified his tutor’s opinion of him by an excellent performance of the probation exercise: but being looked upon as a favourer of Arminianism, the choice fell upon another; and this disappointment, it is thought, helped to determine him in his resolution of travelling abroad. In order to execute this design, he was obliged to sell his books. Accordingly, in the year 1655, he went into France; where, at Paris, he found his father attending the English court, and out of his small means made him a seasonable present. The same year his “Euclid” was printed at Cambridge, which he had left behind him for that purpose. He gave his college an account of his journey to Paris in a poem, and some farther observations in a letter. After a few months, he went into Italy, and stayed sometime at Florence, where he had the advantage of perusing several books in the great duke’s library, and of conversing with Mr. Fitton, an Englishman, his librarian. Here his poverty must have put an end to his travels, had he not been generously supplied with money by Mr. James Stock, a young merchant of London, to whom he afterwards dedicated his edition of Euclid’s Data. He was desirous to have seen Rome; but the plague then raging in that city, he took ship at Leghorn, November the 6th 1656, for Smyrna. In this voyage they were attacked by a corsair of Algiers, who, perceiving the stout defence the ship made, sheered off and left her; and upon this occasion Mr. Barrow gave a remarkable instance of his natural courage and intrepidity. At Smyrna, he made himself welcome to Mr. Bretton the consul (upon whose death he afterwards wrote an elegy), and to the English factory. Front thence he proceeded to Constantinople, where he met with a very friendly reception from sir Thomas Bendish the English ambassador, and sir Jonathan Daws, with whom he afterwards kept up an intimate friendship and correspondence. This voyage, from Leghorn to Constantinople, he has described in a Latin poem. At Constantinople, he read over the works of St. Chrysostom, once bishop of that see, whom he preferred to all the other fathers. Having stayed in Turkey above a year, he returned from thence to Venice, where, soon after they were landed, the ship took fire, and was consumed with all the goods. From thence he came home, in 1659, through Germany and Holland, and has left a description of some parts of those countries in his poems. Soon after his return into England, the time being somewhat elapsed, before which all fellows of Trinity-college are obliged to take orders, or quit the society, Mr. Barrow was episcopally ordained by bishop Brownrig, notwithstanding the unsettled state of the times, and the declining condition of the church of England. Upon the king’s restoration, his friends expected he would have been immediately preferred on account of his having suffered and deserved so much; but it came to nothing, which made him wittily say (which he has not left in his poems),

However, he wrote an ode upon that occasion, in which he introduces Britannia congratulating the king upon his return. In 1660, he was chosen, without a competitor, Greek professor of the university of Cambridge. His oration, spoken upon that occasion, is preserved among his Opuscula. When he entered upon this province, he designed to have read upon the tragedies of Sophocles: but, altering his intention, he made choice of Aristotle’s rhetoric. These lectures, having been lent to a person who never returned them, are irrecoverably lost. The year following, which was 1661, he took the degree of bachelor in divinity. July the 16th, 1662, he was elected professor of geometry in Gresham-college, in the room of Mr. Lawrence Rooke, chiefly through the interest and recommendation of Dr. Wilkins, master of Trinity-college, and afterwards bishop of Chester. In this station, he not only discharged his own duty, but supplied, likewise, the absence of Dr. Pope the astronomy professor. Among his lectures, some were upon the projection of the sphere which being borrowed and never returned, are lost but his Latin oration, previous to his lectures, is in his works. The same year, 1662, he wrote an epithalamium on the marriage of king Charles and queen Catherine, in Greek verse. About this time, Mr. Barrow was offered a valuable living, but the condition annexed of teaching the patron’s son, made him refuse it, as too like a simouiacal contract. Upon the 20th of May 1663, he was elected a fellow of the royal society, in the first choice made by the council after their charter. The same year, Mr. Lucas having founded a mathematical lecture at Cambridge, Mr. Barrow was so powerfully recommended, by Dr. Wilkins, to that gentleman’s executors Mr. Raworth and Mr. Buck, that he was appointed the first professor; and the better to secure the end of so noble and useful a foundation, he took care that himself and his successors should be obliged to leave yearly to the university ten written lectures. We have his prefatory oration, spoken in the public mathematical school, March the 14th, 1664. Though his two professorships were not incompatible, he resigned that of Gresham-college, May the 20th, 1664. He had been invited to take the charge of the Cotton library; but, after ;a short trial, he declined it, and resolved to settle in the university. In 1669, he resigned the mathematical chair to his very worthy friend the celebrated Isaac Newton, being now determined to exchange the study of the mathematics for that of divinity, partly from a strong inclination for the latter, and partly because his mathematical works were less favourably received than he thought they deserved. In 1670, he wrote a Latin poem upon the death of the duchess of Orleans, an epicedium upon the duke of Albemarle, and a Latin ode upon the Trinity. He was only a fellow of Trinity-college, when he was collated by his uncle, the bishop of St. Asaph, to a small sinecure in Wales, and by Dr. Seth Ward, bishop of Salisbury, to a prebend in that cathedral; the profits of both which he applied to charitable uses, and afterwards resigned them, when he became master of his college. In the same year he was created doctor in divinity by mandate. In 1672, Dr. Pearson, master of Trinity-college, being, upon the death of bishop Wilkins, removed to the bishopric of Chester, Dr. Barrow was appointed by the king to succeed him; and his majesty was pleased to say upon that occasion, “he had given it to the best scholar in England.” His patent hears date February the 13th, 1672, with permission to marry, which he caused to be erased, as contrary to the statutes, and he was admitted the 27th of the same month. He gave the highest satisfaction to that society, whose interest he constantly and carefully consulted. In 1675, he was chosen vice-chancellor of the university. This great and learned divine died of a fever, the 4th of May 1677, and was buried in Westminster-abbey, where a monument was erected to him by the contribution of his friends. His epitaph was written by his friend Dr. Mapletoft. He left his manuscripts to Dr. Tillotson and Mr. Abraham Hill, with permission to publish what they should think proper. He left little behind him, except books, which were so well chosen, that they sold for more than the prime cost. Though he could never be prevailed to sit for his picture, some of his friends contrived to have it taken without his knowledge, whilst they diverted him with such discourse as engaged his attention. As to his person, he was low of stature, lean, and of a pale complexion, and negligent of his dress to a fault; of extraordinary strength, a thin skin, and very sensible of cold; his eyes grey, clear, and somewhat short-sighted; his hair a light brown, very fine, and curling. He was of a healthy constitution, very fond of tobacco, which he used to call his panpharmacon, or universal medicine, and imagined it helped to compose and regulate his thoughts. If he was guilty of any intemperance, it seemed to be in the love of fruit, which he thought very salutary. He slept little, generally rising in the winter months before day. His conduct and behaviour were truly amiable; he was always ready to assist others, open and communicative in his conversation, in which he generally spoke to the importance, as well as truth, of any question proposed; facetious in his talk upon fit occasions, and skilful to accommodate his discourse to different capacities; of indefatigable industry in various studies, clear judgment on all arguments, and steady virtue under all difficulties; of a calm temper in factious times, and of large charity in mean estate; he was easy and contented with a scanty fortune, and with the same decency and moderation maintained his character under the temptations of prosperity. In short, he was, perhaps, the greatest scholar of his times and, as an ingenious writer expresses it, “he may be esteemed as having shewn a compass of invention equal, if not superior, to any of the moderns, sir Isaac Newton only excepted.”

Dr. Barrow’s works are very numerous, and indeed various, mathematical, theological, poetical, &c. and such as do honour to the English nation. They are principally as follow: l.“EuclidisElementa,” Cantab. 1655, 8vo. 2.“EuclidisData,” Cantab. 1657,8vo. 3.^ Lectiones Opticaexviii,“Lond. 1669, 4to. 4.” Lectiones Geometric^ xiii,“Lond. 1670, 4to. 5.” Archimedis Opera, Apollonii Conicorum libri iv. Theodosii Sphericoruni lib. iii.; nova methodo illustrata, et succiricte clemonstrata,“Lond. 1675, 4to. The following were published after his decease, viz. 6.” Lectio, in qua theoremata Archimedis de sphcera et cylindro per methodum indivisibilium investigata, ac breviter investigata, exhibentur,“Lond. 1678, 12mo. 7.” Mathematics Lectiones habitrc in scholis publicis academiai Cantabrigiensis, an. 1664, 5,6, &c.“Lond. 1683. 8. All his English works in 3 volumes, Lond. 1683, folio. These are all theological, and were published by Dr. John Tillotson. 9.” Isaaci Barrow Opuscula, viz. Determinationes, Conciones ad Clerum, Orationes, Poemata, &c. volumen quartum,“Lond. 1687, folio. Dr. Barrow left also several curious papers on mathematical subjects, written in his own hand, which were communicated by Mr. Jones to the author of” The Lives of the Gresham Professors,“a particular account of which may be seen in that book, in the life of Barrow. Several of his works have been translated into English, and published as the Elements and Data of Euclid; the Geometrical Lectures, the Mathematical Lectures. And accounts of some of them were also given ia several volumes of the Philos. Trans. Dr. Barrow must ever be esteemed, in all the subjects which exercised his pen, a person of the clearest perception, the finest fancy, the soundest judgment, the profoundest thought, and the closest and most nervous reasoning.” The name of Dr. Barrow (says the learned Mr. Granger) will ever be illustrious for a strength of mind and a compass of knowledge that did honour to his country. He was unrivalled in mathematical learning, and especially in the sublime geometry; in which he has been excelled only by his successor Newton. The same genius that seemed to be born only to bring hidden truths to light, and to rise to the heights or descend to the depths of science, would sometimes amuse itself in the flowery paths of poetry, and he composed verses both in Greek and Latin."

Several good anecdotes are told of Barrow, as well of his great integrity, as of his wit, and bold intrepid spirit and strength of body. His early attachment to fighting when a boy is some indication of the latter; to which may be added the two following anecdotes: in his voyage between Leghorn and Smyrna, already noticed, the ship was attacked by an Algerine pirate, which after a stout resistance they compelled to sheer off, Barrow keeping his post at the gun assigned him to the last. And when Dr. Pope in their conversation asked him, “Why he did not go down into the hold, and leave the defence of the ship to those, to whom it did belong r” He replied, “It concerned no man more than myself: I would rather have lost my life, than to have fallen into the hands of those merciless infidels.”

There is another anecdote told of him, which shewed not only his intrepidity, but an uncommon goodness of disposition, in circumstances where an ordinary share of it would have been probably extinguished. Being once on a visit at a gentleman’s house in the country, where the necessary was at the end of a long garden, and consequently at a great distance from the room where he lodged as he was going to it before day, for he was a very early riser, a fierce mastiff, that used to be chained up all day, and let loose at night for the security of the house, perceiving a strange person in the garden at that unusual time, set upon him with great fury. The doctor caught him by the throat, grappled with him, and, throwing him down, lay upon him once he had a mind to kill him; but he altered his resolution, on recollecting that this would be unjust, since the dog did only his duty, and he himself was in fault for rambling out of his room before it was light. At length he called out so loud, that he was heard by some of the family, who came presently out, and freed the doctor and the dog from the danger they both had been in.

Among other instances of his wit and vivacity, they relate the following rencontre between him and the profligate lord Rochester. These two meeting one day at court, while the doctor was king’s chaplain in ordinary, Rochester, thinking to banter him, with a flippant air, and a low formal bow, accosted him with, “Doctor, 1 am yours to my shoe-tie:” Barrow perceiving his drift, returned the salute, with, “My lord, I am yours to the ground.” Rochester, on this, improving his blow, quickly returned it, with, “Doctor, I am yours to the centre;” which was as smartly followed up by Barrow, 'with, “My lord, I am yours to the antipodes.” Upon which, Rochester, disdaining to be foiled by a musty old piece of divinity, as he used to call him, exclaimed, “Doctor, I am yours to the lowest pit of hell;” upon which Barrow, turning upon his heel, with a sarcastic smile, archly replied, “There, my lord, I leave you.”

Dr. Barrow’s sermons are yet admired for the style and moral sentiment. Yet in him, says Dr. Blair, one admires more the prodigious fecundity of his invention, and the uncommon strength and force of his conceptions, than the felicity of his execution, or his talent in composition. We see a genius far surpassing the common, peculiar, indeed, almost to himself; but that genius often shooting wild, and unchastised by any discipline or study of eloquence. His style is unequal, incorrect, and redundant, but uncommonly distinguished for force and expressiveness. On every subject, he multiplies words with an overflowing copiousness, but it is always a torrent of strong ideas and significant expressions which he pours forth.

, D. D. a clergyman of Scotland, was born, in 1748, in the county of Berwick. He was educated in the university of Edinburgh, and for a short time was employed as private tutor to the sons of some gentlemen in Orkney, by whose patronage he became second minister of the royal burgh and ancient cathedral of Kirkwall; from whence, about 1796, he was translated to the island and parish of Shapinshay. Here he discharged the duties of the pastoral office with zeal, and the approbation of his parishioners. He first attracted public notice by the statistical account of his two parishes, published by sir John Sinclair in that work (“Statistical Reports”), which has done so much credit to the talents of the clergy of Scotland. Dr. Barry had also great merit in the education of youth, which he superintended in his parish and its neighbourhood with the happiest effect. Sensible of his zeal in this respect, the society for propagating Christian knowledge in Scotland, about the year 1800, chose him one of their members, and gave him a superintendence over their schools at Orkney. Soon after the university of Edinburgh conferred on him the degree of doctor in divinity. For some years before his death, he was employed in drawing up a work of great value and authenticity, entitled “The History of the Orkney Islands; in which is comprehended an account of their present as well as their ancient state, c.” 4to. This was published a short time after his death, which took place May 14, 1805.

, usually called Giraldus Cambren­sis, or Girald of Wales, was born at the castle of Mainaper, near Pembroke, in 1146. By his mother he was descended from the princes of South Wales and his father, William Barry, was one of the chief men of that principality. Being a younger brother, and intended for the cburch, he was sent to St. David’s, and educated in the family of the bishop of that see, who was his uncle. He acknowledges in his history of his own life and actions, that in his early youth he was too negligent and playful; but his uncle and his masters remonstrated with him so sharply, that he became diligent, and soon excelled his school-fellows. When about twenty years of age, he was sent to the university of Paris, where he continued for three years, acquiring great fame by his skill in rhetoric, and on his return he entered into holy orders, and obtained several benefices in England and Wales. Finding that the Welch were very reluctant in paying tidies of wool and cheese, he applied to Richard, archbishop of Canterburv, and was appointed his legate in Wales for rectifying that disorder, and for other purposes. He executed this commission with great spirit, excommunicating all without distinction, who neglected to pay. He also informed against the old archdeacon of Brechin for being married, and procured him to be deprived of his archdeaconry, which was bestowed on this officious legate. In otherwise discharging the duties of this new office, he acted with great vigour, which involved him in many quarXels; but, according to his own account, he was always in the right, and always victorious. On his uncle’s death, he was elected by the chapter of St. David’s, bishop of that see, but he declined accepting it, owing to the informality of not applying to the king for his licence, although in reality he knew that the king, Henry II. would never have confirmed such an election, and did in fact express his displeasure at it, in consequence of which another person was chosen. Girald, however, was not reconciled to the disappointment, and determined to get rid of his chagrin by travelling, and studying for some time longer at Paris. Here he pursued the civil and canon law, and with his usual vanity he boasts what a prodigious fame he acquired, especially in the knowledge of papal constitutions, or decretals, as they are called. In 1179, he was elected professor of the canon law in the university of Paris; but rejected the honour, expecting more solid advantages in his own country. In 1180, he returned home through Flanders and England, and in his way stopped at Canterbury, where he emphatically describes (what may be well allowed him) the great luxury of the monks of that place. At length he got home, where he found the whole country in a flame, the canons and archdeacons of Menevia having joined with the inhabitants in driving out the bishop of that see, the administration of which was committed to our author, by the archbishop of Canterbury. Under this authority he governed the see of St. David’s for three or four years, and made wonderful reformations in it. The abdicated bishop, whose name was Peter, did not acquiesce in the conduct of his clergy, but by letters suspended and excommunicated the canons and archdeacons, uncited and unheard: and at length, Girald, not having power to redress them, resigned his charge to the archbishop, who absolved the excommunicated. Bishop Peter imputed his disgrace, or at least the continuance of it, to Girald; great contests arose, and appeals were made to Rome: but at length they were reconciled, and the bishop restored. About the year 1184, king Henry II. invited Girald to court, and made him his chaplain, and at times he attended the king for several years, and was very useful to him in keeping matters quiet in Wales’. Yet though the king approved of his services, and in private often coinmended his prudence and fidelity, he never could be prevailed on to promote him to any ecclesiastical benefices, on account of the relation he bore to prince Rhees, and other grandees of Wales. In 1185, the king sent him to Ireland with his son John, in quality of secretary and privy-counsellor to the young prince: but the expedition did not meet with success, because earl John made use only of youthful counsels, and shewed no favour to the old adventurers, who were men experienced in the affairs of Ireland. While Girald thus employed himself in Ireland, the two bishoprics of Ferns and Leighlin fell vacant, which earl John offered to unite, and confer on him; but he rejected the promotion, and employed himself in collecting materials for writing his Topography and history of the conquest of Ireland, which he compiled and published a few years after. In the spring of the year 1186, John Comyn, archbishop of Dublin, convened a synod of his clergy, in Christ-church of that city, at which Girald was one of the preachers, but by the account of it in his life, it appears to have been a turbulent assembly. Having obtained great fame in Ireland, as he tells us himself, between Easter and Whitsuntide 1187, he returned to Wales, and employed all his time in writing and revising his Topography, to which, when he had put, the last hand, he took a journey to Oxford, and repeated it in a public audience of the university; and as it consisted of three distinctions, he repeated one every day of three successively; and in order to captivate the people, and secure their applause, the first day he entertained all the poor of the town, the next day the doctors and scholars of fame and reputation, and the third day the scholars of the lower rank, the soldiers, townsmen, and burgesses. In the year 1188, he accompanied Baldwin, archbishop of Canterbury, in a journey through the rough and mountainous parts of Wales, in order to preach up to the people the necessity of taking the cross, and engaging in an expedition in defence of the Holy Land. Here our author shews the vast success his eloquence met with, in persuading the greatest part of the country to engage in this adventure, when the archbishop was able to do nothing. Girald himself took the cross at this time, and it afforded him the opportunity of writing his “Itinerarium Cambriae.” The same year he went over into France, in the retinue of king Henry If, which he did by the advice of the archbishop of Canterbury, and Ranulph de Glanville, chief-justice of England; but the king dying the year after, he was sent back by Richard I. to preserve the peace of Wales, and was even joined with the bishop of Ely, as one of the regents of the kingdom. After refusing one or two bishoprics, in hopes to succeed to St. David’s, which was his favourite object, this latter became vacant in 1198, and he was unanimously elected by the chapter. Yet here again he was disappointed, owing to the opposition of Hubert archbishop of Canterbury, and was involved in a contest, which lasted five years, during which he took three journies to Rome, and was at last defeated. Soon after this, he retired from the world, and spent the last seventeen years of his life in study, composing many of his writings. He was unquestionably a man of genius and learning, but as a historian, full of credulity and fable; and as a man, one of the most vain upon record. Ware, and the editor of the Biog. Britannica, have given a long list of his manuscript works, which are in the Cotton and Harleian libraries in the British museum, the archbishop’s library at Lambeth, the Bodleian, Oxford, and the public library and Bene't college library, Cambridge. Those printed are: 1. “Topographia Hibernioe,” Francfort, 1602, and in Holinshed, 2. “Historia Vaticinalis, de expugnatione Hiberniae,” Francfort, 1602, both published by Camden. 3. “Itinerarium Cambriae,” published with annotations by David Powel, 1585, 8vo. 4. “De laudibus Carnbrorum,” also published by Powel. 5. “Gemma Ecclesiastica,” Mentz, 1549, under the title of “Gemma animoe,” without the author’s name. 6. “Liber secundus de descriptione Wallise,” published by Wharton, in Anglia Sacra, part II. p, 447. Camden every where quotes Giraldus as an author of undoubted credit and reputation.

In 1806, sir Richard Colt Hoare, bart. published in two splendid quarto volumes, “The Itinerary of archbishop Baldwin through Wales, A. D. 1188, by Giraldus de Barri; translated into English, and illustrated with views, annotations, and a life of Giraldus.” In this life, an elegant and elaborate composition, although the facts are not materially different from the preceding, yet the colouring is more highly favourable, and we refer with pleasure to it as a memoir in which the curiosity of the antiquary will be amply gratified. Sir Richard thus briefly sums up the character of Girald: “Noble in his birth, and comely in his person; mild in his manners, and affable in his conversation; zealous, active, and undaunted in maintaining the rights and dignities of his church; moral in his character, and orthodox in his principles; charitable and disinterested, though ambitious; learned, though superstitious. Such was Giraldus. And in whatever point of view we examine the character of this extraordinary man, whether as a scholar, a patriot, or a divine, we may justly consider him as one of the brightest luminaries that adorned the annals of the twelfth century.”